Yucaipa City Council
June 26, 2023

715

Association of Governments (SCAG), county transportation commissions, and local governments and cooperates actively with all federal and state agencies.

The SCAQMD develops rules and regulations, establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources, inspects emission sources, and enforces such measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary. The SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect sources. It has responded to this requirement by preparing a sequence of AQMPs. On June 30, 2016, the SCAQMD released its Draft 2016 AQMP. The 2016 AQMP is a regional blueprint for achieving the federal air quality standards and healthful air.

Air Quality Management Plan
The 2016 AQMP includes both stationary and mobile source strategies to ensure that rapidly approaching attainment deadlines are met, that public health is protected to the maximum extent feasible, and that the region is not faced with burdensome sanctions if the Plan is not approved or if the NAAQS are not met on time. As with every AQMP, a comprehensive analysis of emissions, meteorology, atmospheric chemistry, regional growth projections, and the impact of existing control measures is updated with the latest data and methods. The most significant air quality challenge in the Basin is to reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions sufficiently to meet the upcoming ozone standard deadlines. On March 23, 2017, the CARB approved the 2016 AQMP. The primary goal of this Air Quality Management Plan is to meet clean air standards and protect public health, including ensuring benefits to environmental justice and disadvantaged communities. Now that the Plan has been approved by the CARB, it has been forwarded to the U.S. EPA for its review. The Plan was approved by the EPA on June 15, 2017.

South Coast AQMD has initiated the development of the 2022 AQMP to address the attainment of the 2015 8-hour ozone standard (70 ppb) for South Coast Air Basin and Coachella Valley. To support the development of mobile source strategies for the 2022 AQMP, South Coast AQMD, in conjunction with California Air Resources Board, has established Mobile Source Working Groups which are open to all interested parties.

SCAQMD Rules and Regulations
During construction and operation, the project must comply with applicable rules and regulations. The following are rules the project may be required to comply with, either directly, or indirectly:

SCAQMD Rule 402
Prohibits a person from discharging from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.

SCAQMD Rule 403
Governs emissions of fugitive dust during construction and operation activities. Compliance with this rule is achieved through application of standard Best Management Practices, such as application of water or chemical stabilizers to disturbed soils, covering haul vehicles, restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour, sweeping loose dirt from paved site access roadways, cessation of construction activity when winds exceed 25 mph, and establishing a permanent ground cover on finished sites.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

716

Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 403 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off -site. Applicable dust suppression techniques from Rule 403 are summarized below. Implementation of these dust suppression techniques can reduce the fugitive dust generation (and thus the PIV110 component). Compliance with these rules would reduce impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. Rule 403 measures may include but are not limited to the following:
■ Apply nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 10 days or more). ■ Water active sites at least three times daily. (Locations where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving.)
■ Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, or maintain at least 0.6 meters (2 feet) of freeboard (vertical space between the top of the load and top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code section 23114. ■ Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph) or less. ■ Suspension of all grading activities when wind speeds (including instantaneous wind gusts) exceed 25 mph.
■ Bumper strips or similar best management practices shall be provided where vehicles enter and exit the construction site onto paved roads or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip.
■ Replanting disturbed areas as soon as practical.
■ During all construction activities, construction contractors shall sweep on -site and off -site streets if silt is carried to adjacent public thoroughfares, to reduce the amount of particulate matter on public streets.
■ All sweepers shall be compliant with SCAQMD Rule 1186.1, Less Polluting Sweepers.

SCAQMD Rule 445
Prohibits permanently installed wood burning devices into any new development. A wood burning device means any fireplace, wood burning heater, or pellet -fueled wood heater, or any similarly enclosed, permanently installed, indoor or outdoor device burning any solid fuel for aesthetic or space -heating purposes, which has a heat input of less than one million British thermal units per hour.

SCAQMD Rule 481
Applies to all spray painting and spray coating operations and equipment. The rule states that a person shall not use or operate any spray painting or spray coating equipment unless one of the following conditions is met:

The spray coating equipment is operated inside a control enclosure, which is approved by the Executive Officer. Any control enclosure for which an application for permit for new construction, alteration, or change of ownership or location is submitted after the date of adoption of this rule shall be exhausted only through filters at a design face velocity not less than 100 feet per minute nor greater than 300 feet per minute, or through a water wash system designed to be equally effective for the purpose of air pollution control.

Coatings are applied with high -volume low-pressure, electrostatic and/or airless spray equipment.

An alternative method of coating application or control is used which has effectiveness equal to or greater than the equipment specified in the rule.

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

717

SCAQMD Rule 1108
Governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of asphalt and limits the volatile organic compound (VOC) content in asphalt used in the South Coast Air Basin. This rule would regulate the VOC content of asphalt used during construction. Therefore, all asphalt used during construction of the project must comply with SCAQMD Rule 1108.

SCAQMD Rule 1113
Governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of architectural coating and limits the VOC content in paints and paint solvents. This rule regulates the VOC content of paints available during construction. Therefore, all paints and solvents used during construction and operation of the project must comply with SCAQMD Rule 1113.

SCAQMD Rule 1143
Governs the manufacture, sale, and use of paint thinners and solvents used in thinning of coating materials, cleaning of coating application equipment, and other solvent cleaning operations by limiting their VOC content. This rule regulates the VOC content of solvents used during construction. Solvents used during the construction phase must comply with this rule.

SCAQMD Rule 1186
Limits the presence of fugitive dust on paved and unpaved roads and sets certification protocols and requirements for street sweepers that are under contract to provide sweeping services to any federal, state, county, agency or special district such as water, air, sanitation, transit, or school district.

SCAQMD Rule 1303
Governs the permitting of re -located or new major emission sources, requiring Best Available Control Measures and setting significance limits for PM10 among other pollutants.

SCAQMD Rule 1401
New Source Review of Toxic Air Contaminants specifies limits for maximum individual cancer risk, cancer burden, and non -cancer acute and chronic hazard index from new permit units, relocations, or modifications to existing permit units, which emit toxic air contaminants.

SCAQMD Rule 1403
Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities, specifies work practice requirements to limit asbestos emissions from building demolition and renovation activities, including the removal and associated disturbance of asbestos -containing materials (ACM).

SCAQMD Rule 2202
On -Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options is to provide employers with a menu of options to reduce mobile source emissions generated from employee commutes, to comply with federal and state Clean Air Act requirements, Health & Safety Code Section 40458, and Section 182(d)(1)(B) of the federal Clean Air Act. It applies to any employer who employs 250 or more employees on a full or part-time basis at a worksite for a consecutive six-month period calculated as a monthly average.

SCAQMD Rule 2305
The Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE) Program aims to reduce nitrogen oxide and diesel emissions associated with warehouses, help meet federal standards and improve public health. The WAIRE Program is an indirect source rule that regulates warehouse facilities to reduce Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

718

emissions from the goods movement industry. Owners and operators of warehouses that have 100,000 square feet or more of indoor floor space in a single building must comply with the WAIRE Program. WAIRE is a menu -based point system in which warehouse operators are required to earn a specific number of points every year. The yearly number of points required is based on the number of trucks trips made to and from the warehouse each year, with largertrucks such as tractors ortractor-trailers multiplied by 2.5.

Warehouse operators may be exempt from parts of the rule if they operate less than 50,000 square feet of warehousing activities, if the number of points required is less than 10, or if the WAIRE menu action chosen under performs due to circumstances beyond the operator's control, such as a manufacturer defect. SCAQMD Rule 316 establishes fees to fund Rule 2305 compliance activities.

Air Quality Guidance Documents
SCAQMD CEQA Handbook
Although the SCAQMD is responsible for regional air quality planning efforts, it does not have the authority to directly regulate air quality issues associated with plans and new development projects throughout the South Coast Air Basin. Instead, this is controlled through local jurisdictions in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In order to assist local jurisdictions with air quality compliance issues the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) prepared by the SCAQMD (1993) with the most current updates found at http://www.agmd.gov/ceqa/hdbk.html , was developed in accordance with the projections and programs of the AQMP. The purpose of the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook is to assist Lead Agencies, as well as consultants, project proponents, and other interested parties in evaluating a proposed project's potential air quality impacts. Specifically, the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook explains the procedures that the SCAQMD recommends be followed for the environmental review process required by CEQA. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook provides direction on how to evaluate potential air quality impacts, how to determine whetherthese impacts are significant, and how to mitigate these impacts. SCAQMD is in the process of developing an "Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook" to replace the CEQA Air Quality Handbook approved by the AQMD Governing Board in 1993. The 1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook is still available but not online. In addition, there are sections of the 1993 Handbook that are obsolete. In order to assist the CEQA practitioner in conducting an air quality analysis while the new Handbook is being prepared, supplemental information regarding significance thresholds and analysis, emissions factors, cumulative impacts emissions analysis, and other useful subjects, are available at the SCAQMD website2. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook and supplemental information is used in this analysis.

Southern California Association of Governments
The SCAG is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino and Imperial Counties and addresses regional issues relating to transportation, the economy, community development and the environment. SCAG is the Federally designated MPO for the majority of the southern California region and is the largest MPO in the nation. With respect to air quality planning, SCAG has prepared the Regional Transportation Plan and Regional Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP), which addresses regional development and growth forecasts. These plans form the basis for the land use and transportation components of the AQMP, which are utilized in the preparation of air quality forecasts and in the consistency, analysis included in the AQMP. The Regional Transportation Plan, Regional 2 http://www.agmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook .

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

719

Transportation Improvement Plan, and AQMP are based on projections originating within the City and County General Plans.

On April 7, 2016, SCAG's Regional Council adopted the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS or Plan). The Plan is a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental and public health goals. The Plan charts a course for closely integrating land use and transportation — so that the region can grow smartly and sustainably. It outlines more than $556.5 billion in transportation system investments through 2040. The Plan was prepared through a collaborative, continuous, and comprehensive process with input from local governments, county transportation commissions, tribal governments, non-profit organizations, businesses and local stakeholders within the counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura. In June 2016, SCAG received its conformity determination from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) indicating that all air quality conformity requirements for the 2016 RTP/SCS and associated 2015 FTIP Consistency Amendment through Amendment 15-12 have been met.

On May 7, 2020, SCAG's Regional Council adopted Connect SoCal (2020 - 2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy) for federal transportation conformity purposes only. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Regional Council will consider approval of Connect SoCal in its entirety and for all other purposes within 120 days from May 7, 2020. Connect SoCal is a long-range visioning plan that builds upon and expands land use and transportation strategies established over several planning cycles to increase mobility options and achieve a more sustainable growth pattern. Connect SoCal outlines more than $638 billion in transportation system investments through 2045. It was prepared through a collaborative, continuous, and comprehensive process with input from local governments, county transportation commissions, tribal governments, non-profit organizations, businesses and local stakeholders within the counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura.

2.2.4 Local — City of Yucaipa
Local jurisdictions, such as the City of Yucaipa, have the authority and responsibility to reduce air pollution through its police power and decision -making authority. Specifically, the City is responsible for the assessment and mitigation of air emissions resulting from its land use decisions. The City is also responsible for the implementation of transportation control measures as outlined in the 2016 AQMP.

Examples of such measures include bus turnouts, energy -efficient streetlights, and synchronized traffic signals. In accordance with CEQA requirements and the CEQA review process, the City assesses the air quality impacts of new development projects, requires mitigation of potentially significant air quality impacts by conditioning discretionary permits, and monitors and enforces implementation of such mitigation.

The City relies on the expertise of the SCAQMD and utilizes the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook as the guidance document for the environmental review of plans and development proposals within its jurisdiction.

The Public Safety Element of the City of Yucaipa General Plan establishes goals and policies to improve air quality in the City. Applicable goals and policies include:

Goal S-7 Air Quality and Climate Change. Clean and healthful air resources that promotes public health, protects the natural environment, and mitigates local impacts to climate change.

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

720

Policy S-7.1 Integrated Planning. Integrate air quality planning with land use, economic development, and transportation -related planning to allow for the control and management of air quality.

Policy S-7.2 Transportation Sources. Encourage the expansion of transit, buildout of the pedestrian and bicycle route network, support of regional ride -share programs, and other efforts to reduce vehicle miles travelled from Yucaipa and associated vehicle emissions.

Policy S-7.3 Sensitive Land Uses. Protect residents from health risks by avoiding the placement of sensitive uses and land uses generating high levels of pollutants within close proximity to one another. Appropriate distances shall be determined based on best available knowledge.

Policy S-7.4 Regional Cooperation. Work with the South Coast Air Quality Management District, San Bernardino Association of Governments, local cities, and other agencies and stakeholders in implementing programs that reduce air pollution.

Policy S-7.8 Odor Management. Work with businesses to address odors and associated potential public nuisances from operations; where permissible under state law, require odor management plans where needed to minimize odors resulting from business operations.

2.3 MONITORED AIR QUALITY
The air quality at any site is dependent on the regional air quality and local pollutant sources. Regional air quality is determined by the release of pollutants throughout the air basin. Estimates of the existing emissions in the Basin provided in the Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan prepared by SCAQMD (March 2017) indicate that collectively, mobile sources account for 60 percent of the VOC, 90 percent of the NOx emissions, 95 percent of the CO emissions and 34 percent of directly emitted PM2.5, with another 13 percent of PM2.5 from road dust.

The SCAQMD has divided the South Coast Air Basin into 38 air -monitoring areas with a designated ambient air monitoring station representative of each area. The project site is located in the East San Bernardino Valley Air Monitoring Area (Area 35). The nearest air monitoring station to the project site is the Redland - Dearborn Monitoring Station (Redlands Station). The Redlands Station is located approximately 3.84 miles northwest of the project site at 500 N. Dearborn, Redlands. As not all monitoring stations monitor all pollutants, data was also taken from the Banning Airport Monitoring Station (Banning Station) located approximately 15.21 miles southeast of the project site at 200 S. Hathaway Street, Banning was also utilized. However, it should be noted that due to the air monitoring stations distances from the project site, recorded air pollution levels at the air monitoring station reflect with varying degrees of accuracy, local air quality conditions at the project site. Table 4 presents the monitored pollutant levels from the Redlands and Banning Stations.

Table 4 summarizes 2017 through 2019 published monitoring data, which is the most recent 3-year period available. The data shows that during the past few years, the project area has exceeded the ozone standards.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

721

Table 4
Air Quality Monitoring Summary
Pollutant (Standard)'
Year
2017
2018
2019
Ozone:

Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm)
Days > CAAQS (0.09 ppm)
Maximum 8-Hour Concentration (ppm)
Days > NAAQS (0.070 ppm)
Days > CAAQS (0.070 ppm)

0.156

0.136

0.137
80 53
73 0.135

0.115

0.118
116
95 109
117
99 111
Carbon
Monoxide:

Maximum 8-Hour Concentration (ppm)
Days > CAAQS (9 ppm)
Days > NAAQS (9 ppm)
0 0
0 0
0 0
Nitrogen
Dioxide:

Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm)
Days > CAAQS (0.18 ppm)

0.056

0.051

0.056
0 0
0 Inhalable
Particulates
2 (PM10):

Maximum 24-Hour Concentration (ltg/m
Days > NAAQS (150 µg/m3)
Days > CAAQS (50 µg/m3)
Annual Average (µg/m3)

77.0 74.2

44.9 0
0 0
2 2

26.2 26.4

26.0 Ultra -Fine
Particulates
(PM2.5):

Maximum 24-Hour Concentration (ltg1m
Days > NAAQS (35 µg/m3)
Annual Average (µg/m3)

34.9 32.0

23.4 11.4
*

9.5 Source: http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfourl.php . Data from the Redlands -Dearborn Monitoring Station unless otherwise noted.

Notes:
(1) CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standard; NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standard; ppm = parts per million * Means there was insufficient data available to determine value. (2) Data from the Banning Airport Monitoring Station.
722

Ozone
During the 2017 to 2019 monitoring period, the State 1-hour concentration standard for ozone was exceeded between 53 and 80 days each year at the Redlands Station. The State 8-hour ozone standard has been exceeded between 99 and 117 days each year over the past three years at the Redlands Station.

The Federal 8-hour ozone standard was exceeded between 95 and 116 days each year over the past three years at the Redlands Station.

Ozone is a secondary pollutant as it is not directly emitted. Ozone is the result of chemical reactions between other pollutants, most importantly hydrocarbons and NO2, which occur only in the presence of bright sunlight. Pollutants emitted from upwind cities react during transport downwind to produce the oxidant concentrations experienced in the area. Many areas of the SCAQMD contribute to the ozone levels experienced at the monitoring station, with the more significant areas being those directly upwind.

Carbon Monoxide
CO is another important pollutant that is due mainly to motorvehicles. The Banning Station did not record an exceedance of the state or federal 8-hour CO standard for the last three years.

Nitrogen Dioxide
The Banning Station did not record an exceedance of the State or Federal NO2 standards for the last three years.

Particulate Matter
The State 24-hour concentration standards for PM10 were exceeded for two days each year in 2017 and 2018 over the last three years at the Redlands Station. Over the past three years, the Redlands Station did not record an exceedance of the Federal 24-hour standards for PM10.

Over the last three years, there was insufficient data for the Federal 24-hour standard for PM2.5 at the Banning Station.

Accordingto the EPA, some people are much more sensitive than others to breathing fine particles (PM10 and PM2.5). People with influenza, chronic respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and the elderly may suffer worsening illness and premature death due to breathing these fine particles. People with bronchitis can expect aggravated symptoms from breathing in fine particles. Children may experience decline in lung function due to breathing in PM10 and PM2.5. Other groups considered sensitive are smokers and people who cannot breathe well through their noses. Exercising athletes are also considered sensitive because many breathe through their mouths during exercise.

2.4 AIR QUALITY STANDARDS

2.4.1 Significance Thresholds
Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines
Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

723

Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines states that, where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make a significance determination. Pursuant to Appendix G, the project would result in a significant impact related to air quality if it would:
■ Conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable air quality plan; ■ Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation;
■ Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard; ■ Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or ■ Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

The CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7 provides the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district, when available, may be relied upon to make determinations of significance. The potential air quality impacts of the project are, therefore, evaluated according to thresholds developed by SCAQMD in their CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook, and subsequent guidance, which are listed below.' Therefore, the project would result in a potentially significant impact to air quality if it would:

AIR-1: Conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable air quality plan; AIR-2: Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation as a result of:
■ Criteria pollutant emissions during construction (direct and indirect) in excess of the SCAQMD's regional significance thresholds,
■ Criteria pollutant emissions during operation (direct and indirect) in excess of the SCAQMD's regional significance thresholds.

AIR-3: Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors);
AIR-4: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations that would:
■ Exceed SCAQMD's localized significance thresholds, or ■ Cause or contribute to the formation of CO hotspots.

AIR-5: Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. 3 While the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook contains significance thresholds for lead, Project construction and operation would not include sources of lead emissions and would not exceed the established thresholds for lead. Unleaded fuel and unleaded paints have virtually eliminated lead emissions from commercial land use projects such as the Project. As a result, lead emissions are not further evaluated herein.

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

724

The SCAQMD is in the process of developing an Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook to replace the CEQA Air Quality Handbook. In the interim, supplemental guidance has been adopted by the SCAQMD.

The potential air quality impacts of the project are, therefore, evaluated according to numeric indicators developed by the SCAQMD in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook and supplemental guidance from the SCAQM D.4
Regional Air Quality
Many air quality impacts that derive from dispersed mobile sources, which are the dominate pollution generators in the basin, often occurs hours later and miles away after photochemical processes have converted primary exhaust pollutants into secondary contaminants such as ozone. The incremental regional air quality impact of an individual project is generally very small and difficult to measure.

Therefore, the SCAQMD has developed significance thresholds based on the volume of pollution emitted rather than on actual ambient air quality because the direct air quality impact of a project is not quantifiable on a regional scale. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that any project in the South Coast Air Basin with daily emissions that exceed any of the identified significance thresholds should be considered as having an individually and cumulatively significant air quality impact. For the purposes to this air quality impact analysis, a regional air quality impact would be considered significant if emissions exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds identified in Table 5.

Local Air Quality
Project -related construction air emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and Federal air quality standards in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the South Coast Air Basin. In orderto assess local air quality impacts the SCAQMD has developed Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) to assess the project -related air emissions in the project vicinity. The SCAQMD has also provided Final Localized Significance Thresholds Methodology (LST Methodology), June 2003, which details the methodology to analyze local air emission impacts. The Localized Significance Thresholds Methodology found that the primary emissions of concern are NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. Under the LST methodology, local air quality emissions from the project were analyzed using the SCAQMD's Mass Rate Localized Significance Thresholds Look -up Tables.

The significance thresholds for the local emissions of NO2 and CO are determined by subtracting the highest background concentration from the last three years of these pollutants from Table 4 above, from the most restrictive ambient air quality standards for these pollutants that are outlined in the Localized Significance Thresholds. Table 5 shows the ambient air quality standards for NO2, CO, and PM10 and PM2.5.

Odor Impacts
The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that an odor impact would occur if the proposed project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402, which states:
^ While the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook contains significance thresholds for lead, Project construction and operation would not include sources of lead emissions and would not exceed the established thresholds for lead. Unleaded fuel and unleaded paints have virtually eliminated lead emissions from commercial land use projects such as the Project. As a result, lead emissions are not further evaluated herein.

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

725

A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.

The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.

If the proposed project results in a violation of Rule 402 with regards to odor impacts, then the proposed project would create a significant odor impact.

2.5 SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Construction activities associated with the proposed project would have the potential to generate air emissions, toxic air contaminant emissions, and odor impacts. Assumptions forthe phasing, duration, and required equipment for the construction of the proposed project were obtained from the project applicant. The construction activities for the proposed project are anticipated to include: grading of approximately 4.66 net acres,5 construction of: a 11,900 square foot auto repair use (includes 7,500 square foot truck repair building and 3,900 square foot car wash area) and a 25,000 square foot building with a 20,000 square foot building footprint that includes 19,000 square feet of truck museum use and 6,000 square feet of office use; a 58-space parking lot with paved areas (parking lot and circulation areas) covering approximately 37,500 square feet; approximately 3.08 acres of landscaping, open space, and existing storage areas'; and application of architectural coatings. The project is anticipated to need between 2,000 to 5,000 cubic yards of sub excavation for compaction purposes; therefore, it was assumed that there would be 5,000 cubic yards of export during grading. See Appendix B for more details.

CAIEEMod does not have a truck museum land use in its database. In addition, there are no other museum type or other similar land uses available; therefore, as the applicant used a Church use to calculate trip generation based on the assembly characteristics of a Church being the most similar to the special event activity occurring at the truck museum (see Operations -Related Regional Air Quality Impacts below for more details), to be consistent, this analysis modeled the museum under the Church land use in CalEEMod.

The proposed project is anticipated to start construction no sooner than December 2021, take approximately 9 months, and be completed around the beginning September 2022.' The project will be operational in 2022.
5 The total project site is 5.19 acres; however, that includes approximately 22,900 square feet of existing structures that are to remain.

Therefore, the potential disturbed acreage is 4.66 acres. A large portion of the site is to remain as the existing storage operations and may not be graded/disturbed; however, in order to provide a worst -case, conservative analysis it was assumed that the whole 4.66 acres (after reduction from existing structures) could potentially be disturbed due to the relocating of storage containers and storage areas throughout the site.
6 The 3.08 acres modeled as non -asphalt surfaces in.CalEEMod includes areas that are to remain as the existing storage use. Although this acreage is to remain as the existing use, this acreage was included in the model in order to account for potential emissions from relocation of the existing storage containers within this area during the construction process. 7 The project is anticipated to occur in three Phases. Phase 1 does not include construction as it is just expansion of existing construction yard land use onto additional parcels and obtaining building permits for unpermitted structures. Phase 2 is anticipated to last approximately 6 months and Phase 3 is anticipated to last approximately 9 months. Per the project applicant, Phase 2 and Phase 3 of construction are anticipated to occur concurrently. Therefore, project construction was modeled as occurring in one phase with a total duration of approximately 9 months.

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis Page 27 726

Table 5
SCAQMD Air Quality Signficance Thresholds'
Mass Daily Thresholds
Pollutant
Construction
(Ibs/day)
Operation (Ibs/day)
NOx
100
55 VOC
75 55
P M 10
150
150
PM2.5
55 55
Sox
150
150
CO
550
550
Lead
3 3
Toxic Air Contaminants, Odor and GHG Thresholds
TACs
Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk >_ 10 in 1 million
Cancer Burden > 0.5 excess cancer cases (in areas >_ 1 in 1 million) Chronic & Acute Hazard Index > 1.0 (project increment)
Odor
lProject creates an odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402 GHG
110,000 MT/yr CO2e for industrial projects
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant
SCAQMD Standards
NO2 -1-hour average

0.18 ppm (338 µg/m^3)
PM10 -24-hour average
Construction
Operations

10.4 µg/m^3

2.5 ug/m^3
PM2.5 -24-hour average
Construction
Operations

10.4 µg/m^3

2.5 µg/m^3
SO2
1-hour average
24-hour average

0.25 ppm

0.04 ppm
CO
1-hour average
8-hour average
20 ppm (23,000 µg/m^3)
9 ppm (10,000 µg/m^3)
Leaa
30-day average
Rolling 3-month average
Quarterly average

1.5 µg/m^3

0.15 µg/m^3

1.5 µg/m^3
Source: http://www.agmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/signthres.pdf 727

2.5.1 Methodology
The following provides a discussion of the methodology used to calculate construction air emissions and an analysis of the proposed project's short-term construction emissions for the criteria pollutants. The construction -related regional air quality impacts have been analyzed for both criteria pollutants and GHGs.

Emissions are estimated using the CaIEEMod (Version 2020.4.0) software, which is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and GHG emissions from a variety of land use projects. CaIEEMod was developed in collaboration with the air districts of California. Regional data (e.g., emission factors, trip lengths, meteorology, source inventory, etc.) have been provided by the various California air districts to account for local requirements and conditions. The model is considered to be an accurate and comprehensive tool for quantifying air quality and GHG impacts from land use projects throughout California.

Daily regional emissions during construction are forecasted by assuming a conservative estimate of construction activities (i.e., assuming all construction occurs at the earliest feasible date) and applying the mobile source and fugitive dust emissions factors. The input values used in this analysis were adjusted to be project -specific for the construction schedule and the equipment used was based on CaIEEMod defaults. The CaIEEMod program uses the EMFAC2017 computer program to calculate the emission rates specific for San Bernardino County for construction -related employee vehicle trips and the OFFROAD2011 computer program to calculate emission rates for heavy truck operations. EMFAC2017 and OFFROAD2011 are computer programs generated by CARB that calculates composite emission rates for vehicles.

Emission rates are reported by the program in grams per trip and grams per mile or grams per running hour. Daily truck trips and CalEEMod default trip length data were used to assess roadway emissions from truck exhaust. The maximum daily emissions are estimated values for the worst -case day and do not represent the emissions that would occur for every day of project construction. The maximum daily emissions are compared to the SCAQMD daily regional numeric indicators. Detailed construction equipment lists, construction scheduling, and emission calculations are provided in Appendix B.

The project will be required to comply with existing SCAQMD rules for the reduction of fugitive dust emissions. SCAQMD Rule 403 establishes these procedures. Compliance with this rule is achieved through application of standard best management practices in construction and operation activities, such as application of water or chemical stabilizers to disturbed soils, managing haul road dust by application of water, covering haul vehicles, restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph, sweeping loose dirt from paved site access roadways, cessation of construction activity when winds exceed 25 mph and establishing a permanent, stabilizing ground cover on finished sites. In addition, projects that disturb 50 acres or more of soil or move 5,000 cubic yards of materials per day are required to submit a Fugitive Dust Control Plan or a Large Operation Notification Form to SCAQMD. Based on the size of the Project area (approximately 4.66 acres after reduction from existing building square footages that are remaining) a Fugitive Dust Control Plan or Large Operation Notification would not be required.

SCAQMD's Rule 403 minimum requirements require that the application of the best available dust control measures are used for all grading operations and include the application of water or other soil stabilizers in sufficient quantity to prevent the generation of visible dust plumes. Compliance with Rule 403 would require the use of watertrucks during all phases where earth moving operations would occur. Compliance with Rule 403 has been included in the CalEEMod modeling for the proposed project.

Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

728

Per SCAQMD Rule 1113 as amended on June 3, 2011, the architectural coatings that would be applied after January 1, 2014, will be limited to an average of 50 grams per liter or less of VOCs for building coatings and 100 grams per liter or less of VOCs for traffic coatings.

The phases of the construction activities which have been analyzed below for each phase are: (1) grading, (2) building construction, (3) paving, and (4) application of architectural coatings. Details pertaining to the project's construction timing and the type of equipment modeled for each construction phase are available in the CaIEEMod output in Appendix B.

2.5.2 Construction -Related Regional Impacts
The construction -related criteria pollutant emissions for each phase are shown below in Table 6. Table 6 shows that none of the project's emissions will exceed SCAQMD regional screening thresholds. Therefore, a less than significant air quality impact would occur from construction of the proposed project.

2.5.3 Construction -Related Local Impacts
Construction -related air emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and Federal air quality standards in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the South Coast Air Basin. The proposed project has been analyzed for the potential local air quality impacts created from: construction -related fugitive dust and diesel emissions; from toxic air contaminants; and from construction -related odor impacts.

Local Air Quality Impacts from Construction
The SCAQMD has published a "Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds" (South Coast Air Quality Management District 2011b). CalEEMod calculates construction emissions based on the number of equipment hours and the maximum daily disturbance activity possible for each piece of equipment. In orderto compare CalEEMod reported emissions against the localized significance threshold lookup tables, the CEQA document should contain the following parameters:
(1) The off -road equipment list (including type of equipment, horsepower, and hours of operation) assumed for the day of construction activity with maximum emissions. (2) The maximum number of acres disturbed on the peak day. (3) Any emission control devices added onto off -road equipment. (4) Specific dust suppression techniques used on the day of construction activity with maximum emissions.

The CalEEMod output in Appendix B show the equipment used for this analysis.

As shown in Table 7, the maximum number of acres disturbed in a day would be 2.5 acres during grading.

The local air quality emissions from construction were analyzed using the SCAQMD's Mass Rate Localized Significance Threshold Look -up Tables and the methodology described in Localized Significance Threshold Methodology prepared by SCAQMD (revised July 2008). The Look -up Tables were developed by the SCAQMD in order to readily determine if the daily emissions of CO, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 from the proposed project could result in a significant impact to the local air quality. The emission thresholds were calculated based on the East San Bernardino Valley source receptor area (SRA) 35 and a disturbance value of two acres per day, to be conservative. According to LST Methodology, any receptor located closer than 25 meters (82 feet) shall be based on the 25-meter thresholds. The nearest sensitive receptors to the Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

729

Table 6
Construction -Related Regional Pollutant Emissions
Activity
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
ROG
NOx
CO
SOZ
PM10
PM2.5
Grading
On -Site'

2.29 24.74

15.86 0.03

3.95 2.41
Off-Site2

0.47 12.81

3.77 0.05

1.72 0.60
Subtotal

2.76 37.54

19.62 0.08

5.67 3.00
Building Construction
On -Site'

2.91 27.68

25.14 0.04

1.48 1.39
Off-Site2

0.48 2.13

4.50 0.02

1.22 0.35
Subtotal

3.39 29.81

29.65 0.06

2.70 1.75
Paving
On -Site'

1.10 9.52

12.19 0.02

0.49 0.45
Off-Site2

0.08 0.06

0.82 0.00

0.22 0.06
Subtotal

1.19 9.58

13.02 0.02

0.71 0.51
Architectural Coating
On -Site'

21.60 1.41

1.81 0.00

0.08 0.08
Off-Site2

0.07 0.05

0.70 0.00

0.19 0.05
Subtotal

21.67 1.46

2.51 0.00

0.27 0.13
Total for overlapping phases'

26.25 40.84

45.18 0.08

3.68 2.39
SCAQMD Thresholds
75 100
550
150
150
55 Exceeds Thresholds?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Source: CalEEMod Version 2020.4.0
Notes:
(1) On -site emissions from equipment operated on -site that is not operated on public roads. On -site grading PM-10 and PM-2.5 emissions show mitigated values for fugitive dust for compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403. (2) Off -site emissions from equipment operated on public roads. (3) Construction, painting and paving phases may overlap. 730

Table 7
Maximum Number of Acres Disturbed Per Day
Activity
Equipment
Number
Acres/8hr-day
Total Acres
Grading
Rubber Tired Dozers
1 0.5

0.5 Graders
1 0.5

0.5 Crawler Tractors'
3 0.5

1.5 Total for phase
I
I -
I -
1 2.5
Source: South Coast AQMD, Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds, 2011b.

Notes:
(1) Tractor/loader/backhoe is a suitable surrogate for a crawler tractor per SCAQMD staff. 731

project site are the existing single-family residential unit located on the project site (caretaker's residence) and the single-family residential uses located adjacent to the north, approximately 55 feet (-17 meters) southwest, and approximately 70 feet (^21 meters) to the east of the project site; therefore, the SCAQMD Look -up Tables for 25 meters was used. Table 8 shows the on -site emissions from the CaIEEMod model for the different construction phases and the LST emissions thresholds.

The data provided in Table 8 shows that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the local emissions thresholds at the nearest sensitive receptors. Therefore, a less than significant local air quality impact would occur from construction of the proposed project.

2.5.4 Construction -Related Human Health Impacts
Regarding health effects related to criteria pollutant emissions, the applicable significance thresholds are established for regional compliance with the state and federal ambient air quality standards, which are intended to protect public health from both acute and long-term health impacts, depending on the potential effects of the pollutant. Because regional and local emissions of criteria pollutants during construction of the project would be below the applicable thresholds, it would not contribute to long- term health impacts related to nonattainment of the ambient air quality standards. Therefore, significant adverse acute health impacts as a result of project construction are not anticipated.

