Initial Study ERC Recommendation.pdf
CITY OF CUPERTINO
RECOMMENDATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
November 16, 2017
As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure, adopted by the City Council of the City of
Cupertino on May 27, 1983, as amended, the following described project was reviewed by the
Environmental Review Committee of the City of Cupertino on November 16, 2017.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
Application No(s): EA-2017-03, TM-2016-02
Applicant: Thomas Adamo (Lands of Adamo)
Location: 10208 Orange Avenue APN# 357-18-032
DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST
A Tentative Map application to allow the subdivision of an approximately 0.29 acre lot into 2 (two)
equal parcels of approximately 6,000 square feet each
FINDINGS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Mitigated Negative Declaration
finding that the project is consistent with the General Plan and is determined to be insignificant.
/s/Aarti Shrivastava
Aarti Shrivastava
Director of Community Development
g/erc/REC ea21703
CITY OF CUPERTINO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
October 2017
1501 Sports Drive, Suite A, Sacramento CA 95834
Office 916.372.6100 Fax 916.419.610
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
1 October 2017
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 2
B. SOURCES ....................................................................................................................................... 3
C. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ............................................. 3
D. DETERMINATION ...................................................................................................................... 4
E. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 5
F. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................... 5
G. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST .......................................................................................... 12
I. AESTHETICS........................................................................................................14
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. .................................................16
III. AIR QUALITY. .....................................................................................................18
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. ..............................................................................26
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. .................................................................................29
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. .....................................................................................32
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. .....................................................................35
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. ...............................................38
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. ..........................................................45
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING. ............................................................................49
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES. ....................................................................................50
XII. NOISE. ...................................................................................................................51
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. .........................................................................54
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES. ............................................................................................55
XV. RECREATION. .....................................................................................................57
XVI. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION. .....................................................58
XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. ..................................................................61
XVIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. .............................................................62
XIX. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. .............................................64
Appendices
Appendix A: Air Quality and GHG Modeling Results
Appendix B: Soil Remediation Plan
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
2 October 2017
INITIAL STUDY
October 2017
A. BACKGROUND
1. Project Title: Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Cupertino
Community Development Department
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3255
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Gian Paolo Martire
Associate Planner
(408) 777-3319
4. Project Location: 10206 and 10208 Orange Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Joseph and Doris C. Adamo Trust
3255 West March Lane, 4th Floor
Cupertino, CA
6. General Plan Designation: Residential (4.4-7.7 du/ac)
7. Zoning Designation: Planned Development [P(Res 4.4-7.7)]
8. Project Description Summary:
The Orange Avenue Lot Split Project is located within the Monta Vista Village Specific
Plan area at 10206 and 10208 Orange Avenue in the City of Cupertino, California. The
proposed project site is bordered by Orange Avenue to the west, and by existing one- and
two-story single-family residential development to the north, east, and south. Additional
single-family homes are located west of the site across Orange Avenue. The project would
include demolition of a small number of existing on-site structures and subdivision of the
12,960-square-foot property into two approximately 6,000-square-foot lots. The site would
be redeveloped with two single-family residences. In addition, the proposed project would
include widening of Orange Avenue along the project frontage.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3 October 2017
B. SOURCES
All of the technical reports and modeling results used for the project analysis are available upon
request at the Cupertino City Hall, located at 10300 Torre Avenue in Cupertino, California. The
City Hall is open between 7:30 AM and 5:30 PM, Monday through Thursday, and between 7:30
AM and 4:30 PM on Friday. The following documents are referenced information sources used
for purposes of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration:
1. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. California Environmental Quality Act, Air
Quality Guidelines. May 2017.
2. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. Plans & Climate. Available at:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-climate. Accessed September 2017.
3. California Department of Conservation. Santa Clara County Important Farmland Map
2014. Published October 2016.
4. California Department of Conservation. Special Studies Zones, Cupertino Quadrangle.
Effective July 1, 1974.
5. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Santa Clara County, Very High
Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. October 8, 2008.
6. California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site
List. Available at: http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/Cortese_List.cfm. Accessed March
2017.
7. California Department of Transportation. California Scenic Highway Mapping System.
Available at:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm. Accessed
March 2017.
8. California Department of Transportation. Transportation and Construction Vibration,
Guidance Manual. September 2013.
9. City of Cupertino. Emergency Operations Plan. September 2005.
10. City of Cupertino. General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated
Rezoning Draft EIR. June 18, 2014.
11. City of Cupertino. General Plan: Community Vision 2015 – 2040. Adopted October 20,
2015.
12. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Handbook, 9th Edition. September
2012.
13. McCloskey Consultants, Inc. Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue, Cupertino,
California. September 19, 2017.
14. Running Moose Environmental Consulting, LLC. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment,
10206 and 10208 Orange Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014. June 27, 2016.
15. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. 2013 Congestion Management Program.
October 2013.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is “Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4 October 2017
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forest
Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Noise
Population and Housing Public Services Recreation
Transportation and Circulation Tribal Cultural
Resources
Utilities and Service Systems
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
D. DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial study:
I find that the Proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will
be prepared.
I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially
significant unless mitigated” on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)
has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on
attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier
EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
Gian Paolo Martire, Associate Planner City of Cupertino
Printed Name For
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
5 October 2017
E. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
This Initial Study identifies and analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the Orange
Avenue Lot Split Project (proposed project). The information and analysis presented in this
document is organized in accordance with the order of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) checklist in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Where the analysis provided in this
document identifies potentially significant environmental effects of the project, mitigation
measures are prescribed.
The mitigation measures prescribed for environmental effects described in this Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) would be implemented in conjunction with the
project, as required by CEQA. The mitigation measures would be incorporated into the project
through project conditions of approval. The City would adopt findings and a Mitigation
Monitoring/Reporting Program for the project in conjunction with approval of the project.
On October 20, 2015, the City of Cupertino adopted an amended General Plan 1 and an associated
Environmental Impact Report (EIR).2 The General Plan EIR is a program EIR, prepared pursuant
to Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Sections
15000 et seq.). The General Plan EIR analyzed full implementation of the General Plan and
identified measures to mitigate the significant adverse impacts associated with buildout of the
General Plan. The proposed project would be consistent with the General Plan; therefore, in
accordance with Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines (Section 21083.3 of the Public Resources
Code), this IS/MND will tier from the previously certified EIR (SCH# 2014032007) prepared for
the City’s General Plan where appropriate.
F. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The following provides a description of the project site’s current location and setting, as well as
the proposed project components and the discretionary actions required for the project.
Project Location and Setting
The proposed project site consists of an approximately 12,960-square-foot (0.3-acre) property
located within the Monta Vista Village Specific Plan area at 10206 and 10208 Orange Avenue in
the City of Cupertino, California (see Figure 1 and Figure 2). The site is identified by Assessor’s
Parcel Number (APN) 357-18-032 and is zoned Planned Development [P(Res 4.4-7.7)]. The City’s
General Plan designates the site as Residential (4.4-7.7 du/ac). The proposed project site is
bordered by Orange Avenue to the west, and by existing one- and two-story single-family
residential development to the north, east, and south. Additional single-family homes are located
west of the site across Orange Avenue. The nearest major roadway, Stevens Creek Boulevard, is
located approximately 1,000 feet north of the site along Orange Avenue.
1 City of Cupertino. General Plan: Community Vision 2015 – 2040. Adopted October 20, 2015.
2 City of Cupertino. General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning Draft EIR. June
18, 2014.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
6 October 2017
Figure 1
Regional Project Location
N
Project Location
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
7 October 2017
Figure 2
Project Vicinity Map
Project Site
N
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
8
October 2017
The proposed project site currently contains two small residential structures (approximately 900
and 400 square feet, respectively), as well as a detached garage that has been converted into a
studio (approximately 200 square feet). Access to the garage is provided by a gravel driveway.
Both residences are connected to below-ground septic systems. A 100-square-foot shed and a
concrete patio are also present on the site. The 900-square-foot residence adjacent to Orange
Avenue is currently occupied, while the remaining on-site structures are vacant.
The 400-square-foot residence is located in the southeast portion of the site, and is separated from
the remainder of the site by wire fencing. Access to the residence is provided by a dirt driveway
that extends eastward from Orange Avenue. A small orchard was present on the undeveloped
portion of the site near the residence in the mid-1950s; however, agricultural operations associated
with the orchard have long since ceased and the orchard is no longer present.3 Vegetation present
on the site consists of scattered grasses and other weedy vegetation, as well as a small number of
trees. The site does not contain any aquatic or riparian habitat.
Project Components
The proposed project would include demolition of the existing on-site structures, removal of on-
site trees (as necessary), subdivision of the 12,960-square-foot property into two approximately
6,000-square-foot lots, and redevelopment of the site with two single-family residences (see Figure
3). In addition, the proposed project would include widening of Orange Avenue along the project
frontage. The project would be consistent with the existing zoning and General Plan land use
designations for the site.
As shown in Figure 4 below, both of the proposed single-family residences would be two stories
and would include attached garages and rear patio areas. Sewer and water service for the proposed
residences would be provided by the City by way of connections to existing sanitary sewer and
water supply lines located in Orange Avenue. Approximately 960 square feet of land along the
western portion of the site would be dedicated to the City, and the portion of Orange Avenue
fronting the project site would be widened to extend approximately ten feet into the dedicated area
(see Figure 3). New paved driveways would connect the garages of the two residences to the
widened roadway.
On-site runoff would be captured by a new series of swales bordering the northern and southern
sides of both of the proposed residences (see Figure 4). The swales would convey runoff to the
backyard area of the residences and route stormwater into a set of new six-inch diameter drywells
(see Figure 5). Runoff from the swales would enter the inlets at the top of the drywells and would
percolate through a layer of drain rock and filter fabric, allowing for stormwater to slowly infiltrate
the underlying soils. Each set of two drywells would be connected by a six-inch perforated pipe
set in a dissipation trench.
3 Running Moose Environmental Consulting, LLC. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10206 and 10208
Orange Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014. June 27, 2016.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
9
October 2017
Figure 3
Conceptual Site Plan
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
10
October 2017
Figure 4
Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
11
October 2017
Figure 5
Proposed Drainage System Detail
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
12
October 2017
Discretionary Action
Implementation of the proposed project would require City approval of a Tentative Subdivision
Map to subdivide the proposed project site into two approximately 6,000-square-foot lots (see
Figure 6).
G. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The following Checklist contains the environmental checklist form presented in Appendix G of
the CEQA Guidelines. The checklist form is used to describe the impacts of the proposed project.
A discussion follows each environmental issue identified in the checklist. Included in each
discussion are project-specific mitigation measures recommended, as appropriate, as part of the
proposed project.
For this checklist, the following designations are used:
Potentially Significant Impact: An impact that could be significant, and for which no mitigation
has been identified. If any potentially significant impacts are identified, an EIR must be prepared.
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: An impact that requires mitigation to
reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.
Less-Than-Significant Impact: Any impact that would not be considered significant under
CEQA relative to existing standards.
No Impact: The project would not have any impact.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
13
October 2017
Figure 6
Tentative Subdivision Map
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
14
October 2017
I. AESTHETICS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
b. Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
State scenic highway?
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
Discussion
a,b. Examples of typical scenic vistas would include mountain ranges, ridgelines, or bodies of
water as viewed from a highway, public space, or other area designated for the express
purpose of viewing and sightseeing. In general, a project’s impact to a scenic vista would
occur if development of the project would substantially change or remove a scenic vista.
Given that the proposed project site is currently developed and is located in a residential
neighborhood, redevelopment of the site with two single-family homes would not obstruct
views of a scenic vista. Furthermore, according to the California Scenic Highway Mapping
System, the proposed project site is located approximately 4.4 miles north of the nearest
State Scenic Highway, State Route (SR) 9, and approximately 0.85 mile south of Interstate
280 (I-280), an Eligible State Scenic Highway.4 Neither SR 9, nor Interstate 280, are visible
from the project site.
Based on the above discussion, the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse
effect on a scenic vista and would not substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic
Highway. Thus, no impact would occur related to such.
c. Distinguishing between public and private views is important when evaluating changes to
visual character or quality, because private views are views seen from privately-owned
land and are typically associated with individual viewers, including views from private
residences. Public views are experienced by the collective public, and include views of
significant landscape features and along scenic roads. According to CEQA (Pub. Resources
Code, § 21000 et seq.) case law, only public views, not private views, are protected under
CEQA. For example, in Association for Protection etc. Values v. City of Ukiah (1991) 2
Cal.App.4th 720 [3 Cal. Rptr.2d 488], the court determined that “we must differentiate
between adverse impacts upon particular persons and adverse impacts upon the
environment of persons in general. As recognized by the court in Topanga Beach Renters
4 California Department of Transportation. California Scenic Highway Mapping System. Available at:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm. Accessed March 2017.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
15
October 2017
Assn. v. Department of General Services (1976) 58 Cal.App.3d 188 [129 Cal.Rptr. 739]:
‘[A]ll government activity has some direct or indirect adverse effect on some persons. The
issue is not whether [the project] will adversely affect particular persons but whether [the
project] will adversely affect the environment of persons in general.’” Therefore, the focus
in this section is on potential impacts to public views. Sensitive public viewers in the
surrounding area would primarily consist of motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists travelling
on Orange Avenue.
Views of the proposed project site from Orange Avenue currently consist of the existing
on-site single-family residences, the two existing on-site driveways, and various trees and
shrubs located on the southern portion of the site. The project site is bordered on the north
and south by two-story single-family residences. The proposed project would include
demolition of the existing structures, removal of a majority of the on-site vegetation, and
redevelopment of the site with two single-family residences. As discussed previously,
Orange Avenue would be widened along the project frontage. The proposed residences
would be designed to be visually congruous with the existing residences to the north and
south of the project site.
Given that the site is already developed with residential uses, and the project would be
consistent with the surrounding single-family residential development, the project would
not substantially degrade the aesthetic character or quality of the site for motorists,
pedestrians, and bicyclists travelling along Orange Avenue. In addition, the project would
be consistent with the site’s existing zoning and General Plan land use designation. As
such, changes to aesthetic character and quality associated with buildout of the site have
been previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, impacts related to degrading
the existing visual character of the site and its surroundings would be less than significant.
d. The project site is currently developed with residential structures, and, thus, the site
contains existing sources of light and glare associated with such, including, but not limited
to, headlights on cars using the on-site driveways, exterior light fixtures, and interior light
spilling through windows. In addition, the site is surrounded by existing residential
development that currently generates light and glare in the area. Therefore, redevelopment
of the site with two residential homes would not introduce new sources of substantial light
or glare to the site which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area, and
implementation of the project would result in a less-than-significant impact.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
16
October 2017
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST
RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act contract?
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code section 4526),
or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as
defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could
individually or cumulatively result in loss of
Farmland to non-agricultural use?
Discussion
a,e. The proposed project site is currently developed with residential uses and is surrounded by
existing residential development. While the project site historically contained an orchard,
the site has not been used recently for agricultural production 5 and is currently designated
as “Urban and Built-Up Land” on the Santa Clara County Important Farmland map.6
Furthermore, the site is not zoned or designated in the General Plan for agriculture uses.
Given the designation of the site as Urban and Built-Up Land, development of the proposed
project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance to a non-agricultural use, or otherwise result in the loss of Farmland to non-
agricultural use. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the proposed project.
b. The proposed project site is not under a Williamson Act contract and is not designated or
zoned for agricultural uses. Therefore, buildout of the proposed project would not conflict
with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract, and no impact
would occur.
c,d. The project site is not considered forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section
12220[g]), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), and is not
zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104[g]). In
5 Running Moose Environmental Consulting, LLC. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10206 and 10208
Orange Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014. June 27, 2016.
6 California Department of Conservation. Santa Clara County Important Farmland Map 2014. Published October
2016.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
17
October 2017
addition, the General Plan land use designation for the site is Low-Density Residential.
Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact with regard to conversion of forest
land or any potential conflict with forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production
zoning.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
18
October 2017
III. AIR QUALITY.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-
Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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 non-attainment 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?
a-c. The City of Cupertino is located in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB),
which is under the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD). The SFBAAB area is currently designated as a nonattainment area for the
State and federal ozone, State and federal fine particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter
(PM 2.5 ), and State respirable particulate matter 10 microns in diameter (PM 10 ) ambient air
quality standards (AAQS). The SFBAAB is designated attainment or unclassified for all
other AAQS. It should be noted that on January 9, 2013, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA) issued a final rule to determine that the Bay Area has attained the 24-
hour PM 2.5 federal AAQS. Nonetheless, the Bay Area must continue to be designated as
nonattainment for the federal PM 2.5 AAQS until such time as the BAAQMD submits a
redesignation request and a maintenance plan to the USEPA, and the USEPA approves the
proposed redesignation.
In compliance with regulations, due to the nonattainment designations of the area, the
BAAQMD periodically prepares and updates air quality plans that provide emission
reduction strategies to achieve attainment of the AAQS, including control strategies to
reduce air pollutant emissions through regulations, incentive programs, public education,
and partnerships with other agencies. The current air quality plans are prepared in
cooperation with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association
of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
The most recent federal ozone plan is the 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan, which was adopted
on October 24, 2001 and approved by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) on
November 1, 2001. The plan was submitted to the USEPA on November 30, 2001 for
review and approval. The most recent State ozone plan is the 2010 Clean Air Plan (CAP),
adopted on September 15, 2010. The 2010 CAP was developed as a multi-pollutant plan
that provides an integrated control strategy to reduce ozone, PM, toxic air contaminants
(TACs), and greenhouse gases (GHGs). Although a plan for achieving the State PM 10
standard is not required, the BAAQMD has prioritized measures to reduce PM in
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
19
October 2017
developing the control strategy for the 2010 CAP. The control strategy serves as the
backbone of the BAAQMD’s current PM control program.
The aforementioned air quality plans contain mobile source controls, stationary source
controls, and transportation control measures to be implemented in the region to attain the
State and federal AAQS within the SFBAAB. Adopted BAAQMD rules and regulations,
as well as the thresholds of significance, have been developed with the intent to ensure
continued attainment of AAQS, or to work towards attainment of AAQS for which the area
is currently designated nonattainment, consistent with applicable air quality plans. The
BAAQMD’s established significance thresholds associated with development projects for
emissions of the ozone precursors reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen
(NO x ), as well as for PM 10 , and PM 2.5 , expressed in pounds per day (lbs/day) and tons per
year (tons/yr), are listed in Table 1. By exceeding the BAAQMD’s mass emission
thresholds for operational emissions of ROG, NO X , PM 10 , or PM 2.5 a project would be
considered to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the BAAQMD’s air quality
planning efforts.
Table 1
BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance
Pollutant
Construction Operational
Average Daily
Emissions (lbs/day)
Average Daily
Emissions (lbs/day)
Maximum Annual
Emissions (tons/year)
ROG 54 54 10
NO x 54 54 10
PM 10 (exhaust) 82 82 15
PM 2.5 (exhaust) 54 54 10
Source: BAAQMD, CEQA Guidelines, May 2017.
The proposed project’s construction and operational emissions were quantified using the
California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) software version 2016.3.1 - a
Statewide model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land
use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify air quality emissions, including
GHG emissions, from land use projects. The model applies inherent default values for
various land uses, including construction data, trip generation rates based on the Institute
of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, vehicle mix, trip
length, average speed, etc. However, where project-specific information is available, such
information should be applied in the model. Accordingly, the proposed project’s modeling
assumed the following:
• Construction was assumed to occur over an approximately eight-month period;
• The total building area to be demolished was assumed to be approximately 1,500
square feet;
• A total of approximately 0.3-acre of land would be disturbed during site
preparation;
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
20
October 2017
• A total of 300 cubic yards of material would be exported during site preparation,
including soil remediation; and
• The proposed project would comply with the 2016 California Building Energy
Efficiency Standards Code.
All CalEEMod results are included in Appendix A to this IS/MND.
The proposed project’s estimated emissions associated with construction and operations
are presented and discussed in further detail below. A discussion of the proposed project’s
contribution to cumulative air quality conditions is provided below as well.
Construction Emissions
According to the CalEEMod results, the proposed project would result in maximum
unmitigated construction criteria air pollutant emissions as shown in Table 2. As shown in
the table, the proposed project’s construction emissions would be well below the applicable
thresholds of significance for ROG, NO X, PM 10 , and PM 2.5 .
Table 2
Maximum Unmitigated Construction Emissions (lbs/day)
Pollutant
Proposed Project
Emissions
Threshold of
Significance Exceeds Threshold?
ROG 1.72 54 NO
NO X 13.04 54 NO
PM 10 (exhaust) 0.86 82 NO
PM 10 (fugitive) 0.83 None N/A
PM 2.5 (exhaust) 0.80 54 NO
PM 2.5 (fugitive) 0.44 None N/A
Source: CalEEMod, October 2017 (see Appendix A).
Although thresholds of significance for mass emissions of fugitive dust PM 10 and PM 2.5
have not been identified by the City of Cupertino or BAAQMD, the proposed project’s
estimated fugitive dust emissions have been included for informational purposes. All
projects within the jurisdiction of the BAAQMD are required to implement all of the
BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Mitigation Measures, which include the following:
1. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be
covered.
2. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using
wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power
sweeping is prohibited.
3. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
4. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as
possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding
or soil binders are used.
5. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use
or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
21
October 2017
airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of
Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all
access points.
6. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance
with manufacturer‘s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified
visible emissions evaluator.
7. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the
lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take
corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be
visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
The proposed project’s required implementation of the BAAQMD’s Basic Construction
Mitigation Measures listed above, to the extent that the measures are feasible for the
proposed project’s construction activities, would help to further minimize construction-
related emissions. Because the proposed project would be below the applicable thresholds
of significance for construction emissions, the proposed project would not be considered
to result in a significant air quality impact during construction.
