HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality & Greenhouse Gas Analysis
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
5DQFKR9LVWD 9LOODJH
City of Temecula
Prepared for:
The City of Temecula
41000 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590
Prepared by:
43410 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
(951) 506-0055
July 2012
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village i
July 2012
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 3
1.1. Project Location ...................................................................................................... 3
1.2. Sensitive Air Quality Receptors .............................................................................. 3
2.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK........................................................................... 7
2.1. Federal Regulations and Standards ......................................................................... 7
2.2. State Regulations and Standards ............................................................................. 7
2.3. Regional Regulations and Standards....................................................................... 9
2.4. Local Regulations and Standards .......................................................................... 10
2.5. Greenhouse Gases ................................................................................................. 10
2.5.1. State Regulations and Standards............................................................................. 10
2.5.2. Climate Change Significance Criteria .................................................................... 14
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING .......................................................................... 18
3.1. Regional Setting .................................................................................................... 18
3.2. Local Setting ......................................................................................................... 18
3.3. Regional and Local Air Quality ............................................................................ 19
3.4. Maintenance Plan .................................................................................................. 21
4.0 AIR QUALITY POLLUTANTS .......................................................................... 23
5.0 Thresholds of Significance ................................................................................... 27
6.0 AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT .......................................................................... 28
6.1. Construction Assumptions .................................................................................... 28
6.2. Construction Impacts ............................................................................................ 29
6.3. Operation Assumption .......................................................................................... 31
6.4. Operation Impacts ................................................................................................. 31
6.5. Consistency With Air Quality Management Plan ................................................. 35
6.6. Odors ..................................................................................................................... 35
6.7. Cumulative Impacts .............................................................................................. 35
7.0 MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................................ 36
8.0 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 37
9.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 38
Appendices
Appendix A CEQA Appendix G Checklist........................................................................ 39
Appendix B CalEEMod Results ........................................................................................ 42
List of Figures
Figure 1. Regional Map of Project Location ................................................................................... 4
Figure 2. Project Vicinity Map Location ......................................................................................... 5
Figure 3. Project Site Plan ............................................................................................................... 6
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village ii
July 2012
List of Tables
Table 1. Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards ............................................................ 8
Table 2. SCAQMD Daily Emissions Thresholds ............................................................................ 9
Table 3. Attainment Status of the South Coast Air Basin ............................................................. 20
Table 4. Ambient Air Quality at Air Monitoring Station .............................................................. 21
Table 5. Anticipated Construction Equipment .............................................................................. 29
Table 6. Peak- Day Construction Emissions (lbs/day) by Phase ................................................... 30
Table 7. CO2e Emissions for Construction Stages ........................................................................ 31
Table 8. Operational Emissions (lbs/day) ..................................................................................... 33
Table 9. CO2e Emissions for Operation of Proposed Project ........................................................ 34
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 3
July 2012
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The 5DQFKR9LVWD9LOODJH Development Plan is a proposed multi-family residential
development plan to construct 120 apartment units on 8.67 acres. The multi-family
residential development will be located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and
Rancho Vista Road. The proposed project is also associated with a Minor Exception to
reduce the amount of required parking by 8 percent and a PDO and General Plan
Amendment to change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to
High Density. Figure 1 depicts the project area in a regional context.
This air quality and greenhouse gas analysis has been prepared to support the City of
Temecula’s (City) environmental review process and provide information regarding
potential impacts to air quality associated with the approval of the proposed project. This
air quality study describes the existing air quality, identifies applicable rules and
regulations, evaluates potential air quality impacts of the proposed project, and where
applicable, includes measures to mitigate or minimize pollutant emissions associated with
the proposed project.
1.1. Project Location
The project site is located in the southwest region of southwest Riverside County in the
City of Temecula, as shown in Figure 1. This area is within the South Coast Air Basin.
The project site is located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive at Rancho Vista
Road within the Midwestern portion of the City of Temecula, as shown in Figure 2. The
area is zoned as a Medium Density Residential land use.
1.2. Sensitive Air Quality Receptors
People that are more susceptible to air quality are young children, the elderly, and people
with immune deficiencies. Land uses, such as schools, daycare facilities, hospitals,
elderly care facilities, residential properties and other areas that are occupied by people
susceptible to air quality pollutants are considered sensitive air quality receptors. Vail
Elementary School borders the eastern limits of the proposed project site. Further,
several multi-family residences are located within the proposed project area.
Construction and operation of the proposed project can potentially impact the sensitive
receivers that have been identified within the proposed project area.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 4
July 2012
Figure 1. Regional Map of Project
Location Rancho Vista Village
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula
Project
Site
No Scale
Ai
r
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
G
r
e
e
n
h
o
u
s
e
G
a
s
S
t
u
d
y
Ci
t
y
o
f
T
e
m
e
c
u
l
a
–
Ra
n
c
h
o
V
i
s
t
a
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
5
Ju
l
y
2
0
1
2
No
S
c
a
l
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
2
.
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
V
i
c
i
n
i
t
y
M
a
p
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
Ra
n
c
h
o
V
i
s
t
a
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
Ai
r
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
G
r
e
e
n
h
o
u
s
e
G
a
s
S
t
u
d
y
Ci
t
y
o
f
T
e
m
e
c
u
l
a
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Si
t
e
Ai
r
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
G
r
e
e
n
h
o
u
s
e
G
a
s
S
t
u
d
y
Ci
t
y
o
f
T
e
m
e
c
u
l
a
–
Ra
n
c
h
o
V
i
s
t
a
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
6
Ju
l
y
2
0
1
2
No
S
c
a
l
e
F
i
g
u
r
e
3
.
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
Ra
n
c
h
o
V
i
s
t
a
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
Ai
r
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
a
n
d
G
r
e
e
n
h
o
u
s
e
G
a
s
S
t
u
d
y
Ci
t
y
o
f
T
e
m
e
c
u
l
a
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 7
July 2012
2.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The governing regulatory framework in the proposed Project area is driven by federal,
state and local agencies enforcement of ambient air quality standards and specific
regulations that govern project development, emitted pollutants and ambient air quality
status for the region.
2.1. Federal Regulations and Standards
The federal Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) [Title 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 50] to protect public health and the environment from
the effects of air pollutants. The EPA has identified for six “criteria” pollutants that are
known to cause harm to public health and the environment. Currently there are standards
set for sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3),
and particulate matter less than ten micrometers in diameter (PM10), particulate matter
less than five micrometers in diameter (PM2.5) and lead (Pb). The CAA established two
types of national air quality standards. Primary standards set limits to protect public
health, including the health of "sensitive" populations such as asthmatics, children, and
the elderly. Secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare, including protection
against decreased visibility, damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. Federal
standards are shown in Table 1.
2.2. State Regulations and Standards
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) requires all areas of the state to achieve and
maintain the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) by the earliest
practicable date. Authority has been given to the California Air Resource Board (CARB)
to improve air quality throughout the state of California by overseeing the development
and conformity of the State Implementation Plan (SIP), the state’s plan for meeting and
maintaining NAAQS. The goals of CARB include attaining and maintaining health air
quality; protecting the public from exposure to toxic contaminants; and providing
innovative approaches for complying with air pollution rules and regulations. CARB has
established ambient air quality standards for the State of California. A few of the
standards are similar to the federal standards; however, some are more stringent. Also,
additional pollutants are included in the California Ambient Air Quality Standards
(CAAQS). The State standards are shown in Table 1.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 8
July 2012
Table 1. Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant Averaging Time
Concentrations
State Standards
(CAAQS)
Federal Standards
(NAAQS)
Ozone (O3) 8 hour 0.07 ppm 0.075 ppm
1 hour 0.09 ppm NA
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
8 hour 9 ppm 9 ppm
1 hour 20 ppm 35 ppm
Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2)
Annual arithmetic mean 0.03 ppm 53 ppb
1 hour 0.18 ppm 100 ppb
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2)
24 hour 0.04 ppm NA
3 hour NA 0.5 ppm
1 hour 0.25 ppm 75 ppb
Particulate Matter
(PM10)
Annual arithmetic mean 20 µg/m3 NA
24 hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3
Particulate Matter –
fine (PM2.5)
Annual arithmetic mean 12 µg/m3 15 µg/m3
24 hour NA 35 µg/m3
Sulfates 24 hour 25 µg/m3 NA
Lead (Pb) Rolling 3-month Average 0.15 µg/m3
30-day average 1.5 µg/m3 NA
Hydrogen Sulfide 1 hour 0.03 ppm NA
Vinyl Chloride
(chloroethene) 24 hour 0.01 ppm NA
Visibility-Reducing
Particles
8 hour (10:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m. Pacific Standard Time)
Extinction coefficient of
0.23 kilometer—visibility
of 10 miles or more due
to particles when relative
humidity is less than 70
percent.
NA
Source: California Air Resources Board (November 2009) and Environmental Protection Agency (October 2011)
Notes:
mg/m3=milligrams per cubic meter; NA=no standard implemented; ppm=part per million; µg/m3=micrograms per cubic meter; ppb=parts per
billion
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 9
July 2012
2.3. Regional Regulations and Standards
The project is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), which is regulated by the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and has regional authority
delegated by CARB and the EPA. The SCAQMD is responsible for managing ambient
air quality and setting regulations in the South Coast Air Basin, establishing an air quality
monitoring network for measuring ambient concentration levels for criteria pollutants,
administer funds that are used to reduce regional mobile source emissions, and permitting
of stationary air pollutant sources. Stationary sources can include anything from large
power plants and refineries to the corner gas station. Many consumer products are also
considered stationary sources; these include house paint, furniture varnish, and thousands
of products containing solvents that evaporate into the air.
The SCAQMD develops and adopts an Air Quality Management Plan, which serves as
the blueprint to bring this region into compliance with federal and state air quality
standards. Rules are adopted to reduce emissions from various sources, including
specific types of equipment, industrial processes, paints and solvents, even consumer
products. Permits are issued to many businesses and industries to ensure compliance
with air quality rules.
Significant impacts from the construction and operation of the project will be determined
utilizing the SCAQMD’s California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Handbook
significant thresholds. The Handbook states that any proposed project in the basin that
exceeds these thresholds should be considered as having an individually and
cumulatively significant air quality impact. Table 2 displays the SCAQMD daily
emissions thresholds.
Table 2. SCAQMD Daily Emissions Thresholds
Pollutant
Thresholds (lbs/day)
Construction Operational
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 75 55
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) 100 55
Particulate Matter (PM10) 150 150
Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 55 55
Sulfur Oxides (SOx) 150 150
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 550
Lead (Pb) 3 3
Source: South Coast AQMD web page, www.aqmd.gov
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 10
July 2012
2.4. Local Regulations and Standards
The City of Temecula has local authority over the project area to reduce air quality
through its policies and decision-making authority. This is accomplished by developing a
blueprint through the General Plan that provides policies that govern the way in which
growth and development should occur in the city, outlining threshold levels for
evaluating project impacts, and providing recommended mitigation measures to minimize
project impacts.
The City of Temecula has created a General Plan that includes an Air Quality Element
which establishes a policy foundation to implement local air quality improvement
measures and provides a framework for coordination of air quality planning efforts with
surrounding jurisdictions. The Element includes policies and programs that address a
few of the following topics: sensitive receptors, mobile pollution sources, stationary
pollution sources, and particulate matter. The City of Temecula’s General Plan is
consistent with the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan.
2.5. Greenhouse Gases
There are no federal laws or regulations governing the emission of greenhouse gases
(GHGs). However, the following paragraphs describe current federal activities and
related regulation.
