Agenda packet — Yucca Valley City Council, June 2, 2026 (part 8 of 20)

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-98 PlaceWorks
Consequently, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and, therefore, would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).

PARKS?
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The Certified EIR determined that the approved project would not result in an increase in population and therefore would not increase demand for parks or recreational facilities. The proposed project would maintain a similar non-residential land use profile and would not increase the Town’s population. Therefore, the proposed project would not contribute to the need for new or expanded park facilities, and impacts would remain less than significant.

OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES?
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The Certified EIR found that the approved project would not result in substantial demand for other public facilities such as libraries or government offices, as it did not involve residential growth. The proposed project would maintain the same commercial character and would not increase population or service demands. Therefore, the proposed project would not require the construction or expansion of other public facilities, and impacts would remain less than significant.

3.15.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project
The following mitigation measures were taken directly from the Certified EIR and would be incorporated as part of the proposed project. Applicable mitigation measures from the Certified

Page 1126 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-99
EIR have been incorporated into the proposed project’s mitigation monitoring and reporting program.

The Certified EIR Mitigation Measures 4.13-1A, 4.13-1B, and 4.13.2A, are reproduced below.

4.13-1A Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the project applicant shall make payment of fair share contribution fees (as determined by the Fire Chief) to a Townwide public services assessment district.

4.13-1B Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Fire Chief, a site plan design which includes looped water service which provides adequate fire flow (as determined by the Fire Chief).

4.13.2A Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the project applicant shall make payment of fair share contribution fees to a City-wide public services assessment district.

3.16 RECREATION

3.16.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Approved Project  Increased Use of Parks or Recreational Facilities. According to the Certified EIR the approved project may result in an increase in use of parks and recreational facilities.

Although the approved project does not include a residential, park, or recreation component, the approved project’s retail and restaurant uses would generate employment opportunities. The Certified EIR determined the approved project is unlikely to significantly increase local or regional populations, and that any resulting increase in demand for existing or planned neighborhood or regional parks and other recreational facilities would be less than significant.
 Provide Parks or Recreational Facilities. The Certified EIR stated that the approved project does not include a park or residential component. Therefore, impacts related to parks and recreational facilities would be less than significant.

3.16.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
Would the Project:

Page 1127 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-100 PlaceWorks
Conditions Requiring Subsequent Review
Environmental Issues
Level of
Impact in
Certified
EIR
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Involving New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(1–2)
New
Information
Showing New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(A–B)
New
Mitigation or
Alternative to
Reduce
Significant
Effect Is
Declined
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(C–D)
Proposed
Project
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
CEQA
Guidelines
Section
15164
a) Would the project
increase the use of
existing neighborhood
and regional parks or
other recreational
facilities such that
substantial physical
deterioration of the
facility would occur or be
accelerated?
LTS No No No Yes
b) Does the project include
recreational facilities or
require the construction
or expansion of
recreational facilities
which might have an
adverse physical effect on
the environment?
LTS No No No Yes
Key: NI = no impact; LTS = less than significant; LTS/M = less than significant with mitigation; SU = significant and unavoidable; N/A = topic not analyzed in Certified EIR a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

Consistent with the approved project, no parks or recreational facilities are proposed. Although the proposed project would generate an increase in six employment opportunities, the new positions are likely to be filled by persons already residing in the Town. As discussed in Impact

3.14 (a), the proposed project would not result in significant increase in population growth.

Page 1128 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-101
Therefore, a less than significant increase in demand on existing or planned neighborhood/ regional parks or other recreational facilities will occur.

Consequently, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and, therefore, would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

As discussed above, the proposed project would not construct any recreational facilities, would not significantly increase the local or regional population base, and would not result in the need for new or expanded parks. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

3.16.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project
No mitigation measures were adopted as part of the approved project’s Certified EIR relating to recreational services and facilities. As discussed above, the proposed project is within the scope of the approved project, and no mitigation measures are warranted.

3.17 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC

3.17.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Approved Project  Consistency with Circulation System Plans. The Certified EIR evaluated traffic operations using Level of Service (LOS) under the San Bernardino County CMP Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for both Opening Day (2007) and Year 2030 scenarios. Under Opening Day + Project conditions, five intersections would operate below the Town’s LOS standard, constituting a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.15-1A (signal

Page 1129 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-102 PlaceWorks
and striping improvements) and 4.15-1B (payment of Town traffic and signal impact fees) reduced intersection impacts to acceptable LOS. However, under Year 2030 + Project cumulative conditions, several intersections would still exceed LOS standards due to regional growth, and impacts were determined to remain significant and unavoidable even with implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.15-2A (fair-share payment of traffic and signal impact fees).
 Vehicle Miles Traveled. The Certified EIR was prepared prior to adoption of VMT as a CEQA metric and therefore relied on LOS and CMP methodologies. At the time of certification, VMT analysis was not required, and no significance determination under Section 15064.3 applied.
 Transportation Safety and Design Hazards. The Certified EIR identified a potential sightdistance hazard at the proposed signalized driveway on SR-62. Mitigation Measure 4.15-3A requires grading and landscaping plans to preserve a minimum 942-foot westerly sight distance, ensuring adequate visibility consistent with Caltrans standards. With implementation of this measure, impacts were determined to be less than significant.  Emergency Access. The Certified EIR concluded that the approved project would maintain adequate emergency access to and within the site. Circulation and driveway configurations would not interfere with emergency-response operations or evacuation routes. Therefore, impacts were less than significant.

3.17.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
Would the project:

Page 1130 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-103
Conditions Requiring Subsequent Review
Environmental Issues
Level of
Impact in
Certified
EIR
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Involving New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(1–2)
New
Information
Showing New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(A–B)
New
Mitigation or
Alternative to
Reduce
Significant
Effect Is
Declined
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(C–D)
Proposed
Project
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
CEQA
Guidelines
Section
15164
circulation system,
including transit,
roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines § 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
N/A No No No Yes
c) Substantially increase
hazards due to a
geometric design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
LTS/M No No No Yes
d) Result in inadequate
emergency access? LTS No No No Yes
Key: NI = no impact; LTS = less than significant; LTS/M = less than significant with mitigation; SU = significant and unavoidable; N/A = topic not analyzed in Certified EIR A Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared for the proposed project by Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc. (dated September 2025) to evaluate potential traffic, circulation, and access impacts associated with development of six new fueling dispensers and a 1,556-square-foot convenience store within the existing Walmart Supercenter parking lot. The analysis evaluated trip generation, distribution, intersection operations, queuing, site circulation, and VMT in accordance with the Town of Yucca Valley, Caltrans, and San Bernardino County Transportation Impact Study Guidelines (SBC 2019) (see Appendix F).
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?

Page 1131 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-104 PlaceWorks
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The Certified EIR evaluated buildout of approximately 28 acres of commercial development, including a 229,000-square-foot Walmart Supercenter, a six-pump fuel station, and a fast-food restaurant, and required implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.15.1A, 4.15.1B, and 4.15.2A for intersection and roadway improvements. These measures (signalization/striping at specified intersections and payment of Town traffic/signal impact fees) are related to traffic congestion and are no longer considered environmental impacts by the Town, pursuant to Senate Bill 743.

The proposed project (six fueling dispensers and a 1,556-square-foot convenience store) would generate approximately 826 daily trips, including 46 AM and 72 PM peak-hour trips. Accounting for pass-by trips (60 percent daily, 63 percent AM, 57 percent PM), the proposed project would result in negligible net increases in local traffic.

The proposed project would utilize existing driveways, drive aisles, and signalized access points, and no changes to the surrounding roadway network or bicycle/pedestrian facilities are proposed. During construction, short-duration work adjacent to the existing Morongo Basin Transit Authority (MBTA) bus stop may be required; the applicant would coordinate in advance with MBTA to maintain access or provide a brief, agency-approved temporary relocation. Such temporary conditions would not alter transit service levels, routes, or adopted transit plans.

Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any adopted circulation plans or policies.

Consequently, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and, therefore, would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The proposed project qualifies for VMT screening under the San Bernardino County Transportation Impact Study Guidelines because it is a local-serving use under 50,000 square feet that primarily serves the surrounding community (SBC 2019). The TIA concluded that the project screens out of VMT analysis and would be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact consistent with the intent of SB 743. Therefore, no further VMT assessment is required.

The Certified EIR predated the adoption of CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b), which establishes VMT as the primary metric for evaluating transportation impacts. However, the proposed project would not increase the total building area or introduce new destinationoriented uses that would generate additional regional travel demand.

Page 1132 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-105
Trips generated by the convenience store would largely be captured as pass-by trips associated with existing commercial traffic on SR-62 and Avalon Avenue. Because the proposed project would not result in a measurable increase in regional VMT relative to the approved project, it would not conflict with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b). Therefore, VMT-related impacts would be less than significant.

Consequently, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and, therefore, would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The proposed fuel station would be constructed within the existing Walmart parking lot and would not modify existing roadway geometry or intersection design. Access would occur through two existing driveways along SR-62: a right-in/right-out driveway and a full-access driveway. The TIA’s on-site queuing analysis found that the 95th percentile queues at both driveways would not back into internal aisles or SR-62, demonstrating adequate storage and safe operations.

No new conflicts with transit, bicycles, or pedestrians are anticipated, as existing sidewalk and transit facilities would remain intact. A new pedestrian walkway provided by the proposed project would connect the proposed project to the existing bus stop, thereby improving project site accessibility. Accordingly, the proposed project would not introduce hazardous geometric features or incompatible uses, and impacts would be less than significant with continued compliance with Certified EIR Mitigation Measure 4.15.3A (sight-distance preservation at SR-62 driveway).

Consequently, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and, therefore, would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The proposed project would retain the existing circulation pattern and emergency access routes serving the Walmart Supercenter site. The Town’s emergency services would continue to use SR-62 and Avalon Avenue for access, and on-site drive aisles would accommodate fire and

Page 1133 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-106 PlaceWorks
emergency vehicles consistent with Town of Yucca Valley Fire Department standards. The TIA found no conditions that would impede emergency access or circulation. Therefore, this impact would remain less than significant.

3.17.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project
The following mitigation measures were taken directly from the Certified EIR and would be incorporated as part of the proposed project. Applicable mitigation measures from the Certified EIR have been incorporated into the proposed project’s mitigation monitoring and reporting program. Any modifications to these mitigation measures are shown in strikethrough for deleted text and underline for new, inserted text.

The Certified EIR Mitigation Measures 4.12-1 through 4.12-3 are reproduced below. Mitigation measures related to level-of-service (LOS) are not applicable.

4.15-1A All Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy, the project applicant shall construct the following improvements:
 Inca Trail/Twentynine Palms Highway (SR-62). Install traffic signal.  Old Woman Springs Road (SR-247)/Buena Vista Drive. Install traffic signal.  Joshua Lane/Yucca Trail. Install traffic signal.
 Joshua Lane/Onaga Trail. The re-striping of a southbound shared lane to a southbound shared left-turn/through lane, and the addition of a southbound shared through/right-turn lane.
 Palomar Avenue/Yucca Trail. Install traffic signal

4.15-1B Pay all applicable Town traffic and signal impact fees.

4.15-2A Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy, the project applicant shall pay all applicable CMP fair-share fees as determined by the TIA ($676,097).

4.15-3A Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall submit and receive Town approval of detailed grading and landscaping plans to ensure that grading elevation, height of landscaping, vegetation, fencing, monumentation, signage, and

Page 1134 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-107
other visual obstructions along the project site frontage do not obstruct the minimum sight distance requirement of 942 feet westerly from the proposed signalized driveway on SR-62. This area falls primarily within the proposed detention basin between the proposed signalized driveway and the proposed right in/out only driveway on SR-62.

3.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

3.18.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Approved Project At the time of preparation of the Certified EIR, tribal cultural resources was not one of the environmental topics within the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist.

3.18.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
Would the Project:

Conditions Requiring Subsequent Review
Environmental Issues
Level of
Impact in
Certified
EIR
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Involving New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(1–2)
New
Information
Showing New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(A–B)
New
Mitigation or
Alternative to
Reduce
Significant
Effect Is
Declined
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(C–D)
Proposed
Project
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15164
a) Would the project cause
a substantial adverse
change in the
significance of a tribal
cultural resource,
defined in Public
Resources Code § 21074
as either a site, feature,
place, cultural landscape
that is geographically
defined in terms of the
size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place,
N/A No No No Yes

Page 1135 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-108 PlaceWorks
Conditions Requiring Subsequent Review
Environmental Issues
Level of
Impact in
Certified
EIR
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Involving New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(1–2)
New
Information
Showing New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(A–B)
New
Mitigation or
Alternative to
Reduce
Significant
Effect Is
Declined
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(C–D)
Proposed
Project
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15164
or object with cultural
value to a California
Native American tribe,
and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for
listing in the
California Register of
Historical Resources,
or in a local register
of historical
resources as defined
in Public Resources
Code section
5020.1(k), or
N/A No No No Yes
ii) A resource
determined by the
lead agency, in its
discretion and
supported by
substantial evidence,
to be significant
pursuant to criteria
set forth in
subdivision (c) of
Public Resources
Code § 5024.1. In
applying the criteria
set forth in
subdivision (c) of
Public Resource
Code § 5024.1, the
lead agency shall
N/A No No No Yes

Page 1136 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-109
Conditions Requiring Subsequent Review
Environmental Issues
Level of
Impact in
Certified
EIR
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Involving New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(1–2)
New
Information
Showing New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(A–B)
New
Mitigation or
Alternative to
Reduce
Significant
Effect Is
Declined
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(C–D)
Proposed
Project
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15164
consider the
significance of the
resource to a
California Native
American tribe.

Key: NI = no impact; LTS = less than significant; LTS/M = less than significant with mitigation; SU = significant and unavoidable; N/A = topic not analyzed in Certified EIR a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. As discussed under Impact 3.5(a), the project site is not listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, National Register of Historic Places, California State Historical Landmarks, or Points of Historical Interest or in a local register of historical resources. As identified in the approved project, regular maintenance, resurfacing, and widening to a four-lane thoroughfare have obliterated any remaining trace of the historic portions of Highway 62 within or adjacent to the project site (OHP 2025; NPS 2025; Yucca Valley 2022). The proposed project would be within the boundaries of the approved Specific Plan area and would not impact any known historical sources. Additionally, the Open Space and Conservation Element of the Town’s General Plan states, “no Native American cultural resources that may have traditional or cultural significance have been

Page 1137 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-110 PlaceWorks
identified by records searches, literature reviews, and consultation with interested parties” within the Town (Yucca Valley 2022).

Further, as part of the SB 18 process, the NAHC sacred lands file (SLF) search was conducted and yielded a negative result, which indicates that no known sacred sites or tribal cultural resources existing within the project site or the vicinity. The NAHC provided a list of 14 California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project site area and may have additional information. Pursuant to SB 18, the Town invited 14 tribes to consult based on NAHC’s Native American Contact List—Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians, Cabazon Band of Cahuilla Indians, Cahuilla Band of Indians, Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeño Indians, Quechan Indian Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation, Ramona Band of Cahuilla, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians, Serrano Nation of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, and Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians.

The invitation letters were sent to tribes on July 21, 2025, and July 25, 2025, via email and/or mail to the available addresses.

Four tribes responded to the request, and three requested formal consultation. The Twenty-nine Palms Band of Mission Indians responded on March 10, 2025, requesting formal consultation under SB 18. The Town met with the Tribe on July 10, 2025. The Morongo Band of Mission Indians responded on March 27, 2025, requesting formal consultation under SB 18. The Town provided a draft version of this Addendum to the Tribe and received no response or comments. The Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation responded on August 5, 2025, confirming formal consultation is not required, and shared recommended mitigation measures. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians responded on August 5, 2025, requesting formal consultation under SB 18. The Town met with the Tribe on August 6, 2025, and the Tribe followed up after the meeting via email with a letter requesting the presence of an approved Cultural Resource Monitor(s) from a Consulting Tribe during any ground-disturbing activities.

The Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation, Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, and Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians also requested the presence of a tribal cultural monitor during ground disturbing activities, due to the potential of unearthing unknown resources. Mitigation Measure 4.5.2B would be implemented to ensure that impacts related to tribal cultural resources are less than significant. With the incorporation of Mitigation Measure 4.5.2B, impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant.

Page 1138 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-111
under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code § 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. The project site is developed with the existing Walmart Supercenter parking lot and is surrounded by a mix of commercial and retail uses along SR-62. The NAHC’s Sacred Lands File record search received a negative result on July 17, 2025; thus, no tribal resources are known to exist within the project site.

As described under the prior threshold, consultation was conducted pursuant to SB 18 and several tribes requested the presence of a tribal cultural monitor during ground-disturbing activities. Mitigation Measure 4.5.2B would be implemented to ensure that impacts related to tribal cultural resources are less than significant.

Additionally, as discussed in Section 3.5, Cultural Resources, in the unlikely event human remains are encountered during ground-disturbing activities the human remains would be treated in accordance with procedures and requirements in Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code; Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code; and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. However, as discussed in Impact 3.18(a)(i) above, multiple tribes requested to be contacted in the event tribal cultural resources are uncovered due to the potential of unearthing unknown tribal cultural resources. With the incorporation of Mitigation Measure 4.5.2B, impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant.

3.18.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project
The following applicable mitigation measures were taken directly from the Certified EIR and would be incorporated as part of the proposed project. Applicable mitigation measures from

Page 1139 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-112 PlaceWorks
the Certified EIR have been incorporated into the proposed project’s mitigation monitoring and reporting program. Any modifications to these mitigation measures are shown in strikethrough for deleted text and underline for new, inserted text.

The Certified EIR Mitigation Measure 4.5.2B (as modified) would apply to the proposed project and is provided in Section 3.5, Cultural Resources.