2.5.5 Construction -Related Toxic Air Contaminant Impacts The greatest potential for toxic air contaminant emissions would be related to diesel particulate emissions associated with heavy equipment operations during construction of the proposed project. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA)$ and the SCAQMD Health Risk Assessment Guidance for Analyzing Cancer Risks from Mobile Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis (August 2003),9 health effects from TACs are described in terms of individual cancer risk based on a lifetime (i.e., 30-year) resident exposure duration. Given the temporary and short-term construction schedule (approximately 9 months), the project would not result in a long-term (i.e., lifetime or 30-year) exposure as a result of project construction. Furthermore, construction -based particulate matter (PM) emissions (including diesel exhaust emissions) do not exceed any local or regional thresholds.

The project would comply with the CARB AirToxics Control Measure that limits diesel powered equipment and vehicle idling to no more than 5 minutes at a location, and the CARB In -Use Off -Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation; compliance with these would minimize emissions of TACs during construction. The project would also comply with the requirements of SCAQMD Rule 1403 if asbestos is found during the construction activities. Therefore, impacts from TACs during construction would be less than significant. s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Air Toxic Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessment, February 2015, https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/20lSguidancemanual.pdf . e South Coast Air Quality Management District, Health Risk Assessment Guidance for Analyzing Cancer Risks from Mobile Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis, August 2003, http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/mobile-source-toxics- analysis.doc?sfvrsn=2.

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

732

Table 8
Local Construction Emissions at the Nearest Receptors
Activity
On -Site Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
NOx
CO
PM10
PM2.5
Grading

24.74 15.86

3.95 2.41
Building Construction

27.68 25.14

1.48 1.39
Paving

9.52 12.19

0.49 0.45
Architectural Coating

1.41 1.81
1 0.08
1 0.08
SCAQMD Thresholds'
170
1,174
7 5
Exceeds Threshold?
No
No
No
No
Source: Calculated from CalEEMod and SCAQMD's Mass Rate Look -up Tables for 2 acres, to be conservative, at a distance of 25 m in SRA 35 East San Benardino Valley.

Notes:
(1) The nearest sensitive receptors are the existing single-family residential unit located on the project site and the single-family residnetial uses located adjacent to the north, approximately 55 feet (-17 meters) southwest, and approximately 70 feet (" 21 meters) to the east of the project site; therefore, the 25 meter threshold was used.

Note: The project will disturb up to a maximum of 2.5 acres a day during grading (see Table 7). 733

2.5.6 Construction -Related Odor Impacts
Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the application of materials such as asphalt pavement. The objectionable odors that may be produced during the construction process are of short-term in nature and the odor emissions are expected to cease upon the drying or hardening of the odor producing materials. Due to the short-term nature and limited amounts of odor producing materials being utilized, no significant impact related to odors would occur during construction of the proposed project. Diesel exhaust and VOCs would be emitted during construction of the project, which are objectionable to some; however, emissions would disperse rapidly from the project site and therefore should not reach an objectionable level at the nearest sensitive receptors.

2.6 LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
The on -going operation of the proposed project would result in a long-term increase in air quality emissions. This increase would be due to emissions from the project -generated vehicle trips and through operational emissions from the on -going use of the proposed project. The following section provides an analysis of potential long-term air quality impacts due to regional air quality and local air quality impacts with the on -going operations of the proposed project.

2.6.1 Operations -Related Regional Air Quality Impacts
The potential operations -related air emissions have been analyzed below for the criteria pollutants and cumulative impacts.

2.6.2 Operations -Related Criteria Pollutants Analysis
The operations -related criteria air quality impacts created by the proposed project have been analyzed through use of the CaIEEMod model. The operating emissions were based on the year 2022, which is the anticipated opening year for the proposed project. The operations daily emissions printouts from the CalEEMod model are provided in Appendix B. The CalEEMod analyzes operational emissions from area sources, energy usage, and mobile sources, which are discussed below.

Mobile Sources
Mobile sources include emissions from the additional vehicle miles generated from the proposed project.

The City did not require either a traffic impact analysis or a trip generation analysis for the proposed project due to it being an existing operation. Therefore, estimated trip generation for the proposed project was provided by the project applicant per use of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation 10th Edition Land Use Table (September 2017). It was assumed that the auto repair building would have approximately 3.05 average daily trips per employee, the office building would have

3.28 average daily trips per employee, and the truck museum would have 1.21 average daily trips per visitor (it is assumed that during an event the museum could have up to 100 visitors).10 Although the 10 The auto repair vehicle trips were based off of the light industrial land use (ITE 110), the office uses were based on an office land use for a single tenant (ITE 710), and the truck museum was based on a church land use (ITE land use code 560). As stated by the project applicant, the ITE manual does not have a similar use to the special events anticipated for the proposed project at the truck museum. As the assembly Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

734

proposed truck museum is anticipated to have only one event every quarter, the modeling was completed with an event with 100 visitors occurring in order to show a worst -case analysis. Therefore, the project is anticipated to have approximately 9.15 trips per day for the auto repair shop use, 19.68 trips per day for the office use, and 121 trips per day for the truck museum (during an event).11 For use in the CaIEEMod model, the trips were converted to 3.28 trips per thousand square feet for the office use, 0.8 trips per thousand square feet per day for the auto repair use, and 6.37 trips per thousand square feet per day for the truck museum use. The CaIEEMod program then applies the emission factors for each trip which is provided by the EMFAC2017 model to determine the vehicular traffic pollutant emissions. CaIEEMod default trip lengths were used in this analysis.

Area Sources
Per the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Appendix A Calculation Details for CaIEEMod, area sources include emissions from consumer products, landscape equipment and architectural coatings. Landscape maintenance includes fuel combustion emissions from equipment such as lawn mowers, rototillers, shredders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chain saws, and hedge trimmers, as well as air compressors, generators, and pumps. As specifics were not known about the landscaping equipment fleet, CaIEEMod defaults were used to estimate emissions from landscaping equipment. No changes were made to the default area source parameters.

Energy Usage
Energy usage includes emissions from the generation of electricity and natural gas used on -site. No changes were made to the default energy usage parameters.

Project Impacts
The worst -case summer or winter criteria pollutant emissions created from the proposed project's long- term operations have been calculated and are shown below in Table 9. The results show that none of the SCAQMD regional thresholds would be exceeded. Therefore, a less than significant regional air quality impact would occur from operation of the proposed project.

2.6.3 Operations -Related Local Air Quality Impacts
Project -related air emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and Federal air quality standards in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the South Coast Air Basin. The proposed project has been analyzed for the potential local CO emission impacts from the project -generated vehicular trips and from the potential local air quality impacts from on -site operations. The following analysis analyzes the vehicular CO emissions, local impacts from on -site operations per SCAQMD LST methodology, and odor impacts. characteristics of a church land use were the most similar to the event characteristics anticipated for the truck museum, the church land use was chosen to estimate trip generation for the proposed museum. 1 It is assumed that the project would have approximately 10 auto repair shop employees and 6 office employees on site. However, the auto repair shop uses are already existing on the site including at least approximately seven employees; therefore, only approximately three new auto shop employees are anticipated as part of the proposed project.

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

735

Table 9
Regional Operational Pollutant Emissions
Activity
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
PM10
PM2.5
Area Sources'

0.89 0.00

0.01 0.00

0.00 0.00
Energy Usage

0.03 0.27

0.23 0.00

0.02 0.02
Mobile Sources3

0.47 0.59

3.81 0.01

0.71 0.19
Total Emissions

1.39 0.86

4.04 0.01

0.73 0.22
SCAQMD Thresholds
55 55
550
150
150
55 Exceeds Threshold?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Source: CalEEMod Version 2020.4.0; the higher of either summer or winter emissions.

Notes:
(1) Area sources consist of emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment. (2) Energy usage consists of emissions from generation of electricity and on -site natural gas usage. (3) Mobile sources consist of emissions from vehicles and road dust. 736

Local CO Emission Impacts from Project -Generated Vehicular Trips CO is the pollutant of major concern along roadways because the most notable source of CO is motor vehicles. For this reason, CO concentrations are usually indicative of the local air quality generated by a roadway network and are used as an indicator of potential local air quality impacts. Local air quality impacts can be assessed by comparing future without and with project CO levels to the State and Federal CO standards which were presented above.

To determine if the proposed project could cause emission levels in excess of the CO standards discussed above, a sensitivity analysis is typically conducted to determine the potential for CO "hot spots" at a number of intersections in the general project vicinity. Because of reduced speeds and vehicle queuing, "hot spots" potentially can occur at high traffic volume intersections with a Level of Service E or worse.

The analysis prepared for CO attainment in the South Coast Air Basin by the SCAQMD can be used to assist in evaluating the potential for CO exceedances in the South Coast Air Basin. CO attainment was thoroughly analyzed as part of the SCAQMD's 2003 Air Quality Management Plan (2003 AQMP) and the 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan). As discussed in the 1992 CO Plan, peak carbon monoxide concentrations in the South Coast Air Basin are due to unusual meteorological and topographical conditions, and not due to the impact of particular intersections. Considering the region's unique meteorological conditions and the increasingly stringent CO emissions standards, CO modeling was performed as part of 1992 CO Plan and subsequent plan updates and air quality management plans.

In the 1992 CO Plan, a CO hot spot analysis was conducted for four busy intersections in Los Angeles at the peak morning and afternoon time periods. The intersections evaluated included: South Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway (Lynwood); Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue (Westwood); Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue (Hollywood); and La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard (Inglewood). These analyses did not predict a violation of CO standards. The busiest intersection evaluated was that at Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, which has a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority evaluated the Level of Service in the vicinity of the Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection and found it to be Level of Service E during the morning peak hour and Level of Service F during the afternoon peak hour.

As discussed previously, the City did not require either a traffic impact analysis or a trip generation analysis for the proposed project due to it being an existing operation. Therefore, estimated trip generation for the proposed project was provided by the project applicant per use of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation 10th Edition Land Use Table (September 2017). Although the proposed truck museum is anticipated to have only one event every quarter, the estimated trip generation was calculated forthis analysis with an event with 100 visitors occurring in orderto show a worst -case analysis.

Therefore, the project is anticipated to have approximately 9.15 trips per day for the auto repair shop use,

19.68 trips per day for the office use, and 121 trips per day for the truck museum (during an event) for a total of up to approximately 150 vehicle trips per day. The 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan) showed that an intersection which has a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day would not violate the CO standard. Therefore, as the project even during an event would only have approximately 150 daily vehicle trips, intersections volumes would fall far short of 100,000 vehicles per day, no CO "hot spot" modeling was performed, and no significant long-term air quality impact is anticipated to local air quality with the on -going use of the proposed project.

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

737

Local Air Quality Impacts from On -Site Operations
Project -related air emissions from on -site sources such as architectural coatings, landscaping equipment, on -site usage of natural gas appliances as well as the operation of vehicles on -site may have the potential to exceed the State and Federal air quality standards in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the Air Basin. An existing single- family residential unit is located on the project site (caretaker's residence) and existing single-family residential uses are also located adjacent to the north, approximately 55 feet (-17 meters) southwest, and approximately 70 feet (^21 meters) to the east of the project site The local air quality emissions from on -site operations were analyzed according to the methodology described in Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, prepared by SCAQMD, revised July 2008. The Look -up Tables were developed by the SCAQMD in order to readily determine if the daily emissions of CO, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 from the proposed project could result in a significant impact to the local air quality. Per SCAQMD staff, the 5-acre Look -up Table, which is the largest site available, can be used as a conservative screening analysis for on -site operational emissions to determine whether more -detailed dispersion modeling would be necessary. The proposed project was analyzed based on the East San Bernardino Valley source receptor area (SRA) 35 and, to be conservative, used the thresholds for 2-acre project site. The site is 5.19 acres, but only 4.66 acres once the existing structures to remain are take into consideration.

Table 10 shows the on -site emissions from the CaIEEMod model that includes natural gas usage, landscape maintenance equipment, and vehicles operating on -site and the calculated emissions thresholds. Per LST methodology, mobile emissions include only on -site sources which equate to approximately 10 percent of the project -related new mobile sources.12 The data provided in Table 10 shows that the on -going operations of the proposed project would not exceed SCAQMD local operational thresholds of significance. Therefore, the on -going operations of the proposed project would create a less than significant operations -related impact to local air quality due to on -site emissions and no mitigation would be required.

2.6.4 Operations -Related Human Health Impacts
Regarding health effects related to criteria pollutant emissions, the applicable significance thresholds are established for regional compliance with the state and federal ambient air quality standards, which are intended to protect public health from both acute and long-term health impacts, depending on the potential effects of the pollutant. Because regional and local emissions of criteria pollutants during operation of the project would be below the applicable thresholds, it would not contribute to long-term health impacts related to nonattainment of the ambient air quality standards. Therefore, significant adverse acute health impacts as a result of project operation are not anticipated. 12 The project site is approximately 0.14 miles in length at its longest point; therefore, the on -site mobile source emissions represent approximately 1/49th of the shortest CalEEMod default distance of 6.9 miles. Therefore, to be conservative, 1/10th the distance (dividing the mobile source emissions by 10) was used to represent the portion of the overall mobile source emissions that would occur on -site.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

738

Table 10
Local Operational Emissions at the Nearest Receptors"
On -Site Emission Source
On -Site Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
NOx
CO
PM10
PM2.5
Area Sources2

0.00 0.01

0.00 0.00
Energy Usage

0.27 0.23

0.02 0.02
Vehicle Emissions4

0.59 3.81

0.71 0.19
Total Emissions

0.86 4.04

0.73 0.02
SCAQMD Thresholdss
170
1,174
2 2
Exceeds Threshold?
No
No
No
No
Notes:
(1) Source: Calculated from CalEEMod and SCAQMD's Mass Rate Look -up Tables for 2 acres, to be conservative. (2) Area sources consist of emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment. (3) Energy usage consists of emissions from on -site natural gas usage. (4) On -site vehicular emissions based on 1/10 of the gross vehicular emissions and road dust. (5) The nearest sensitive receptors are the existing single-family residential unit located on the project site and the single-family residnetial uses located adjacent to the north, approximately 55 feet (-17 meters) southwest, and approximately 70 feet (-21 meters) to the east of the project site; therefore, the 25 meter threshold was used. 739

2.6.5 Operations -Related Odor Impacts
Potential sources that may emit odors during the on -going operations of the proposed project would include odor emissions from the intermittent diesel delivery truck emissions and trash storage areas. Due to the distance of the nearest receptors from the project site and through compliance with SCAQMD's Rule 402 no significant impact related to odors would occur during the on -going operations of the proposed project.

2.7 CUMULATIVE AIR QUALITY IMPACTS
There are a number of cumulative projects in the project area that have not yet been built or are currently under construction. Since the timing or sequencing of the cumulative projects is unknown, any quantitative analysis to ascertain daily construction emissions that assumes multiple, concurrent construction projects would be speculative. Further, cumulative projects include local development as well as general growth within the project area. However, as with most development, the greatest source of emissions is from mobile sources, which travel well out of the local area. Therefore, from an air quality standpoint, the cumulative analysis would extend beyond any local projects and when wind patterns are considered would cover an even larger area. The SCAQMD recommends using two different methodologies: (1) that project -specific air quality impacts be used to determine the potential cumulative impacts to regional air quality;13 and (2) that a project's consistency with the current AQMP be used to determine its potential cumulative impacts.

2.7.1 Project Specific Impacts
The project area is out of attainment for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5. Construction and operation of cumulative projects will further degrade the local air quality, as well as the air quality of the South Coast Air Basin. The greatest cumulative impact on the quality of regional air cell will be the incremental addition of pollutants mainly from increased traffic volumes from residential, commercial, and industrial development and the use of heavy equipment and trucks associated with the construction of these projects. Air quality will be temporarily degraded during construction activities that occur separately or simultaneously. However, in accordance with the SCAQMD methodology, projects that do not exceed the SCAQMD criteria or can be mitigated to less than criteria levels are not significant and do not add to the overall cumulative impact. A significant impact may occur if a project would add a cumulatively considerable contribution of a federal or state non -attainment pollutant.

Project operations would generate emissions of NOx, ROG, CO, PM10, and PM2.5, which, would not exceed the SCAQMD regional or local thresholds and would not be expected to result in ground level concentrations that exceed the NAAQS or CAAQS. Since the project would not introduce any substantial stationary sources of emissions, CO is the benchmark pollutant for assessing local area air quality impacts from post -construction motor vehicle operations. As indicated earlier, no violations of the state and federal CO standards are projected to occur for the project, based on the magnitude of traffic the project is anticipated to create. Therefore, operation of the project would not result in a cumulatively is South Coast Air Quality Management District, Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution White Paper, 1993, http://www.agmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook .

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

740

considerable net increase for non -attainment of criteria pollutants or ozone precursors. As a result, the project would result in a less than significant cumulative impact for operational emissions.

2.7.2 Air Quality Compliance
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a discussion of any inconsistencies between a proposed project and applicable General Plans and Regional Plans (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125). The regional plan that applies to the proposed project includes the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Therefore, this section discusses any potential inconsistencies of the proposed project with the AQM P.

The purpose of this discussion is to set forth the issues regarding consistency with the assumptions and objectives of the AQMP and discuss whetherthe proposed projectwould interfere with the region's ability to comply with Federal and State air quality standards. If the decision -makers determine that the proposed project is inconsistent, the lead agency may consider project modifications or inclusion of mitigation to eliminate the inconsistency.

The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that "New or amended General Plan Elements (including land use zoning and density amendments), Specific Plans, and significant projects must be analyzed for consistency with the AQMP". Strict consistency with all aspects of the plan is usually not required. A proposed project should be considered to be consistent with the AQMP if it furthers one or more policies and does not obstruct other policies. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook identifies two key indicators of consistency:
(1) Whether the project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP. (2) Whether the project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP in 2016 or increments based on the year of project buildout and phase.

Both of these criteria are evaluated in the following sections.

Criteria 1 — Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations Based on the air quality modeling analysis contained in this Air Analysis, short-term construction impacts will not result in significant impacts based on the SCAQMD regional and local thresholds of significance.

This Air Analysis also found that, long-term operations impacts will not result in significant impacts based on the SCAQMD local and regional thresholds of significance.

Therefore, the proposed project is not projected to contribute to the exceedance of any air pollutant concentration standards and is found to be consistent with the AQMP for the first criterion.

Criteria 2 — Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP?
Consistency with the AQMP assumptions is determined by performing an analysis of the proposed project with the assumptions in the AQMP. The emphasis of this criterion is to ensure that the analyses conducted for the proposed project are based on the same forecasts as the AQMP. The 2016-2040 Regional Transportation/Sustainable Communities Strategy prepared by SCAG (2016) includes chapters on: the challenges in a changing region, creating a plan for our future, and the road to greater mobility and Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

741

sustainable growth. These chapters currently respond directly to federal and state requirements placed on SCAG. Local governments are required to use these as the basis of their plans for purposes of consistency with applicable regional plans under CEQA. For this project, the City of Yucaipa Land Use Plan defines the assumptions that are represented in the AQMP.

The majority of the Project Site has a General Plan land use designation of Service Commercial (CS) (-4.62 acres), while the remaining portion (-0.57 acres) has a General Plan land use designation of multi -family residential (RM-10m). The project will be applying for a General Plan Amendment to change the RM designation to CS. Therefore, part of the proposed project is not currently consistent with the existing land use. However, the existing storage uses on this portion of the site are already in operation and are to remain. Once the GPA is approved, the project would be consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation. Although the project and GPA may initially result in an inconsistency with the AQMP on paper, the inconsistency would not necessarily constitute a conflict with the AQMP. The SCAQMD acknowledges that strict consistency with all aspects of the AQMP is not required in order to make a finding of no conflict. Rather, a project is considered to be consistent with the AQMP if it furthers one or more policies and does not obstruct other policies. The project would implement contemporary energy - efficient technologies and regulatory/operational programs required per Title 24, CalGreen and City standards. Generally, compliance with SCAQMD emissions reductions and control requirements also act to reduce project air pollutant emissions. In combination, project emissions -reducing design features and regulatory/operational programs are consistent with and support overarching AQMP air pollution reduction strategies. Project support of these strategies promotes timely attainment of AQMP air quality standards and would bring the project into conformance with the AQMP. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to exceed the AQMP assumptions for the project site and is found to be consistent with the AQMP for the second criterion.

Based on the above, the proposed project will not result in an inconsistency with the SCAQMD AQMP.

Therefore, a less than significant impact will occur.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

742

3 GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE ANALYSIS

3.1 EXISTING GREENHOUSE GAS ENVIRONMENT
Constituent gases of the Earth's atmosphere, called atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHG), play a critical role in the Earth's radiation amount by trapping infrared radiation emitted from the Earth's surface, which otherwise would have escaped to space. Prominent greenhouse gases contributing to this process include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), ozone, water vapor, nitrous oxide (N20), and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). This phenomenon, known as the Greenhouse Effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate. Anthropogenic (caused or produced by humans) emissions of these greenhouse gases in excess of natural ambient concentrations are responsible for the enhancement of the Greenhouse Effect and have led to a trend of unnatural warming of the Earth's natural climate, known as global warming or climate change. Emissions of gases that induce global warming are attributable to human activities associated with industrial/manufacturing, agriculture, utilities, transportation, and residential land uses.

Transportation is responsible for 41 percent of the State's greenhouse gas emissions, followed by electricity generation. Emissions of CO2 and nitrous oxide (NOx) are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion.

Methane, a potent greenhouse gas, results from off -gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Sinks of CO2, where CO2 is stored outside of the atmosphere, include uptake by vegetation and dissolution into the ocean. The following provides a description of each of the greenhouse gases and their global warming potential.

3.1.1 Water Vapor
Water vapor is the most abundant, important, and variable GHG in the atmosphere. Water vapor is not considered a pollutant; in the atmosphere it maintains a climate necessary for life. Changes in its concentration are primarily considered a result of climate feedbacks related to the warming of the atmosphere rather than a direct result of industrialization. The feedback loop in which water is involved is critically important to projecting future climate change. As the temperature of the atmosphere rises, more water is evaporated from ground storage (rivers, oceans, reservoirs, soil). Because the air is warmer, the relative humidity can be higher (in essence, the air is able to "hold" more water when it is warmer), leading to more water vapor in the atmosphere. As a GHG, the higher concentration of water vapor is then able to absorb more thermal indirect energy radiated from the Earth, thus further warming the atmosphere. The warmer atmosphere can then hold more water vapor and so on and so on. This is referred to as a "positive feedback loop". The extent to which this positive feedback loop will continue is unknown as there is also dynamics that put the positive feedback loop in check. As an example, when water vapor increases in the atmosphere, more of it will eventually also condense into clouds, which are more able to reflect incoming solar radiation (thus allowing less energy to reach the Earth's surface and heat it up).

3.1.2 Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
The natural production and absorption of CO2 is achieved through the terrestrial biosphere and the ocean.

However, humankind has altered the natural carbon cycle by burning coal, oil, natural gas, and wood.

Since the industrial revolution began in the mid-1700s. Each of these activities has increased in scale and distribution. CO2 was the first GHG demonstrated to be increasing in atmospheric concentration with the first conclusive measurements being made in the last half of the 20th century. Prior to the industrial revolution, concentrations were fairly stable at 280 parts per million (ppm). The International Panel on Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

743

Climate Change (IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, 2014) Emissions of CO2 from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes contributed about 78% of the total GHG emissions increase from 1970 to 2010, with a similar percentage contribution for the increase during the period 2000 to 2010. Globally, economic and population growth continued to be the most important drivers of increases in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. The contribution of population growth between 2000 and 2010 remained roughly identical to the previous three decades, while the contribution of economic growth has risen sharply.

3.1.3 Methane (CH4)
CH4 is an extremely effective absorber of radiation, although its atmospheric concentration is less than that of CO2. Its lifetime in the atmosphere is brief (10 to 12 years), compared to some other GHGs (such as CO2, N2O, and Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). CH4 has both natural and anthropogenic sources. It is released as part of the biological processes in low oxygen environments, such as in swamplands or in rice production (at the roots of the plants). Overthe last 50 years, human activities such as growing rice, raising cattle, using natural gas, and mining coal have added to the atmospheric concentration of methane. Other anthropocentric sources include fossil -fuel combustion and biomass burning.

3.1.4 Nitrous Oxide (N20)
Concentrations of N2O also began to rise at the beginning of the industrial revolution. In 1998, the global concentration of this GHG was documented at 314 parts per billion (ppb). N2O is produced by microbial processes in soil and water, including those reactions which occur in fertilizer containing nitrogen. In addition to agricultural sources, some industrial processes (fossil fuel -fired power plants, nylon production, nitric acid production, and vehicle emissions) also contribute to its atmospheric load. It is also commonly used as an aerosol spray propellant, (i.e., in whipped cream bottles, in potato chip bags to keep chips fresh, and in rocket engines and in race cars).

3.1.5 Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC)
CFCs are gases formed synthetically by replacing all hydrogen atoms in methane or ethane (C2H6) with chlorine and/or fluorine atoms. CFCs are nontoxic, nonflammable, insoluble, and chemically unreactive in the troposphere (the level of air at the Earth's surface). CFCs have no natural source but were first synthesized in 1928. It was used for refrigerants, aerosol propellants, and cleaning solvents. Due to the discovery that they are able to destroy stratospheric ozone, a global effort to halt their production was undertaken and in 1989 the European Community agreed to ban CFCs by 2000 and subsequent treaties banned CFCs worldwide by 2010. This effort was extremely successful, and the levels of the major CFCs are now remaining level or declining. However, their long atmospheric lifetimes mean that some of the CFCs will remain in the atmosphere for over 100 years.

3.1.6 Hydrofluorocarbons (HFC)
HFCs are synthetic man-made chemicals that are used as a substitute for CFCs. Out of all the GHGs, they are one of three groups with the highest global warming potential. The HFCs with the largest measured atmospheric abundances are (in order), HFC-23 (CHF3), HFC-134a (CF3CH2F), and HFC-152a (CH3CHF2).

Prior to 1990, the only significant emissions were HFC-23. HFC-134a use is increasing due to its use as a refrigerant. Concentrations of HFC-23 and HFC-134a in the atmosphere are now about 10 parts pertrillion (ppt) each. Concentrations of HFC-152a are about 1 ppt. HFCs are manmade for applications such as automobile air conditioners and refrigerants.

Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

744

3.1.7 Perfluorocarbons (PFC)
PFCs have stable molecular structures and do not breakdown through the chemical processes in the lower atmosphere. High-energy ultraviolet rays about 60 kilometers above Earth's surface are able to destroy the compounds. Because of this, PFCs have very long lifetimes, between 10,000 and 50,000 years. Two common PFCs are tetrafluoromethane (CF4) and hexafluoroethane (C2F6). Concentrations of CF4 in the atmosphere are over 70 ppt. The two main sources of PFCs are primary aluminum production and semiconductor manufacturing.

3.1.8 Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
SF6 is an inorganic, odorless, colorless, nontoxic, nonflammable gas. SF6 has the highest global warming potential of any gas evaluated; 23,900 times that of CO2. Concentrations in the 1990s were about 4 ppt.

Sulfur hexafluoride is used for insulation in electric power transmission and distribution equipment, in the magnesium industry, in semiconductor manufacturing, and as a tracer gas for leak detection.

3.1.9 Aerosols
Aerosols are particles emitted into the air through burning biomass (plant material) and fossil fuels.

Aerosols can warm the atmosphere by absorbing and emitting heat and can cool the atmosphere by reflecting light. Cloud formation can also be affected by aerosols. Sulfate aerosols are emitted when fuel containing sulfur is burned. Black carbon (or soot) is emitted during biomass burning due to the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels. Particulate matter regulation has been lowering aerosol concentrations in the United States; however, global concentrations are likely increasing.

3.2 GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIAL
The Global Warming Potential (GWP) was developed to allow comparisons of the global warming impacts of different gases. Specifically, it is a measure of how much energy the emissions of 1 ton of a gas will absorb over a given period of time, relative to the emissions of 1 ton of carbon dioxide (CO2). The larger the GWP, the more that a given gas warms the Earth compared to CO2 over that time period. The time period usually used for GWPs is 100 years. GWPs provide a common unit of measure, which allows analysts to add up emissions estimates of different gases (e.g., to compile a national GHG inventory), and allows policymakers to compare emissions reduction opportunities across sectors and gases. A summary of the atmospheric lifetime and the global warming potential of selected gases are summarized in Table

11. As shown in Table 11, the global warming potential of GHGs ranges from 1 to 22,800.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

745

Table 11
Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes
Gas
Atmospheric Lifetime
Global Warming Potential'
(100 Year Horizon)
Carbon Dioxide (CO,)
—z
1 Methane (CH4)
12 28-36
Nitrous Oxide (NO)
114
298
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)
1-270
12-14,800
Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
2,600-50,000
7,390-12,200
Nitrogen trifluoride (NF3)
740
17,200
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
3,200
22,800
Notes:

Source: http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases.html (1) Compared to the same quantity OfCO2 emissions.
(2) Carbon dioxide's lifetime is poorly defined because the gas is not destroyed over time, but instead moves among different parts of the ocean —atmosphere —land system. Some of the excess carbon dioxide will be absorbed quickly (for example, by the ocean surface), but some will remain in the atmosphere for thousands of years, due in part to the very slow process by which carbon is transferred to ocean sediments. 746

3.3 GREENHOUSE GAS STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS

3.3.1 International
Montreal Protocol
In 1988, the United Nations established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to evaluate the impacts of global climate change and to develop strategies that nations could implement to curtail global climate change. In 1992, the United States joined other countries around the world in signing the United Nations' Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) agreement with the goal of controlling GHG emissions. As a result, the Climate Change Action Plan was developed to address the reduction of GHGs in the United States. The plan consists of more than 50 voluntary programs.

Additionally, the Montreal Protocol was originally signed in 1987 and substantially amended in 1990 and 1992. The Montreal Protocol stipulates that the production and consumption of compounds that deplete ozone in the stratosphere —CFCs, halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform —were to be phased out, with the first three by the year 2000 and methyl chloroform by 2005.

The Paris Agreement
The Paris Agreement entered into force on 4 November 2016, thirty days after the date on which at least 55 Parties to the Convention accounting in total for at least an estimated 55 % of the total global greenhouse gas emissions have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession with the Depositary.

The Paris Agreement builds upon the Convention and —forthe first time— brings all nations into a common cause to undertake take ambitious efforts to combat climate change and adapt to its effects, with enhanced support to assist developing countries to do so. As such, it charts a new course in the global climate effort.

The Paris Agreement's central aim is to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre -industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Additionally, the agreement aims to strengthen the ability of countries to deal with the impacts of climate change. To reach these ambitious goals, appropriate financial flows, a new technology framework and an enhanced capacity building framework will be put in place, thus supporting action by developing countries and the most vulnerable countries, in line with their own national objectives. The Agreement also provides for enhanced transparency of action and support through a more robust transparency framework.

3.3.2 Federal
In Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency (Docket No. 05-1120), argued November 29, 2006, and decided April 2, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court held that not only did the EPA have authority to regulate greenhouse gases, but the EPA's reasons for not regulating this area did not fit the statutory requirements. As such, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the EPA should be required to regulate CO2 and other greenhouse gases as pollutants under the federal Clean Air Act (CAA).

Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

747

In response to the FY2008 Consolidations Appropriations Act (H.R. 2764; Public Law 110-161), EPA proposed a rule on March 10, 2009, that requires mandatory reporting of GHG emissions from large sources in the United States. On September 22, 2009, the Final Mandatory Reporting of GHG Rule was signed and published in the Federal Register on October 30, 2009. The rule became effective on December 29, 2009. This rule requires suppliers of fossil fuels or industrial GHGs, manufacturers of vehicles and engines, and facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more per year of GHG emissions to submit annual reports to EPA.

On December 7, 2009, the EPA Administrator signed two distinct findings under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. One is an endangerment finding that finds concentrations of the six GHGs in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. The other is a cause or contribute finding, that finds emissions from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the GHG pollution which threatens public health and welfare. These actions will not themselves impose any requirements on industry or other entities. However, it is a prerequisite to finalizing the EPA's proposed GHG emission standards for light -duty vehicles, which were jointly proposed by the EPA and Department of Transportation on September 15, 2009.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is responsible for implementing federal policy to address GHGs. The federal government administers a wide array of public -private partnerships to reduce the GHG intensity generated in the United States. These programs focus on energy efficiency, renewable energy, methane and other non-CO2 gases, agricultural practices, and implementation of technologies to achieve GHG reductions. The USEPA implements numerous voluntary programs that contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions. These programs (e.g., the ENERGY STAR labeling system for energy -efficient products) play a significant role in encouraging voluntary reductions from large corporations, consumers, industrial and commercial buildings, and many major industrial sectors.

Clean Air Act
In Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency (Docket No. 05-1120), the U.S. Supreme Court held in April of 2007 that the USEPA has statutory authority under Section 202 of the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) to regulate GHGs. The court did not hold that the USEPA was required to regulate GHG emissions; however, it indicated that the agency must decide whether GHGs cause or contribute to air pollution that is reasonably anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. On December 7, 2009, the USEPA Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding GHGs under Section 202(a) of the CAA. The USEPA adopted a Final Endangerment Finding forthe six defined GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6) on December 7, 2009. The Endangerment Finding is required before USEPA can regulate GHG emissions under Section 202(a)(1) of the CAA consistently with the United States Supreme Court decision. The USEPA also adopted a Cause or Contribute Finding in which the USEPA Administrator found that GHG emissions from new motor vehicle and motor vehicle engines are contributing to air pollution, which is endangering public health and welfare. These findings do not, by themselves, impose any requirements on industry or other entities. However, these actions were a prerequisite for implementing GHG emissions standards for vehicles.

Energy Independence Security Act
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) facilitates the reduction of national GHG emissions by requiring the following:

Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

M.