All levels of government have some responsibility for the protection of air quality, and
each level (Federal, State, and regional/local) has specific responsibilities relating to air
quality regulation. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the regulation of GHGs is a
relatively new component of air quality.
2.5.1. State Regulations and Standards
The following subsections describe regulations and standards that have been adopted by
the State of California to address GCC issues.
Assembly Bill 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. In
September 2006, Governor Schwarzenegger signed California AB 32, the global
warming bill, into law. AB 32 directed the CARB to do the following:
• Make publicly available a list of discrete early action GHG emission reduction
measures that can be implemented prior to the adoption of the statewide GHG limit
and the measures required to achieve compliance with the statewide limit.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 11
July 2012
• Make publicly available a GHG inventory for the year 1990 and determine target
levels for 2020.
• On or before January 1, 2010, adopt regulations to implement the early action GHG
emission reduction measures. The CARB has adopted nine early action measures,
including the following:
o Low Carbon Fuel Standard
o Landfill Methane Gas Capture
o Reductions from Mobile Air Conditioners
o Semiconductor Reduction
o SF6 Reductions
o High GWP Consumer Products
o Heavy-Duty Measure
o Tire Pressure Program
o Shore Power
• On or before January 1, 2011, adopt quantifiable, verifiable, and enforceable
emission reduction measures by regulation that will achieve the statewide GHG
emissions limit by 2020, to become operative on January 1, 2012, at the latest. The
emission reduction measures may include direct emission reduction measures,
alternative compliance mechanisms, and potential monetary and non-monetary
incentives that reduce GHG emissions from any sources or categories of sources that
ARB finds necessary to achieve the statewide GHG emissions limit.
• Monitor compliance with and enforce any emission reduction measure adopted
pursuant to AB 32.
AB 32 required that by January 1, 2008, CARB determine what the statewide GHG
emissions level was in 1990, and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit that is
equivalent to that level, to be achieved by 2020. CARB adopted its Scoping Plan in
December 2008, which provided estimates of the 1990 GHG emissions level and
identified sectors for the reduction of GHG emissions. The CARB has estimated that the
1990 GHG emissions level was 427 MMT net CO2e (CARB 2007b). The CARB
estimates that a reduction of 173 MMT net CO2e emissions below business-as-usual
would be required by 2020 to meet the 1990 levels (CARB 2007b). This amounts to a 15
percent reduction from today’s levels, and approximately 30 percent reduction from
projected business-as-usual levels in 2020 (CARB 2008a).
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 12
July 2012
Senate Bill 97. Senate Bill 97, enacted in 2007, amends the CEQA statute to clearly
establish that GHG emissions and the effects of GHG emissions are appropriate subjects
for CEQA analysis. It directed OPR to develop draft CEQA guidelines “for the mitigation
of greenhouse gas emissions or the effects of greenhouse gas emissions” by July 1, 2009
and directs the Resources Agency to certify and adopt the CEQA guidelines by January 1,
2010. The OPR developed its draft CEQA guidelines on April 13, 2009, and on
December 30, 2009, the California Natural Resources Agency adopted the amendment of
regulations based on OPR’s proposed revisions to CEQA to address GHG emissions. The
amendments to CEQA indicate the following:
• Climate action plans and other greenhouse gas reduction plans can be used to
determine whether a project has significant impacts, based upon its compliance with
the plan.
• Local governments are encouraged to quantify the greenhouse gas emissions of
proposed projects, noting that they have the freedom to select the models and
methodologies that best meet their needs and circumstances. The section also
recommends consideration of several qualitative factors that may be used in the
determination of significance, such as the extent to which the given project complies
with state, regional, or local GHG reduction plans and policies. OPR does not set or
dictate specific thresholds of significance. Consistent with existing CEQA
Guidelines, OPR encourages local governments to develop and publish their own
thresholds of significance for GHG impacts assessment.
• When creating their own thresholds of significance, local governments may consider
the thresholds of significance adopted or recommended by other public agencies, or
recommended by experts.
• New amendments include guidelines for determining methods to mitigate the effects
of greenhouse gas emissions in Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines.
• OPR is clear to state that “to qualify as mitigation, specific measures from an
existing plan must be identified and incorporated into the project; general
compliance with a plan, by itself, is not mitigation.”
• OPR’s emphasizes the advantages of analyzing GHG impacts on an institutional,
programmatic level. OPR therefore approves tiering of environmental analyses and
highlights some benefits of such an approach.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 13
July 2012
• Environmental impact reports (EIRs) must specifically consider a project's energy
use and energy efficiency potential.
Executive Order S-3-05. Executive Order S-3-05, signed by Governor Schwarzenegger
on June 1, 2005, calls for a reduction in GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and for
an 80 percent reduction in GHG emissions by 2050. Executive Order S-3-05 also calls for
the California EPA to prepare biennial science reports on the potential impact of
continued GCC on certain sectors of the California economy. The first of these reports,
“Our Changing Climate: Assessing Risks to California”, and its supporting document
“Scenarios of Climate Change in California: An Overview” were published by the
California Climate Change Center in 2006.
California Code of Regulations Title 24. Although not originally intended to reduce
GHG emissions, California Code of Regulations Title 24 Part 6: California’s Energy
Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings were first established
in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption.
The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation
of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. The GHG emission inventory was
based on Title 24 standards as of October 2005; however, Title 24 has been updated as of
2008 and standards are set to be phased in summer 2009. Energy efficient buildings
require less electricity, natural gas, and other fuels. Electricity production from fossil
fuels and on-site fuel combustion (typically for water heating) results in greenhouse gas
emissions. Therefore, increased energy efficiency results in decreased GHG emissions.
State Standards Addressing Vehicular Emissions. California Assembly Bill 1493
(Pavley) enacted on July 22, 2002, required the ARB to develop and adopt regulations
that reduce GHG emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. Regulations
adopted by ARB would apply to 2009 and later model year vehicles. ARB estimated that
the regulation would reduce climate change emissions from light duty passenger vehicle
fleet by an estimated 18% in 2020 and by 27% in 2030 (AEP 2007). Once implemented,
emissions from new light-duty vehicles are expected to be reduced in San Diego County
by 21 percent by 2020. In 2005, the CARB requested a waiver from EPA to enforce the
regulation, as required under the CAA. Despite the fact that no waiver had ever been
denied over a 40-year-period, the then Administrator of the EPA sent Governor
Schwarzenegger a letter in December, 2007, indicating he had denied the waiver. On
March 6, 2008 the waiver denial was formally issued in the Federal Register. Governor
Schwarzenegger and several other states immediately filed suit against the federal
government to reverse that decision. On January 21, 2009, CARB requested that EPA
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 14
July 2012
reconsider denial of the waiver. The parties involved entered a May 19, 2009 agreement
to resolve these issues. With the granting of the waiver on June 30, 2009, it is expected
that the Pavley regulations will reduce GHG emissions from California passenger
vehicles by about 22 percent in 2012 and about 30 percent in 2016, all while improving
fuel efficiency and reducing motorists’ costs.
Executive Order S-01-07 was enacted by the Governor on January 18, 2007. Essentially,
the order mandates the following: 1) that a statewide goal be established to reduce the
carbon intensity of California's transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020; and 2)
that a Low Carbon Fuel Standard ("LCFS") for transportation fuels be established for
California. It is assumed that the effects of the LCFS would be a 10% reduction in GHG
emissions from fuel use by 2020. On April 23, 2009, CARB adopted regulations to
implement the LCFS.
Senate Bill 375. Senate Bill 375 requires that regions within the state which have a
metropolitan planning organization must adopt a sustainable communities strategy as part
of their regional transportation plans. The strategy must be designed to achieve certain
goals for the reduction of GHG emissions. The bill finds that GHG from autos and light
trucks can be substantially reduced by new vehicle technology, but even so “it will be
necessary to achieve significant additional greenhouse gas reductions from changed land
use patterns and improved transportation. Without improved land use and transportation
policy, California will not be able to achieve the goals of AB 32.” SB 375 provides that
new CEQA provisions be enacted to “encourage developers to submit applications and
local governments to make land use decisions that will help the state achieve its goals
under AB 32,” and that “current planning models and analytical techniques used for
making transportation infrastructure decisions and for air quality planning should be able
to assess the effects of policy choices, such as residential development patterns, expanded
transit service and accessibility, the walkability of communities, and the use of economic
incentives and disincentives.”
2.5.2. Climate Change Significance Criteria
According to the California Natural Resources Agency, “due to the global nature of GHG
emissions and their potential effects, GHG emissions will typically be addressed in a
cumulative impacts analysis. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the
following criteria may be considered to establish the significance of GCC emissions:
Would the project:
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 15
July 2012
• Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
• Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
As discussed in Section 15064.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, the determination of the
significance of greenhouse gas emissions calls for a careful judgment by the lead agency,
consistent with the provisions in Section 15064. Section 15064.4 further provides that a
lead agency should make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific
and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of GHG emissions
resulting from a project. A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context
of a particular project, whether to:
(1) Use a model or methodology to quantify greenhouse gas emissions resulting
from a project, and which model or methodology to use. The lead agency has
discretion to select the model or methodology it considers most appropriate
provided it supports its decision with substantial evidence. The lead agency
should explain the limitations of the particular model or methodology selected for
use; and/or
(2) Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance based standards.
Section 15064.4 also advises a lead agency to consider the following factors, among
others, when assessing the significance of impacts from greenhouse gas emissions on the
environment:
(1) The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas
emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting;
(2) Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead
agency determines applies to the project; and
(3) The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements
adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or
mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.
Based on the ARB’s analysis that statewide 2020 business as usual GHG emissions
would be 596 MMTCO2e and that 1990 emissions were 427 MMTCO2e, local lead
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 16
July 2012
agencies have estimated that a reduction of 28.35% below business as usual is required to
achieve the AB 32 reduction mandate (ARB 2010).
As previously discussed the air quality for the proposed project area is regulated by the
SCAQMD, the agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in
SoCAB, which includes portions of Riverside County. To that end, the SCAQMD, a
regional agency, works directly with the Southern California Association of Governments
(SCAG), County transportation commissions, and local governments and cooperates
actively with all federal and State government agencies. The SCAQMD develops rules
and regulations; establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources; inspects
emissions sources; and enforces such measures through educational programs or fines,
when necessary. To date, the SCAQMD Board has adopted an interim CEQA
significance threshold for GHGs for industrial projects where the SCAQMD is the lead
agency, and continues to consider screening levels under CEQA for residential,
commercial, and mixed use projects. No thresholds have been developed for residential
projects.
Beginning in April 2008, the SCAQMD convened a working group to provide guidance
to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CEQA
documents. The Working Group meets approximately once per month. On December 5,
2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted its staff proposal for an interim CEQA
GHG significance threshold for industrial projects where the SCAQMD is the lead
agency (SCAQMD 2008). The interim screening threshold for industrial projects is
10,000 MTCO2e per year (MTCO2e/yr).