Operational Emissions
According to the CalEEMod results, the proposed project would result in maximum
unmitigated operational criteria air pollutant emissions as shown in Table 3. As shown in
the table, the proposed project’s operational emissions would be below the applicable
thresholds of significance. Because the proposed project’s operational emissions would be
below the applicable thresholds of significance, the proposed project would result in a less-
than-significant air quality impact during operations.
Table 3
Maximum Unmitigated Operational Emissions
Pollutant Proposed Project Emissions Threshold of Significance Exceeds
Threshold? lbs/day tons/yr lbs/day tons/yr
ROG 2.21 0.03 54 10 NO
NO X 0.21 0.03 54 10 NO
PM 10 (exhaust) 0.38 0.00 82 15 NO
PM 10 (fugitive) 0.09 0.02 None None N/A
PM 2.5 (exhaust) 0.38 0.00 54 10 NO
PM 2.5 (fugitive) 0.03 0.00 None None N/A
Source: CalEEMod, October 2017 (see Appendix A).
Cumulative Emissions
Past, present and future development projects contribute to the region’s adverse air quality
impacts on a cumulative basis. By nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. A
single project is not sufficient in size to, by itself, result in nonattainment of AAQS. Instead,
a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air
quality impacts. If a project’s contribution to the cumulative impact is considerable, then
the project’s impact on air quality would be considered significant.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
22
October 2017
In developing thresholds of significance for air pollutants, BAAQMD considered the
emission levels for which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively
considerable. The thresholds of significance presented in Table 1 represent the levels at
which a project’s individual emissions of criteria air pollutants or precursors would result
in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the SFBAAB’s existing air quality
conditions. If a project exceeds the significance thresholds presented in Table 1, the
proposed project’s emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant
adverse cumulative air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions.
Because the proposed project would result in emissions below the applicable thresholds of
significance for both construction and operation, the project would not result in a
cumulatively considerable contribution to the region’s existing air quality conditions.
Conclusion
As stated previously, the applicable regional air quality plans include the 2001 Ozone
Attainment Plan and the 2010 CAP. According to BAAQMD, if a project would not result
in significant and unavoidable air quality impacts after the application of all feasible
mitigation, the project may be considered consistent with the air quality plans. Because the
proposed project would result in emissions below BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance,
the proposed project would not be considered to conflict with or obstruct the
implementation of any regional air quality plans.
Based on the above, the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard. Thus, a less-than-significant
impact would result.
d. Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others, due to the types
of population groups or activities involved. Heightened sensitivity may be caused by health
problems, proximity to the emissions source, and/or duration of exposure to air pollutants.
Children, pregnant women, the elderly, and those with existing health problems are
especially vulnerable to the effects of air pollution. Sensitive receptors are typically defined
as facilities where sensitive receptor population groups (i.e., children, the elderly, the
acutely ill, and the chronically ill) are likely to be located. Accordingly, land uses that are
typically considered to be sensitive receptors include residences, schools, playgrounds,
childcare centers, retirement homes, convalescent homes, hospitals, and medical clinics.
The nearest existing sensitive receptors to the project site would be the single-family
residences located immediately to the east, south, and west of the site. In addition, the
proposed project would include the construction of housing, and, thus, would be considered
a sensitive receptor.
The major pollutant concentrations of concern are localized carbon monoxide (CO)
emissions and TAC emissions, which are addressed in further detail below.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
23
October 2017
Localized CO Emissions
Localized concentrations of CO are related to the levels of traffic and congestion along
streets and at intersections. High levels of localized CO concentrations are only expected
where background levels are high, and traffic volumes and congestion levels are high.
Emissions of CO are of potential concern, as the pollutant is a toxic gas that results from
the incomplete combustion of carbon-containing fuels such as gasoline or wood. CO
emissions are particularly related to traffic levels.
In order to provide a conservative indication of whether a project would result in localized
CO emissions that would exceed the applicable threshold of significance, the BAAQMD
has established screening criteria for localized CO emissions. According to BAAQMD, a
proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to localized CO
emission concentrations if all of the following conditions are true for the project:
• The project is consistent with an applicable congestion management program
established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or
highways, regional transportation plan, and local congestion management agency
plans;
• The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to
more than 44,000 vehicles per hour; and
• The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to
more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is
substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, underpass, etc.).
As discussed in the Transportation and Circulation section of this IS/MND, the proposed
project would not conflict with the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA)
Congestion Management Plan (CMP).7 In addition, the proposed project would be
anticipated to generate a total of 19 average daily trips (ADT). Given the relatively small
number of trips that would be generated, the project would not substantially affect traffic
volumes at intersections in the project vicinity. Furthermore, areas where vertical and/or
horizontal mixing is limited due to tunnels, underpasses, or similar features do not exist in
the project area. As such, based on the BAAQMD screening criteria, the proposed project
would not be expected to result in substantial levels of localized CO at surrounding
intersections or generate localized concentrations of CO that would exceed standards.
TAC Emissions
Another category of environmental concern is TACs. The CARB’s Air Quality and Land
Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (Handbook) provides recommended
setback distances for sensitive land uses from major sources of TACs, including, but not
limited to, freeways and high traffic roads, distribution centers, and rail yards. The CARB
has identified diesel particulate matter (DPM) from diesel-fueled engines as a TAC; thus,
high volume freeways, stationary diesel engines, and facilities attracting heavy and
7 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. 2013 Congestion Management Program. October 2013.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
24
October 2017
constant diesel vehicle traffic are identified as having the highest associated health risks
from DPM. Health risks associated with TACs are a function of both the concentration of
emissions and the duration of exposure, where the higher the concentration and/or the
longer the period of time that a sensitive receptor is exposed to pollutant concentrations
would correlate to a higher health risk.
The proposed project would not involve any land uses or operations that would be
considered major sources of TACs, including DPM. As such, the proposed project would
not generate any substantial pollutant concentrations during operations. However, short-
term, construction-related activities could result in the generation of TACs, specifically
DPM, from on-road haul trucks and off-road equipment exhaust emissions. Nevertheless,
construction is temporary and occurs over a relatively short duration in comparison to the
operational lifetime of the proposed project. All construction equipment and operation
thereof would be regulated per the In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation, which is
intended to help reduce emissions associated with off-road diesel vehicles and equipment,
including DPM. Project construction would also be required to comply with all applicable
BAAQMD rules and regulations, particularly associated with permitting of air pollutant
sources. In addition, construction activity (except for street construction) would be limited
to daytime hours per Section 10.48.053 of the City’s Municipal Code.
Because construction equipment on-site would not operate for long periods of time and
would occur on a relatively small scale, associated emissions of DPM would be minimal.
Due to the temporary nature of construction and the relatively short duration of potential
exposure to associated emissions, sensitive receptors in the area would not be exposed to
pollutants for a permanent or substantially extended period of time. Therefore, construction
of the proposed project would not be expected to expose nearby sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations.
Conclusion
Based on the above, the proposed project would not expose any sensitive receptors to
substantial concentrations of localized CO or TACs from construction or operation.
Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to
the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
e. Due to the subjective nature of odor impacts, the number of variables that can influence
the potential for an odor impact, and the variety of odor sources, quantitative
methodologies to determine the presence of a significant odor impact do not exist. Typical
odor-generating land uses include, but are not limited to, wastewater treatment plants,
landfills, and composting facilities. The proposed project would not introduce any such
land uses. Residential land uses, such as the proposed single-family homes, are not
typically associated with objectionable odors.
Construction activities often include diesel-fueled equipment and heavy-duty trucks, which
could create odors associated with diesel fumes that may be considered objectionable.
However, as discussed above, construction activities would be temporary, and operation of
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
25
October 2017
construction equipment would be restricted to daytime hours per the City’s Municipal
Code. Project construction would also be required to comply with all applicable BAAQMD
rules and regulations, particularly associated with permitting of air pollutant sources. The
aforementioned regulations would help to minimize air pollutant emissions as well as any
associated odors. Accordingly, substantial objectionable odors would not be expected to
occur during construction activities.
It should be noted that BAAQMD regulates objectionable odors through Regulation 7,
Odorous Substances, which does not become applicable until the Air Pollution Control
Officer (APCO) receives odor complaints from ten or more complainants within a 90-
day period. Once effective, Regulation 7 places general limitation on odorous substances
and specific emission limitations on certain odorous compounds, which remain effective
until such time that citizen complaints have not been received by the APCO for one year.
The limits of Regulation 7 become applicable again when the APCO receives odor
complaints from five or more complainants within a 90-day period. Thus, although not
anticipated, if odor complaints are made after the proposed project is developed, the
BAAQMD would ensure that such odors are addressed and any potential odor effects
reduced to less than significant.
For the aforementioned reasons, construction and operation of the proposed project would
not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people, and a less-than-
significant impact related to objectionable odors would result.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
26 October 2017
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-
Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation
Community Plan, or other approved local, regional,
or state habitat conservation plan?
Discussion
a. The proposed project site comprises a 12,960-square-foot property located in a residential
neighborhood. The site is currently developed with residential uses and is highly disturbed
as a result. Vegetation present on the site consists of scattered grasses and other weedy
vegetation, as well as a small number of trees. Landscaping on the site shows signs of stress
due to lack of irrigation.8 The proposed project site does not contain any aquatic or riparian
habitat.
A query of CNDDB was performed in order to determine the potential plant and wildlife
species that could occur within the proposed project site area. The Cupertino Quad was
8 Running Moose Environmental Consulting, LLC. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10206 and 10208
Orange Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014. June 27, 2016.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
27 October 2017
used as the search area. The CNDDB query results indicate 18 special-status plant and
wildlife species that are known to occur within the project vicinity. However, due to the
highly-disturbed nature of the project site, requisite habitat types for these special-status
species are not found on-site. The species require aquatic, woodland, chaparral, or
proximate open grassland habitat, which does not occur on-site or in the immediate project
vicinity.
While special-status species would not occur on-site, migratory birds have the potential to
nest within the on-site trees and shrubs. Birds and their nests are protected under California
Fish and Wildlife Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3513), and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA). The proposed project would include removal of trees during construction, and,
thus, could result in impacts to nesting raptors and migratory birds, potentially occurring
in the trees. Therefore, the proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special-status in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and a potentially
significant impact could result.
Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above impact to a
less-than-significant level.
IV-1. A pre-construction survey for nesting birds shall be conducted for the
project site and a 250-foot radius around the project site by a qualified
biologist not more than two weeks prior to site disturbance during the
breeding season (February 1 to August 31). If site disturbance commences
outside the breeding season, a pre-construction survey for nesting birds are
not required. If active nests of migratory birds are not detected within
approximately 250 feet of the project site, further mitigation is not required.
Results of the survey shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department.
If nesting raptors or other migratory birds are detected on or within 250
feet of the site during the survey, a suitable construction-free buffer shall be
established around all active nests. The dimensions of the buffer shall be a
minimum of 75 feet for passerine birds and 250 feet for raptors. The buffer
size may vary depending on location and species. The buffer areas shall be
enclosed with temporary fencing, and construction equipment and workers
shall not enter the enclosed setback areas. Buffers shall remain in place for
the duration of the breeding season or until a qualified biologist has
confirmed that all chicks have fledged and are independent of their parents.
b,c. The project site is currently developed with residential uses, and, thus, is highly disturbed.
The site does not contain any aquatic features or riparian habitat, and sensitive plant
communities, including wetlands, do not exist on or near the site. As a result, the proposed
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
28 October 2017
project would not have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat, sensitive natural
communities, or federally protected wetlands. Thus, no impact would occur.
d. The project site is surrounded by existing development and is not linked to any open space
areas through which wildlife movement would occur. As noted above, the project does not
contain streams or other waterways that could be used by migratory fish or as a wildlife
corridor for other wildlife species. As such, the project would not interfere substantially
with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites. Thus,
no impact would occur.
e. Based upon the project plans, it is estimated that a total of 12 trees are located on-site,
several of which are oak trees, and thus protected pursuant to Section 14.18.050 of the
City’s Municipal Code. Development of the project would require removal of on-site
protected trees. In order to remove protected trees, the applicant must first obtain a tree
removal permit from the City’s Community Development Department and pay the permit
fee. The information required when submitting a tree removal permit application, includes
but is not limited to the following:
a. A drawing outlining the location of the tree(s) and proposed tree replacements.
b. A written explanation of why the tree(s) should be removed.
Furthermore, per Section 14.18.060 of the Municipal Code, the project applicant would be
required to adopt a maintenance plan for any protected trees that would be retained as part
of the project. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources, including the City’s Municipal Code; and a
less-than-significant impact would occur.
f. The City of Cupertino is not currently participatory to a Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural
Community Conservation Plan (HCP/NCCP). Therefore, the project site is not located in
an area with an approved HCP/NCCP, or local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan,
and no impact would occur regarding a conflict with the provisions of such a plan.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
29 October 2017
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-
Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
Section 15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a unique archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource on site or unique geologic
features?
d. Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries.
Discussion
a. Historical resources are features that are associated with the lives of historically important
persons and/or historically significant events, or that embody the distinctive characteristics
of a type, period, region or method of construction. Examples of typical historical resources
include, but are not limited to, buildings, farmsteads, rail lines, bridges, and trash scatters
containing objects such as colored glass and ceramics. As discussed previously, the
proposed project site currently contains two residences, a detached garage that has been
converted to a studio, and a shed.
According to a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared for the proposed
project by Running Moose Environmental Consulting, LLC, the northernmost residence
on the site and the detached garage were constructed between 1939 and 1943, while the
residence in the southeast portion of the site was constructed between 1948 and 1950. In
order to determine whether the on-site structures constitute historical resources, the
structures were evaluated using the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) and
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility criteria.
CRHR Criteria
The CRHR eligibility criteria include the following:
(1) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the
U.S.;
(2) It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national
history;
(3) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of
construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or
(4) It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory
or history of the local area, California, or the nation.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
30 October 2017
In addition, the resource must retain integrity. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the
retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.
NRHP Criteria
The NRHP eligibility criteria include the following: “The quality of significance in
American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is present in districts, sites,
buildings, structures, and objects of state and local importance that possess aspects of
integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, association, and
(a) is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of our history;
(b) is associated with the lives of a person or persons significance in our past;
(c) embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction,
or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic value, or represents a
significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual
distinction; or
(d) has yielded or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history.
In addition, the resource must be at least 50 years old, except in exceptional circumstances.
Conclusion
The existing on-site structures are not associated with any significant historical events or
narratives in the City of Cupertino or California, and are not likely to yield information
important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation. The
proposed project site property has been owned by the Adamo Trust and used as a residential
rental property since approximately 1989, prior to which the property was owned by the
original land developer.9 The site has not been occupied or owned by any persons important
to local, State, or national history. Paint on the exterior of the single-family residences, as
well as the detached garage/studio is in fair to poor condition, and is visibly peeling.
Overall, the integrity of the structures has been diminished due to a lack of proper upkeep.
Based on the above, the on-site structures are not eligible for consideration as historical
resources per the CRHR or NRHP eligibility criteria, and, thus, would not be considered
historical resources. Therefore, the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
b-d. The proposed project site is currently developed with residential structures, and, thus, is
highly disturbed. In addition, the site is located within a residential neighborhood. Due to
the disturbed nature of the site and the surrounding area, the discovery of underlying
archeological, paleontological, and/or tribal resources is not expected. However, unknown
archaeological resources, including human bone, have the potential to be uncovered during
ground-disturbing construction activities at the proposed project site.
9 Running Moose Environmental Consulting, LLC. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10206 and 10208
Orange Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 [pg. 7]. June 27, 2016.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
31 October 2017
In compliance with State law (Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code and Section
5097.94 of the Public Resources Code), as well as the City’s standard conditions of
approval, in the event human remains are encountered during grading and construction, all
work within 50 feet of the find would be stopped, and the Santa Clara County Coroner’s
office would be notified. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the Coroner
would notify the Native American Heritage Commission to identify the “Most Likely
Descendant” (MLD). The City of Cupertino, in consultation with the MLD, would then
prepare a plan for treatment, study, and re-internment of the remains.
Therefore, given that the proposed project would be required to comply with the City’s
standard conditions of approval regarding cultural resources, the project would not cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or geological feature on site, or disturb human remains, including
those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Therefore, impacts would be considered less
than significant.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
32 October 2017
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-
Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault (Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Pub.
42)?
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv. Landslides?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a result
of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-
site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of wastewater?
a,c. According to the California Geological Survey Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone
Maps, the proposed project site is not located within the vicinity of an Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zone.10 Figure HS-5 in the City’s General Plan identifies areas in the City
that are potentially at risk for fault rupture, landslides, and liquefaction/inundation. Areas
mapped as Liquefaction/Inundation Zones by the City are also generally at risk for lateral
spreading hazards.11 Per Figure HS-5, the site is located within a Valley Zone, which is
defined as an area with relatively low levels of geologic hazard risk. Therefore, the
proposed project would not be at risk for fault rupture impacts, seismic-related ground
failure (including liquefaction, lateral spreading and subsidence), or landslides. In addition,
the project would be designed to comply with all applicable State and local regulations,
including the California Building Code (CBC), which would minimize any potential risks
associated with seismic ground shaking.
10 California Department of Conservation. Special Studies Zones, Cupertino Quadrangle. Effective July 1, 1974.
11 City of Cupertino. General Plan: Community Vision 2015 – 2040 [pg. E-5]. Adopted October 20, 2015.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
33 October 2017
Consequently, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to potential
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known
earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, and/or
liquefaction or landslides. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would result.
b. The proposed project would require excavation and grading of the site prior to construction.
This includes soil excavation and off-haul associated with on-site soil remediation (see
Section VIII for additional discussion). During such early stages of construction, topsoil
would be exposed. After grading and prior to overlaying the ground surface with structures,
while topsoil would be exposed, the potential exists for wind and/or water erosion to occur,
which could affect the project area and potentially inadvertently transport eroded soils to
downstream waterways. However, topsoil exposure would be temporary during site
preparation and would cease once development of the proposed single-family homes
occurs.
The City’s Municipal Code requires applicants to provide and comply with an Interim
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Interim Plan). The Interim Plan shall show the
location of erosion control measures and erosion control planting shall be shown on the
site map/grading plan. The applicant shall provide the following information with respect
to conditions existing on the site during land-disturbing or filling activities or stockpiling
of soil:
1. A delineation and brief description of the measures to be undertaken to retain
sediment on the site, including, but not limited to, the designs and specifications or
berms and sediment detention basins, and a schedule for their maintenance and
upkeep;
2. A delineation and brief description of the surface runoff and erosion control
measures to be implemented, including, but not limited, to types and methods of
applying mulches, and designs and specifications for diverters, dikes and drains,
and a schedule for their maintenance and upkeep;
3. A delineation and brief description of the vegetative measures to be undertaken,
including, but not limited to, seeding methods, and type, location and extent of
preexisting and undisturbed vegetation types, and a schedule for maintenance and
upkeep.
Because the project would comply with the City’s interim erosion control requirements,
the project would not result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil; and a less-than-
significant impact would occur.
d. Expansive soils increase in volume when they absorb water and have the potential to crack
or otherwise compromise the integrity of building foundations. According to the City’s
General Plan EIR, the proposed project site is not located in an area of the City known to
contain highly expansive soils.12 Furthermore, the proposed project would be subject to
12 City of Cupertino. General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning Draft EIR [4.5-
18]. June 18, 2014.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
34 October 2017
applicable CBC regulations and provisions, as adopted in Chapter 16.04 of the City’s
Municipal Code. Therefore, the proposed project would not be located on expansive soil,
as defined in Table 18-1B of the Uniform Building Code, and a less-than-significant
impact could occur.
e. The proposed project would connect to the City’s existing sewer system, and would not
require the use of a septic tank or other alternative waste water disposal method. Therefore,
no impact would occur related to having soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternate wastewater disposal systems.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
35 October 2017
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gasses?
a,b. Emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) contributing to global climate change are
attributable in large part to human activities associated with the industrial/manufacturing,
utility, transportation, residential, and agricultural sectors. Therefore, the cumulative global
emissions of GHGs contributing to global climate change can be attributed to every nation,
region, and city, and virtually every individual on earth. An individual project’s GHG
emissions are at a micro-scale level relative to global emissions and effects to global
climate change; however, an individual project could result in a cumulatively considerable
incremental contribution to a significant cumulative macro-scale impact. As such, impacts
related to emissions of GHG are inherently considered cumulative impacts.
Implementation of the proposed project would cumulatively contribute to increases of
GHG emissions. Estimated GHG emissions attributable to future development would be
primarily associated with increases of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and, to a lesser extent, other
GHG pollutants, such as methane (CH 4 ) and nitrous oxide (N 2 O) associated with area
sources, mobile sources or vehicles, utilities (electricity and natural gas), water usage,
wastewater generation, and the generation of solid waste. The primary source of GHG
emissions for the project would be mobile source emissions. The common unit of
measurement for GHG is expressed in terms of annual metric tons of CO 2 equivalents
(MTCO 2 e/yr).
A number of regulations currently exists related to GHG emissions, predominantly
Assembly Bill (AB 32), Executive Order S-3-05, and Senate Bill (SB 32). AB 32 sets forth
a statewide GHG emissions reduction target of 1990 levels by 2020. Executive Order S-3-
05 sets forth a transitional reduction target of 2000 levels by 2010, the same target as AB
32 of 1990 levels by 2020, and further builds upon the AB 32 target by requiring a reduction
to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. SB 32 also builds upon AB 32 and sets forth a
transitional reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. In order to implement
the statewide GHG emissions reduction targets, local jurisdictions are encouraged to
prepare and adopt area-specific GHG reduction plans and/or thresholds of significance for
GHG emissions.