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems

3.19.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Approved Project  Relocation or Construction of New or Expanded Utility Facilities. The Certified EIR determined that development under the approved project would increase demand for water supply, wastewater treatment, storm drainage, and other utilities, including electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications. However, the Certified EIR found that all necessary utility connections could be accommodated within existing or planned infrastructure systems.. Impacts were determined to be less than significant.  Sufficiency of Water Supplies. The Certified EIR found that the Hi-Desert Water District (HDWD) had adequate water supplies to serve the approved project and other planned development under normal, dry, and multiple-dry-year conditions. Impacts related to watersupply sufficiency were less than significant.  Adequate Wastewater Treatment Capacity. At the time of the Certified EIR, the Town of Yucca Valley did not operate a centralized wastewater collection or treatment system. The approved project was to utilize on-site septic systems, consistent with County standards for siting, percolation, and maintenance. Although the Certified EIR acknowledged that reliance on septic systems could constrain long-term regional growth, it concluded that the approved project would not individually necessitate expansion of treatment facilities or exceed the capacity of existing on-site systems. Therefore, wastewater impacts were found to be less than significant.
 Solid Waste Generation and Landfill Capacity. The Certified EIR found that construction and operation of the approved project would generate additional solid waste, but that disposal would continue to occur at regional landfill facilities with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s waste stream. With compliance to State requirements, the Certified EIR concluded that solid-waste generation would not exceed local or State capacity standards and that impacts would be less than significant.  Compliance with Solid Waste Regulations. The Certified EIR determined that the approved project would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local solid-waste

Page 1140 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-113
management regulations, including diversion and recycling mandates implemented through the Town’s solid-waste collection contracts. The Certified EIR concluded that the approved project would comply with all applicable solid-waste statutes and regulations, and impacts would be less than significant.

3.19.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
Would the project:

Conditions Requiring Subsequent Review
Environmental Issues
Level of
Impact in
Certified
EIR
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Involving New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(1–2)
New
Information
Showing New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(A–B)
New
Mitigation or
Alternative to
Reduce
Significant
Effect Is
Declined
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(C–D)
Proposed
Project
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
CEQA
Guidelines
Section
15164
a) Require or result in the
relocation or
construction of new or
expanded water,
wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage,
electric power, natural
gas, or
telecommunications
facilities, the
construction or
relocation of which
could cause significant
environmental effects?
LTS No No No Yes
b) Have sufficient water
supplies available to
serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable
future development
during normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
LTS No No No Yes

Page 1141 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-114 PlaceWorks
Conditions Requiring Subsequent Review
Environmental Issues
Level of
Impact in
Certified
EIR
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Involving New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(1–2)
New
Information
Showing New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(A–B)
New
Mitigation or
Alternative to
Reduce
Significant
Effect Is
Declined
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(C–D)
Proposed
Project
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
CEQA
Guidelines
Section
15164
c) Result in a
determination by the
wastewater treatment
provider which serves or
may serve the project
that it has adequate
capacity to serve the
project’s projected
demand in addition to
the provider’s existing
commitments?
LTS No No No Yes
d) Generate solid waste in
excess of state or local
standards, or in excess of
the capacity of local
infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the
attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
LTS No No No Yes
e) Comply with federal,
state, and local
management and
reduction statutes and
regulations related to
solid waste?
LTS No No No Yes
Key: NI = no impact; LTS = less than significant; LTS/M = less than significant with mitigation; SU = significant and unavoidable; N/A = topic not analyzed in Certified EIR

Page 1142 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-115
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The proposed project would not result in changes to land use or zoning and would involve the conversion of a surface parking area to a fuel station with a convenience store, consistent with the approved project analyzed in the Certified EIR. The proposed project would continue to be served by existing and planned HDWD water facilities, on-site storm drainage infrastructure, and other utilities (electric, gas, and telecommunications).

The Certified EIR concluded that utility infrastructure demands generated by the approved project could be accommodated by existing or planned systems and would not require new offsite improvements that could result in significant environmental effects. The proposed project would not increase utility demands beyond what was previously analyzed. The relocated fuel station and new convenience store represent a minor modification to on-site utility connections but would not require expanded water supply, drainage, or energy infrastructure.

Accordingly, the proposed project would not result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded utility facilities that could cause significant environmental effects. Impacts would remain less than significant, consistent with the Certified EIR.

Consequently, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and, therefore, would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The Certified EIR determined that HDWD had adequate water supplies to serve the approved project, based on available groundwater resources and planned infrastructure improvements.

Since certification of the EIR, HDWD has continued to maintain reliable groundwater supplies through local wells and conservation programs.

The proposed project would not substantially change water demand compared to the approved project. The relocated fuel station and small convenience store would require standard potable water connections, similar to the approved commercial development. No new water-intensive uses are proposed, and the project would remain subject to HDWD’s connection, conservation, and water-efficiency requirements. Therefore, sufficient water supplies would be available to

Page 1143 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-116 PlaceWorks
serve the project during normal, dry, and multiple-dry-year conditions, and impacts would remain less than significant, consistent with the Certified EIR.

Consequently, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and, therefore, would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

At the time of the Certified EIR, the Town of Yucca Valley relied on on-site septic systems. The approved project proposed to use on-site wastewater disposal consistent with County Environmental Health standards, and impacts were found to be less than significant.

Since that time, the HDWD Wastewater Reclamation Project has been completed, providing a centralized wastewater collection and treatment system for the Town of Yucca Valley. The proposed project would connect to this existing public sewer system rather than use septic disposal. As a result, wastewater management under the proposed project would be improved relative to the approved project, reducing the potential for localized groundwater or soil impacts.

The HDWD Wastewater Reclamation Facility currently operates with available capacity and has sufficient treatment capability to accommodate the project’s minor wastewater generation.

Therefore, the proposed project would not exceed treatment capacity or require expansion of facilities, and impacts would remain less than significant, consistent with and incrementally improved relative to the Certified EIR.

Consequently, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and, therefore, would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).
d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The Certified EIR concluded that the approved project would generate solid waste that could be

Page 1144 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-117
accommodated by existing regional landfill capacity and that compliance with Assembly Bill 939 diversion requirements would ensure impacts remained less than significant.

The proposed project would generate similar quantities of solid waste as the approved project, primarily from commercial operations and customer waste associated with the fuel station and new convenience store. Disposal services would continue to be provided by the Town’s contracted waste hauler, with waste directed to County-approved facilities with adequate capacity.

Since certification of the EIR, additional solid-waste reduction measures have been implemented under Senate Bill 1383, which establishes organic-waste recycling requirements.

The proposed project would be required to comply with these regulations, further ensuring that landfill impacts remain less than significant. Therefore, impacts would remain less than significant, consistent with and marginally improved compared to the Certified EIR.

Consequently, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and, therefore, would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The Certified EIR found that the approved project would comply with applicable State and local solid-waste management regulations, including diversion and recycling requirements under AB 939. The proposed project would be subject to the same, and now more stringent, solidwaste diversion requirements under SB 1383 and the Town’s updated municipal code. The project would provide standard waste collection and recycling facilities consistent with Town requirements for commercial uses.

Compliance with these regulations would ensure that solid waste is properly managed and diverted from landfill disposal. Therefore, impacts related to compliance with solid-waste statutes and regulations would remain less than significant, consistent with the Certified EIR.

Page 1145 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-118 PlaceWorks

3.19.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project
No mitigation measures were identified in the Certified EIR for Utilities and Service Systems. As discussed above, the proposed project is within the scope of the approved project, and no mitigation measures are warranted.

3.20 Wildfire

3.20.1 Summary of Impacts Identified in the Approved Project At the time of preparation of the Certified EIR wildfire was not one of the environmental topics within the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist. However, wildfire and emergency response plans were discussed in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section and are summarized in Section 3.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this Addendum.

3.20.2 Impacts Associated with the Proposed Project
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

Page 1146 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-119
Conditions Requiring Subsequent Review
Environmental Issues
Level of
Impact in
Certified
EIR
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Involving New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(1–2)
New
Information
Showing New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(A–B)
New
Mitigation or
Alternative to
Reduce
Significant
Effect Is
Declined
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(C–D)
Proposed
Project
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
CEQA
Guidelines
Section
15164
b) Due to slope, prevailing
winds, and other
factors, exacerbate
wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a
wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of
a wildfire?
N/A No No No Yes
c) Require the installation
or maintenance of
associated
infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks,
emergency water
sources, power lines or
other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or
that may result in
temporary or ongoing
impacts to the
environment?
N/A No No No Yes

Page 1147 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-120 PlaceWorks
Conditions Requiring Subsequent Review
Environmental Issues
Level of
Impact in
Certified
EIR
Change in
Project or
Circumstances
Involving New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(1–2)
New
Information
Showing New
or More
Severe
Significant
Effects
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(A–B)
New
Mitigation or
Alternative to
Reduce
Significant
Effect Is
Declined
CEQA Guidelines
Section
15162(a)(3)(C–D)
Proposed
Project
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
CEQA
Guidelines
Section
15164
d) Expose people or
structures to significant
risks, including
downslope or
downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of
runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage
changes?
N/A No No No Yes
Key: NI = no impact; LTS = less than significant; LTS/M = less than significant with mitigation; SU = significant and unavoidable; N/A = topic not analyzed in Certified EIR a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The project site is located within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) and is within an area designated as a moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) (CAL FIRE 2024). The nearest very high FHSZ, according to CAL FIRE, is within a State Responsibility Area (SRA) approximately 10.3 miles northwest of the project site (CAL FIRE 2024). Additionally, based on U.S. Forest Service Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) mapping, the project site is not within the WUI; however, the project site is bounded by the WUI to the north across SR-62 (USFS 2020).

The Town of Yucca Valley maintains the 2025 Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP), which is a plan to identify and profile hazard conditions, analyze risk to people and facilities, and develop mitigation actions to reduce or eliminate hazard risks in Yucca Valley. Although there is no local emergency evacuation plan available, the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) in collaboration with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) identified evacuation routes in the region, which include SR-62 and Avalon Avenue. The proposed project’s construction and equipment would be staged within the project site. As discussed in

Page 1148 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-121
Section 3.17, Transportation, the proposed project would not physically impede the circulation network and the surrounding roadways. Additionally, the proposed project would connect its driveway to the existing circulation infrastructure and would include a direct egress onto CA-62 that would not block the evacuation route. As with the approved project, project design and construction would be required to comply with applicable emergency access standards, and construction activities that might temporarily restrict access would be managed with traffic control measures to maintain emergency response capability. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact.

Although wildfire and associated impacts were not previously analyzed as part of the approved project, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and, therefore, would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

Since certification of the EIR, the approved project site has been fully developed with the Walmart Supercenter and parking lot, which is generally flat with a slight slope along landscaped areas. The Town of Yucca Valley is intermittently impacted by Santa Ana winds, the hot, dry winds that blow across southern California in the spring and late fall (April through November) (Yucca Valley 2022). Santa Ana wind events can increase wildfire risk.

The proposed project would not construct a structure that would affect prevailing winds. The proposed project would be designed in accordance with the CBC and California Fire Code. Fire suppression equipment specific to construction would be maintained on site. Construction of the proposed project would comply with applicable codes and ordinances related to the maintenance of mechanical equipment, handling and storage of flammable materials, and cleanup of spills of flammable materials. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors. Impacts would be less than significant.

Page 1149 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-122 PlaceWorks
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The project site is in an LRA and is designated a moderate FHSZ (CAL FIRE 2024). The nearest very high FHSZ, according to CAL FIRE, is in an SRA approximately 10.3 miles northwest of the project site. Based on the U.S. Forest Service Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) mapping, the project site is not in the WUI; however, it is bounded by the WUI to the north across SR-62 (USFS 2020). The project site is in a developed area and would be served by existing utility infrastructure. The proposed project would be served by existing utility infrastructure and would connect to these utilities via underground connections.

The proposed project would be designed and constructed in accordance with the CBC and the California Fire Code, as adopted and enforced by the Town of Yucca Valley. The new driveway and utility connections would not exacerbate fire risk. Development of the proposed project would not require the installation of roads and fuel breaks. Therefore, the proposed project does not include the installation or maintenance of infrastructure that could exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. Impacts would be less than significant.

Although wildfire and associated impacts were not previously analyzed as part of the approved project, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and, therefore, would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Project Meets the Conditions for an Addendum Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

The project site is within an LRA and is designated a moderate FHSZ (CAL FIRE 2024). As discussed in Section 3.7, Geology and Soils, and Section 3.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact related to flooding, landslides, stormwater/drainage, and slope instability with adherence with CBC and the geotechnical engineering report recommendations. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. A less than significant impact would occur.

Page 1150 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
JANUARY 2026 3-123
Although wildfire and associated impacts were not previously analyzed as part of the approved project, the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects and, therefore, would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a).

3.20.3 Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project
No mitigation measures were adopted as part of the approved project’s Certified EIR relating to wildfire. As discussed above, the proposed project is within the scope of the approved project, and no mitigation measures are warranted.

Page 1151 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
3-124 PlaceWorks
This page is intentionally left blank

Page 1152 of 2762 ends

JANUARY 2026 4-1

4. FINDINGS
As summarized below, and for the reasons described in Section 3, Environmental Analysis, of this Addendum, the Town of Yucca Valley has concluded that the proposed project meets the conditions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 and that therefore an Addendum to the Certified EIR is the appropriate CEQA document to address the proposed project.

As previously discussed, under CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an addendum to an EIR or MND may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or MND have occurred. The following restates the standards in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 as they relate to the proposed project.

1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which would require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effect or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effect.

As discussed in Section 2.3 of this Addendum, the proposed project would construct a development of a new fuel station and convenience store within the northeastern portion of the existing Walmart Supercenter parking area. While the Certified EIR analyzed a fuel station as part of the overall development program, the specific location and design of the current proposed fueling facility differ from the original layout. However, the use, intensity, and environmental footprint are similar to the fuel station analyzed in the Certified EIR. Additionally, the proposed project includes the construction of a convenience store associated with the fuel station, which was not previously analyzed as part of the approved project.

The proposed project would remain within the previously approved Specific Plan area boundaries and would not introduce new land uses or expand the development footprint.

Accordingly, no new or more severe impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources, cultural resources, hydrology and water quality, mineral resources, recreation, or tribal cultural resources would occur beyond those previously evaluated in the Certified EIR.

The inclusion of the convenience store was evaluated in this Addendum to determine the whether this use would result in potential impacts to aesthetics, hazardous materials, population and housing, public services, transportation, and utilities and service systems. The intensity and environmental footprint of the fuel station are similar to the approved project, and the proposed convenience store would be of a similar height. Due to existing development and vegetation surrounding the project site and distance from scenic resources, impacts to

Page 1153 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

4. FINDINGS
4-2 PlaceWorks
aesthetics would be reduced to less than significant with adherence to local policies. Although the proposed convenience store would result in an increase in employment opportunities (six employment positions); the use of hazardous materials for operational purposes; minor increases in demand for public services, utilities, and service systems; and a negligible net increase in local traffic, adherence to applicable local, State, and federal policies and regulations would ensure that impacts related to hazardous materials, population and housing, public services, transportation, and utilities and service systems would remain less than significant.

At the time the Certified EIR was prepared, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, tribal cultural resources and wildfire were not included as separate environmental topics in the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist and, therefore, were not previously evaluated.

Impacts associated with energy, GHG emissions, tribal cultural resources and wildfire under the proposed project have been evaluated in this Addendum and are determined to be less than significant. As discussed in Section 3.7, Geology and Soils, of this Addendum, although the proposed project is within the same boundaries as the approved project, the geotechnical report prepared for the proposed project included project-specific recommendations. These site-specific recommendations required minor modifications to Mitigation Measure 4.6.1A.

With modification of Mitigation Measure 4.6.1A, impacts related to checklist items 3.7(c) and

3.7(d) would not result in a significant impact, consistent with the conclusions of the Certified EIR. Therefore, no substantial changes are proposed that will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

2. No substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

As discussed in Section 2.3 of this Addendum, the proposed project would construct a new fuel station and convenience store within the northeastern portion of the existing Walmart Supercenter parking lot. While the Certified EIR analyzed a fuel station as part of the overall development program, the specific location and design of the currently proposed fueling facility differ from the original layout.

Since certification of the EIR, the State has updated the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards. The 2022 Standards became effective in January 2023, and the State continues to update these standards on a three-year cycle. These updates are intended to improve building energy efficiency in new construction and do not represent a substantial or unusual change in circumstances (California Department of General Services 2024). No substantial changes have occurred within the project site or surrounding area that would alter the circumstances under which the approved project would be undertaken.

Page 1154 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

4. FINDINGS
JANUARY 2026 4-3
As described previously, the proposed project’s revised fuel station location, inclusion of a convenience store, and associated employment opportunities would result in impacts that are less than or equal to those analyzed in the Certified EIR. Impacts to the environmental thresholds would remain similar to, or less than, those identified in the Certified EIR for the approved project. Additionally, impacts related to energy, greenhouse gas emissions, tribal cultural resources and wildfire, all of which were topics not previously analyzed, were found to be less than significant. Therefore, no major revisions to the Certified EIR are required, as the proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

3. No new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:

A. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration
Similar to the approved project, the proposed project would construct a new fuel station. The proposed project’s specific location and design of the proposed fueling facility differ from the original layout and includes a convenience store within the northeastern portion of the existing Walmart Supercenter parking. However, the change in location, layout and the inclusion of a convenience store would not result in new or increased significant environmental impacts. Environmental impacts under the proposed project would be considered less than or equal to those analyzed in the Certified EIR. Additionally, impacts to energy, greenhouse gas emissions tribal cultural resources and wildfire, which were not previously analyzed, were found to be less than significant. There is no new information of substantial importance that shows that the proposed project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR.

B. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
The proposed project’s specific location and design of the proposed fueling facility differ from the original layout and inclusion of a convenience store would result in similar or reduced physical environmental effects, as compared to the approved project. The proposed project would implement the applicable mitigation measures originally identified in the Certified EIR and referred to throughout this analysis under the heading Adopted Mitigation Measures Applicable to the Proposed Project. As substantiated in this analysis, no significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR.

Page 1155 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

4. FINDINGS
4-4 PlaceWorks
C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
The Certified EIR analyzed the following alternatives to the approved project:

1. No Project: Alternative 1, the No Project Alternative, would assume that the proposed project would not be approved and the fuel station component of the Specific Plan would not be established.

2. Mixed Commercial/Office Alternative: Alternative 2: the mixed commercial/office alternative would allow for the construction of 115,000 square feet of general office building, and approximately 115,000 square feet of retail uses.