In September 2010, SCAQMD staff presented to the Working Group a proposed tiered
approach to determining GHG significance for proposed residential and commercial
projects (SCAQMD 2010). At Tier 1, GHG emissions impact would be less than
significant if the project qualifies under a categorical or statutory CEQA exemption. At
Tier 2, the GHG emissions impact would be less than significant if the project is
consistent with a previously adopted GHG reduction plan that meets specific
requirements. At Tier 3, the Working Group proposes extending the 10,000 MTCO2e/yr
screening threshold applicable to industrial projects where SCAQMD is the lead agency,
described above, to other lead agency industrial projects. For residential and commercial
projects the Working Group proposes the following Tier 3 screening values: either (1) a
single 3,000 MTCO2e/yr threshold for all land use types or (2) separate thresholds of
3,500 MTCO2e/yr residential projects, 1,400 MTCO2e/yr for commercial projects, and
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 17
July 2012
3,000 MTCO2e/yr for mixed use projects. A project with emissions less than the
applicable screening value would have less than significant GHG emissions.
Projects with emissions greater than the Tier 3 screening values would be analyzed at
Tier 4 by one of two methods:
1. A percent emission reduction target. This method is used by the Sacramento
Metropolitan and San Joaquin Valley Air Districts and the City of San Diego. The
SCAQMD Working Group made no recommendation relative to this method.
2. Efficiency Targets. On the project level, 2020 GHG emissions should not exceed
4.8 MTCO2e/yr per service population (SP) where SP is project residents plus
employees. Further, 2035 GHG emissions should not exceed 3.0 MTCO2e/yr per
SP.
Projects with GHG emissions that do not meet the Tier 4 targets would be required to
provide mitigation in the form of real, quantifiable, and verifiable offsets to achieve the
target thresholds. The offsets may be achieved through project design features, other on-
site methods, or by off-site actions, such as energy efficiency upgrade of existing
buildings.
This proposed screening and mitigation proposal from SCAQMD remains a work in
progress; the Working Group has not convened since the fall of 2010. As of July 2012,
the proposal has not been considered or approved for use by the SCAQMD Board. In the
meantime, no GHG significance thresholds are approved for use in the SoCAB.
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 18
July 2012
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Many portions of Southern California are in exceedance of federal air quality standards.
Temecula, unlike most of Southern California, has very good air quality. The existing
ambient air quality environment is directly related to the topographic structure and
regional climate conditions of the City of Temecula.
3.1. Regional Setting
The South Coast Air Basin is located in the southwestern portion of Southern California.
The basin is approximately 10,750 square miles. The basin’s jurisdiction consists of
Orange County and the urban portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino
counties. The topography ranges greatly in each of these areas. Topography near the
coastal region is relatively flat with sporadic hills off the coast. The topography is more
mountainous in the inland portion of the region creating pockets where pollutants are able
to accumulate.
The climate in the South Coast Air Basin can be characterized as having sparse winter
rainfall and hot summers that are alleviated with cool breezes. A temperature inversion,
warm layer of air that traps the cool marine air layer underneath it and prevents vertical
mixing, is the prime factor that forces pollutants to accumulate in the basin. The basin’s
climate pattern is sometimes interrupted by periods of extremely hot weather, winter
storms, and Santa Ana winds. The climate in the basin is not unique, however, the high
concentration of stationary sources of air pollutants in the western portion of the basin
and mobile sources throughout the basin, in addition to the mountains which surround the
perimeter of the basin all contribute to the poor air quality in the region.
3.2. Local Setting
The City of Temecula is located in the southwestern portion of the air basin and is
defined by the City of Murrieta to the northwest and the Pechanga Indian Reservation on
the south, with unincorporated areas of Riverside County on all of its other borders.
Temecula is approximately 26.3 square miles and is at an elevation of 1,175 feet above
sea level. The land the Project site is located on is relatively flat; however, the site is
slightly depressed from the nearby I-15. The terrain increases slightly to the west
towards a residential area.
The air quality in the City of Temecula is quite good due to the Lake Elsinore
Convergence Zone, where coastal winds block air pollutants from the rest of the South
Coast Air Basin. Riverside County is unique in that it is bordered to the north and east by
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 19
July 2012
mountains rising to over 11,500 feet, and to the west by the Santa Ana Mountains which
extend to close to 5,700 feet near Santiago Peak. This topographical configuration lends
itself to allowing the late morning and afternoon sea breeze to extend inland with two
branches working their way around the northern and southern ends of the Santa Ana
Mountains and towards Lake Elsinore. When the two airstreams meet, a convergence line
is created known as the Lake Elsinore Convergence Zone.
The climate is warm during the summer when temperatures tend to be in the 70 degrees
Fahrenheit and cool during winter when temperatures tend to be in the 50's. The warmest
month of the year is August with an average maximum temperature of 98 degrees
Fahrenheit, while the coldest month of the year is December with an average minimum
temperature of 34 degrees Fahrenheit.
Temperature variations between night and day tend to be relatively big during summer
with a difference that can reach 39 degrees Fahrenheit, and relatively big during winter
with an average difference of 30 degrees Fahrenheit. The annual average precipitation at
Temecula is 11.4 Inches. Rainfall in is fairly evenly distributed throughout the year. The
wettest month of the year is February with an average rainfall of 2.8 inches.
3.3. Regional and Local Air Quality
Air quality is continuously monitored throughout the South Coast Air Basin by the
SCAQMD. The SCAQMD has positioned ten air quality monitoring stations throughout
the basin to monitor criteria pollutants CO, PM10, PM2.5, O3, NO2, SO2, and Pb
concentration levels in the atmosphere. The SCAQMD utilizes these monitoring stations
to monitor exceedances of criteria pollutant concentrations in the environment. An area
is designated a nonattainment area when measured concentrations of any one of the six
criteria pollutants exceeds the NAAQS for that area, and remains a nonattainment area
until concentrations are in compliance with the NAAQS. Only after measured
concentrations have fallen below the NAAQS can the state apply for redesignation to
attainment, and must then submit a ten year plan for continuing to meet and maintain air
quality standards that follow the CAA. The redesignated area will be referred to as an air
quality maintenance area until the standard has been sustained for a period of at least ten
years. The air quality attainment status for all criteria pollutants in the Project area is
provided in Table 3.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 20
July 2012
Table 3. Attainment Status of the South Coast Air Basin
Criteria Pollutant Federal Designation State Designation
Ozone Nonattainment Nonattainment
PM10 Nonattainment Nonattainment
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Attainment
Nitrogen Dioxide Maintenance Nonattainment
Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Attainment
Lead Attainment Attainment
Sulfates No Standard Attainment
Hydrogen Sulfide No Standard Unclassified*
Visibility Reducing Particles No Standard Unclassified*
Sources: EPA website, http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/greenbk/index.html, March 2012
and CARB website, http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm, June 2011
*If there is inadequate or inconclusive data to make a definitive attainment designation, districts are considered “unclassified.”
Criteria pollutants found to be in nonattainment in the South Coast Air Basin are O3,
PM10, and PM2.5. All other criteria pollutants are in attainment in the Project area. There
are a total of 11 monitoring stations located in Riverside County. There are no air
monitoring stations located in the City of Temecula, due to the good air quality.
However, concentrations have also been collected from the nearest monitoring stations to
the Project area for the criteria pollutants that are in nonattainment; O3, PM10, and PM2.5.
CO and NO2 concentrations levels will also be collected from the nearest air quality
station. Criteria pollutants SO2 and Pb are not pollutants of concern in the South Coast
Air Basin.
Table 4 displays the last three years of monitoring data to illustrate the air pollutant
concentration trends for the pollutants of concern. The concentrations collected from
nearby air quality monitoring stations show that CO has not exceeded the federal
NAAQS or state CAAQS in the last three years. O3 exceeded the 8-hour federal and state
standards in 2011, 2010, and 2009. The federal 1-hour standard for O3 no longer applies
since the EPA revoked the standard in 2005; however, the State standard is still valid. O3
has exceeded State standards in 2011, 2010 and 2009. PM10 did not exceed federal
standards in 2011, 2010 and 2009. PM10 concentrations did exceed state standards in
2011, 2010 and 2009. Further, PM2.5 exceeded the 24-hour federal and state standards in
2011, 2010 and 2009. NO2 has not exceeded Federal standards in the last three years;
however, NO2 has exceeded State standards in 2011, 2010 and 2009
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 21
July 2012
Table 4. Ambient Air Quality at Nearby Air Monitoring Stations
Ozone Carbon Monoxide PM2.5 a PM10 NO2 b
Max
1-hour
Conc.
(ppm)
Max
8-hour
Conc.
(ppm)
Max
1-hour
Conc.
(ppm)
Max
8-hour
Conc.
(ppm)
Max 24-hour
Conc. (ppm)
Max 24-hour
Conc. (ppm)
Max
1-hour Conc.
(ppb)
Monitoring
Station
Location
506 W Flint St
Lake Elsinore, CA
506 W Flint St
Lake Elsinore, CA
7002 Magnolia
Ave. Riverside, CA
237 1/2 N. "D" St.
Perris, CA
506 W Flint St
Lake Elsinore, CA
Federal
Standard
No Federal
Standard
0.075
ppm 35 ppm 9 ppm 35 µµµµg/m3 150 µµµµg/m3 100 ppb
2011 0.133 0.106 2.7 0.7 51.6 65 50
2010 0.107 0.091 1.1 0.7 43.7 51 51
2009 0.128 0.105 1.0 0.7 42.1 80 55
State
Standard 0.09 ppm 0.07 ppm 20 ppm 9 ppm 35 µµµµg/m3 50 µµµµg/m3 18 ppb
2011 0.133 0.106 2.7 0.7 51.6 65 50
2010 0.107 0.091 1.1 0.7 43.7 51 51
2009 0.128 0.105 1.0 0.7 42.1 80 55
Source: EPA web page, http://www.epa.gov/airdata/ad_rep_mon.html
a. Monitoring data was not available for the annual PM2.5 emissions.
b. Monitoring data was n t available for the annual NO2 emissions.
3.4. Maintenance Plan
Every three years the SCAQMD prepares an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for
air quality improvement to be submitted for the inclusion in the SIP. Overall, control
strategy for this plan is designed to meet applicable federal and state requirements,
including attainment of ambient air quality standards. Each reiteration of the plan is an
update of the previous plan. The Final 2007 AQMP was adopted by the SCAQMD in
June 2007. The SCAQMD is currently updating the AQMP; however, at this time the
document is not available. The 2007 AQMP employs the most up-to-date science and
technological tools and incorporates a comprehensive strategy aimed at controlling
pollution from all sources, including on-road and off-road mobile sources and stationary
sources. Further, the plan addresses several federal planning requirements and
incorporates significant new scientific data, primarily in the form of updated emissions
inventories, ambient measurements, new meteorological episodes and new air quality
modeling tools.
The AQMP will rely on a comprehensive and integrated control approach aimed at
achieving the PM2.5 standard by 2015. Furthermore, the 8-hour O3 control strategy builds
upon the PM2.5 strategy, augmented with additional NOx and VOC reductions to meet
federal standards by 2024. The South Coast Air Basin has met the PM10 standards at all
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 22
July 2012
stations except for western Riverside. Additional efforts, through localized programs, are
under way to ensure compliance with the NAAQS.
To ultimately achieve the PM2.5 and 8-hour O3 ambient air quality standards and
demonstrate attainment, significant additional emissions reductions will be necessary
from sources under the jurisdiction of CARB and the EPA. Sources under the
jurisdiction include the following: on-road motor vehicles, off-road equipment, and
consumer products. Sources such as aircraft, ships, trains, and pre-empted off-road
equipment are under the jurisdiction of the EPA.
According to the AQMP air quality in the South Coast Air Basin has improved
significantly due to the comprehensive control strategies implemented to reduce pollution
from mobile and stationary sources. In the last two decades the total number of days the
basin exceeded the federal 8-hour O3 standard decreased dramatically from 150 days to
less than 90 days. The basin is still far from demonstrating attainment with federal
standards; however, with the implementation of advanced technologies and more
stringent policies the basin has hopes of demonstrating attainment of PM2.5 by 2015 and
O3 by 2024.