A discussion of the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP), as well as applicable BAAQMD
thresholds related to GHG emissions, is provided below.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
36 October 2017
Climate Action Plan
As a means of achieving the statewide GHG emissions reduction goals, the City has
adopted a CAP. The targets are consistent with statewide goals. In addition, the CAP
includes a number of reduction measures intended to be implemented by the City in order
to accomplish the reduction goals. The emissions reduction strategies developed by the
City follows the BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines and the corresponding criteria for a
Qualified Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Program as defined by the BAAQMD.
Because the provisions included in the CAP mirror the elements required per Section
15.183.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, the CAP is consistent with existing State regulations
related to GHG emissions, as well as BAAQMD thresholds of significance. It should be
noted that a qualitative threshold for GHG emissions for individual development projects
has not been established by the City or set forth in the CAP.
The GHG inventory contained in the City’s CAP was derived based on the land use
designations and associated densities defined in the City’s General Plan. Because the
proposed project would be consistent with the project site’s existing General Plan land use
designation, and would not modify the type, intensity, or density of use previously
anticipated for the site by the City, the project would be consistent with the GHG inventory
contained in the CAP.
BAAQMD Thresholds
The proposed project is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the BAAQMD. The
BAAQMD threshold of significance for project-level operational GHG emissions is 1,100
MTCO 2 e/yr or 4.6 MTCO 2 e/yr per service population (population + employees).
BAAQMD’s approach to developing a threshold of significance for GHG emissions is to
identify the emissions level for which a project would not be expected to substantially
conflict with existing California legislation adopted to reduce statewide GHG emissions
needed to move towards climate stabilization. If a project would generate GHG emissions
above the threshold level, the project would be considered to generate significant GHG
emissions and conflict with applicable GHG regulations.
The proposed project’s estimated GHG emissions were quantified using CalEEMod, using
the same assumptions as presented in the Air Quality section of this IS/MND, and are
presented in Table 4 and Table 5 below. The proposed project’s required compliance with
the current California Building Energy Efficiency Standards Code was assumed in the
modeling. In addition, the CO 2 intensity factor within the model was adjusted to reflect the
Pacific Gas & Electric Company’s anticipated progress towards statewide renewable
portfolio standard goals. All CalEEMod results are included as Appendix A to this
IS/MND.
As shown in the tables, the proposed project would result in operational GHG emissions
below the 1,100 MT CO 2 e/yr threshold. Therefore, the proposed project would not result
in operational impacts related to GHG emissions. In addition, while neither the City nor
BAAQMD has established GHG emissions thresholds for construction, construction
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
37 October 2017
emissions associated with the proposed project would be far below the BAAQMD’s
adopted operational threshold of 1,100 MTCO 2 e/yr.
Table 4
Project Construction GHG Emissions
Year Annual GHG Emissions (MTCO 2 e/yr)
2018 68.16
2019 40.10
TOTAL GHG EMISSIONS 108.26
Source: CalEEMod, October 2017.
Table 5
Project Operational GHG Emissions
Emission Source Annual GHG Emissions (MTCO 2 e/yr)
Area 0.36
Energy 7.29
Mobile 18.37
Solid Waste 1.27
Water 0.36
TOTAL ANNUAL GHG EMISSIONS 27.65
Source: CalEEMod, October 2017.
Conclusion
Based on the above, the proposed project would be consistent with the City’s adopted CAP.
In addition, the estimated annual operational and construction GHG emissions would be
below the applicable BAAQMD thresholds of significance. As such, the proposed project
would not be considered to generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the environment, or conflict with any applicable plan, policy,
or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs; and impacts
would be considered less than significant.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
38 October 2017
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the likely release
of hazardous materials into the environment?
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h. Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury
or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Discussion
a. Residential land uses are not typically associated with the routine transport, use, disposal,
or generation of substantial amounts of hazardous materials. Future residents may use
common household cleaning products, fertilizers, and herbicides on-site, any of which
could contain potentially hazardous chemicals; however, such products would be expected
to be used in accordance with label instructions. Due to the regulations governing use of
such products and the amount that would be used on the site, routine use of such products
would not represent a substantial risk to public health or the environment. Therefore, the
project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
39 October 2017
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and a less-than-significant
impact would occur.
b. The following discussion includes an analysis of hazardous and toxic materials that could
be used on the proposed project site during construction activities, as well as existing
hazardous materials known to be present on the site.
Construction
Construction activities associated with the proposed project would involve the use of heavy
equipment, which would contain fuels and oils, and various other products such as
concrete, paints, and adhesives. Small quantities of potentially toxic substances (e.g.,
petroleum and other chemicals used to operate and maintain construction equipment)
would be used at the project site and transported to and from the site during construction.
However, the project contractor would be required to comply with all California Health
and Safety Codes and local City and County ordinances regulating the handling, storage,
and transportation of hazardous and toxic materials. Compliance with such regulations
would ensure that the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving
the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment during construction
activities.
Existing Hazardous Materials
As noted previously, a Phase I ESA was prepared for the proposed project by Running
Moose Environmental Consulting, LLC.13 Hazardous materials and/or wastes have not
been observed or reported on the proposed project site, and previous residential occupants
of the on-site buildings have not used significant quantities of such materials. According
to the ESA, aboveground and/or underground storage tanks were not documented on or
beneath the proposed project site. While a pole-mounted PG&E transformer is present on
a power pole adjoining the northwestern corner of the project site, the ESA did not identify
any concerns. However, based on the ESA, potential recognized environmental conditions
(RECs) were identified for the project site, which are discussed in further detail below.
Asbestos-Containing Materials and Lead-Based Paint
Asbestos is the name for a group of naturally occurring silicate minerals that are considered
to be “fibrous” and, through processing, can be separated into smaller and smaller fibers.
The fibers are strong, durable, chemical resistant, and resistant to heat and fire. They are
also long, thin, and flexible, such that they can be woven into cloth. Because of the above
qualities, asbestos was considered an ideal product and has been used in thousands of
consumer, industrial, maritime, automotive, scientific, and building products. However,
later discoveries found that, when inhaled, the material caused serious illness.
13 Running Moose Environmental Consulting, LLC. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10206 and 10208
Orange Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014. June 27, 2016.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
40 October 2017
For buildings constructed prior to 1980, the Code of Federal Regulations (29 CFR
1926.1101) states that all thermal system insulation (boiler insulation, pipe lagging, and
related materials) and surface materials must be designated as “presumed asbestos-
containing material” unless proven otherwise through sampling in accordance with the
standards of the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act. Because the existing
structures were built prior to 1980, the potential exists that asbestos-containing materials
were used in the construction of the residential structures and outbuildings on-site.
Lead-based paint (LBP) is defined by federal guidelines as any paint, varnish, stain, or
other applied coating that has one milligram of lead per square centimeter or greater. Lead
is a highly toxic material that may cause a range of serious illnesses, and in some cases
death. In buildings constructed after 1978, the presence of LBP is unlikely. Structures built
prior to 1978, and especially prior to the 1960s, are expected to contain LBP. The existing
structures on the property were constructed before the phase-out of LBPs in the 1970s.
Therefore, the potential exists that LBPs are present in the on-site residential and
outbuildings.
Based on the age of the existing on-site structures, ACM and LBP are presumed to be
present. The proposed project would include demolition of all on-site structures. Therefore,
without implementation of the appropriate safety measures, the proposed project could
potentially expose construction workers during structure demolition to LBP and asbestos-
containing materials.
Contaminated Soils
As discussed previously, the proposed project site has historically been used for
agricultural purposes. As such, pesticides and herbicides may have been used on the site.
In order to evaluate on-site contaminated soil conditions, a Soil Remediation Plan was
prepared for the proposed project b y McCloskey Consultants, Inc.14 The Soil Remediation
Plan included Phase II Environmental Sampling. As part of Phase II Environmental
Sampling, four soil samples were collected on-site and analyzed for pesticides (including,
but not limited to, chlordane, 4,4’-DDE, 4,4’-DDT, and dieldrin), arsenic, and lead. Results
of the analysis are included in Table 6 below.
Table 6 Historic Agricultural Use Area Sampling
Substance
Detected Concentration
Range (mg/kg)
Applicable Threshold
(mg/kg)
Chlordane 0.055 to 0.509 0.43
4,4’-DDE 0.00477 to 0.14 2.0
4,4’-DDT 0.00261 to 0.0687 1.9
Dieldrin 0.0046 0.0046
Arsenic 5.63 to 17.7 13.0
Lead 46.6 to 590 1,000
Source: McCloskey Consultants, Inc, Soil Remediation Plan, September 2017.
14 McCloskey Consultants, Inc. Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue, Cupertino, California. September
19, 2017.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
41 October 2017
Due to the age of the existing on-site structures, the perimeters of the structures may have
been treated with insecticides/herbicides. In addition, LBP may have been used, as
discussed above, and the soils around the base of the structures may have been
contaminated by paint chips flaking off of the structures. To evaluate such concerns, 10
soil samples were collected from the soil adjacent to the structures at a depth of zero to 0.5
feet. In addition, two soil samples were collected from areas where concrete had been
historically placed on the east side of the single-family residence and on the north side of
the garage, respectively. The 12 samples were analyzed for organochlorine pesticides
(OCPs), lead, and arsenic. Results of the sample analysis are included in Table 7 below.
Table 7
Building Perimeter Sampling
Substance Detected Concentration Range (mg/kg) Applicable Threshold (mg/kg)
Chlordane 0.0814 to 4.46 2.5
4,4’-DDE 0.0045 to 0.437 2.0
4,4’-DDT 0.0125 to 0.437 1.9
Dieldrin 0.00194 to 0.503 0.034
Heptachlor 0.00958 0.130
Heptachlor epoxide 0.00228 to 0.0548 0.07
Methoxychlor 0.01099 320
Arsenic 3.02 to 23.2 13.0
Lead 66.6 to 925 1,000
Source: McCloskey Consultants, Inc, Soil Remediation Plan, September 2017.
As shown in the table, elevated concentrations of arsenic, lead, and pesticides were
detected. In order to evaluate the lateral and vertical extent of the elevated arsenic, lead,
and pesticide concentrations detected in some of the shallow soils, supplemental sampling
was conducted throughout the site.
Supplemental Arsenic Sampling
The supplemental soil sampling conducted for areas south and west of the existing
buildings detected arsenic in all samples ranging from 1.32 mg/kg to 11.5 mg/kg.
All of the arsenic concentrations detected exceed the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Regional Screening Level (USEPA RSL) for sensitive uses, but
none exceed the calculated naturally‐occurring background concentration of 13
mg/kg. Regulatory agencies do not require mitigation for concentrations that are
less than naturally-occurring concentrations. Arsenic was also detected in a deeper
sample at a concentration of 1.10 mg/kg. An elevated lead concentration was
detected in one of the two samples at a concentration of 94.8 mg/kg. Based on the
results of the sampling, elevated arsenic concentrations would not pose a risk to the
proposed project.
Supplemental Lead Sampling
Supplemental soil samples were collected primarily across northern and
northeastern portion of the site, as well as approximately four feet from previous
sample locations adjacent to the existing structures. Lead concentrations exceeding
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
42 October 2017
the CHHSL of 80 mg/kg were detected in nine of the 13 samples, but none exceeded
the total threshold limit concentration (TTLC) for hazardous waste of 1,000 mg/kg.
Lead was also detected in two deeper samples but at concentrations less than the
California Human Health Screening Level (CHHSL). Neither of the lead
concentrations detected in the deeper samples exceeded the regulatory threshold.
Based on the results of the sampling, lead contamination is present in shallow soils
in the northern and northeastern portions of the site. Per the Phase II ESA,
additional testing of excavated soils is recommended after excavation to determine
if the soils exceed the California hazardous waste criteria.
Supplemental Pesticide Sampling
The supplemental sampling results indicate that pesticide concentrations are
present around the northwestern portions of the project site, and on the northern
side of the southeastern building. Concentrations of several different
organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) were detected in at least one of the samples
collected. Of the pesticides detected, only chlordane and toxaphene were detected
at concentrations exceeding the respective USEPA RSLs for each substance. Based
on the sampling results, pesticide concentrations are present around the northwest
portion of the site and at the northern side of the southeastern building.
Remediation
Generally, the approach to remediating contaminated soils would consist of
excavation of soils and off-hauling the soils for disposal at an appropriately-
licensed landfill prior to site development. Specific precautionary measures are set
forth in the Soil Remediation Plan, and required by Mitigation Measure VIII-2
below.
Septic Systems
Both of the existing residences on the proposed project site are connected to on-site septic
systems. The proposed project would be required to properly abandon the existing septic
systems prior to connection of the project to the existing City sewer infrastructure.
Conclusion
Based on the above, development of the proposed project could create a significant hazard
to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment,
particularly associated with ACM, LBP, and contaminated soils. Therefore, a potentially
significant impact would occur.
Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the above impact to a
less-than-significant level.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
43 October 2017
Asbestos-Containing Materials and Lead-Based Paint
VIII-1. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit for any on-site structures, the
project applicant shall consult with certified Asbestos and/or Lead Risk
Assessors to complete and submit for review to the Community
Development Department an asbestos and lead survey. If asbestos-
containing materials or lead-containing materials are not discovered
during the survey, further mitigation related to asbestos-containing
materials or lead containing materials shall not be required. If asbestos-
containing materials and/or lead-containing materials are discovered by
the survey, the project applicant shall prepare a work plan to demonstrate
how the on-site asbestos-containing materials and/or lead-containing
materials shall be removed in accordance with current California
Occupational Health and Safety (Cal-OSHA) Administration regulations
and disposed of in accordance with all CalEPA regulations, prior to the
demolition and/or removal of the on-site structures. The plan shall include
the requirement that work shall be conducted by a Cal-OSHA registered
asbestos and lead abatement contractor in accordance with Title 8 CCR
1529 and Title 8 CCR 1532.1 regarding asbestos and lead training,
engineering controls, and certifications. The applicant shall submit the
work plan to the Community Development Department for review and
approval. Materials containing more than one (1) percent asbestos that is
friable are also subject to BAAQMD regulations. Removal of materials
containing more than one (1) percent friable asbestos shall be completed in
accordance with BAAQMD Section 11-2-303.
Contaminated Soils
VIII-2. Prior to initiation of demolition or construction activities, the project
applicant shall comply with all applicable recommendations within the Soil
Remediation Plan prepared for the proposed project by McCloskey
Consultants, Inc. The required remediation activities shall be performed by
a licensed hazardous waste contractor (Class A) and contractor personnel
that have completed 40-hour OSHA hazardous training. Compliance with
the recommendations shall be verified by the Community Development
Department and the Santa Clara County Environmental Health Department
throughout the remediation process.
Septic Systems
VIII-3. Prior to issuance of a building/grading permits, the existing septic tank
shall be abandoned in consultation with the Santa Clara County
Environmental Health Department. Proof of abandonment shall be
provided to the Community Development Department and the City
Engineer.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
44 October 2017
c. The proposed project site is not located within one-quarter mile of a school. Therefore, the
project would have no impact related to hazardous emissions or the handling of hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school.
d. The project site is not located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.15 Therefore, the project would
not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment, and no impact associated
with such would occur.
e,f. The nearest airport to the project site is the San Jose International Airport, located
approximately 7.5 miles east of the site. As such, the proposed project site is not located
within two miles of any public airports or private airstrips and does not fall within an airport
land use plan area. Therefore, no impact related to a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area would occur related to such.
g. The City of Cupertino Office of Emergency Services is responsible for coordinating agency
response to disasters or other large‐scale emergencies in the City of Cupertino, with
assistance from the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Services and the Santa Clara
County Fire Department (SCCFD). The Cupertino Emergency Operations Plan establishes
policy direction for emergency planning, mitigation, response, and recovery activities
within the City.16
Implementation of the proposed project would include widening of Orange Avenue by
approximately ten feet along the project frontage; however, such modifications would not
physically interfere with the Emergency Operations Plan, particularly with identified
emergency routes. Furthermore, the proposed project would not include land uses or
operations that could impair implementation of the plan. Therefore, the proposed project
would not interfere with an emergency evacuation or response plan, and a less-than-
significant impact would occur.
h. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire
and Resource Assessment Program, the proposed project site is not located within a Very
High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.17 In addition, the site is currently developed, surrounded
by existing development, and is not located adjacent to wildlands. Therefore, the proposed
project would not expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
15 California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List. Available at:
http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/Cortese_List.cfm. Accessed March 2017.
16 City of Cupertino. Emergency Operations Plan. September 2005.
17 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Santa Clara County, Very High Fire Hazard Severity
Zones in LRA. October 8, 2008.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
45 October 2017
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-
or off-site?
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on- or off-
site?
e. Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g. Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h. Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam.
j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Discussion
a,f. The following section describes the project’s consistency with applicable water quality
standards and waste discharge requirements during construction and operation.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
46 October 2017
Construction
The proposed project site is currently developed with residential uses. As such, the site
contains a substantial amount of impervious areas. Nonetheless, during the early stages of
construction activities, topsoil would be exposed due to grading of the site. After grading
and prior to overlaying the ground surface with impervious surfaces and structures, the
potential exists for wind and water erosion to discharge sediment and/or urban pollutants
into stormwater runoff, which could adversely affect water quality downstream.
The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) regulates stormwater discharges
associated with construction activities where clearing, grading, or excavation results in a
land disturbance of one or more acres. The project site is 12,960 square feet (0.30-acre),
and, thus, construction activities would not be regulated by the SWRCB. However, the
City’s Municipal Code requires applicants to provide and comply with an Interim Erosion
and Sediment Control Plan (Interim Plan). The Interim Plan shall show the location of
erosion control measures and erosion control planting shall be shown on the site
map/grading plan. The applicant shall provide the following information with respect to
conditions existing on the site during land-disturbing or filling activities or stockpiling of
soil:
1. A delineation and brief description of the measures to be undertaken to retain
sediment on the site, including, but not limited to, the designs and specifications or
berms and sediment detention basins, and a schedule for their maintenance and
upkeep;
2. A delineation and brief description of the surface runoff and erosion control
measures to be implemented, including, but not limited, to types and methods of
applying mulches, and designs and specifications for diverters, dikes and drains,
and a schedule for their maintenance and upkeep;
3. A delineation and brief description of the vegetative measures to be undertaken,
including, but not limited to, seeding methods, and type, location and extent of
preexisting and undisturbed vegetation types, and a schedule for maintenance and
upkeep.
Because the project would comply with the City’s interim erosion control requirements,
the project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements
or otherwise degrade water quality during construction.
Operation
The proposed residential uses would not involve operations typically associated with the
generation or discharge of polluted water. Thus, typical operations on the project site would
not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, nor degrade water
quality. However, addition of the impervious surfaces on the site would result in the
generation of urban runoff, which could contain pollutants if the runoff comes into contact
with vehicle fluids on parking surfaces and/or landscape fertilizers and herbicides.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
47 October 2017
As of December 1, 2012, detached single-family homes that create or replace 2,500 square
feet or more of impervious surface are required by the City of Cupertino to install one or
more of the following design measures:
• Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas (standard condition of approval, unless
infeasible);
• Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse;
• Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas;
• Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas;
• Construct sidewalks, walkways and/or patios with permeable surface; or
• Construct bike lanes, driveways and or uncovered parking lots with permeable
surfaces.
As discussed previously, the proposed project would include a series of swales that capture
runoff created by impervious areas on the project site. Runoff from roofs, patios, and
walkways would drain to the landscaped areas of the site prior to entering the swales, which
would direct runoff to two sets of dry wells located in the backyard areas of the proposed
residences. Runoff from the swales would enter the inlets at the top of the drywells and
would percolate through a layer of drain rock and filter fabric, allowing for stormwater to
slowly infiltrate the underlying soils. Each set of two drywells would be connected by a
six-inch perforated pipe set in a dissipation trench. The proposed drainage system would
satisfy City requirements by routing on-site runoff through vegetated areas. Therefore,
during operation, the project would comply with all relevant water quality standards and
waste discharge requirements, and, thus, would not degrade water quality during operation.
Conclusion
Based on the above, the project would comply with all applicable regulations during
construction and operation, and would not involve uses associated with the generation or
discharge of polluted water. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur related
to violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or degradation of
water quality.
b. As discussed previously, the project site is currently developed with residential structures.
The proposed project site would not substantially increase demand for water supplies
associated with the site, including groundwater, and the proposed on-site drainage system
would allow for stormwater to percolate into the underlying soils, contributing to the
recharge of groundwater. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially deplete
groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, and a less-than-
significant impact would occur.
c-e. The proposed project site is currently developed with residential structures. As such,
development of the proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in
impervious surfaces or runoff from what currently exists on-site. In addition, as discussed
above, the project would include a drainage system that would manage all on-site runoff
without connecting to the City’s existing stormwater drainage system. Runoff entering the
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
48 October 2017
dry wells and the perforated drainage pipes would be able to infiltrate the soil in a similar
manner to what currently occurs on the project site, and erosion, siltation, and/or flooding
would not occur. Because the project would not connect to the City’s stormwater drainage
system, the capacity of existing stormwater drainage infrastructure would not be exceeded,
and alterations to such infrastructure would not be needed.
In conclusion, the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area in a manner which would result in erosion, siltation, or flooding
on- or off-site, create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, or provide substantial additional sources
of polluted runoff. Consequently, the proposed project would result in a less-than-
significant impact related to such.
g-i. According to the City’s General Plan,18 as well as the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM),19 the proposed project site is not at
risk for inundation by flood. As a result, the project would not place housing or structures
within the 100-year floodplain, nor expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee
or dam. Therefore, no impact would result.
j. Tsunamis are defined as sea waves created by undersea fault movement, whereas a seiche
is a long-wavelength, large-scale wave action set up in a closed body of water such as a
lake or reservoir. The project area is located over 20 miles from the Pacific Ocean and
tsunamis typically affect coastlines and areas up to one-quarter mile inland. Due to the
project’s distance from the coast, the project site would not be exposed to flooding risks
associated with tsunamis. Seiches do not pose a risk to the proposed project, as the project
site is not located in close proximity to any large closed bodies of water. Mudflows
typically occur on steep, unstable slopes. Given that the proposed project site is not located
on a slope, mudflows would not pose an issue. Based on the above, no impact would occur
related to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.