3. Off-Site Location Alternative: Under the Off-Site Location Alternative, the project would result in the same level of development relocated to a suitable site at the northwest corner of Balsa Avenue and Yucca Trail

4. Reduced Intensity Commercial: Under this alternative, the project site would be developed with approximately half of the 233,000 square feet of uses envisioned under the proposed project. The 115,000 square feet of commercial uses under the Reduced Intensity Commercial Alternative would consist of a multi-tenant shopping center hosting a single mid-size anchor (50,000– 60,000 square feet).

D. No alternatives previously found to be infeasible would, in fact, be feasible under the proposed project. Mitigation Measures 4.1.1A, 4.3.2A, 4.6.2A, and 4.6.3A from the Certified EIR are not applicable to the proposed project and were therefore not incorporated. Furthermore, the modification to Mitigation Measure 4.6.1A, which requires adherence to the proposed project’s geotechnical report, encompasses the intent of Certified EIR Mitigation Measures 4.6.1A, 4.6.2A, and 4.6.3A. As substantiated in Section 4 of this Addendum, the proposed project would result in impacts that are similar to or reduced compared to those identified for the approved project.

E. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

The proposed project would result in environmental impacts that are similar to or less than those of the approved project. As stated previously, no new or more severe impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project. There is no new information

Page 1156 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

4. FINDINGS
JANUARY 2026 4-5
of substantial importance indicating that alternatives considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant environmental effects. As discussed above, Mitigation Measures 4.1.1A, 4.3.2A, 4.6.2A, and 4.6.3A from the Certified EIR are not applicable to the proposed project and were therefore not incorporated. Furthermore, the modification to Mitigation Measure

4.6.1A, which requires adherence to the proposed project’s geotechnical report, encompasses the intent of Certified EIR Mitigation Measures 4.6.1A, 4.6.2A, and

4.6.3A.

Page 1157 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

4. FINDINGS
4-6 PlaceWorks
This page is intentionally left blank

Page 1158 of 2762 ends

JANUARY 2026 5-1

5. LIST OF PREPARERS

PLACEWORKS
Nicole Vermilion, Principal
Mariana Zimmermann, Associate Principal
Justine Garner, Associate
Miles Barker, Associate
Angel Castro, Project Planner

LEAD AGENCY
Jared Jerome, Associate Planner, Town of Yucca Valley

Page 1159 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

5. LIST OF PREPARERS
5-2 PlaceWorks
This page is intentionally left blank.

Page 1160 of 2762 ends

JANUARY 2026 6-1

6. REFERENCES
BLM (Bureau of Land Management). 2025, October 8 (accessed). West Mojave Route Network Project. https://www.blm.gov/programs/planning-and-nepa/plans-development/ california/west-mojave-plan-route-network.

CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2025, October 27 (accessed).

Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. https://fire-hazard-severity-zones-rollout-calfire -forestry.hub.arcgis.com/pages/access-map.

Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2025, September 17 (accessed). California Scenic Highway Mapping System. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape -architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways.

DOC (California Department of Conservation). 2025, October 19 (accessed). California Important Farmland Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/.

DOF (California Department of Finance). 2025, September 17 (accessed). E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020-2025. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing -estimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2025/.

DTSC (California Department of Toxic Substances Control). 2025. Site Search for “58501 29 Palms Hwy #1915, Yucca Valley, CA 92284.” EnviroStor Database. Accessed October 2025. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress =58501+29+Palms+Hwy+%231915%2C+Yucca+Valley%2C+CA+92284.

FTA (Federal Transit Administration. 2018, September. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/researchinnovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-reportno-0123_0.pdf.

Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc. 2025a, August 27. Yucca Valley Walmart Fuel Station: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas EIR Addendum Analysis Memorandum. Appendix A of this Addendum.
––––––. 2025b, August 27. Yucca Valley Walmart Fuel Station: Health Risk Assessment Memorandum.
––––––. 2025c, August 27. Yucca Valley Walmart Fuel Station: Noise EIR Addendum Analysis Memorandum.

Page 1161 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION PROJECT EIR ADDENDUM

TOWN OF YUCCA VALLEY

6. REFERENCES
6-2 PlaceWorks
––––––. 2025d, August 27. Transportation Impact Analysis for the Proposed Walmart Fuel Project in the Town of Yucca Valley.
––––––. 2020, September 8. Mojave River Watershed Water Quality Management Plan.

NPS (National Park Service). 2025, September 25. National Register of Historic Places. https://www.nps.gov/maps/full.html?mapId=7ad17cc9-b808-4ff8-a2f9-a99909164466.

OHP (California Office of Historic Preservation). 2025, September 25 (accessed). California Historical Resources.
https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=36.

SBC (San Bernardino County). 2019. Transportation Impact Study Guidelines. https://www.sbcounty.gov/uploads/DPW/docs/Traffic-Study-Guidelines.pdf.

South Coast AQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District). 2009, November 19.GHG Meeting 14 Main Presentation. Greenhouse Gases (GHG) CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/ greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/ghg-meeting -14/ghg-meeting-14-main-presentation.pdf?sfvrsn=2.

WVBW (Warren Valley Basin Watermaster). 1991, January 30. Warren Valley Basin Management Plan. https://www.hdwd.com/DocumentCenter/View/274/1991-Basin-Management -Plan-PDF
USFS (United States Forest Service). 2025, October 10 (accessed). Wildland Urban Interface:
2020. Map Service. https://data-usfs.hub.arcgis.com/documents/7804d89ed1094 ccb9aae753228e8d89a/explore.

USFWS (United Stats Fish and Wildfire Service). 2011, 11 May. Revised Recovery Plan for the Mojave Population of the Desert Tortoise.
https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USFWS.2011.RRP%20for%20the%2 0Mojave%20Desert%20Tortoise.pdf
Yucca Valley, Town of. 2025. Town of Yucca Valley General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map. https://www.yucca-valley.org/?splash=https%3a%2f%2fexperience.arcgis .com%2fexperience%2f8d739bc93b044464a62b4d77fc034d48&____isexternal=true. ––––––. 2022. General Plan Update. https://www.yucca-valley.org/our-town/departments/ community-development/planning/general-plan-update.
––––––. 2014. Official Zoning District Map. https://www.yucca-valley.org/home/ showpublisheddocument/6044/638526759731270000.

Page 1162 of 2762 ends

APPENDIX A, AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EIR ADDENDUM

ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM

Page 1163 of 2762 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 1164 of 2762 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868

MEMORANDUM
To: Town of Yucca Valley Planning Division
From: Alex Pohlman, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Date: August 27, 2025
Subject:

Yucca Valley Walmart Fuel Station – Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas EIR Addendum Analysis

PURPOSE
This comparative air quality impacts analysis has been undertaken to analyze whether the proposed Yucca Valley Walmart Fuel Station Project (Project) would result in any new or substantially more severe significant environmental impacts as compared to the conclusions discussed in the certified Yucca Valley Retail Specific Plan (Original Project) Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) that was certified on June 25, 2008. The purpose of this technical memorandum is to document whether any new air quality or greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts would occur based on the proposed updates to the Project (described below) pursuant to Public Resources Code, Section 21166 or State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

ORIGINAL PROJECT
The Final EIR for the Original Project analyzed the development of a commercial retail center on approximately 25.51 acres located on the southeast corner of Twentynine Palms Highway (SR62) and Avalon Avenue. The EIR analysis for the Original Project included a 229,000-square foot Walmart Supercenter, a fuel station, a 4,000-square foot fast-food restaurant with drive-through, and a detention basin. However, the Specific Plan, approved on August 14, 2008, did not include the fuel station as a permitted use and the area designated in the EIR for the fuel station and a 4,000-square foot fast-food restaurant with drive-through was ultimately developed with two smaller fast-food restaurants instead.

PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed Project involves the development of a fuel station similar to the one previously analyzed in the Final EIR, although in a different location. The fuel station would be located in the northeastern portion of the existing parking lot, south of the detention basin and SR-62, see Exhibit 1: Local Vicinity Map and Exhibit 2: Conceptual Site Plan.

Page 1165 of 2762 ends

Maxar, Microsoft
Not to Scale
EXHIBIT 1:

Yucca Valley Fuel Sta�on Project
Local Vicinity Map
Source: ArcGIS Pro

PROJECT
SITE
29 Palms Highway
Avalon Avenue
Paxton Outerhighway

WALMART

Page 1166 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION - STORE #1915
58501 TWENTYNINE PALMS HIGHWAY, YUCCA VALLEY, CA 92284
Not to Scale
EXHIBIT 2:

Yucca Valley Walmart Fuel Sta�on Project
Conceptual Site Plan
Source: Kimley-Horn Traffic Scoping Agreement

Page 1167 of 2762 ends

Page 4 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868

AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS
Previous Significance Determination: The Final EIR determined that the Original Project, which included a fuel station, was consistent with applicable air quality plans and policies. However, the Final EIR also determined that the Original Project would generate short-term construction emissions and long-term operational emissions that would exceed the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District’s (MDAQMD’s) significance thresholds for criteria pollutants. The Final EIR identified mitigation measure 4.3.1A, which includes requirements for reducing equipment emissions and requirements during construction activities to prevent impacting traffic during peak hours; however, impacts remained significant and unavoidable.

Proposed Project Analysis:

Threshold (a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.

As discussed in the Final EIR, the Original Project is consistent with the MDAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), and as a result, the impacts of the Original Project are less than significant.

The proposed Project would be consistent with development in the area and applicable AQMP assumptions. The proposed Project would result in a similar number of permanent jobs as compared to the Original Project. Therefore, no new impacts from air quality emissions or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified impacts evaluated in the Final EIR would be caused by the proposed Project.

Mitigation Program
None identified in the Original Project Final EIR.

Conclusion
Project development would not result in any new impacts, or increase the severity of the previously identified impacts, with respect to compliance with applicable air quality plans.

Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Certified EIR was certified is available that would change the significance determination for the Original Project in the Final EIR. This impact remains less than significant.

Threshold (b) Violate an air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation.

The proposed Project is under the jurisdiction of the MDAQMD and is located within the Mojave Desert Air Basin (MDAB). The MDAB includes the desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Kern counties. The MDAB is in a federal and state non-attainment area for ozone and PM10; and a state nonattainment area for particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less

Page 1168 of 2762 ends

Page 5 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 (PM2.5). An area is considered to be in non-attainment status when air pollution persistently exceeds the State or National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

Construction Emissions
The Project includes the demolition of an area of the existing parking lot, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. Predicted maximum daily construction-generated emissions during each year construction activities occurred are summarized in Table 1: Construction-Related Emissions and compared with the construction emissions identified in the Final EIR. It should be noted that the Final EIR based its construction emission analysis on the grading phase of the Original Project and used the Urban Emission (URBEMIS) model 2002 to calculate emissions. The URBEMIS software is now outdated and was replaced with California Emission Estimator Model (CalEEMod) in February 2011. This analysis has been prepared using CalEEMod version 2022.1.1.29, the most recent version available.

Table 1: Construction-Related Emissions
Source
Emissions (Pounds per Day)
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Original Project1
Total Construction Emissions: No Mitigation 18 275 120 25 794 NA Total Construction Emissions: With Mitigation 18 275 120 25 401 NA MDAQMD Threshold2 137 137 548 137 82 65
Exceed MDAQMD Threshold? No Yes No No Yes No
Proposed Project3
Construction Year 2025 1.69 23.6 17.8 0.08 13.7 4.23
Construction Year 2026 1.19 8.58 9.99 0.02 0.35 0.27
MDAQMD Threshold 137 137 548 137 82 65
Exceed MDAQMD Threshold? No No No No No No
ROG= reactive organic gases; NOX = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; SOX = sulfur oxides; PM10 = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less; PM2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less; NA = data not available

1. Original Project emissions are from Final EIR, Table 4.3.M, page 4.3-38.

2. MDAQMD CEQA Guidelines, Page 9, February 2020.

3. Emissions modeled with CalEEMod version 2022. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.

The construction emissions for the Proposed Project in Table 1 have been conservatively modeled without mitigation and with construction beginning in 2025 and concluding in 2026.1 As 1 A conservative worst-case construction timeline has been modeled for analysis purposes. This involves modeling emissions at the earliest feasible date. Emissions in future years (i.e., due to a later construction start date or operational opening year) would be lower due to phased-in emissions standards, inspection and maintenance requirements, and fleet turnover). Project construction that occurs at a later date than what was modeled impacts would result in lower emissions than those analyzed due to the use of more energy-efficient and cleaner burning construction vehicle fleet mix, pursuant to state regulations that require vehicle fleet operators to phase-in less polluting heavy-duty equipment. As a result, Project-related construction emissions would be lower than the impacts disclosed herein. For emissions modeling purposes, conservatively analyzing the emissions using an earlier construction start date provides for a worst-case analysis and full disclosure of potential air quality impacts, as required by CEQA.

Page 1169 of 2762 ends

Page 6 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 shown in Table 1, the maximum daily emissions would remain below the construction emissions calculated for the Original Project and below MDAQMD’s thresholds for all criteria pollutants. As a result, impacts associated with the construction of the proposed Project would be less than significant and would not require any additional mitigation.

Operational Emissions
The main source of air pollutant emissions during operations is from motor vehicles. As noted above, the Final EIR determined that original Project would exceed operational emission thresholds for CO, VOC, NOX, and PM10. However, the Air Quality Impact Analysis, Appendix B of the Final EIR, separates the operational emissions by land use; therefore, the emissions associated specifically with the fuel station can be compared with the proposed Project. Based on the Project Trip Generation Analysis in the Traffic Scoping Agreement, the proposed Project would generate 826 daily trips, 52 daily trips more than the 774 trips anticipated for the gas station in the Final EIR.

Operational emissions associated with the Original Project and proposed Project are summarized in Table 2: Operational-Related Emissions. As shown in Table 2, the proposed Project’s operational emissions are below MDAQMD’s criteria pollutant thresholds. Although the proposed Project’s emissions are below the MDAQMD’s thresholds, operational emissions are slightly higher than the SOX and PM10 emissions modeled for the fuel station in the Final EIR.

This increase in emissions is likely the result of changing the models from the outdated URBEMIS model to the current version of CalEEMod, as the models calculate emissions differently.

Although the proposed Project would generate 52 more daily trips than the Original Project, the emission rates for vehicles have decreased since the analysis for the EIR was conducted in 2006, due to regulatory requirements, technology improvements, and fleet turnover. However, the increase of these pollutants would not change the results when combined with the total emissions of the Original Project. As a result, impacts associated with the construction of the proposed Project would be less than significant and would not require any additional mitigation.

Page 1170 of 2762 ends

Page 7 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 Table 2: Operational-Related Emissions
Source Emissions (Pounds per Day)
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Original Project1
Total Original Project’s Emissions 140 250 1,500 0.94 190 36 MDAQMD Threshold 137 137 548 137 82 65
Exceed MDAQMD Threshold? Yes Yes Yes No Yes No
Original Project, Fuel Station Emissions Only2
Fuel Station Emissions 5.82 10.42 73.00 0.65 7.95 NA
MDAQMD Threshold 137 137 548 137 82 65
Exceed MDAQMD Threshold? No No No No No No
Proposed Project3
Fuel Station Emissions 4.92 5.97 51.6 0.12 9.92 2.58
MDAQMD Threshold 137 137 548 137 82 65
Exceed MDAQMD Threshold? No No No No No No
ROG= reactive organic gases; NOX = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; SOX = sulfur oxides; PM10 = particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or less; PM2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less; NA = data not available

1. Original Project emissions are from Final EIR, Table 4.3.N, page 4.3-41.

2. Original Project fuel station emissions are from Air Quality Analysis, Appendix A URBEMIS 2002 Model Printouts, page 7, Mitigated Operational Emissions (Draft EIR Appendix B).

3. Emissions modeled with CalEEMod version 2022. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.

The Final EIR identified construction and operational exceedances of MDAQMD thresholds for criteria air pollutants and concluded that the Original Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact. However, the proposed Project would not exceed any MDAQMD thresholds and therefore would result in a less than significant impact. The Final EIR identified Mitigation Measure 4.3.1A to reduce construction emissions of criteria pollutants, which would still be required as part of the EIR to reduce cumulative impacts.

Mitigation Program
The following applicable Mitigation Measure is identified in the Final EIR. No additional mitigation measures are required.

4.3.1A Prior to issuance of grading permits, the construction contractor shall provide evidence showing that the following measures shall be implemented to reduce NOX and PM10 emissions from ground disturbance and VOC emissions from application of architectural coatings:
• The construction contractor shall select the construction equipment used on site based on low emission factors and high energy efficiency. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that all

Page 1171 of 2762 ends

Page 8 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications.
• The construction contractor shall demonstrate to the Town that construction activities shall make use of alternatively fueled equipment or catalyst-equipped diesel powered equipment to the extent such alternative fuels are available. • The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. • The construction contractor shall time the construction activities so as not to interfere with peak hour traffic and to minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the site; if necessary, a flagperson shall be retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways.
• The construction contractor shall support and encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew.
• The construction contractor shall demonstrate compliance with the fugitive dust suppression measures 403 a) through 403 e) contained in MDAQMD Rule 403. • The construction contractor shall demonstrate compliance with the VOC suppression measures contained in MDAQMD 1113.
• The construction contractor shall apply non-toxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers’ specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 10 days or more).
• The construction contractor shall water active sites at least twice daily (Locations where grading is to occur shall be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving). • The construction contractor shall provide evidence to the Town that all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or maintain at least two 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 (CVC) section 23114.
• The construction contractor shall pave construction access roads at least 100 feet onto the site from the main road.
• The construction contractor shall promote the reduction of traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph) or less.

Conclusion
No new impact relative to air quality emissions evaluated in the Original Project Final EIR would occur with the development of the proposed Project. Although the Final EIR determined that the Original Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact, improvements to equipment and engine efficiencies over time have reduced Project emissions to a less than significant level.

Page 1172 of 2762 ends

Page 9 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 Threshold (c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

The Final EIR determined that the exposure of sensitive receptors to harmful pollutant concentrations associated with the Original Project would be less than significant. The Final EIR analyzed CO emission hotspots from the vehicular traffic increase in local areas as well as diesel emissions from truck deliveries as a result of the Original Project.