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 23
July 2012
4.0 AIR QUALITY POLLUTANTS
As stated previously, federal, state and local agencies have established ambient air quality
standards for six criteria pollutants: CO, O3, PM10, PM2.5, NO2, SO2, and Pb. O3 and PM
are generally considered to be regional pollutants because they or their precursors affect
air quality on a regional scale. Pollutants such as CO, PM, NO2, SO2, and Pb are
considered to be local pollutants because they tend to accumulate in the air locally. In the
project area, PM and O3 are pollutants of particular concern as the Basin is currently
designated as nonattainment for PM10, PM2.5 and O3.
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
CO is a public health concern because it combines readily with hemoglobin and thus
reduces the amount of oxygen transported in the bloodstream. Effects on humans range
from slight headaches to nausea to death. For urban areas, the internal combustion
engines of motor vehicles are the principal sources of CO that cause ambient air quality
levels to exceed the NAAQS. State and federal CO standards have been set for both 1-
hour and 8-hour averaging times. The state 1-hour standard is 20 parts per million (ppm)
by volume, and the federal 1-hour is 35 ppm. Both the state and federal standards are 9
ppm for the 8-hour averaging period. High CO levels develop primarily during winter
when periods of light wind combine with ground-level temperature inversions. These
conditions result in reduced dispersion of vehicle emissions. In addition, motor vehicles
emit more CO in cool temperatures than in warm temperatures.
Ozone (O3)
O3 is not emitted directly into the air but is formed by a photochemical reaction in the
atmosphere. O3 precursors, which include NOx and ROGs, react in the atmosphere in the
presence of sunlight to form ozone. Ground-level and stratosphere-level O3 share the
same chemical structure; however, their effects differ greatly due to their positions in the
atmosphere. Ground-level O3 has adverse effects due to its potential impacts to human
health, while stratospheric O3 has a protective effect by shielding the earth’s surface from
harmful radiation. When O3 is inhaled, it can cause a variety of health problems such as
chest pain, coughing, throat irritation, and congestion. State and federal standards for O3
have been set for a 1-hour averaging time. The state requires that O3 concentration not
exceed 0.09 ppm of O3 being produced in a given area in 1 hour. The federal 1-hour O3
standard was revoked by the EPA in 2005. The federal 8-hour O3 standard is 0.075 ppm
and the state standard is 0.07 ppm.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 24
July 2012
Particulate Matter (PM10) & (PM2.5)
PM emissions are generated by a wide variety of sources, including agricultural activities,
industrial emissions, dust suspended by vehicle traffic and construction equipment, and
secondary aerosols formed by reactions in the atmosphere. The NAAQS for particulate
matter applies to two classes of particulate: PM2.5, particulate matter 2.5 microns or less
in diameter, and PM10, particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter. PM of ten
microns in diameter and smaller pose the greatest health problems by being able to
bypass the nose and throat’s natural filtration systems and enter deep into the lungs, heart,
and bloodstream. This can cause difficulty with breathing (including aggravating
asthma), irregular heartbeat, nonfatal heart attacks, and premature death in people with
heart or lung problems. The state PM10 standards are 50 micrograms per cubic meter
(µg/m3) as a 24-hour average and 20 µg/m3 as an annual arithmetic mean. The federal
PM10 standard is 150 µg/m3 as a 24-hour average. The federal standards for PM2.5 are 15
µg/m3 and 35 µg/m3 for annual and 24 hours respectively. The state standard for PM2.5 is
12 µg/m3 as an annual arithmetic mean. There is no separate state standard for 24-hour
PM2.5.
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
NO2 belongs to a family of highly reactive gases called NOx. These gases form when fuel
is burned at high temperatures, and come principally from motor vehicle exhaust and
stationary sources such as electric utilities and industrial boilers. A suffocating, brownish
gas, NO2 is a strong oxidizing agent that reacts in air to form corrosive nitric acid, as well
as toxic organic nitrates. It also plays a major role in the atmospheric reactions that
produce ground-level O3 (or smog), which can trigger serious respiratory problems. The
EPA's health-based national air quality standard for NO2 is 0.053 ppm (measured on an
annual average) and 0.1 ppm (one hour average).
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
SO2 belongs to the family of sulfur oxide gases (SOx). These gases are formed when fuel
containing sulfur (mainly coal and oil) is burned, and during metal smelting and other
industrial processes. SO2 contributes to respiratory illness, particularly in children and the
elderly, and aggravates existing heart and lung diseases. SO2 also contributes to the
formation of acid rain, which causes damages to trees, crops, historic buildings, and
monuments; and makes soils, lakes, and streams acidic. The EPA's health-based national
air quality standard for SO2 is 0.075 ppm (one hour average) and 0.5 ppm (measured over
3 hours).
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 25
July 2012
Lead (Pb)
Pb is a metal found naturally in the environment as well as in manufactured products.
Once taken into the body, Pb distributes throughout the body in the blood and is
accumulated in the bones. Depending on the level of exposure, lead can adversely affect
the nervous system, kidney function, immune system, reproductive and developmental
systems and the cardiovascular system. The major sources of Pb emissions have
historically been motor vehicles and industrial sources. Due to the phase out of leaded
gasoline, metal processing is the major source of Pb emissions to the air today. The
highest levels of Pb in air are generally found near lead smelters. Other stationary sources
are waste incinerators, utilities, and lead-acid battery manufacturers.
On October 15, 2008 the EPA signed a final rule to tighten allowable Pb concentrations
from 1.5 µg/m3 to 0.15 µg/m3. The EPA said it strengthened the standards after a
thorough review of the science on lead, advice from the Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee, and consideration of public comments. The EPA has noted that the existing
monitoring network for lead is not sufficient to determine whether many areas of the
country would meet the revised standards. As a result, the EPA is redesigning the nation's
lead monitoring network. No later than October 2011, the EPA will designate areas that
must take additional steps to reduce lead air emissions. States will have five years to meet
the new standards after designations take effect.
Greenhouse Gases (GHG)
Global Climate Change (GCC) refers to changes in average climatic conditions on Earth
as a whole, including temperature, wind patterns, precipitation and storms. Global
temperatures are moderated by naturally occurring atmospheric gases, including water
vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), which are known
as greenhouse gases (GHGs). These gases allow solar radiation (sunlight) into the Earth’s
atmosphere, but prevent radioactive heat from escaping, thus warming the Earth’s
atmosphere. Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often called greenhouse gases,
analogous to a greenhouse. GHGs are emitted by both natural processes and human
activities. The accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere regulates the Earth’s
temperature. Without these natural GHGs, the Earth’s temperature would be about 61º
Fahrenheit cooler (California EPA 2006). Emissions from human activities, such as
electricity production and vehicle use, have elevated the concentration of these gases in
the atmosphere.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 26
July 2012
GHGs have been at the center of a widely contested political, economic, and scientific
debate surrounding GCC. Although the conceptual existence of GCC is generally
accepted, the extent to which GHGs contribute to it remains a source of debate. The State
of California has been at the forefront of developing solutions to address GCC. GCC
refers to any significant change in measures of climate, such as average temperature,
precipitation, or wind patterns over a period of time. GCC may result from natural
factors, natural processes, and/or human activities that change the composition of the
atmosphere and alter the surface and features of land.
Global climate change attributable to anthropogenic (human) emissions of GHGs (mainly
carbon dioxide [CO2], methane [CH4] and nitrous oxide [N2O]) is currently one of the
most important and widely debated scientific, economic and political issues in the United
States. Historical records indicate that global climate changes have occurred in the past
due to natural phenomena (such as during previous ice ages). Some data indicate that the
current global conditions differ from past climate changes in rate and magnitude.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel (Panel) on Climate Change constructed
several emission trajectories of GHGs needed to stabilize global temperatures and climate
change impacts. The Panel concluded that a stabilization of GHGs at 400 to 450 ppm
CO2 equivalent concentration is required to keep global mean warming below 35.6º
Fahrenheit (2º Celsius), which is assumed to be necessary to avoid dangerous climate
change (Association of Environmental Professionals 2007). State law defines greenhouse
gases as any of the following compounds: CO2, CH4, N2O, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs),
perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) (California Health and Safety
Code Section 38505(g).) CO2, followed by CH4 and N2O, are the most common GHGs
that result from human activity.
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 27
July 2012
5.0 Thresholds of Significance
A checklist provided in Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines states that a project would have a significant adverse effect on air
quality if any of the following would occur as a result of a project-related component.
Would the project:
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
• Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
• Result in cumulative considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is nonattainment under any applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard (including releasing emission which exceeds quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
• Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.
Section 6.0, Air Quality Assessment, will provide information to respond to the checklist
and determine if the project will have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding
area. Responses to the checklist can also be found in Appendix A.
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 28
July 2012
6.0 AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT
An air quality impact assessment will be conducted to determine the significance of the
impact created by the short-term construction and long-term operation of the proposed
project on the surrounding area. Construction may affect air quality as a result of the (1)
construction equipment emissions, (2) fugitive dust from grading and earth moving, and
(3) emissions from vehicles to/from the sites by construction workers. Operation related
emissions would be generated primarily from vehicle emissions generated from the
operation of the project with minor emissions from gas for water heating and other gas
appliances located in commercial/retail buildings.
The California Emission Estimator Model (CalEEMod) will be utilized to estimate
emission from the construction and operation of the proposed project. CalEEMod is a
modeling program developed by ENVIRON in collaboration with the SCAQMD and
other California Air Districts to estimate potential emissions associated with both
construction and operational use of land use projects. The calculated concentrations will
be compared to the thresholds defined in Table 2. Any exceedances of those thresholds
created by the proposed project will signify a significant impact created by the proposed
Project.
6.1. Construction Assumptions
This analysis is based on the anticipated construction emissions calculated by CalEEMod
and construction assumptions from similar projects. A summary of the anticipated
construction equipment requirements is listed in Table 5. CalEEMod will analyze the
construction equipment that will be used and the duration of the construction period to
estimate construction emissions.
An equipment list and construction schedule was provided for the grading activity for the
proposed project, however, a detailed building construction schedule was not provided.
Therefore, default data in CalEEMod for building construction schedule and construction
equipment were utilized. It is assumed building construction would take approximately
ten months and that the construction of the project will require approximately one year to
complete, starting in January 2013 and ending in February 2014. Construction activity
would occur for eight hours per day, at least five days per week; sometimes six days if
necessary.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 29
July 2012
Table 5. Anticipated Construction Equipment
Construction Phase and
Equipment
Number of
Equipment Pieces
Site Preparation
Dozer 3
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4
Site Grading
Scrapers 2
Grader (blade) 1
Water Truck 1
Compactor 1
Building Construction
Crane 1
Forklifts 3
Generator 1
Tractor/Loaders/Backhoes 3
Welders 1
Paving
Pavers 2
Paving Equipment 2
Rollers 2
Architectural Coating
Air Compressors 1
Source: CalEEMod, 2011 (construction defaults)
Note: Equipment inventory is based on the CalEEMod computer-
modeling program and information received from the Project Engineer.
6.2. Construction Impacts
Short-term impacts generated from the construction activities for the proposed Project are
expected to impact ambient air quality in the area. Temporary construction emissions
result directly from site preparation activities and paving, and indirectly from
construction equipment emissions and worker commuting patterns. No demolition is
expected to occur on the project site. Depending on the construction schedule,
construction activity, and climate conditions pollutant emissions will vary from day to
day.