■ Increasing the supply of alternative fuel sources by setting a mandatory Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) that requires fuel producers to use at least 36 billion gallons of biofuel in 2022; ■ Prescribing or revising standards affecting regional efficiency for heating and cooling products, procedures for new or amended standards, energy conservation, energy efficiency labeling for consumer electronic products, residential boiler efficiency, electric motor efficiency, and home appliances;
■ Requiring approximately 25 percent greater efficiency for light bulbs by phasing out incandescent light bulbs between 2012 and 2014; requiring approximately 200 percent greater efficiency for light bulbs, or similar energy savings, by 2020; and
■ While superseded by the USEPA and NHTSA actions described above, (i) establishing miles per gallon targets for cars and light trucks and (ii) directing the NHTSA to establish a fuel economy program for medium- and heavy-duty trucks and create a separate fuel economy standard for trucks.

Additional provisions of EISA address energy savings in government and public institutions, promote research for alternative energy, additional research in carbon capture, international energy programs, and the creation of green jobs.14
Executive Order 13432
In response to the Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency ruling, the President signed Executive Order 13432 on May 14, 2007, directing the USEPA, along with the Departments of Transportation, Energy, and Agriculture, to initiate a regulatory process that responds to the Supreme Court's decision. Executive Order 13432 was codified into law by the 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Law signed on February 17, 2009. The order sets goals in the areas of energy efficiency, acquisition, renewable energy, toxics reductions, recycling, sustainable buildings, electronics stewardship, fleets, and water conservation. Light -Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards.

On May 19, 2009, President Obama announced a national policy for fuel efficiency and emissions standards in the United States auto industry. The adopted federal standard applies to passenger cars and light -duty trucks for model years 2012 through 2016. The rule surpasses the prior Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards (CAFE)15 and requires an average fuel economy standard of 35.5 miles per gallon (mpg) and 250 grams of CO2 per mile by model year 2016, based on USEPA calculation methods. These standards were formally adopted on April 1, 2010. In August 2012, standards were adopted for model year 2017 through 2025 for passenger cars and light -duty trucks. By 2025, vehicles are required to achieve

54.5 mpg (if GHG reductions are achieved exclusively through fuel economy improvements) and 163 grams of CO2 per mile. According to the USEPA, a model year 2025 vehicle would emit one-half of the GHG emissions from a model year 2010 vehicle.16 In 2017, the USEPA recommended no change to the GHG standards for light -duty vehicles for model years 2022-2025. 14 A green job, as defined by the United States Department of Labor, is a job in business that produces goods or provides services that benefit the environment or conserve natural resources.
1s The Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards are regulations in the United States, first enacted by Congress in 1975, to improve the average fuel economy of cars and light trucks. The U.S Department of Transportation has delegated the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration as the regulatory agency for the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards. 16 United States Environmental Protection Agency, EPA and NHTSA Set Standards to Reduce Greenhouse Gases and Improve Fuel Economy for Model Years 2017-2025 Cars and Light Trucks, August 2012, https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P100EZ7C.PDF?Dockey=P100EZ7C.PDF .

Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis Page 50 749

Issued by NHTSA and EPA in March 2020 (published on April 30, 2020, and effective after June 29, 2020), the Safer Affordable Fuel -Efficient Vehicles Rule would maintain the CAFE and CO2 standards applicable in model year 2020 for model years 2021 through 2026. The estimated CAFE and CO2 standards for model year 2020 are 43.7 mpg and 204 grams of CO2 per mile for passenger cars and 31.3 mpg and 284 grams of CO2 per mile for light trucks, projecting an overall industry average of 37 mpg, as compared to 46.7 mpg under the standards issued in 2012. This Rule also excludes CO2- equivalent emission improvements associated with air conditioning refrigerants and leakage (and, optionally, offsets for nitrous oxide and methane emissions) after model year 2020.17
On May 12, 2021, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register, proposing to repeal "The Safer Affordable Fuel -Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One: One National Program," published Sept. 27, 2019 (SAFE I Rule), in which NHTSA codified regulatory text and made additional pronouncements regarding the preemption of state and local laws related to fuel economy standards. Specifically, this document proposes to fully repeal the regulatory text and appendices promulgated in the SAFE I Rule. In addition, this document proposes to repeal and withdraw the interpretative statements made by the Agency in the SAFE I Rule preamble, including those regarding the preemption of particular state Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions standards or Zero Emissions Vehicle (ZEV) mandates. As such, this document proposes to establish a clean slate with respect to NHTSA's regulations and interpretations concerning preemption under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA).18
State of California
The State currently has no regulations that establish ambient air quality standards for GHGs. However, the State has passed laws directing CARB to develop actions to reduce GHG emissions, which are listed below.

Assembly Bill 1493
California Assembly Bill 1493 enacted on July 22, 2002, required CARB to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. In 2005, the CARB submitted a "waiver" request to the EPA from a portion of the federal Clean Air Act in order to allow the State to set more stringent tailpipe emission standards for CO2 and other GHG emissions from passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. On December 19, 2007, the EPA announced that it denied the "waiver" request. On January 21, 2009, CARB submitted a letter to the EPA administrator regarding the State's request to reconsider the waiver denial. The EPA approved the waiver on June 30, 2009.

Executive Order S-3-05
The California Governor issued Executive Order S-3-05, GHG Emission, in June 2005, which established the following reduction targets:
2010: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 2000 levels
17 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2018. Federal Register/ Vol. 83, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2018 / Proposed Rules, The Safer Affordable Fuel -Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks 2018. Available at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-08-24/pdf/2018-16820.pdf . 18 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/05/12/2021-08758/corporate-average-fuel-economy-cafe-preemption Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis Page 51 750

2020: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels
2050: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.

The executive order directed the secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA) to coordinate a multi -agency effort to reduce GHG emissions to the target levels. To comply with the Executive Order, the secretary of CaIEPA created the California Climate Action Team (CAT), made up of members from various state agencies and commissions. The team released its first report in March 2006.

The report proposed to achieve the targets by building on the voluntary actions of businesses, local governments, and communities and through State incentive and regulatory programs.

3.3.3 Assembly Bill 32
In 2006, the California State Legislature adopted Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 requires CARB, to adopt rules and regulations that would achieve GHG emissions equivalent to statewide levels in 1990 by 2020 through an enforceable statewide emission cap which will be phased in starting in 2012. Emission reductions shall include carbon sequestration projects that would remove carbon from the atmosphere and best management practices that are technologically feasible and cost effective.

On December 6, 2007, CARB released the calculated Year 1990 GHG emissions of 427 million metric tons of CO2e (MMTCO2e). The 2020 target of 427 MMTCO2e requires the reduction of 169 MMTCO2e, or approximately 30 percent from the State's projected 2020 business as usual emissions of 596 MMTCO2e and the reduction of 42 MMTCO2e, or almost 10 percent from the 2002-2004 average GHG emissions.

Under AB 32, CARB was required to adopt regulations by January 1, 2011, to achieve reductions in GHGs to meet the 1990 cap by 2020. Early measures CARB took to lower GHG emissions included requiring operators of the largest industrial facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons of CO2 in a calendar year to submit verification of GHG emissions by December 1, 2010. The CARB Board also approved nine discrete early action measures that include regulations affecting landfills, motor vehicle fuels, refrigerants in cars, port operations and other sources that became enforceable on or before January 1, 2010.

On December 11, 2008, the CARB Board approved a Scoping Plan, with final adoption May 11, 2009, that proposed a variety of measures including direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non -monetary incentives, voluntary actions, a market -based cap -and -trade system, and a fee regulation to fund the program. Association of Irritated Residents v. California Air Resources Board, a California State trial court found that the analysis of the alternatives identified in the AB 32 Scoping Plan Functional Equivalent Document (FED) was not sufficient for informed decision -making and public review under CEQA. In response, CARB has appealed the decision. In addition, CARB prepared the Supplement to the AB 32 Scoping Plan Functional Equivalent Document (June 13, 2011). On August 24, 2011, CARB recertified the complete AB 32 Scoping Plan Functional Equivalent Environmental Document revised by the Final Supplement. In December 2011 the Final Supplement was accepted as sufficient to fulfill the trial court's March order.

While local government operations were not accounted for in achieving the 2020 emissions reduction, local land use changes are estimated to result in a reduction of 5 metric tons of CO2e, which is approximately 3 percent of the 2020 GHG emissions reduction goal. In recognition of the critical role local governments will play in successful implementation of AB 32, CARB is recommending GHG reduction goals of 15 percent of 2010 levels by 2020 to ensure that municipal and community -wide emissions match the state's reduction target. According to the Measure Documentation Supplement to the Scoping Plan, local Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

751

government actions and targets are anticipated to reduce vehicle miles by approximately 2 percent through land use planning, resulting in a potential GHG reduction of 2 metric tons of CO2e (or approximately 1.2 percent of the GHG reduction target).

In May 2014, CARB released its First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan (CARB 2014). This Update identifies the next steps for California's leadership on climate change. While California continues on its path to meet the near -term 2020 greenhouse gas limit, it must also set a clear path toward long-term, deep GHG emission reductions. This report highlights California's success to date in reducing its GHG emissions and lays the foundation for establishing a broad framework for continued emission reductions beyond 2020, on the path to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

On January 20, 2017, CARB announced its release of a proposed plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 — the most ambitious target in North America. The plan builds on the state's successful efforts to reduce emissions and outlines the most effective ways to reach the 2030 goal, including continuing California's Cap -and -Trade Program. The Final 2017 Scoping Plan Update was approved by CARB on December 14, 2017. Implementing this Scoping Plan will ensure that California's climate actions continue to promote innovation, drive the generation of new jobs, and achieve continued reductions of smog and air toxics. The ambitious approach draws on a decade of successful programs that address the major sources of climate -changing gases in every sector of the economy:
■ More Clean Cars and Trucks: The plan sets out far-reaching programs to incentivize the sale of millions of zero -emission vehicles, drive the deployment of zero -emission trucks, and shift to a cleaner system of handling freight statewide.
■ Increased Renewable Energy: California's electric utilities are ahead of schedule meeting the requirement that 33 percent of electricity come from renewable sources by 2020. The Scoping Plan guides utilities to 50 percent renewables, as required under SB 350. ■ Slashing Super -Pollutants: The plan calls for a significant cut in super -pollutants such as methane and HFC refrigerants, which are responsible for as much as 40 percent of global warming. ■ Cleaner Industry and Electricity: California's renewed cap -and -trade program extends the declining cap on emissions from utilities and industries and the carbon allowance auctions. The auctions will continue to fund investments in clean energy and efficiency, particularly in disadvantaged communities.
■ Cleaner Fuels: The Low Carbon Fuel Standard will drive further development of cleaner, renewable transportation fuels to replace fossil fuels.
■ Smart Community Planning: Local communities will continue developing plans which will further link transportation and housing policies to create sustainable communities. ■ Improved Agriculture and Forests: The Scoping Plan also outlines innovative programs to account for and reduce emissions from agriculture, as well as forests and other natural lands.

The 2017 Scoping Plan also evaluates reductions of smog -causing pollutants through California's climate programs.

SB 3Z Pavley. California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (1) The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 designates the State Air Resources Board as the state agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of emissions of greenhouse gases. The state board is required to approve a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions level in 1990 to be achieved by 2020 and to adopt rules and Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

752

regulations in an open public process to achieve the maximum, technologically feasible, and cost- effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions. This bill would require the state board to ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to 40% below the 1990 level by 2030. (2) This bill would become operative only if AB 197 of the 2015-16 Regular Session is enacted and becomes effective on or before January 1, 2017. AB 197 requires that the California Air Resources Board, which directs implementation of emission -reduction programs, should target direct reductions at both stationary and mobile sources. AB 197 of the 2015-2016 Regular Session was approved on September 8, 2016.

Senate Bill 1368
Senate Bill 1368 (SB 1368) is the companion Bill of AB 32 and was adopted September 2006. SB 1368 requires the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to establish a performance standard for baseload generation of GHG emissions by investor -owned utilities by February 1, 2007, and for local publicly owned utilities by June 30, 2007. These standards could not exceed the GHG emissions rate from a baseload combined -cycle, natural gas -fired plant. Furthermore, the legislation states that all electricity provided to the State, including imported electricity, must be generated by plants that meet the standards set by California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and California Energy Commission (CEC).

Executive OrderS-1-07
Executive Order 5-1-07 was issued in 2007 and proclaims that the transportation sector is the main source of GHG emissions in the State, since it generates more than 40 percent of the State's GHG emissions. It establishes a goal to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels sold in the State by at least ten percent by 2020. This Order also directs CARB to determine whether this Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) could be adopted as a discrete early -action measure as part of the effort to meet the mandates in AB 32.

On April 23, 2009, CARB approved the proposed regulation to implement the low carbon fuel standard and began implementation on January 1, 2011. The low carbon fuel standard is anticipated to reduce GHG emissions by about 16 MMT per year by 2020. CARB approved some amendments to the LCFS in December 2011, which were implemented on January 1, 2013. In September 2015, the Board approved the re -adoption of the LCFS, which became effective on January 1, 2016, to address procedural deficiencies in the way the original regulation was adopted. In 2018, the Board approved amendments to the regulation, which included strengthening and smoothing the carbon intensity benchmarks through 2030 in -line with California's 2030 GHG emission reduction target enacted through SB 32, adding new crediting opportunities to promote zero emission vehicle adoption, alternative jet fuel, carbon capture and sequestration, and advanced technologies to achieve deep decarbonization in the transportation sector.

The LCFS is designed to encourage the use of cleaner low -carbon transportation fuels in California, encourage the production of those fuels, and therefore, reduce GHG emissions and decrease petroleum dependence in the transportation sector. Separate standards are established for gasoline and diesel fuels and the alternative fuels that can replace each. The standards are "back -loaded", with more reductions required in the last five years, than during the first five years. This schedule allows for the development of advanced fuels that are lower in carbon than today's fuels and the market penetration of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, battery electric vehicles, fuel cell vehicles, and flexible fuel vehicles. It is anticipated that Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

753

compliance with the low carbon fuel standard will be based on a combination of both lower carbon fuels and more efficient vehicles.

Reformulated gasoline mixed with corn -derived ethanol at ten percent by volume and low sulfur diesel fuel represent the baseline fuels. Lower carbon fuels may be ethanol, biodiesel, renewable diesel, or blends of these fuels with gasoline or diesel as appropriate. Compressed natural gas and liquefied natural gas also may be low carbon fuels. Hydrogen and electricity, when used in fuel cells or electric vehicles are also considered as low carbon fuels for the low carbon fuel standard.

Senate Bill 97
Senate Bill 97 (5B 97) was adopted August 2007 and acknowledges that climate change is a prominent environmental issue that requires analysis under CEQA. SB 97 directed the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR), which is part of the State Natural Resources Agency, to prepare, develop, and transmit to CARB guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions, as required by CEQA, by July 1, 2009. The Natural Resources Agency was required to certify and adopt those guidelines by January 1, 2010.

Pursuant to the requirements of SB 97 as stated above, on December 30, 2009, the Natural Resources Agency adopted amendments to the state CEQA guidelines that address GHG emissions. The CEQA Guidelines Amendments changed 14 sections of the CEQA Guidelines and incorporate GHG language throughout the Guidelines. However, no GHG emissions thresholds of significance were provided, and no specific mitigation measures were identified. The GHG emission reduction amendments went into effect on March 18, 2010, and are summarized below:

Climate action plans and other greenhouse gas reduction plans can be used to determine whether a project has significant impacts, based upon its compliance with the plan.

Local governments are encouraged to quantify the greenhouse gas emissions of proposed projects, noting that they have the freedom to select the models and methodologies that best meet their needs and circumstances. The section also recommends consideration of several qualitative factors that may be used in the determination of significance, such as the extent to which the given project complies with state, regional, or local GHG reduction plans and policies. OPR does not set or dictate specific thresholds of significance. Consistent with existing CEQA Guidelines, OPR encourages local governments to develop and publish their own thresholds of significance for GHG impacts assessment.
■ When creating their own thresholds of significance, local governments may consider the thresholds of significance adopted or recommended by other public agencies or recommended by experts. ■ New amendments include guidelines for determining methods to mitigate the effects of greenhouse gas emissions in Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines.
■ OPR is clear to state that "to qualify as mitigation, specific measures from an existing plan must be identified and incorporated into the project; general compliance with a plan, by itself, is not mitigation".
■ OPR's emphasizes the advantages of analyzing GHG impacts on an institutional, programmatic level.

OPR therefore approves tiering of environmental analyses and highlights some benefits of such an approach.
■ Environmental impact reports (EIRs) must specifically consider a project's energy use and energy efficiency potential.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

754

Senate Bills 1078, 107, and X1-2 and Executive Orders 5-14-08 and S-21-09 Senate Bill 1078 (SB 1078) requires retail sellers of electricity, including investor -owned utilities and community choice aggregators, to provide at least 20 percent of their supply from renewable sources by 2017. Senate Bill 107 (SB 107) changed the target date to 2010. Executive Order 5-14-08 was signed on November 2008 and expands the State's Renewable Energy Standard to 33 percent renewable energy by 2020. Executive Order S-21-09 directed CARB to adopt regulations by July 31, 2010, to enforce 5-14-08.

Senate Bill X1-2 codifies the 33 percent renewable energy requirement by 2020.

Senate Bill 100
Senate Bill 100 (SB 100) requires 100 percent of total retail sales of electricity in California to come from eligible renewable energy resources and zero -carbon resources by December 31, 2045. SB 100 was adopted September 2018.

The interim thresholds from prior Senate Bills and Executive Orders would also remain in effect. These include Senate Bill 1078 (SB 1078), which requires retail sellers of electricity, including investor -owned utilities and community choice aggregators, to provide at least 20 percent of their supply from renewable sources by 2017. Senate Bill 107 (SB 107) which changed the target date to 2010. Executive Order S-14- 08, which was signed on November 2008 and expanded the State's Renewable Energy Standard to 33 percent renewable energy by 2020. Executive Order S-21-09 directed the CARB to adopt regulations by July 31, 2010, to enforce 5-14-08. Senate Bill X1-2 codifies the 33 percent renewable energy requirement by 2020.

Senate Bill 375
Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) was adopted September 2008 and aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG emission reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation. SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) to adopt a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) or alternate planning strategy (APS) that will prescribe land use allocation in that MPOs Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). CARB, in consultation with each MPO, will provide each affected region with reduction targets for GHGs emitted by passenger cars and light trucks in the region for the years 2020 and 2035. These reduction targets will be updated every eight years but can be updated every four years if advancements in emissions technologies affect the reduction strategies to achieve the targets. CARB is also charged with reviewing each MPO's sustainable communities strategy or alternate planning strategy for consistency with its assigned targets.

Senate Bill X7-7
Senate Bill X7-7 (SB X7-7), enacted on November 9, 2009, mandates water conservation targets and efficiency improvements for urban and agricultural water suppliers. SB X7-7 requires the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to develop a task force and technical panel to develop alternative best management practices for the water sector. In addition, SB X7-7 required the DWR to develop criteria for baseline uses for residential, commercial, and industrial uses for both indoor and landscaped area uses.

The DWR was also required to develop targets and regulations that achieve a statewide 20 percent reduction in water usage.

Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

755

Assembly Bill 939 and Senate Bill 1374
Assembly Bill 939 (AB 939) requires that each jurisdiction in California to divert at least 50 percent of its waste away from landfills, whether through waste reduction, recycling or other means. Senate Bill 1374 (SB 1374) requires the California Integrated Waste Management Board to adopt a model ordinance by March 1, 2004, suitable for adoption by any local agency to require 50 to 75 percent diversion of construction and demolition of waste materials from landfills.

California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 6
CCR Title 24, Part 6: California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24) were first established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. Although it was not originally intended to reduce GHG emissions, electricity production by fossil fuels results in GHG emissions and energy efficient buildings require less electricity. Therefore, increased energy efficiency results in decreased GHG emissions.

The Energy Commission adopted 2008 Standards on April 23, 2008, and Building Standards Commission approved them for publication on September 11, 2008. These updates became effective on August 1, 2009. CalEEMod modeling defaults to 2008 standards. 2013 Standards were approved and have been effective since July 1, 2014. 2019 standards were published July 1, 2019 and became effective January 1, 2020.

California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 11
CCR Title 24, Part 6: California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24) were first established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. Although it was not originally intended to reduce GHG emissions, electricity production by fossil fuels results in GHG emissions and energy efficient buildings require less electricity. Therefore, increased energy efficiency results in decreased GHG emissions.

The Energy Commission adopted 2008 Standards on April 23, 2008, and Building Standards Commission approved them for publication on September 11, 2008. These updates became effective on August 1, 2009. 2013 Standards were approved and were effective July 1, 2014. 2016 Standards were adopted January 1, 2017. 2019 standards were published July 1, 2019 and became effective January 1, 2020. All buildings for which an application for a building permit is submitted on or after January 1, 2020, must follow the 2019 standards. Single-family homes built with the 2019 standards will use about 7 percent less energy due to energy efficiency measures versus those built underthe 2016 standards. Once rooftop solar electricity generation is factored in, homes built under the 2019 standards will use about 53 percent less energy than those under the 2016 standards. This will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 700,000 Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

756

metric tons over three years, equivalent to taking 115,000 fossil fuel cars off the road. Nonresidential buildings will use about 30 percent less energy due mainly to lighting upgrades19.

On January 12, 2010, the State Building Standards Commission unanimously adopted updates to the California Green Building Standards Code, which went into effect on January 1, 2011. 2016 CALGreen Code: During the 2016-2017 fiscal year, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) updated CALGreen through the 2015 Triennial Code Adoption Cycle.

HCD adopted three new definitions related to electric vehicle charging regulations. These definitions provided clarity to the code user as to the differences between an electric vehicle charging space and an electric vehicle charging station. HCD replaced the term "electric vehicle charging stations" with "electric vehicle charging spaces" since the term "electric vehicle charging space" better describes a space available for future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment, but with no electric vehicle charger installed.

HCD also increased the required construction waste reduction from 50 percent to 65 percent of the total building site waste. This increase aids in meeting CalRecycle's statewide solid waste recycling goal of 75 percent for 2020 as stated in Chapter 476, Statutes of 2011 (AB 341). HCD adopted new regulations requiring recycling areas for multifamily projects of five or more dwelling units. This regulation requires developers to provide readily accessible areas adequate in size to accommodate containers for depositing, storage and collection of non -hazardous materials (including organic waste) for recycling. This requirement assists businesses that were required as of April 1, 2016, to meet the requirements of Chapter 727, Statutes of 2014 (AB 1826).

HCD adopted new regulations to require information on photovoltaic systems and electric vehicle chargers to be included in operation and maintenance manuals. Currently, CALGreen section 4.410.1 Item 2(a) requires operation and maintenance instructions for equipment and appliances. Photovoltaic systems and electric vehicle chargers are systems that play an important role in many households in California, and their importance is increasing every day. HCD incorporated these two terms in the existing language in order to provide clarity to code users as to additional systems requiring operation and maintenance instructions.

HCD updated the reference to Clean Air Standards of the United States Environmental Protection Agency applicable to woodstoves and pellet stoves. HCD also adopted a new requirement for woodstoves and pellet stoves to have a permanent label indicating they are certified to meet the emission limits. This requirement provides clarity to the code user and is consistent with the United States Environmental Protection Agency's New Source Performance Standards. HCD updated the list of standards which can be used for verification of compliance for exterior grade composite wood products. This list now includes four standards from the Canadian Standards Association (CSA): CSA 0121, CSA 0151, CSA 0153 and CSA 0325. HCD updated heating and air-conditioning system design references to the ANSI/ACCA 2 Manual J, ANSI/ACCA 1 Manual D, and ANSI/ACCA 3 Manual S to the most recent versions approved by ANSI. HCD adopted a new elective measure for hot water recirculation systems for water conservation. The United States Department of Energy estimates that 3,600 to 12,000 gallons of water per year can be saved by the typical household (with four points of hot water use) if a hot water recirculation system is installed. 19 https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/title24/2019standards/documents/2018_Title_24_2019_Building_Standards_FAQ.pdf Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

757

2019 CALGReen Code: During the 2019-2020 fiscal year, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) updated CALGreen through the 2019 Triennial Code Adoption Cycle.

HCD modified the best management practices for stormwater pollution prevention adding Section 5.106.2 for projects that disturb one or more acres of land. This section requires projects that disturb one acre or more of land or less than one acre of land but are part of a larger common plan of development or sale must comply with the postconstruction requirement detailed in the applicable National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities issued by the State Water Resources Control Board. The NPDES permits require postconstruction runoff (post -project hydrology) to match the preconstruction runoff pre -project hydrology) with installation of postconstruction stormwater management measures.

HCD added sections 5.106.4.1.3 and 5.106.4.1.5 in regard to bicycle parking. Section 5.106.4.1.3 requires new buildings with tenant spaces that have 10 or more tenant -occupants, provide secure bicycle parking for 5 percent of the tenant -occupant vehicular parking spaces with a minimum of one bicycle parking facility. In addition, Section 5.106.4.1.5 states that acceptable bicycle parking facility for Sections

5.106.4.1.2 through 5.106.4.1.4 shall be convenient from the street and shall meeting one of the following: (1) covered, lockable enclosures with permanently anchored racks for bicycles; (2) lockable bicycle rooms with permanently anchored racks; or (3) lockable, permanently anchored bicycle lockers.

HCD amended section 5.106.5.3.5 allowing future charging spaces to qualify as designated parking for clean air vehicles.

HCD updated section 5.303.3.3 in regard to showerhead flow rates. This update reduced the flow rate to

1.8 GPM.

HCD amended section 5.304.1 for outdoor potable water use in landscape areas and repealed sections

5.304.2 and 5.304.3. The update requires nonresidential developments to comply with a local water efficient landscape ordinance or the current California Department of Water Resource's' Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), whichever is more stringent. Some updates were also made in regard to the outdoor potable water use in landscape areas for public schools and community colleges.

HCD updated Section 5.504.5.3 in regard to the use of MERV filters in mechanically ventilated buildings.

This update changed the filter use from MERV 8 to MERV 13. MERV 13 filters are to be installed prior to occupancy, and recommendations for maintenance with filters of the same value shall be included in the operation and maintenance manual.

Executive Order B-30-15
On April 29, 2015, Governor Brown issued Executive Order B-30-15. Therein, the Governor directed the following:
■ Established a new interim statewide reduction target to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.
■ Ordered all state agencies with jurisdiction over sources of GHG emissions to implement measures to achieve reductions of GHG emissions to meet the 2030 and 2050 reduction targets. ■ Directed CARB to update the Climate Change Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.

Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis Page 59 758

Executive Order B-29-15
Executive Order B-29-15 mandates a statewide 25 percent reduction in potable water usage. EO B-29-15 signed into law on April 1, 2015.

Executive Order B-37-16
Executive Order B-37-16, continuing the State's adopted water reductions, was signed into law on May 9, 2016. The water reductions build off the mandatory 25 percent reduction called for in EO B-29-15.

Executive Order N-79-20
Executive Order N-79-20 Signed in September 2020, Executive Order N-79-20 establishes as a goal that where feasible, all new passenger cars and trucks, as well as all drayage/cargo trucks and off -road vehicles and equipment, sold in California, will be zero -emission by 2035. The executive order sets a similar goal requiring that all medium and heavy-duty vehicles will be zero -emission by 2045 where feasible. It also directs CARB to develop and propose rulemaking for passenger vehicles and trucks, medium -and heavy- duty fleets where feasible, drayage trucks, and off -road vehicles and equipment "requiring increasing volumes" of new zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) "towards the target of 100 percent." The executive order directs the California Environmental Protection Agency, the California Geologic Energy Management Division (CaIGEM), and the California Natural Resources Agencyto transition and repurpose oil production facilities with a goal toward meeting carbon neutrality by 2045. Executive Order N-79-20 builds upon the CARB Advanced Clean Trucks regulation, which was adopted by CARB in July 2020.

SBX1 2
Signed into law in April 2011, SBX1 2, requires one-third of the state's electricity to come from renewable sources. The legislation increases California's current 20 percent renewables portfolio standard target in 2010 to a 33 percent renewables portfolio standard by December 31, 2020.

Senate Bill 350
Signed into law October 7, 2015, SB 350 increases California's renewable electricity procurement goal from 33 percent by 2020 to 50 percent by 2030. This will increase the use of Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) eligible resources, including solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, and others. In addition, SB 350 requires the state to double statewide energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas end uses by 2030. To help ensure these goals are met and the greenhouse gas emission reductions are realized, large utilities will be required to develop and submit Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs). These IRPs will detail how each entity will meet their customers resource needs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and ramp up the deployment of clean energy resources.

3.3.4 California Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets
Executive Order 5-3-05
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced on June 1, 2005, through Executive Order 5-3- 05, the following GHG emission reduction targets:

Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

759

By 2010, California shall reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels; By 2020, California shall reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and By 2050, California shall reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.

In accordance with Executive Order S-3-05, the Secretary of CalEPA is required to coordinate efforts of various agencies, which comprise the California Climate Action Team (CAT), in order to collectively and efficiently reduce GHGs. These agencies include CARB, the Secretary of the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency, Department of Food and Agriculture, the Resources Agency, the California Energy Commission, and the Public Utilities Commission. The CAT provides periodic reports to the Governor and Legislature on the state of GHG reductions in the state as well as strategies for mitigating and adapting to climate change. The first CAT Report to the Governor and the Legislature, in 2006, contained recommendations and strategies to help meet the targets in Executive Order S-3-05. The 2010 CAT Report, finalized in December 2010, expands on the policies in the 2006 assessment.2o The new information detailed in the CAT Report includes development of revised climate and sea -level projections using new information and tools that became available and an evaluation of climate change within the context of broader social changes, such as land -use changes and demographic shifts.

Executive Order 8-30-15
On April 29, 2015, Governor Brown issued Executive Order B-30-15. Therein, the Governor directed the following:

Established a new interim statewide reduction target to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

Ordered all state agencies with jurisdiction over sources of GHG emissions to implement measures to achieve reductions of GHG emissions to meet the 2030 and 2050 reduction targets.

Directed CARB to update the Climate Change Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.

California Health and Safety Code, Division 25.5 — California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 In 2006, the California State Legislature adopted Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (codified in the California Health and Safety Code [HSC], Division 25.5 — California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006), which focuses on reducing GHG emissions in California to 1990 levels by 2020. HSC Division 25.5 defines GHGs as CO2, CH4, N20, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 and represents the first enforceable statewide program to limit emissions of these GHGs from all major industries with penalties for noncompliance. The law further requires that reduction measures be technologically feasible and cost effective. Under HSC Division 25.5, CARB has the primary responsibility for reducing GHG emissions. CARB is required to adopt rules and regulations directing state actions that would achieve GHG emissions reductions equivalent to 1990 statewide levels by 2020.
20 California Environmental Protection Agency, Climate Action Team, Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature, 2010, http://www.energy.ca.gov/2010publications/CAT-1000-2010- 005/CAT-1000-2010-005.PDF.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

760

Senate Bill 32 and Assembly Bill 197
In 2016, the California State Legislature adopted Senate Bill (SB) 32 and its companion bill AB 197, and both were signed by Governor Brown. SB 32 and AB 197 amends HSC Division 25.5 and establishes a new climate pollution reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and includes provisions to ensure the benefits of state climate policies reach into disadvantaged communities.

Climate Change Scoping Plan (2008)
A specific requirement of AB 32 was to prepare a Climate Change Scoping Plan for achieving the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emission reduction by 2020 (Health and Safety Code section 38561 (h)). CARB developed an AB 32 Scoping Plan that contains strategies to achieve the 2020 emissions cap. The initial Scoping Plan was approved in 2008 and contains a mix of recommended strategies that combined direct regulations, market -based approaches, voluntary measures, policies, and other emission reduction programs calculated to meet the 2020 statewide GHG emission limit and initiate the transformations needed to achieve the State's long-range climate objectives.

As required by HSC Division 25.5, CARB approved the 1990 GHG emissions inventory, thereby establishing the emissions limit for 2020. The 2020 emissions limit was originally set at 427 MMTCO2e using the GWP values from the IPCC SAR. CARB also projected the state's 2020 GHG emissions under no -action -taken (NAT) conditions —that is, emissions that would occur without any plans, policies, or regulations to reduce GHG emissions. CARB originally used an average of the state's GHG emissions from 2002 through 2004 and projected the 2020 levels at approximately 596 MMTCO2e (using GWP values from the IPCC SAR).

Therefore, under the original projections, the state must reduce its 2020 NAT emissions by 28.4 percent in order to meet the 1990 target of 427 MMTCO2e.

First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan (2014)
The First Update to the Scoping Plan was approved by CARB in May 2014 and builds upon the initial Scoping Plan with new strategies and recommendations. In 2014, CARB revised the target using the GWP values from the IPCC AR4 and determined that the 1990 GHG emissions inventory and 2020 GHG emissions limit is 431 MMTCO2e. CARB also updated the State's 2020 NAT emissions estimate to account for the effect of the 2007-2009 economic recession, new estimates for future fuel and energy demand, and the reductions required by regulation that were recently adopted for motor vehicles and renewable energy. CARB's projected statewide 2020 emissions estimate using the GWP values from the IPCC AR4 is 509.4 MMTCO2e.
2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan
In response to the 2030 GHG reduction target, CARB adopted the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan at a public meeting held in December 2017. The 2017 Scoping Plan outlines the strategies the State will implement to achieve the 2030 GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels. The 2017 Scoping Plan also addresses GHG emissions from natural and working lands of California, including the agriculture and forestry sectors. The 2017 Scoping Plan considered the Scoping Plan Scenario and four alternatives for achieving the required GHG reductions but ultimately selected the Scoping Plan Scenario.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

761

CARB states that the Scoping Plan Scenario "is the best choice to achieve the State's climate and clean air goals."" Under the Scoping Plan Scenario, the majority of the reductions would result from the continuation of the Cap -and -Trade regulation. Additional reductions are achieved from electricity sector standards (i.e., utility providers to supply at least 50 percent renewable electricity by 2030), doubling the energy efficiency savings at end uses, additional reductions from the LCFS, implementing the short-lived GHG strategy (e.g., hydrofluorocarbons), and implementing the mobile source strategy and sustainable freight action plan. The alternatives were designed to consider various combinations of these programs, as well as consideration of a carbon tax in the event the Cap -and -Trade regulation is not continued.