18 City of Cupertino. General Plan: Community Vision 2015 – 2040 [pg. E-5]. Adopted October 20, 2015.
19 Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer (Official), Panel
#06085C0208H. Available at:
http://fema.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=cbe088e7c8704464aa0fc34eb99e7f30&exte
nt=-122.05675800688134,37.31906767684711,-122.0534481609565,37.32047549983092. Accessed October
2017.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
49 October 2017
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Physically divide an established community?
b. Conflict with any applicable land use plans,
policies, or regulations of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for
the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural communities conservation plan?
Discussion
a. A project risks dividing an established community if the project would introduce
infrastructure or alter land use so as to change the land use conditions in the surrounding
community, or isolate an existing land use. The proposed project site currently contains
two single-family residences and a detached garage that has been converted to a studio,
which would be demolished as part of the proposed project. Given that the proposed project
would include redevelopment of the site with two new single-family residences, the
proposed project would not alter the land uses on the site. Accordingly, the proposed
project would not change the land use conditions in the area or isolate an existing land use.
In addition, the project would be consistent with the site’s existing zoning and General Plan
land use designations. As such, the proposed project would not physically divide an
established community and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
b. The City of Cupertino General Plan designates the 12,960-square-foot site as Residential
(4.4-7.7 du/ac), and the site is currently zoned P(Res 4.4-7.7). The proposed project would
include division of the site into two approximately 6,000-square-foot lots and dedication
of approximately 960 square feet of land to the City to allow for widening of Orange
Avenue along the project frontage. The two new lots would maintain the existing zoning
and General Plan land use designations for the site, and would be consistent with Sections
19.28.050 and 19.28.060 of the City’s Municipal Code relating to zoning districts and site
development regulations. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any applicable land
use plans, policies, or regulations of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including,
but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. As
a result, the proposed project would not conflict with applicable land use plans, policies,
or regulations, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
c. As discussed previously, the project site is not located in an area with an approved
HCP/NCCP. As a result, no impact would occur.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
50 October 2017
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-
Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
Discussion
a,b. The proposed project site is located in a developed area and is currently developed with
residential uses. According to the City’s General Plan, the project site is located in an area
which is unsuitable for mineral extraction.20 Therefore, no impact to mineral resources
would occur as a result of the proposed project.
20 City of Cupertino. General Plan: Community Vision 2015 – 2040 [pg. ES-10]. Adopted October 20, 2015.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
51 October 2017
XII. NOISE.
Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-
Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise
levels?
c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
Discussion
a,c. The existing noise environment of the site is currently defined by traffic noise on Orange
Avenue. Such traffic is currently generated by the surrounding residences in the project
vicinity, as well as the occupied single-family residence currently located on the project
site. The proposed project would include demolition of the existing on-site buildings and
redevelopment of the site with two single-family residences. Therefore, the project would
be considered to result in a potentially significant impact if the net increase in traffic
generated by the proposed project would result in exceedances of noise levels established
in the City’s Municipal Code or an increase in the ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity.
As discussed in the Transportation and Circulation section of this IS/MND, the proposed
project would be anticipated to generate a total of 19 ADT. A total of 19 new vehicle trips
spread over a 24-hour period would not result in a substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project.
Furthermore, a portion of the trips generated by the project would replace trips currently
generated by the occupied single-family residence on the project site. Therefore, given that
the proposed project would not substantially alter the number of vehicle trips associated
with the project site, the project would not result in the exposure of persons to or generation
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
52 October 2017
of noise levels in excess of standards established in City of Cupertino Municipal Code or
substantially increase ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project. Thus, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
b. Heavy-duty construction equipment would be used during construction of the proposed
project (e.g., tractors, pavers, bulldozers). Such equipment has the potential to generate
groundborne vibration. Levels of vibration include imperceptible vibrations at low levels,
low rumbling and minor vibration at moderate levels, and structural or architectural
damage at high levels. For structural damage, the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) uses a vibration limit of 0.5 inches per second, peak particle velocity (in/sec,
PPV) for buildings structurally sound and designed to modern engineering standards and
0.2 in/sec PPV for buildings that are found to be structurally sound but where structural
damage is a major concern. The threshold of 0.2 in/sec PPV is also used by Caltrans as the
threshold for human annoyance caused by vibration. Although all surrounding structures
are assumed to be structurally sound, the 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold offers a conservative
value with regard to structural damage and is used as the threshold of significance for the
anal ysis within this IS/MND.
The primary vibration-generating activities associated with the project would occur during
demolition of the existing on-site structures, construction of the two proposed single-family
residences, and widening of Orange Avenue. Table 8 below presents typical vibration
levels that could be expected from construction equipment at various distances.
Table 8
Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment
Equipment PPV at 25 ft (in/sec)
Large Bulldozer 0.089
Caisson drilling 0.089
Loaded trucks 0.076
Jackhammer 0.035
Small bulldozer 0.003
Source: Caltrans, Transportation and Construction Vibration: Guidance Manual, September 2013.
The most significant source of ground-borne vibrations during project construction would
be the use of large bulldozers, which, as shown above, would generate vibrations of
approximately 0.089 in/sec PPV at a distance of 25 feet.21
The nearest building relative to the proposed project site is the existing single-family
residence located south of the site. The residence is situated approximately 25 feet from
the nearest proposed construction areas. Therefore, vibration levels at the residence would
likely be 0.089 in/sec PPV during construction activities associated with the project, which
is below the applicable 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold. As such, groundborne vibrations would
not damage the building and would not be perceptible to residents of the building.
Additionally, construction activities would be temporary in nature and would be limited to
normal daytime working hours in accordance with Section 10.48.053 of the City’s
21 California Department of Transportation. Transportation and Construction Vibration, Guidance Manual.
September 2013.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
53 October 2017
Municipal Code. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur related to exposure
of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.
d. During demolition of the existing on-site structures, construction of the proposed
residences, and widening of Orange Avenue, noise from such activities would temporarily
add to the noise environment in the project vicinity. Noise would also be generated during
the construction phase by truck traffic associated with transport of heavy materials and
equipment to and from the project site. However, per Section 10.48.053 of the City’s
Municipal Code, grading, construction, and demolition activities are permitted to exceed
the City’s established noise limits during daytime hours provided that any piece of
equipment involved in such activities has high-quality noise muffler and abatement devices
installed and in good condition and the activities meet certain established criteria.
Compliance with the Municipal Code requirements would be verified as part of the City’s
standard conditions of approval.
Furthermore, noise associated with construction activities would be temporary, would
occur intermittently throughout implementation of the proposed project, and would occur
on a relatively small scale. Thus, while demolition and construction activities associated
with the project could result in temporary increases in noise levels at nearby noise-sensitive
receptors, such increases would not be substantial, would be minimized with compliance
with the City’s Municipal Code, and would be typical of residential construction activities.
Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
e,f. The project site is located approximately 7.5 miles west of the nearest airport which is the
San Jose International Airport. Given the distance between the airport and the project site,
noise levels resulting from aircraft traffic at the nearest airport would be negligible at the
proposed project site. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
54 October 2017
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through
projects in an undeveloped area or extension of
major infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
c. Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Discussion
a. The proposed project would include the demolition of the existing on-site residences and
the construction of two new single-family homes. Given that the project would not result
in a net increase in the number of housing units on the project site, the project would not
be considered to induce substantial population growth through the construction of new
homes. In addition, the project would be consistent with the existing zoning and General
Plan land use designations for the site. Consequently, a less-than-significant impact would
occur with regard to the project inducing substantial population growth.
b,c. The proposed project currently contains two single-family residences and a detached
garage that has been converted to a studio. All three structures would be demolished as part
of the proposed project, and the site would be redeveloped with two new single-family
residences. As discussed previously, only one of the on-site residences is currently
occupied. Given that the project would provide new housing to replace the existing
residences, the proposed project would not displace a substantial number of existing
housing or people and would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
55 October 2017
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES.
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need for new
or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-
Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks?
e. Other Public Facilities?
Discussion
a. Fire protection services to the project area are provided by the SCCFD, which serves Santa
Clara County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills,
Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga. The SCCFD operates 17 fire stations; the
Cupertino Fire Station, located at 20215 Stevens Creek Boulevard, currently serves the
project site. The SCCFD would continue to provide service following construction of the
proposed project. Given that the proposed project would be consistent with the existing
land uses on the site and the General Plan land use designation for the site, provision of
fire protection services to the project site has been previously anticipated by the City. In
addition, demand for fire protection services would not substantially increase, as the site is
currently developed with residential uses.
Per Section 16.40.060 of the City’s Municipal Code, the proposed project would be
required to pay applicable fire protection fees to the SCCFD. In addition, the proposed
residential buildings would be constructed in accordance with the fire protection
requirements of the 2013 California Fire Code, which contain provisions to minimize fire
hazard risks. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact
related to the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental impacts.
b. The City of Cupertino contracts with the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office (Sheriff’s
Office) and the West Valley Patrol Division for police protection services. The West Valley
Patrol Division is headquartered at the Westside Sheriff’s Substation at 1601 South De
Anza Boulevard in Cupertino. Given that the proposed project site is already developed
with residential uses and provided with police protection services, and the project would
be consistent with the City’s General Plan, the project would not substantially increase the
demand for police protection services at the site. Therefore, the proposed project would
have a less-than-significant impact related to the need for new or physically altered police
protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
56 October 2017
c. Public schools in the City of Cupertino are managed by the Cupertino Union School
District (CUSD) and the Fremont Union High School District (FUHSD). The proposed
project would be required to pay the school impact fees specified in the City’s General
Plan.22 As noted in the General Plan, school impact mitigation fees are presumed to fully
mitigate any school impacts associated with development. Because the project applicant
would be required to pay the applicable school impact fees, the proposed project would
result in a less-than-significant impact regarding an increase in demand for schools.
d,e. The City of Cupertino assesses park maintenance fees for new residential development
based on the density of the proposed development. Given that the proposed project would
include the construction of single-family housing, the project applicant would be required
to pay the appropriate park maintenance fee to the City. Pursuant to Section 14.05.060 of
the City’s Municipal Code, the final amount of the fee would be determined by the Director
of Public Works. The in-lieu fees would fund improvements to and expansion of park
facilities within the City. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less-than-
significant impact related to the need for new or physically altered parks or other public
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts.
22 City of Cupertino. General Plan: Community Vision 2015 – 2040 [pg. B-83]. Adopted October 20, 2015.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
57 October 2017
XV. RECREATION.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporate
d
Less-
Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
Discussion
a,b. The proposed project would include the construction of two new single-family homes.
Residents of the proposed homes would likely use existing neighborhood, regional, parks
and/or other recreational facilities. However, given that the project site is currently
developed with residential uses, the proposed project would not be anticipated to
substantially increase the demand for parks or other recreational facilities associated with
the site. In addition, development of the site with residential uses has been previously
anticipated in the City’s General Plan. As discussed in Section XIV, Public Services,
above, the project applicant would be required to pay any applicable park maintenance fees
to the City.
Therefore, the proposed project would not be expected to result in substantial physical
deterioration of any existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities,
and would not result in adverse physical effects related to the construction or expansion of
new facilities. Thus, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
58 October 2017
XVI. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-
Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass
transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but
not limited to intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass
transit?
b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management
program, including, but not limited to level of
service standards and travel demand measures, or
other standards established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or
highways?
c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d. Substantially increase hazards due to design features
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e. Result in inadequate emergency access?
f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian
facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or
safety of such facilities?
Discussion
a,b. The Institute of Traffic Engineer’s (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used to estimate
weekday AM, PM, and daily trip generation forecasts for the proposed project based on the
proposed single-family residential land use.23 As shown in Table 9 below, implementation
of the proposed project would be expected to result in a total of 19 ADT, with two trips
occurring during the AM peak hour and two trips occurring during the PM peak hour.
Table 9
Weekday Project Trip Generation Rates and Estimates
Units Rate
Daily
Trips
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total
2 9.52 19 0.75 1 1 2 1.00 1 1 2
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2012.
23 Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Handbook, 9th Edition. September 2012.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
59 October 2017
According to the Santa Clara VTA, projects anticipated to generate fewer than 100 peak
hour trips are not subject to review by the VTA.24 Because the project would generate fewer
than 100 peak hour trips, preparation of a traffic impact study for the proposed project is
not required and the project is not subject to review by the VTA.
Because the project would result in less than 100 peak hour trips, and traffic associated
with buildout of the site has been previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR, the project
would not be expected to adversely impact levels of service at nearby signalized
intersections or roadways. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with an
applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system, and would not conflict with the applicable CMP.
Consequently, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
c. The proposed project is not located near an airport and does not include any improvements
to airports or a change in air traffic patterns. The nearest airport to the site is San Jose
International Airport, located approximately 7.5 miles east of the site. Therefore, because
the proposed project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in air traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks,
no impact would occur.
d,e. Currently, the proposed project site extends further into the Orange Avenue Roadway than
the adjoining lots. As a result, the roadway is narrowed along the project frontage, and the
sidewalk along the sections of the roadway to north and south of the project site is
discontinuous. As part of the proposed project, approximately 960 square feet of land along
the western portion of the proposed project site would be dedicated to the City, and the
portion of Orange Avenue fronting the project site would be widened to extend
approximately ten feet into the dedicated area. Both of the proposed single-family
residences would include paved driveways which would connect to the widened roadway.
Thus, adequate emergency access would be provided to the site. A sidewalk would be
included along the project frontage, and would connect with the existing sidewalks to the
north and south. Overall, the proposed roadway improvements would reduce hazards
associated with the existing narrow roadway and discontinuous sidewalks, and would
create greater consistency between the project frontage and the frontages of the
surrounding development.
Residential uses associated with the proposed project would be considered compatible with
existing residential development in the surrounding area. Given that the proposed buildings
would be located adjacent to the Orange Avenue roadway, emergency vehicles would have
reasonable access to the buildings from the project frontage. Based on the above, the
project would not substantially increase hazards due to design features or incompatible
uses, and emergency access to the site would be adequate. Therefore, the project would
result in a less-than-significant impact.
f. The proposed project site is located in a residential subdivision. While bike lanes are not
present on the surrounding roadway network, bicycle travel in the project vicinity remains
24 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. 2013 Congestion Management Program [pg. 12]. October 2013.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
60 October 2017
a viable transportation option due to the low levels of traffic experienced by the roads. As
noted above, the proposed project would include the provision of a sidewalk at the project
frontage, which would improve the pedestrian network along the street. Thus, the project
would be consistent with the Policy M-3.2 in the City’s General Plan, which requires new
development and redevelopment to increase pedestrian connectivity.
The nearest transit stop relative to the project site is located at the intersection of Stevens
Creek Boulevard and Pasadena Avenue, approximately 1,500 feet northeast of the project
site. Thus, residents of the proposed single-family homes would be provided with
reasonable access to the City’s public transportation system.
Given the presence of existing transit and pedestrian facilities, and incorporation of a new
sidewalk along the project frontage, the project would result in a less-than-significant
impact with respect to conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public
transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or with respect to degradation of such facilities.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
61 October 2017
XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined
in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of
the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural
value to a California Native American Tribe, and that
is:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-
Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?
b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
Discussion
a,b. As discussed in Section V, Cultural Resources, of this IS/MND, the proposed project site
does not contain any existing permanent structures or any other known resources listed or
eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register
of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), and does not
contain known resources that could be considered historic pursuant to the criteria set forth
in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. Furthermore, the potential for
unrecorded Native American resources to exist within the project site is relatively low
based on the highly-disturbed nature of the site, and Native American resources have not
been identified within the vicinity of the project site. Given that the project would be
required to comply with the City’s standard conditions of approval regarding cultural
resources, construction of the proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, and a less-than-significant impact
to tribal cultural resources could occur.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
62 October 2017
XVIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board?
b. Require or result in the construction of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c. Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project from existing entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded entitlements
needed?
e. Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste
disposal needs?
g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Discussion
a,b,e. Wastewater service at the proposed project site would be provided by the Cupertino
Sanitary District (CSD). The proposed project would connect to the CSD’s existing
sanitary sewer system by way of connections to existing sewer lines in Orange Avenue.
The CSD collection system directs wastewater to the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution
Control Plant (SJ/SCWPCP), a joint powers authority.
The project site is located in a residential neighborhood that is currently served by the CSD.
Given that the proposed project would include two single-family residences, the project
would not be considered to substantially increase demand for wastewater services at the
proposed project site or have a substantial impact on the available capacity of the
SJ/SCWPCP. Furthermore, increased wastewater generation associated with buildout of
the project site has been anticipated by the City, as the project would be consistent with the
existing General Plan land use designation of the site. Because the project’s expected
wastewater generation would be relatively minor relative, and has been anticipated by the
City, a less-than-significant impact would occur related to requiring or resulting in the
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
63 October 2017
construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.
c. As discussed in further detail in Section IX, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this IS/MND,
the proposed project would not include connections to the City’s existing stormwater
drainage facilities, and, thus, would not result in the expansion of such facilities. Rather,
runoff from impervious surfaces created by the proposed project would be routed to a set
of dry wells in the backyard areas of the proposed residences. The dry wells would allow
stormwater to slowly infiltrate the underlying native soils. Therefore, the proposed project
would have a less-than-significant impact with respect to requiring or resulting in the
construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.
d. Water service to the proposed project site is currently provided under contract with San
Jose Water. The proposed project would connect to existing water supply infrastructure
located in Orange Avenue. The proposed project would be consistent with the existing
General Plan land use designation of the site, and, thus, the City has previously anticipated
increased demand for water supplies associated with buildout of the site. Therefore,
sufficient water supplies would be available to serve the proposed project from existing
entitlements and resources, and new or expanded entitlements would not be needed. In
addition, the project would not necessitate the construction of new water supply facilities.
Thus, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
f,g. The City contracts with Recology South Bay (Recology) for solid waste collection services
in the City. All non-hazardous waste solid waste collected under the Recology franchise
agreement is taken to Newby Island Sanitary Landfill for processing. Under the agreement
recyclable materials also are handled by Recology. Of the 27,593 tons of solid waste
disposed in 2012, 25,440 tons, or 92 percent was disposed of at the Newby Island Landfill.
The Monterey Peninsula Landfill, the Guadalupe Sanitary Landfill and the Altamont
Landfill and Resource Recovery Facility accepted the next highest amounts of waste from
Cupertino, respectively receiving 1,260 tons (4.6 percent of total), 321 tons (1.2 percent)
and 238 tons (0.9 percent) of all waste. Per the General Plan EIR, sufficient landfill capacity
is available to serve buildout of the General Plan.
The proposed project site is currently developed with residential uses and is designated as
Low-Density Residential in the City’s General Plan. Given that the proposed project would
not substantially alter the existing site uses, and generation of solid waste associated with
the project site has been previously anticipated by the City, the project would not exceed
the capacity of any landfills serving the City. In addition, construction and any demolition
debris associated with the project would be subject to Chapter 16.72 of the City’s
Municipal Code, which requires that a minimum of 60 percent of construction and
demolition debris be diverted from landfill. Therefore, the proposed project would be
served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid
waste disposal needs and would comply with federal, State, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste. Thus, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
64 October 2017
XIX. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects)?
c. Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Discussion
a. As described throughout this IS/MND, impacts related to special-status plants and cultural
resources would be less than significant. In addition, potential impacts related to reducing
the habitat for nesting migratory birds would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with
implementation of the mitigation measures required by this IS/MND, as well as compliance
with General Plan policies and all applicable sections of the Municipal Code. As such,
development of the proposed project would not result in impacts related to the following:
1) degrade the quality of the environment; 2) substantially reduce or impact the habitat of
fish or wildlife species; 3) cause fish or wildlife populations to drop below self-sustaining
levels; 4) threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; 5) reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal; or 6) eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore, a less-than-
significant impact would occur.
b. The proposed project in conjunction with other development within the City of Cupertino
could incrementally contribute to cumulative impacts in the area. However, as
demonstrated in this IS/MND, all potential environmental impacts that could occur as a
result of project implementation would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with
implementation of project-specific mitigation measures, as well as compliance with
applicable General Plan policies and Municipal Code standards. In addition, the site has
been anticipated by the City for residential development. Thus, buildout of the site with
residential uses was considered in the cumulative analysis of buildout of the General Plan.
When viewed in conjunction with other closely related past, present, or reasonably
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
65 October 2017
foreseeable future projects, development of the proposed project would not substantially
contribute to cumulative impacts in the City of Cupertino, and the project’s cumulative
impact would be less than significant.
c. As described in this IS/MND, implementation of the proposed project could result in
potential impacts related to existing environmental hazards, including a septic system,
ACMs, LBP, and contaminated soils. However, the proposed project would be required to
implement the project-specific mitigation measures within this IS/MND, as well as
applicable General Plan policies, in order to ensure that any potential direct or indirect
effects to human beings would be reduced to less-than-significant levels. Therefore, the
proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact.