As discussed previously, CalEEMod was used to estimate pollutant emissions from the
construction and operation of the proposed project. Inputs for calculating the construction
emissions include the following:
• Construction schedule; including phases of construction activity, start dates and
end dates,
• Construction equipment used,
• Truck trips generated, and
• Soil hauling
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 30
July 2012
These inputs combined with defaults provided in CalEEMod will be used to calculate
expected pollutant emissions generated from the construction of the proposed project.
Emissions were estimated for summer and winter seasons. Table 6 displays the average
daily emissions in pounds per day that are expected to be generated from the construction
of the proposed project in comparison to the daily thresholds established by the
SCAQMD. The inputs, assumptions and detailed calculations sheets are included in
Appendix B.
Table 6. Peak- Day Construction Emissions (lbs/day) by Phase
Construction Year and Season ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
2013
Summer 9.99 80.09 46.54 0.08 22.24 13.88
Winter 9.99 80.10 46.39 0.07 22.24 13.88
SCAQMD Significance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed Significance? No No No No No No
2014
Winter 47.41 32.18 21.50 0.03 2.94 2.75
SCAQMD Significance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed Significance? No No No No No No
Source: Entech Consulting Group, 2012
As shown in Table 6, construction of the proposed project will not cause a significant
impact to the surrounding area. The calculated emission results from CalEEMod
demonstrate that the construction of this project will not exceed average daily thresholds
created by the SCAQMD. Thus, construction related impacts on regional air quality will
be less than significant. Construction of the proposed project will not worsen ambient air
quality, create additional violations of federal and state standards, or delay the basin’s
goal for meeting attainment standards.
Greenhouse Gas Construction Emissions
GHG emissions will result from construction activities. Temporary GHG emissions are
expected to occur for the duration of the construction of the proposed project. CalEEMod
will be utilized to estimate CO2e emissions from the construction of the proposed project.
Emissions were estimated for each stage of construction scheduled. Table 7 displays the
CalEEMod results and the output results are located in Appendix B.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – 5DQFKR9LVWD9LOODJH 31
July 2012
Table 7. CO2e Emissions for Construction of Proposed Project
Construction Year
and Season
CO2e Emissions,
metric tons/year
Annually
2013 648a
2013 Emissions
amortized over 30 years 22b
2014 32 a
2014 Emissions
amortized over 30 years 1.1 b
Total CO2e Emissions 23.1c
Source: Entech Consulting Group, 2012
a) Total emissions for all construction phases
b) Following SCAQMD guidance 2013 and 2014
construction emission totals were spread out over a
30 year period.
c) 2013 and 2014 amortized emissions were added
together to determine the total CO2e Emissions for
the construction of the proposed project.
Draft guidance from the SCAQMD recommend amortizing construction emissions over a
30-year period to account for their contribution to project lifetime greenhouse gas
emissions. The 2013 and 2014 annual MTCO2e emissions were amortized over a 30-year
period, total construction emissions would be estimated at 23.1 MTCO2e per year, which
is far below the 3,500 MTCO2e residential screening threshold suggested by SCAQMD.
GHG emissions are expected to decrease in 2014 because construction will only occur for
two months in the year 2014, as compared to the 11 months in 2013. Construction
emissions would therefore have a less than cumulatively contribution to global climate
change impacts.
6.3. Operation Assumption
Emissions generated from the operation of the proposed project are related to both area
source emissions and mobile source emissions. Area sources include natural gas for
space and water heating, gasoline-powered landscaping and maintenance equipment,
consumer products (such as household cleaners). Mobile sources emissions are generated
from vehicle operations associated with the operation of the proposed project.
6.4. Operation Impacts
As previously stated, operation impacts are related to area source emissions and mobile
source emissions. Typically, area sources are small sources that contribute very little
emissions individually, but when combined may generate substantial amounts of
pollutants. Examples of generated area source emissions are gas for residential space and
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – 5DQFKR9LVWD9LOODJH 32
July 2012
water heating, gasoline-powered landscaping and maintenance equipment, and consumer
products such as household cleaners and chemicals. Area specific defaults in the
CalEEMod were used to calculate area source emissions. It is also assumed that the
surrounding residences will utilize natural gas for space and water heating.
CalEEMod was also used to calculate pollutants emissions from vehicular trips generated
from the proposed project. CalEEMod default inputs, vehicle mix and trip distances,
were unaltered for this analysis. In addition to the default inputs, it is assumed that
occupancy of the multi-family residences will begin in 2014. CalEEMod estimated
emissions from the operation of the proposed project are shown in Table 8. The
dispersion rate for each air pollutant differs during the summer and winter seasons.
During the summer months the inversion periods can augment the formation of O3. In the
winter months, steep inversion layers typically set up after the passage of a cold front and
these stagnant conditions can be characterized by a buildup of particulates or carbon
monoxide.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – 5DQFKR9LVWD9LOODJH 33
July 2012
Table 8. Operational Emissions (lbs/day)
Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Summer Emissions
Area 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 6.40 6.40
Energy 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.04 0.04
Mobile1 4.35 10.66 47.34 0.08 8.53 0.73
Total Emissions 20.15 11.88 97.55 0.18 14.97 7.17
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceed thresholds? No No No No No No
Winter Emissions
Area 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 6.40 6.40
Energy 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.04 0.04
Mobile1 4.21 11.36 43.76 0.07 8.54 0.74
Total Emissions 20.01 12.58 93.97 0.17 14.98 7.18
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceed thresholds? No No No No No No
Source: Entech Consulting Group, 2012
1. Mobile emissions were estimated utilizing CalEEMod defaults based on trip generation rates based upon data collected by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 8th Edition.
Emission calculations generated from CalEEMod demonstrate that the operation of the
proposed project will not cause a significant impact to the surrounding area. CalEEMod
was used to calculate average daily emissions for both area source and mobile source
emissions. Project-related emissions do not exceed the SCAQMD’s established
thresholds. Calculated emissions for ROG, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 are far below the
thresholds. Therefore, the operation of the Project does not cause a significant impact to
the surrounding area.
Greenhouse Gas Operational Emissions
GHG emissions were calculated from activities that would occur from tenant use,
mechanical building operations, and trip generations associated with vehicular traffic.
CalEEMod will be utilized to estimate CO2e emissions from the operation of the
proposed project. Identified within CalEEMod are specific sources of GHG emissions in
the form of area, energy, mobile, waste and water. Table 9 displays the CalEEMod
results and the output results are located in Appendix B.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 34
July 2012
Table 9. CO2e Emissions for Operation of Proposed Project
Construction Year
and Season
CO2e Emissions,
metric tons/year
Annually
Area 91
Energy 108
Mobile 1,081
Waste 25
Water 7
Total 1,312
Source: Entech Consulting Group, 2012
Draft guidance from the SCAQMD recommend a significance threshold for residential
projects of 3,500 MTCO2e. The total annual GHG emissions were estimated to be 1,312
MTCO2e per year, which is below the 3,500 MTCO2e residential screening threshold
suggested by SCAQMD. Operation emissions would therefore have a less than
cumulatively contribution to global climate change impacts.
Toxic Air Contaminants
In 1999, the CARB identified particulate emissions from diesel-fueled engines as a Toxic
Air Contaminant (TAC). Once a substance is identified as a TAC, the CARB is required
by law to determine if there is a need for further control. This is referred to as risk
management. The process of further studies is ongoing at the CARB, with committees
meeting to analyze both stationary and mobile diesel engine sources, as well as many
other aspects of the problem. No guidance has been issued on impact analysis or control
measures. Therefore, other than recognition of CARB actions, no analysis can be made at
this time for TAC impact from diesel engine exhaust. The status of impact analysis of
diesel engine exhaust is not unlike the consideration of PM2.5, which was defined as a
federal criteria pollutant in 1997.
Specific mitigation measures have been included in projects that would create or be
located near facilities that have high concentrations of diesel engine vehicles, such as
distribution warehouses or bus yards. There are no similar facilities as part of the
proposed project or near the project site.
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 35
July 2012
6.5. Consistency With Air Quality Management Plan
The regional air quality plan is the SCAQMD’s AQMP. Consistency with the AQMP is
typically determined by whether the project would increase the frequency or severity of
violation of exiting air quality violations, contribute to new violations, or delay the timely
attainment of air quality standards or interim reductions as specified in the AQMP.
Based on the air quality emissions modeling contained in this report, with the
implementation of identified mitigation measures, the air emissions associated with the
proposed project would be below the applicable thresholds of significance. Thus, it is
expected that there would be no short-term construction impacts or long-term operational
impacts on air quality due to the proposed project, and implementation of the project
would not contribute to the severity of existing air quality violations or create new ones.
6.6. Odors
Odors are one of the most obvious forms of air pollution to the general public. Odors can
present a significant problem for both the source and the surrounding community.
Offensive odors seldom cause any physical harm. Sometimes offensive odors cause
agitation, anger, and concern to the public about the possibility of health effects,
especially in residential neighborhoods located near industrial sources. Public concerns
are that offensive odors may cause adverse health effects, but that is not necessarily the
case. For example, hydrogen sulfide (H2S) gas, which has a very unpleasant rotten egg
odor, is not toxic at low concentrations.
The proposed project would not have any significant odor sources and any odors
generated would be similar in nature to odors from commercial and retail land uses. The
surrounding land uses are commercial in nature; the surrounding properties are not
considered sensitive to odors but may be considered odor producers. During a site visit,
no unusual or objectionable odors were detected from on-site or off-site land uses. Thus,
the proposed project is not anticipated to be exposed to, or generate, significant odors.
6.7. Cumulative Impacts
The operational impact analysis is based on cumulative traffic conditions in the project
area. As shown in that analysis, the proposed project would not result in violations of the
state or federal ambient air quality standards. The proposed project would be consistent
with the SCAQMD’s AQMP, which is a long-range air quality planning document. Thus,
the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on cumulative regional
and local air quality.
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 36
July 2012
7.0 MITIGATION MEASURES
As previously stated, if significant impacts to the surrounding area were generated due to
the construction and operation of the proposed Project mitigation measures minimizing
the impacts would be discussed. After a detailed analysis, it has been determined that no
significant impacts will be created from the construction and operation of the proposed
Project, thus no mitigation measures are required. However, it is recommended that the
following Best Available Control Measures (BACM) be implemented to minimize the
emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 during construction as a preventative measure:
• Minimize land disturbances
• Utilize watering trucks to minimize dust
• Cover trucks when hauling dirt
• Put grading and earth moving on hold when wind gusts exceed 25 miles per hour
unless the soil is wet enough to prevent dispersion.
• Stabilize the surface of dirt piles if they are not removed immediately
• Sweep nearby paved streets at least once per day if there is evidence of dirt that
has been carried onto the roadway.
• Revegetate disturbed land as soon as possible
• Remove unused materials.
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 37
July 2012
8.0 CONCLUSION
The air quality assessment conducted on the project area demonstrates that the proposed
project will cause a less than significant impact to the ambient air quality. The South
Coast Air Basin is designated as attainment for criteria pollutants SO2 and Lead.
However, the basin is currently in nonattainment for O3 and NO2. VOC and NOx
emissions, precursors to O3, are far below the thresholds established by the SCAQMD.
The Project’s demonstration of compliance with the SCAQMD thresholds is consistent
with the federal NAAQS.