However, in July 2017, the California Legislature voted to extend the Cap -and -Trade regulation to 2030.

Energy Sector and CEQA Guidelines Appendix F
The CEC first adopted Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (CCR, Title 24, Part 6) in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce energy consumption in the state.

Although not originally intended to reduce GHG emissions, increased energy efficiency and reduced consumption of electricity, natural gas, and other fuels would result in fewer GHG emissions from residential and nonresidential buildings subject to the standard. The standards are updated periodically (typically every three years) to allow for the consideration and inclusion of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. The 2019 update to the Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings focuses on several key areas to improve the energy efficiency of renovations and addition to existing buildings as well as newly constructed buildings and renovations and additions to existing buildings. The major efficiency improvements to the residential Standards involve improvements for attics, walls, water heating, and lighting, whereas the major efficiency improvements to the nonresidential Standards include alignment with the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air - Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 90.1-2013 national standards. Furthermore, the 2019 update requires that enforcement agencies determine compliance with CCR, Title 24, Part 6 before issuing building permits for any construction."
Part 11 of the Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards is referred to as the California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code. The purpose of the CALGreen Code is to "improve public health, safety and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the use of building concepts having a reduced negative impact or positive environmental impact and encouraging sustainable construction practices in the following categories: (1) Planning and design; (2) Energy efficiency; (3) Water efficiency and conservation; (4) Material conservation and resource efficiency; and (5) Environmental air quality."23 As of January 1, 2011, the CALGreen Code is mandatory for all new buildings constructed in the state. The CALGreen Code establishes mandatory measures for new residential and non-residential buildings. Such mandatory measures include energy efficiency, water conservation, material conservation, planning and design, and overall environmental quality. The CALGreen Code was most recently updated in 2019 to include new mandatory measures for residential and nonresidential uses; the new measures took effect on January 1, 2020.
21 California Air Resources Board, California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, November 2017, https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf 22 California Energy Commission, 2016 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, June 2015, http://www.energy.ca.gov/2015publications/CEC-400- 2015-037/CEC-400-2015-037-CM F. pdf
23 California Building Standards Commission, 2010 California Green Building Standards Code, (2010).

Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

762

3.3.5 Regional — South Coast Air Quality Management District The project is within the South Coast Air Basin, which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).

SCAQMD Regulation XXV11, Climate Change
SCAQMD Regulation XXVII currently includes three rules:
■ The purpose of Rule 2700 is to define terms and post global warming potentials. ■ The purpose of Rule 2701, SoCal Climate Solutions Exchange, is to establish a voluntary program to encourage, quantify, and certify voluntary, high quality certified greenhouse gas emission reductions in the SCAQMD.
■ Rule 2702, Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program, was adopted on February 6, 2009. The purpose of this rule is to create a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program for greenhouse gas emission reductions in the SCAQMD. The SCAQMD will fund projects through contracts in response to requests for proposals or purchase reductions from other parties.

A variety of agencies have developed greenhouse gas emission thresholds and/or have made recommendations for how to identify a threshold. However, the thresholds for projects in the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD remain in flux. The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association explored a variety of threshold approaches but did not recommend one approach (2008). The ARB recommended approaches for setting interim significance thresholds (California Air Resources Board 2008b), in which a draft industrial project threshold suggests that non -transportation related emissions under 7,000 MTCO2e per year would be less than significant; however, the ARB has not approved those thresholds and has not published anything since then. The SCAQMD is in the process of developing thresholds, as discussed below.

SCAQMD Threshold Development
On December 5, 2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted an interim greenhouse gas significance threshold for stationary sources, rules, and plans where the SCAQMD is lead agency (SCAQMD permit threshold). The SCAQMD permit threshold consists of five tiers. However, the SCAQMD is not the lead agency for this project. Therefore, the five permit threshold tiers do not apply to the proposed project.

The SCAQMD is in the process of preparing recommended significance thresholds for greenhouse gases for local lead agency consideration ("SCAQMD draft local agency threshold"); however, the SCAQMD Board has not approved the thresholds as of the date of the Notice of Preparation. The current draft thresholds consist of the following tiered approach:
■ Tier 1 consists of evaluating whether or not the project qualifies for any applicable exemption under CEQA.
■ Tier 2 consists of determining whether the project is consistent with a greenhouse gas reduction plan.

If a project is consistent with a qualifying local greenhouse gas reduction plan, it does not have significant greenhouse gas emissions.
■ Tier 3 consists of screening values, which the lead agency can choose, but must be consistent with all projects within its jurisdiction. A project's construction emissions are averaged over 30 years and are added to a project's operational emissions. If a project's emissions are under one of the following screening thresholds, then the project is less than significant:

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis Page 64 763

o All land use types: 3,000 MTCO2e per year
o Based on land use type: residential: 3,500 MTCO2e per year; commercial: 1,400 MTCO2e per year; or mixed use: 3,000 MTCO2e per year.
o Based on land type: Industrial (where SCAQMD is the lead agency), 10,000 MTCO2e per year. ■ Tier 4 has the following options:
o Option 1: Reduce emissions from business as usual (BAU) by a certain percentage; this percentage is currently undefined.
o Option 2: Early implementation of applicable AB 32 Scoping Plan measures. o Option 3, 2020 target for service populations (SP), which includes residents and employees: 4.8 MTCO2e/SP/year for projects and 6.6 MTCO2e/SP/year for plans; o Option 3, 2035 target: 3.0 MTCO2e/SP/year for projects and 4.1 MTCO2e/SP/year for plans. ■ Tier 5 involves mitigation offsets to achieve target significance threshold.

The SCAQMD's draft threshold uses the Executive Order 5-3-05 goal as the basis for the Tier 3 screening level. Achieving the Executive Order's objective would contribute to worldwide efforts to cap carbon dioxide concentrations at 450 ppm, thus stabilizing global climate. Specifically, the Tier 3 screening level for stationary sources is based on an emission capture rate of 90 percent for all new or modified projects.

A 90 percent emission capture rate means that 90 percent of total emissions from all new or modified stationary source projects would be subject to a CEQA analysis, including a negative declaration, a mitigated negative declaration, or an environmental impact report, which includes analyzing feasible alternatives and imposing feasible mitigation measures. A GHG significance threshold based on a 90 percent emission capture rate may be more appropriate to address the long-term adverse impacts associated with global climate change because most projects will be required to implement GHG reduction measures. Further, a 90 percent emission capture rate sets the emission threshold low enough to capture a substantial fraction of future stationary source projects that will be constructed to accommodate future statewide population and economic growth, while setting the emission threshold high enough to exclude small projects that will in aggregate contribute a relatively small fraction of the cumulative statewide GHG emissions. This assertion is based on the fact that staff estimates that these GHG emissions would account for slightly less than one percent of future 2050 statewide GHG emissions target (85 MMTCO2eq/year). In addition, these small projects may be subject to future applicable GHG control regulations that would further reduce their overall future contribution to the statewide GHG inventory. Finally, these small sources are already subject to BACT for criteria pollutants and are more likely to be single -permit facilities, so they are more likely to have few opportunities readily available to reduce GHG emissions from other parts of their facility.

SCAQMD Working Group
Since neither the CARB nor the OPR has developed GHG emissions threshold, the SCAQMD formed a Working Group to develop significance thresholds related to GHG emissions. At the September 28, 2010, Working Group meeting, the SCAQMD released its most current version of the draft GHG emissions thresholds, which recommends a tiered approach that provides a quantitative annual threshold of 10,000 MTCO2e for industrial uses.

In orderto assist local agencies with direction on GHG emissions, the SCAQMD organized a working group and adopted Rules 2700, 2701, 2702, and 3002 which are described below.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

764

SCAQMD Rules 2700 and 2701
The SCAQMD adopted Rules 2700 and 2701 on December 5, 2008, which establishes the administrative structure for a voluntary program designed to quantify GHG emission reductions. Rule 2700 establishes definitions for the various terms used in Regulation XXVII — Global Climate Change. Rule 2701 provides specific protocols for private parties to follow to generate certified GHG emission reductions for projects within the district. Approved protocols include forest projects, urban tree planting, and manure management. The SCAQMD is currently developing additional protocols for other reduction measures.

Fora GHG emission reduction project to qualify, it must be verified and certified by the SCAQMD Executive Officer, who has 60 days to approve or deny the Plan to reduce GHG emissions. Upon approval of the Plan, the Executive Officer issues required to issue a certified receipt of the GHG emission reductions within 90 days.

SCAQMD Rule 2702
The SCAQMD adopted Rule 2702 on February 6, 2009, which establishes a voluntary air quality investment program from which SCAQMD can collect funds from parties that desire certified GHG emission reductions, pool those funds, and use them to purchase or fund GHG emission reduction projects within two years, unless extended by the Governing Board. Priority will be given to projects that result in co - benefit emission reductions of GHG emissions and criteria or toxic air pollutants within environmental justice areas. Further, this voluntary program may compete with the cap -and -trade program identified for implementation in CARB's Scoping Plan, or a Federal cap and trade program.

SCAQMD Rule 3002
The SCAQMD amended Rule 3002 on November 5, 2010, to include facilities that emit greater than 100,000 tons per year of CO2e are required to apply for a Title V permit by July 1, 2011. A Title V permit is for facilities that are considered major sources of emissions.

3.3.6 Local — City of Yucaipa
City of Yucaipa Climate Action Plan
The City adopted the City of Yucaipa Climate Action Plan (CAP) in September 2015. The CAP presents the greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories, identifies the effectiveness of California initiatives to reduce GHG emissions, and identifies local measures that were selected by the City to reduce GHG emissions under the City's jurisdictional control to achieve the City's identified GHG reduction target. The City of Yucaipa participated in the San Bernardino County Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan which presents the collective results of all local efforts to reduce GHG emissions consistent with statewide GHG targets expressed in Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the "Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006" and Senate Bill (SB) 375.

Yucaipa used the technical information within the San Bernardino County Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan in the development of the CAP. The City has selected a goal to reduce their community GHG emissions by 15% below 2008 baseline levels by the year 2020.

That CAP states that a threshold level of 3,000 MTCO2e per year will be used to identify projects that require the use of Screening Tables or a project -specific technical analysis to quantify and mitigate project emissions.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

765

Appendix C of the CAP includes screening tables to be used by the City for review of development projects in order to ensure that the specific reduction strategies in the CAP are implemented as part of the CEQA process. The Screening Tables provide a menu of options that both ensures implementation of the reduction strategies and flexibility on how development projects will implement the reduction strategies to achieve an overall reduction of emissions, consistent with the reduction target of the CAP. The Screening Tables assigns points for each option incorporated into a project as mitigation or a project design feature (collectively referred to as "feature"). The point values correspond to the minimum emissions reduction expected from each feature. The menu of features allows maximum flexibility and options for how development projects can implement the GHG reduction measures. The point levels are based upon improvements compared to 2008 emission levels of efficiency. Projects that garner at least 100 points will be consistent with the reduction quantities anticipated in the City's CAP. As such, those projects that garner a total of 100 points or greater would not require quantification of project specific GHG emissions. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines, such projects would be determined to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impact for GHG emissions.

City of Yucaipa General Plan
The Public Safety Element of the City of Yucaipa General Plan establishes goals and policies to reduce greenhouse gases in the City. Applicable goals and policies include:

Goal S-7 Air Quality and Climate Change. Clean and healthful air resources that promotes public health, protects the natural environment, and mitigates local impacts to climate change.

Policy 5-7.5 Energy Usage. Support the reduction and conservation of energy usage in residential and nonresidential buildings through adoption of building codes, promotion of energy -saving equipment, solar power, and other technology.

Policy 5-7.6 Greenhouse Gas Reductions. Reduce communitywide greenhouse gas emissions locally through the implementation of Yucaipa's Climate Action Plan; actively support regional efforts to reduce greenhouse gases throughout the county.

Policy 5-7.7 Open Spaces Preservation. Continue to preserve and protect Yucaipa's open natural spaces, maintain a community forest, and plant public landscaping to help filter air pollutants and improve air quality.

3.4 SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS

3.4.1 Appendix G of State CEQA Guidelines
The CEQA Guidelines recommend that a lead agency consider the following when assessing the significance of impacts from GHG emissions on the environment:
■ Threshold 1: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
■ Threshold 2: Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted forthe purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

766

To determine whether the project's GHG emissions are. significant, this analysis uses the SCAQMD draft screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year for all land uses.

The project's GHG emissions for both construction and operation have been quantified and an analysis of the project's compliance with all applicable regulations and plans in regard to GHG emissions has been included below.

3.5 METHODOLOGY
The proposed project is anticipated to generate GHG emissions from area sources, energy usage, mobile sources, waste, water, and construction equipment. The following provides the methodology used to calculate the project related GHG emissions and the project impacts.

CalEEMod Version 2020.4.0 was used to calculate the GHG emissions from the proposed project. The CalEEMod Annual Output for year 2022 is available in Appendix C. Each source of GHG emissions is described in greater detail below.

3.5.1 Area Sources
Area sources include emissions from consumer products, landscape equipment and architectural coatings. No changes were made to the default area source emissions.

3.5.2 Energy Usage
Energy usage includes emissions from the generation of electricity and natural gas used on -site. No changes were made to the default energy usage parameters.

3.5.3 Mobile Sources
Mobile sources include emissions from the additional vehicle miles generated from the proposed project.

The vehicle trips associated with the proposed project have been analyzed based on the trip generation rates as detailed in Section 2. The vehicle trips associated with the proposed project have been analyzed by inputting the project -generated vehicular trips into the CalEEMod Model. The program then applies the emission factors for each trip which is provided by the EMFAC2017 model to determine the vehicular traffic pollutant emissions.

3.5.4 Waste
Waste includes the GHG emissions generated from the processing of waste from the proposed project as well as the GHG emissions from the waste once it is interred into a landfill. AB 341 requires that 75 percent of waste be diverted from landfills by 2020, reductions for this are shown in the mitigated CalEEMod output values. No other changes were made to the default waste parameters.

3.5.5 Water
Water includes the water used for the interior of the building as well as for landscaping and is based on the GHG emissions associated with the energy used to transport and filter the water. The project will be required to comply with CalGreen's 20 percent reduction in indoor water use, reductions for this are Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

767

shown in the mitigated CalEEMod output values. No other changes were made to the default water usage parameters.

3.5.6 Construction
The construction related GHG emissions were also included in the analysis and were based on a 30-year amortization rate as recommended in the SCAQMD GHG Working Group meeting on November 19, 2009.

The construction related GHG emissions were calculated by CalEEMod using the methodology as detailed above in Section 2.

3.5.7 Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The GHG emissions have been calculated based on the parameters described above. A summary of the results are shown below in Table 12 and the CalEEMod Model run for the proposed project is provided in Appendix C. Table 12 shows that the total for the proposed project's emissions (with an evet occurring at the museum), would be 345.63 MTCO2e per year which would not exceed the SCAQMD draft threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year for all land uses. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not create a significant cumulative impact to global climate change. No mitigation is required.

3.6 CONSISTENCY WITH APPLICABLE GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION PLANS AND POLICIES The proposed project would have the potential to conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted forthe purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. As stated previously, the applicable plan for the proposed project is the City of Yucaipa CAP; however, the City's CAP thresholds are based on the year 2020 and the proposed project is to be operational in 2023. Therefore, to determine consistency with applicable greenhouse gas plans, the project has been compared to both the City's CAP as well as the CARB Scoping Plan.

3.6.1 City of Yucaipa CAP
As stated in the CAP, the procedures for evaluating GHG impacts and determining significance for CEQA purposes are streamlined by (1) applying an emissions level that is determined to be less than significant for small projects, and (2) utilizing Screening Tables to mitigate project GHG emissions that exceed the threshold level. The CAP uses a threshold level of 3,000 MTCO2e per year to identify projects that require the use of Screening Tables or a project -specific technical analysis to quantify and mitigate project emissions.

As shown above in Table 12, the proposed project's emissions would not exceed 3,000 MTCO2e per year.

Therefore, the project is consistent with the City of Yucaipa CAP and does not need to accrue points through the CAP's Screening Tables.

3.6.2 Scoping Plan
Emission reductions in California alone would not be able to stabilize the concentration of greenhouse gases in the earth's atmosphere. However, California's actions set an example and drive progress towards a reduction in greenhouse gases elsewhere. If other states and countries were to follow California's emission reduction targets, this could avoid medium or higher ranges of global temperature increases.

Thus, severe consequences of climate change could also be avoided.

Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

M.

Table 12
Project -Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Category
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons/Year)
Bio-0O2
NonBio-COz
CO2
CH,
N20
COZe
Area Sources'

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Energy Usage

0.00 119.13
119.13

0.01 0.00
119.79
Mobile Sources3

0.00 120.67
120.67

0.01 0.01
122.89
Waste

31.96 0.00

31.96 1.89

0.00 79.17
Waters

0.87 10.73

11.59 0.09

0.00 14.50
Construction

0.00 12.65

12.65 0.00

0.00 12.81
7_7
Total Emissions

32.82 263.18
296.01

1.99 0.01
345.63
SCAQMD Draft Screening Threshold
3,000.00
Exceeds Threshold?
No
Notes:

Source: CalEEMod Version 2020.4.0 for Opening Year 2022. (1) Area sources consist of GHG emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscape equipment. (2) Energy usage consist of GHG emissions from electricity and natural gas usage. (3) Mobile sources consist of GHG emissions from vehicles. (4) Solid waste includes the CO2 and CH4 emissions created from the solid waste placed in landfills. (5) Water includes GHG emissions from electricity used for transport of water and processing of wastewater. (6) Construction GHG emissions CO2e based on a 30 year amortization rate. 769

The ARB Board approved a Climate Change Scoping Plan in December 2008. The Scoping Plan outlines the State's strategy to achieve the 2020 greenhouse gas emissions limit. The Scoping Plan "proposes a comprehensive set of actions designed to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions in California, improve our environment, reduce our dependence on oil, diversify our energy sources, save energy, create new jobs, and enhance public health" (California Air Resources Board 2008). The measures in the Scoping Plan have been in place since 2012.

This Scoping Plan calls for an "ambitious but achievable" reduction in California's greenhouse gas emissions, cutting approximately 30 percent from business -as -usual emission levels projected for 2020, or about 10 percent from today's levels. On a per -capita basis, that means reducing annual emissions of 14 tons of carbon dioxide for every man, woman and child in California down to about 10 tons per person by 2020.

In May 2014, CARB released its First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan (CARB 2014). This Update identifies the next steps for California's leadership on climate change. While California continues on its path to meet the near -term 2020 greenhouse gas limit, it must also set a clear path toward long-term, deep GHG emission reductions. This report highlights California's success to date in reducing its GHG emissions and lays the foundation for establishing a broad framework for continued emission reductions beyond 2020, on the path to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

In November 2017, CARB release the 2017 Scoping Plan. This Scoping Plan incorporates, coordinates, and leverages many existing and ongoing efforts and identifies new policies and actions to accomplish the State's climate goals, and includes a description of a suite of specific actions to meet the State's 2030 GHG limit. In addition, Chapter 4 provides a broader description of the many actions and proposals being explored across the sectors, including the natural resources sector, to achieve the State's mid and long- term climate goals.

Guided by legislative direction, the actions identified in the 2017 Scoping Plan reduce overall GHG emissions in California and deliver policy signals that will continue to drive investment and certainty in a low carbon economy. The 2017 Scoping Plan builds upon the successful framework established by the Initial Scoping Plan and First Update, while identifying new, technologically feasible, and cost-effective strategies to ensure that California meets its GHG reduction targets in a way that promotes and rewards innovation, continues to foster economic growth, and delivers improvements to the environment and public health, including in disadvantaged communities. The Plan includes policies to require direct GHG reductions at some of the State's largest stationary sources and mobile sources. These policies include the use of lower GHG fuels, efficiency regulations, and the Cap -and Trade Program, which constrains and reduces emissions at covered sources.

As the latest, 2017 Scoping Plan builds upon previous versions, project consistency with applicable strategies of both the 2008 and 2017 Plan are assessed in Table 13. As shown in Table 13, the project is consistent with the applicable strategies and would result in a less than significant impact.

At a level of 345.63 MTCO2e per year, the project's GHG emissions do not exceed the SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year for all land uses and would be in compliance with the reduction goals of the City's CAP, CARB Scoping Plan, AB-32 and SB-32. Furthermore, the project will comply with applicable Green Building Standards and City of Yucaipa's policies regarding sustainability (as dictated by the City's General Plan). Impacts are considered to be less than significant.

Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

770

Table 13
Project Consistency with CARS Scoping Plan Policies and Measures 2008 Scoping Plan Measures to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions Project Compliance with Measure
California Light -Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Standards —Implement adapted standards and planned Consistent. These are CARS enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the second phase of the program. Align zero -emission vehicle, alternative and renewable fuel and vehicle standards will comply with the strategy.
technology programs with long-term climate change goals.

Energy Efficiency — Maximize energy efficiency building and appliance standards; pursue additional efficiency including new technologies, policy, and implementation mechanisms. Pursue comparable Consistent. The project will be compliant with the current Title 24 standards. investment in energy efficiency from all retail providers of electricity in California.

Consistent. These are CARE enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the Low Carbon Fuel Standard —Develop and adopt the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. standards will comply with the strategy.

Consistent. These are CARE enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the Vehicle Efficiency Measures— Implement light -duty vehicle efficiency measures. standards will comply with the strategy.

Consistent. These are CARE enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the Medium/Heavy-Duty Vehicles — Adopt medium and heavy-duty vehicle efficiency measures. standards will comply with the strategy.

Consistent. The California Green Building Standards Code (proposed Part 11, Title 24) was adopted as part of the California Building Standards Code in the CCR. Part 11 establishes voluntary standards, that are mandatory in the 201 Green Building Strategy— Expand the use of green building practices to reduce the carbon footprint of edition of the Code, on planning and design for sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California's new and existing inventory of buildings.

California Energy Code requirements), water conservation, material conservation, and internal air contaminants. The project will be subject to these mandatory standards.

High Global Warming Potential Gases —Adopt measures to reduce high global warming potential Consistent. CARE identified five measures that reduce HFC emissions from vehicular and commercial refrigeration gases.
systems; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the measures will comply with the strategy Consistent. The state is currently developing a regulation to reduce methane emissions from municipal solid waste Recycling and Waste— Reduce methane emissions at landfills. Increase waste diversion, composting, landfills. The project will be required to comply with City programs, such as any City recycling and waste reduction and commercial recycling. Move toward zero -waste.
programs, which comply, with the 75 percent reduction required by 2020 per AS 341.

Water —Continue efficiency programs and use cleaner energy sources to move and treat water.

Consistent. The project will comply with all applicable City ordinances and CAL Green requirements. 2017 Scoping Plan Recommended Actions to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions Project Compliance with Recommended Action
Implement Mobile Source Strategy: Further increase GHG stringency on all light -duty vehicles beyond Consistent. These are CARE enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the existing Advanced Clean Car regulations.
standards will comply with the strategy.

Implement Mobile Source Strategy: At least 1.5 million zero emission and plug -In hybrid light -duty Consistent. These are CARS enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the electric vehicles by 2025 and at least 4.2 million zero emission and plug-in hybrid light -duty electric standards will comply with the strategy.
vehicles by 2030.

Implement Mobile Source Strategy: Innovative Clean Transit: Transition to a suite of to -be -determined innovative clean transit options. Assumed 20 percent of new urban buses purchased beginning in 2018 Consistent. These are CARS enforced standards; vehicles that access the project that are required to comply with the will be zero emission buses with the penetration of zero -emission technology ramped up to 100 standards will comply with the strategy.
percent of new sales In 2030. Also, new natural gas buses, starting In 2018, and diesel buses, starting in 2020, meet the optional heavy-duty low-NOX standard.

Implement Mobile Source Strategy: last Mile Delivery: New regulation that would result in the use of low NOX or cleaner engines and the deployment of increasing numbers of zero -emission trucks Consistent, These are CARE enforced standards; vehicles that access the project required with the p 1 that are quire to comply y
primarily for class 3-7 last mile delivery trucks In California. This measure assumes ZEVs comprise 2.5 standards will comply with the strategy.
percent of new Class 3-7 truck sales in local fleets starting in 2020, increasing to 10 percent in 2025 and remaining flat through 2030.

Implement S8 350 by 2030: Establish annual targets for statewide energy efficiency savings and demand reduction that will achieve a cumulative doubling of statewide energy efficiency savings in Consistent. The project will be compliant with the current Title 24 standards. electricity and natural gas end uses by 2030.

By 2019, develop regulations and programs to support organic waste landfill reduction goals in the Consistent. The project will be required to comply with City programs, such as any City recycling and waste reduction SLOP and SB 1383.
programs, which comply, with the 75 percent reduction required by 2020 per AS 341.

S ur ;- Roping Pun (2ong and 2e17)
771

3.7 CUMULATIVE GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACTS
Although the project is expected to emit GHGs, the emission of GHGs by a single project into the atmosphere is not itself necessarily an adverse environmental effect. Rather, it is the increased accumulation of GHG from more than one project and many sources in the atmosphere that may result in global climate change. Therefore, in the case of global climate change, the proximity of the project to other GHG emission generating activities is not directly relevant to the determination of a cumulative impact because climate change is a global condition. According to CAPCOA, "GHG impacts are exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non -cumulative GHG emission impacts from a climate change perspective."24 The resultant consequences of that climate change can cause adverse environmental effects. A project's GHG emissions typically would be very small in comparison to state or global GHG emissions and, consequently, they would, in isolation, have no significant direct impact on climate change.

The state has mandated a goal of reducing statewide emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, even though statewide population and commerce are predicted to continue to expand. In order to achieve this goal, CARB is in the process of establishing and implementing regulations to reduce statewide GHG emissions.

Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064h(3)," the City, as lead agency, has determined that the project's contribution to cumulative GHG emissions and global climate change would be less than significant if the project is consistent with the applicable regulatory plans and policies to reduce GHG emissions.

As discussed in the Consistency With Applicable Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plans and Policies section above, the project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City of Yucaipa CAP and the CARB Scoping Plan.

Thus, given the project's consistency with the City's CAP, CARB Scoping Plan, and SCAQMD's 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold for all land uses, the project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Given this consistency, it is concluded that the project's incremental contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and their effects on climate change would not be cumulatively considerable. 24 Source: California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, CEQA & Climate change: Evaluating and Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Projects Subject to the California Environmental Quality Act, (2008). 25 The State CEQA Guidelines were amended in response to SB 97. In particular, the State CEQA Guidelines were amended to specify that compliance with a GHG emissions reduction program renders a cumulative impact insignificant. Per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), a project's incremental contribution to a cumulative impact can be found not cumulatively considerable if the project will comply with an approved plan or mitigation program that provides specific requirements that will avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative problem within the geographic area of the project. To qualify, such a plan or program must be specified in law or adopted by the public agency with jurisdiction over the affected resources through a public review process to implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by the public agency. Examples of such programs include a "water quality control plan, air quality attainment or maintenance plan, integrated waste management plan, habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, (and] plans or regulations for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions." Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

772

4 MITIGATION MEASURES

4.1 CONSTRUCTION MEASURES
Adherence SCAQMD Rule 403 is required.

No construction mitigation required.

4.2 OPERATIONAL MEASURES
No operational mitigation is required.

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

773

5 ENERGY ANALYSIS

5.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section provides an overview of the existing energy conditions in the project area and region.

5.1.1 Overview
California's estimated annual energy use as of 2019 included:
■ Approximately 277,704 gigawatt hours of electricity;26 ■ Approximately 2,154,030 million cubic feet of natural gas per year 27; and ■ Approximately 23.2 billion gallons of transportation fuel (for the year 2015).28 As of 2018, the year of most recent data currently available by the United States Energy Information Administration (EIA), energy use in California by demand sector was:
■ Approximately 39.1 percent transportation;
■ Approximately 23.5 percent industrial;
■ Approximately 18.3 percent residential; and
■ Approximately 19.2 percent commercia1.29
California's electricity in -state generation system generates approximately 200,475 gigawatt-hours each year. In 2019, California produced approximately 72 percent of the electricity it uses; the rest was imported from the Pacific Northwest (approximately 9 percent) and the U.S. Southwest (approximately 19 percent). Natural gas is the main source for electricity generation at approximately 42.97 percent of the total in -state electric generation system power as shown in Table 14. 26 California Energy Commission. Energy Almanac. Total Electric Generation. [Online] 2020. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/caIifornia-electricity-data/2019-total-system-electric-generation . 27 Natural Gas Consumption by End Use. U.S. Energy Information Administration. [Online] August 31, 20020. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_cons_sum_dcu— SCA—a.htm. 28 California Energy Commission. Revised Transportation Energy Demand Forecast 2018-2030. [Online] April 19, 2018. https://www.energy.ca.gov/assessments/
29 U.S. Energy Information Administration. California Energy Consumption by End -Use Sector.

California State Profile and Energy Estimates. [Online] January 16, 2020, https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2 Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

774

Table 14
Total Electricity System Power (California 2019)
Fuel Type
California In-
State
Generation
(GWh)
Percent of
California In
State
Generation
Northwest
Imports
(GWh)
Southwest
Imports
(GWh)
Total
Imports
(GWh)
Percent of
Imports
Total
California
Energy Mix
(GWh)
Total
California
Power Mix
Coal
248

0.12%
219
7,765
7,985

10.34%
8,233

2.96%
Natural Gas
86,136

42.97%
62 8,859
8,921

11.55%
95,057

34.23%
Nuclear
16,163

8.06%
39 8,743
8,782

11.37%
24,945

8.98%
Oil
36 0.02%
0 0
0 0.00%
36 0.01%
Other (Petroleum Coke/Waste Heat)
411

0.20%
0 11
11 0.01%
422

0.15%
Large Hydro
33,145

16.53%
6,387
1,071
7,458

9.66%
40,603

14.62%
Unspecified Sources of Power
Renewables
Biomass
Geothermal
Somali Hydro
Solar
Wind
0 0.00%
6,609
13,767
20,376

26.38%
20,376

7.34%
64,336

32.09%
10,615
13,081
23,696

30.68%
88,032

31.70%
5,851

2.92%
903
33 936

1.21%
6,787

2.44%
10,943

5.46%
99 2,218
2,318

3.00%
13,260

4.77%
5,349

2.67%
292
4 296

0.38%
5,646

2.03%
28,513

14.22%
282
5,295
5,577

7.22%
34,090

12.28%
13,680

6.82%
9,038
5,531
14,569

18.87%
28,249

10.17%
Total
200,475
100.00%
23,930
53,299
77,229
100.00%
277,704
100.00-
Notes:
(1) Source: California Energy Commission. 2019 Total System electric Generation. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2019-total- system-e le ctric-generation
775

A summary of and context for energy consumption and energy demands within the State is presented in "U.S. Energy Information Administration, California State Profile and Energy Estimates, Quick Facts" excerpted below:
■ California was the seventh -largest producer of crude oil among the 50 states in 2018, and, as of January 2019, it ranked third in oil refining capacity. ■ California is the largest consumer of jet fuel among the 50 states and accounted for one -fifth of the nation's jet fuel consumption in 2018.
■ California's total energy consumption is the second highest in the nation, but, in 2018, the State's per capita energy consumption ranked the fourth -lowest, due in part to its mild climate and its energy efficiency programs.
■ In 2018, California ranked first in the nation as a producer of electricity from solar, geothermal, and biomass resources and fourth in the nation in conventional hydroelectric power generation. ■ In 2018, large- and small-scale solar PV and solar thermal installations provided 19% of California's net electricity generation3o
As indicated above, California is one of the nation's leading energy -producing states, and California per capita energy use is among the nation's most efficient. Given the nature of the proposed project, the remainder of this discussion will focus on the three sources of energy that are most relevant to the project —namely, electricity and natural gas, and transportation fuel for vehicle trips associated with the proposed project.

5.1.2 Electricity
Electricity would be provided to the project by Southern California Edison (SCE). SCE provides electric power to more than 15 million persons, within a service area encompassing approximately 50,000 square miles.31 SCE derives electricity from varied energy resources including: fossil fuels, hydroelectric generators, nuclear power plants, geothermal power plants, solar power generation, and wind farms. SCE also purchases from independent power producers and utilities, including out-of-state suppliers.12 Table 15 identifies SCE's specific proportional shares of electricity sources in 2019. As shown in Table 15, the 2019 SCE Power Mix has renewable energy at 35 percent of the overall energy resources, of which biomass and waste is at 1 percent, geothermal is at 8 percent, eligible hydroelectric is at 1 percent, solar energy is at 16 percent, and wind power is at 12 percent; other energy sources include large hydroelectric at 8 percent, natural gas at 16 percent, nuclear at 8 percent and unspecified sources at 33 percent.

5.1.3 Natural Gas
Natural gas would be provided to the project by Southern California Gas (SoCalGas). The following summary of natural gas resources and service providers, delivery systems, and associated regulation is excerpted from information provided by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). 30 State Profile and Energy Estimates. Independent Statistics and Analysis. [Online] [Cited: January 16, 2020.] http://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs2 .
31 https://www.sce,com/about-us/who-we-are/leadership/our-service-territory 32 California Energy Commission. Utility Energy Supply plans from 2015. https://www.energy.ca.gov/almanac/electricity_data/supply_forms.htmI Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

776

Table 15
SCE 2019 Power Content Mix
Energy Resources
2019 SCE Power Mix
Eligible Renewable
Biomass & Biowaste
Geothermal
Eligible Hydroelectric
Solar
Wind
35%
1%
6%
1%
16%
12%
Coal
0%
Large Hydroelectric
8%
Natural Gas
16%
Nuclear
8%
Other
0%
Unspecified Sources of power*
33%
Total
100%
Notes:
(1) https://www.sce.com/sites/default/files/inIine-files/SCE_2019PowerContentLabe1.pdf * Unspecified sources of power means electricity from transactions that are not traceable to specific generation sources.
777

The CPUC regulates natural gas utility service for approximately 11 million customers that receive natural gas from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Southern California Gas (SoCalGas), San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E), Southwest Gas, and several smaller investor -owned natural gas utilities. The CPUC also regulates independent storage operators Lodi Gas Storage, Wild Goose Storage, Central Valley Storage and Gill Ranch Storage.