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
APPENDIX A
AIR QUALITY AND GHG MODELING RESULTS
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
APPENDIX A
AIR QUALITY AND GHG MODELING RESULTS
Project Characteristics - Intensity Factors for CO2 adjusted based on PG&E RPS reductions
Land Use - Applicant provided
Construction Phase - Applicant provided
Trips and VMT -
Demolition -
Grading - Applicant provided
Vehicle Trips - Based on ITE 9th ed. trip generation rates
Energy Mitigation - 2016 Title 24 standards (latest standards) are anticipated to result in 28% improvement from 2013 Title 24 standards for residential buildings
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Single Family Housing 2.00 Dwelling Unit 0.30 3,600.00 6
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
5
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 64
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company
2020Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
404.79 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Orange Avenue Lot Split
Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 1 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 5.00 151.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 100.00 151.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 3.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 2.00 5.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 5.00 2.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 1.00 5.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/22/2019 4/8/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/21/2019 3/25/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/25/2019 8/24/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/26/2019 9/10/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/23/2018 8/27/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/22/2019 8/23/2018
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 2.50 0.30
tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 300.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.65 0.30
tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 641.35 404.79
tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2018 2020
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 9.91 9.52
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 8.62 9.52
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 2 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2018 0.0829 0.6618 0.4817 7.5000e-
004
4.0900e-
003
0.0424 0.0465 1.5100e-
003
0.0396 0.0411 0.0000 67.7243 67.7243 0.0176 0.0000 68.1648
2019 0.0499 0.3589 0.2916 4.5000e-
004
2.4000e-
004
0.0227 0.0229 6.0000e-
005
0.0212 0.0213 0.0000 39.8410 39.8410 0.0105 0.0000 40.1027
Maximum 0.0829 0.6618 0.4817 7.5000e-
004
4.0900e-
003
0.0424 0.0465 1.5100e-
003
0.0396 0.0411 0.0000 67.7243 67.7243 0.0176 0.0000 68.1648
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2018 0.0829 0.6618 0.4817 7.5000e-
004
4.0900e-
003
0.0424 0.0465 1.5100e-
003
0.0396 0.0411 0.0000 67.7242 67.7242 0.0176 0.0000 68.1647
2019 0.0499 0.3589 0.2916 4.5000e-
004
2.4000e-
004
0.0227 0.0229 6.0000e-
005
0.0212 0.0213 0.0000 39.8409 39.8409 0.0105 0.0000 40.1027
Maximum 0.0829 0.6618 0.4817 7.5000e-
004
4.0900e-
003
0.0424 0.0465 1.5100e-
003
0.0396 0.0411 0.0000 67.7242 67.7242 0.0176 0.0000 68.1647
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 3 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.0288 4.3000e-
004
0.0320 4.0000e-
005
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
0.2542 0.0867 0.3409 5.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
0.3578
Energy 5.7000e-
004
4.8700e-
003
2.0700e-
003
3.0000e-
005
3.9000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
0.0000 8.7782 8.7782 3.3000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
8.8312
Mobile 5.5400e-
003
0.0265 0.0625 2.0000e-
004
0.0164 2.2000e-
004
0.0166 4.3900e-
003
2.1000e-
004
4.6000e-
003
0.0000 18.3522 18.3522 7.2000e-
004
0.0000 18.3703
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.5115 0.0000 0.5115 0.0302 0.0000 1.2673
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0413 0.1823 0.2236 4.2600e-
003
1.0000e-
004
0.3608
Total 0.0350 0.0318 0.0966 2.7000e-
004
0.0164 3.1600e-
003
0.0195 4.3900e-
003
3.1500e-
003
7.5400e-
003
0.8071 27.3993 28.2064 0.0360 2.6000e-
004
29.1874
Unmitigated Operational
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
1 8-6-2018 11-5-2018 0.4395 0.4395
2 11-6-2018 2-5-2019 0.4653 0.4653
3 2-6-2019 5-5-2019 0.2389 0.2389
Highest 0.4653 0.4653
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 4 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.0288 4.3000e-
004
0.0320 4.0000e-
005
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
0.2542 0.0867 0.3409 5.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
0.3578
Energy 4.2000e-
004
3.5800e-
003
1.5200e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.9000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
0.0000 7.2507 7.2507 3.0000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
7.2947
Mobile 5.5400e-
003
0.0265 0.0625 2.0000e-
004
0.0164 2.2000e-
004
0.0166 4.3900e-
003
2.1000e-
004
4.6000e-
003
0.0000 18.3522 18.3522 7.2000e-
004
0.0000 18.3703
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.5115 0.0000 0.5115 0.0302 0.0000 1.2673
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0413 0.1823 0.2236 4.2600e-
003
1.0000e-
004
0.3608
Total 0.0348 0.0306 0.0960 2.6000e-
004
0.0164 3.0600e-
003
0.0194 4.3900e-
003
3.0500e-
003
7.4400e-
003
0.8071 25.8719 26.6790 0.0360 2.3000e-
004
27.6509
Mitigated Operational
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.43 4.05 0.57 3.70 0.00 3.16 0.51 0.00 3.17 1.33 0.00 5.57 5.42 0.08 11.54 5.26
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 5 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 8/6/2018 8/8/2018 5 3
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 8/9/2018 8/15/2018 5 5
3 Grading Grading 8/16/2018 8/22/2018 5 5
4 Building Construction Building Construction 8/27/2018 3/25/2019 5 151
5 Paving Paving 8/23/2018 8/24/2018 5 2
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/10/2018 4/8/2019 5 151
OffRoad Equipment
Residential Indoor: 7,290; Residential Outdoor: 2,430; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0
(Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.3
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 6 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1.00 247 0.40
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 1 7.00 130 0.42
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 4.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 4 10.00 0.00 7.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 2 5.00 0.00 38.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 5 1.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 7 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 7.4000e-
004
0.0000 7.4000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000 1.1000e-
004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.6000e-
003
0.0141 0.0117 2.0000e-
005
9.3000e-
004
9.3000e-
004
8.9000e-
004
8.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.5912 1.5912 3.1000e-
004
0.0000 1.5989
Total 1.6000e-
003
0.0141 0.0117 2.0000e-
005
7.4000e-
004
9.3000e-
004
1.6700e-
003
1.1000e-
004
8.9000e-
004
1.0000e-
003
0.0000 1.5912 1.5912 3.1000e-
004
0.0000 1.5989
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 3.0000e-
005
1.1500e-
003
2.2000e-
004
0.0000 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 6.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2739 0.2739 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2743
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 6.0000e-
005
5.0000e-
005
4.6000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
3.0000e-
005
0.0000 3.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1105 0.1105 0.0000 0.0000 0.1106
Total 9.0000e-
005
1.2000e-
003
6.8000e-
004
0.0000 1.8000e-
004
0.0000 1.8000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.3844 0.3844 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.3849
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 8 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.2 Demolition - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 7.4000e-
004
0.0000 7.4000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000 1.1000e-
004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.6000e-
003
0.0141 0.0117 2.0000e-
005
9.3000e-
004
9.3000e-
004
8.9000e-
004
8.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.5912 1.5912 3.1000e-
004
0.0000 1.5989
Total 1.6000e-
003
0.0141 0.0117 2.0000e-
005
7.4000e-
004
9.3000e-
004
1.6700e-
003
1.1000e-
004
8.9000e-
004
1.0000e-
003
0.0000 1.5912 1.5912 3.1000e-
004
0.0000 1.5989
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 3.0000e-
005
1.1500e-
003
2.2000e-
004
0.0000 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 6.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2739 0.2739 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2743
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 6.0000e-
005
5.0000e-
005
4.6000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
3.0000e-
005
0.0000 3.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1105 0.1105 0.0000 0.0000 0.1106
Total 9.0000e-
005
1.2000e-
003
6.8000e-
004
0.0000 1.8000e-
004
0.0000 1.8000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.3844 0.3844 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.3849
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 9 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.3 Site Preparation - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.8000e-
004
0.0000 1.8000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.9600e-
003
0.0244 0.0106 2.0000e-
005
1.0500e-
003
1.0500e-
003
9.6000e-
004
9.6000e-
004
0.0000 2.2288 2.2288 6.9000e-
004
0.0000 2.2461
Total 1.9600e-
003
0.0244 0.0106 2.0000e-
005
1.8000e-
004
1.0500e-
003
1.2300e-
003
2.0000e-
005
9.6000e-
004
9.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.2288 2.2288 6.9000e-
004
0.0000 2.2461
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.8000e-
004
6.2700e-
003
1.1900e-
003
2.0000e-
005
3.2000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
3.5000e-
004
9.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
1.1000e-
004
0.0000 1.4868 1.4868 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.4888
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 5.0000e-
005
4.0000e-
005
3.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.0000e-
004
0.0000 1.0000e-
004
3.0000e-
005
0.0000 3.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.0921 0.0921 0.0000 0.0000 0.0922
Total 2.3000e-
004
6.3100e-
003
1.5800e-
003
2.0000e-
005
4.2000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
4.5000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.5789 1.5789 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.5810
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 10 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.3 Site Preparation - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.8000e-
004
0.0000 1.8000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
0.0000 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.9600e-
003
0.0244 0.0106 2.0000e-
005
1.0500e-
003
1.0500e-
003
9.6000e-
004
9.6000e-
004
0.0000 2.2288 2.2288 6.9000e-
004
0.0000 2.2461
Total 1.9600e-
003
0.0244 0.0106 2.0000e-
005
1.8000e-
004
1.0500e-
003
1.2300e-
003
2.0000e-
005
9.6000e-
004
9.8000e-
004
0.0000 2.2288 2.2288 6.9000e-
004
0.0000 2.2461
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.8000e-
004
6.2700e-
003
1.1900e-
003
2.0000e-
005
3.2000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
3.5000e-
004
9.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
1.1000e-
004
0.0000 1.4868 1.4868 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.4888
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 5.0000e-
005
4.0000e-
005
3.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.0000e-
004
0.0000 1.0000e-
004
3.0000e-
005
0.0000 3.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.0921 0.0921 0.0000 0.0000 0.0922
Total 2.3000e-
004
6.3100e-
003
1.5800e-
003
2.0000e-
005
4.2000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
4.5000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.5789 1.5789 8.0000e-
005
0.0000 1.5810
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 11 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.8800e-
003
0.0000 1.8800e-
003
1.0300e-
003
0.0000 1.0300e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.6600e-
003
0.0236 0.0194 3.0000e-
005
1.5600e-
003
1.5600e-
003
1.4900e-
003
1.4900e-
003
0.0000 2.6520 2.6520 5.1000e-
004
0.0000 2.6648
Total 2.6600e-
003
0.0236 0.0194 3.0000e-
005
1.8800e-
003
1.5600e-
003
3.4400e-
003
1.0300e-
003
1.4900e-
003
2.5200e-
003
0.0000 2.6520 2.6520 5.1000e-
004
0.0000 2.6648
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.0000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
0.0000 2.0000e-
004
0.0000 2.0000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1842 0.1842 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1844
Total 1.0000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
0.0000 2.0000e-
004
0.0000 2.0000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1842 0.1842 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1844
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 12 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.4 Grading - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.8800e-
003
0.0000 1.8800e-
003
1.0300e-
003
0.0000 1.0300e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.6600e-
003
0.0236 0.0194 3.0000e-
005
1.5600e-
003
1.5600e-
003
1.4900e-
003
1.4900e-
003
0.0000 2.6520 2.6520 5.1000e-
004
0.0000 2.6648
Total 2.6600e-
003
0.0236 0.0194 3.0000e-
005
1.8800e-
003
1.5600e-
003
3.4400e-
003
1.0300e-
003
1.4900e-
003
2.5200e-
003
0.0000 2.6520 2.6520 5.1000e-
004
0.0000 2.6648
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.0000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
0.0000 2.0000e-
004
0.0000 2.0000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1842 0.1842 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1844
Total 1.0000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
0.0000 2.0000e-
004
0.0000 2.0000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1842 0.1842 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1844
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 13 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0494 0.5019 0.3527 5.2000e-
004
0.0323 0.0323 0.0297 0.0297 0.0000 47.3253 47.3253 0.0147 0.0000 47.6936
Total 0.0494 0.5019 0.3527 5.2000e-
004
0.0323 0.0323 0.0297 0.0297 0.0000 47.3253 47.3253 0.0147 0.0000 47.6936
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.8000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
1.4100e-
003
0.0000 3.6000e-
004
0.0000 3.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
0.0000 1.0000e-
004
0.0000 0.3353 0.3353 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.3355
Total 1.8000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
1.4100e-
003
0.0000 3.6000e-
004
0.0000 3.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
0.0000 1.0000e-
004
0.0000 0.3353 0.3353 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.3355
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 14 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0494 0.5019 0.3527 5.2000e-
004
0.0323 0.0323 0.0297 0.0297 0.0000 47.3253 47.3253 0.0147 0.0000 47.6936
Total 0.0494 0.5019 0.3527 5.2000e-
004
0.0323 0.0323 0.0297 0.0297 0.0000 47.3253 47.3253 0.0147 0.0000 47.6936
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.8000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
1.4100e-
003
0.0000 3.6000e-
004
0.0000 3.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
0.0000 1.0000e-
004
0.0000 0.3353 0.3353 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.3355
Total 1.8000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
1.4100e-
003
0.0000 3.6000e-
004
0.0000 3.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
0.0000 1.0000e-
004
0.0000 0.3353 0.3353 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.3355
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 15 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0287 0.2946 0.2263 3.4000e-
004
0.0182 0.0182 0.0167 0.0167 0.0000 30.6901 30.6901 9.7100e-
003
0.0000 30.9329
Total 0.0287 0.2946 0.2263 3.4000e-
004
0.0182 0.0182 0.0167 0.0167 0.0000 30.6901 30.6901 9.7100e-
003
0.0000 30.9329
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.1000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
8.2000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
6.0000e-
005
0.0000 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2144 0.2144 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2146
Total 1.1000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
8.2000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
6.0000e-
005
0.0000 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2144 0.2144 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2146
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 16 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.5 Building Construction - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0287 0.2946 0.2263 3.4000e-
004
0.0182 0.0182 0.0167 0.0167 0.0000 30.6901 30.6901 9.7100e-
003
0.0000 30.9329
Total 0.0287 0.2946 0.2263 3.4000e-
004
0.0182 0.0182 0.0167 0.0167 0.0000 30.6901 30.6901 9.7100e-
003
0.0000 30.9329
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.1000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
8.2000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
6.0000e-
005
0.0000 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2144 0.2144 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2146
Total 1.1000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
8.2000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
0.0000 2.4000e-
004
6.0000e-
005
0.0000 6.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2144 0.2144 1.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.2146
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 17 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 9.2000e-
004
8.7400e-
003
7.2200e-
003
1.0000e-
005
5.1000e-
004
5.1000e-
004
4.7000e-
004
4.7000e-
004
0.0000 0.9708 0.9708 2.7000e-
004
0.0000 0.9777
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 9.2000e-
004
8.7400e-
003
7.2200e-
003
1.0000e-
005
5.1000e-
004
5.1000e-
004
4.7000e-
004
4.7000e-
004
0.0000 0.9708 0.9708 2.7000e-
004
0.0000 0.9777
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 7.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
5.6000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
4.0000e-
005
0.0000 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1326 0.1326 0.0000 0.0000 0.1327
Total 7.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
5.6000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
4.0000e-
005
0.0000 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1326 0.1326 0.0000 0.0000 0.1327
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 18 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.6 Paving - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 9.2000e-
004
8.7400e-
003
7.2200e-
003
1.0000e-
005
5.1000e-
004
5.1000e-
004
4.7000e-
004
4.7000e-
004
0.0000 0.9708 0.9708 2.7000e-
004
0.0000 0.9777
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 9.2000e-
004
8.7400e-
003
7.2200e-
003
1.0000e-
005
5.1000e-
004
5.1000e-
004
4.7000e-
004
4.7000e-
004
0.0000 0.9708 0.9708 2.7000e-
004
0.0000 0.9777
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 7.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
5.6000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
4.0000e-
005
0.0000 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1326 0.1326 0.0000 0.0000 0.1327
Total 7.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
5.6000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
0.0000 1.4000e-
004
4.0000e-
005
0.0000 4.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.1326 0.1326 0.0000 0.0000 0.1327
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 19 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0136 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0121 0.0812 0.0751 1.2000e-
004
6.1000e-
003
6.1000e-
003
6.1000e-
003
6.1000e-
003
0.0000 10.3407 10.3407 9.8000e-
004
0.0000 10.3653
Total 0.0257 0.0812 0.0751 1.2000e-
004
6.1000e-
003
6.1000e-
003
6.1000e-
003
6.1000e-
003
0.0000 10.3407 10.3407 9.8000e-
004
0.0000 10.3653
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 20 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0136 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0121 0.0812 0.0751 1.2000e-
004
6.1000e-
003
6.1000e-
003
6.1000e-
003
6.1000e-
003
0.0000 10.3407 10.3407 9.8000e-
004
0.0000 10.3653
Total 0.0257 0.0812 0.0751 1.2000e-
004
6.1000e-
003
6.1000e-
003
6.1000e-
003
6.1000e-
003
0.0000 10.3407 10.3407 9.8000e-
004
0.0000 10.3653
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 21 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0118 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 9.3300e-
003
0.0642 0.0645 1.0000e-
004
4.5100e-
003
4.5100e-
003
4.5100e-
003
4.5100e-
003
0.0000 8.9364 8.9364 7.5000e-
004
0.0000 8.9553
Total 0.0211 0.0642 0.0645 1.0000e-
004
4.5100e-
003
4.5100e-
003
4.5100e-
003
4.5100e-
003
0.0000 8.9364 8.9364 7.5000e-
004
0.0000 8.9553
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 22 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0118 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 9.3300e-
003
0.0642 0.0645 1.0000e-
004
4.5100e-
003
4.5100e-
003
4.5100e-
003
4.5100e-
003
0.0000 8.9364 8.9364 7.5000e-
004
0.0000 8.9553
Total 0.0211 0.0642 0.0645 1.0000e-
004
4.5100e-
003
4.5100e-
003
4.5100e-
003
4.5100e-
003
0.0000 8.9364 8.9364 7.5000e-
004
0.0000 8.9553
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 23 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
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 5.5400e-
003
0.0265 0.0625 2.0000e-
004
0.0164 2.2000e-
004
0.0166 4.3900e-
003
2.1000e-
004
4.6000e-
003
0.0000 18.3522 18.3522 7.2000e-
004
0.0000 18.3703
Unmitigated 5.5400e-
003
0.0265 0.0625 2.0000e-
004
0.0164 2.2000e-
004
0.0166 4.3900e-
003
2.1000e-
004
4.6000e-
003
0.0000 18.3522 18.3522 7.2000e-
004
0.0000 18.3703
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Single Family Housing 19.04 19.04 19.04 43,975 43,975
Total 19.04 19.04 19.04 43,975 43,975
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
Single Family Housing 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Single Family Housing 0.573139 0.040894 0.193976 0.114604 0.017740 0.005371 0.017133 0.024527 0.002545 0.002442 0.005942 0.000877 0.000812
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 24 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.1092 3.1092 2.2000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
3.1285
Electricity
Unmitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.1345 3.1345 2.2000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
3.1540
NaturalGas
Mitigated
4.2000e-
004
3.5800e-
003
1.5200e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.9000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
0.0000 4.1416 4.1416 8.0000e-
005
8.0000e-
005
4.1662
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
5.7000e-
004
4.8700e-
003
2.0700e-
003
3.0000e-
005
3.9000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
0.0000 5.6437 5.6437 1.1000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
5.6772
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Exceed Title 24
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 25 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
105759 5.7000e-
004
4.8700e-
003
2.0700e-
003
3.0000e-
005
3.9000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
0.0000 5.6437 5.6437 1.1000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
5.6772
Total 5.7000e-
004
4.8700e-
003
2.0700e-
003
3.0000e-
005
3.9000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
0.0000 5.6437 5.6437 1.1000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
5.6772
Unmitigated
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
77610.5 4.2000e-
004
3.5800e-
003
1.5200e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.9000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
0.0000 4.1416 4.1416 8.0000e-
005
8.0000e-
005
4.1662
Total 4.2000e-
004
3.5800e-
003
1.5200e-
003
2.0000e-
005
2.9000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
2.9000e-
004
0.0000 4.1416 4.1416 8.0000e-
005
8.0000e-
005
4.1662
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 26 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
17071.5 3.1345 2.2000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
3.1540
Total 3.1345 2.2000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
3.1540
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
16933.5 3.1092 2.2000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
3.1285
Total 3.1092 2.2000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
3.1285
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 27 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
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 0.0288 4.3000e-
004
0.0320 4.0000e-
005
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
0.2542 0.0867 0.3409 5.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
0.3578
Unmitigated 0.0288 4.3000e-
004
0.0320 4.0000e-
005
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
0.2542 0.0867 0.3409 5.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
0.3578
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating
2.5300e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
0.0141 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0118 2.6000e-
004
0.0171 4.0000e-
005
2.4700e-
003
2.4700e-
003
2.4700e-
003
2.4700e-
003
0.2542 0.0624 0.3166 4.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
0.3330
Landscaping 4.5000e-
004
1.7000e-
004
0.0149 0.0000 8.0000e-
005
8.0000e-
005
8.0000e-
005
8.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.0243 0.0243 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.0249
Total 0.0288 4.3000e-
004
0.0320 4.0000e-
005
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
0.2542 0.0867 0.3409 5.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
0.3578
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 28 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating
2.5300e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
0.0141 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 0.0118 2.6000e-
004
0.0171 4.0000e-
005
2.4700e-
003
2.4700e-
003
2.4700e-
003
2.4700e-
003
0.2542 0.0624 0.3166 4.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
0.3330
Landscaping 4.5000e-
004
1.7000e-
004
0.0149 0.0000 8.0000e-
005
8.0000e-
005
8.0000e-
005
8.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.0243 0.0243 2.0000e-
005
0.0000 0.0249
Total 0.0288 4.3000e-
004
0.0320 4.0000e-
005
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
2.5500e-
003
0.2542 0.0867 0.3409 5.0000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
0.3578
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 29 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 0.2236 4.2600e-
003
1.0000e-
004
0.3608
Unmitigated 0.2236 4.2600e-
003
1.0000e-
004
0.3608
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
0.130308 /
0.0821507
0.2236 4.2600e-
003
1.0000e-
004
0.3608
Total 0.2236 4.2600e-
003
1.0000e-
004
0.3608
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 30 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
0.130308 /
0.0821507
0.2236 4.2600e-
003
1.0000e-
004
0.3608
Total 0.2236 4.2600e-
003
1.0000e-
004
0.3608
Mitigated
8.0 Waste Detail
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 0.5115 0.0302 0.0000 1.2673
Unmitigated 0.5115 0.0302 0.0000 1.2673