The basin is also in nonattainment for PM10 and PM2.5. However, the impact analysis
performed demonstrates that PM10 and PM2.5 emissions generated throughout the
operation of the proposed Project will be far below the thresholds established by the
SCAQMD. Compliance with the SCAQMD thresholds is consistent with the federal
NAAQS.
Short-term impacts will be generated from the construction of the proposed Project.
However, the emissions generated are far the below the SCAQMD established thresholds
and will not cause a significant impact to the surrounding area. BACMs are
recommended to be employed during construction as preventative measures. Further the
proposed project would not expose people to objectionable orders.
The air quality assessment conducted demonstrates that the proposed Project will not
worsen air quality, create addition violations, or delay the areas redesignation to
attainment for criteria pollutants in nonattainment of federal NAAQS.
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 38
July 2012
9.0 REFERENCES
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation
Measures. August 2010.
California Air Resource Board web page, www.arb.ca.gov
California Department of Transportation web page, http://www.dot.ca.gov/
City of Temecula web page, http://www.cityoftemecula.org/
Environ International Corporation in coordination with South Coast Air Quality Management
District and other Air Quality Districts. California Emissions Estimator Model version 2011.1.
February 2011.
Google Maps web page, http://maps.google.com
Institute of Transportation Studies University of California, Davis. Transportation Project-Level
Carbon Monoxide Protocol. Revised 1997.
South Coast Air Quality Management District web page, www.aqmd.gov
South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2007 Final Air Quality Management Plan. June
2007.
South Coast Air Quality Management District. Greenhouse Gas CEQA Significance Threshold
Stakeholder Working Group #15 (slide presentation). Diamond Bar, CA. SCAQMD.
http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/GHG/2010/ sept28mtg/ghgmtg15-web.pdf. September
28, 2010.
Temecula General Plan. Air Quality Element. Created in 1993, revised 2005.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency web page. Air Section, www.epa.gov
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 39
July 2012
Appendix A CEQA Appendix G Checklist
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 40
July 2012
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Where available, the significance
criteria established by the
applicable air quality management
or pollution control district may be
relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
b. Violate any air quality standard
or contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality
violation?
c. Result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the
project region is nonattainment
under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d. Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e. Create objectionable odors
affecting a substantial number of
people?
Discussion:
A through E. An air quality assessment was performed on the impacts of the construction
and operation of the proposed project. The South Coast Air Basin is currently designated
as nonattainment for O3, PM10, and PM2.5, a maintenance area for CO and NO2, and in
attainment for all other federal criteria pollutants. Emissions calculated by CalEEMod
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 41
July 2012
were far below the SCAQMD thresholds, indicating that the construction and operation
of the proposed project will create a less than significant impact to the surrounding area.
Projects of this type can potentially create CO “hot-spots” at nearby affected
intersections. The proposed project site is located in an area that is designated as a
maintenance area for CO. The Caltrans Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide
Protocol outlines guidance on how to perform a CO “hot-spot” analysis. Those
guidelines were followed and it was determined that no CO “hot-spots” will be created
from the operation of the proposed project.
The air quality assessment conducted on the project area demonstrates that the proposed
project will cause a less than significant impact to the ambient air quality. The basin is
currently in nonattainment for O3 and NO2. VOC and NOx emissions, precursors to O3,
are far below the thresholds established by the SCAQMD. The Project’s demonstration
of compliance with the SCAQMD thresholds is consistent with the federal NAAQS.
The basin is also in nonattainment for PM10 and PM2.5. However, the impact analysis
performed demonstrates that minimal PM10 and PM2.5 will be generated throughout the
operation of the proposed Project. The PM10 and PM2.5 emissions generated from the
proposed project is far below the thresholds established by the SCAQMD. Compliance
with the SCAQMD thresholds is consistent with the federal NAAQS.
The air quality assessment also determined that the operation of the proposed project will
not be a significant source of offensive orders. Any odors generated from the project will
be similar in nature to odors from typical single family residences.
Further, the operational impact analysis is based on the cumulative conditions in the
project area. As shown in the operational analysis, the proposed project will not worsen
air quality, create additional violations, or delay the areas federal and state attainment
goals. Thus, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact on cumulative
and local air quality.
City of Temecula – Rancho Vista Village 42
July 2012
Appendix B CalEEMod Results
1 of 22
Off-road Equipment - Changes made to default are based on specific information regarding the proposed project.
Grading -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation -
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - The project site is 8.67 acres.
Construction Phase -
Riverside-South Coast County, Annual
City of Temecula - Rancho Vista Village
1.1 Land Usage
Apartments Low Rise 120 Dwelling Unit
Land Uses Size Metric
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
10
Wind Speed (m/s)
Precipitation Freq (Days)
2.4
28
1.3 User Entered Comments
1.0 Project Characteristics
2.0 Emissions Summary
Utility Company
Date: 7/10/2012CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1
2 of 22
2014 0.53 0.35 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 31.78 31.78 0.00 0.00 31.88
2013 0.80 5.36 4.08 0.01 0.19 0.33 0.53 0.04 0.33 0.37 0.00 646.82 646.82 0.07 0.00 648.19
Total 1.33 5.71 4.32 0.01 0.19 0.36 0.56 0.04 0.36 0.40 0.00 678.60 678.60 0.07 0.00 680.07
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated Construction
2.1 Overall Construction
2014 0.53 0.35 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 31.78 31.78 0.00 0.00 31.88
2013 0.80 5.36 4.08 0.01 0.29 0.33 0.62 0.09 0.33 0.42 0.00 646.82 646.82 0.07 0.00 648.19
Total 1.33 5.71 4.32 0.01 0.29 0.36 0.65 0.09 0.36 0.45 0.00 678.60 678.60 0.07 0.00 680.07
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated Construction
3 of 22
2.2 Overall Operational
Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.21 0.00 11.21 0.66 0.00 25.11
Mobile 0.68 1.80 7.55 0.01 1.23 0.08 1.31 0.05 0.08 0.12 0.00 1,080.00 1,080.00 0.05 0.00 1,081.01
Area 0.94 0.03 2.63 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 12.75 76.47 89.21 0.04 0.00 90.64
Energy 0.01 0.09 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 107.82 107.82 0.00 0.00 108.48
Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.24 0.01 6.93
Total 1.63 1.92 10.22 0.01 1.23 0.08 1.45 0.05 0.08 0.26 23.96 1,264.38 1,288.33 0.99 0.01 1,312.17
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated Operational
4 of 22
2.2 Overall Operational
Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.21 0.00 11.21 0.66 0.00 25.11
Mobile 0.68 1.80 7.55 0.01 1.23 0.08 1.31 0.05 0.08 0.12 0.00 1,080.00 1,080.00 0.05 0.00 1,081.01
Area 0.94 0.03 2.63 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 12.75 76.47 89.21 0.04 0.00 90.64
Energy 0.01 0.09 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 107.82 107.82 0.00 0.00 108.48
Water 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.24 0.01 6.93
Total 1.63 1.92 10.22 0.01 1.23 0.08 1.45 0.05 0.08 0.26 23.96 1,264.38 1,288.33 0.99 0.01 1,312.17
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated Operational
3.0 Construction Detail
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
5 of 22
3.2 Site Preparation - 2013
Off-Road 0.05 0.40 0.23 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 36.27 36.27 0.00 0.00 36.35
Fugitive Dust 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.05 0.40 0.23 0.00 0.09 0.02 0.11 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.00 36.27 36.27 0.00 0.00 36.35
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.79
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
Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.79
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
6 of 22
3.2 Site Preparation - 2013
Off-Road 0.05 0.40 0.23 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 36.27 36.27 0.00 0.00 36.35
Fugitive Dust 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.05 0.40 0.23 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.00 36.27 36.27 0.00 0.00 36.35
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.79
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
Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.79 0.00 0.00 0.79
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
7 of 22
3.3 Grading - 2013
Off-Road 0.09 0.68 0.42 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.00 63.78 63.78 0.01 0.00 63.93
Fugitive Dust 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.09 0.68 0.42 0.00 0.07 0.04 0.11 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.00 63.78 63.78 0.01 0.00 63.93
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.88
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
Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.88
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
8 of 22
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
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.88
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
Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.88
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Grading - 2013
Off-Road 0.09 0.68 0.42 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.00 63.78 63.78 0.01 0.00 63.93
Fugitive Dust 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.09 0.68 0.42 0.00 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.00 63.78 63.78 0.01 0.00 63.93
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated Construction On-Site
9 of 22
Vendor 0.02 0.24 0.13 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 36.67 36.67 0.00 0.00 36.69
Worker 0.05 0.06 0.60 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 87.00 87.00 0.01 0.00 87.11
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
Total 0.07 0.30 0.73 0.00 0.13 0.01 0.14 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.00 123.67 123.67 0.01 0.00 123.80
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Building Construction - 2013
Off-Road 0.59 3.99 2.70 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.00 421.43 421.43 0.05 0.00 422.44
Total 0.59 3.99 2.70 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.00 421.43 421.43 0.05 0.00 422.44
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
10 of 22
Vendor 0.02 0.24 0.13 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 36.67 36.67 0.00 0.00 36.69
Worker 0.05 0.06 0.60 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 87.00 87.00 0.01 0.00 87.11
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
Total 0.07 0.30 0.73 0.00 0.13 0.01 0.14 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.00 123.67 123.67 0.01 0.00 123.80
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Building Construction - 2013
Off-Road 0.59 3.99 2.70 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.00 421.43 421.43 0.05 0.00 422.44
Total 0.59 3.99 2.70 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.00 421.43 421.43 0.05 0.00 422.44
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated Construction On-Site
11 of 22
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
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.30 1.30 0.00 0.00 1.30
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
Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.30 1.30 0.00 0.00 1.30
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Paving - 2014
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Off-Road 0.05 0.32 0.21 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 26.46 26.46 0.00 0.00 26.55
Total 0.05 0.32 0.21 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 26.46 26.46 0.00 0.00 26.55
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
12 of 22
3.5 Paving - 2014
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Off-Road 0.05 0.32 0.21 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 26.46 26.46 0.00 0.00 26.55
Total 0.05 0.32 0.21 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 26.46 26.46 0.00 0.00 26.55
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.30 1.30 0.00 0.00 1.30
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
Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.30 1.30 0.00 0.00 1.30
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
13 of 22
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2014
Off-Road 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.55 2.55 0.00 0.00 2.56
Archit. Coating 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.47 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.55 2.55 0.00 0.00 2.56
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.47 1.47 0.00 0.00 1.47
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
Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.47 1.47 0.00 0.00 1.47
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
14 of 22
4.0 Mobile Detail
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
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
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.47 1.47 0.00 0.00 1.47
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
Total 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.47 1.47 0.00 0.00 1.47
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2014
Off-Road 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.55 2.55 0.00 0.00 2.56
Archit. Coating 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.47 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.55 2.55 0.00 0.00 2.56
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated Construction On-Site
15 of 22
Unmitigated 0.68 1.80 7.55 0.01 1.23 0.08 1.31 0.05 0.08 0.12 0.00 1,080.00 1,080.00 0.05 0.00 1,081.01
Mitigated 0.68 1.80 7.55 0.01 1.23 0.08 1.31 0.05 0.08 0.12 0.00 1,080.00 1,080.00 0.05 0.00 1,081.01
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Apartments Low Rise 790.80 859.20 728.40 2,248,401 2,248,401
Total 790.80 859.20 728.40 2,248,401 2,248,401
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Low Rise 10.80 7.30 7.50 40.20 19.20 40.60
Miles Trip %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW
5.0 Energy Detail
16 of 22
Electricity
Mitigated
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.01 0.09 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 107.82 107.82 0.00 0.00 108.48
Electricity
Unmitigated
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.01 0.09 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 107.82 107.82 0.00 0.00 108.48
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Apartments Low
Rise
2.02045e+006 0.01 0.09 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 107.82 107.82 0.00 0.00 108.48
Total 0.01 0.09 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 107.82 107.82 0.00 0.00 108.48
NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
17 of 22
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Apartments Low
Rise
536722 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Electricity Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Apartments Low
Rise
2.02045e+006 0.01 0.09 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 107.82 107.82 0.00 0.00 108.48
Total 0.01 0.09 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 107.82 107.82 0.00 0.00 108.48
NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated
18 of 22
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
Unmitigated 0.94 0.03 2.63 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 12.75 76.47 89.21 0.04 0.00 90.64
Mitigated 0.94 0.03 2.63 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 12.75 76.47 89.21 0.04 0.00 90.64
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Apartments Low
Rise
536722 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Electricity Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated
19 of 22
Architectural
Coating
0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hearth 0.40 0.01 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.12 12.75 73.48 86.23 0.04 0.00 87.59
Consumer
Products
0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Landscaping 0.06 0.02 1.87 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 2.98 2.98 0.00 0.00 3.05
Total 0.94 0.03 2.62 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 12.75 76.46 89.21 0.04 0.00 90.64
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated
6.2 Area by SubCategory
Architectural
Coating
0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hearth 0.40 0.01 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.12 12.75 73.48 86.23 0.04 0.00 87.59
Consumer
Products
0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Landscaping 0.06 0.02 1.87 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 2.98 2.98 0.00 0.00 3.05
Total 0.94 0.03 2.62 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 12.75 76.46 89.21 0.04 0.00 90.64
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated
20 of 22
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.2 Water by Land Use
Apartments Low
Rise
7.81848 /
4.92904
0.09 0.24 0.01 6.93
Total 0.09 0.24 0.01 6.93
Indoor/Outdoor
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated
Unmitigated 0.09 0.24 0.01 6.93
Mitigated 0.09 0.24 0.01 6.93
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
7.0 Water Detail
21 of 22
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.2 Water by Land Use
Apartments Low
Rise
7.81848 /
4.92904
0.09 0.24 0.01 6.93
Total 0.09 0.24 0.01 6.93
Indoor/Outdoor
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated
8.0 Waste Detail
Unmitigated 11.21 0.66 0.00 25.11
Mitigated 11.21 0.66 0.00 25.11
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
tons/yr MT/yr
Category/Year
22 of 22
9.0 Vegetation
Apartments Low
Rise
55.2 11.21 0.66 0.00 25.11
Total 11.21 0.66 0.00 25.11
Waste
Disposed
ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Apartments Low
Rise
55.2 11.21 0.66 0.00 25.11
Total 11.21 0.66 0.00 25.11
Waste
Disposed
ROG NOx CO SO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons tons/yr MT/yr
Unmitigated
1 of 18
Off-road Equipment - Changes made to default are based on specific information regarding the proposed project.