The Final EIR studied 22 intersections in the project vicinity and determined that none of the studied intersections would exceed State standards. As shown in Table 2, CO emissions generated by the proposed Project would be lower than those modeled for the Original Project.

Therefore, the development of proposed Project would not result in CO hotspots.

The Final EIR also determined that operational health risk impacts would be less than significant.2 Typical Sources of carcinogenic and chronically hazardous toxic air contaminants (TACs) mostly include diesel particulate matter (DPM) from trucks and industrial manufacturing processes. As with the Original Project, the proposed Project would include delivery trucks which would generate DPM. The analysis for the Final EIR determined that emissions would not exceed the 10 in one million carcinogenic health risk threshold or the 1.0 chronic health index threshold.

Although it is not discussed in the Final EIR, TACs would also be generated by the fueling station component of the Original Project. Of the toxic compounds emitted from gasoline stations, benzene, ethylbenzene, and naphthalene have cancer toxicity values. However, benzene is the TAC which drives the risk, accounting for 87 percent of cancer risk from gasoline vapors and constitutes more than three to four times the weight of gasoline than ethylbenzene and naphthalene, respectively. Therefore, ethylbenzene and naphthalene have not been modeled and are instead considered significant in the case that benzene emissions are significant.

Benzene emissions associated with the proposed Project were computed based on the maximum anticipated throughput of fuel (i.e., approximately 5.0 million gallons per year), used CARB emission factors for fuel dispensing facilities, and assumed that benzene makes up 0.46 percent of gasoline vapor.3
A Health Risk Assessment (HRA) was prepared separately for the proposed Project. The HRA determined that the health risk at the maximally exposed receptor, including DPM from construction equipment, DPM from truck deliveries during operations, and benzene emissions from the operation of the fuel station, would not exceed the cancer risk, chronic health risk, or acute health risk thresholds (refer to Yucca Valley Walmart Fuel Station - Health Risk Assessment).
2 Final EIR Yucca Valley Retail Specific Plan, 2008. Table 4.3.J page 4.3-34 3 CARB, Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidance, January 2022

Page 1173 of 2762 ends

Page 10 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 Mitigation Program
None identified in the Final EIR. No additional mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
No new impact relative to air quality emissions evaluated in the Original Project Final EIR would occur with the development of the proposed Project. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would alter the Final EIR’s significance finding. This impact remains less than significant.

Threshold (d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.

The MDAQMD regulates odors through Rule 402 (Nuisance). Rule 402 prohibits the discharge from any source that 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. Typical land uses that generate odors include agriculture (farming and livestock), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting facilities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding.

During construction-related activities, some odors (not substantial pollutant concentrations) that may be detected are those typical of construction vehicles (e.g. diesel exhaust from grading and construction equipment). These odors are a temporary short-term impact that is typical of construction projects and would disperse rapidly.

The Final EIR for the Original Project determined that odors associated with the Original Project would be less than significant. Consistent with the Original Project, the proposed Project would not include any of the land uses that have been identified by the MDAQMD as odor sources.

Therefore, the Project would not create objectionable odors.

Mitigation Program
None identified in the Final EIR. No additional mitigation measures are required.

Page 1174 of 2762 ends

Page 11 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868

GREENHOUSE GAS ANALYSIS
Previous Significance Determination: The Certified EIR analyzed GHG emissions from the Original Project for informational purposes only, as GHG emission analysis was not required by CEQA at that time and there was no quantifiable emission threshold.

The Final EIR used URBEMIS and calculated that the Original Project would generate 7,124 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per year. However, the fuel station component was not analyzed separately in the Final EIR. Therefore, for this analysis, GHG emissions for the fuel station from the Original Project were calculated using CalEEMod 2022 using emission rates from 2010, (although opening year was originally modeled as 2007, CalEEMod emission rates only go back to 2010. Using 2010 emissions would be conservative when calculating emissions because emission rates improve in future years due to improvements in engines and fuel efficiency, as a result 2010 emissions would be lower than 2007 emissions).

Using CalEEMod 2022 with 2010 emission rates, the fuel station from the Original Project was estimated to generate 2,351 MTOC2e per year during operation. However, as discussed earlier, MDAQMD did not have a GHG threshold at this time, therefore the analysis for the Final EIR was based on consistency with GHG reduction strategies that would reduce GHG emissions. These strategies should not be construed as mitigation as they are either existing standards required of all developments or are voluntary programs. The Final EIR acknowledges that although these strategies may reduce GHG emissions it was not possible at that time to quantify reductions in GHG emissions. However, the Original Project was found to be consistent with proposed reduction strategies. As a result, the Original Project’s GHG emissions impact was found to be less than significant.

Proposed Project Analysis:

Threshold (e) Conflict with the emission reduction strategies contained in the California Climate Action Team’s Report to the Governor.

Construction GHG Emissions
The proposed Project would result in direct emissions of CO2, N2O, and CH4 from construction equipment and the transport of materials and construction workers to and from the project site.

The GHG emissions would only occur during temporary construction activities and would cease once construction is complete. The total GHG emissions generated during the construction of the proposed Project are shown in Table 3: Proposed Project – Construction Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Construction GHG emissions are typically summed and

Page 1175 of 2762 ends

Page 12 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 amortized over the lifetime of the project (assumed to be 30 years), then added to the operational emissions.4
Table 3: Proposed Project - Construction Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Category MTCO2e
Total Construction Emissions 102.3
30-Year Amortized Construction 3.41
Source CalEEMod version 2022. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.

As shown in Table 3, the proposed Project would result in the generation of approximately 102.3 MTCO2e throughout the course of construction. The amortized Project construction emissions would be 3.41 MTCO2e per year. Once construction is complete, the generation of these GHG emissions would cease.

Operational GHG Emissions
Operational emissions occur over the life of the Project. GHG emissions would result from direct emissions such as project-generated vehicular traffic including passenger automobiles and trucks, and from indirect sources such as off-site generation of electrical power, the energy required to convey water and wastewater to and from the Project, the emissions associated with solid waste generated from the Project, and any fugitive refrigerants from air conditioning or refrigerators. GHG emissions associated with the Project are summarized in Table 4: Proposed Project Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Construction GHG emissions have been amortized over a 30-year period and added to the total operational emissions of a project to ensure that GHG reduction strategies address construction emissions as part of the overall operation.

As shown in Table 4, the proposed Project would generate 1,960.29 MTCO2e of GHG emissions which is less than the 2,351 MTCO2e assumed for the fuel station component of the Original Project. As discussed previously, the Final EIR was prepared before MDAQMD had adopted the 100,000 short ton threshold (approximately 90,718 MTCO2e). Instead, the Final EIR based GHG impacts based on consistency with GHG reduction strategies that would reduce GHG emissions. However, these GHG reduction strategies are now required under the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Scoping Plan. As a result, the proposed Project would be consistent with the original GHG reduction strategies and as shown in Table 4, would generate less emissions than both the Original Project and MDAQMD’s current GHG threshold. Therefore, impacts related to GHG emissions would be less than significant. 4 The project lifetime is based on the standard 30-year assumption of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast Air Quality Management District, Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #13, August 26, 2009).

Page 1176 of 2762 ends

Page 13 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 Table 4: Proposed Project Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions Source Emissions (MTCO2e per Year)1
Proposed Project
Construction Amortized Over 30 Years 3.41
Mobile Sources 1,886
Area Source 0.02
Energy 16.5
Water and Wastewater 0.17
Solid Waste 0.79
Refrigerants 53.4
Total 1,960.29
MDAQMD Threshold 90,718
Exceed MDAQMD Threshold? No

1. Emissions modeled with CalEEMod version 2022. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.

Mitigation Program
None identified in the Final EIR. No additional mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
No new impact relative to GHG emissions evaluated in the Original Project Final EIR would occur with the development of the proposed Project. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would alter the Final EIR’s significance finding. This impact remains less than significant.

Page 1177 of 2762 ends

Appendix A
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Data

Page 1178 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Station
CalEEMod Assumptions
Land Use
Land Use Size Metric
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 6 Pump
Parking Lot 51.1 KSF
KSF = thousand square feet; Pump = fuel pump
Construction
Schedule
Phase Name Start Date End Date Workdays
Demolition 11/11/2025 11/17/2025 5
Site Preparation 11/18/2025 11/26/2025 7
Grading 11/27/2025 11/28/2025 2
Building Construction 11/29/2025 3/3/2026 67
Paving 3/4/2026 3/20/2026 13
Architectural Coating 3/21/2026 4/17/2026 20
Equipment
Construction Phase Equipment Number per Day Hours Per Day Demolition
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8
Site Preparation
Graders 1 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 7
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8
Grading
Graders 1 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 7
Building Construction
Cranes 1 6
Forklifts 1 6
Generator 1 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6
Paving
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8
Paving Equipment 1 8
Pavers 1 6
Rollers 1 7
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6
Grading/Earthwork
Phase Import (CY) Export (CY) Haul Distance (mi)
Site Preparation 0 351.3 20
Grading 0 491.82 20
CY = cubic yards; mi = miles

Page 1179 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Station CalEEMod Assumptions
2 Worker, Vendor, and Haul Trips
Trip Type # One-Way Trips/Day Trip Length (miles)
Demolition
Worker 12.5 18.5
Vendor 0 10.2
Hauling 119 20
On-Site Truck 0 0
Site Preparation
Worker 7.8 18.5
Vendor 0 10.2
Hauling 6.29 20
On-Site Truck 0 0
Grading
Worker 10 18.5
Vendor 0 10.2
Hauling 31 20
On-Site Truck 0 0
Building Construction
Worker 10 18.5
Vendor 4 10.2
Hauling 0 20
On-Site Truck 0 0
Paving
Worker 12.5 18.5
Vendor 0 10.2
Hauling 0 20
On-Site Truck 0 0
Architectural Coating
Worker 2 18.5
Vendor 0 10.2
Hauling 0 20
On-Site Truck 0 0
Demolition
Phase Amount (tons)
Demolition 2,384
tons = tons of debris

Page 1180 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Station CalEEMod Assumptions
3 Operations
Vehicle Data
Land Use Size Metric Trip Rate Daily Trip
Generation
Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps 6 Pump 137.6667 826
Parking Lot 51.1 KSF 0 0
Total Daily Trips - - - 826
KSF = thousand square feet; Pump = fuel pumps
100% primary trips; trip lengths and trip type distributions are CalEEMod defaults Trip Length
Land Use
Trip Length (miles)
Non-Res H-W
/ Res H-W
Non-Res W-O
/ Res H-S
Non-Res O-O
/ Res H-O
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 45.81 24.75 5.05
Parking Lot 0 0 0
Trip Purpose and Percent
Land Use
Trip Percent (%) Trip Purpose (%)
Primary Diverted Pass-By Non-Res H-W
/ Res H-W
Non-Res W-O
/ Res H-S
Non-Res O-O
/ Res H-O
Convenience Market with
Gas Pumps 100 0 0 23.45 11.35 65.18
Parking Lot 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fleet Mix
Land Use HHD
%
LDA
%
LDT1
%
LDT2
%
LHD1
%
LHD2
%
MCY
%
MDV
%
MH
%
MHD
%
OBUS
%
SBUS
%
UBUS
%
Convenience
Market with
Gas Pumps

1.95 48.63 4.44 20.86 3.46 0.93 2.63 15.74 0.60 0.54 0.04 0.10 0.02 Parking Lot 1.95 48.63 4.44 20.86 3.46 0.93 2.63 15.74 0.60 0.54 0.04 0.10 0.02

Page 1181 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 1 / 49
Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated

Page 1182 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 2 / 49

3.11. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated

3.13. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

Page 1183 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 3 / 49

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

Page 1184 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 4 / 49

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

Page 1185 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 5 / 49

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

Page 1186 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 6 / 49

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data

Page 1187 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 7 / 49

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley
Construction Start Date 3/3/2025
Operational Year 2025
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 3.60
Precipitation (days) 14.4
Location 58501 29 Palms Hwy, Yucca Valley, CA 92284, USA County San Bernardino-Mojave Desert
City Yucca Valley
Air District Mojave Desert AQMD
Air Basin Mojave Desert
TAZ 5142
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.29

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description

Page 1188 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 8 / 49
Convenience 6.00 Pump 0.02 1,556 0.00 0.00 — —
Market with Gas
Pumps
Parking Lot 51.1 1000sqft 1.17 0.00 1,790 0.00 — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.22 1.19 0.86 1.14 < 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.02 — 135 135 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 135 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.99 1.69 23.6 17.8 0.08 0.73 13.0 13.7 0.68 3.60 4.23 — 10,796 10,796 0.12 1.33 0.47 11,195 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.25 0.22 1.25 1.53 < 0.005 0.05 0.35 0.39 0.04 0.11 0.15 — 341 341 0.01 0.02 0.13 348 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.04 0.04 0.23 0.28 < 0.005 0.01 0.06 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.03 — 56.4 56.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 57.6 Exceeds
(Daily
Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 137 137 548 137 — — 82.0 — — 82.0 — — — — — — —

Page 1189 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 9 / 49
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Average
Daily)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 137 137 548 137 — — 82.0 — — 82.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Annual)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 25.0 25.0 100 25.0 — — 15.0 — — 15.0 — — — — — — 100,000 Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — No

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2026 1.22 1.19 0.86 1.14 < 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.02 — 135 135 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 135 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 1.99 1.69 23.6 17.8 0.08 0.73 13.0 13.7 0.68 3.60 4.23 — 10,796 10,796 0.12 1.33 0.47 11,195 2026 1.22 1.19 8.58 9.99 0.02 0.29 0.16 0.35 0.27 0.04 0.27 — 1,815 1,815 0.07 0.02 0.02 1,822 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.15 0.13 1.24 1.22 < 0.005 0.05 0.35 0.39 0.04 0.11 0.15 — 341 341 0.01 0.02 0.13 348 2026 0.25 0.22 1.25 1.53 < 0.005 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 0.04 — 269 269 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 270 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.03 0.02 0.23 0.22 < 0.005 0.01 0.06 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.03 — 56.4 56.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 57.6 2026 0.04 0.04 0.23 0.28 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 — 44.5 44.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 44.7

Page 1190 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 10 / 49

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 5.36 4.92 5.53 51.6 0.12 0.09 9.82 9.92 0.09 2.49 2.58 1.49 12,137 12,138 0.53 0.49 368 12,666 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.78 4.34 5.97 38.9 0.11 0.09 9.82 9.92 0.09 2.49 2.58 1.49 11,070 11,071 0.55 0.51 324 11,561 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.78 4.33 6.12 42.3 0.11 0.09 9.73 9.83 0.09 2.47 2.56 1.49 11,309 11,310 0.55 0.52 342 11,820 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.87 0.79 1.12 7.71 0.02 0.02 1.78 1.79 0.02 0.45 0.47 0.25 1,872 1,873 0.09 0.09 56.6 1,957 Exceeds
(Daily
Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 137 137 548 137 — — 82.0 — — 82.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Average
Daily)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Threshol
d
— 137 137 548 137 — — 82.0 — — 82.0 — — — — — — —
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — —
Exceeds
(Annual)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 1191 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 11 / 49
Threshol — 25.0 25.0 100 25.0 — — 15.0 — — 15.0 — — — — — — 100,000 d
Unmit. — No No No No — — No — — No — — — — — — No

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.31 4.87 5.52 51.5 0.12 0.09 9.82 9.92 0.09 2.49 2.58 — 12,037 12,037 0.38 0.49 45.1 12,238 Area 0.06 0.05 < 0.005 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.28 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.28 Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 99.1 99.1 0.01 < 0.005 — 99.7 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.12 0.51 0.63 0.01 < 0.005 — 1.02 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 323 323
Total 5.36 4.92 5.53 51.6 0.12 0.09 9.82 9.92 0.09 2.49 2.58 1.49 12,137 12,138 0.53 0.49 368 12,666 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 4.73 4.29 5.97 38.9 0.11 0.09 9.82 9.92 0.09 2.49 2.58 — 10,970 10,970 0.39 0.51 1.17 11,133 Area 0.04 0.04 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 99.1 99.1 0.01 < 0.005 — 99.7 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.12 0.51 0.63 0.01 < 0.005 — 1.02 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 323 323
Total 4.78 4.34 5.97 38.9 0.11 0.09 9.82 9.92 0.09 2.49 2.58 1.49 11,070 11,071 0.55 0.51 324 11,561 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 4.73 4.29 6.12 42.2 0.11 0.09 9.73 9.83 0.09 2.47 2.56 — 11,209 11,209 0.39 0.52 19.5 11,392

Page 1192 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 12 / 49
Area 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.14 Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 99.1 99.1 0.01 < 0.005 — 99.7 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.12 0.51 0.63 0.01 < 0.005 — 1.02 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 323 323
Total 4.78 4.33 6.12 42.3 0.11 0.09 9.73 9.83 0.09 2.47 2.56 1.49 11,309 11,310 0.55 0.52 342 11,820 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.86 0.78 1.12 7.71 0.02 0.02 1.78 1.79 0.02 0.45 0.47 — 1,856 1,856 0.06 0.09 3.22 1,886 Area 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02 Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 16.4 16.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 16.5 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.08 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.17 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.02 0.00 — 0.79 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 53.4 53.4
Total 0.87 0.79 1.12 7.71 0.02 0.02 1.78 1.79 0.02 0.45 0.47 0.25 1,872 1,873 0.09 0.09 56.6 1,957

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.75 1.47 13.9 15.1 0.02 0.57 — 0.57 0.52 — 0.52 — 2,494 2,494 0.10 0.02 — 2,502

Page 1193 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 13 / 49
Demoliti — — — — — — 10.7 10.7 — 1.62 1.62 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.02 0.02 0.19 0.21 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 34.2 34.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 34.3 Demoliti
on
— — — — — — 0.15 0.15 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.66 5.66 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.67 Demoliti
on
— — — — — — 0.03 0.03 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

Page 1194 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 14 / 49
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 111 111 < 0.005 0.02 0.10 117 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.38 0.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.38 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 18.5 18.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 19.4

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.56 1.31 12.1 12.1 0.02 0.56 — 0.56 0.52 — 0.52 — 2,065 2,065 0.08 0.02 — 2,072 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 6.27 6.27 — 3.00 3.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.03 0.03 0.23 0.23 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 39.6 39.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 39.7