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 31 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
2.52 0.5115 0.0302 0.0000 1.2673
Total 0.5115 0.0302 0.0000 1.2673
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Single Family
Housing
2.52 0.5115 0.0302 0.0000 1.2673
Total 0.5115 0.0302 0.0000 1.2673
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 32 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
11.0 Vegetation
10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:30 PMPage 33 of 33
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Annual
Project Characteristics - Intensity Factors for CO2 adjusted based on PG&E RPS reductions
Land Use - Applicant provided
Construction Phase - Applicant provided
Trips and VMT -
Demolition -
Grading - Applicant provided
Vehicle Trips - Based on ITE 9th ed. trip generation rates
Energy Mitigation - 2016 Title 24 standards (latest standards) are anticipated to result in 28% improvement from 2013 Title 24 standards for residential buildings
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Single Family Housing 2.00 Dwelling Unit 0.30 3,600.00 6
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
5
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 64
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company
2020Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
404.79 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Orange Avenue Lot Split
Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 1 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 5.00 151.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 100.00 151.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 3.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 2.00 5.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 5.00 2.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 1.00 5.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/22/2019 4/8/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/21/2019 3/25/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/25/2019 8/24/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/26/2019 9/10/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/23/2018 8/27/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/22/2019 8/23/2018
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 2.50 0.30
tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 300.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.65 0.30
tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 641.35 404.79
tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2018 2020
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 9.91 9.52
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 8.62 9.52
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 2 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2018 1.7233 13.0401 9.6389 0.0164 0.8349 0.8593 1.4582 0.4356 0.8026 1.0304 0.0000 1,686.447
0
1,686.447
0
0.3839 0.0000 1,694.974
7
2019 1.5634 11.6585 9.4143 0.0144 8.2100e-
003
0.7342 0.7424 2.1800e-
003
0.6858 0.6879 0.0000 1,417.591
9
1,417.591
9
0.3808 0.0000 1,427.111
3
Maximum 1.7233 13.0401 9.6389 0.0164 0.8349 0.8593 1.4582 0.4356 0.8026 1.0304 0.0000 1,686.447
0
1,686.447
0
0.3839 0.0000 1,694.974
7
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2018 1.7233 13.0401 9.6389 0.0164 0.8349 0.8593 1.4582 0.4356 0.8026 1.0304 0.0000 1,686.447
0
1,686.447
0
0.3839 0.0000 1,694.974
7
2019 1.5634 11.6585 9.4143 0.0144 8.2100e-
003
0.7342 0.7424 2.1800e-
003
0.6858 0.6879 0.0000 1,417.591
9
1,417.591
9
0.3808 0.0000 1,427.111
3
Maximum 1.7233 13.0401 9.6389 0.0164 0.8349 0.8593 1.4582 0.4356 0.8026 1.0304 0.0000 1,686.447
0
1,686.447
0
0.3839 0.0000 1,694.974
7
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 3 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.1686 0.0418 2.8461 5.0600e-
003
0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 40.7567 12.6501 53.4067 0.0507 2.8800e-
003
55.5308
Energy 3.1200e-
003
0.0267 0.0114 1.7000e-
004
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
34.0882 34.0882 6.5000e-
004
6.2000e-
004
34.2907
Mobile 0.0347 0.1410 0.3554 1.1700e-
003
0.0934 1.2300e-
003
0.0947 0.0250 1.1500e-
003
0.0262 117.7214 117.7214 4.4200e-
003
117.8318
Total 2.2064 0.2095 3.2129 6.4000e-
003
0.0934 0.3834 0.4768 0.0250 0.3833 0.4083 40.7567 164.4596 205.2163 0.0558 3.5000e-
003
207.6534
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.1686 0.0418 2.8461 5.0600e-
003
0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 40.7567 12.6501 53.4067 0.0507 2.8800e-
003
55.5308
Energy 2.2900e-
003
0.0196 8.3400e-
003
1.3000e-
004
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
25.0155 25.0155 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1641
Mobile 0.0347 0.1410 0.3554 1.1700e-
003
0.0934 1.2300e-
003
0.0947 0.0250 1.1500e-
003
0.0262 117.7214 117.7214 4.4200e-
003
117.8318
Total 2.2056 0.2024 3.2098 6.3600e-
003
0.0934 0.3828 0.4762 0.0250 0.3827 0.4077 40.7567 155.3869 196.1436 0.0556 3.3400e-
003
198.5268
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 4 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 8/6/2018 8/8/2018 5 3
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 8/9/2018 8/15/2018 5 5
3 Grading Grading 8/16/2018 8/22/2018 5 5
4 Building Construction Building Construction 8/27/2018 3/25/2019 5 151
5 Paving Paving 8/23/2018 8/24/2018 5 2
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/10/2018 4/8/2019 5 151
OffRoad Equipment
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.04 3.39 0.09 0.62 0.00 0.15 0.12 0.00 0.15 0.14 0.00 5.52 4.42 0.30 4.57 4.40
Residential Indoor: 7,290; Residential Outdoor: 2,430; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0
(Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.3
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 5 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1.00 247 0.40
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 1 7.00 130 0.42
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 4.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 4 10.00 0.00 7.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 2 5.00 0.00 38.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 5 1.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 6 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.4922 0.0000 0.4922 0.0745 0.0000 0.0745 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.6228 0.6228 0.5943 0.5943 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Total 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.4922 0.6228 1.1149 0.0745 0.5943 0.6688 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0221 0.7532 0.1416 1.9000e-
003
0.0408 3.0300e-
003
0.0438 0.0112 2.9000e-
003
0.0141 202.6492 202.6492 0.0104 202.9095
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0421 0.0272 0.3350 8.8000e-
004
0.0822 5.5000e-
004
0.0827 0.0218 5.1000e-
004
0.0223 87.3564 87.3564 2.5500e-
003
87.4202
Total 0.0642 0.7804 0.4766 2.7800e-
003
0.1229 3.5800e-
003
0.1265 0.0330 3.4100e-
003
0.0364 290.0056 290.0056 0.0130 290.3296
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 7 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.2 Demolition - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.4922 0.0000 0.4922 0.0745 0.0000 0.0745 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.6228 0.6228 0.5943 0.5943 0.0000 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Total 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.4922 0.6228 1.1149 0.0745 0.5943 0.6688 0.0000 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0221 0.7532 0.1416 1.9000e-
003
0.0408 3.0300e-
003
0.0438 0.0112 2.9000e-
003
0.0141 202.6492 202.6492 0.0104 202.9095
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0421 0.0272 0.3350 8.8000e-
004
0.0822 5.5000e-
004
0.0827 0.0218 5.1000e-
004
0.0223 87.3564 87.3564 2.5500e-
003
87.4202
Total 0.0642 0.7804 0.4766 2.7800e-
003
0.1229 3.5800e-
003
0.1265 0.0330 3.4100e-
003
0.0364 290.0056 290.0056 0.0130 290.3296
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 8 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.3 Site Preparation - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.0704 0.0000 0.0704 7.9000e-
003
0.0000 7.9000e-
003
0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.7858 9.7572 4.2514 9.7600e-
003
0.4180 0.4180 0.3846 0.3846 982.7113 982.7113 0.3059 990.3596
Total 0.7858 9.7572 4.2514 9.7600e-
003
0.0704 0.4180 0.4884 7.9000e-
003
0.3846 0.3925 982.7113 982.7113 0.3059 990.3596
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0720 2.4533 0.4612 6.1900e-
003
0.1328 9.8600e-
003
0.1426 0.0364 9.4400e-
003
0.0458 660.0575 660.0575 0.0339 660.9051
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0211 0.0136 0.1675 4.4000e-
004
0.0411 2.8000e-
004
0.0414 0.0109 2.6000e-
004
0.0112 43.6782 43.6782 1.2800e-
003
43.7101
Total 0.0930 2.4669 0.6287 6.6300e-
003
0.1738 0.0101 0.1840 0.0473 9.7000e-
003
0.0570 703.7357 703.7357 0.0352 704.6152
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 9 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.3 Site Preparation - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.0704 0.0000 0.0704 7.9000e-
003
0.0000 7.9000e-
003
0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.7858 9.7572 4.2514 9.7600e-
003
0.4180 0.4180 0.3846 0.3846 0.0000 982.7113 982.7113 0.3059 990.3596
Total 0.7858 9.7572 4.2514 9.7600e-
003
0.0704 0.4180 0.4884 7.9000e-
003
0.3846 0.3925 0.0000 982.7113 982.7113 0.3059 990.3596
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0720 2.4533 0.4612 6.1900e-
003
0.1328 9.8600e-
003
0.1426 0.0364 9.4400e-
003
0.0458 660.0575 660.0575 0.0339 660.9051
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0211 0.0136 0.1675 4.4000e-
004
0.0411 2.8000e-
004
0.0414 0.0109 2.6000e-
004
0.0112 43.6782 43.6782 1.2800e-
003
43.7101
Total 0.0930 2.4669 0.6287 6.6300e-
003
0.1738 0.0101 0.1840 0.0473 9.7000e-
003
0.0570 703.7357 703.7357 0.0352 704.6152
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 10 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.7528 0.0000 0.7528 0.4138 0.0000 0.4138 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.6228 0.6228 0.5943 0.5943 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Total 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.7528 0.6228 1.3755 0.4138 0.5943 1.0081 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0421 0.0272 0.3350 8.8000e-
004
0.0822 5.5000e-
004
0.0827 0.0218 5.1000e-
004
0.0223 87.3564 87.3564 2.5500e-
003
87.4202
Total 0.0421 0.0272 0.3350 8.8000e-
004
0.0822 5.5000e-
004
0.0827 0.0218 5.1000e-
004
0.0223 87.3564 87.3564 2.5500e-
003
87.4202
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 11 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.4 Grading - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.7528 0.0000 0.7528 0.4138 0.0000 0.4138 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.6228 0.6228 0.5943 0.5943 0.0000 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Total 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.7528 0.6228 1.3755 0.4138 0.5943 1.0081 0.0000 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0421 0.0272 0.3350 8.8000e-
004
0.0822 5.5000e-
004
0.0827 0.0218 5.1000e-
004
0.0223 87.3564 87.3564 2.5500e-
003
87.4202
Total 0.0421 0.0272 0.3350 8.8000e-
004
0.0822 5.5000e-
004
0.0827 0.0218 5.1000e-
004
0.0223 87.3564 87.3564 2.5500e-
003
87.4202
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 12 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0848 11.0316 7.7512 0.0114 0.7087 0.7087 0.6520 0.6520 1,146.532
3
1,146.532
3
0.3569 1,155.455
5
Total 1.0848 11.0316 7.7512 0.0114 0.7087 0.7087 0.6520 0.6520 1,146.532
3
1,146.532
3
0.3569 1,155.455
5
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.2100e-
003
2.7200e-
003
0.0335 9.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
6.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
8.7356 8.7356 2.6000e-
004
8.7420
Total 4.2100e-
003
2.7200e-
003
0.0335 9.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
6.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
8.7356 8.7356 2.6000e-
004
8.7420
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 13 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0848 11.0316 7.7512 0.0114 0.7087 0.7087 0.6520 0.6520 0.0000 1,146.532
3
1,146.532
3
0.3569 1,155.455
5
Total 1.0848 11.0316 7.7512 0.0114 0.7087 0.7087 0.6520 0.6520 0.0000 1,146.532
3
1,146.532
3
0.3569 1,155.455
5
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.2100e-
003
2.7200e-
003
0.0335 9.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
6.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
8.7356 8.7356 2.6000e-
004
8.7420
Total 4.2100e-
003
2.7200e-
003
0.0335 9.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
6.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
8.7356 8.7356 2.6000e-
004
8.7420
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 14 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9576 9.8207 7.5432 0.0114 0.6054 0.6054 0.5569 0.5569 1,127.669
6
1,127.669
6
0.3568 1,136.589
2
Total 0.9576 9.8207 7.5432 0.0114 0.6054 0.6054 0.5569 0.5569 1,127.669
6
1,127.669
6
0.3568 1,136.589
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 3.8000e-
003
2.3800e-
003
0.0298 9.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
5.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
8.4742 8.4742 2.3000e-
004
8.4798
Total 3.8000e-
003
2.3800e-
003
0.0298 9.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
5.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
8.4742 8.4742 2.3000e-
004
8.4798
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 15 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.5 Building Construction - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9576 9.8207 7.5432 0.0114 0.6054 0.6054 0.5569 0.5569 0.0000 1,127.669
6
1,127.669
6
0.3568 1,136.589
2
Total 0.9576 9.8207 7.5432 0.0114 0.6054 0.6054 0.5569 0.5569 0.0000 1,127.669
6
1,127.669
6
0.3568 1,136.589
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 3.8000e-
003
2.3800e-
003
0.0298 9.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
5.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
8.4742 8.4742 2.3000e-
004
8.4798
Total 3.8000e-
003
2.3800e-
003
0.0298 9.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
5.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
8.4742 8.4742 2.3000e-
004
8.4798
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 16 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9202 8.7447 7.2240 0.0113 0.5109 0.5109 0.4735 0.4735 1,070.137
2
1,070.137
2
0.3017 1,077.679
8
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9202 8.7447 7.2240 0.0113 0.5109 0.5109 0.4735 0.4735 1,070.137
2
1,070.137
2
0.3017 1,077.679
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0758 0.0490 0.6030 1.5800e-
003
0.1479 1.0000e-
003
0.1489 0.0392 9.2000e-
004
0.0401 157.2415 157.2415 4.5900e-
003
157.3563
Total 0.0758 0.0490 0.6030 1.5800e-
003
0.1479 1.0000e-
003
0.1489 0.0392 9.2000e-
004
0.0401 157.2415 157.2415 4.5900e-
003
157.3563
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 17 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.6 Paving - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9202 8.7447 7.2240 0.0113 0.5109 0.5109 0.4735 0.4735 0.0000 1,070.137
2
1,070.137
2
0.3017 1,077.679
8
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9202 8.7447 7.2240 0.0113 0.5109 0.5109 0.4735 0.4735 0.0000 1,070.137
2
1,070.137
2
0.3017 1,077.679
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0758 0.0490 0.6030 1.5800e-
003
0.1479 1.0000e-
003
0.1489 0.0392 9.2000e-
004
0.0401 157.2415 157.2415 4.5900e-
003
157.3563
Total 0.0758 0.0490 0.6030 1.5800e-
003
0.1479 1.0000e-
003
0.1489 0.0392 9.2000e-
004
0.0401 157.2415 157.2415 4.5900e-
003
157.3563
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 18 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 0.3357 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.2986 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e-
003
0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.1171
Total 0.6343 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e-
003
0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.1171
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 19 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 0.3357 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.2986 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e-
003
0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.0000 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.1171
Total 0.6343 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e-
003
0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.0000 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.1171
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 20 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 0.3357 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.2664 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e-
003
0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423
Total 0.6021 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e-
003
0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 21 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 0.3357 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.2664 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e-
003
0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423
Total 0.6021 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e-
003
0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 22 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
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 0.0347 0.1410 0.3554 1.1700e-
003
0.0934 1.2300e-
003
0.0947 0.0250 1.1500e-
003
0.0262 117.7214 117.7214 4.4200e-
003
117.8318
Unmitigated 0.0347 0.1410 0.3554 1.1700e-
003
0.0934 1.2300e-
003
0.0947 0.0250 1.1500e-
003
0.0262 117.7214 117.7214 4.4200e-
003
117.8318
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Single Family Housing 19.04 19.04 19.04 43,975 43,975
Total 19.04 19.04 19.04 43,975 43,975
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
Single Family Housing 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Single Family Housing 0.573139 0.040894 0.193976 0.114604 0.017740 0.005371 0.017133 0.024527 0.002545 0.002442 0.005942 0.000877 0.000812
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 23 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated
2.2900e-
003
0.0196 8.3400e-
003
1.3000e-
004
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
25.0155 25.0155 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1641
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
3.1200e-
003
0.0267 0.0114 1.7000e-
004
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
34.0882 34.0882 6.5000e-
004
6.2000e-
004
34.2907
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Exceed Title 24
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 24 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Single Family
Housing
289.749 3.1200e-
003
0.0267 0.0114 1.7000e-
004
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
34.0882 34.0882 6.5000e-
004
6.2000e-
004
34.2907
Total 3.1200e-
003
0.0267 0.0114 1.7000e-
004
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
34.0882 34.0882 6.5000e-
004
6.2000e-
004
34.2907
Unmitigated
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Single Family
Housing
0.212632 2.2900e-
003
0.0196 8.3400e-
003
1.3000e-
004
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
25.0155 25.0155 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1641
Total 2.2900e-
003
0.0196 8.3400e-
003
1.3000e-
004
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
25.0155 25.0155 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1641
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 25 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
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 2.1686 0.0418 2.8461 5.0600e-
003
0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 40.7567 12.6501 53.4067 0.0507 2.8800e-
003
55.5308
Unmitigated 2.1686 0.0418 2.8461 5.0600e-
003
0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 40.7567 12.6501 53.4067 0.0507 2.8800e-
003
55.5308
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.0139 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
0.0770 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 2.0726 0.0399 2.6806 5.0500e-
003
0.3791 0.3791 0.3791 0.3791 40.7567 12.3529 53.1096 0.0504 2.8800e-
003
55.2265
Landscaping 5.0400e-
003
1.9100e-
003
0.1656 1.0000e-
005
9.1000e-
004
9.1000e-
004
9.1000e-
004
9.1000e-
004
0.2971 0.2971 2.9000e-
004
0.3044
Total 2.1686 0.0418 2.8461 5.0600e-
003
0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 40.7567 12.6500 53.4067 0.0507 2.8800e-
003
55.5309
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 26 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.0139 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
0.0770 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 2.0726 0.0399 2.6806 5.0500e-
003
0.3791 0.3791 0.3791 0.3791 40.7567 12.3529 53.1096 0.0504 2.8800e-
003
55.2265
Landscaping 5.0400e-
003
1.9100e-
003
0.1656 1.0000e-
005
9.1000e-
004
9.1000e-
004
9.1000e-
004
9.1000e-
004
0.2971 0.2971 2.9000e-
004
0.3044
Total 2.1686 0.0418 2.8461 5.0600e-
003
0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 40.7567 12.6500 53.4067 0.0507 2.8800e-
003
55.5309
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 27 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
11.0 Vegetation
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:32 PMPage 28 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summer
Project Characteristics - Intensity Factors for CO2 adjusted based on PG&E RPS reductions
Land Use - Applicant provided
Construction Phase - Applicant provided
Trips and VMT -
Demolition -
Grading - Applicant provided
Vehicle Trips - Based on ITE 9th ed. trip generation rates
Energy Mitigation - 2016 Title 24 standards (latest standards) are anticipated to result in 28% improvement from 2013 Title 24 standards for residential buildings
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Single Family Housing 2.00 Dwelling Unit 0.30 3,600.00 6
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
5
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 64
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company
2020Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
404.79 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Orange Avenue Lot Split
Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 1 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 5.00 151.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 100.00 151.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 3.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 2.00 5.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 5.00 2.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 1.00 5.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/22/2019 4/8/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/21/2019 3/25/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/25/2019 8/24/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/26/2019 9/10/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 8/23/2018 8/27/2018
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 3/22/2019 8/23/2018
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 2.50 0.30
tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 300.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.65 0.30
tblProjectCharacteristics CO2IntensityFactor 641.35 404.79
tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2018 2020
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 9.91 9.52
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 8.62 9.52
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 2 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2018 1.7235 13.0407 9.6373 0.0163 0.8349 0.8593 1.4582 0.4356 0.8026 1.0304 0.0000 1,672.338
5
1,672.338
5
0.3839 0.0000 1,680.912
1
2019 1.5637 11.6590 9.4127 0.0144 8.2100e-
003
0.7342 0.7424 2.1800e-
003
0.6858 0.6879 0.0000 1,416.924
0
1,416.924
0
0.3808 0.0000 1,426.443
1
Maximum 1.7235 13.0407 9.6373 0.0163 0.8349 0.8593 1.4582 0.4356 0.8026 1.0304 0.0000 1,672.338
5
1,672.338
5
0.3839 0.0000 1,680.912
1
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2018 1.7235 13.0407 9.6373 0.0163 0.8349 0.8593 1.4582 0.4356 0.8026 1.0304 0.0000 1,672.338
5
1,672.338
5
0.3839 0.0000 1,680.912
1
2019 1.5637 11.6590 9.4127 0.0144 8.2100e-
003
0.7342 0.7424 2.1800e-
003
0.6858 0.6879 0.0000 1,416.924
0
1,416.924
0
0.3808 0.0000 1,426.443
1
Maximum 1.7235 13.0407 9.6373 0.0163 0.8349 0.8593 1.4582 0.4356 0.8026 1.0304 0.0000 1,672.338
5
1,672.338
5
0.3839 0.0000 1,680.912
1
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 3 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.1686 0.0418 2.8461 5.0600e-
003
0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 40.7567 12.6501 53.4067 0.0507 2.8800e-
003
55.5308
Energy 3.1200e-
003
0.0267 0.0114 1.7000e-
004
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
34.0882 34.0882 6.5000e-
004
6.2000e-
004
34.2907
Mobile 0.0303 0.1487 0.3607 1.0900e-
003
0.0934 1.2400e-
003
0.0947 0.0250 1.1600e-
003
0.0262 110.1292 110.1292 4.5100e-
003
110.2419
Total 2.2020 0.2173 3.2182 6.3200e-
003
0.0934 0.3834 0.4768 0.0250 0.3833 0.4083 40.7567 156.8674 197.6241 0.0558 3.5000e-
003
200.0635
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.1686 0.0418 2.8461 5.0600e-
003
0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 40.7567 12.6501 53.4067 0.0507 2.8800e-
003
55.5308
Energy 2.2900e-
003
0.0196 8.3400e-
003
1.3000e-
004
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
25.0155 25.0155 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1641
Mobile 0.0303 0.1487 0.3607 1.0900e-
003
0.0934 1.2400e-
003
0.0947 0.0250 1.1600e-
003
0.0262 110.1292 110.1292 4.5100e-
003
110.2419
Total 2.2012 0.2102 3.2152 6.2800e-
003
0.0934 0.3828 0.4762 0.0250 0.3827 0.4077 40.7567 147.7948 188.5514 0.0557 3.3400e-
003
190.9369
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 4 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 8/6/2018 8/8/2018 5 3
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 8/9/2018 8/15/2018 5 5
3 Grading Grading 8/16/2018 8/22/2018 5 5
4 Building Construction Building Construction 8/27/2018 3/25/2019 5 151
5 Paving Paving 8/23/2018 8/24/2018 5 2
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 9/10/2018 4/8/2019 5 151
OffRoad Equipment
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.04 3.27 0.09 0.63 0.00 0.15 0.12 0.00 0.15 0.14 0.00 5.78 4.59 0.30 4.57 4.56
Residential Indoor: 7,290; Residential Outdoor: 2,430; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0
(Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.3
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 5 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1.00 247 0.40
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1.00 247 0.40
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Pavers 1 7.00 130 0.42
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Building Construction Cranes 1 4.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 4 10.00 0.00 7.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation 2 5.00 0.00 38.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 5 1.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 6 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.4922 0.0000 0.4922 0.0745 0.0000 0.0745 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.6228 0.6228 0.5943 0.5943 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Total 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.4922 0.6228 1.1149 0.0745 0.5943 0.6688 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0228 0.7727 0.1540 1.8700e-
003
0.0408 3.0900e-
003
0.0439 0.0112 2.9600e-
003
0.0141 199.3735 199.3735 0.0110 199.6483
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0446 0.0336 0.3184 8.1000e-
004
0.0822 5.5000e-
004