Grading -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation -
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - The project site is 8.67 acres.
Construction Phase -
Riverside-South Coast County, Winter
City of Temecula - Rancho Vista Village
1.1 Land Usage
Apartments Low Rise 120 Dwelling Unit
Land Uses Size Metric
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
10
Wind Speed (m/s)
Precipitation Freq (Days)
2.4
28
1.3 User Entered Comments
1.0 Project Characteristics
2.0 Emissions Summary
Utility Company
Date: 7/10/2012CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1
2 of 18
2014 47.41 32.18 21.50 0.03 0.22 2.74 2.94 0.01 2.74 2.75 0.00 3,055.21 0.00 0.48 0.00 3,065.21
2013 9.99 80.10 46.39 0.07 7.28 3.94 11.22 3.88 3.94 7.82 0.00 8,165.79 0.00 0.90 0.00 8,184.69
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
2014 47.41 32.18 21.50 0.03 0.22 2.74 2.94 0.01 2.74 2.75 0.00 3,055.21 0.00 0.48 0.00 3,065.21
2013 9.99 80.10 46.39 0.07 18.30 3.94 22.24 9.94 3.94 13.88 0.00 8,165.79 0.00 0.90 0.00 8,184.69
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction
3 of 18
Energy 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
Mobile 4.21 11.36 43.76 0.07 8.08 0.46 8.54 0.28 0.46 0.74 6,884.30 0.32 6,890.98
Area 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 0.00 6.40 0.00 6.40 846.81 2,178.04 3.37 0.05 3,111.72
Total 20.01 12.58 93.97 0.17 8.08 0.46 14.98 0.28 0.46 7.18 846.81 9,713.57 3.70 0.06 10,657.90
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Operational
2.2 Overall Operational
Energy 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
Mobile 4.21 11.36 43.76 0.07 8.08 0.46 8.54 0.28 0.46 0.74 6,884.30 0.32 6,890.98
Area 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 0.00 6.40 0.00 6.40 846.81 2,178.04 3.37 0.05 3,111.72
Total 20.01 12.58 93.97 0.17 8.08 0.46 14.98 0.28 0.46 7.18 846.81 9,713.57 3.70 0.06 10,657.90
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Operational
3.0 Construction Detail
4 of 18
3.2 Site Preparation - 2013
Off-Road 9.90 79.99 45.35 0.07 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93 7,997.69 0.89 8,016.38
Fugitive Dust 18.07 0.00 18.07 9.93 0.00 9.93 0.00
Total 9.90 79.99 45.35 0.07 18.07 3.93 22.00 9.93 3.93 13.86 7,997.69 0.89 8,016.38
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.09 0.11 1.05 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 168.10 0.01 168.31
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
Total 0.09 0.11 1.05 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 168.10 0.01 168.31
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
5 of 18
3.2 Site Preparation - 2013
Off-Road 9.90 79.99 45.35 0.07 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93 0.00 7,997.69 0.89 8,016.38
Fugitive Dust 7.05 0.00 7.05 3.87 0.00 3.87 0.00
Total 9.90 79.99 45.35 0.07 7.05 3.93 10.98 3.87 3.93 7.80 0.00 7,997.69 0.89 8,016.38
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.09 0.11 1.05 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 168.10 0.01 168.31
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
Total 0.09 0.11 1.05 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 168.10 0.01 168.31
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
6 of 18
3.3 Grading - 2013
Off-Road 8.86 67.65 42.02 0.07 3.80 3.80 3.80 3.80 7,032.35 0.79 7,049.03
Fugitive Dust 6.55 0.00 6.55 3.31 0.00 3.31 0.00
Total 8.86 67.65 42.02 0.07 6.55 3.80 10.35 3.31 3.80 7.11 7,032.35 0.79 7,049.03
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.05 0.06 0.58 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.01 93.39 0.01 93.51
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
Total 0.05 0.06 0.58 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.01 93.39 0.01 93.51
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
7 of 18
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
Worker 0.05 0.06 0.58 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.01 93.39 0.01 93.51
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
Total 0.05 0.06 0.58 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.01 93.39 0.01 93.51
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Grading - 2013
Off-Road 8.86 67.65 42.02 0.07 3.80 3.80 3.80 3.80 0.00 7,032.35 0.79 7,049.03
Fugitive Dust 2.56 0.00 2.56 1.29 0.00 1.29 0.00
Total 8.86 67.65 42.02 0.07 2.56 3.80 6.36 1.29 3.80 5.09 0.00 7,032.35 0.79 7,049.03
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction On-Site
8 of 18
Vendor 0.17 2.16 1.16 0.00 0.12 0.07 0.19 0.01 0.07 0.08 349.68 0.01 349.85
Worker 0.42 0.54 5.01 0.01 1.12 0.04 1.16 0.04 0.04 0.08 803.16 0.05 804.16
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
Total 0.59 2.70 6.17 0.01 1.24 0.11 1.35 0.05 0.11 0.16 1,152.84 0.06 1,154.01
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Building Construction - 2013
Off-Road 5.17 34.66 23.45 0.04 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 4,040.62 0.46 4,050.31
Total 5.17 34.66 23.45 0.04 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 4,040.62 0.46 4,050.31
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
9 of 18
Vendor 0.17 2.16 1.16 0.00 0.12 0.07 0.19 0.01 0.07 0.08 349.68 0.01 349.85
Worker 0.42 0.54 5.01 0.01 1.12 0.04 1.16 0.04 0.04 0.08 803.16 0.05 804.16
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
Total 0.59 2.70 6.17 0.01 1.24 0.11 1.35 0.05 0.11 0.16 1,152.84 0.06 1,154.01
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Building Construction - 2013
Off-Road 5.17 34.66 23.45 0.04 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 0.00 4,040.62 0.46 4,050.31
Total 5.17 34.66 23.45 0.04 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 0.00 4,040.62 0.46 4,050.31
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction On-Site
10 of 18
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
Worker 0.07 0.08 0.80 0.00 0.20 0.01 0.20 0.01 0.01 0.01 137.57 0.01 137.73
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
Total 0.07 0.08 0.80 0.00 0.20 0.01 0.20 0.01 0.01 0.01 137.57 0.01 137.73
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Paving - 2014
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Off-Road 5.20 32.09 20.70 0.03 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 2,917.65 0.47 2,927.48
Total 5.20 32.09 20.70 0.03 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 2,917.65 0.47 2,927.48
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
11 of 18
3.5 Paving - 2014
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Off-Road 5.20 32.09 20.70 0.03 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 0.00 2,917.65 0.47 2,927.48
Total 5.20 32.09 20.70 0.03 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 0.00 2,917.65 0.47 2,927.48
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.07 0.08 0.80 0.00 0.20 0.01 0.20 0.01 0.01 0.01 137.57 0.01 137.73
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
Total 0.07 0.08 0.80 0.00 0.20 0.01 0.20 0.01 0.01 0.01 137.57 0.01 137.73
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
12 of 18
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2014
Off-Road 0.45 2.77 1.92 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 281.19 0.04 282.03
Archit. Coating 46.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 47.34 2.77 1.92 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 281.19 0.04 282.03
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.08 0.10 0.91 0.00 0.22 0.01 0.23 0.01 0.01 0.02 155.91 0.01 156.09
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
Total 0.08 0.10 0.91 0.00 0.22 0.01 0.23 0.01 0.01 0.02 155.91 0.01 156.09
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
13 of 18
4.0 Mobile Detail
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
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
Worker 0.08 0.10 0.91 0.00 0.22 0.01 0.23 0.01 0.01 0.02 155.91 0.01 156.09
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
Total 0.08 0.10 0.91 0.00 0.22 0.01 0.23 0.01 0.01 0.02 155.91 0.01 156.09
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2014
Off-Road 0.45 2.77 1.92 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.00 281.19 0.04 282.03
Archit. Coating 46.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 47.34 2.77 1.92 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.00 281.19 0.04 282.03
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction On-Site
14 of 18
Unmitigated 4.21 11.36 43.76 0.07 8.08 0.46 8.54 0.28 0.46 0.74 6,884.30 0.32 6,890.98
Mitigated 4.21 11.36 43.76 0.07 8.08 0.46 8.54 0.28 0.46 0.74 6,884.30 0.32 6,890.98
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Apartments Low Rise 790.80 859.20 728.40 2,248,401 2,248,401
Total 790.80 859.20 728.40 2,248,401 2,248,401
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Low Rise 10.80 7.30 7.50 40.20 19.20 40.60
Miles Trip %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW
5.0 Energy Detail
15 of 18
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Apartments Low
Rise
5535.48 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
Total 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
16 of 18
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
Unmitigated 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 0.00 6.40 0.00 6.40 846.81 2,178.04 3.37 0.05 3,111.72
Mitigated 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 0.00 6.40 0.00 6.40 846.81 2,178.04 3.37 0.05 3,111.72
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Apartments Low
Rise
5.53548 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
Total 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU lb/day lb/day
Mitigated
17 of 18
Architectural
Coating
0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hearth 12.77 0.59 39.72 0.10 0.00 6.35 0.00 6.34 846.81 2,160.00 3.35 0.05 3,093.27
Consumer
Products
2.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Landscaping 0.33 0.12 10.27 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 18.04 0.02 18.45
Total 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 0.00 6.40 0.00 6.39 846.81 2,178.04 3.37 0.05 3,111.72
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Mitigated
6.2 Area by SubCategory
Architectural
Coating
0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hearth 12.77 0.59 39.72 0.10 0.00 6.35 0.00 6.34 846.81 2,160.00 3.35 0.05 3,093.27
Consumer
Products
2.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Landscaping 0.33 0.12 10.27 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 18.04 0.02 18.45
Total 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 0.00 6.40 0.00 6.39 846.81 2,178.04 3.37 0.05 3,111.72
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated
18 of 18
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste Detail
9.0 Vegetation
1 of 18
Off-road Equipment - Changes made to default are based on specific information regarding the proposed project.