The vast majority of California's natural gas customers are residential and small commercial customers, referred to as "core" customers. Larger volume gas customers, like electric generators and industrial customers, are called "noncore" customers. Although very small in number relative to core customers, noncore customers consume about 65% of the natural gas delivered by the state's natural gas utilities, while core customers consume about 35%.

The PUC regulates the California utilities' natural gas rates and natural gas services, including in -state transportation over the utilities' transmission and distribution pipeline systems, storage, procurement, metering and billing.

Most of the natural gas used in California comes from out-of-state natural gas basins. In 2017, for example, California utility customers received 38% of their natural gas supply from basins located in the U.S.

Southwest, 27% from Canada, 27% from the U.S. Rocky Mountain area, and 8% from production located in California.1133

5.1.4 Transportation Energy Resources
The project would attract additional vehicle trips with resulting consumption of energy resources, predominantly gasoline and diesel fuel. Gasoline (and other vehicle fuels) are commercially provided commodities and would be available to the project residents and employees via commercial outlets.

The most recent data available shows the transportation sector emits 40 percent of the total greenhouse gases in the state and about 84 percent of smog -forming oxides of nitrogen (NOx).14,"About 28 percent of total United States energy consumption in 2019 was for transporting people and goods from one place to another. In 2019, petroleum comprised about 91 percent of all transportation energy use, excluding fuel consumed for aviation and most marine vessels.36 In 2020, about 123.49 billion gallons (or about 2.94 billion barrels) of finished motor gasoline were consumed in the United States, an average of about 337 million gallons (or about 8.03 million barrels) per day.31

5.2 REGULATORY BACKGROUND
Federal and state agencies regulate energy use and consumption through various means and programs.

On the federal level, the United States Department of Transportation, the United States Department of Energy, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency are three federal agencies with 33 California Public Utilities Commission. Natural Gas and California. http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/natural_gas/ 34 CARB. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory— 2020 Edition. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm 35 CARB. 2016 SIP Emission Projection Data. https://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/2017/emseicl_query.php?F_DlV=- 4&F YR=2012&F_SEASON=A&SP=SIP105ADJ&F_AREA=CA
36 US Energy Information Administration. Use of Energy in the United States Explained: Energy Use for Transportation. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/?page=us_energy_transportation 37 https://www.ela.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=23&t=10
Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

778

substantial influence over energy policies and programs. On the state level, the PUC and the California Energy Commissions (CEC) are two agencies with authority over different aspects of energy. Relevant federal and state energy -related laws and plans are summarized below.

5.2.1 Federal Regulations
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards
First established by the U.S. Congress in 1975, the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards reduce energy consumption by increasing the fuel economy of cars and light trucks. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) jointly administer the CAFE standards. The U.S. Congress has specified that CAFE standards must be set at the "maximum feasible level" with consideration given for: (1) technological feasibility; (2) economic practicality; (3) effect of other standards on fuel economy; and (4) need for the nation to conserve e n e rgy.38
Issued by NHTSA and EPA in March 2020 (published on April 30, 2020, and effective after June 29, 2020), the Safer Affordable Fuel -Efficient Vehicles Rule would maintain the CAFE and CO2 standards applicable in model year 2020 for model years 2021 through 2026. The estimated CAFE and CO2 standards for model year 2020 are 43.7 mpg and 204 grams of CO2 per mile for passenger cars and 31.3 mpg and 284 grams of CO2 per mile for light trucks, projecting an overall industry average of 37 mpg, as compared to 46.7 mpg under the standards issued in 2012.39
Intermodal Surface transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991(ISTEA) promoted the development of inter - modal transportation systems to maximize mobility as well as address national and local interests in air quality and energy. ISTEA contained factors that Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) were to address in developing transportation plans and programs, including some energy -related factors. To meet the new ISTEA requirements, MPOs adopted explicit policies defining the social, economic, energy, and environmental values guiding transportation decisions.

The Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century (TEA-21) The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) was signed into law in 1998 and builds upon the initiatives established in the ISTEA legislation, discussed above. TEA-21 authorizes highway, highway safety, transit, and other efficient surface transportation programs. TEA-21 continues the program structure established for highways and transit under ISTEA, such as flexibility in the use of funds, emphasis on measures to improve the environment, and focus on a strong planning process as the foundation of good transportation decisions. TEA-21 also provides for investment in research and its application to maximize the performance of the transportation system through, for example, deployment of Intelligent 38 https://www.nhtsa.gov/1awsreguIations/corporate-average-fuel-economy . 39 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USE PA), 2018. Federal Register/Vol. 83, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2018 / Proposed Rules, The Safer Affordable Fuel -Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks 2018. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/safer-affordable-fuel- efficient-safe-vehicles-final-rule.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

779

Transportation Systems, to help improve operations and management of transportation systems and vehicle safety.

5.2.2 State Regulations
Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR)
Senate Bill 1389 requires the California Energy Commission (CEC) to prepare a biennial integrated energy policy report that assesses major energy trends and issues facing the State's electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuel sectors and provides policy recommendations to conserve resources; protect the environment; ensure reliable, secure, and diverse energy supplies; enhance the state's economy; and protect public health and safety. The Energy Commission prepares these assessments and associated policy recommendations everytwo years, with updates in alternate years, as part of the Integrated Energy Policy Report.

The 2019 Integrated Energy Policy Report (2019 IEPR) was adopted February 20, 2020, and continues to work towards improving electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuel energy use in California. The 2019 IEPR focuses on a variety of topics such as decarbonizing buildings, integrating renewables, energy efficiency, energy equity, integrating renewable energy, updates on Southern California electricity reliability, climate adaptation activities for the energy sector, natural gas assessment, transportation energy demand forecast, and the California Energy Demand Forecast.40 State of California Energy Plan
The CEC is responsible for preparing the State Energy Plan, which identifies emerging trends related to energy supply, demand, conservation, public health and safety, and the maintenance of a healthy economy. The Plan calls for the state to assist in the transformation of the transportation system to improve air quality, reduce congestion, and increase the efficient use of fuel supplies with the least environmental and energy costs. To furtherthis policy, the plan identifies a numberof strategies, including assistance to public agencies and fleet operators and encouragement of urban designs that reduce vehicle miles traveled and accommodate pedestrian and bicycle access.

California Building Standards Code (Title 24)
The California Building Standards Code Title 24 was previously discussed in Section 2 of this report.

California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6) The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6) were adopted to ensure that building construction and system design and installation achieve energy efficiency and preserve outdoor and indoor environmental quality. The current California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24 standards) are the 2019 Title 24 standards, which became effective on January 1, 2020. The 2019 Title 24 standards include efficiency improvements to the lighting and efficiency improvements to the non-residential standards include alignment with the 40 California Energy Commission. Final 2019 Integrated Energy Policy Report. February 20, 2020. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data- reports/reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/2019-integrated-energy-policy-report Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

American Society of Heating and Air -Conditioning Engineers. For example, window operation is no longer a method allowed to meet ventilation requirements, continuous operation of central forced air system handlers used in central fan integrated ventilation system is not a permissible method of providing the dwelling unit ventilation airflow, and central ventilation systems that serve multiple dwelling units must be balanced to provide ventilation airflow to each dwelling unit. In addition, requirements for kitchen range hoods were also provided in the updated Section 120.1. Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality included both additions and revisions in the 2019 Code. This section now requires nonresidential and hotel/motel buildings to have air filtration systems that use forced air ducts to supply air to occupiable spaces to have air filters. Further, the air filter efficiency must be either MERV 13 or use a particle size efficiency rating specific in the Energy Code AND be equipped with air filters with a minimum 2-inch depth or minimum 1 inch depth if sized according to the equation 120.1-A. If natural ventilation is to be used the space must also use mechanical unless ventilation openings are either permanently open or controlled to stay open during occupied times.

New regulations were also adopted under Section 130.1 Indoor Lighting Controls. These included new exceptions being added for restrooms, the exception for classrooms being removed, as well as exceptions in regard to sunlight provided through skylights and overhangs.

All buildings for which an application for a building permit is submitted on or after January 1, 2020, must follow the 2019 standards. The 2016 residential standards were estimated to be approximately 28 percent more efficient than the 2013 standards, whereas the 2019 residential standards are estimated to be approximately 7 percent more efficient than the 2016 standards. Furthermore, once rooftop solar electricity generation is factored in, 2019 residential standards are estimated to be approximately 53 percent more efficient than the 2016 standards. Under the 2019 standards, nonresidential buildings are estimated to be approximately 30 percent more efficient than the 2016 standards. Energy efficient buildings require less electricity; therefore, increased energy efficiency reduces fossil fuel consumption and decreases greenhouse gas emissions.

California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 11) The 2019 California Green Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11), commonly referred to as the CALGreen Code, went into effect on January 1, 2020. The 2019 CALGreen Code includes mandatory measures for non-residential development related to site development; energy efficiency; water efficiency and conservation; material conservation and resource efficiency; and environmental quality.

As previously discussed in Section 3 of this report, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) updated CALGreen through the 2019 Triennial Code Adoption Cycle. HCD modified the best management practices for stormwater pollution prevention adding Section 5.106.2 for projects that disturb one or more acres of land. This section requires projects that disturb one acre or more of land or less than one acre of land but are part of a larger common plan of development or sale must comply with the postconstruction requirement detailed in the applicable National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities issued by the State Water Resources Control Board. The NPDES permits require postconstruction runoff (post -project hydrology) to match the preconstruction runoff pre -project hydrology) with installation of postconstruction stormwater management measures.

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

781

HCD added sections 5.106.4.1.3 and 5.106.4.1.5 in regard to bicycle parking. Section 5.106.4.1.3 requires new buildings with tenant spaces that have 10 or more tenant -occupants, provide secure bicycle parking for 5 percent of the tenant -occupant vehicular parking spaces with a minimum of one bicycle parking facility. In addition, Section 5.106.4.1.5 states that acceptable bicycle parking facility for Sections

5.106.4.1.2 through 5.106.4.1.4 shall be convenient from the street and shall meeting one of the following: (1) covered, lockable enclosures with permanently anchored racks for bicycles; (2) lockable bicycle rooms with permanently anchored racks; or (3) lockable, permanently anchored bicycle lockers.

HCD amended section 5.106.5.3.5 allowing future charging spaces to qualify as designated parking for clean air vehicles.

HCD updated section 5.303.3.3 in regard to showerhead flow rates. This update reduced the flow rate to

1.8 GPM.

HCD amended section 5.304.1 for outdoor potable water use in landscape areas and repealed sections

5.304.2 and 5.304.3. The update requires nonresidential developments to comply with a local water efficient landscape ordinance or the current California Department of Water Resource's' Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), whichever is more stringent. Some updates were also made in regard to the outdoor potable water use in landscape areas for public schools and community colleges.

HCD updated Section 5.504.5.3 in regard to the use of MERV filters in mechanically ventilated buildings.

This update changed the filter use from MERV 8 to MERV 13. MERV 13 filters are to be installed prior to occupancy, and recommendations for maintenance with filters of the same value shall be included in the operation and maintenance manual.

Senate Bill 100
Senate Bill 100 (SB 100) requires 100 percent of total retail sales of electricity in California to come from eligible renewable energy resources and zero -carbon resources by December 31, 2045. SB 100 was adopted September 2018.

The interim thresholds from prior Senate Bills and Executive Orders would also remain in effect. These include Senate Bill 1078 (SB 1078), which requires retail sellers of electricity, including investor -owned utilities and community choice aggregators, to provide at least 20 percent of their supply from renewable sources by 2017. Senate Bill 107 (SB 107) which changed the target date to 2010. Executive Order S-14- 08, which was signed on November 2008 and expanded the State's Renewable Energy Standard to 33 percent renewable energy by 2020. Executive Order 5-21-09 directed the CARB to adopt regulations by July 31, 2010, to enforce 5-14-08. Senate Bill X1-2 codifies the 33 percent renewable energy requirement by 2020.

Senate Bill 350
As previously discussed in Section 2 Air Quality Management of this report, Senate Bill 350 (SB 350) was signed into law October 7, 2015, SB 350 increases California's renewable electricity procurement goal from 33 percent by 2020 to 50 percent by 2030. This will increase the use of Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) eligible resources, including solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, and others. In addition, SB 350 requires the state to double statewide energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas end uses by 2030. To help ensure these goals are met and the greenhouse gas emission reductions are realized, Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

782

large utilities will be required to develop and submit Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs). These IRPs will detail how each entity will meet their customers resource needs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and ramp up the deployment of clean energy resources.

Assembly Bill 32
As discussed in Section 2 Air Quality Management of this report, in 2006 the California State Legislature adopted Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 requires CARB, to adopt rules and regulations that would achieve GHG emissions equivalent to statewide levels in 1990 by 2020 through an enforceable statewide emission cap which will be phased in starting in 2012.

Emission reductions shall include carbon sequestration projects that would remove carbon from the atmosphere and best management practices that are technologically feasible and cost effective. Please see Section 4 for further detail on AB 32.

Assembly Bill 1493/Pavley Regulations
As discussed in Section 2 Air Quality Management of this report, California Assembly Bill 1493 enacted on July 22, 2002, required CARB to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. In 2005, the CARB submitted a "waiver" request to the EPA from a portion of the federal Clean Air Act in order to allow the State to set more stringent tailpipe emission standards for CO2 and other GHG emissions from passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. On December 19, 2007, the EPA announced that it denied the "waiver" request. On January 21, 2009, CARB submitted a letter to the EPA administrator regarding the State's request to reconsider the waiver denial. The EPA approved the waiver on June 30, 2009.

Executive Order 5-1-07/Low Carbon Fuel Standard
As discussed in Section 2 Air Quality Management of this report, Executive Order 5-1-07 was issued in 2007 and proclaims that the transportation sector is the main source of GHG emissions in the State, since it generates more than 40 percent of the State's GHG emissions. It establishes a goal to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels sold in the State by at least ten percent by 2020. This Order also directs CARB to determine whether this Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) could be adopted as a discrete early - action measure as part of the effort to meet the mandates in AB 32.

On April 23, 2009, CARB approved the proposed regulation to implement the low carbon fuel standard.

The low carbon fuel standard is anticipated to reduce GHG emissions by about 16 MMT per year by 2020.

The low carbon fuel standard is designed to provide a framework that uses market mechanisms to spur the steady introduction of lower carbon fuels. The framework establishes performance standards that fuel producers and importers must meet each year beginning in 2011. Separate standards are established for gasoline and diesel fuels and the alternative fuels that can replace each. The standards are "back - loaded", with more reductions required in the last five years, than during the first five years. This schedule allows for the development of advanced fuels that are lower in carbon than today's fuels and the market penetration of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, battery electric vehicles, fuel cell vehicles, and flexible fuel vehicles. It is anticipated that compliance with the low carbon fuel standard will be based on a combination of both lower carbon fuels and more efficient vehicles.

Reformulated gasoline mixed with corn -derived ethanol at ten percent by volume and low sulfur diesel fuel represent the baseline fuels. Lower carbon fuels may be ethanol, biodiesel, renewable diesel, or Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

783

blends of these fuels with gasoline or diesel as appropriate. Compressed natural gas and liquefied natural gas also may be low carbon fuels. Hydrogen and electricity, when used in fuel cells or electric vehicles are also considered as low carbon fuels for the low carbon fuel standard.

5.2.3 California Air Resources Board
CARB's Advanced Clean Cars Program
Closely associated with the Pavley regulations, the Advanced Clean Cars emissions control program was approved by CARB in 2012. The program combines the control of smog, soot, and GHGs with requirements for greater numbers of zero -emission vehicles for model years 2015-2025.15 The components of the Advanced Clean Cars program include the Low -Emission Vehicle (LEV) regulations that reduce criteria pollutants and GHG emissions from light- and medium -duty vehicles, and the Zero -Emission Vehicle (ZEV) regulation, which requires manufacturers to produce an increasing number of pure ZEVs (meaning battery electric and fuel cell electric vehicles), with provisions to also produce plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) in the 2018 through 2025 model years."
Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel -Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling The Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel -Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling (Title 13, California Code of Regulations, Division 3, Chapter 10, Section 2435) was adopted to reduce public exposure to diesel particulate matter and other air contaminants by limiting the idling of diesel -fueled commercial motor vehicles. This section applies to diesel -fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of greater than 10,000 pounds that are or must be licensed for operation on highways. Reducing idling of diesel -fueled commercial motor vehicles reduces the amount of petroleum - based fuel used by the vehicle.

Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen, and other Criteria Pollutants, form In -Use Heavy -Duty Diesel -Fueled Vehicles The Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen and other Criteria Pollutants, from In -Use Heavy -Duty Diesel -Fueled Vehicles (Title 13, California Code of Regulations, Division 3, Chapter 1, Section 2025) was adopted to reduce emissions of diesel particulate matter, oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and other criteria pollutants from in -use diesel -fueled vehicles. This regulation is phased, with full implementation by 2023. The regulation aims to reduce emissions by requiring the installation of diesel soot filters and encouraging the retirement, replacement, or repower of older, dirtier engines with newer emission -controlled models. The newer emission -controlled models would use petroleum -based fuel in a more efficient manner.

Sustainable Communities Strategy
The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, or Senate Bill 375 (SB 375), coordinates land use planning, regional transportation plans, and funding priorities to help California meet the GHG reduction mandates established in AB 32.
41 California Air Resources Board, California's Advanced Clean Cars Program, January 18, 2017. www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/acc/acc.htm .

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

As previously stated in Section 2 Air Quality Management of this report, Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) was adopted September 2008 and aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG emission reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation. SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) to adopt a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) or alternate planning strategy (APS) that will prescribe land use allocation in that MPOs Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). CARB, in consultation with each MPO, will provide each affected region with reduction targets for GHGs emitted by passenger cars and light trucks in the region for the years 2020 and 2035. These reduction targets will be updated every eight years but can be updated every four years if advancements in emissions technologies affect the reduction strategies to achieve the targets. CARB is also charged with reviewing each MPO's sustainable communities strategy or alternate planning strategy for consistency with its assigned targets.

The proposed project is located within the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) jurisdiction, which has authority to develop the SCS or APS. For the SCAG region, the targets set by CARB are at eight percent below 2005 per capita GHG emissions levels by 2020 and 19 percent below 2005 per capita GHG emissions levels by 2035. These reduction targets became effective October 2018.

5.2.4 Local Regulations
City of Yucaipa General Plan
The Public Safety Element of the City of Yucaipa General Plan incudes the following policy related to energy usage:

Policy S-7.5 Energy Usage. Support the reduction and conservation of energy usage in residential and nonresidential buildings through adoption of building codes, promotion of energy -saving equipment, solar power, and other technology.

5.3 PROJECT ENERGY DEMANDS AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES

5.3.1 Evaluation Criteria
In compliance with Appendix G of the State CECtA Guidelines, this report analyzes the project's anticipated energy use to determine if the project would:

Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation; or Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

In addition, Appendix F of the State CEQA Guidelines states that the means of achieving the goal of energy conservation includes the following:

Decreasing overall per capita energy consumption;
Decreasing reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas and oil; and Increasing reliance on renewable energy sources.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

785

5.3.2 Methodology
Information from the CaIEEMod 2020.4.0 Daily and Annual Outputs contained in Appendix B and C, utilized for air quality and greenhouse gas analyses in Sections 2 and 3 of this report, were also utilized for this analysis. The CalEEMod outputs detail project related construction equipment, transportation energy demands, and facility energy demands.

Construction Energy Demands
The construction schedule is anticipated to occur between early December 2021 and early September 2022 and be completed in one phase.42 Staging of construction vehicles and equipment will occur on -site.

The approximately 9-month schedule is relatively short, and the project site is relatively small at approximately 5.19 gross acres.

Construction Equipment Electricity Usage Estimates
As stated previously, Electrical service will be provided by SCE. The focus within this section is the energy implications of the construction process, specifically the power cost from on -site electricity consumption during construction of the proposed project. Based on the 2017 National Construction Estimator, Richard Pray (2017)43, the typical power cost per 1,000 square feet of building construction per month is estimated to be $2.32. The project plans to develop the site with 11,400 square feet of truck repair uses (includes a 7,500 square foot repair building and 3,900 square foot truck wash), 19,000 square feet of truck museum uses, and 6,000 square feet of office uses over the course of approximately 9 months. Based on Table 16, the total power cost of the on -site electricity usage during the construction of the proposed project is estimated to be approximately $655.63.

Construction Equipment Fuel Estimates
Fuel consumed by construction equipment would be the primary energy resource expended over the course of project construction. Fuel consumed by construction equipment was evaluated with the following assumptions:
■ Construction schedule of 9 months
■ All construction equipment was assumed to run on diesel fuel ■ Typical daily use of 8 hours, with some equipment operating from —6 hours ■ Aggregate fuel consumption rate for all equipment was estimated at 18.5 hp-hr/gallon (from CARB's 2017 Emissions Factors Tables and fuel consumption rate factors as shown in Table D-21 of the Moyer Guidelines: ( https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/moyer/guidelines/2017gi/2017_gl_appendix_d.pdf) . ■ Diesel fuel would be the responsibility of the equipment operators/contractors and would be sources within the region.
42 The project is anticipated to occur in three Phases. Phase 1 does not include construction as it is just the rearranging/movement of the existing storage on -site (expanding existing construction yard land use onto additional parcels and obtaining building permits for unpermitted structures). Phase 2 is anticipated to last approximately 6 months and Phase 3 is anticipated to last approximately 9 months. Per the project applicant, Phase 2 and Phase 3 of construction are anticipated to occur concurrently. Therefore, project construction was modeled as occurring in one phase with a total duration of approximately 9 months. 43 Pray, Richard. 2017 National Construction Estimator. Carlsbad: Craftsman Book Company, 2017.

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis Page 87

Table 16
Project Construction Power Cost and Electricity Usage
Power Cost
(per 1,000 square
foot of building per
Total Project
month of
Total Building Size*
Construction
Construction Power
construction)
(1,000 Square Foot)
Duration (months)
Cost
$2.32
j 31.400
1 9
j $655.63
787

Project construction represents a "single -event" for diesel fuel demand and would not require on- going or permanent commitment of diesel fuel resources during longterm operation.

Using the CaIEEMod data input for the air quality and greenhouse gas analyses (Sections 2 and 3 of this report), the project's construction phase would consume electricity and fossil fuels as a single energy demand, that is, once construction is completed their use would cease. CARB's 2017 Emissions Factors Tables show that on average aggregate fuel consumption (gasoline and diesel fuel) would be approximately 18.5 hp-hr-gal. Table 17 shows the results of the analysis of construction equipment.

As presented in Table 17, project construction activities would consume an estimated 28,886 gallons of diesel fuel. As stated previously, project construction would represent a "single -event" diesel fuel demand and would not require on -going or permanent commitment of diesel fuel resources for this purpose.

Construction Worker Fuel Estimates
It is assumed that construction worker trips are from light duty autos (LDA), light duty truck 1 (LDT1), and light duty truck 2 9LDT2) at a mix of 50 percent/25 percent/25 percent, respectively, along area roadways.44 With respect to estimated VMT, the construction worker trips would generate an estimated 175,900 VMT. Data regarding project related construction workertrips were based on CalEEMod 2020.4.0 model defaults.

Vehicle fuel efficiencies for construction workers were estimated in the air quality and greenhouse gas analyses (Sections 2 and 3 of this report) using information generated using CARB's EMFAC 2021 model.

An aggregate fuel efficiency of 26.38 miles per gallon (mpg) was used to calculate vehicle miles traveled for construction worker trips. Table 18 shows that an estimated 6,668 gallons of fuel would be consumed for construction worker trips.

Construction Vendor/Hauling Fuel Estimates
Tables 19 and 20 show the estimated fuel consumption for vendor and hauling during grading, building construction and architectural coating. With respect to estimated VMT, the vendor and hauling trips would generate an estimated 42,998 VMT. Data regarding project related construction worker trips were based on CaIEEMod 2020.4.0 model defaults.

For the architectural coatings it is assumed that the contractors would be responsible for bringing coatings and equipment with them in their light duty vehicles. Therefore, vendors delivering construction material or hauling debris from the site during grading would use medium to heavy duty vehicles with an average fuel consumption of 7.59 mpg for medium trucks and 5.87 mpg for heavy duty trucks. Tables 19 and 20 show that an estimated 6,661 gallons of fuel would be consumed for vendor trips and haul trips. 44 CalEEMod User's Guide (May 2021) states that the CalEEMod default fleet mix for worker trips includes light duty autos and light duty trucks, LDA, LDT1, LDT2, at a mix of 505'o/25%/25%, respectively.

Hal Hays Construction—AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

W.

Table 17
Construction Equipment Fuel Consumption Estimates
Phase
Number
of Days
Offroad Equipment Type
Amount
Usage
Hours
Horse
Power
Load
Factor
HP
hrs/day
Total Fuel
Consumption
(gal diesel fuel)'
Grading
8 Excavators
1 8
158

0.38 480
208
8 Graders
1 8
187

0.41 613
265
8 Rubber Tired Dozers
1 8
247

0.4 790
342
8 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoe
3 8
97 0.37
861
372
130
Cranes
2 7
231

0.29 938
6,590
130
Forklifts
4 8
89 0.2
570
4,003
Building
Construction
130
Generator Sets
2 8
84 0.74
995
6,989
130
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoe
4 7
97 0.37
1,005
7,062
130
Welders
1 8
46 0.45
166
1,164
18 Cement and Mortar Mixer
2 6
9 0.56
60 59
18 Pavers
1 8
130

0.42 437
425
Paving
18 Paving Equipment
2 6
132

0.36 570
555
18 Rollers
2 6
80 0.38
365
355
18 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoe
1 8
97 0.37
287
279
Architectural
Coating
1 18
lAir Compressors
1 6
78 0.48
225
219
CONSTRUCTION FUEL DEMAND (gallons of diesel fuel)
28,886
Notes:
(1) Using Carl Moyer Guidelines Table D-21 Fuel consumption rate factors (bhp-hr/gal) for engines less than 750 hp. (Source: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/moyer/guidelines/2017gi/2017_g1_appendix_d,pdf)

Table 18
Construction Worker Fuel Consumption Estimates'
Phase
Number of
Days
Worker
Trips/Day
Trip Length
(miles)
Vehicle Miles
Traveled
Average
Vehicle Fuel
Economy
(mpg),
Estimated Fuel
Consumption
(gallons)
Grading
8 15

14.7 1,764

26.38 67
Building Construction
130
86 14.7
164,346

26.38 6,230
Paving
18 20

14.7 5,292

26.38 201
Architectural Coating
18 17

14.7 4,498

26.38 171
Total Construction Worker Fuel Consumption
I6,668
Notes:
(1) Assumptions for the worker trip length and vehicle miles traveled are consistent with CalEEMod 2020.4.0 defaults. (2) Cal EEMod worker vehicle class is based on an LID Mix, which, per Cal EEMod User's Guide (May 2021), inlcudes LDA, LDT1, and LDT2 at a mix of 50%/25%/25%, respectively.
790

Table 19
Construction Vendor Fuel Consumption Estimates (MHD & HHDT Trucks)' Phase
Number of
Days
Vendor
Trips/Day
Trip Length
(miles)
Vehicle Miles
Traveled
Average
Vehicle Fuel
Economy
(mpg)
Estimated Fuel
Consumption
(gallons)
Grading
8 0

6.9 0

6.73 0
Building Construction
130
34 6.9
30,498

6.73 4,532
Paving
18 0

6.9 0

6.73 0
Architectural Coating
1 18
0 6.9
0 6.73
0 Total Construction Vendor Fuel Consumption
4,532
Notes:
(1) Assumptions for the vendor trip length and vehicle miles traveled are consistent with CaIEEMod 2020.4.0 defaults. (2) CalEEMod vendor vehicle class is based on an HDT_Mix, which, per CalEEMod User's Guide (May 2021), inlcudes HHDT and MHDT at a mix of 50%/50%.
791

Table 20
Construction Hauling Fuel Consumption Estimates (HHD Trucks)' Phase
Number of
Days
Total Hauling
Trips
Trip Length
(miles)
Vehicle Miles
Traveled
Average
Vehicle Fuel
Economy
(mpg)
Estimated Fuel
Consumption
(gallons)
Grading
8 625
20 12,500

5.87 2,129
Building Construction
130
0 20
0 5.87
0 Paving
18 0
20 0

5.87 0
Architectural Coating
1 18
1 0
20 0

5.87 0
Total Construction Hauling Fuel Consumption
2,129
Notes:
(1) Assumptions for the hauling trip length and vehicle miles traveled are consistent with CalEEMod 2020.4.0 defaults. 792

Construction Energy Efficiency/Conservation Measures
Construction equipment used over the approximately 9-month construction phase would conform to CARB regulations and California emissions standards and is evidence of related fuel efficiencies. There are no unusual project characteristics or construction processes that would require the use of equipment that would be more energy intensive than is used for comparable activities; or equipment that would not conform to current emissions standards (and related fuel efficiencies). Equipment employed in construction of the project would therefore not result in inefficient wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of fuel.

The project would utilize construction contractors which practice compliance with applicable CARB regulation regarding retrofitting, repowering, or replacement of diesel off -road construction equipment.

Additionally, CARB has adopted the Airborne Toxic Control Measure to limit heavy-duty diesel motor vehicle idling in order to reduce public exposure to diesel particulate matter and other Toxic Air Contaminants. Compliance with these measures would result in a more efficient use of construction - related energy and would minimize or eliminate wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy. Idling restrictions and the use of newer engines and equipment would result in less fuel combustion and energy consumption.

Additionally, as required by California Code of Regulations Title 13, Motor Vehicles, section 2449(d)(3) Idling, limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than five minutes, thereby minimizing or eliminating unnecessary and wasteful consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of construction equipment. Enforcement of idling limitations is realized through periodic site inspections conducted by City building officials, and/or in response to citizen complaints.

5.3.3 Operational Energy Demands
Energy consumption in support of or related to project operations would include transportation energy demands (energy consumed by employee and patron vehicles accessing the project site) and facilities energy demands (energy consumed by building operations and site maintenance activities).

Transportation Fuel Consumption
Using the CalEEMod output from the air quality and greenhouse gas analyses (Sections 2 and 3 of this report), it is assumed that an average trip for autos and light trucks was assumed to be 6.9 miles and 3- 4- axle trucks were assumed to travel an average of 16.6 miles45. To present a worst -case scenario, it was assumed that vehicles would operate 365 days per year rather than the more likely 253 days (excluding weekends and up to 8 holidays). Table 21 shows the estimated annual fuel consumption for all classes of vehicles from autos to heavy -heavy trucks.

As discussed previously, with an event occurring, the proposed project would generate approximately 150 trips per day. The vehicle fleet mix was used from the CalEEMod output. Table 21 shows that an estimated 19,111 gallons of fuel would be consumed per year for the operation of the proposed project. 45 CalEEMod default distance for H-W (home -work) or C-W (commercial -work) is 16.6 miles; 6.9 miles for H-0 (home -other) or C-0 (commercial - other).

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

793

Table 21
Estimated Vehicle Operations Fuel Consumption
Vehicle Type
Vehicle Mix
Number of
Vehicles'
Average Trip
(miles)2,3
Daily VMT
Average
Fuel
Economy
(mpg)
Total
Gallons per
Day
Total Annual
Fuel
Consumption
(gallons)
Light Auto
Automobile
80 6.9
552

29.69 18.59
6,786
Light Truck
Automobile
8 6.9
55 23.58

2.34 854
Light Truck
Automobile
26 6.9
179

22.57 7.95
2,901
Medium Truck
Automobile
21 6.9
145

18.67 7.76
2,833
Light Heavy Truck
2-Axle Truck
4 6.9
28 14.67

1.88 687
ight Heavy Truck 10,000 Ibs
2-Axle Truck
2 6.9
1 16.6
14 L 14.12
1 0.98
357
Medium Heavy Truck
3-Axle Truck
1 2
33 7.59
1 4.37
1,597
Heavy Heavy Truck
4-Axle Truck
3 16.6
50 5.87

8.48 3,097
Total
150
--
1,056

52.36 Total Annual Fuel Consumption
19,111
Notes.
(1) Based on CaIEEMod fleet mix.
(2) Based on CalEEMod fleet mix. The size of the site and relative location, trips were assumed to be local rather than regional. (3) As provided by the project applicant, based on ITE Trip Generation 10th Edition it was assumed that the auto repair uses would have three new employees generating 9.15 trips per day, the office use would have six employees generating 19.68 trips per day and during an event with 100 visitors the museum would generate 121 trips per day for a total of approximatley 150 daily vehicle trips. Events are anticipated to only occur approximately once every quarter; however, to provide a worst -case scenario this analysis was completed with an event occurring. 794

Facility Energy Demands (Electricity and Natural Gas)
Building operation and site maintenance (including landscape maintenance) would result in the consumption of electricity (provided by Southern California Edison) and natural gas (provided by Southern California Gas Company The annual natural gas and electricity demands were provided per the CaIEEMod output from the air quality and greenhouse gas analyses (Sections 2 and 3 of this report) and are provided in Table 22.

As shown in Table 22, the estimated electricity demand for the proposed project is approximately 369,833 kWh per year. In 2019, the non-residential sector of the County of San Bernardino consumed approximately 9,933 million kWh of electricity.46 In addition, the estimated natural gas consumption for the proposed project is approximately 1,003,412 kBTU per year. In 2019, the non-residential sector of the County of San Bernardino consumed approximately 272 million therms of gas.47 Therefore, the increase in both electricity and natural gas demand from the proposed project is insignificant compared to the County's 2019 non-residential sector demand.