0.0827 0.0218 5.1000e-
004
0.0223 80.4787 80.4787 2.4100e-
003
80.5390
Total 0.0673 0.8063 0.4724 2.6800e-
003
0.1229 3.6400e-
003
0.1266 0.0330 3.4700e-
003
0.0364 279.8522 279.8522 0.0134 280.1873
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 7 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.2 Demolition - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.4922 0.0000 0.4922 0.0745 0.0000 0.0745 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.6228 0.6228 0.5943 0.5943 0.0000 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Total 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.4922 0.6228 1.1149 0.0745 0.5943 0.6688 0.0000 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0228 0.7727 0.1540 1.8700e-
003
0.0408 3.0900e-
003
0.0439 0.0112 2.9600e-
003
0.0141 199.3735 199.3735 0.0110 199.6483
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0446 0.0336 0.3184 8.1000e-
004
0.0822 5.5000e-
004
0.0827 0.0218 5.1000e-
004
0.0223 80.4787 80.4787 2.4100e-
003
80.5390
Total 0.0673 0.8063 0.4724 2.6800e-
003
0.1229 3.6400e-
003
0.1266 0.0330 3.4700e-
003
0.0364 279.8522 279.8522 0.0134 280.1873
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 8 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.3 Site Preparation - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.0704 0.0000 0.0704 7.9000e-
003
0.0000 7.9000e-
003
0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.7858 9.7572 4.2514 9.7600e-
003
0.4180 0.4180 0.3846 0.3846 982.7113 982.7113 0.3059 990.3596
Total 0.7858 9.7572 4.2514 9.7600e-
003
0.0704 0.4180 0.4884 7.9000e-
003
0.3846 0.3925 982.7113 982.7113 0.3059 990.3596
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0741 2.5169 0.5015 6.0900e-
003
0.1328 0.0101 0.1428 0.0364 9.6300e-
003
0.0460 649.3879 649.3879 0.0358 650.2830
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0223 0.0168 0.1592 4.0000e-
004
0.0411 2.8000e-
004
0.0414 0.0109 2.6000e-
004
0.0112 40.2393 40.2393 1.2100e-
003
40.2695
Total 0.0964 2.5337 0.6607 6.4900e-
003
0.1738 0.0104 0.1842 0.0473 9.8900e-
003
0.0572 689.6273 689.6273 0.0370 690.5525
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 9 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.3 Site Preparation - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.0704 0.0000 0.0704 7.9000e-
003
0.0000 7.9000e-
003
0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.7858 9.7572 4.2514 9.7600e-
003
0.4180 0.4180 0.3846 0.3846 0.0000 982.7113 982.7113 0.3059 990.3596
Total 0.7858 9.7572 4.2514 9.7600e-
003
0.0704 0.4180 0.4884 7.9000e-
003
0.3846 0.3925 0.0000 982.7113 982.7113 0.3059 990.3596
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0741 2.5169 0.5015 6.0900e-
003
0.1328 0.0101 0.1428 0.0364 9.6300e-
003
0.0460 649.3879 649.3879 0.0358 650.2830
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0223 0.0168 0.1592 4.0000e-
004
0.0411 2.8000e-
004
0.0414 0.0109 2.6000e-
004
0.0112 40.2393 40.2393 1.2100e-
003
40.2695
Total 0.0964 2.5337 0.6607 6.4900e-
003
0.1738 0.0104 0.1842 0.0473 9.8900e-
003
0.0572 689.6273 689.6273 0.0370 690.5525
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 10 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.7528 0.0000 0.7528 0.4138 0.0000 0.4138 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.6228 0.6228 0.5943 0.5943 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Total 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.7528 0.6228 1.3755 0.4138 0.5943 1.0081 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0446 0.0336 0.3184 8.1000e-
004
0.0822 5.5000e-
004
0.0827 0.0218 5.1000e-
004
0.0223 80.4787 80.4787 2.4100e-
003
80.5390
Total 0.0446 0.0336 0.3184 8.1000e-
004
0.0822 5.5000e-
004
0.0827 0.0218 5.1000e-
004
0.0223 80.4787 80.4787 2.4100e-
003
80.5390
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 11 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.4 Grading - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.7528 0.0000 0.7528 0.4138 0.0000 0.4138 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.6228 0.6228 0.5943 0.5943 0.0000 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Total 1.0643 9.4295 7.7762 0.0120 0.7528 0.6228 1.3755 0.4138 0.5943 1.0081 0.0000 1,169.350
2
1,169.350
2
0.2254 1,174.985
7
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0446 0.0336 0.3184 8.1000e-
004
0.0822 5.5000e-
004
0.0827 0.0218 5.1000e-
004
0.0223 80.4787 80.4787 2.4100e-
003
80.5390
Total 0.0446 0.0336 0.3184 8.1000e-
004
0.0822 5.5000e-
004
0.0827 0.0218 5.1000e-
004
0.0223 80.4787 80.4787 2.4100e-
003
80.5390
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 12 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0848 11.0316 7.7512 0.0114 0.7087 0.7087 0.6520 0.6520 1,146.532
3
1,146.532
3
0.3569 1,155.455
5
Total 1.0848 11.0316 7.7512 0.0114 0.7087 0.7087 0.6520 0.6520 1,146.532
3
1,146.532
3
0.3569 1,155.455
5
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.4600e-
003
3.3600e-
003
0.0318 8.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
6.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
8.0479 8.0479 2.4000e-
004
8.0539
Total 4.4600e-
003
3.3600e-
003
0.0318 8.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
6.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
8.0479 8.0479 2.4000e-
004
8.0539
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 13 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.0848 11.0316 7.7512 0.0114 0.7087 0.7087 0.6520 0.6520 0.0000 1,146.532
3
1,146.532
3
0.3569 1,155.455
5
Total 1.0848 11.0316 7.7512 0.0114 0.7087 0.7087 0.6520 0.6520 0.0000 1,146.532
3
1,146.532
3
0.3569 1,155.455
5
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.4600e-
003
3.3600e-
003
0.0318 8.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
6.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
8.0479 8.0479 2.4000e-
004
8.0539
Total 4.4600e-
003
3.3600e-
003
0.0318 8.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
6.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
8.0479 8.0479 2.4000e-
004
8.0539
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 14 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9576 9.8207 7.5432 0.0114 0.6054 0.6054 0.5569 0.5569 1,127.669
6
1,127.669
6
0.3568 1,136.589
2
Total 0.9576 9.8207 7.5432 0.0114 0.6054 0.6054 0.5569 0.5569 1,127.669
6
1,127.669
6
0.3568 1,136.589
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.0200e-
003
2.9400e-
003
0.0282 8.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
5.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
7.8063 7.8063 2.1000e-
004
7.8116
Total 4.0200e-
003
2.9400e-
003
0.0282 8.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
5.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
7.8063 7.8063 2.1000e-
004
7.8116
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 15 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.5 Building Construction - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9576 9.8207 7.5432 0.0114 0.6054 0.6054 0.5569 0.5569 0.0000 1,127.669
6
1,127.669
6
0.3568 1,136.589
2
Total 0.9576 9.8207 7.5432 0.0114 0.6054 0.6054 0.5569 0.5569 0.0000 1,127.669
6
1,127.669
6
0.3568 1,136.589
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.0200e-
003
2.9400e-
003
0.0282 8.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
5.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
7.8063 7.8063 2.1000e-
004
7.8116
Total 4.0200e-
003
2.9400e-
003
0.0282 8.0000e-
005
8.2100e-
003
5.0000e-
005
8.2700e-
003
2.1800e-
003
5.0000e-
005
2.2300e-
003
7.8063 7.8063 2.1000e-
004
7.8116
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 16 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9202 8.7447 7.2240 0.0113 0.5109 0.5109 0.4735 0.4735 1,070.137
2
1,070.137
2
0.3017 1,077.679
8
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9202 8.7447 7.2240 0.0113 0.5109 0.5109 0.4735 0.4735 1,070.137
2
1,070.137
2
0.3017 1,077.679
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0802 0.0605 0.5731 1.4600e-
003
0.1479 1.0000e-
003
0.1489 0.0392 9.2000e-
004
0.0401 144.8616 144.8616 4.3400e-
003
144.9702
Total 0.0802 0.0605 0.5731 1.4600e-
003
0.1479 1.0000e-
003
0.1489 0.0392 9.2000e-
004
0.0401 144.8616 144.8616 4.3400e-
003
144.9702
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 17 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.6 Paving - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9202 8.7447 7.2240 0.0113 0.5109 0.5109 0.4735 0.4735 0.0000 1,070.137
2
1,070.137
2
0.3017 1,077.679
8
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9202 8.7447 7.2240 0.0113 0.5109 0.5109 0.4735 0.4735 0.0000 1,070.137
2
1,070.137
2
0.3017 1,077.679
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0802 0.0605 0.5731 1.4600e-
003
0.1479 1.0000e-
003
0.1489 0.0392 9.2000e-
004
0.0401 144.8616 144.8616 4.3400e-
003
144.9702
Total 0.0802 0.0605 0.5731 1.4600e-
003
0.1479 1.0000e-
003
0.1489 0.0392 9.2000e-
004
0.0401 144.8616 144.8616 4.3400e-
003
144.9702
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 18 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 0.3357 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.2986 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e-
003
0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.1171
Total 0.6343 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e-
003
0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.1171
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 19 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2018
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 0.3357 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.2986 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e-
003
0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.0000 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.1171
Total 0.6343 2.0058 1.8542 2.9700e-
003
0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.1506 0.0000 281.4485 281.4485 0.0267 282.1171
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 20 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 0.3357 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.2664 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e-
003
0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423
Total 0.6021 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e-
003
0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 21 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 0.3357 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.2664 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e-
003
0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423
Total 0.6021 1.8354 1.8413 2.9700e-
003
0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0238 282.0423
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 22 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
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 0.0303 0.1487 0.3607 1.0900e-
003
0.0934 1.2400e-
003
0.0947 0.0250 1.1600e-
003
0.0262 110.1292 110.1292 4.5100e-
003
110.2419
Unmitigated 0.0303 0.1487 0.3607 1.0900e-
003
0.0934 1.2400e-
003
0.0947 0.0250 1.1600e-
003
0.0262 110.1292 110.1292 4.5100e-
003
110.2419
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Single Family Housing 19.04 19.04 19.04 43,975 43,975
Total 19.04 19.04 19.04 43,975 43,975
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
Single Family Housing 10.80 4.80 5.70 31.00 15.00 54.00 86 11 3
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Single Family Housing 0.573139 0.040894 0.193976 0.114604 0.017740 0.005371 0.017133 0.024527 0.002545 0.002442 0.005942 0.000877 0.000812
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 23 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated
2.2900e-
003
0.0196 8.3400e-
003
1.3000e-
004
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
25.0155 25.0155 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1641
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
3.1200e-
003
0.0267 0.0114 1.7000e-
004
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
34.0882 34.0882 6.5000e-
004
6.2000e-
004
34.2907
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Exceed Title 24
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 24 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Single Family
Housing
289.749 3.1200e-
003
0.0267 0.0114 1.7000e-
004
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
34.0882 34.0882 6.5000e-
004
6.2000e-
004
34.2907
Total 3.1200e-
003
0.0267 0.0114 1.7000e-
004
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
2.1600e-
003
34.0882 34.0882 6.5000e-
004
6.2000e-
004
34.2907
Unmitigated
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Single Family
Housing
0.212632 2.2900e-
003
0.0196 8.3400e-
003
1.3000e-
004
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
25.0155 25.0155 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1641
Total 2.2900e-
003
0.0196 8.3400e-
003
1.3000e-
004
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
1.5800e-
003
25.0155 25.0155 4.8000e-
004
4.6000e-
004
25.1641
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 25 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
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 2.1686 0.0418 2.8461 5.0600e-
003
0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 40.7567 12.6501 53.4067 0.0507 2.8800e-
003
55.5308
Unmitigated 2.1686 0.0418 2.8461 5.0600e-
003
0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 40.7567 12.6501 53.4067 0.0507 2.8800e-
003
55.5308
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.0139 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
0.0770 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 2.0726 0.0399 2.6806 5.0500e-
003
0.3791 0.3791 0.3791 0.3791 40.7567 12.3529 53.1096 0.0504 2.8800e-
003
55.2265
Landscaping 5.0400e-
003
1.9100e-
003
0.1656 1.0000e-
005
9.1000e-
004
9.1000e-
004
9.1000e-
004
9.1000e-
004
0.2971 0.2971 2.9000e-
004
0.3044
Total 2.1686 0.0418 2.8461 5.0600e-
003
0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 40.7567 12.6500 53.4067 0.0507 2.8800e-
003
55.5309
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 26 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.0139 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
0.0770 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Hearth 2.0726 0.0399 2.6806 5.0500e-
003
0.3791 0.3791 0.3791 0.3791 40.7567 12.3529 53.1096 0.0504 2.8800e-
003
55.2265
Landscaping 5.0400e-
003
1.9100e-
003
0.1656 1.0000e-
005
9.1000e-
004
9.1000e-
004
9.1000e-
004
9.1000e-
004
0.2971 0.2971 2.9000e-
004
0.3044
Total 2.1686 0.0418 2.8461 5.0600e-
003
0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 0.3800 40.7567 12.6500 53.4067 0.0507 2.8800e-
003
55.5309
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 27 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
11.0 Vegetation
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:33 PMPage 28 of 28
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Winter
Bay Area AQMD Air District, Mitigation Report
Orange Avenue Lot Split
Construction Mitigation Summary
Phase ROG NOx CO SO2
Exhaust
PM10
Exhaust
PM2.5 Bio- CO2
NBio-
CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Percent Reduction
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Building Construction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grading 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Site Preparation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
OFFROAD Equipment Mitigation
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:34 PMPage 1 of 11
Equipment Type Fuel Type Tier Number Mitigated Total Number of Equipment DPF Oxidation Catalyst
Air Compressors Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Cement and Mortar Mixers Diesel No Change 0 4 No Change 0.00
Concrete/Industrial Saws Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00
Cranes Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Forklifts Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00
Graders Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Pavers Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Rollers Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Diesel No Change 0 8 No Change 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:34 PMPage 2 of 11
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Unmitigated tons/yr Unmitigated mt/yr
Air Compressors 2.14200E-002 1.45470E-001 1.39540E-001 2.20000E-004 1.06000E-002 1.06000E-002 0.00000E+000 1.92771E+001 1.92771E+001 1.74000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.93205E+001
Cement and
Mortar Mixers
1.80000E-004 1.10000E-003 9.30000E-004 0.00000E+000 4.00000E-005 4.00000E-005 0.00000E+000 1.37480E-001 1.37480E-001 1.00000E-005 0.00000E+000 1.37840E-001
Concrete/Industria
l Saws
2.08000E-003 1.56600E-002 1.49000E-002 3.00000E-005 1.07000E-003 1.07000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.15063E+000 2.15063E+000 1.70000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.15479E+000
Cranes 2.05400E-002 2.45280E-001 9.17700E-002 2.20000E-004 1.05400E-002 9.69000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.97556E+001 1.97556E+001 6.19000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.99103E+001
Forklifts 1.93600E-002 1.71730E-001 1.36410E-001 1.70000E-004 1.35500E-002 1.24700E-002 0.00000E+000 1.56992E+001 1.56992E+001 4.92000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.58222E+001
Graders 1.30000E-003 1.78200E-002 4.79000E-003 2.00000E-005 5.80000E-004 5.30000E-004 0.00000E+000 1.51939E+000 1.51939E+000 4.70000E-004 0.00000E+000 1.53121E+000
Pavers 2.90000E-004 3.16000E-003 2.56000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.50000E-004 1.40000E-004 0.00000E+000 3.75570E-001 3.75570E-001 1.20000E-004 0.00000E+000 3.78490E-001
Rollers 2.30000E-004 2.18000E-003 1.69000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.50000E-004 1.40000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.09490E-001 2.09490E-001 7.00000E-005 0.00000E+000 2.11120E-001
Rubber Tired
Dozers
5.80000E-004 6.28000E-003 2.19000E-003 0.00000E+000 3.10000E-004 2.80000E-004 0.00000E+000 3.90170E-001 3.90170E-001 1.20000E-004 0.00000E+000 3.93200E-001
Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
4.06800E-002 4.04200E-001 3.72710E-001 5.00000E-004 2.80600E-002 2.58200E-002 0.00000E+000 4.52208E+001 4.52208E+001 1.41600E-002 0.00000E+000 4.55749E+001
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:34 PMPage 3 of 11
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Mitigated tons/yr Mitigated mt/yr
Air Compressors 2.14200E-002 1.45470E-001 1.39540E-001 2.20000E-004 1.06000E-002 1.06000E-002 0.00000E+000 1.92771E+001 1.92771E+001 1.74000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.93205E+001
Cement and Mortar
Mixers
1.80000E-004 1.10000E-003 9.30000E-004 0.00000E+000 4.00000E-005 4.00000E-005 0.00000E+000 1.37480E-001 1.37480E-001 1.00000E-005 0.00000E+000 1.37840E-001
Concrete/Industrial
Saws
2.08000E-003 1.56600E-002 1.49000E-002 3.00000E-005 1.07000E-003 1.07000E-003 0.00000E+000 2.15062E+000 2.15062E+000 1.70000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.15479E+000
Cranes 2.05400E-002 2.45280E-001 9.17700E-002 2.20000E-004 1.05400E-002 9.69000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.97555E+001 1.97555E+001 6.19000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.99103E+001
Forklifts 1.93600E-002 1.71730E-001 1.36410E-001 1.70000E-004 1.35500E-002 1.24700E-002 0.00000E+000 1.56992E+001 1.56992E+001 4.92000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.58222E+001
Graders 1.30000E-003 1.78200E-002 4.79000E-003 2.00000E-005 5.80000E-004 5.30000E-004 0.00000E+000 1.51939E+000 1.51939E+000 4.70000E-004 0.00000E+000 1.53121E+000
Pavers 2.90000E-004 3.16000E-003 2.56000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.50000E-004 1.40000E-004 0.00000E+000 3.75570E-001 3.75570E-001 1.20000E-004 0.00000E+000 3.78490E-001
Rollers 2.30000E-004 2.18000E-003 1.69000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.50000E-004 1.40000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.09490E-001 2.09490E-001 7.00000E-005 0.00000E+000 2.11120E-001
Rubber Tired Dozers 5.80000E-004 6.28000E-003 2.19000E-003 0.00000E+000 3.10000E-004 2.80000E-004 0.00000E+000 3.90170E-001 3.90170E-001 1.20000E-004 0.00000E+000 3.93200E-001
Tractors/Loaders/Ba
ckhoes
4.06800E-002 4.04200E-001 3.72710E-001 5.00000E-004 2.80600E-002 2.58200E-002 0.00000E+000 4.52208E+001 4.52208E+001 1.41600E-002 0.00000E+000 4.55748E+001
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:34 PMPage 4 of 11
Fugitive Dust Mitigation
No Soil Stabilizer for unpaved
Roads
PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction
No Replace Ground Cover of Area
Disturbed
PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction
No Water Exposed Area PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Frequency (per
day)
No Unpaved Road Mitigation Moisture Content
%
Vehicle Speed
(mph)
No Clean Paved Road % PM Reduction 0.00
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Percent Reduction
Air Compressors 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.03750E-006 1.03750E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.03517E-006
Cement and Mortar
Mixers
0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000
Concrete/Industrial
Saws
0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 4.64980E-006 4.64980E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000
Cranes 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.51856E-006 1.51856E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.50676E-006
Forklifts 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 6.36975E-007 6.36975E-007 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.26405E-006
Graders 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000
Pavers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000
Rollers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000
Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000
Tractors/Loaders/Ba
ckhoes
0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.10569E-006 1.10569E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.09710E-006
Yes/No Mitigation InputMitigation InputMitigation InputMitigation Measure
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:34 PMPage 5 of 11
Operational Percent Reduction Summary
Unmitigated Mitigated Percent Reduction
Phase Source PM10 PM2.5 PM10 PM2.5 PM10 PM2.5
Architectural Coating Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Architectural Coating Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Building Construction Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Building Construction Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Demolition Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Demolition Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grading Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grading Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Paving Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Paving Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Site Preparation Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Site Preparation Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:34 PMPage 6 of 11
Category ROG NOx CO SO2
Exhaust
PM10
Exhaust
PM2.5 Bio- CO2
NBio-
CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Percent Reduction
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Electricity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.81
Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Landscaping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Natural Gas 26.32 26.49 26.57 33.33 25.64 25.64 0.00 26.62 26.62 27.27 20.00 26.62
Water Indoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Water Outdoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Operational Mobile Mitigation
Mitigation
Selected
No
No
No
No
No
No
Category
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
% Reduction
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.25
0.00
0.00
-0.01
Input Value 1
0.13
Input Value 2 Input Value
3
Measure
Increase Diversity
Land Use SubTotal
Integrate Below Market Rate Housing
Increase Transit Accessibility
Improve Destination Accessibility
Improve Walkability Design
Increase Density
Project Setting:
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:34 PMPage 7 of 11
No
No
No Neighborhood Enhancements
Neighborhood Enhancements
Neighborhood Enhancements
0.00Implement NEV Network
Provide Traffic Calming Measures
Improve Pedestrian Network
No
No
No
No
No
No
Parking Policy Pricing
Transit Improvements
Transit Improvements
Transit Improvements
Transit Improvements
Parking Policy Pricing
Parking Policy Pricing
Parking Policy Pricing
Neighborhood Enhancements 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00Limit Parking Supply
Land Use and Site Enhancement Subtotal
Transit Improvements Subtotal
Increase Transit Frequency
Expand Transit Network
Provide BRT System
Parking Policy Pricing Subtotal
On-street Market Pricing
Unbundle Parking Costs
Neighborhood Enhancements Subtotal
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
Transit Subsidy
Commute Subtotal
Provide Ride Sharing Program
Employee Vanpool/Shuttle
Market Commute Trip Reduction Option
Encourage Telecommuting and Alternative
Work Schedules
Workplace Parking Charge
Implement Employee Parking "Cash Out"
Implement Trip Reduction Program
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:34 PMPage 8 of 11
Area Mitigation
Measure Implemented
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Mitigation Measure
No Hearth
% Electric Chainsaw
% Electric Leafblower
% Electric Lawnmower
Use Low VOC Paint (Non-residential Exterior)
Use Low VOC Paint (Non-residential Interior)
Use Low VOC Paint (Residential Exterior)
Use Low VOC Paint (Residential Interior)
Use Low VOC Cleaning Supplies
Only Natural Gas Hearth
Input Value
150.00
100.00
150.00
100.00
Energy Mitigation Measures
Measure Implemented
No
No
Yes
Mitigation Measure
Install High Efficiency Lighting
On-site Renewable
Exceed Title 24
Input Value 1
28.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Input Value 2
No School Trip 0.00Implement School Bus Program
0.00Total VMT Reduction
No Use Low VOC Paint (Parking)150.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:34 PMPage 9 of 11
Appliance Type Land Use Subtype % Improvement
ClothWasher 30.00
DishWasher 15.00
Fan 50.00
Refrigerator 15.00
Water Mitigation Measures
Measure Implemented
No
No
No
Mitigation Measure
Use Reclaimed Water
Use Grey Water
Apply Water Conservation on Strategy
Input Value 1 Input Value 2
No
No
No
No
Install low-flow bathroom faucet
Install low-flow Toilet
Install low-flow Shower
Install low-flow Kitchen faucet
32.00
18.00
20.00
20.00
No
No
No
Turf Reduction
Water Efficient Landscape
Use Water Efficient Irrigation Systems 6.10
Solid Waste Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Input Value
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:34 PMPage 10 of 11
Institute Recycling and Composting Services
Percent Reduction in Waste Disposed
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:34 PMPage 11 of 11
Project Characteristics - Intensity Factors for CO2 adjusted based on PG&E RPS reductions
Land Use - Applicant provided
Construction Phase - Applicant provided
Trips and VMT -
Demolition -
Grading - Applicant provided
Vehicle Trips - Based on ITE 9th ed. trip generation rates
Energy Mitigation - 2016 Title 24 standards (latest standards) are anticipated to result in 28% improvement from 2013 Title 24 standards for residential buildings
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Single Family Housing 2.00 Dwelling Unit 0.30 3,600.00 6
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
5
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.2 64
1.3 User Entered Comments
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company
2020Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
404.79 0.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Orange Avenue Lot Split
Bay Area AQMD, Summary Report
Only CalEEMod defaults were used.