Grading -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation -
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - The project site is 8.67 acres.
Construction Phase -
Riverside-South Coast County, Summer
City of Temecula - Rancho Vista Village
1.1 Land Usage
Apartments Low Rise 120 Dwelling Unit
Land Uses Size Metric
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
10
Wind Speed (m/s)
Precipitation Freq (Days)
2.4
28
1.3 User Entered Comments
1.0 Project Characteristics
2.0 Emissions Summary
Utility Company
Date: 7/10/2012CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1
2 of 18
2014 47.41 32.17 21.62 0.03 0.22 2.74 2.94 0.01 2.74 2.75 0.00 3,072.26 0.00 0.48 0.00 3,082.27
2013 9.99 80.09 46.54 0.08 7.28 3.94 11.22 3.88 3.94 7.82 0.00 8,186.58 0.00 0.90 0.00 8,205.49
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
2014 47.41 32.17 21.62 0.03 0.22 2.74 2.94 0.01 2.74 2.75 0.00 3,072.26 0.00 0.48 0.00 3,082.27
2013 9.99 80.09 46.54 0.08 18.30 3.94 22.24 9.94 3.94 13.88 0.00 8,186.58 0.00 0.90 0.00 8,205.49
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction
3 of 18
Energy 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
Mobile 4.35 10.66 47.34 0.08 8.08 0.45 8.53 0.28 0.45 0.73 7,573.43 0.31 7,579.93
Area 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 0.00 6.40 0.00 6.40 846.81 2,178.04 3.37 0.05 3,111.72
Total 20.15 11.88 97.55 0.18 8.08 0.45 14.97 0.28 0.45 7.17 846.81 10,402.70 3.69 0.06 11,346.85
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Operational
2.2 Overall Operational
Energy 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
Mobile 4.35 10.66 47.34 0.08 8.08 0.45 8.53 0.28 0.45 0.73 7,573.43 0.31 7,579.93
Area 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 0.00 6.40 0.00 6.40 846.81 2,178.04 3.37 0.05 3,111.72
Total 20.15 11.88 97.55 0.18 8.08 0.45 14.97 0.28 0.45 7.17 846.81 10,402.70 3.69 0.06 11,346.85
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Operational
3.0 Construction Detail
4 of 18
3.2 Site Preparation - 2013
Off-Road 9.90 79.99 45.35 0.07 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93 7,997.69 0.89 8,016.38
Fugitive Dust 18.07 0.00 18.07 9.93 0.00 9.93 0.00
Total 9.90 79.99 45.35 0.07 18.07 3.93 22.00 9.93 3.93 13.86 7,997.69 0.89 8,016.38
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.09 0.10 1.20 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 188.89 0.01 189.12
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
Total 0.09 0.10 1.20 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 188.89 0.01 189.12
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
5 of 18
3.2 Site Preparation - 2013
Off-Road 9.90 79.99 45.35 0.07 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93 0.00 7,997.69 0.89 8,016.38
Fugitive Dust 7.05 0.00 7.05 3.87 0.00 3.87 0.00
Total 9.90 79.99 45.35 0.07 7.05 3.93 10.98 3.87 3.93 7.80 0.00 7,997.69 0.89 8,016.38
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.09 0.10 1.20 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 188.89 0.01 189.12
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
Total 0.09 0.10 1.20 0.00 0.23 0.01 0.24 0.01 0.01 0.02 188.89 0.01 189.12
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
6 of 18
3.3 Grading - 2013
Off-Road 8.86 67.65 42.02 0.07 3.80 3.80 3.80 3.80 7,032.35 0.79 7,049.03
Fugitive Dust 6.55 0.00 6.55 3.31 0.00 3.31 0.00
Total 8.86 67.65 42.02 0.07 6.55 3.80 10.35 3.31 3.80 7.11 7,032.35 0.79 7,049.03
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.05 0.06 0.67 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.01 104.94 0.01 105.06
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
Total 0.05 0.06 0.67 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.01 104.94 0.01 105.06
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
7 of 18
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
Worker 0.05 0.06 0.67 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.01 104.94 0.01 105.06
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
Total 0.05 0.06 0.67 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.01 104.94 0.01 105.06
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Grading - 2013
Off-Road 8.86 67.65 42.02 0.07 3.80 3.80 3.80 3.80 0.00 7,032.35 0.79 7,049.03
Fugitive Dust 2.56 0.00 2.56 1.29 0.00 1.29 0.00
Total 8.86 67.65 42.02 0.07 2.56 3.80 6.36 1.29 3.80 5.09 0.00 7,032.35 0.79 7,049.03
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction On-Site
8 of 18
Vendor 0.16 2.08 1.02 0.00 0.12 0.07 0.19 0.01 0.07 0.08 352.76 0.01 352.93
Worker 0.43 0.49 5.72 0.01 1.12 0.04 1.16 0.04 0.04 0.08 902.48 0.05 903.56
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
Total 0.59 2.57 6.74 0.01 1.24 0.11 1.35 0.05 0.11 0.16 1,255.24 0.06 1,256.49
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Building Construction - 2013
Off-Road 5.17 34.66 23.45 0.04 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 4,040.62 0.46 4,050.31
Total 5.17 34.66 23.45 0.04 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 4,040.62 0.46 4,050.31
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
9 of 18
Vendor 0.16 2.08 1.02 0.00 0.12 0.07 0.19 0.01 0.07 0.08 352.76 0.01 352.93
Worker 0.43 0.49 5.72 0.01 1.12 0.04 1.16 0.04 0.04 0.08 902.48 0.05 903.56
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
Total 0.59 2.57 6.74 0.01 1.24 0.11 1.35 0.05 0.11 0.16 1,255.24 0.06 1,256.49
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Building Construction - 2013
Off-Road 5.17 34.66 23.45 0.04 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 0.00 4,040.62 0.46 4,050.31
Total 5.17 34.66 23.45 0.04 2.28 2.28 2.28 2.28 0.00 4,040.62 0.46 4,050.31
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction On-Site
10 of 18
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
Worker 0.07 0.08 0.92 0.00 0.20 0.01 0.20 0.01 0.01 0.01 154.61 0.01 154.79
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
Total 0.07 0.08 0.92 0.00 0.20 0.01 0.20 0.01 0.01 0.01 154.61 0.01 154.79
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Paving - 2014
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Off-Road 5.20 32.09 20.70 0.03 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 2,917.65 0.47 2,927.48
Total 5.20 32.09 20.70 0.03 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 2,917.65 0.47 2,927.48
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
11 of 18
3.5 Paving - 2014
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Off-Road 5.20 32.09 20.70 0.03 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 0.00 2,917.65 0.47 2,927.48
Total 5.20 32.09 20.70 0.03 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 0.00 2,917.65 0.47 2,927.48
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.07 0.08 0.92 0.00 0.20 0.01 0.20 0.01 0.01 0.01 154.61 0.01 154.79
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
Total 0.07 0.08 0.92 0.00 0.20 0.01 0.20 0.01 0.01 0.01 154.61 0.01 154.79
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
12 of 18
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2014
Off-Road 0.45 2.77 1.92 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 281.19 0.04 282.03
Archit. Coating 46.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 47.34 2.77 1.92 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 281.19 0.04 282.03
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
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
Worker 0.08 0.09 1.04 0.00 0.22 0.01 0.23 0.01 0.01 0.02 175.23 0.01 175.42
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
Total 0.08 0.09 1.04 0.00 0.22 0.01 0.23 0.01 0.01 0.02 175.23 0.01 175.42
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
13 of 18
4.0 Mobile Detail
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
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
Worker 0.08 0.09 1.04 0.00 0.22 0.01 0.23 0.01 0.01 0.02 175.23 0.01 175.42
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
Total 0.08 0.09 1.04 0.00 0.22 0.01 0.23 0.01 0.01 0.02 175.23 0.01 175.42
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2014
Off-Road 0.45 2.77 1.92 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.00 281.19 0.04 282.03
Archit. Coating 46.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 47.34 2.77 1.92 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.00 281.19 0.04 282.03
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated Construction On-Site
14 of 18
Unmitigated 4.35 10.66 47.34 0.08 8.08 0.45 8.53 0.28 0.45 0.73 7,573.43 0.31 7,579.93
Mitigated 4.35 10.66 47.34 0.08 8.08 0.45 8.53 0.28 0.45 0.73 7,573.43 0.31 7,579.93
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Apartments Low Rise 790.80 859.20 728.40 2,248,401 2,248,401
Total 790.80 859.20 728.40 2,248,401 2,248,401
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Apartments Low Rise 10.80 7.30 7.50 40.20 19.20 40.60
Miles Trip %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW
5.0 Energy Detail
15 of 18
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Apartments Low
Rise
5535.48 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
Total 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
16 of 18
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
Unmitigated 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 0.00 6.40 0.00 6.40 846.81 2,178.04 3.37 0.05 3,111.72
Mitigated 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 0.00 6.40 0.00 6.40 846.81 2,178.04 3.37 0.05 3,111.72
Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Apartments Low
Rise
5.53548 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
Total 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 651.23 0.01 0.01 655.20
NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU lb/day lb/day
Mitigated
17 of 18
Architectural
Coating
0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hearth 12.77 0.59 39.72 0.10 0.00 6.35 0.00 6.34 846.81 2,160.00 3.35 0.05 3,093.27
Consumer
Products
2.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Landscaping 0.33 0.12 10.27 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 18.04 0.02 18.45
Total 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 0.00 6.40 0.00 6.39 846.81 2,178.04 3.37 0.05 3,111.72
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Mitigated
6.2 Area by SubCategory
Architectural
Coating
0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hearth 12.77 0.59 39.72 0.10 0.00 6.35 0.00 6.34 846.81 2,160.00 3.35 0.05 3,093.27
Consumer
Products
2.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Landscaping 0.33 0.12 10.27 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 18.04 0.02 18.45
Total 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 0.00 6.40 0.00 6.39 846.81 2,178.04 3.37 0.05 3,111.72
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Unmitigated
18 of 18
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste Detail
9.0 Vegetation