Energy use in buildings is divided into energy consumed by the built environment and energy consumed by uses that are independent of the construction of the building such as in plug-in appliances. In California, the California Building Standards Code Title 24 governs energy consumed by the built environment, mechanical systems, and some types of fixed lighting. Non -building energy use, or "plug-in" energy use can be further subdivided by specific end -use (refrigeration, cooking, appliances, etc.).

Furthermore, the proposed project energy demands in total would be comparable to other commercial projects of similar scale and configuration. Therefore, the project facilities' energy demands, and energy consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary.

5.4 RENEWABLE ENERGY AND EFFICIENCY PLAN CONSISTENCY
Regarding federal transportation regulations, the project site is located in an already developed area.

Access to/from the project site is from existing roads. These roads are already in place so the project would not interfere with, nor otherwise obstruct intermodal transportation plans or projects that may be proposed pursuant to the ISTEA because SCAG is not planning for intermodal facilities in the project area.

Regarding the State's Energy Plan and compliance with Title 24 CCR energy efficiency standards, the applicant is required to comply with the California Green Building Standard Code requirements for energy efficient buildings and appliances as well as utility energy efficiency programs implemented by SDG&E Regarding Pavley (AB 1493) regulations, an individual project does not have the ability to comply or conflict with these regulations because they are intended for agencies and their adoption of procedures and protocols for reporting and certifying GHG emission reductions from mobile sources.

Regarding the State's Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards, the project would be required to meet or exceed the energy standards established in the California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11 46 California Energy Commission, Electricity Consumption by County. https:Hecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx 47 California Energy Commission, Gas Consumption by County. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx Hal Hays Construction —AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

795

Table 22
Project Annual Operational Energy Demand Summary'
Natural Gas Demand
kBTU/year
Automobile Care Center
368,562
General Office Building
20,580
Truck MuseuM
614,270
Total
1,003,412
Electricity Demand
kWh/year
Automobile Care Center
113,088
General Office Building
55,140
Truck Museumz
188,480
Parking Lot
13,125
Total
369,833
Notes:
(1) Taken from the CalEEMod 2020.4.0 annual output (Appendix C of this report). (2) CAIEEMod does not have a truck museum land use in its database. In additon, there are no other museum type or similar land uses available; therefore, as the applicant used a Church use to calculate trip generation based on the assembly characteristics of a Church being the most similar to the special event activity occurring at the truck museum, to be consistent, this analysis also modeled the museum under the Church land use. 796

(CALGreen). CALGreen Standards require that new buildings reduce water consumption, employ building commissioningto increase buildingsystem efficiencies, divert construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant -emitting finish materials.

As shown in Section 3 above, the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable goals of the City of Yucaipa CAP.

5.5 CONCLUSIONS
As supported by the preceding analyses, project construction and operations would not result in the inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy. Further, the energy demands of the project can be accommodated within the context of available resources and energy delivery systems. The project would therefore not cause or result in the need for additional energy producing or transmission facilities.

The project would not engage in wasteful or inefficient uses of energy and aims to achieve energy conservations goals within the State of California. Notwithstanding, the project proposes truck repair, museum, and office uses and will not have any long-term effects on an energy provider's future energy development or future energy conservation strategies.

Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

797

6 REFERENCES
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) 2008 CEQA and Climate Change. January.

California Air Resources Board
2008 Resolution 08-43
2008 Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for Greenhouse Gases under the California Environmental Quality Act
2008 Climate Change Scoping Plan, a framework for change. 2011 Supplement to the AB 32 Scoping Plan Functional Equivalent Document 2013 Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality.

Source: https://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanacl3/almanacl3.htm 2014 First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, Building on the Framework Pursuant to A632, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. May. 2017 California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November. 2021 Historical Air Quality, Top 4 Summary
City of Yucaipa
2015 City of Yucaipa Climate Action Plan. September.
2016 City of Yucaipa General Plan. April.

Governor's Office of Planning and Research
2008 CEQA and Climate: Addressing Climate Change Through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Review
2018 CEQA Guideline Sections to be Added or Amended
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
2014 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report South Coast Air Quality Management District
1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook
Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

2005 Rule 403 Fugitive Dust
2007 2007 Air Quality Management Plan
2008 Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, Revised 2012 Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan
2016 2016 Air Quality Management Plan
2021 Historical Data by Year. 2013, 2014 and 2015 Air Quality Data Tables.

Source: http://www.agmd.gov/home/library/air-quality-data-studies/historical-data-by-year Southern California Association of Governments
2016 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
2017 Understanding Global Warming Potentials
(Source: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials) U.S. Geological Survey
2011 Reported Historic Asbestos Mines, Historic Asbestos Prospects, and Other Natural Occurrences of Asbestos in California
Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

799

APPENDICES
Appendix A Glossary of Terms
Appendix B CalEEMod Model Daily Emissions Printouts
Appendix C CalEEMod Model Annual Emissions Printouts
Hal Hays Construction AQ-GHG-HRA-Energy Impact Analysis

:11

APPENDIX A

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

AQMP
Air Quality Management Plan
BACT
Best Available Control Technologies
CAAQS
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CaIEPA
California Environmental Protection Agency
CARB
California Air Resources Board
CCAA
California Clean Air Act
CCAR
California Climate Action Registry
CEQA
California Environmental Quality Act
CFCs
Chlorofluorocarbons
CH4
Methane
CNG
Compressed natural gas
CO
Carbon monoxide
CO2
Carbon dioxide
CO2e
Carbon dioxide equivalent
DPM
Diesel particulate matter
EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
GHG
Greenhouse gas
GWP
Global warming potential
HIDPM
Hazard Index Diesel Particulate Matter
HFCs
Hydrofluorocarbons
IPCC
International Panel on Climate Change
LCFS
Low Carbon Fuel Standard
LST
Localized Significant Thresholds
MTCO2e
Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
MMTCO2e
Million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
MPO
Metropolitan Planning Organization
NAAQS
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NOx
Nitrogen Oxides
NO2
Nitrogen dioxide
N2O
Nitrous oxide
03 Ozone
OPR
Governor's Office of Planning and Research
PFCs
Perfluorocarbons
PM
Particle matter
PM10
Particles that are less than 10 micrometers in diameter PM2.5
Particles that are less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter PIVll
Point of maximum impact
PPM
Parts per million
PPB
Parts per billion
RTIP
Regional Transportation Improvement Plan
RTP
Regional Transportation Plan
ROG
Reactive Organic Gas (see VOC)
SANDAG
San Diego Association of Governments
SCAQMD
South Coast Air Quality Management District
SDAPCD
San Diego Air Pollution Control District
SF6
Sulfur hexafluoride
SIP
State Implementation Plan
Sox
Sulfur Oxides
TAC
Toxic air contaminants
VOC
Volatile organic compounds

APPENDIX B

CALEEMOD MODEL DAILY EMISSIONS PRINTOUTS

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Hal Hays Construction Project
San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses
Size
Metric
Lot Acreage
Floor Surface Area
Population
General Office Building

6.00 1000sgft

0.02 6,000.00 i
0 Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces 3.08 Acre 3.08
134,164.80
0 ....................

Parking Lot

58.00 Space

0.86 , 37,500.00
0 ------------------------------ ------------- ---- -- _ -- _ --•- Place of Worship 19.00 1000sgft

0.44 19,000.00
0 ---' -••••• ........... ........... ---------- -----------4----- ---- ---- ----' ...............

Automobile Care Center

11.40 1000sgft

0.26 11,400.00
0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban
Climate Zone 10
Utility Company Southern California Edison
CO2Intensity 390.98
(lb/MWhr)
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 32
Operational Year 2022
CH4Intensity 0.033 N20Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr)

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - 4.66 ac (w/o exstng bldg sf to remain) -58 spc prkg lot (prkg It/circ-37.5TSF) 3.9TSF trck wash, 7.5TSF auto repair, & bldg w/ 6TSF office & 19TSF museum (20TSF ftprnt). Rmndr site assumed gravel/landscape etc. due extng strge use/movement.

Construction Phase - Construction anticipated to start December 2021 and take -9 months to complete. No demo.

Off -road Equipment - CalEEMod default building construction timing reduced by -43%; therefore, -47% more equipment needed from CalEEMod defaults.

Grading - Anticpiated to have up to 5,000 CY export for subexcavation due to compaction.

Vehicle Trips - Per applicant (using ITE), 9.15 trips/day for shop, 19.68 trips/day office, & 121 trips/day museum (during event w/ 100 visitors), which results in

3.28 tdps/TSF/day office, 0.8 trips/TSF/day auto shop, & 6.37 trips/TSF/day museum.

Sequestration - -12 new trees to be planted.

M

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Construction Off -road Equipment Mitigation -
Mobile Land Use Mitigation - Site is -3.18 miles SW of downtown yucaipa. Sidewalks on/off-site.

Water Mitigation - 20% indoor water reduction per CalGreen Standards.

Waste Mitigation - AB 341 requires each jurisdiction in CA to divert -75% of their waste away from landfills by 2020.

Energy Mitigation -
Table Name
Column Name
Default Value
New Value
tblConslDustMitigation
WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed
0 i
15 ------------------------------ �----------------Y
tblConstructionPhase
------•-----------------------------------
NumDa s 230.00 i
130.00
.........................•-•-.+----•••---------------------• tblGrading

Y-----------------------------
MaterialExported 0.00 i
....................------
5,000.00
...............................
.............................

LandUseS uareFeet
-------------------------------
23,200.00 i
37,500.00
-----------------•-----•-------
lblLandUse
-----------------------------
LotAcrea a
Y-

0.14 i

0.02 ..............................+-••••••---------------------- tblLandUse
r-----------------------------
LotAcrea a 0.52 i

0.86 .............................
..............................

OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 i

2.00 '-----------------------------+
lblOffRoadEquipment
------------------------------ ------------------------------f OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmounl 3.00 i
--------------------------

4.00 .............................. ;------------------------------------------------------------F-•--------•-•------------- tblOffRoad Equipment
OffRoadEquipmenlUnitAmount 1.00 i

2.00 '.............••••------------_-------...................... tblOffRoadEquipment
OffRoadEquipmenlUnitAmount
r-----------------------------t--------------------------

3.00 i

4.00 - ----------q--• ------------
tblSe uestration
---------------------------•- ------------------------------- NumberOfNewTrees 0.00 i
--------------------------

12.00 '-----------------------••---•
tblVehicleTri s
------------------------------ ------------------------------- ST_TR 5.99 r
-------••-----.....-------

6.37 tblVehicleTri s
P
r-----------------------------
ST_TR 23.72 1

0.80 '............................. 4
tblVehicleTri s
----- -.----------------------- ----------------------------- ST_TR 2.21 +

3.28 --------------- ............. y
tblVehicleTri s
-----------------------------
SU_TR
----------------- -------------

27.63 f

6.37 -•---------------------------
tblVehicleTri s
-----•----------------------- r-----------------
SU_TR 11.88 1

0.80 ............................•.
lblVehicleTri s
------------------------------ ------------------------------- SU_TR 0.70 i

3.28 •...........................
tblVehicleTri s
.............................. ------------------------------- WD_TR 6.95

6.31 ---------- '----•••P.........-+
lblVehicleTri s
------------------------------ ------------------
WD_TR 23.72 i

0.80 .............................4
tblVehicleTrips
---•-•--- ----------------------
-------
WD_TR 9.74
••-••--•- -
- ------ ---------

3.28 2.0 Emissions Summary

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
Unmitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Year
lb/day
lb/day
2021 3.3894 36.9498 29.6453 0.0784 8.6891 1.5167 10.0331 3.8551 1.4293 5,0983 ! 0.0000 8,169.124 8,169.124 1.1571 0.8180 8,441.805 i 2 2 4
2022 •� 21.6748 26,4458 28.8964 0.0580 1.1791 1.2794 2.4585 0.3177 1.2063 1.5240 1 0.0000 5,660.822 5,660.822 0.9747 0.1231 ? 5,721.880 + 1 1 2
' ' ,
Maximum

21.6748

36.9498

29.6453

0.0784

8.6691

1.5167

10.0331

3.8551

1.4293

5.0983 0.0000
0,169.12418,169.124

1.1571

0.8180
8,441.805
2 2
4 Mitigated Construction
ROG
NOz
CO
I S02
F
CO2e
I
PM10
PM70
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Year
lb/day
lb/day
2021 3.3894 36.9498 29.6453 0.0784 4.3256 1.5167 5.6696 1.7595 1.4293 3.0027 0.0000 8,169.124 8.169.124 1.1571 0.8180 8,441.805 2 2 4
1 ________ _______ _______ _______
2022 21.6748 26.4458 28.8964 0.0580 1.1791 1.2794 2.4585 0.3177 1.2063 1.5240 D.0000 5,660.822 5,660.822 0.9747 0.1231 ?5,721.880 +
1 1 2
•, ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 1 3 , , , ' ,
Maximum

21.6748

36.9498

29.6453

0.0784

4.3256

1.5167

5.6696

1.7595

1.4293

3.0027 0.0000
8,169.124
8,169.124

1.1571

0.8180
8,441.805
2 2
4 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG
NOx
CO
502
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Blo-0O2
NBio-CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Percent

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

44.22 0.00

34.93 50.22

0.00 31.64

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Reduction
1 1

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fughive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NB io-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Area 0.8880 9.000Oe- 9.9700e- 0.0000 r 4.0000e. 4.0000e- 4.000Oe- 4.0000e- + r 0.0213 0.0213 r 6.000Oe- 0.0227
005 003 005 005 005 005
j 005
•r r , r r i r r
i , i
Energy 0.0297 0.2695 0.2264 1.6200e- r 0,0205 0.0205 r 0.0205 0.0205 f, 323,4205 323.4205 6.2000e- 5.9300e- 325.3424
., 003
r , r , , , r r ,
i 003
003 r ,
r ,
, r r ,
Mobile •� 0.4686 0.5547 3.8054 7.5800e- 0.7049 6.8500e- 0.7118 0.1880 6.4300e- 0.1945 ± 776.4329 776.4329 0.0476 0.0395 789.3914
003 003 003
i
' ' ' '
i '
,T7,4.756.0539
Total

1.3863

0.8243

4.0410

9.2000e-

0.7049

0.0274

0.7323

0.1000

0.0270

0.2150
1,099.874
1,099.674

0.0454
111
11 003
7 7
5 Mitigated Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fughive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM 10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Area 0.8880 r 9.0000e- r 9.9700e- 0.0000 4.000Oe- 4.000Oe- r 4.0000e- r 4.0000e- + 0.0213 0.0213 6.0000e- r 0.0227
, r r
005 003 005 005 005 005
,
j 005
Energy 0.0297 0.2695 0.2264 1.6200e. r 0.0205 0.0205 r r 0.0205 0.0205 + r 323.4205 323.4205 r 6.2000e- 5.9300e- r 325,3424
003 r r
y 003 003
Mobile •� 0.4439 0.4865 3.3039 - 6.3800e- r 0.5893 r 5.8300e- r 0.5951 0.1572 5.4700e- 0.1627 653.6867 653.6867 r 0.0428 r 0.0347 665.0954
003 003 003
i
i
r 1 r r
i ' r
Total

1.3615

0.7561

3.5403

8.0000e-

0.5893

0.0264

0.6156

0.1572

0.0260

0.1832
977.1285
977.1285

0.0491

0.0406
990.4605
11 003
• / •

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG
NOx
c0
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Blo-0O2
NBIo-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
NZO
CO2e
PM70
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Percent

1.79 8.27

12.41 13.04

16.41 3.73

15.93 16.41

3.56 14.79

0.00 11.16

11.16 B.B6

10.57 11.15
Reduction

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name
Phase Type
Start Date
End Date
Num Days
Week
Num Days
Phase Description
1 :Grading
:Grading
:1211/2021
:12/10/2021
5'
8'
2 :Building Construction
:Building Construction
:12/11/2021
�6/11/2022
, i
5:
130
------------------------------------------------
3 :Paving :Paving
:6/12/2022
:7/6/2022
5'
18'
4 •Architectural Coating :Architectural Coaling
:7/7/2022
'8/1/2022
5:
18:

Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 8
Acres of Paving: 3.94
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non -Residential Indoor: 54,600; Non -Residential Outdoor: 18,200; Striped Parking Area: 10,300 (Architectural Coating — sgft)
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment Type
Amount
Usage Hours
I Horse Power I
Load Factor
Grading :Excavators
•
1 i

8.00i 158'

0.38 ----------------- i
----------------1
----------F-------------%
..........

Grading :Graders
1 i

8.00- 167'

0.41 -------------------------- :---------------------------i ----------------1
----------F-----------------------------
Grading :Rubber Tired Dozers
1 i

8.00, 247'

0.40 ...........................I----------------------------i ----------------i-------------t----------------------------- Grading •Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1
31 8.00, 97'

0.37 ----------------------------r--------------------------- ----------------i
----------- —%..............

Building Construction :Cranes
2i

7.00� 231'

0.29 -------------------------------------------------------i ---------------- I ----------
F------------ %
------------
Building Construction :Forklifts
41 8.00' 89:

0.20 Building Construction :Generator Sets
2,

8.00. 84,

0.74 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes I
4;

7.00: 97:

0.37 -----------------------------%-------------------------- +----------- -----fi----------------+------------.-_.___.._------
Building Construction •Welders
11 8.00' 46'

0.45 ------------------------------------------------------H----------------i H--------------- .............

Paving :Cement and Mortar Mixers
2i

6.00' 9�

0.56 ............................. :--------------------------- H---------------- i-------------H------------------.---------- Paving :Pavers
1 i

8.00' 130'

0.42 -----------------------------:-------------------------------------------- -------------------------
Paving Paving Equipment
21 6.00132:

0.36 --------------------------r---------------------------I-----------------i-- -------------�------------
Paving :Rollers
21 6.00' 80'

0.38 •------------------------ ---I---------------------------i-----------------i------------- --------------------------------
Paving •Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
1i

8.00' 97'

0.37 Architectural Coating :Air Compressors

6.00: 78:

0.48 Trips and VMT
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
I Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
I Hauling Trip
Length
I Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
I
Grading

15.00:

0.001
625.00:

14.70:

6.90'

20.00'LD_Mix
'HDT_Mix
:HHDT
Building Construction 13

86.00:

34.001

0.00:

14.701

6.90'

20.00'LD_Mix
'HDT_Mix
IHHDT
.Paving 8:

20.00'

0.00:

0.00'

14.70i

6.90�

20.00'1D_Mix
:HDT_Mix
IHHDT
--------------------------------4-------------------------------1-----------+-------------------a--------------+---------T--------•- Architectural Coating 1

17.00:

0.00:

0.00:

14.70:

6.90:

20.00:LD_Mix
•HDT—Mix
:HHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
i

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Grading - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
R77-F-7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugtive
Exhaust
PM2.5
810- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.1533 0.0000 7.1533 3.4354 0.0000 3.4354 i 0.0000 0.0000 11 Otf-Road 2.2903 24.7367 15.8575 0.0296 1.1599 1.1599 1.0671 1.0671 i 2,071.928 2,871.928 0.9288 2,895.149 i 5 5 5
1 1 ' 1
Total

2.2903

24.7367

15.8575

0.0296

7.1533

1.1599

8.3132

3.4354

1.0671

4.5026
2,871.928
2,871.928

0.9288
2,895.149
5 5
5 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.4030 12.1672 3.0662 0.0472 1.3682 0.1831 1.5513 0.3752 0.1752 0.5504 5,135.347 5.135.347 0.2237 0.8137 5,383.417
i 3 3 9
i
Vendor 0.0000 D.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
i_______ _______ _______
Worker •� 0.0689 0.0459 0.6786 1.6000e- 0,1677 9.4000e- 0.1686 0.0445 8.6000e- 0.0453 _
i 161.8483 161.8483 4.5800e 4.2800e ? 163.2380
003 004 004
i 003 003
1 i ' 1
Total

0.4720

12.2131

3.7668

0.0488

1.5358

0.1841

1.7199

0.4196

0.1761

0.5957
5,297.195
5,297.195

0.2283

0.0180
5,546.655
7 7
9 811

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Grading - 2021
Mitigated Construction On -Site
R=f�7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM70
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 2.7898 0.0000 2,7896 1.3398 0.0000 1.3396 0.0000 0.0000 1 Off -Road •2.2903 24.7367 15.8575 0.0296 . . 1.1599 1.1599 1.0671 1.0671 0.0000 2,871.928 2,871.928 0.9288 ' 2,895.149 i 5 5 5
' ' , 7
Total

2.2903

24.7367

15.8575

0.0296

2.7898

1.1599

3.9497

1.3390

1.0671

2.4069 0.0000
2,871.928
2,871.928
5 55
1��2,895.149
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
F
Category
Ib/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.4030 12.1672 3.0882 0.0472 1.3682 0.1831 1.5513 0.3752 0.1752 0.5504 i 5,135.347 5,135.347 0.2237 0.8137 ' 5,383.417
1 3 3 9
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
1 Worker 0.0689 0.0459 0.6786 1.6000e- 0.1677 9.4000e- 0.1686 0.0445 ' 8.6000e- 0.0453 1 161.8483 161.8483 4.5800e- 4.2800e- 163.2380
003 004 004
1 003 003
1 ,
Total

0.4720

12.2131

3.7668

0.0488

1.5358

0.1841

1.7199

0.4196

0.1761

0.5957
5,297.195
5,297.195

0.2283

0.8180
5,546.655
7 7
9 812

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Building Construction - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
F�chaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
Ib/day
Ib/day
Off -Road 2.9128 27,6794 25.1405 0.0428 1.4801 1.4801 1.3945 1.3945 + 4,076.613 4,076.613 0.9390 4.100.087
+ 3 3 2
• 1 1 1 1
r , , '
Total

2.9128

27.6794

25.1405

0.0428

1.4801

1.4801

1.3945

1.3945
4,076.613
4,076.613

0.9390
4,100.087
1 3
3 2
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Blo-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
Ib/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0,0000 0.0000 0.0000 0,0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0,0000 0,0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0813 1.7655 0.6141 6.5100e- 0.2178 0.0312 0.2490 0.0627 0.0299 0.0926 _ ..........
` 697.7843 : 697.7643 0.0198 0.1034 ? 729.0804
003
y
1 Worker 0.3952 0.2632 3.8907 9.1600e- 0.9613 5.3800e- 0.9667 0.2549 4.9500e- 0.2599 _�___T ... .._
927.9304 927.9304 1 0.0263 0.0245 935.8977
003 003 003
t
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
a 1 1 1 1
Total

0.4766

2.0287

4.5049

0.0157

1.1791

0.0366

1.2157

0.3177

0.0348

0.3525
1,625.714

1.625.714

0.0461

0.1279
1,664.978
7 7
2 813

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Building Construction - 2021
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM70
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
N77702
TotaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
I
PM2.5
I
Total
I
I
I
I
Category
Ib/day
lb/day
Off -Road 2.9128 27.6794 25.1405 0.0428 1.4801 1,4801 1.3945 1.3945

0.0000 4,076.613 4,076.613 0.9390 4.100.087
i 3 3 2
1 ' ' 1 '
i ,
Total

2.9120

27.6794

25.1405

0.0428

1.4801

1.4801

1.3945

1.3945

0.0000
4,076.613
4,076.613

0.9390
4,100.087
3 3
2 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
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
i
i
Vendor •� 0.0813 1.7655 0.6141 6.51008- 0.2178 0.0312 0.2490 0.0627 0.0299 0.0926 ____
697.7843 697.7843 0.0198 0.1034 r 729.0804
003
i
i
Worker 0.3952 0.2632 3.8907 9.1600e- 0.9613 5.3800e- 0.9667 0.2549 4.9500e- 0.2599 927.9304 - 927.9304 0.0263 0.0245 975.8977
003 003 003
i
i
' ' ' '
i 1 '
Total

0.4766

2.0287

4.5049

0.0157

1.1791

0.0366

1.2157

0.3177

0.0348

0.3525
1,625.714
1,625.714

0.0461

0.1279
1,664.970
7 7
2 •

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Building Construction - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
R77�F�7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM70
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
N77702
TotaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
lb/day
Ib/day
Off -Road 2.6203 24.7262 24.8071 0.0420 1.2567 1.2567 1.1848 1,1848 i 4,077.959 4.077.959 0.9328 4.101.280
6 6 0
1 1 1 1 '
1 Total

2.62113

24.7262

24.8071

0.0428

1.2567

1.2567

1.1848

1.1848

0.9328
4,101.280
14,077.959
6 14,077.9591
6 0
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM70
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
13102.5
Total
I
I
I
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
r
1 ______________ _
Vendor 0.0593 1.4889 0.5464 6.3400e- 0.2178 0.0177 0.2356 0.0627 0.0170 0.0797 t 680.2340 ' 680.2340 0.0184 0.1007 ? 710.6913
003
1 1 ___________ _______ _______ _______
Worker 0.3642 0.2307 3.5429 8.8700e- 0.9613 S.OSOOe- 0.9663 0.2549 4.6500e- 0.2596 + 902.6284 902.6284 0.0235 0.0225 ? 909.9089
003 003 003
' ' ' ' 1 1 ' 1 1
1 ' 1 1 1
Total

0.4235

1.7196

4.0893

0.0152

1.1791

0.02211

1.2019

0.3177

0.0216

0.3393
1,582.862
1,582.662

0.0419

0.1231

1.620.600
5 5
2 815

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Building Construction - 2022
Mitigated Construction On -Site
R77­[�7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBIo- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 2.6203 24.7262 24.8071 0,0428 1.2567 1,2567 1.1048 1.1848

0.0000 4.077.959 -4,077.959 - 0.9328 4,101.280
6 6 0
' ' 1
' '
Total

2.6203

24.7262

24.8071

0.0428

1.2567

1.2567

1.1848

1.1848

0.0000
4,077.959
4,077.959

0.9326
4,101.280
6 6
0 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
P72.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
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 j 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
a
____
Vendor 0.0593 1.4889 0.5464 6.3400e- 0.2178 0.0177 0.2356 0.0627 • 0.0170 0.0797 680.2340 680.2340 • 0.0184 0.1007 710.6913
003
1 Worker 0.3642 � 0.2307 3.5429 8.8700e- 0.9613 • S.OSOOe- • 0.9663 0.2549 4.6500e- 0.2596 : 902.6284 902.6284 0.0235 0.0225 909.9089
003 003 003
r
1 1 1 ' ' , 1 ' '
' ' ' '
Total

0.4235

1.7196

4.0893

0.0152

1.1791

0.0228

1.2019

0.3177

0.0216

0.3393
1,582.862
1,582.862

0.0419

0.1231
1,620.600
5 5
2 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Paving - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
R=1�7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 0.9765 9.5221 12.1940 0.0189 0.4677 0.4877 0.4504 0.4504 i 1,805.129 1,805.129 0.5672 1,819.309 ii 7 7 1
.,
Paving 0.1252 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ` 0.0000 0.0000 i
1 i ' ' ' '
Total

1.1017

9.5221

12.1940

0.0189

0.4877

0.4877

0.4504

0.4504
1,805.129
1,805.129

0.5672
11 7
1 7
11,819.309
1 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- COZ
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM70
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
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
................... i i , , i,
__________________________________________�_______�_______r_______y i
Vendor •� 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ...___,____�_______
7 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
i
i
Worker 0,0847 0.0537 0.8239 2.0600e- 0.2236 1.1700e- 0.2247 0.0593 1.0800e. 0.0604 1 209.9136 209.9136 5.4600e- 5.2200e- 211.6067
003 003 003
i 003 003
' '
i ,
Total

0.0847

0.0537

0.0239

2.0600e-

0.2236

1.1700e-

0.2247

0.0593

1.0800e-

0.0604
209.9136
209.9136

5.4600e-

5.2200e-
211.6067
003
003
003
003
003
817

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Paving - 2022
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
802
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
Ib/day
lb/day
Off -Road 0.9765 9.5221 12.1940 0.0189 0.4877 0.4877 0.4504 0.4504 i 0,0000 1,805.129 1,805.129 0.5672 1,819.309 7 7 1
--------------- _0.0000
Paving •� 0.1252 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0,0000
i
Total

1.1017

9.5221

12.1940

0.0189

0.4077

0.4877

0.4504

0.4504 0.0000
1,805.129
1,605.129

0.5672
1,819.309
7 7
1 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
Ib/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
t
+ _
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 t 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
t
Worker •0,0847 0.0537 0.8239 2.0600e- 0.2236 1.1700e- 0.2247 0.0593 1.0800e- 0.0604 209,9136 209.9136 5.4600e- 5.2200e- 211.6067
003 003 003
+ 003 003
,
1 ' ,
Total

0.0847

0.0537

0.0239

2.0600e-

0.2236

1.1700e-

0.2247

0.0593

1.0800e-

0.0604
209.9136
209.9136

5.4600e-

5.2200e-
211.6067
003
003
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
FugBive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
Iblday
Ib/day
Archil. Coaling 21.3983 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road 0.2045 1.4085 1.8136 2.9700e- 0.0817 0.0817 0.0817 0.0817 281.4481 281.4481 0.0183 281.9062 003 y
1 1 1
' '
Total

21.6028

1.4085

1.8136

2.9700e-

0.0817

0.0817

0.0817

0.0817
281.4481
261.4481

0.0183
281.9062
003
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
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 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
i
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
1 Worker 0.0720 0.0456 0.7003 1.7500e- 0.1900 1.000Oe- 0.1910 0.0504 9.2000e- 0.0513 178.4266 178.4266 4.6400e- 4.4400e- 179.8657
003 003 004
i
S 003 003
' ' '
i ,
' ' '
Total

0.0720

0.0456

0.7003

1.7500a-

0.1900

1.0000e-

0.1910

0.0504

9.2000e-

0.0513
178.4266
170.4266

4.6400e-

4.4400e-
179.8657
003
003
004
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2022
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
F
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Archit. Coaling 21.3983 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 Off -Road 0.2045 1.4085 1.8136 2.9700e- 0.0817 0.0817 0.0817 0.0817 0.0000 261.4481 281.4481 0.0183 ? 281.9062 003
' 1 1
Total

21.6028

1.4085

1.8136

2.9700e-

0.0817

0.0817

0.0817

0.01117 0.0000
281.4481
281.4481

0.0183
281.9062
003
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PIA15
PM2.5
Total
I
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
t
..........._____________________________.;_________r_______y....._____�_______ 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 0.0720 0.0456 0.7003 1.7500e- 0.1900 1.0000e- 0.1910 0.0504 9.2000e- 0.0513 178.4266 178.4266 4.6400e- 4.4400e- 179.8657
003 003 004
'
1 003 003
' 1
Total

0.0720

0.0456

0.7003

1.7500e-

0.1900

1.000Oe-

0.1910

0.0504

9.20000-

0.0513
178.4266
178.4266

4.6400e-

4.4400'-
179.8657
003
003
004
003
003

CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
Improve Destination Accessibility
Improve Pedestrian Network
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Category
Iblday
lb/day
Mitigated 0.4439 0.4865 3.3039 6.3800e-

0.5893 5.8300e-

0.5951 0.1572 5.4700e-

0.1627
i 653.6867 653,6067 0.0428 0.0347 665,0954
003
003
003
1 ...........•.'__-___T-____-T__-___T______T______T______T______T______T______T_______---------______T______T______T______t------- 1 Unmitigated •� 0.4686 0.5547 3.8054 7.5900e-

0.7049 6.8500e-

0.7118 0.1880 6.4300e-

0.1945 776.4329 776.4329 0.0476 0.0395 789.3914
003
003
003

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate
Unmitigated
Mitigated
Land Use
Weekday
Saturday Sunday
Annual VMT
Annual VMT
Place of Worship
121.03
121.03 i
121.03
............ ...........?.............
i--------------

H------------ -----------
4 ________258,132_________215,782__........
•••••••••Automobile CareCenler 9.12
.....-----------t

9.12 i
-..........4.

9.12 _._._.__ 12,217
---------%-
_____.-._ 10,212...........

General Offce Building
..................ice ui..............i-

19.68 - ----

19.68 i
F-----------t

19.68 4.

63.398
52:997
Other Non -As hall Surfaces

0.00 0.00 i

0.00 ...................9.................--------------F-----------t-...................................

Parkin Lot

0.00 0.00 i

0.00 Total
149.83
149.83 i
149.83
333,747
278,992

4.3 Trip Type Information
821

CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I Miles I Trip % I Trip Purpose %
Land Use I H-W or C-W I H-S or C-C I H-O or C-NW I H-W or C-W H-S or C-C I H-0 or C-N W I Primary I Diverted Pass -by Place of Worship

16.60 8.40

6.90 ;

0.00 : 95.00 i

5.00 ;
64 ; 25 ;
11 ..... ...............----------+----------••
Automobile Care Center

16.60 8.40

6.90 ----------

33.00 ... r...................................................

48.00 1

19.00 21
51 28
General Offce Buildin

16.60 8.40

6.90 ;

33.00 : 48.00 I

19.00 77
; 19 ;
4 ...........P...........