Page 1195 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 15 / 49
Dust — — — — — — 0.12 0.12 — 0.06 0.06 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.01 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 6.56 6.56 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.58 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.02 0.02 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 96.8 96.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 98.1 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.01 0.01 0.51 0.11 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 0.12 0.01 0.03 0.04 — 429 429 < 0.005 0.07 0.02 450 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.91 1.91 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.94 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.23 8.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.63 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.32 0.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.32

Page 1196 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 16 / 49
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.36 1.36 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.43

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.80 1.51 14.1 14.5 0.02 0.64 — 0.64 0.59 — 0.59 — 2,455 2,455 0.10 0.02 — 2,463 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 7.10 7.10 — 3.43 3.43 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.01 0.01 0.08 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 13.5 13.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.5 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 1197 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 17 / 49
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.23 2.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.23 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 129 129 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 131 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.05 0.04 2.50 0.53 0.01 0.04 0.56 0.60 0.04 0.14 0.18 — 2,117 2,117 < 0.005 0.34 0.12 2,218 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.73 0.73 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.74 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.6 11.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 12.2 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.12 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.92 1.92 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.01

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

Page 1198 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 18 / 49
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.28 1.07 8.95 10.0 0.02 0.33 — 0.33 0.30 — 0.30 — 1,801 1,801 0.07 0.01 — 1,807 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.08 0.07 0.58 0.65 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 116 116 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 117 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.02 0.01 0.11 0.12 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 19.3 19.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 19.3 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 1199 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 19 / 49
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.43 6.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.51 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.13 8.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 8.46 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.43 0.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.43 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.52 0.52 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.55 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.07 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.22 1.01 8.57 9.96 0.02 0.29 — 0.29 0.27 — 0.27 — 1,801 1,801 0.07 0.01 — 1,807 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 1200 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 20 / 49
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.15 0.12 1.04 1.21 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.03 — 0.03 — 219 219 0.01 < 0.005 — 219 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.03 0.02 0.19 0.22 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 36.2 36.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 36.3 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.30 6.30 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.38 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.97 7.97 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 8.30 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.79 0.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.80 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.97 0.97 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.01 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.16 0.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.17 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 1201 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 21 / 49

3.11. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.56 0.47 4.41 6.48 0.01 0.18 — 0.18 0.17 — 0.17 — 991 991 0.04 0.01 — 995 Paving 0.24 0.24 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.02 0.02 0.16 0.23 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 35.3 35.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 35.4 Paving 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.85 5.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.87 Paving < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 1202 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 22 / 49
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 158 158 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 160 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.80 5.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.88 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.96 0.96 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.97 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.13. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.15 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134

Page 1203 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 23 / 49
Architect 1.07 1.07 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
ural
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.15 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coating
s

1.07 1.07 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.01 0.01 0.05 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.32 7.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.34 Architect
ural
Coating
s

0.06 0.06 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.21 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.22 Architect
ural
Coating
s

0.01 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 1204 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 24 / 49
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.42 1.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.44 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.26 1.26 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.28 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.07 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)

Page 1205 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 25 / 49
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps

5.31 4.87 5.52 51.5 0.12 0.09 9.82 9.92 0.09 2.49 2.58 — 12,037 12,037 0.38 0.49 45.1 12,238 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 5.31 4.87 5.52 51.5 0.12 0.09 9.82 9.92 0.09 2.49 2.58 — 12,037 12,037 0.38 0.49 45.1 12,238 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps

4.73 4.29 5.97 38.9 0.11 0.09 9.82 9.92 0.09 2.49 2.58 — 10,970 10,970 0.39 0.51 1.17 11,133 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 4.73 4.29 5.97 38.9 0.11 0.09 9.82 9.92 0.09 2.49 2.58 — 10,970 10,970 0.39 0.51 1.17 11,133 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps

0.86 0.78 1.12 7.71 0.02 0.02 1.78 1.79 0.02 0.45 0.47 — 1,856 1,856 0.06 0.09 3.22 1,886 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.86 0.78 1.12 7.71 0.02 0.02 1.78 1.79 0.02 0.45 0.47 — 1,856 1,856 0.06 0.09 3.22 1,886

4.2. Energy

Page 1206 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 26 / 49

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — 48.0 48.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 48.2 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 42.8 42.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 43.0 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 90.7 90.7 0.01 < 0.005 — 91.3 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — 48.0 48.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 48.2 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 42.8 42.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 43.0 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 90.7 90.7 0.01 < 0.005 — 91.3 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — 7.94 7.94 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.99 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 7.08 7.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.12 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 15.0 15.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 15.1

Page 1207 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 27 / 49

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 8.42 8.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.44 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 8.42 8.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.44 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 8.42 8.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.44 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 8.42 8.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.44 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.39 1.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.40 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.39 1.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.40

Page 1208 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 28 / 49

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s

0.04 0.04 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s

0.01 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent

0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.28 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.28 Total 0.06 0.05 < 0.005 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.28 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.28 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Product
s

0.04 0.04 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s

0.01 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 0.04 0.04 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 1209 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 29 / 49
Consum 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
er
Product
Architect
ural
Coating
s
< 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02 Total 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.12 0.35 0.47 0.01 < 0.005 — 0.86 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.16 0.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.16 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.12 0.51 0.63 0.01 < 0.005 — 1.02 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 1210 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 30 / 49
Conveni — — — — — — — — — — — 0.12 0.35 0.47 0.01 < 0.005 — 0.86 ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.16 0.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.16 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.12 0.51 0.63 0.01 < 0.005 — 1.02 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.06 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.14 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.03 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.08 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.17

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79

Page 1211 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 31 / 49
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.02 0.00 — 0.79
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.02 0.00 — 0.79

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 323 323

Page 1212 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 32 / 49
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 323 323
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 323 323
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 323 323
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Conveni
ence
Market
with Gas
Pumps
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 53.4 53.4
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 53.4 53.4

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 1213 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 33 / 49
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 1214 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 34 / 49
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 1215 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 35 / 49
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Page 1216 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 36 / 49
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 11/11/2025 11/17/2025 5.00 5.00 — Site Preparation Site Preparation 11/18/2025 11/26/2025 5.00 7.00 — Grading Grading 11/27/2025 11/28/2025 5.00 2.00 —
Building Construction Building Construction 11/29/2025 3/3/2026 5.00 67.0 — Paving Paving 3/4/2026 3/20/2026 5.00 13.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 3/21/2026 4/17/2026 5.00 20.0 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

Page 1217 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 37 / 49
Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 2.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 10.0 0.56
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

Page 1218 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 38 / 49
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 12.5 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 119 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 7.50 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 6.29 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 10.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 31.0 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 0.50 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 0.26 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 12.5 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 0.10 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2

Page 1219 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 39 / 49
Architectural Coating Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 2,334 778 3,066

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (Cubic
Yards)
Material Exported (Cubic
Yards)
Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Ton of
Debris)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,384 —
Site Preparation 0.00 351 1.88 0.00 —
Grading 0.00 492 4.00 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.17

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 0.00 0%

Page 1220 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 40 / 49
Parking Lot 1.17 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 349 0.03 < 0.005
2026 0.00 346 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
826 843 826 302,351 13,918 13,919 13,918 5,080,080
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 2,334 778 3,066

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

Page 1221 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 41 / 49
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps
50,223 349 0.0330 0.0040 26,265
Parking Lot 44,767 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 62,743 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 39,628

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 2.54 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

Page 1222 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 42 / 49

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
Supermarket
refrigeration and
condensing units
R-404A 3,922 26.5 16.5 16.5 18.0

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor

5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

Page 1223 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 43 / 49

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 32.9 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 0.65 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.41 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters

Page 1224 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 44 / 49
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 4 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought 0 0 0 N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 4 1 1 4
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought 1 1 1 2
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A

Page 1225 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 45 / 49
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 93.6
AQ-PM 0.92
AQ-DPM 2.80
Drinking Water 50.3
Lead Risk Housing 35.9
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 3.78
Traffic 11.0
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 4.42
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 39.8
Impaired Water Bodies 0.00
Solid Waste 39.0
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 61.8

Page 1226 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 46 / 49
Cardio-vascular 95.6
Low Birth Weights 63.3
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 26.4
Housing 57.4
Linguistic 7.38
Poverty 56.1
Unemployment 59.4

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 33.01680996
Employed 22.3662261
Median HI 26.52380341
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 23.67509303
High school enrollment 14.38470422
Preschool enrollment 8.507635057
Transportation —
Auto Access 60.64416784
Active commuting 29.26985756
Social —
2-parent households 28.19196715
Voting 69.12613884
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 82.54844091

Page 1227 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 47 / 49
Park access 10.6249198
Retail density 13.01167715
Supermarket access 27.64018991
Tree canopy 0.384960862
Housing —
Homeownership 61.36276145
Housing habitability 67.11151033
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 37.71333248 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 53.27858334
Uncrowded housing 88.2586937
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 30.60438855
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 34.7
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 5.2
Cognitively Disabled 15.9
Physically Disabled 28.8
Heart Attack ER Admissions 5.9
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 41.8

Page 1228 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 48 / 49
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 44.4
Elderly 28.7
English Speaking 74.7
Foreign-born 3.4
Outdoor Workers 28.1
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 93.6
Traffic Density 39.1
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 52.0
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 68.7

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 28.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 25.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No

Page 1229 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Detailed Report, 12/16/2024 49 / 49
Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) Yes Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use default building square feet updated to 1,556 sq. feet to be consistent with Traffic Scoping Plan (November 2024). Landscape estimates based on January 2024 site plan Operations: Vehicle Data default trip rate changed to be consistent with Traffic Scoping Plan. 826 daily trips ÷ 6 pumps = 137.6667. default Weekday Primary Trip % changed to 100 percent because Traffic Scoping Plan daily trips already takes into account pass-by trips.

Construction: Construction Phases default construction schedule was modified to be consistent with project specific construction schedule.

Construction: Dust From Material Movement default values changed to be consistent with project specific data construction data.

Construction: Architectural Coatings —

Page 1230 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 1 / 39
Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2010) - Unmitigated

3.3. Site Preparation (2010) - Unmitigated

3.5. Grading (2010) - Unmitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2010) - Unmitigated

3.9. Paving (2010) - Unmitigated

Page 1231 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 2 / 39

3.11. Architectural Coating (2010) - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

Page 1232 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 3 / 39

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

Page 1233 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 4 / 39

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

Page 1234 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 5 / 39

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

Page 1235 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 6 / 39

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data

Page 1236 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 7 / 39

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Construction Start Date 1/4/2010
Operational Year 2010
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 3.60
Precipitation (days) 14.4
Location 58501 29 Palms Hwy, Yucca Valley, CA 92284, USA County San Bernardino-Mojave Desert
City Yucca Valley
Air District Mojave Desert AQMD
Air Basin Mojave Desert
TAZ 5142
EDFZ 10
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.30

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description

Page 1237 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 8 / 39
Convenience 6.00 Pump 0.02 1,556 0.00 0.00 — —
Market with Gas
Pumps
Parking Lot 51.1 1000sqft 1.17 0.00 1,790 0.00 — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Unmit. — 1,819 1,819 0.07 0.03 0.98 1,825
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Unmit. — 11,294 11,294 0.34 1.37 0.49 11,713
Average Daily (Max) — — — — — — —
Unmit. — 616 616 0.02 0.03 0.16 625
Annual (Max) — — — — — — —
Unmit. — 102 102 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 103
Exceeds (Daily Max) — — — — — — —
Threshold — — — — — — —
Unmit. — — — — — — —
Exceeds (Average
Daily)
— — — — — — —
Threshold — — — — — — —
Unmit. — — — — — — —
Exceeds (Annual) — — — — — — —
Threshold — — — — — — —

Page 1238 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 9 / 39
Unmit. — — — — — — Yes

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily - Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
2010 — 1,819 1,819 0.07 0.03 0.98 1,825
Daily - Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
2010 — 11,294 11,294 0.34 1.37 0.49 11,713
Average Daily — — — — — — —
2010 — 616 616 0.02 0.03 0.16 625
Annual — — — — — — —
2010 — 102 102 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 103

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.49 14,599 14,601 1.30 0.94 385 15,300
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.49 13,180 13,181 1.32 1.01 324 13,838
Average Daily (Max) — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.49 13,508 13,510 1.34 1.03 350 14,201
Annual (Max) — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.25 2,236 2,237 0.22 0.17 57.9 2,351
Exceeds (Daily Max) — — — — — — —
Threshold — — — — — — —
Unmit. — — — — — — —

Page 1239 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 10 / 39
Exceeds (Average
Daily)
— — — — — — —
Threshold — — — — — — —
Unmit. — — — — — — —
Exceeds (Annual) — — — — — — —
Threshold — — — — — — 90,718
Unmit. — — — — — — No

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Mobile — 14,452 14,452 1.14 0.94 62.4 14,824
Area — 0.28 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.28
Energy — 147 147 0.01 < 0.005 — 147
Water 0.12 0.77 0.89 0.01 < 0.005 — 1.29
Waste 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79
Refrig. — — — — — 323 323
Total 1.49 14,599 14,601 1.30 0.94 385 15,300
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Mobile — 13,032 13,032 1.16 1.01 1.62 13,362
Area — — — — — — —
Energy — 147 147 0.01 < 0.005 — 147
Water 0.12 0.77 0.89 0.01 < 0.005 — 1.29
Waste 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79
Refrig. — — — — — 323 323
Total 1.49 13,180 13,181 1.32 1.01 324 13,838
Average Daily — — — — — — —

Page 1240 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 11 / 39
Mobile — 13,361 13,361 1.18 1.03 26.9 13,725
Area — 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.14
Energy — 147 147 0.01 < 0.005 — 147
Water 0.12 0.77 0.89 0.01 < 0.005 — 1.29
Waste 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79
Refrig. — — — — — 323 323
Total 1.49 13,508 13,510 1.34 1.03 350 14,201
Annual — — — — — — —
Mobile — 2,212 2,212 0.20 0.17 4.46 2,272
Area — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02
Energy — 24.3 24.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 24.4
Water 0.02 0.13 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.21
Waste 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.02 0.00 — 0.79
Refrig. — — — — — 53.4 53.4
Total 0.25 2,236 2,237 0.22 0.17 57.9 2,351

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2010) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,482 2,482 0.10 0.02 — 2,490
Demolition — — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — — —

Page 1241 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 12 / 39
Off-Road Equipment — 34.0 34.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 34.1
Demolition — — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 5.63 5.63 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.65
Demolition — — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Worker — 204 204 0.02 0.02 0.03 210
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 8,608 8,608 0.22 1.34 0.46 9,013
Average Daily — — — — — — —
Worker — 2.89 2.89 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 2.97
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 118 118 < 0.005 0.02 0.11 124
Annual — — — — — — —
Worker — 0.48 0.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.49
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 19.5 19.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 20.5

3.3. Site Preparation (2010) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —

Page 1242 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 13 / 39
Off-Road Equipment— 2,051 2,051 0.08 0.02— 2,058
Dust From Material
Movement
———————
Onsite truck— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily———————
Off-Road Equipment— 39.3 39.3 < 0.005 < 0.005— 39.5
Dust From Material
Movement
———————
Onsite truck— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual———————
Off-Road Equipment— 6.51 6.51 < 0.005 < 0.005— 6.54
Dust From Material
Movement
———————
Onsite truck— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite———————
Daily, Summer (Max)———————
Daily, Winter (Max)———————
Worker— 123 123 0.01 0.01 0.02 126
Vendor— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling— 454 454 0.01 0.07 0.02 475
Average Daily———————
Worker— 2.43 2.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.50
Vendor— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling— 8.71 8.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 9.13
Annual———————
Worker— 0.40 0.40 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.41
Vendor— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling— 1.44 1.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.51

Page 1243 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 14 / 39

3.5. Grading (2010) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2,440 2,440 0.10 0.02 — 2,448
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 13.4 13.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.4
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 2.21 2.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.22
Dust From Material
Movement
— — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Worker — 163 163 0.02 0.01 0.02 168
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 2,239 2,239 0.06 0.35 0.12 2,344
Average Daily — — — — — — —
Worker — 0.92 0.92 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.95
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Page 1244 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 15 / 39
Hauling — 12.3 12.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 12.9
Annual — — — — — — —
Worker — 0.15 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 2.03 2.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.13

3.7. Building Construction (2010) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 1,801 1,801 0.07 0.01 — 1,807
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 1,801 1,801 0.07 0.01 — 1,807
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 331 331 0.01 < 0.005 — 332
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 54.7 54.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 54.9
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Worker — 9.27 9.27 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 9.53
Vendor — 8.58 8.58 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 8.96
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —

Page 1245 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 16 / 39
Worker — 8.14 8.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 8.36
Vendor — 8.56 8.56 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 8.92
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — — —
Worker — 1.54 1.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.59
Vendor — 1.57 1.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.64
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — —
Worker — 0.26 0.26 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.26
Vendor — 0.26 0.26 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.27
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Paving (2010) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 993 993 0.04 0.01 — 996
Paving — — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 35.4 35.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 35.5
Paving — — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 5.85 5.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.87
Paving — — — — — — —

Page 1246 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 17 / 39
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Worker — 233 233 0.02 0.02 0.98 239
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — — —
Worker — 7.51 7.51 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 7.72
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — —
Worker — 1.24 1.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.28
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.11. Architectural Coating (2010) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Onsite — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134
Architectural Coatings — — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 7.32 7.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.34
Architectural Coatings — — — — — — —

Page 1247 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 18 / 39
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — —
Off-Road Equipment — 1.21 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.22
Architectural Coatings — — — — — — —
Onsite truck — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Offsite — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Worker — 1.85 1.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 1.91
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — — —
Worker — 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — —
Worker — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02
Vendor — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —

Page 1248 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 19 / 39
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
— 14,452 14,452 1.14 0.94 62.4 14,824
Parking Lot — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 14,452 14,452 1.14 0.94 62.4 14,824
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
— 13,032 13,032 1.16 1.01 1.62 13,362
Parking Lot — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 13,032 13,032 1.16 1.01 1.62 13,362
Annual — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
— 2,212 2,212 0.20 0.17 4.46 2,272
Parking Lot — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total — 2,212 2,212 0.20 0.17 4.46 2,272

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
— 73.2 73.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 73.5
Parking Lot — 65.2 65.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 65.5
Total — 138 138 0.01 < 0.005 — 139
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
— 73.2 73.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 73.5
Parking Lot — 65.2 65.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 65.5
Total — 138 138 0.01 < 0.005 — 139

Page 1249 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 20 / 39
Annual — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
— 12.1 12.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.2
Parking Lot — 10.8 10.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.8
Total — 22.9 22.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 23.0

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
— 8.42 8.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.44
Parking Lot — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — 8.42 8.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.44
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
— 8.42 8.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.44
Parking Lot — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — 8.42 8.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.44
Annual — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
— 1.39 1.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.40
Parking Lot — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — 1.39 1.39 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.40

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e

Page 1250 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 21 / 39
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Consumer Products — — — — — — —
Architectural Coatings — — — — — — —
Landscape Equipment — 0.28 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.28
Total — 0.28 0.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.28
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Consumer Products — — — — — — —
Architectural Coatings — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — —
Consumer Products — — — — — — —
Architectural Coatings — — — — — — —
Landscape Equipment — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02
Total — 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps

0.12 0.53 0.65 0.01 < 0.005 — 1.04
Parking Lot 0.00 0.24 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.25
Total 0.12 0.77 0.89 0.01 < 0.005 — 1.29
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps

0.12 0.53 0.65 0.01 < 0.005 — 1.04
Parking Lot 0.00 0.24 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.25

Page 1251 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 22 / 39
Total 0.12 0.77 0.89 0.01 < 0.005 — 1.29
Annual — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps

0.02 0.09 0.11 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.17
Parking Lot 0.00 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.04
Total 0.02 0.13 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.21

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps

1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps

1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.14 0.00 — 4.79
Annual — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps

0.23 0.00 0.23 0.02 0.00 — 0.79
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total 0.23 0.00 0.23 0.02 0.00 — 0.79

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

Page 1252 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 23 / 39

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
— — — — — 323 323
Total — — — — — 323 323
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
— — — — — 323 323
Total — — — — — 323 323
Annual — — — — — — —
Convenience Market
with Gas Pumps
— — — — — 53.4 53.4
Total — — — — — 53.4 53.4

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

Page 1253 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 24 / 39

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

Page 1254 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 25 / 39
Total — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer (Max) — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter (Max) — — — — — — —

Page 1255 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 26 / 39
Avoided — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 1/4/2010 1/8/2010 5.00 5.00 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/11/2010 1/19/2010 5.00 7.00 — Grading Grading 1/20/2010 1/21/2010 5.00 2.00 —
Building Construction Building Construction 1/22/2010 4/26/2010 5.00 67.0 — Paving Paving 4/27/2010 5/13/2010 5.00 13.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 5/14/2010 6/10/2010 5.00 20.0 —

Page 1256 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 27 / 39

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 2.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 10.0 0.56
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48

Page 1257 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 28 / 39

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 12.5 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 119 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 7.50 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 6.29 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 10.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 31.0 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 0.50 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 0.26 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 12.5 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT

Page 1258 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 29 / 39
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 0.10 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

Page 1259 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 30 / 39

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 0.00 0%
Parking Lot 1.17 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2010 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
774 774 774 282,510 13,042 13,042 13,042 4,760,186
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

Page 1260 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 31 / 39

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps
50,223 532 0.0330 0.0040 26,265
Parking Lot 44,767 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 62,743 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 39,628

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 2.54 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —

Page 1261 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 32 / 39

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor

5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type

5.18. Vegetation

Page 1262 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 33 / 39

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

Page 1263 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 34 / 39
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Page 1264 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 35 / 39
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation N/A N/A N/A N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Page 1265 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 36 / 39
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 61.8
Cardio-vascular 95.6
Low Birth Weights 63.3
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 26.4
Housing 57.4
Linguistic 7.38
Poverty 56.1
Unemployment 59.4

Page 1266 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 37 / 39
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 82.54844091
Park access 10.6249198
Retail density 13.01167715
Supermarket access 27.64018991
Tree canopy 0.384960862
Housing —
Homeownership 61.36276145
Housing habitability 67.11151033
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 37.71333248 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 53.27858334
Uncrowded housing 88.2586937
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 30.60438855
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 34.7
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 5.2
Cognitively Disabled 15.9
Physically Disabled 28.8
Heart Attack ER Admissions 5.9
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0

Page 1267 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 38 / 39
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 41.8
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 44.4
Elderly 28.7
English Speaking 74.7
Foreign-born 3.4
Outdoor Workers 28.1
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 93.6
Traffic Density 39.1
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 52.0
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 68.7

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 28.0

Page 1268 of 2762 ends

Walmart Fuel Operations-Yucca Valley Original Detailed Report, 8/27/2025 39 / 39
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 25.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) Yes Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use default building square feet updated to 1,556 sq. feet to be consistent with Traffic Scoping Plan (November 2024). Landscape estimates based on January 2024 site plan Operations: Vehicle Data default trip rate changed to be consistent with Original EIR. 774 daily trips ÷ 6 pumps = 129. default Weekday Primary Trip % changed to 100 percent
Construction: Construction Phases default construction schedule was modified to be consistent with project specific construction schedule.

Construction: Dust From Material Movement default values changed to be consistent with project specific data construction data.

Construction: Architectural Coatings —

Page 1269 of 2762 ends

APPENDIX B, HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT MEMORANDUM

Page 1270 of 2762 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 1271 of 2762 ends

Page 1 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868

MEMORANDUM
To: Town of Yucca Valley Planning Division
From: Alex Pohlman, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Date: August 27, 2025
Subject: Yucca Valley Walmart Fuel Station – Health Risk Assessment

1.0 Purpose
This comparative Health Risk Assessment (HRA) has been undertaken to analyze whether the proposed Yucca Valley Walmart Fuel Station Project (Project) would result in any new or substantially more severe significant health risks associated with Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) as compared to the conclusions discussed in the certified Yucca Valley Retail Specific Plan (Original Project) Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) that was certified on June 25, 2008. This technical memorandum evaluates the proposed updates associated with the Project, (described below) pursuant to Public Resources Code, Section 21166 or State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. This HRA was prepared in accordance with the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Air Toxics Program Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Health Risk Assessments (February 2015).

2.0 Project Description
Original Project
The Final EIR for the Original Project analyzed the development of a commercial retail center on approximately 25.51 acres located on the southeast corner of Twentynine Palms Highway (SR-62) and Avalon Avenue. The EIR analysis for the Original Project included a 229,000-square foot Walmart Supercenter, a fuel station, a 4,000-square foot fast-food restaurant with drive-through, and a detention basin. However, the Specific Plan, approved on August 14, 2008, did not include the fuel station as a permitted use and the area designated in the EIR for the fuel station and a 4,000-square foot fast-food restaurant with drive-through was ultimately developed with two smaller fast-food restaurants instead.

Proposed Project
The proposed Project involves the development of a fuel station similar to the one previously analyzed in the Final EIR, although in a different location. The fuel station would be located in the northeastern portion of the existing parking lot, south of the detention basin and SR-62, see Exhibit 1: Local Vicinity Map and Exhibit 2: Conceptual Site Plan.

Page 1272 of 2762 ends

Maxar, Microsoft
Not to Scale
EXHIBIT 1:

Yucca Valley Fuel Sta�on Project
Local Vicinity Map
Source: ArcGIS Pro

PROJECT
SITE
29 Palms Highway
Avalon Avenue
Paxton Outerhighway

WALMART

Page 1273 of 2762 ends

WALMART FUEL STATION - STORE #1915
58501 TWENTYNINE PALMS HIGHWAY, YUCCA VALLEY, CA 92284
Not to Scale
EXHIBIT 2:

Yucca Valley Walmart Fuel Sta�on Project
Conceptual Site Plan
Source: Kimley-Horn Traffic Scoping Agreement

Page 1274 of 2762 ends

Page 4 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868

3.0 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Federal Clean Air Act
The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) was amended in 1990 to address the numerous air pollutants that are known to cause or may reasonably be anticipated to cause adverse effects to human health or adverse environmental effects. 188 specific pollutants and chemical groups were initially identified as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), and the list has been modified over time. The FCAA Amendments included new regulatory programs to control acid deposition and for the issuance of stationary source operating permits.

In 2001, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) issued its first Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule, which identified 21 mobile source air toxic (MSAT) compounds as being HAPs that required regulation. A subset of six of these MSAT compounds were identified as having the greatest influence on health and included benzene, 1,3‐butadiene, formaldehyde, acrolein, acetaldehyde, and diesel particulate matter (DPM). More recently, the U.S. EPA issued a second MSAT Rule in February 2007, which generally supported the findings in the first rule and provided additional recommendations of compounds having the greatest impact on health. The rule also identified several engine emission certification standards that must be implemented. Unlike the criteria pollutants, toxics do not have National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) making evaluation of their impacts more subjective.

National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) were incorporated into a greatly expanded program for controlling toxic air pollutants. The provisions for NAAQS attainment and maintenance were substantially modified and expanded. Other revisions included provisions regarding stratospheric ozone protection, increased enforcement authority, and expanded research programs.

FCAA Amendments Section 112 governs the federal control program for HAPs. NESHAPs are issued to limit the release of specified HAPs from specific industrial sectors. These standards are technology‐based, meaning that they represent the best available control technology an industrial sector could afford. The level of emissions controls required by NESHAPs are not based on health risk considerations because allowable releases and resulting concentrations have not been determined to be safe for the general public. The FCAA does not establish air quality standards for HAPs that define legally acceptable concentrations of these pollutants in ambient air.

Federal Emissions Standards for On-Road Trucks
To reduce emissions from on-road, heavy-duty diesel trucks, the U.S. EPA established a series of increasingly strict emission standards for new engines, starting in 1988. The U.S. EPA promulgated

Page 1275 of 2762 ends

Page 5 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 the final and cleanest standards with the 2007 Heavy-Duty Highway Rule.1 The particulate matter (PM) emission standard of 0.01 gram per horsepower-hour (g/hp-hr) is required for new vehicles beginning with model year 2007. Also, the oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and nonmethane hydrocarbon (NMHC) standards of 0.20 g/hp-hr and 0.14 g/hp-hr, respectively, were phased in together between 2007 and 2010 on a percent of sales basis: 50 percent from 2007 to 2009 and 100 percent in 2010.

In December 2022, the U.S. EPA final rule set new, more stringent standards to reduce NOX pollution from heavy-duty vehicles and engines starting in model year 2027. The rule will reduce NOX emissions from heavy-duty trucks by almost 50 percent by 2045, producing significant healthrelated benefits.2 Emission Standards for Off-Road Diesel Engines
To reduce emissions from off-road diesel equipment, the U.S. EPA established a series of cleaner emission standards for new off-road diesel engines. Tier 1 standards were phased in from 1996 to 2000 (year of manufacture), depending on the engine horsepower category. Tier 2 standards were phased in from 2001 to 2006. Tier 3 standards were phased in from 2006 to 2008. Tier 4 standards, which generally require add-on emission control equipment to attain them, were phased in from 2008 to 2015. The Tier 4 standards require that emissions of PM and NOX be further reduced by about 90 percent from Tier 3 standards.

State of California
California Air Resources Board
CARB’s statewide comprehensive air toxics program was established in 1983 with AB 1807 the Toxic Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act (Tanner Air Toxics Act of 1983). AB 1807 created California's program to reduce exposure to air toxics and sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. Once a TAC is identified, CARB adopts an airborne toxics control measure (ATCM) for sources that emit designated TACs. If there is a safe threshold for a substance at which there is no toxic effect, the control measure must reduce exposure to below that threshold.

If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate toxics best available control technology (T‐BACT) to minimize emissions.

CARB also administers the state’s mobile source emissions control program and oversees air quality programs established by state statute, such as AB 2588. Under AB 2588, TAC emissions from individual facilities are quantified and prioritized by the air quality management district or air pollution control district. High priority facilities are required to perform a health risk assessment and, if specific thresholds are exceeded, required to communicate the results to the public in the form of 1 California Air Resources Board, Overview: Diesel Exhaust & Health, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaustand-health, accessed November 2024. 2 United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements, Final Rule. 40 Code of Federal Regulations, s 2, 59, 60, 80, 85, 86, 600, 1027, 1030, 1031, 1033, 1036, 1037, 1039, 1042, 1043, 1045, 1048, 1051, 1054, 1060, 1065, 1066, 1068, and 1090. January 24, 2023.

Page 1276 of 2762 ends

Page 6 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 notices and public meetings. In September 1992, the AB 2588 was amended by Senate Bill (SB) 1731 which required facilities that pose a significant health risk to the community to reduce their risk through a risk management plan.

Emission Standards for Off-Road Diesel Engines
To reduce emissions from off-road diesel equipment, the U.S. EPA established a series of cleaner emission standards for new off-road diesel engines. CARB is currently developing potential amendments to the off-road diesel engine standards, in a Tier 5 rulemaking. The Tier 5 rulemaking aims to reduce NOX and PM emissions from new, off-road compression-ignition (CI) engines, by an additional 50 percent to 90 percent, compared to what is allowed by today’s Tier 4 final emission standards.

Diesel Risk Reduction Plan
The identification of DPM as a TAC in 1998 led CARB to adopt the Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel‐Fueled Engines and Vehicles (DRRP) in October 2000. The DRRP's goals include an 85 percent reduction in DPM by 2020 from the 2000 baseline.3 CARB estimates that emissions of DPM in 2035 will be less than half those in 2010, further reducing statewide cancer risk and non-cancer health effects.
4 The DRRP includes regulations for cleaner
new diesel engines, cleaner in‐use diesel engines (retrofits), and cleaner diesel fuel.

Truck and Bus Regulation Reducing Emissions from Existing Diesel Vehicles On December 12, 2008, CARB approved the Truck and Bus Regulation to significantly reduce PM and NOX emissions from existing diesel vehicles operating in California. The regulation requires diesel trucks and buses that operate in California to be upgraded to reduce emissions. Heavier trucks were required to be retrofitted with PM filters beginning January 1, 2012, and older trucks were required to be replaced starting January 1, 2015. Effective January 1, 2023, nearly all trucks and buses are required to have 2010 model year engines or equivalent.

The regulation applies to most privately and federally‐owned diesel fueled trucks and buses and to privately and publicly owned school buses with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 14,000 pounds. Small fleets with three or fewer diesel trucks can delay compliance for heavier trucks and there are several extensions for low‐mileage construction trucks, early PM filter retrofits, adding cleaner vehicles, and other situations. Privately and publicly owned school buses have different requirements.
3 California Air Resources Board, Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel‐Fueled Engines and Vehicles, October 2000.
4 California Air Resources Board, Overview: Diesel Exhaust & Health, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaustand-health, accessed November 2024.

Page 1277 of 2762 ends

Page 7 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 Heavy‐Duty Vehicle Idling Emission Reduction Program
The purpose of the CARB ATCM to Limit Diesel‐Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling is to reduce public exposure to DPM and criteria pollutants by limiting the idling of diesel‐fueled commercial vehicles including transportation refrigeration units (TRUs). The driver of any vehicle subject to this ATCM is prohibited from idling the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than five minutes at any location and is prohibited from idling a diesel‐fueled auxiliary power system (APS) for more than five minutes to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on the vehicle if it has a sleeper berth and the truck is located within 100 feet of a restricted area (homes and schools). On February 24, 2022, CARB approved amendments to the TRU ATCM (2022 Amendments) to achieve additional emission and health risk reductions from diesel-powered TRUs and increase the use of zero emission technology in the off-road sector. The 2022 Amendments will help meet the State’s multiple risk reduction, air quality, and climate goals, as well as the directive of Executive Order N29-20, which set a goal for 100 percent zero-emission off-road vehicles and equipment in the State by 2035.

CARB Final Regulation Order, Requirements to Reduce Idling Emissions from New and In‐Use Trucks, beginning in 2008, requires that new 2008 and subsequent model‐year heavy‐duty diesel engines be equipped with an engine shutdown system that automatically shuts down the engine after 300 seconds of continuous idling operation once the vehicle is stopped, the transmission is set to “neutral” or “park”, and the parking brake is engaged.

Section 2485 and Section 2449 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations limits diesel‐fueled motor vehicle and off-road idling to no more than five minutes. Section 2485 limits idling for dieselfueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicle weight ratings of greater than 10,000 pounds that are or must be licensed to operate on publicly maintained highways and streets within California. Section 2449 limits idling for off-road diesel-fueled fleets.

California Energy Commission – Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards The Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, as specified in California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 Part 6, were 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. The 2022 Energy Standards include requirements for mandatory mechanical ventilation intended to improve indoor air quality in homes, and requirements for Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) 13 air filtration on space conditioning systems, and ventilation systems that provide outside air to a dwelling’s occupiable space. The Residential Compliance Manual for the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards notes that air filter efficiencies of at least MERV 13 protect occupants from exposure to the smaller airborne particles (i.e., PM2.5) that are known to adversely affect respiratory health. CCR Title 24 Part 6 requires a particle size efficiency rating equal to or greater than 50 percent in the 0.30 to 1.00 µm range and 85 percent in the 1.0 to

3.0 µm range.

Page 1278 of 2762 ends

Page 8 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 CalEnviroScreen
OEHHA developed CalEnviroScreen 4.0, which is a mapping tool that helps identify California communities that are most affected by many sources of pollution, and where people are often especially vulnerable to pollution’s effects. CalEnviroScreen uses environmental, health, and socioeconomic information to produce scores for every census tract in the State. The scores are mapped so that different communities can be compared. An area with a high score is one that experiences a much higher pollution burden than areas with low scores. According to CalEnviroScreen, the Project Site is located within Census Tract 6071010412, which is within the 28nd overall percentile while the nearest sensitive receptors are located in Census Tract 6071010411 to the north and is within the 46th overall percentile.5 It should be noted that the CalEnviroScreen scores are relative to other census tracts and are not an expression of health risk, and do not provide quantitative information on increases in cumulative impacts for specific sites or projects. Further, as a comparative screening tool, the results do not provide a basis for determining when differences between scores are significant in relation to public health or the environment.