Other Non -As halt Surfaces
---------- 16.60
T--------- 8.40

I -------------------

6.90 0.00
-r--------- r------•-------------•--�
: 0.00 I

0.00 0
-------- -
0 -------
0 .............9.......... :----------
Parkin Lol

16.60 *------------------------------

8.40 6.90

0.00 •--------- ;------------------------•---------�

0.00 0.00
0 0
-------
0 4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use I LDA I LDT1 I LDT2 1 MDV I LHD1 I LHD2 I MHD I HHD I OBUS I UBUS I MCY I SBUS I MH 1 Place of Worship

0.534251• 0.055593: 0.171990: 0.141576: 0.027719: 0.007281: 0.011628: 0.017336: 0.000569: 0.000257: 0.025522: 0.000954:

0.00532:

Automobile Care Center

0.534251• 0.055593: 0,171990: 0.141576: 0.027719: 0,007281: 0,011628: 0.017336: 0.000569: 0.000257: 0.025522: 0.000954:

0.00532:

General Office Buildin

0.534251 • 0.055593: 0.171990; 0.141576: 0.027719: 0.007281: 0.011628: 0.017336: 0.000569:0.000257: 0.025522: 0.000954:

0.00532:
----------------•-+---------I---------I--
Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces
- ----I---------1 ----- - 1 -.61 I -------I---- --- I-------- I- - ----I - - -I

0.534251• 0.055593: 0.171990: 0.141576:0.027719� 0.007281! 0.011628: 0.017336� 0,000569: 0.000257: 0.025522: 0.000954:

0.00532:

Parking Lot
; 0.534251; 0.055593: 0.171990: 0.141576: 0.027719: 0.007281' 0.011628: 0.017336: 0.000569: 0.000257: 0.025522: 0.000954:

0.00532:

5.0 Enerciv Detail
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
822

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive I
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
I N20
I CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
NaluralGas
•' 0.0297 0.2695 0.2264 1.6200e-
' 0.0205 ' 0.0205

0.0205

0.0205
323.4205 ' 323.4205 ' 6.2000e-
' 5,9300e- ' 325.3424
Mitigated
003
j
003
003
i
NaturalGas

0.0297 0.2695 0.2264 1.6200e-

0.0205 0.0205

0.0205

0.0205
323.4205 323.4205 6.2000e-

5.9300e-? 325.3424
Unmitigated
003
003
003

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaluralGa
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM70
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TolaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
s Use
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Land Use
kBTU/yr
lb/day
lb/day
Automobile Care ' 1009.76 0.0109 0.0990 0.0832 5.9000e- ' 7.5200e- ' 7.5200e- ' 7.5200e- ' 7.5200e- 1 118.7952 ' 118.7952 ' 2.2800e- ' 2.1600e- ' 119.5011 Center 004 003 003 003 003 + 003 003
t
General Office 56.3836 6.1000e- 5.5300e- ' 4.6400e- ' 3.000Oe- ' 4.2000e- 4.2000e- 4.2000e- ' 4.2000e- r 6.6334 6.6334 1.3000e- ' 1.2000e- 6.6728 Building 004 003 003 005 004 004 004 004 i 004 004
,
Other No 0 r' 0.0000 0.0000 ' 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 r
Asphalt Surfaces, i, A,
1, i
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ' 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 A 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 1
Place of Worship ' 1682.93 +� 0.0182 0.1650 0.1386 9.9000e- ' 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125 197.9919 ' 197.9919 ' 3.7900e- ' 3.6300e- ' 199.1665 i
a, 004 + 003 003
1 ' r
Total

0.0297

0.2695

0.2264

1.6100e-

0.0205

0.0205

0.0205

0.0205
323.4205
323.4205

6.2000e-

5.9300e-
325.3424
003
003
003
823

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Mitigated
NaturalGa
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TotaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
s Use
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Land Use
kBTU/yr
lb/day
lb/day
Automobile Care 1.00976 It 0.0109 0.0990 0.0832 5.9000e- 7.5200e- 7.5200e- 7.5200e- 7.5200e- ± 118.7952 118.7952 2.2800e- 2.1800e- 119.5011 Center +, 004 003 003 003 003 + 003 003
+ +
General Office -0.0563836+- 6.1000e- 5.5300e- 4.6400e. 3.0000e. 4.2000e. 4.2000e- 4.2000e- 4.2000e- + 6.6334 6.6334 1.3000e- 1.2000e- 6.6728 Building +, 004 003 003 005 004 004 004 004 j 004 004
Other Nan- 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 Asphalt Surfaces , +, j
4 +
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 +, y
Place of Worship 1.68293 &,: 0.0182 0.1650 0.1386 9.9000e- 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125 197.9919 197.9919 3.7900e 3.6300e ? 199.1685 +
+, 004 + 003 003
1 ,
+i 1
' ' ' ' ' '
Total

0.0297

0.2695

0.2264

1.6100'-

0.0205

0.0205

0.0205

0.0205
323.4205
323.4205

6.2000e-

5.9300e-
325.3424
003
003
003

6.0 Area Detail

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
•

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG
I NOx
I CO
I S02
Fugitive
PM10
I Exhaust
PM1O
I PM10
Total
I Fugitive
P102.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-0O2
NBio.0O2
TotaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Category
Ib/day
lb/day
Mitigated

0.8880 9.000Oe-

9.9700e-

0.0000

4.000Oe-

4.000Oe-

4.0000e-

4.000Oe-

0.0213 0.0213 6.000Oe-

0.0227
005
003
005
005
005
005 1
005
....... .....:.._____T______T__-__--______T______T______.r______T______T______T-______:....... ______T___-_--______T
---
Unmitigated 0.6880 9.0000e-

9.9700e-

0.0000

4.0000e-

4.000Oe-

4.000Oe-

4.0000e-

0.0213 0.0213 6.0000e-
? 0.0227
005
003
005
005
005
005
005

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
SubCategory
lb/day
lb/day
Architectural •• 0.1055 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 • 0.0000
Coaling
i
t
Consumer 5 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
1 0.0000 0.0000
Products
Landscaping 9.3000e- 9.0000e- 9.9700e- 0.0000 4.000Oe- 4.000Oe- 4.0000e- 4.0000e-

0.0213 0.0213 6.0000e- 0.0227
004 005 003 005 005 005 005
i 005
r '
i
Total

0.8880

9.000Oe-

9.9700e-

0.0000

4.0000e-

4.0000e-

4.000Oe-

4.0000e-

0.0213

0.0213

6.000Oe-

0.0227
005
003
005
005
005
005
005
825

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Mitigated
ROG
NOx
CO
502
Fugftiv
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TotaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Subcategory
lb/day
lb/day
Architectural 0.1055 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
I 0.0000 0.0000
Coating
y
t ____-_______-_______T_______
Consumer 0.7815 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Products
Landscaping 9.3000e- 9.00OOe- 9.9700e- 0.0000 4.0000e- 4.00OOe- 4.00OOe- 4.0000e- + 0.0213 0.0213 6.00OOe- 0.0227
004 005 003 005 005 005 005
j 005
1 1
' ' '
t '
Total

0.8880

9.00OOe-

9.9700e-

0.0000

4.0000e-

4.0000e-

4.0000e-

4.0000e-

0.0213

0.0213

6.0000'-

0.0227
005
003
005
005
005
005
005

7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
Apply Water Conservation Strategy

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:00 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

8.0 Waste Detail

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Institute Recycling and Composting Services

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

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumos and Emeraencv Generators
Equipment Type I Number I Hours/Day I Hours/Year I Horse Power I Load Factor I Fuel Type I Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number

11.0 Vegetation
827

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Hal Hays Construction Project
San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses
Size
Metric
Lot Acreage
Floor Surface Area
Population
General Office Building

6.00 1000sgft

0.02 6,000.00 i
0 ............................. y-------------------------------------------------------------- f•--------------I-..._....._.__._..t-----------.

Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces 3.08 Acre 3.06
134,164.80 i
-
0 ------------------------------------ ---..........------------:

Parking Lot

58.00 Space

0.86 37,500.00 r
0 Place of Worship

19.00 1000sgft

0.44 19,000.00
0 ••.............�'-•••••••••• '---......- ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- --- ..•---•--.....•••••
....

Automobile Care Center

11.40 1000sgft

0.26 11,400.00
0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban
Climate Zone 10
Utility Company Southern California Edison
CO2Intensity 390.98
(lb/MWhr)
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 32
Operational Year 2022
CH4Intensity 0.033 N20Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr)

1.3 User Entered Comments Sr Non -Default Data
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - 4.66 ac (w/o exstng bldg sf to remain) -58 spc prkg lot (prkg It/circ -•37.5TSF) 3.9TSF trck wash, 7.5TSF auto repair, & bldg w/ 6TSF office & 19TSF museum (20TSF ftprnt). Rmndr site assumed gravel/landscape etc. due extng strge use/movement.

Construction Phase - Construction anticipated to start December 2021 and take -9 months to complete. No demo.

Off -road Equipment - CalEEMod default buildng construction timing reduced by -43%; therefore, -47% more equipment needed from CalEEMod defaults.

Grading - Anticpiated to have up to 5,000 CY export for subexcavation due to compaction.

Vehicle Trips - Per applicant (using ITE), 9.15 trips/day for shop, 19.68 trips/day office, & 121 trips/day museum (during event w/ 100 visitors), which results in

3.28 trips/TSF/day office, 0.8 trips/TSF/day auto shop, & 6.37 tripsfFSF/day museum.

Sequestration - -12 new trees to be planted.

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Construction Off -road Equipment Mitigation -
Mobile Land Use Mitigation - Site is -3.18 miles SW of downtown yucaipa. Sidewalks on/off-site.

Water Mitigation - 20% indoor water reduction per CalGreen Standards.

Waste Mitigation - AB 341 requires each jurisdiction in CA to divert -75% of their waste away from landfills by 2020.

Energy Mitigation -
Table Name
Column Name
Default Value
New Value
tblConstDuslMiligation
WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed
0 i
15 -------------------------------
tblConslruclionPhase
---------------- ------------------------------
NumDaY s 230.00 1
130.00
.............................. ;
tblGrading
- - - - - - ......................,r-----------------------------i MatenalExported 0.00 1
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .
5,000.00
..............................
tblLandUse
------------------------------
LandUseS uareFeet 23,200.00 i
37,500.00
-..............................
tblLandUse
..............................

LotAcrea a
-----------------------------t

0.14 0.02
'..............................y..----.........-•-.........--.------------------------------- tblLandUse
LotAcreage

0.52 i
--------------------------

0.86 ..............................4--------....----------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
r-----------------------------.f..------.......----------- OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00

2.00 -------------------------------
tblOftRoadEquipment
------------------------------t-------------------------- OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1

4.00 -------------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipmenl
-----------------------------4------------------------------- f-------------------------- OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 1

2.00 '..................'-'--------+-•-------•----•--------------r------------------------------f-------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1

4.00 ---q ---------------
tblSe uestration
:-----------------------------t
NumberOfNewTrees 0.00 i

12.00 .-----------------------------
lblVehicleTr i s
-------------------------------
ST_TR 5.99 i

6.37 ...............'-P--•-------_
tblVehicleTri s
----------------------------- r----------------------------- ST_TR 23.72

0.80 ..........................
lblVehicleTri s
----------------------------- ------------------------------ t-------------------------- ST TR 2.21 r

3.28 ------------------P----------
-
•------•--•--•--•-------------
r
--------------------------------------------------------- lblVehicleTri s
SU_TR

27.63 6.37
...............................
lblVehicleTri s
.............................

SU_TR
r----------------------------- t

11.88 i
-------------

0.80-------------
.............................. +------------------------------ tblVehicleTri s
-----------------------------
SU_TR 0.70 i

3.28 .--.....----• .................a----------------------------- lblVehicleTri s
r-----------------------------t
WD_TR 6.95 i

6.37 -----------------------------_.............................. lblVehicleTri s
-------------------------------
WD_TR 23.72 1

0.80 lblVehicleTri s
WD_TR - 9.74

3.28 2.0 Emissions Summary

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, 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)
Unmitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
I
Year
Ib/day
lb/day
2021 3.3708 37.5426 28.9643 0.0763 8.6691 1.5168 10.0333 3.8551 1.4294 5,0985 i 0.0000 8,156,520 8.156.520 1.1565 0.8185 8,429.357 4 4 7
a
2022 •� 21.6720 26.5319 28.2830 0.0572 1.1791 1.2795 2.4586 0.3177 1.2064 1.5241 0.0000 - 5,576.450 - 5,576.450 - 0.9745 0.1240 - 5,637.773 + 5 5 7
1 1 i , , ,
Maximum

21.6720

37.5426

28.9643

0.0763

8.6891

1.5168

10.0333

3.8551

1.4294

5.0985 0.0000
8,156.520
8,156.520

1.1565

0.8185
8,429.357
4 4
7 Mitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Year
Ib/day
lb/day
2021 3.3708 37.5426 28.9643 0.0783 4.3256 1,5168 5.6698 1.7595 1.4294 3.0029 i 0.0000 8,156.520 8,156.520, 1.1565 0.8185 :8,429.357 11 4 4 7
_______r_______-______ _______-_______.;_______ _______ ______ ........... T-_______i_______________;_______;_______;_______;_______-______ 2022 21.6720 26.5319 28.2830 0.0572 1.1791 1.2795 2.4586 0.3177 1.2064 1.5241 1 0.0000 5,576.450 5,576.450 0.9745 0.1240 ?5,637.773 + 5 5 7
Maximum

21.6720

37.5426

28.9643

0.0783

4.3256

1.5168

5.6698

1.7595

1.4294

3.0029 0.0000
8,156.520
6,156.520

1.1565

0.8185
8,429.357
4 4
7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG
NOx i
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Percent

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

44.22 0.00

34.93 50.22

0.00 31.64

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Reduction
1 1
1 831

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
R=J�7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
N7 CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM70
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
I
Category
Ib/day
lb/day
Area •• 0.8880 9.000Oe- 9.9700e- 0.0000 4.000Oe- 4.000Oe- 4.0000e. 4.000Oe- + 0.0213 0.0213 6.000Oe- 0.0227
005 003 005 005 005 005
1 005
1 _
Energy •• 0.0297 0.2695 0.2264 1.6200e- 0.0205 0.0205 0.0205 0.0205 323.4205 323.4205 6.2000e- 5.9300e- 325.3424
003
1 003 003
1 Mobile 0.4009 0.5874 3.4518 r 7.0300e- 0.7049 6.8600e- 0.7118 0.1880 r 6.4300e- 0.1945 _ _
± 721.0552 721.0552 0.0496 0.0405 ? 734.3715
003 003 003
1 ' ,
1 ' ' r
Total

1.3185

0.8570

3.6882

8.6500e-

0.7049

0.0274

0.7323

0.1880

0.0270

0.2150
1,044.497
1,044.497

0.0558

0.0465
1,059.736
003
1 1
0 0
7 Mitigated Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
xh us
Exhaust
PM 10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
T.talCO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM70
Total
PMtiv2.

Phau
Total
Category
lb/day
Ib/day
Area 0.8880 9.0000e- r 9.9700e- r 0.0000 4.000Oe- r 4.000Oe- 4.000Oe- r 4.000Oe- + 0.0213 0.0213 6.0000e- 0.0227
005 003 005 005 005 005
i r r r i r � � r
j 005
Energy •� 0.0297 0.2695 0.2264 r 1.6200e- r 0.0205 r 0.02002 5 r 0.05 r 0.0205 + 323.4205 323.4205 6.2000e 5.9300e r 325.3424
003
j 003 003
1 _ _ ______ _______ _______ _
Mobile 0.3766 0.5151 3.0264 5.9200e- 0.5893 5.8400e- 0.5951 0.1572 r 5.4800e- 0.1627 607.4524 607.4524 0.0450 0.0356 r 619.1916
003 003 003
+
i
r r
Total

1.2942

0.7847

3.2648

7.5400e-

0.5893

0.0264

0.6156

0.1572

0.0260

0.1832
930.8942
930.8942

0.0512

0.0416
944.5567
11 003
832

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG
NOx
CO
502
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Blo-0O2
NBlo-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Percent

1.84 8.43

11.48 12.83

16.41 3.73

15.93 16.41

3.53 14.79

0.00 10.88

10.88 8.24

10.57 10.87
Reduction
1 1

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name
I
Phase Type
Start Date I End Date
Num Days
Week
I Num Days
Phase Description
1 :Grading :Grading
'12/1/2021 :12/10/2021
5'
8'
2 :Building Construction :Building Construction
:12/11/2021 :6/11/2022
' 5'
130'
-------------------------------------------------------- I ------------ 4-
---------------
3 :Paving :Paving :6/12/2022
:716/2022
5'
18:
4 •Architectural Coaling :Architectural Coaling :7/7/2022 :8/l/2022
5:
18:

Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 8
Acres of Paving: 3.94
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non -Residential Indoor: 54,600; Non -Residential Outdoor: 18,200; Striped Parking Area: 10,300 (Architectural Coating — sgft)
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment Type
Amount
Usage Hours
I Horse Power I
Load Factor
Grading :Excavators
1i

8.00i 158'

0.38 . ........................ :--------------------------- ----------------i
......
:Graders
1 i

8.00, 187:

0.41 --------------------------r-------------------------- ----------------i
----------F---------------..............

Grading :Rubber Tired Dozers
1 i

8.00, 247:

0.40 ------------------------------------------------------ i ------i
----------
..............

Grading •Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
3i

8.001H-----------97-%:

0.37 --------------------------------------------------------I ----------------i

F----------- ----------------
Building Construction Cranes
2i

7.00� 231;

0.29 -----------------------------------------
---------------- i-------------i..
. ..... ... ...............

Building Construction :Forklifts

4. 8.00- 89'

0.20 Building Construction :Generator Sets
2-

8.00- 84-

0.74 833

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Building Construction •Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
4 7.00; 97;

0.37 ____________________________`___-__--__________________T____-________________________F-------------- Building Construction •Welders
11 8.00� 46,

0.45 t
Paving :Cement and Mortar Mixers
2i

6.00: 9

0.56 ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- 1-------------
i---------------- --------------
Paving :Pavers
11 8.00. 130:

0.42 ------- •-----••-•-•-••:Paving
i
---2�
I ---------- -- ..............

Paving Equipment-------------H------------

6.00� 132:—�

0.36 ............................ :--------------------------- f----------------- Paving :Rollers
21 6.00: 80;

0.38 -------------------•----• :--------------------------- ----------------i------------------------------------------ Paving •Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
1 i

8.00. 97:

0.37 Architectural Coating :Air Compressors
1 6.00: 78:

0.46 Trios and VMT
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment
Worker Trip
Vendor Tdp
Hauling Trip
Worker Trip
Vendor Trip
Hauling Trip
Worker Vehicle
Vendor
Hauling
Count
Number
Number
Number
Length
Length
Length
Class
Vehicle Class
I Vehicle Class
Grading 6:

15.00:

0.001
625.00-

14.70i

6.90i

20.001LD_Mix
:HDT_Mix ;HHDT
--------------------------------- H__________I----------- ---------- t--------- __I---------- 4---------- I --------------
I_.________r__________
Building Construction 1386.00:

34.001

0.00. 14.70:

6.90:

20.00:LD_Mix
�HDT_Mix IHHDT
Paving 8: 20.00:

0.001

0.00:

14.70:

6.90:

20.00:LD_Mix
:HDT_Mix :HHDT
Architectural Coaling : 1: 17.00•

0.00:

0.00:

14.70:

6.90:

20.00:LD_Mix
:HDT_Mix -HHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads

CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Grading - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
R77mF7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM70
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.1533 0.0000 7.1533 3.4354 0.0000 3.4354 0.0000 0.0000 i
i
Off -Road 2.2903 24.7367 15,8575 0.0296 1.1599 1.1599 1.0671 1.0671 2,871.928 2,871.928 0.9288 2,895.149 i 5 5 5
' i 1 12,095.149
Total

2.2903

24.7367

15.8575

0.0296

7.1533

1.1599

8.3132

3.4354

1.0671

4.5026
2,671.928
2,871.928

9.9288
1 5
1 5
1 5
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugillve
Exhaust
PM10
Fug6ive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Sio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
Ib/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.3921 12.7576 3.1551 0.0472 1.3682 0.1034 1.5516 0.3752 0.1754 0.5506 :5.138.055: 5.138.055 0,2231 0.8141 5,366.241
i 4 4 0
i
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 C.0000 0.0000 0.0000
i
i_______ ______ _______ _
Worker •0.0661 0.0483 0.5563 1.4500e- 0.1677 9.4000e- O.16B6 0.0445 8.6000e- 0.0453 ± 146.5366 146.5366 �4.5600e 4.4200e ? 147.9673
003 004 004
i 003 003
1 1 1
i
Total

0.4581

12.8059

3.7114

0.04B7

1.535E

0.1643

1.7202

0.4196

0.1763

0.5959
5,284.591
5,284.5911

0.2277

0.8185
5,534.208
9 9
2 835

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Grading - 2021
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
1420
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
1 1
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 2.7898 0.0000 2.7898 1.3398 0.0000 1.3396 ± 0.0000 0.0000 1 OH -Road 2.2903 24.7367 15.8575 0,0296 1.1599 1.1599 1.0671 1.0671 0.0000 2,871.928 2,871.926 0.9288 2,895,149 1 y 5 5 5
' 1 1 1 1 , ' ,
Total

2.2903

24.7367

15.8575

0.0296

2.7898

1.1599

3.9497

1.3398

1.0671

2.4069 0.0000
2,871.928
2,671.928

0.9298
2,895.149
5 5
5 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
6chaust
PMtO
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.3921 12.7576 3.1551 0.0472 1,3682 0.1634 1.5516 0.3752 0.1754 0.5506 • 5,138.055 - 5,138.055 - 0.2231 0.8141 - 5,386.241
4 4 0
..-.-__.__.._______r______ _______ ______________.;_____________ _______r_______--------_______-_______-_______�_______
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 T 0.0000
1 Worker •� 0.0661 0.0483 0.5563 1.4500e- 0.1677 9.4000e- 0.1686 0.0445 8.6000e- 0.0453 i 146,5366 146,5366 4.5600e- 4.4200e- . 147.9673
003 004 004
003 003
t ' 1 ,
Total

0.4581

12.8059

3.7114

0.0487

1.5358

0.1843

1.7202

0.4196

0.1763

0.5959
5,284.591
5,284.591

0.2277

0.8185
5,534.208
9 9
2 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Building Construction - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
R77-[-7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
N77702
TotaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM70
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 2.9128 27.6794 25.1405 0.0428 1.4801 1.4801 1.3945 1.3945 i 4,076.613 4,076.613 0.9390 4,100.087
3 3 2
' ' '
1 1
Total

2.9128

27.6794

25.1405

0.0428

1.4801

1.4801

1.3945

1.3945
4,076.613
4,076.613

0.9390
3 3
171
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
Bla-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
I
I.PM2.5
Total
I
I
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
1 1
Vendor •' 0.0793 1.8494 0.6346 6.5100e- 0.2178 0.0313 0.2491 0.0627 0.0299 0.0927 t 698.2640 698.2640 0,0197 0.1035 729.5993
003
1 Worker 0.3787 0.2770 3.1892 8.290oe- 0.9613 5.3800e- 0.9667 0.2549 4.9500a 0.2599 840.1429 840.1429 0,0261 0.0253 848.3457
003 003 003
1 1
' '
1 , , , '
Total

0.4580

2.1263

3.8238

0.0148

1.1791

0.0367

1.2158

0.3177

0.0349

0.3525
1,538.406
1,536.406

0.0450

0.1288
1,577.945
9 9
0 837

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project- San Bernardino -South Coast County, Writer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Building Construction - 2021
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
lb/day
Ib/day
Off -Road 2.9128 27.6794 25.1405 0,0428 1.4801 1.4801 1.3945 1.3945 ! 0.0000 4,076.613 4.076.613 0.9390 4,100.087 i 3 3 2
1 ' ' 1 ' 1 ' ' ' '
Total

2.9128

27.6794

25.1405

0.0428

1.4801

1.4801

1.3945

1.3945 0.0000
4,07
4,076.613

0.9390

76.61333
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM70
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
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
1 _
Vendor 0.0793 1.8494 0.6346 6.5100e- 0.2178 0.0313 0.2491 0.0627 0.0299 0.0927 698.2640 698.2640 0.0197 0.1035 729.5993
003
.._._....._�_______, , r ______
w
Worker 0.3787 0.2770 3.1892 8.2900e 0.9613 5.3800e 0.9667 0.2549 4.9500e 0.2599 ± 840.1429 �840.1429 0.0261 0.0253 T 848.3457
003 003 003
+
1 ' ' ' 1 '
1 '
Total

0.4580

2.1263

3.823B

0.0148

1.1791

0.0367

1.2158

0.3177

0.0349

0.3525
1,538.406
1,538.406

0.0458

0.1288
1,577.945
9 9
0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Building Construction - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
R77-[-7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBia-0O2
TotaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
OR -Road 2.6203 24.7262 24.8071 0.0428 1.2567 1.2567 1.1848 1.1846 4,077,959 4.077.959 0.9326 - 4,101.280
t 6 6 0
' 1 ' ' 1
t 1 ,
Total

2.6203

24.7262

24.8071

0.0428

1.2567

1.2567

1.1848

1.1848
4,077.959
4,077.959

0.9328
4,101.280
1 6
1 6
1 0
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
R77-F-7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NB77702
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
today
Hauling 0.0000 0,0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0,0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0,0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
---------' '�----30
i
Vendor •� 0.0569 1.563D 0.5656 6.3500e- 0.2176 0.0178 0.2356 0.0627 0.0170 0.0797 680.9843 660.9843 0.0163 0.1006 ? 711.4908
003
t_
Worker 0.3499 0.2427 I 2.9102 8.0400e- D.9613 5.0500e- 0.9663 0.2549 4.6500e- 0.2596 ___ _ _ _______ _______ _
± 817.50fi6 617.5066 0.0234 0.0232 ? 825.0029
003 003 003
' 1 1 1 ' 1
' 1 ' ' 1
Total

0.4068

1.8056

3.4759

0.0144

1.1791

0.0228

1.2019

0.3177

0.0217

0.3393
1,498.490
1,498.490

0.0417

0.1240
9 9
1'1,536.493
7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Building Construction - 2022
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TolaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 2.6203 24.7262 24.8071 0.0428 1.2567 1.2567 1.1848 1.1848 i 0.0000 • 4,077.959 4.077.959 0.9328 - 4,101.280
6 6 0
1 , ' ' ' ' ' 1 '
1 1 '
Total

2.6203

24.7262

24.8071

0.0428

1.2567

1.2567

1.1848

1.1848

0.0000
4,077.959
4,077.959

0.9321
4,101.2110
6 6
0 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
R77-F-7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
N77702
TolaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
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
i______
Vendor •� 0.0569 1.Sfi30 0.5656 6.35OOe- 0.2178 0.0178 0.2356 0,0627 0.0170 0.0797 _
680.9843 680.9843 0.0183 0.1008 711.4908
003
i
_y--....

Worker 0.3499 0.2427 2.9102 8.0400e- 0.9613 5.0500e- 0.9663 0.2549 4.6500e- 0.2596 _, ___ _______ _
817.5066 817.5066 0.0234 0.0232 ? 825.0029
003 003 003
t
'
' '
Total

0.4068

1.8056

3.4759

0.0144

1.1791

0.0228

1.2019

0.3177

0.0217

0.3393
1,498.490
1,498.490

0.0417

0.1240
1,536.493
9 9
7 • M

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Paving - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
R77-Tm7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
N77702
TolaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
Ib/day
Ib/day
Off -Road 0.9765 9.5221 12.1940 0.0189 0.4877 0.4877 0.4504 0.4504 i 1,805.129 1,805,129 0.5672 1,819.309 + 7 7 1
i_ _______ _ _ _______ ______ _
Paving 0.1252 o.oaaa 0,0000 0.0000 0,0000 A, 0.0000 r 0.0000 i
' i ,
Total

1.1017

9.5221

12.1940

0.0189

0.41177

0.4877

0.4504

0.4504
1,805.129
1,805.129

0.5672
1,819.309
7 7
1 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TotaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
P102.5
PM2.5
Total
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
, , , r , , ,
i
i , , ,
Vendor 0,0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 T 0.0000
i
i
Worker 0.0814 0.0564 C.6768 1.87o0e- � 0.2236 ' 1.1700e- ' 0,2247 0,0593 ' 1.0800e- 0.0604 190.1178 ' 190.1178 5.4400e- 5.3900e- ' 191.8611
o03 003 003
i 003 003
' ' 1 '
i ' ' ' '
Total

0.0814

0.0564

0.6768

1.8700e-

0.2236

1.1700e-

0.2247

0.0593

1.0000e-

0.0604
190.1178
190.1178

5.4400e-

5.3900.-
191.0611
003
003
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Paving - 2022
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
I
Category
lb/day
Ib/day
Off -Road 0.9765 9.5221 12.1940 0.0189 0,4677 0.4877 0.4504 0.4504 i 0.0000 1,805.129 1.805.129 0.5672 • 1,619.309 r 7 7 1
a
Paving 0.1252 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0,0000 0.0000 i
, 1 i '
Total

1.1017

9.5221

12.1940

0.0189

0.4877

0.4877

0.4504

0.4504 0.0000
1,805.1291
1,805.129

0.5672

1.819.309
11 1
7 1
7 1
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
Bio- CO2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
FPM2.5
Total
Category
Ib/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
................... ------- --------------�-------1----------------------- -----__T-------*..-....�------- i ------- ------- ------- '_..

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 r 0.0614 0,0564 0.6768 1.8700e- 0.2236 1.1700e- 0,2247 0.0593 1.0600e- 0.0604 + 190.1178 190.1178 5.4400e 5.3900e 191.8611
003 003 003
i 003 003
'
Total

0.0814

0.0564

0.6768

1.8700e-

0.2236

1.1700e-

0.2247

0.0593

1.0600e-

0.0604
190.1178
190.1178

5.4400e-

5.3900e-
191.8611
003
003
003
003
003
ON

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM70
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Archit. Coating 21,3983 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i
i
Off -Road 0.2045 1.4005 1.8136 2.9700e- 0.0817 0.0817 0.0817 0.0617 281.4481 281.4481 0.0183 281.9062 i
003 i
1 i
' ' '
Total

21.6028

1.4085

1.8136

2.9700e-

0.0817

0.0817

0.0817

0.0817
281.4481
261.4481

0.0183
281.9062
003
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
I
I.PM2,5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
Ib/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
i
L
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
+
--------------
1 Worker 0.0692 0.0460 0.5753 1.5900e- ' 0.1900 ' 1.000Oe- ' 0.1910 0.0504 9.2000e- 0.0513 161.6001 161.6001 4.6300e- ' 4.5800e- ' 163.0620
003 003 004
i
i 003 003
•, ' ' '
i 1 1
'
Total

0.0692

0.0480

0.5753

1.5900e-

0.1900

1.0000e-

0.1910

0.0504

9.2000e-

0.0513
161.6001
161.6001

4.6300e-

4.5800e-
163.0820
11 003
003
004
003
003
MW

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2022
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO28
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Archil. Coaling 21.3983 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 _
....Roa'd .�_______ -------___
Off -Road •� 0.2045 1.4085 1.6136 2.9700e- 0.0817 0.0817 0.0817 0.0817 1 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0183 �281.9062 281.4481 28
003 11
•, 1 ' '
Total

21.6028

1.4085

1.8136

2.9700e-

0.0817

0.0817

0.0817

0.0817 0.0000
281.4481
281.4481

0.0183
281.9062
11 003
1 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
Ib/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
i
1 __._..,_______�_______,._______�_______t ...._..

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
1 Worker 0.0692 0.0480 0.5753 1.5900e- 0.1900 1.000Oe- 0.1910 0.0504 9.2000e- 0.0513 161.6001 161.6001 4.6300e- 4.5600e- 163.0820
003 003 004
i 003 003
i ' '
Total

0.0692

0.0480

0.5753

1.5900e-

0.1900

1.0000e.

0.1910

0.0504

9.2000e-

0.0513
161.6001
161.6001

4.6300e-

4.5800e-
163.0820
003
003
004
003
o03
III

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
Improve Destination Accessibility
Improve Pedestrian Network
1 777
CO
S02
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Mitigated 0.3766 0.5151

3.0284 5.9200e-

0.5693 5.8400e-

0.5951 0.1572 5.4800e-

0.1627 i 607,4524 607.4524 0.0450 0.0356 619.1916
003
om
003
1 r
Unmitigated •� 0.4009 0.5874

3.4518 7.0300e-

0.7049 6.8600e-

0.7118 0.1880 6.4300e-

0.1945 721.0552 721.0552 0.0496 0.0405 734,3715
003
003
003

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate
Unmitigated
Mitigated
Land Use
Weekday
Saturday Sunday
Annual VMT
Annual VMT
PlaceofW rshi
121.03 121.03 1
121.03
.......................P.............i--------------F-----------t----------- +.
--------258,132
....-----�-
----__---215,782--__------
Automobile Care Center 9.12 9.12 1

9.12 12,217

10.212- -

19.68 19.68
.................. -----.....
......•• .G?n!alOfficeBuilding......••• •i---- -___F---1968 --+ -- -F--------- -t-
-
------ ---
--------63,398----------
----------52,997-----------
Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces

0.00 0.00 1

0.00 ................... ................ - ----- -- H-----------t -T
Parkin Lot

0.00 0.00 1

0.00 Total
149.83 149.83 1
149.83
1 333,747 11
278,992

4.3 Trip Type Information
MM

CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal
Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South
Coast County, Winter
EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
TH.-W
Miles
Trip %
Trip Purpose %
Land Use
or C-W
H-S or C-C H-0 or C-NW
H-W or C-W
H-S or C-C I
H-O or C-NW IPrimary
Diverted
Pass -by
Place of Worship ;

16.60 8.40

6.90 ; 0.00 i 95.00 I

5.00 ;
64 25
11 . ..............r-_-_------r-........?-------------------Y Ca A �lomobile re Center ;

16.60 . r--.-.-_.----.

8.40 6.90 33.00 48.00 :
----.-----..-----

19.00 21 51
---.-.-
28 ...........r----------r-----
General Office Building

16.60 --*-------------------------- -

8.40 6.90 ; 33.00 48.0D
---------------------------.

19.OD
77 19
4 ...........P...........---------------------------------------r---------r-------•---;-----------;--•-------.•---------•------ Olhe Non -As es
.:

16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00

0.00 0 0 ;
0 ••
........ .---------
Parking Lot

16.60 ---------

8.40 --'-_--------+---------•----------•••--•--.-.-_--

6.90 0.00 0.00

0.00 ----••................
0 0
0 4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use
I LDA I LDT1 I LDT2 I MDV 1
LHD1 I LHD2 I MHD I HHD I OBUS I

UBUS I MCY I SBUS I
MH
Place of Worship

0.534251• 0.055593i 0.171990i 0.141576i

0.027719i 0.007281: 0.011628; 0.017336i 0.000569i

0.000257i 0.025522i 0.000954i

0.00532:

Automobile Care Center

0.534251• 0.055593: 0.171990: 6.141576:

0.027719� 0.007281: 0.011628: 0.017336: 0.000569:

0.000257: 0.025522: 0.000954:

0.00532:
...................
......•
--27719:---------I--- -----1--------- I --------- I
--------- I --------- I --------- F--------
General Office Buildin

0.534251• 0,055593: 0.171990, 0.141576:

0.027719� 0.007281, 0.011628� 0.017336: 0.000569:

0.000257: 0.025522: 0.000954:

0.00532:

Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces

0.534251• 0.055593 0.171990� 0.141576

0.027719: 0.007281 0.011628: 0.017336: 0.000569:

0.000257: 0.025522: 0.000954:

0.00532:
..................••....
-------- 4--------- --------- +--------- --------- --------- 44--------- }--------- 4--------- 4--------- 4--------- --------- 4 " " " '-
Parking Lot
; 0.534251: 0,055593: 0.171990: 0.141576:

0.027719: 0.007281: 0,011628: 0.017336: 0.000569:
0,000257: 0.025522: 0.000954:

0.00532"

5.0 Energy Detail
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
iM

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG
NOx
I CO
I S02
I Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM70
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
NaluralGas •• 0.0297 0.2695 0.2264 1.6200e-

0.0205 0.0205

0.0205

0.0205 ±
323,4205 323.4205 ' 6.2000e-
' 5.9300e- ' 325.3424
Mitigated
003
003
003
NaluralGas •• 0.0297 0.2695 0.2264 1.6200e-

0.0205 0.0205

0.0205

0.0205
323.4205 323,4205 6.2000e-

5.9300e- 7 325.3424
Unmitigated
003
003
003

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
Nat Ural
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugttive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
s Use
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Land Use
kBTU/yr
lb/day
lb/day
Automobile Care 1009.76 +� 0.0109 0.0990 0.0832 5.9000e- 7.5200e- 7.5200e- 7.52OOe- 7.5200e- A 118.7952 118.7952 2.2600e- 2.1800e- 119.5011 Center �, 004 003 003 003 003 003 003
Al
+,
_
General Office 56.3836 +, 6.1000e- 5.5300e- 4.6400e- 3.000Oe- 4.2000e- 4.2000e- 4.2000e- 4.2000e- 1 6.6334 6.6334 1.3000e- 1.2000e-? 6.6728 Building +, 004 003 003 005 004 004 004 004 r 004 004
i , , , , ,
i, 1
Other Non- 0 1. 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 A, 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Asphalt Surfaces
6 i -------
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 6 i
_
Place of Worship • 1682.93 0.0182 0.1650 0.1386 9.9000e- ' 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125 197.9919 ' 197.9919 3.7900e- 3.6300e. ? 199.1685 i
004 y 003 003
L i
1 ' 1 1 , ' '
Total

0.0297

0.2695

0.2264

1.6100e-

0.0205

0.0205

0.0205

0.0205
323.4205
323.4205

6.2000e-

5.9300e-
325.3424
003
003
003
• M

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, 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
Mitigated
NaturalGa
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fughive
Exhaust
PM70
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TolaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
s Use
PM10
PM70
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Land Use
kBTU/yr
Ib/day
lb/day
Automobile Care 1.00976 0.0109 0.0990 0.0832 5.9000e- ' 7.5200e- ' 7.5200e- ' 7.5200e- ' 7.5200e- 1 118.7952 ' 118.7952 ' 2.2800e- ' 2.1800e- ' 119.5011 Center +, 004 003 003 003 003 + 003 003
+, +
General Office '0.0563836,&' 6.1000e- ' 5.5300e- ' 4.6400e- ' 3.000Oe- ' ' 4.2000e- ' 4.2000e- ' ' 4.2000e- ' 4.2000e- I 6.6334 6.6334 1.3000e- 1.2000e- 6.6728 Building +, 004 003 003 005 004 004 004 004 + 004 004
+, +
........... �____________ _______ _______ _______
_______.;______________�_______;_______.'_______...... _______ _______ _______ _______ ...........

Other Non- 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 j
Asphalt Surfaces , +, + ,
+, +
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 ' a0000 AA:
+, +
+, +
..... .. ..........„_____-___________-_______-_______-_______-_______.,_______-_______.�._______ __.. _______ _______ _______ _______ ______ _
Place of Worship ' 1.68293 +' 0.0182 0.1650 0.1366 9.9000e- ' 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125 ± 197.9919 197.9919 3.7900e- 3.6300e- ? 199.1665 +, 004 + 003 003
+, +
' ' ' 1 ' ' '
Total

0.0297

0.2695

0.2264

1.6100e-
0,0205

0.0205

0.0205

0.0205
323.4205
323.4205

6.2000e-

5.9300e-
325.3424
003
003
003

6.0 Area Detail

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
MO

CaIEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied R77-T-7
CO
S02
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM70
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Iola
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Mitigated

0.8880 9.0000e-

9.9700e-

0.0000 4.000Oe-

4.00ooe-

4.0000e-

4.000Oe- i

0.0213 0.0213 6.000Oe-

0.0227
o05
003
005
005
005
005
005
__
a
Unmitigated

0.6880 9.0000e-

9.9700e-

0.0000 4.000Oe-

4.0000e-

4.000Oe-

4.000Oe-

0.0213 0.0213 6.000Oe-

0.0227
005
003
005
005
005
005
005

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugtive
Exhaust
PM70
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
2 NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
SubCategory
lb/day
lb/day
F
Architectural 0.1055 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Coaling
--------�-
Consumer •• 0.7815 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 7 o.aoao
Products
Landscaping 9.3000e- 9.000oe- 9.9700e- 0.0000 4.0000e- 4.0000e- 4.0000e- 4.000Oe-

0.0213 0.0213 6.0000.- 0.0227
004 005 003 005 005 005 005
i 005
'
t
Total

0.8880

9.0000e-

9.9700e-

0.0000

4.0000e.

4.0000e-

4.0000e-

4.000Oe-

0.0213

0.0213

6.000Oe-

0.0227
005
003
005
005
005
005
005
�I •

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Mitigated
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio. CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
SubCategory
Ib/day
lb/day
Architectural 0.1055 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
Coating
+
Consumer 0.7815 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
+ 0.0000 0.0000
Products
i
t
Landscaping 9.3000e- 9.000Oe- 9.9700e- 0.0000 4.0000e- 4.0000e- 4.000Oe- 4.0000e-

0.0213 0.0213 6.0000e- 0.0227
004 005 003 005 005 005 005
1 005
•, ' , 1
' '
1 1
'
Total

0.8880

9.0000e.

9.9700e-

0.0000

4.0000e-

4.0000e-

4.000Oe-

4.0000e-

0.0213

0.0213

6.0000e-

0.0227
005
003
005
005
005
005
005

7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
Apply Water Conservation Strategy
i

CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 24 Date: 9/16/2021 12:01 PM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

8.0 Waste Detail

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Institute Recycling and Composting Services

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

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

11.0 Vegetation
851

APPENDIX C

CALEEMOD MODEL ANNUAL EMISSIONS PRINTOUTS
852

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Hal Hays Construction Project
San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses
Size
Metric
Lot Acreage
Floor Surface Area
Population
General Office Building

6.00 1000sgft

0.02 6,000.00 i
0 .--• ----------------- -•-----.......---------.......;------------------------------- t--------------- Other Non -Asphalt Surfaces 3.08 Acre 3.08
t---------•-------.i........-------
134,164.80
0 -----------------------------:.----------------------------- ------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- Parking Lot

58.00 Space

0.86 37,500.00 i
0 ..................... - -----•--------------------------- --- ----
Place of Worship

19.00 1000sgft

0.44 19,000.00
0 ---- -'-'-' ----------- ...'....... ---------- -----------4----- ---- Is ---- ---- ...............

Automobile Care Center

11.40 1000sgft

0.26 11,400.00
0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Urban
Climate Zone
10 Utility Company
Southern California Edison
CO2Intensity
390.98
(lb/MWhr)
Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 32
Operational Year 2022
CH4Intensity 0.033 N20Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr)

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - 4.66 ac (w/o exstng bldg sf to remain) -58 spc prkg lot (prkg It/circ-37.5TSF) 3.9TSF trck wash, 7.5TSF auto repair, & bldg w/ 6TSF office & 19TSF museum (20TSF ftpmt). Rmndr site assumed gravel/landscape etc. due extng strge use/movement.

Construction Phase - Construction anticipated to start December 2021 and take -9 months to complete. No demo.

Off -road Equipment - CalEEMod default buildng construction timing reduced by -•43%; therefore, -47% more equipment needed from CalEEMod defaults.

Grading - Anticpiated to have up to 5,000 CY export for subexcavation due to compaction.

Vehicle Trips - Per applicant (using ITE), 9.15 trips/day for shop, 19.68 trips/day office, & 121 trips/day museum (during event w/ 100 visitors), which results in

3.28 trips/TSF/day office, 0.8 trips/TSF/day auto shop, & 6.37 trips/TSF/day museum.

Sequestration - -12 new trees to be planted.
853

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Construction Off -road Equipment Mitigation -
Mobile Land Use Mitigation - Site is -3.18 miles SW of downtown yucaipa. Sidewalks on/off-site.

Water Mitigation - 20% indoor water reduction per CalGreen Standards.

Waste Mitigation - AB 341 requires each jurisdiction in CA to divert -75% of their waste away from landfills by 2020.

Energy Mitigation -
Table Name
Column Name
Default Value
New Value
tblConstDustMitigation
WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed
0 i
15 ........................'----- �----------------
lblConslructionPhase
-----------
NumDaY s
rt ----------------------------------•--•.........-------- 230.00 i
130.00
............... " ••••......... �-------------------
tblGrading
---------
Material
r-----------------------------t-•-•----------------------

0.00 i
5,000.00
------------•...............•--
tblLandUse
-•-----••------ •------------
LandUseS uareFeet
------------------------------ i-------------------------- 23,200.00 1
37,500.00
------------------------------ �----------------------------- tblLandUse
r----------------------------- t
LotAcrea a 0.14
...

0.02 ............................•. ,•----•----------------------- lblLandUse
r------------------------------F----..---------
LotAcrea a 0.52 i

0.86 ------------------------------
lblOffRoadEquipment
•-•-------------------------- ------------------------------t-------------------------- OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 i

2.00 .............................._------------------------------------------------------------t--------.-_..---'--------- lblOffRoadEquipment
OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 i

4.00 ..............................
tblOffRoad Equipment
----------------------------- r------------------------------ OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 1.00 i
--------- ----------------

2.00 tblOffRoad Equipment
OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00

4.00 ..........-•-...............-..-------
tblSeq uestration
------------------- r-----------------------------t-------------------------- NumberOfNewTrees 0.00 i

12.00 ........-'--••................_-----------------------------�------------------------------ tblVehicleTri s
ST_TR

5.99 i
--------------------------

6.37 -------------------------------
tblVehicleTri s
-•---------•--•-•-------•-••--
ST_TR
------------------------------

23.72 i

0.80 ............. ................
tblVehicleTris
-•--•---------•-•-•••---•-••-
ST_TR
Y-----------------------------+---------------

2.21 3.28
.----------------------------------------...-.-...---------- tblVehicleTri s
SU_TR
------------------

27.63 i
------.----

6.37 .............................. +--•-------------------------- lblVehicleTri s
SU_TR
r-----------------

11.88 0.80
.............................. +------------------------------ lblVehicleTri s
SU_TR
------------------------------ t

0.70 i
-------------------..----.

3.28 -------•--••-•----•---------•--
tblVehicleTri s
------------•--•------------- ------------------------------- WD_TR 6.95 i

6.37 -------------------------------
tblVehicleTri s
------------------------------ ------------------------------ t..........................

WD_TR 23.72

0.80 --------- ----------
tblVehicleTnps
-----------------• ----------- ------------F------•-••
WD_TR T 9.74
••-••--•-

3.26 2.0 Emissions Summary
•

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
Unmitigated Construction
R=[­7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
=Bio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Year
tons/yr
MT/yr
2021 0.0361 0.3743 0.2965 7.5000e- 0.0433 0.0168 0.0601 0.0177 0.0157 0.0334 0.0000 67.9191 67.9191 0.0109 3.8500e- 69.3396 004 j 003
2022 0.3782 1.6258 1.7717 3.5300e- 0.0702 0.0787 0.1489 0.0189 0.0742 0.0931 0.0000 311.6765 311.6765 0.0557 6.5900e- 315.0337 1 003 003
1 ,
Maximum

0.3782

1.6258

1.7717

3.5300e-

0.0702

0.0707

0.1489

0.0189

0.0742

0.0931 0.0000
311.6765
311.6765

0.0557

6.5900e-
315.0337
003
003
Mitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
FugAive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Year
tons/yr
MT/yr
2021 0.0361 0.3743 0.2965 7.5000e- 0.0259 0.0168 0.0426 9.3500e- 0.0157 0.0251 + 0.0000 67.9190 67.9190 0.0109 3.8500e- 69.3395 004 003 j 003
2022 0.3782 1.6258 1.7717 3.5300e- 0.0702 0.0787 0.1469 0.0189 0.0742 0.0931 0.0000 311.6762 311.6762 0.0557 - 6.5900e- ? 315.0334 +
003 y 003
1 1
Maximum

0.3782

1.6258

1.7717

3.5300e-

0.0702

0.0787

0.1489

0.0189

0.0742

0.0931 0.0000
311.6762
311.6762

0.0557

6.5900e-
315.0334
003
003
855

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2a
PM10
PM70
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Percent

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

8.35 22.88

0.00 6.62

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Reduction
=t..00
1 Quarter
Start Date
End Date
Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tonsiquarter)
1 12.1-2021
2-28-2022

1.0156

1.0156
2 3.1.2022

5.31.2022

0.9697

0.9697
3 6.1.2022
8-31-2022

0.4267

0.4267
Highest

1.0156

1.0156

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG
NOX
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
66:602
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
tonstyr
MTtyr
P
Area 0.1620 1.O000e- 1.2500e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.4200e- 2.4200e- 1.00OOe- 0.0000 2.5800e- 005 003 i 003 003 005 003
i
Energy 5.4100e- 0.0492 0.0413 3.00OOe- 3.7400e- 3.7400e- 3.7400e- 3.7400e- i 0.0000 119.1341 119.1341 6.5600e- 1.6500e- ' 119.7907 003 004 003 003 003 003 j 003 003
Mobile 0.0720 0.1090 0.6534 1.3000e- ' 0.1259 1.2500e- 0.1271 0.0336 1.1700e- 0.0348 0.0000 120.6669 120.6669 8.2700e 6.7800e T 122.8943 003 003 003 i 003 003
_ i
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 31.9569 0.0000 31.9569 1.8866 0.0000 79.1718 i
i____ ______ _
_
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.8672 10.7271 11.5943 0.0900 r2.2100e 145031 i
i 003
r ' i
Total

0.2394

0.1582

0.6959

1.6000e.

0.1259

4.9900e-

0.1309

0.0336

4.9100e-

0.0385 32.8241
250.5305
283.3546

1.9934

0.0106
336.3624
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
Mitigated Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM 10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM 70
PM70
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Area 0.1620 1.0000e- 1.2500e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 + 0.0000 2.4200e- 2.4200e- 1.0000e- 0.0000 2.5800e- 005 003 + 003 003 005 003
Energy •� 5.4100e- 0.0492 0.0413 3.000Oe- 3.7400e- 3.7400e- 3.7400e- 3.7400e- 0.0000 119.1341 �119.1341 6.5600e 1.6500e T 119.7907 003 004 003 003 003 003 + 003 003
Mobile •• 0.0675 0.0955 0.5726 7 1.09o0e- : 0.1052 1.0600e- 0.1063 0.0281 1.000Oe- 0.0291 + 0.0000 101.6433 101.6433 7.5000e- 5.9600e- T 103.6057 003 003 003 003 003
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 7.9892 0.0000 7.9892 0.4722 0.0000 19,7930 3 1 ___ _ __ _______ ______ ______
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.6938 9.4647 10.1585 w 0.0721 r1.7800e 12.4900 + 003
1 ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 '
Total

0.2349

0.1447

0.6151

1.3900e-

0.1052

4.8000e-

0.1100

0.0281

4.74OOe-

0.0329 8.6830
230.2445
238.9275

0.5583

9.3900e-
255.6.19
003
003
003
003
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Blo. CO2
NBlo-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM10
I
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Percent

1.88 8.55

11.61 13.13

16.40 3.81

15.92 16.41

3.46 14.76

73.55 8.10

15.68 71.99

11.75 23.99
Reduction
1 1
1 1
1 1
857

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.3 Vegetation
Vegetation
CO2e
Category
MT
New Trees 8.4960
Total

6.4960

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name
I
Phase Type
Start Date
I End Date
Num Days
Week
Num Days
Phase Description
1 :Grading :Grading
12/1/2021
:12/10/2021
' 5
i
8�
%•--- --•-
2 :Building Construction :Building Construction
:12/11/2021
16/11/2022
5: i
-__
130'
3 :Paving :Paving
'6/12/2022
:7/6/2022
-------
5:------
18: ------
4 •Architectural Coating :Architectural Coating
•7(7/2022
•8/1/2022
5 18•
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 8
Acres of Paving: 3.94
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non -Residential Indoor: 54,600; Non -Residential Outdoor: 18,200; Striped Parking Area: 10,300 (Architectural Coating — sgft)
OffRoad Equipment

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type
Amount
Usage Hours I Horse Power I
Load Factor
Grading :Excavators
1�

8.00i 158:

0.38 --------------------------%---------------------------I ----------------i
----f------------------------------
Grading :Graders
11 8.00, 187:

0.41 --- .._...-•---------------••-%--------------------------- F----------- -----i
F------------•— --------------
Grading :Rubber Tired Dozers
1�

8.00: 247:

0.40 --
---
Grading •Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
31 8.00. 97:

0.37 -------------%------------------------------------------i

H----------------------------
Building Construction -Cranes
2r

7.00� 231 :

0.29 --------------------------%---------------------------i-----------------i ------------ F-------------%
Building Construction :Forklifts
41 8.00: 89:

0.20 ------------------••--•--•-%---------------------------I ----------------i

I----------------------------
Building Construction -Generator Sets
2i

8.0084:

0.74 i
Building Construction •Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
41 7.00: 97:

0.37 --•--.....-•-------------•-%---------------------------I----------------- i-------------
F-------------------•--•------
Building Construction •Welders
11 8.001 46:

0.45 ------....-•...............%---------------------------I-----------------i-----

I ----------------
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers
2r

6.00, 9:

0.56 r
------------------------------
Paving Pavers
11_________-8.00,
130;
......................................................... ----------------i
------------- E------------------------•-----
Paving :Paving Equipment
21 6.00. 132:

0.36 --------------------------%---------------------------i ----------------i---------
- -------------------------------
Paving :Rollers
2i

6.00� 80:

0.38 ---------------------------- %--------------------------- F---------- ------i

F----------- --
------------
Paving •Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
1i

8.00, 97:

0.37 Architectural Coating :Air Compressors
1 6.00: 78:

0.48 Trips and VMT
Phase Name
Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
I Vendor Tdp
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Grading 6

15.00:

0.001
625.00:

14.70:

6.90i

20.00;LD_Mix
1HDT_Mix
:HHDT
Building Construction 13: 86.00:

34.001 0.00•

14.70i

6.90:

20.00:LD_Mix
:HDT_Mix
:HHDT
Paving 8i

20.00-

0.00:

0.00,

14.701

6.90:

20.00:LD_Mix
:HDT_Mix
:HHDT
Architectural Coaling 1:

17.00•

0.00:

0.00:

14.70•

6.90:

20.00•LD—Mix
:HDT_Mix
:HHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Grading - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0286 0.0000 0.0286 0.0137 0.0000 0.0137 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 _______ _______ _______ _
...... ....., , , , , _
_
OH -Road •� 9.1600e- � 0.0990 � 0.0634 � 1.2000e- � � 4.6400e- � 4.6400e- � � 4.2700e- � 4.2700e- � 0.0000 � 10.4215 � 10.4215 � 3.3700e -0.0000 -105057 003 004 003 003 003 003 003
1 ' ' 1 i
'
Total

9.1600e-

0.0990

0.0634

1.2000'-

0.0286

4.6400e-

0.0333

0.0137

4.2700e-

0.0100 0.0000

10.4215

10.4215

3.3700e-

0.0000

10.5057
003
004
003
003
003
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
R77-F-7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM70
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM10
I
PM10
I
Total
I
PM2.5
I
PM2.5
Total
I
I
I
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling 1.5900e- 0.0515 0.0125 1.9000e- 5.3800e- 7.3000e- 6.1200e- 1.4800e- 7.0000e- 2.1800e-

0.0000 18.6390 18.6390 8.1000e. 2.9500e- 19.5393
003 004 003 004 003 003 004 003
y 004 003
.._.,_______7_______7_______7_______7........

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
1 Worker 2.5000e- 2.0000e- 2.3300e- 1.0000e- 6.6000e- 0.0000 6.60OOe- 1.7000e- 0.0000 1.800Oe-

0.0000 0.5424 0.5424 2.00OOe- 2.00OOe- 0.5477
004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004
i 005 005
' 1 1 1 ' ' ' '
1 Total

1.8400e-

0.0517

0.0148

2.00OOe-

6.0400e-

7.3000e-

6.7800e-

1.6500e-

7.0000e-

2.3600e-

0.0000

19.1813

19.1813

8.3000e-

2.9700e.

20.0871
11 003
004
003
004
003
003
004
003
004
003
• � 1

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.2 Grading - 2021
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Elio- CO
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust I 0.0112 I 0.0000 I 0.0112 15.3600e- I 0.0000 I 5.3600e- ! 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000 003 003 1 I I I I I I I I I I
.I I I I I
Off -Road 9.1600e- I 0.0990 I 0.0634 11.2000e- I 14.6400e- 14.6400e. I 14.2700e- I 4.2700e- + 0.0000 10.4215 I 10,4215 13.37OOe- I 0.0000 105057 003 004 003 003 003 003 003
1 I I I

11.2000e- I
Total

9.1600e-

0.0990

0.0634

0.0112

4.6400e-

0.0158

5.3600e-

4.2700e-

9.6300e- 0.0000

10.4215

10.4215

3.3700e-

0.0000

10.5057
003
004
003
003
003
003
003
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling 1.5900e- I 0.0515 I 0.0125 11.9000e- 15.3800e. 17.3000e- 16.1200e- 1.4800e- 17.0000e- I 2.1800e- + 0.0000 - 18.6390 I 18.6390 8.1000e- 12.9500e- I 19.5393 003 004 003 004 003 003 004 003
i 004 003
................... _ _4------- 4_______r_______ii+
;._000
__I
Vendor 0.0000 0 60_0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.00000_

I I I I I I I I I I
........... ,_______ I _______ I _______-I _______-I _______.I ___ +
I I
- 110000e- fi6000e- 00000_166000e- 117000e- I00000I1B000e+

2.5000e- 2.0000e- 2.3300e•�00.

TI

0.5477Worker
00000 24 2 4 2.000Oe
4 004 003 005 004 004 004 004
005 005
I

12.0000e-
+

12.9700e.

Total

1.8400e-

0.0517

0.0148

6.0400e-

7.3000e-

6.7800e-

1.6500e-

7.000Oe-

2.3600e-

0.0000

19.1813

19.1813

8.3000e.

20.0871
11 003
004
003
004
003
003
004
003
004
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Building Construction - 2021
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
R77-F7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-002
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road 0.0219 0.2076 0.1886 3.2000e- 0.0111 0.0111 0.0105 0.0105 + 0.0000 27.7368 27.7368 6.3900e- 0.0000 27.8965
004
j 003
r 1 ' '
+
Total

0.0219

0.2076

0.1866

3.2000e.

0.0111

0.0111

0.0105

0.0105

0.0000

27.7368

27.7368

6.3900e-

0.0000

27.8965
004
003
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NO.

CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
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 1 0.0000 MOW 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
+
Vendor •� 6.000Oe- 0.0139 4.6800e- 5.0000e- 1.6100e- 2.3000e- 1.8400e- 4.6000e- 2.2000e- 6.9000e- + 0.0000 4.7490 4.7490 1.3000e- 7.0000e 4.9622
004 003 005 003 004 003 004 004 004
i 004 004
Worker 2.6400e- 2.1800e- 0.0251 6.0000e- 7.0700e- 4.0000e- 7.1100e- 1.8800e- 4.0000e- 1.9200e- + 0.0000 5.8305 5.8305 1.8000e- 1.8000e- 5.8881
003 003 005 003 005 003 003 005 003
i 004 004
' ' ' ' '
+ '
Total

3.2400e-
0,01 11

0.0298

1.1000e-

8.6800e-

2.7000e-

6.9500e-

2.3400e-

2.6000e-

2.6100e-

0.0000

10.5795

10.5795

3.1000e.

8.8000e.

10.8502
003
004
003
004
003
003
004
003
004
004

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Building Construction - 2021
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-CO2
TotalCO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
PM10
Total
I
PM2.5
I
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road 0.0219 0.2076 0.1686 3.2000e- 0.0111 0.0111 0.0105 0.0105 + 0.0000 27.7368 27.7368 6.3900e- 0.0000 27.8965
004
003
' ' ' ' 1 1
+ ' '
Total

0.0219

0.2076

0.1886

3.2000e-

0.0111

0.0111

0.0105

0.0105

0.01100

27.7368

27.7368

6.3900e-

0.0000

27.8965
004
003
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 a0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
1 Vendor 6.00OOe- 0.0139 4.68OOe- 5.000Oe- 1.6100e- 2.3000e- 1.8400e- 4.6000e- 2.2000e- 6.9000e-

0.0000 4.7490 4.7490 1.3000e- 7.0000e- 4.9622
004 003 005 003 004 003 004 004 004
+ 004 004
... Wore-...
^-'--"-
Worker •2.6400e- 2.1BOOe 0.0251 6.0000e 7.0700e 4.0000e 7.1100e 1.8800e 4.000Oe r 1.9200e _�_______'_______T....---
+ 0.0000 5.8305 5.8305 1.8000e- 1.8000e- 5.6881
003 003 005 003 005 003 003 005 003
i 004 004
' ' ' ' ' 1 '
1 ' ' ,
Total

3.2400e-

0.0161

0.0299

1.1000e-

8.6800e-

2.7000e-

8.9500'-

2.3400e-

2.6000e.

2.6100e-

0.0000

10.5795

10.5795

3.1000e-

8.8000e-

10.8502
003
004
003
004
003
003
004
003
004
004

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Building Construction - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-CO2
T.talCO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road 0.1507 1.4218 1.4264 2.4600e- 0.0723 0.0723 0.0681 0.0681

0.0000 212.7191 212.7191 0.0487 0.0000 213.9356
003
r
, 1
1 '
1 ' , ' ,
Total

0.1507

1.4218

1.4264

2.4600e-

0.0723

0.0723

0.0681

0.0681

0.0000
212.7191
212.7191

0.0487

0.0000
213.9356
003
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio. CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
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 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor •' 3.3300e- ' 0.0901 0.0319 3.6000e. _ 0.0123 1.0200e- 0.0134 3.5600e- ' 9.8000e- 4.5300e- r 0.0000 35.4996 35.4996 9.6000e- 5.2600e 370903
003 004 003 003 004 003
i 004 003
_____ ___ _ ______ _______ ___ __
i _______ _______
Worker 0.0186 0T 46 0.1755 - 4.7000e 0.0542 2.9000e- 0.0545 0.0144 2.7000e T 0.0147 ___------------
+ 0.0000 43.4927 43.4927 1.2400e 1.2500e 43 8962
004 004 004
j 003 003
t 1
'
a '
Total

0.0220

0.1047

0.2074

8.3000e-

0.0666

1.3100e-

0.0679

0.0180

1.2500e.

0.0192

0.0000

78.9924

78.9924

2.2000e-

6.5100e-

80.9864
004
003
003
003
003
•

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.3 Building Construction - 2022
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
P102.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road 0.1507 1.4218 1.4264 2.4600e- 0.0723 0.0723 0.0681 0.0681 1 0.0000 212.7189 212.7189 0.0487 0.0000 213.9353
003
' ' r
1 ' '
Total

0.1507

1.4218

1.4264

2.4600e-

0.0723

0.0723

0.0681

0.0681

0.0000
212.7189
212.7169

0.0487

0.0000
003
1 171
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- COZ
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
tans/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
1 1 ______ _ _______ _______ _______ _ _
Vendor •� 3.3300e- 0.0901 0.0319 3.6000e- 0.0123 1.0200e- 0.0134 3.5600e- 9.8000e- 4.5300e- _

0.0000 35.4996 35.4996 9.6000e 5.2600e 37.0903
003 004 003 003 004 003
1 004 003
1 Worker 0.0186 0.0146 0.1755 4.7000e- 0.0542 2.9000e- 0.0545 0.0144 2.7000e- 0.0147

0.0000 43.4927 43.4927 1.2400e- 1.2500e- ? 43.8962
004 004 004
003 003
1 1
1 ' 1
Total

0.0220

0.1047

0.2074

8.3000e-

0.0666

1.3100e-

0.0679

0.0180

1.2500e-

0.0192

0.0000

78.9924

78.9924

2.2000e.

6.5100e-

80.9864
004
003
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Paving - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
R77-F-7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TotaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road 8.7900e- 0.0857 0.1098 1.7000e- 4.3900e- 4.3900e- 4.0500e- 4.0500e- i 0.0000 14.7383 14.7363 4.6300e- 0.0000 14.8540 003 004 003 003 003 003 r 003
Paving 1.1300e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 w 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 T 0.0000 003
i
Total

9.9200e-

0.0857

11.1098

1.7000e-

4.3900e-

4.3900e-

4.0500a-

4.0500e- 0.0000

14.7383

14.7383

4.6300e-

0.0000

14.8540
003
004
003
003
003
003
003
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
P102.5
Total
I
Category
tonslyr
MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
l
l
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 r 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
1 Worker •� 6.8000e- 5.3000e- 6.3900e- 2.000Oe- 1.9700e- 1.000Oe- 1.9800e- 5.2000e- 1.0000e- 5.3000e-

0.0000 1.5832 1.5832 5.0000e- 5.000Oe-
004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004
j 005 005
J97
, 1 '
Total

6.8000e-

5.3000e-

6.3900e-

2.0000a-

1.9700e-

1.0000.-

1.9800e-

5.2000e-

1.000Oe-

5.3000e-

0.0000

1.5832

1.5832
S.000Oe.

5.000Oe-
004
004
003
005
003
005
003
004
005
004
005
005

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.4 Paving - 2022
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Fxhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road 8.7900e- 0.0857 0.1098 1.7000e- 4.3900e- 4.3900e- 4.0500e- 4.0500e- 0.0000 14.7383 14.7383 4.6300e- 0.0000 14.8540 003 004 003 003 003 003 r 003
1 _______ _______ _______ _ _
Paving 1.1300e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 t 0.0000 003 y
i
'
Total

9.9200e-

0.0857

0.1098

1.7000e-

4.3900e-

4.3900e-

4.0500e-

4.0500e- 0.0000

14.7383

14.7383

4.6300e-

0.0000

14.8540
003
004
003
003
003
003
003
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM70
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
P102.5
Total
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
a
i
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 D.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
t
7 Worker 6.8000e- 5.3000e- 6.3900e- 2.000Oe- 1.9700e- 1.000Oe- 1.9800e- 5.2000e- 1.000Oe- 5.3000e- ± 0.0000 1.5832 1.5832 5.0000e- 5.000Oe- 1.5978
004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004
i 005 005
1 ,
'
Total

6.8000e-

5.3000e-

6.3900e-

2.0000e-

1.9700e-

1.0000e-

1.9800e-

5.2000e-

1.00000-

5.3000e-

0.0000

1.5832

1.5832

5.0000e-

5.0000e-

1.5978
004
004
003
005
003
005
003
004
005
004
005
005
•

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2022
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBlo-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Archil. Coating 0.1926 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 s 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4 ________ _______ _______ _______ _
Off.Road •� 1.6400e- 0.0127 0.0163 3.00OOe- 7.40OOe- 7.4000e- 7.4000e- 7.4000e- t 0.0000 2.2979 2.2979 1.5000e 0.0000 2.3017 003 005 004 004 004 004 1 004
1 ' a
Total

0.1944

0.0127

0.0163

3.000Oe-

7.4000e-

7.4000e-

7.4000e•

7.4000e. 0.0000

2.2979

2.2979

1.5000e.

0.0000

2.3017
005
004
004
004
004
004
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
tons/yr
MTtyr
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
.i
...,,_______----- __------- ----- __.,_______.,______________--_______�_______r_______y i
1_ _ .. _.._______�_______w______�_______- . _ _ _
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
11 1
t________ _______ _______ _______ .......

Worker •� 5.8000e- 4.500Oe- 5.4300e- 1.00OOe- 1.6600e- 1.00OOe- 1.6900e- 4.500Oe- 1.00OOe- 4.5000e- + 0.0000 1.3457 1.3457 4.00OOe 4.00OOe ? 1.3562
004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005 004
i 005 005
'
1 1
Total

1.8001,e-

4.SDOOe•

5.4300e-

1.00OOe•

1.6600e-

1.00OOe-

1.6900e-

4.5OOOe•

1.0000e-

4.5OOOe-

0.0000

1.3457

1.3457

4.00OOe-

4.00OOe-

1.3562
004
004
003
005
003
005
003
004
005
004
005
005
• •

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMOd.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 31 Date: 9/16/2021 11:59 AM Hal Hays Construction Project - San Bernardino -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

3.5 Architectural Coating - 2022
Mitigated Construction On -Site
R77-T-7
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.1926 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7 1 _______
Off -Road •� 1.8400e- 0.0127 0.0163 3.0000e. 7.4000e- 7.4000e- 7.4000e- 7.4000e- 0.0000 2.2979 2.2979 1.5000e- 0.0000 2.3017 003 005 004 004 004 004 t 004
1 1 ' t
Total