CARB Advanced Clean Truck Regulation
CARB adopted the Advanced Clean Truck Regulation in June 2020 requiring truck manufacturers to transition from diesel trucks and vans to electric zero-emission trucks beginning in 2024. By 2045, every new truck sold in California is required to be zero-emission. This rule directly addresses disproportionate risks and health and pollution burdens and puts California on the path for an all zero-emission short-haul drayage fleet in ports and railyards by 2035, and zero-emission “last-mile” delivery trucks and vans by 2040. The Advanced Clean Truck Regulation accelerates the transition of zero-emission medium-and heavy-duty vehicles from Class 2b to Class 8. The regulation has two components including a manufacturer sales requirement, and a reporting requirement:
• Zero-Emission Truck Sales: Manufacturers who certify Class 2b through 8 chassis or complete vehicles with combustion engines are required to sell zero-emission trucks as an increasing percentage of their annual California sales from 2024 to 2035. By 2035, zeroemission truck/chassis sales need to be 55 percent of Class 2b – 3 truck sales, 75 percent of Class 4 – 8 straight truck sales, and 40 percent of truck tractor sales. • Company and Fleet Reporting: Large employers including retailers, manufacturers, brokers and others are required to report information about shipments and shuttle services. Fleet owners, with 50 or more trucks, are required to report about their existing fleet operations.

This information helps to identify future strategies to ensure that fleets purchase available zero-emission trucks and place them in service where suitable to meet their needs. 5 OEHHA, CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Results (2022 Update), https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen-40, accessed December 2024.

Page 1279 of 2762 ends

Page 9 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 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, mediumand 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 (CalGEM), and the California Natural Resources Agency to 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.

CARB Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation
CARB approved Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation (ACF) on April 28, 2023, requiring fleet owners to begin transitioning toward ZEVs starting in 2024. Due to the impact that truck traffic has on residents living near heavily trafficked corridors, drayage trucks will need to be zero-emissions by 2035. All other fleet owners have the option to transition a percentage of their vehicles to meet expected zeroemission milestones, which gives owners the flexibility to continue operating combustion-powered vehicles as needed during the move toward cleaner technology.

Gasoline Dispensing Facility Vapor Recovery Regulations Since 2001, CARB has adopted a number of significant enhancements to gasoline dispensing facilities' (GDFs') vapor recovery systems. These efforts are necessary to ensure the continued effective operation of the vapor recovery systems during the transfer and dispensing of gasoline at these facilities.

Vapor recovery systems collect gasoline vapors that would otherwise escape into the atmosphere during fuel delivery to the underground storage tanks (Phase I) or fuel storage and vehicle fueling (Phase II). The Enhanced Vapor Recovery (EVR) regulations became state law on April 1, 2001. These regulations provide more stringent requirements for vapor recovery systems in order to reduce gasoline vapor emissions.6
CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook – Gasoline Dispensing Facilities The CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook (2005) recommends avoiding siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of a large gas station (defined as a facility with a throughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater).7 A 50-foot separation is recommended for typical gas dispensing facilities. CARB 6 The project would be required to comply with the State’s Gasoline Dispensing Facility Vapor Recovery Regulations. 7 The proposed Project would have a maximum anticipated throughput of approximately 5.0 million gallons per year.

Page 1280 of 2762 ends

Page 10 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 notes that a typical gasoline dispensing facility in California dispenses under 3.6 million gallons of gasoline per year. The cancer risk for a typical facility is likely to be less than 10 in a million at the fence line under urban air dispersion conditions.

Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidance CARB and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) developed the 2021 Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidance Manual (Technical Guidance) based on health analyses conducted to evaluate the health impacts of emissions from gasoline service stations operating throughout the state. The Technical Guidance provides an update to the CAPCOA Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Program Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Guidelines (1997). The Technical Guidance also provides recommended procedures for preparing gas station emission inventories and HRAs to meet the requirements of individual facilities subject to AB 2588.

Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Supplemental Policy Guidance Document CARB developed the 2022 Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Supplemental Policy Guidance Document (Supplemental Policy Guidance or Guidance) to provide recommendations regarding public policy for gas stations and discuss potential community-scale health impacts caused by gas station emissions. In addition to discussing community-scale health impacts, the Supplemental Policy Guidance provides considerations and recommendations for the siting and permitting of new and modified gas stations. The Guidance also outlines the significant challenges in addressing cumulative impacts from multiple sources of gas stations and other sources.

Regional
Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District
The Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) has jurisdiction over the project site.

The MDAQMD is the air pollution control agency for San Bernardino County’s High Desert and Riverside County’s Palo Verde Valley. It includes nearly 20,000 square miles and a population of more than 500,000; it is the second largest of California’s 35 air districts by area. The MDAQMD has primary responsibility for controlling emissions from stationary sources of air pollution within its jurisdiction. This is accomplished in part by administering air quality programs required by federal and state mandates and enforcing rules and regulations based on air pollution law.

The MDAQMD is responsible for monitoring air quality and for planning, implementing, and enforcing programs designed to attain and maintain NAAQS and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) in their jurisdiction.

The MDAQMD has adopted rules to limit air emissions. Many of these rules were put in place as required measures specified in the various SIPs and air quality attainment plans.

Page 1281 of 2762 ends

Page 11 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868

4.0 Significance Criteria and Methodology
Risk Analysis Thresholds
Project health risks are determined by examining the types and levels of air toxics generated and the associated impacts on factors that affect air quality. The MDAQMD recommends that the following air pollution thresholds be used in determining whether the impacts from the Project are significant.

If the Project has the potential to exceed the air pollution thresholds, the Project should be considered significant. The thresholds for air toxic emissions are as follows. • Excess (Incremental) Cancer Risk: Emit contaminants that result in a maximum individual cancer risk (MICR) that equals or exceeds 10 in one million. • Non‐Cancer Risk: Emit contaminants that equal or exceed the maximum hazard index of 1.0 (project increment).

Cancer risk is expressed in terms of expected incremental incidence per million population. As noted above, the MDAQMD has established an incremental increase rate of less than 10 in one million as the maximum acceptable incremental cancer risk due to TAC exposure. This threshold is an upper-bound incremental probability to determine whether or not a given project has a potentially significant development‐specific and cumulative impact and to ensure an individual new source does not contribute a cumulatively significant impact. The 10 in one million standard is a health‐ protective significance threshold. A risk level of 10 in one million implies a likelihood that up to 10 persons, out of one million equally exposed people would contract cancer if exposed continuously (24 hours per day) to the levels of toxic air contaminants over a specified duration of time. This risk would be an excess cancer risk that is in addition to any cancer risk borne by a person not exposed to these air toxics.

The MDAQMD has also established non‐carcinogenic risk parameters for use in HRAs.

Noncarcinogenic risks are quantified by calculating a "hazard index," expressed as the ratio between the ambient pollutant concentration and its toxicity or Reference Exposure Level (REL). An REL is a concentration at or below which health effects are not likely to occur. A hazard index of less than 1.0 means that adverse health effects are not expected.

Methodology
This HRA evaluates potential health risks associated with potential Project TAC emissions.

Construction equipment and associated heavy-duty truck traffic generate DPM, which is a known TAC. DPM exhaust emissions from construction equipment operating at the site poses a health risk to nearby sensitive receptors. Operational activities would also emit TACs from fueling and the use of heavy-duty diesel trucks.

Construction Sources
Construction would generate DPM emissions from the use of off-road diesel equipment required for demolition, grading and excavation, paving, and other construction activities. For construction

Page 1282 of 2762 ends

Page 12 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 activity, DPM is the primary toxic air contaminant of concern because it is the most potent TAC emitted from construction and includes hundreds of chemicals. Although DPM is a subset of PM10 exhaust, the analysis conservatively assumes all PM10 exhaust emissions are DPM. On-road dieselpowered haul trucks traveling to and from the construction area to deliver materials and equipment were included in the analysis, although they are typically less of a concern because they would not stay on the site for long durations. Diesel exhaust from construction equipment operating at the site potentially poses a health risk to nearby sensitive receptors. The nearest sensitive receptors are the residences located approximately 410 feet to the north, on the opposite side of SR-62.

Health-related risks associated with diesel-exhaust emissions are primarily linked to long-term exposure and the associated risk of contracting cancer. The use of diesel-powered construction equipment would be episodic and would occur throughout the project site. Construction is subject to and would comply with California regulations (e.g., California Code of Regulations, Title 13, §§2485 and 2449), which reduce DPM and criteria pollutant emissions from in-use off-road dieselfueled vehicles and limit the idling of heavy-duty construction equipment to no more than five minutes. Idling limits would further reduce nearby sensitive receptors’ exposure to temporary and variable DPM emissions. Furthermore, even during the most intense period of construction, emissions of DPM would be generated from different locations on the project site rather than in a single location because different types of construction activities (e.g., site preparation and building construction) would not occur at the same place at the same time. Construction emission rates for PM10 (DPM) were calculated from the CalEEMod construction emissions modeling conducted for the project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis. The duration of construction activities are anticipated to occur over an approximately 5-month period and the analysis assumes the earliest feasible start date (i.e., late 2025).8
Operational Sources
CARB estimates that about 70 percent of the cancer risk that the average Californian faces from breathing toxic air pollutants stems from DPM.9 In addition, this HRA also evaluates potential health risks associated with the emission of benzene.

Of the toxic compounds emitted from the gasoline stations, benzene, ethylbenzene, and naphthalene have cancer toxicity values. However, benzene is the TAC which drives the risk, accounting for 87 percent of cancer risk from gasoline vapors and constitutes more than three to four times the weight of gasoline than ethylbenzene and naphthalene, respectively. Therefore, 8 The earliest feasible construction start date has been modeled. Emissions in future years (i.e., due to a later construction start date or operational opening year) would be lower due to phased-in emissions standards, inspection and maintenance requirements, and fleet turnover). Specifically, project construction was modeled to start in 2025. If construction commences at a later date, construction impacts would be less than those analyzed due to the use of more energy-efficient and cleaner burning construction vehicle fleet mix, pursuant to state regulations that require vehicle fleet operators to phase-in less polluting heavy-duty equipment.

For emissions modeling purposes, conservatively analyzing the emissions using the earliest feasible construction start date (i.e., 2025), provides for a worst-case analysis and full disclosure of potential air quality impacts, as required by CEQA. 9 California Air Resources Board, Overview: Diesel Exhaust & Health, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaustand-health, accessed January 2025.

Page 1283 of 2762 ends

Page 13 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 ethylbenzene and naphthalene have not been modeled and are instead considered significant in the case that benzene emissions are significant. Additionally, there are substances emitted from gasoline stations, such as toluene and xylene which possess acute adverse health effects (though not cancer risk). However, it is not until the benzene concentrations are more than two orders of magnitude above the 10 per million cancer risk threshold that the emissions of toluene and xylene begin to cause adverse health effects, according to the CAPCOA Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Guidelines. Therefore, toluene and xylene emissions have not been modeled and are instead considered significant in the case that benzene concentrations are identified at two orders of magnitude above the 10 per million cancer risk threshold.

Fueling Sources
Benzene emissions would occur from the proposed on‐site fuel storage tanks and fuel dispensers.

The specific processes associated with fuel storage tanks and fuel dispensers that emit air toxics include loading, breathing, refueling, and spillage, as described below:
• Loading – Emissions occur when a fuel tanker truck unloads gasoline into the storage tanks.

The storage tank vapors, displaced during loading, are emitted through its vent pipe. A required pressure/vacuum valve installed on the tank vent pipe significantly reduces these emissions.
• Breathing – Emissions occur through the storage tank vent pipe as a result of temperature and pressure changes in the tank vapor space.
• Refueling – Emissions occur during motor vehicle refueling when gasoline vapors escape through the vehicle/nozzle interface.
• Spillage – Emissions occur from evaporating gasoline that spills during vehicle refueling.

Fuel dispensing facility emissions were computed based on the maximum anticipated throughput of fuel (i.e., approximately 5.0 million gallons per year). Emissions of benzene, which is a TAC, were computed using CARB emission factors for fuel dispensing facilities and assuming that benzene makes up 0.46 percent of gasoline vapor.10 Total benzene emissions were calculated at 0.0024 pounds per hour; refer to Appendix A for the details of these calculations. The emission factors conservatively do not reflect control technologies required by any vapor recovery regulations later than 2013 (such as Certification Procedure for Vapor Recovery Systems for Enhanced Conventional [ECO] Nozzles and Low Permeation Conventional Hoses for Use at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities [CP-207], Certification Procedure for Vapor Recovery Systems at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities [CP201]). These emissions factors are currently being updated by CARB.

Mobile Sources
Due to the increased vehicle traffic from the Project, the resulting emissions could also result in pollutant concentrations at existing sensitive receptors. Two daily heavy-duty delivery truck trips 10 CAPCOA, Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidance, January 2022.

Page 1284 of 2762 ends

Page 14 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 were assumed to access the site and serve the fuel station. Emission rates in grams per hour for vehicle idling for PM10 (DPM) was calculated using trip data and CARB 2021 EMission FACtor model version 1.0.2 (EMFAC)11 data for the Mojave Desert portion of San Bernardino County; refer to Appendix A.

The emissions rates were calculated using 2026 emissions factors since project construction would be completed in mid-2026. Truck emissions were conservatively based on the first possible year of operations for a fleet mix of various aged vehicles, as opposed to average emissions over a 30-year window. This approach is conservative as it assumes no cleaner technology in future years. Trucks were assumed to travel at a speed of 55 miles per hour (mph) on SR-62 and 15 mph in the Walmart parking area and on-site at the fueling station.

Dispersion Modeling
The on-site air dispersion modeling for the HRA was performed using the American Meteorological Society (AMS)/U.S. EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD). AERMOD is a steady‐state, multiple‐source, Gaussian dispersion model designed for use with emission sources situated in terrain where ground elevations can exceed the stack heights of the emission sources. AERMOD estimates hourly concentrations for each source/receptor pair and calculates concentrations for user-specified averaging times, including an average concentration for the complete simulation period. AERMOD includes atmospheric dispersion options for both urban and rural environments and can address flat, gently rolling, and complex terrain situations. The parameters used in AERMOD are detailed below.
• Meteorological Data. AERMOD requires hourly meteorological data consisting of wind vector, wind speed, temperature, atmospheric stability class, and mixing height. The latest 5-year meteorological data set from the Palm Springs International Airport Monitoring Station (KPSP), which is outside the MDAQMD area but is the closest station to the Project Site, was obtained from the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).12 Surface and upper air meteorological data from this monitoring station was selected as being the most representative for meteorology based on proximity to the Project Site as well as terrain, surrounding land use and surface characteristics.
• Project Sources. The emissions sources were modeled in AERMOD. The following parameters were used for each source (refer to Appendix A for a depiction of the source and receptor locations):
 Construction emissions sources were modeled as line volume sources (comprised of smaller adjacent volume sources) for on-site construction and off-site haul truck operations. Off-road construction equipment operating on-site were assigned a 11 California Air Resources Board, EMFAC 2021 Web Database, https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/ accessed December 2024. 12 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Health Risk Assessment Tool and AEROD-Ready Meteorological Data Files, https://www.aqmd.gov/assets/aermet/AERMET_files_And_HRA_Tool.html, accessed December 2024.

Page 1285 of 2762 ends

Page 15 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 release height of 12.5 feet (3.82 meters) and a plume height of 25.1 feet (7.6 meters) based on a vehicle height of 14.7 feet (4.5 meters).
13 On-road construction
equipment (hauling materials to and from the Project site) were assigned a release height of 10.3 feet (3.15 meters) and a plume height of 20.6 feet (6.29 meters) based on a vehicle height of 12.1 feet (3.7 meters).
 Operational mobile emission sources were modeled as line volume sources truck operations. Heavy duty vehicle emissions were assigned a release height of 10.3 feet (3.15 meters) and a plume height of 20.6 feet (6.29 meters).  Operational fueling sources were modeled as a combination of volume and point sources.14 Loading and breathing sources were modeled as point sources with a release height of 3.66 meters. Building downwash15 was applied for the loading and breathing sources. Fueling and hose permeation were modeled as volume sources with a release height of 1.5 meters. Spillage was modeled as a volume source with a release height of 1 meter. Fueling sources were assumed to operate 24 hours a day. • Receptor Grid. To identify the maximum impacted receptors, discrete placed on the nearest sensitive receptors and a uniform 20-meter Cartesian grid was placed over other locations within 1,000 feet of proposed Project’s perimeter.
• Terrain Characteristics. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Elevation Dataset (NED) terrain data was imported into AERMOD. AERMOD regulatory defaults, the “Urban” modeling option for the County, and “Elevated” terrain were used for this analysis. • Averaging Times. AERMOD was run to obtain the peak 1‐hour and annual average (period) concentration in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) of PM10 and TOG at receptors (i.e., residents and businesses).

AERMOD was used to estimate (a) annual average concentrations to calculate the Maximum Individual Cancer Risk (MICR), the maximum chronic HI, and the zones of impact, and (b) peak hourly concentrations to calculate the health impact from substances with acute non‐cancer health effects. Note that the concentration estimate developed using this methodology is conservative and is not a specific prediction of the actual concentrations that would occur at the Project Site at any one point in time, which would likely be lower. Actual pollutant concentrations are dependent on many variables, particularly the number and type of vehicles operating at specific distances during time periods of adverse meteorology.

Risk and Hazard Assessment
13 The Haul Road Volume Source Calculator in AERMOD was used to determine the release height and plume height based on the average height of vehicles and equipment modeled.
14 California Air Resources Board, Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidance, February 18, 2022 15 Building downwash is applied to point sources in AERMOD to account for the potential for pollutants to be trapped in a recirculating pattern near buildings

Page 1286 of 2762 ends

Page 16 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 Cancer Risk
Based on the OEHHA methodology, residential inhalation cancer risk from annual average DPM and benzene concentrations are calculated by multiplying the daily inhalation dose, cancer potency factor, age sensitivity factor (ASF), frequency of time spent at home, and exposure duration divided by averaging time, yielding the excess cancer risk. These factors are discussed in more detail below.

Exposure through inhalation (Dose‐air) is a function of breathing rate, exposure frequency, and concentration of substance in the air. To estimate cancer risk, the dose was estimated by applying the following formula to each ground‐level concentration:

Dose-air = Cair*(BR/BW)*A*EF*10-6
Dose-air = dose through inhalation (mg/kg/day)
Cair = air concentration (μg/m3
) from air dispersion model
(BR/BW) = daily breathing rate normalized to body weight (L/kg bodyweight-day) A = inhalation absorption factor (unitless)
EF = exposure frequency (approximately 350 days per year for residential) 10-6 = conversion factor (micrograms to milligrams, liters to cubic meters) OEHHA developed ASFs to consider the increased sensitivity to carcinogens during early‐life exposure. In the absence of chemical‐specific data, OEHHA recommends default ASFs presented in Table 1: Exposure Assumptions. Fraction of time at home (FAH) during the day is used to adjust exposure duration and cancer risk from a specific facility’s emissions, based on the assumption that exposure to the facility’s emissions are not occurring away from home.

Table 1: Exposure Assumptions
Age
Exposure
Frequency
(days/year)1
Exposure
Duration
(years)2
Age
Sensitivity
Factor (ASF) 3
Fraction of
Time at
Home (FAH)4
Daily Breathing
Rate
(L/kg BW-day)5
Residential Exposure
Third trimester 350 0.25 10 85% 361
0 to 2 years 350 2 10 85% 1,090
Ages 2 through 9 years 350 7 3 72% 631
Ages 9 through 16 years 350 7 3 72% 572
Ages 16 and greater 350 13.75 1 73% 261

1. The exposure frequency is based on OEHHA Air Toxics Program Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, February 2015 (OEHHA Manual); refer to OEHHA Manual Section 5.4.1, Estimation of Exposure through Inhalation.

2. The exposure duration is based on the OEHHA Manual) refer to OEHHA Manual Equation 8.2.4 A.

3. The age sensitivity factor is based on OEHHA Manual Table 8.3, Age Sensitivity Factors by Age Group for Cancer Risk Assessment.

4. The fraction of time at home is based on OEHHA Manual Section 8.2.2, Fraction of Time Spent at Home for Cancer Risk Assessment.

5. Daily breathing rate normalized to body weight (L/kg body weight – day) (95th percentile for 3rd trimester to 2 years and 80th percentile for other age groups) per OEHHA Manual Table 5.7, Daily Breathing Rate Distributions by Age Group for Residential Stochastic Analysis (L/kg BW-day).

Source: California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Air Toxics Program Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, February 2015.

Page 1287 of 2762 ends

Page 17 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 To estimate the cancer risk, the dose is multiplied by the cancer potency factor, the ASF, the exposure duration divided by averaging time, and the frequency of time spent at home (for residents only):

Riskinh‐res = (Doseair*CPF*ASF*(ED/AT)*FAH)
Riskinh-res = residential inhalation cancer risk (potential chances per million) Doseair = daily dose through inhalation (mg/kg-day)
CPF = inhalation cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day-1)
ASF = age sensitivity factor for a specified age group (unitless) ED = exposure duration (years)
AT = averaging time of lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Chronic Non-Cancer Risk
Non‐cancer chronic impacts are calculated by dividing the annual average concentration by the REL for that substance. The REL is defined as the concentration at which no adverse non‐cancer health effects are anticipated. The following equation was used to determine the non‐cancer risk:

Hazard Index = Ci/RELi
Ci = concentration in the air of substance i (annual average concentration in μg/m3) RELi = chronic noncancer Reference Exposure Level for substance (μg/m3) Acute Non-Cancer Hazard
The potential for acute non-cancer hazards is evaluated by comparing the maximum short-term exposure level to an acute REL. RELs are designed to protect sensitive individuals within the population. The calculation of acute non-cancer impacts is similar to the procedure for chronic noncancer impacts. The equation is as follows:

Acute HQ = Maximum Hourly Air Concentration (μg/m3) / Acute REL (μg/m3) Health Risk Computation
A health risk computation was performed to determine the risk of developing an excess cancer risk calculated on a 30‐year exposure scenario and the daily breathing rates, age sensitivity factors, exposure duration, and fraction of time at home specified in the OEHHA Air Toxics Program Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Health Risk Assessments (February 2015). Health risks were analyzed at the point of maximum impact and are a conservative estimate. The pollutant concentrations are then used to estimate the long-term cancer health risks to an individual as well as the non-cancer chronic health index.

The off-site impacts would occur from the diesel trucks accessing the proposed Project. The cancer and chronic health risks are based on the annual average concentration of PM10 (used as a proxy for DPM). As noted above, the chronic and carcinogenic health risk calculations are based on the

Page 1288 of 2762 ends

Page 18 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 standardized equations contained in the U.S. EPA Human Health Evaluation Manual (1991) and the OEHHA Guidance Manual (2015).

5.0 Potential Health Risk Impacts
Previous Significance Determination
The Final EIR determined that operational health risk impacts would be less than significant. Typical Sources of carcinogenic and chronically hazardous TACs mostly include DPM from delivery trucks.

The Final EIR reported carcinogenic and chronic health risks for the Original Project based on the distance of sensitive receptors from the Original Project boundary16 and does not separate the emissions from the fueling station. The Final EIR showed that carcinogenic health risk for residences 15 meters (49 feet) from truck activity areas would be 0.63 in one million, while residences 100 meters (328 feet) from truck activity areas would be 0.23 in one million, both of which are below the carcinogenic threshold of 10 in one million. The Final EIR also reported the chronic health risk as

0.00039 for residences 15 meters from truck activity areas and 0.00015 for residences 100 meters from truck activity areas, both are below the 1.0 chronic health index. As a result, the Final EIR determined that the Original Project would not result in any significant health impacts and no mitigation was required.

Proposed Project Analysis
Threshold (a) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

As with the Original Project, the proposed Project would include fuel delivery trucks which would generate DPM. However, this analysis also includes DPM emissions from construction equipment used during construction of the proposed Project, and TAC (benzene) emissions from the operation of the fueling station which were not included in the Final EIR analysis.

Cancer Risk
As noted above, based on the CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook, the Project would be considered a large gasoline dispensing facility with a fuel throughput of greater than 3.6 million gallons per year (the Project is anticipated to have a throughput of approximately 5 million gallons per year). Additionally, the dispensing facility would be located more than 300 feet from the property line adjacent to residential land uses and is expected to produce a risk of less than 10 according to the CAPCOA Gasoline Service Station Industry-wide Risk Assessment Guidelines.

The Project would be required to install vapor recovery systems per CARB’s ATCM, comply with CARB’s Vapor Recovery System Certification Procedure, and Use Enhanced Conventional (ECO) and Enhanced ORVR-Vehicle Recognition (EOR) nozzles, among others. The Project would also be 16 Final EIR Yucca Valley Retail Specific Plan, 2008 Table 4.3.I, page 4.3-34.

Page 1289 of 2762 ends

Page 19 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 required to comply with MDAQMD Rule 201 (Permit to Construct), Rule 203 (Permit to Operate), and Rule 461 (Gasoline Transfer and Dispensing). These regulations are required to reduce fuel station emissions.

Table 2: Risk Assessment Results shows that carcinogenic risk resulting from the proposed Project would not exceed the 10 in one million threshold. The calculations conservatively assume no cleaner technology with lower emissions in future years. Table 2 shows that at the maximally exposed receptor, construction risk would be 0.15 in one million and operational risk would be 0.393 in one million. Worst-case worker exposure would also not exceed the 10 in one million threshold.

Therefore, carcinogenic hazards are calculated to be within acceptable limits and impacts would be less than significant.

Table 2: Risk Assessment Results
Receptors
Cancer Risk (per million)1, 2, 3
Construction
Operations Construction
and
Operations
Trucks Fuel Station Combined
Total
Operations
Residences
Approximately 440 feet northeast 0.13 0.003 0.39 0.393 0.523 Approximately 462 feet northwest 0.15 0.002 0.34 0.342 0.492 Significance Threshold
(Risk per Million) 10 10 10 10 10
Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No No
Worker Exposure
Approximately 118 feet east 0.09 0.003 0.80 0.803 0.893 Significance Threshold
(Risk per Million) 10 10 10 10 10
Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No No No No

1. The reported risk is at the closest receptor (maximally exposed individual receptor (MEIR)) for each exposure category.

2. Risk from construction and trucks is from PM10 and risk from the Gas Dispensing Facility is benzene.

3. The maximum cancer risk is based on worst-case exposure durations for the Project, 95th percentile breathing rates for less than two years old and 80th percentile for two years old and greater, and 30-, 25-, and 9-year averaging time for residences, workers, and students, respectively.

Refer to Appendix A: HRA Modeling Data.

Non‐Carcinogenic Hazard
The significance thresholds for TAC exposure also require an evaluation of non‐cancer risk stated in terms of a hazard index. Non‐cancer chronic impacts are calculated by dividing the annual average concentration by the REL for that substance. The REL is defined as the concentration at which no adverse non‐cancer health effects are anticipated. The potential for acute non‐cancer hazards is evaluated by comparing the maximum short‐term exposure level to an acute REL. RELs are designed to protect sensitive individuals within the population. The calculation of acute non‐cancer impacts is similar to the procedure for chronic non‐cancer impacts.

Page 1290 of 2762 ends

Page 20 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 RELs are designed to protect sensitive individuals within the population. According to OEHHA, the REL for DPM is 5 and the target organ is the respiratory system.17 There is no acute REL for DPM and the acute health risk cannot be calculated. The chronic and acute REL for benzene is 3 and 27 respectively, and the target organ is the hematologic system.

Acute and chronic impacts are shown in Table 3: Chronic and Acute Hazard Assessment Results.

An acute or chronic hazard index of 1.0 is considered individually significant. The hazard index is calculated by dividing the acute or chronic exposure by the reference exposure level. Table 3 shows that non‐carcinogenic hazards are calculated to be within acceptable limits and a less than significant impact would occur.

Table 3: Chronic and Acute Hazards Assessment Results
Emissions Sources Chronic Hazard Acute Hazard
Residential Receptors
Construction 0.000256 N/A
Trucks 0.000001 N/A
Fuel Station 0.006269 0.016999
Threshold 1.0 1.0
Threshold Exceeded? No No
Worker Receptors
Construction 0.001813 N/A
Trucks 0.000002 N/A
Fuel Station 0.011827 0.027863
Threshold 1.0 1.0
Threshold Exceeded? No No
N/A = not applicable, acute health risk for DPM cannot be calculated Refer to Appendix A: HRA Modeling Data.

Mitigation Program
None identified in the Final EIR. No additional mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
No new impacts relative to carcinogenic health risk or non-carcinogenic hazards evaluated in the Original Project Final EIR would occur with the development of the proposed Project. As described above, the proposed Project’s carcinogenic risk would not exceed the MDAQMD’s threshold of 10 in one million and non‐carcinogenic hazards are also below the acceptable limits. It should be noted that the Final EIR did not analyze TAC emissions associated with the fueling station. However, consistent with the CARB Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical 17 California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, OEHHA Acute, 8-hour and Chronic Reference Exposure Level (REL) Summary, https://oehha.ca.gov/air/general-info/oehha-acute-8-hour-and-chronic-reference-exposure-level-rel-summary.

Accessed December 2024.

Page 1291 of 2762 ends

Page 21 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868 Guidance Manual and Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Supplemental Policy Guidance Document, these emissions have been included in this health risk analysis. As noted previously, even with these additional sources of TACs the health risk remains below MDAQMD’s thresholds.

There are no new potentially significant impacts associated with development of the proposed Project; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would alter the Final EIR’s significance finding.

Page 1292 of 2762 ends

Page 22 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868

6.0 References

1. California Air Resources Board (CARB), Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective, April 2005.

2. CARB, EMFAC 2021 Web Database, www.arb.ca.gov/emfac, accessed December 2024.

3. CARB, Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidance, February 2022.

4. CARB, Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Supplemental Policy Guidance Document, July 2022.

5. CARB, Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidance, February 2022

6. CARB, Overview: Diesel Exhaust & Health, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-dieselexhaust-and-health, accessed December 2024.

7. CARB, Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles, October 2000.

8. California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, February 2015.

9. OEHHA, Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, August 2003.

10. OEHHA, CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Results (2022 Update),
https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen-40, accessed December 2024.

11. OEHHA, OEHHA Acute, 8-hour and Chronic Reference Exposure Level (REL) Summary, https://oehha.ca.gov/air/general-info/oehha-acute-8-hour-and-chronic-reference-exposurelevel-rel-summary, accessed November 2024.

12. City of Yucca Valley, Final Environmental Impact Report State Clearing House No. 2004071127:

Yucca Valley Retail Specific Plan, March 2008.

13. Lakes Environmental, AERMOD View Gaussian Plume Air Dispersion Model, Version 12.0.0.

14. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Meteorological Data for Dispersion Modeling, https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/meteorological-data/aermod-table-, accessed December 2024.

15. United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements, Final Rule. 40 Code of Federal Regulations, s 2, 59, 60, 80, 85, 86, 600, 1027, 1030, 1031, 1033, 1036, 1037, 1039, 1042, 1043, 1045, 1048, 1051, 1054, 1060, 1065, 1066, 1068, and 1090. January 24, 2023.

Page 1293 of 2762 ends

Page 23 ends

kimley-horn.com 3801 University Ave, Suite 300, Riverside, CA 92501 951 543 9868

16. United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements, Final Rule. 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 69, 80, and 86.

January 18, 2001.

17. United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition, September 2011.

18. United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), Potential to Emit Calculator for Gasoline Dispensing Facilities, https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016- 06/gasolinedispensingcalculator032315.xlsx, accessed December 2024.

Page 1294 of 2762 ends

Appendix A
HRA Modeling Data

Page 1295 of 2762 ends

W m
m

Page 1296 of 2762 ends

** Lakes Environmental AERMOD MPI
**
****************************************
**
** AERMOD Input Produced by:
** AERMOD View Ver. 13.0.0
** Lakes Environmental Software Inc.
** Date: 8/25/2025
** File:

C:\Lakes\Yucca_Walmart_Fuel\Yucca_Walmart_Const_Revised\Yucca_Walmart_Const_Revised.

ADI
**
****************************************
**
**
****************************************
** AERMOD Control Pathway
****************************************
**
**

CO STARTING
TITLEONE C:\Lakes\Yucca_Walmart_Fuel\Yucca_Walmart_Fuel_Construction\Yucca_Wa

MODELOPT DFAULT CONC
AVERTIME 1 PERIOD
POLLUTID PM_10

RUNORNOT RUN
ERRORFIL Yucca_Walmart_Const_Revised.err

CO FINISHED
**
****************************************
** AERMOD Source Pathway
****************************************
**
**

SO STARTING
** Source Location **
** Source ID - Type - X Coord. - Y Coord. **
** --------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Line Source Represented by Adjacent Volume Sources
** LINE VOLUME Source ID = SLINE1
** DESCRSRC Site Construction
** PREFIX
** Length of Side = 26.00
** Configuration = Adjacent
** Emission Rate = 1.0
** Vertical Dimension = 7.65
** SZINIT = 3.56
** Nodes = 6
** 556817.802, 3777150.072, 977.86, 0.00, 12.09
** 556817.868, 3777193.832, 976.54, 0.00, 12.09

Page 1297 of 2762 ends

** 556840.687, 3777193.661, 976.54, 0.00, 12.09
** 556841.634, 3777156.590, 977.71, 0.00, 12.09
** 556868.989, 3777158.117, 977.47, 0.00, 12.09
** 556867.348, 3777195.323, 976.41, 0.00, 12.09
** --------------------------------------------------------------------- LOCATION L0000001 VOLUME 556817.822 3777163.072 977.54
LOCATION L0000002 VOLUME 556817.861 3777189.072 976.74
LOCATION L0000003 VOLUME 556839.107 3777193.673 976.62
LOCATION L0000004 VOLUME 556841.310 3777169.249 977.33
LOCATION L0000005 VOLUME 556854.949 3777157.333 977.60
LOCATION L0000006 VOLUME 556868.463 3777170.043 977.12
** End of LINE VOLUME Source ID = SLINE1
** --------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Line Source Represented by Adjacent Volume Sources
** LINE VOLUME Source ID = SLINE2
** DESCRSRC Construction Trucks In
** PREFIX
** Length of Side = 16.00
** Configuration = Adjacent
** Emission Rate = 0.455733
** Vertical Dimension = 6.29
** SZINIT = 2.93
** Nodes = 10
** 556939.370, 3777291.763, 972.05, 3.15, 7.44
** 556891.071, 3777286.325, 972.32, 3.15, 7.44
** 556885.633, 3777283.766, 972.47, 3.15, 7.44
** 556878.916, 3777274.810, 971.92, 3.15, 7.44
** 556878.596, 3777266.814, 971.89, 3.15, 7.44
** 556880.515, 3777227.791, 973.08, 3.15, 7.44
** 556877.317, 3777222.353, 972.96, 3.15, 7.44
** 556869.960, 3777218.515, 973.24, 3.15, 7.44
** 556816.863, 3777216.596, 975.89, 3.15, 7.44
** 556809.186, 3777215.636, 975.95, 3.15, 7.44
** --------------------------------------------------------------------- LOCATION L0000059 VOLUME 556931.420 3777290.868 972.16
LOCATION L0000060 VOLUME 556915.521 3777289.078 972.38
LOCATION L0000061 VOLUME 556899.621 3777287.288 972.64
LOCATION L0000062 VOLUME 556884.801 3777282.658 972.71
LOCATION L0000063 VOLUME 556878.669 3777268.624 971.84
LOCATION L0000064 VOLUME 556879.293 3777252.643 971.97
LOCATION L0000065 VOLUME 556880.079 3777236.662 972.44
LOCATION L0000066 VOLUME 556876.599 3777221.979 972.95
LOCATION L0000067 VOLUME 556861.454 3777218.207 973.47
LOCATION L0000068 VOLUME 556845.465 3777217.629 974.69
LOCATION L0000069 VOLUME 556829.475 3777217.052 975.66
LOCATION L0000070 VOLUME 556813.509 3777216.176 975.95
** End of LINE VOLUME Source ID = SLINE2
** --------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Line Source Represented by Adjacent Volume Sources
** LINE VOLUME Source ID = SLINE3

Page 1298 of 2762 ends

Yucca Valley City CouncilJune 2, 2026

Yucca Valley City Council
June 2, 2026