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:35 PMPage 1 of 3
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summary Report
2.0 Peak Daily Emissions
Peak Daily Construction Emissions
Peak Daily Construction Emissions
Unmitigated Mitigated
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Year Phase lb/day
2018 Demolition 1.1316 W 10.2359 W 8.2528 S 0.0148 S 1.2415 W 0.7052 W 1.1316 W 10.2359 W 8.2528 S 0.0148 S 1.2415 W 0.7052 W
2018 Site Preparation 0.8822 W 12.2909 W 4.9121 W 0.0164 S 0.6726 W 0.4496 W 0.8822 W 12.2909 W 4.9121 W 0.0164 S 0.6726 W 0.4496 W
2018 Grading 1.1088 W 9.4632 W 8.1113 S 0.0129 S 1.4582 S 1.0304 S 1.1088 W 9.4632 W 8.1113 S 0.0129 S 1.4582 S 1.0304 S
2018 Building Construction 1.0893 W 11.0350 W 7.7847 S 0.0115 S 0.7170 S 0.6542 S 1.0893 W 11.0350 W 7.7847 S 0.0115 S 0.7170 S 0.6542 S
2019 Building Construction 0.9616 W 9.8236 W 7.5730 S 0.0115 S 0.6136 S 0.5592 S 0.9616 W 9.8236 W 7.5730 S 0.0115 S 0.6136 S 0.5592 S
2018 Paving 1.0004 W 8.8053 W 7.8271 S 0.0128 S 0.6598 S 0.5136 S 1.0004 W 8.8053 W 7.8271 S 0.0128 S 0.6598 S 0.5136 S
2018 Architectural Coating 0.6343 S 2.0058 S 1.8542 S 2.9700e-003 S 0.1506 S 0.1506 S 0.6343 S 2.0058 S 1.8542 S 2.9700e-003 S 0.1506 S 0.1506 S
2019 Architectural Coating 0.6021 S 1.8354 S 1.8413 S 2.9700e-003 S 0.1288 S 0.1288 S 0.6021 S 1.8354 S 1.8413 S 2.9700e-003 S 0.1288 S 0.1288 S
Peak Daily Total 1.1316 W 12.2909 W 8.2528 S 0.0164 S 1.4582 S 1.0304 S 1.1316 W 12.2909 W 8.2528 S 0.0164 S 1.4582 S 1.0304 S
Air District Threshold
Exceed Significance?
Peak Daily Operational Emissions
Peak Daily Operational Emissions
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:35 PMPage 2 of 3
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summary Report
3.0 Annual GHG Emissions
Annual GHG
Annual GHG
Unmitigated Mitigated
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
GHG Activity Year MT/yr
Construction 2018 67.7243 0.0176 0.0000 68.1648 67.7242 0.0176 0.0000 68.1647
Construction 2019 39.8410 0.0105 0.0000 40.1027 39.8409 0.0105 0.0000 40.1026
Operational 2020 28.2064 0.0361 2.7216e-004 29.1888 26.6790 0.0360 2.3587e-004 27.6496
Total
Significance Threshold
Exceed Significance?
Unmitigated Mitigated
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Operational Activity lb/day
On-Site Area 2.1686 S 0.0418 S 2.8461 S 5.0600e-003 S 0.3800 S 0.3800 S 2.1686 S 0.0418 S 2.8461 S 5.0600e-003 S 0.3800 S 0.3800 S
On-Site Energy 3.1200e-003 S 0.0267 S 0.0114 S 1.7000e-004 S 2.1600e-003 S 2.1600e-003 S 2.2900e-003 S 0.0196 S 8.3400e-003 S 1.3000e-004 S 1.5800e-003 S 1.5800e-003 S
Off-Site Mobile 0.0347 S 0.1487 W 0.3607 W 1.1700e-003 S 0.0947 W 0.0262 W 0.0347 S 0.1487 W 0.3607 W 1.1700e-003 S 0.0947 W 0.0262 W
Peak Daily Total 2.2064 S 0.2173 W 3.2182 W 6.4000e-003 S 0.4768 W 0.4083 W 2.2056 S 0.2102 W 3.2152 W 6.3600e-003 S 0.4762 W 0.4077 W
Air District Threshold
Exceed Significance?
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1 Date: 10/11/2017 5:35 PMPage 3 of 3
Orange Avenue Lot Split - Bay Area AQMD Air District, Summary Report
Orange Avenue Lot Split Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
APPENDIX B
SOIL REMEDIATION PLAN
i
Soil Remediation Plan
10206 Orange Avenue
Cupertino, California
Prepared for:
Joseph and Doris C. Adamo Revocable Trust
September 19, 2017
Revised October 19, 2017
Prepared by:
McCloskey Consultants, Inc.
SOIL REMEDIATION PLAN
10206 Orange Avenue
Cupertino, California
September 19, 2017
Revised October 19, 2017
Prepared for:
JOSEPH AND DORIS C. ADAMO REVOCABLE TRUS T
Prepared by:
McCloskey Consultants, Inc.
420 Sycamore Valley Road West
Danville, CA 94526
Christopher M. Vertin
Senior Staff Engineer
Thomas F. McCloskey, P.G., C.E.G., C.Hg.
President and Principal Geologist
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Statement of Purpose ..................................................................................... 1
1.2 Site Description and Background ..................................................................... 1
1.3 Site Background .............................................................................................. 1
1.3.1 Initial Sampling ............................................................................................ 2
1.3.2 Phase II Environmental Sampling ................................................................ 3
1.3.2.1 Agricultural Use ........................................................................................ 3
1.3.2.2 Building Perimeters................................................................................... 4
1.3.2.3 Previous Sampling Locations .................................................................... 6
1.3.2.4 Supplemental Sampling ............................................................................ 6
1.4 Contact Information ........................................................................................ 8
2.0 REMEDIATION SITE MANAGEMENT ................................................................... 9
2.1 Contaminants of Concern and Exposure Routes ............................................... 9
2.2 Site-Specific Health and Safety Worker Requirements ................................... 10
2.3 Pre-Field Activities ........................................................................................ 10
2.3.1 Permitting ................................................................................................... 10
2.3.2 Utility Clearance ......................................................................................... 11
2.3.3 Work Zones ................................................................................................. 11
2.3.4 Support Zone/Staging Area ........................................................................ 11
2.4 Site Control ................................................................................................... 11
2.4.1 Exclusion Zone ............................................................................................ 11
2.4.2 Support Zone/Staging Area ........................................................................ 12
2.5 Excavation of Impacted Soil ........................................................................... 12
2.5.1 Construction Equipment ............................................................................. 12
2.5.2 Excavation/Relocation Procedures ............................................................. 13
2.5.3 Stockpile Profiling ....................................................................................... 13
2.5.4 Truck Loading Procedures .......................................................................... 14
2.5.5 Transportation Procedures ......................................................................... 14
2.6 Dust and Erosion Control ............................................................................... 14
2.6.1 Disturbed Surfaces and Stockpile Control Measures ................................. 14
2.6.2 Control for Earthmoving Activities ............................................................. 15
2.6.3 Control for Off-Site Transport .................................................................... 15
2.7 Decontamination .......................................................................................... 15
2.7.1 Equipment Decontamination and Track-Out Controls ............................... 15
2.7.2 Worker Protection and Decontamination .................................................. 15
2.8 Field Documentation ..................................................................................... 16
2.8.1 Field Oversight and Reporting .................................................................... 16
2.8.2 Photographs................................................................................................ 16
2.9 Confirmation Soil Sampling ........................................................................... 16
2.9.1 Confirmation Soil Sample Locations and Depths ...................................... 16
2.9.2 Soil Sampling Procedure ............................................................................. 16
2.9.3 Laboratory Analyses ................................................................................... 17
2.9.4 Additional Excavation and Confirmation Sampling ................................... 17
3.0 IMPORT SOIL EVALUATION .............................................................................. 17
4.0 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................... 18
5.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 18
FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Sampling Locations and Summary Results
Figure 3 Estimated Removal Areas
APPENDICIES
Appendix A Phase II Summary Results Tables and Analytical Results
Appendix B Background Arsenic Calculations
Appendix C Health and Safety Plan
Page | 1
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Statement of Purpose
McCloskey Consultants, Inc. (MCI) was retained by Joseph and Doris C. Adamo Revocable Trust
(Trust) to prepare this Soil Remediation Plan (SRP) for the property located at 10206 Orange
Avenue in Cupertino, California (Site). The Site location and vicinity map is included as Figure 1.
The SRP was prepared to establish protocols for the excavation, loading, transportation and
landfill disposal of soils containing residual concentrations of agricultural chemicals and lead-
based paint residues. We understand that the property owner seeks to demolish these
structures, subdivide the property, and redevelop with at least one single-family residential
structure pending approvals.
1.2 Site Description and Background
The property consists of approximately 0.298 acre and has the street addresses of 10206
Orange Avenue in the City of Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California (Site). The Site is
designated as assessor’s parcel numbers (APN) 357-18-032 by the Santa Clara County Assessor’s
Office (SCCAO). The Site elevation is approximately 341-342 feet above mean sea level based
on the provided design figure. The Site topography is relatively flat, but slopes slightly
downward to the east. The Site is currently improved with a small home, garage, shed and
another small building used as a studio rental that date back to at least the 1940’s.
1.3 Site Background
The City of Cupertino required soil sampling as part of the approval process for the
redevelopment of the Site. The primary objective of the soil sampling was to identify if man-
made compounds are present in Site soils that could represent health or hazard risks for the
planned redevelopment of the Site. The data obtained was then used to evaluate the degree of
health risk presented by the contaminants identified, and ultimately to evaluate appropriate
response actions at the Site to render it suitable for residential uses. Characterization of the
lateral and vertical extent of the contamination identified was done via supplemental sampling.
The DTSC’s Office of Human and Ecological Risk (“HERO”) has developed the Human Health Risk
Assessment, Note 3 (California HHRA HERO Note 3). Using California toxicity criteria, HERO
created a list of specific chemicals or chemical compounds for which it is recommended that
more conservative (lower) screening values be used. Technical chlordane is listed on the
California HHRA HERO Note 3 compounds and the screening value will be used for this
compound. The other pesticides concentrations were compared to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency Regional Screening Level (USEPA RSL) for residential soil
which have recommended screening-level remediation goals for dieldrin and toxaphene.
Page | 2
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
Arsenic concentrations were compared to published naturally-occurring concentrations and
were analyzed by statistical methods. The arsenic results from all the surface soil sampling
were analyzed by statistical methods (scatter plot) to determine the approximate maximum
naturally-occurring background concentrations. The results of the statistical analysis are
included in Appendix A. The results showed an arsenic concentration of 13.0 mg/kg to be the
approximate maximum naturally-occurring background concentration in the surface soils at the
Site. Lead was compared to the California Human Health Screening Level (CHHSL) guidance of
80 milligram per kilogram (mg/kg) for sensitive uses including residential use.
1.3.1 Initial Sampling
Soil samples were collected as a part of this approval process at three locations around the Site
in August/September 2016. The first sample was collected on August 15, 2016, at a location
between the residence and garage labeled SA-1 (Surface A) on the Figure 2. The sample was
analyzed for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) as gasoline (including benzene, ethylbenzene,
toluene, and xylene) (EPA Test Method 8260B), diesel, and motor oil-range petroleum
hydrocarbons (EPA Test Method 8015B(modified)), and CAM 17 metals (EPA Test Methods
6010B/7471A/). The results are included in Table 1, Appendix A, and indicate low
concentrations of TPH that did not exceed regulatory standards. The metals analysis, however,
indicated arsenic and lead concentrations that exceed regulatory standards for residential uses.
The arsenic concentration is consistent with naturally-occurring concentrations in the South
Bay, but the lead concentration exceeds naturally-occurring concentrations and regulatory
standards for residential uses of 80 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). The lead detected was
likely the result of lead-based paint that flaked off painted structures and onto the ground. The
other metals detected in soils were compared to naturally-occurring concentrations (Bradford,
1996) and appear generally consistent with background concentrations, and do not exceed
regulatory thresholds.
A second set of samples was collected on September 9, 2016, at two locations shown on the
Site Plan, Figure 2, labeled SB-1 (Surface B) and AG-2 (Surface C). At each location samples
were reportedly collected at depths of 6 inches and 12 inches and analyzed for total petroleum
hydrocarbons (TPH) as gasoline (including benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene), diesel,
and motor oil-range petroleum hydrocarbons, and CAM 17 metals and organochlorine
pesticides (OCPs) (EPA Test Method 8081). The results indicated low concentrations of TPH
that do not exceed regulatory standards at both locations and d epths. The 6-inch sample from
Location B also had low concentrations of several OCPs but at concentrations that do not
exceed regulatory standards for residential uses. The metals analysis from this sample indicate
arsenic and lead concentrations that exceed regulatory standards for residential uses. The
arsenic concentration is consistent with naturally-occurring concentrations in the South Bay,
but the lead concentration exceeds naturally-occurring concentrations and exceeds the
Page | 3
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
regulatory standards for residential uses. Location B is not close to any structures, but may
have been close to the location of a burn pit used many years ago according to the property
owner. The 12-inch deep sample from location B did not have concentrations that exceed any
regulatory standards for residential uses. The other metals detected in the soil samples were
compared to naturally-occurring concentrations and appear generally consistent with
background concentrations and do not exceed regulatory thresholds.
The 6-inch deep and 12-inch deep samples from Location C had several metals and TPH
constituents but at naturally-occurring concentrations or concentrations that do not exceed
regulatory standards for residential uses. All OCPs were less than the laboratory detection
limits.
The laboratory results of the pesticides, arsenic and lead analyses are summarized in Table 1.
The complete laboratory results are included in Appendix B.
1.3.2 Phase II Environmental Sampling
The City of Cupertino had a peer review performed of the Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment (Running Moose, 2016) who compared the potential environmental concerns
identified in the Phase I to the soil sampling and lab results perform ed. The consultant
comments were identified in their letter dated April 12, 2017 (Geocon Consultants) and
additional sampling was performed by McCloskey Consultants on June 5, 2017 based on the
identified potential additional environmental concerns. The laboratory results of the
pesticides, arsenic and lead analyses are summarized in Table 1, Appendix A. The laboratory
results of the polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) analyses are summarized in Table 2,
Appendix A. The complete laboratory results are also included in Appendix A.
1.3.2.1 Agricultural Use
A portion of the Site was farmed based on a review of the historical aerial photographs that
date back to 1948 through the mid-1950s, and some fruit trees are present on the property. In
the past, persistent pesticides including OCPs and arsenic-based pesticides and herbicides were
commonly applied to crops and the presence of residual pesticides in soils were a potential
concern identified by the City peer reviewers.
The initial soil samples collected and analyzed for OCPs and arsenic were not done under the
supervision of a licensed professional, which was an objection of the City’s reviewer. To satisfy
this concern the two areas previously sampled were resampled, and two additional shallow soil
samples were collected at locations south and east of the existing residence and analyzed for
Page | 4
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
OCPs (EPA Test Method 8081), arsenic (EPA Test Method 6010B). The approximate discrete
sampling locations are shown on Figure 2.
Results indicate that pesticide concentrations were present around the Site at each of the four
locations sampled for agricultural use (AG-1, AG-2/Surface C, AG-3 and SB-1). Concentrations
of chlordane, 4,4’-DDE, 4,4’-DDT, and dieldrin were detected in at least one of the samples
collected. Chlordane was detected exceeding the laboratory reporting limit in three of the four
samples at concentrations ranging from 0.055 mg/kg to 0.509 mg/kg. Only the concentration
detected at sampling location AG-3 exceeded the single compound California HHRA HERO Note
3 of 0.43 mg/kg for residential uses. All of the samples had detectible concentrations of 4,4’-
DDE ranging from 0.00477 mg/kg to 0.14 mg/kg but none of the concentrations detected
exceed the single compound USEPA RSL of 2.0 mg/kg for residential uses. All of the samples
had detectible concentrations of 4,4’-DDT ranging from 0.00261mg/kg to 0.0687 mg/kg. None
of the concentrations detected exceed the single compound USEPA RSL of 1.9 mg/Kg for
residential uses. Dieldrin was detected in one of the soil samples at a concentration of 0.0046
mg/kg, which does not exceed the single compound USEPA RSL of 0.034 mg/kg for residential
use.
Arsenic was detected in all four of the soil samples analyzed and ranged from 5.63 mg/kg to
17.7 mg/kg. All of the arsenic concentrations detected exceed the USEPA RSLs for residential
uses. The Site-specific maximum background concentration for arsenic was calculated to be 13
mg/kg, as shown in Appendix B. Two of the arsenic concentrations (AG-1 and AG-2/Surface C)
exceeded the calculated maximum naturally-occurring background concentration.
Lead was detected in every soil sample collected and ranged from 46.6 mg/kg to 590 mg/kg.
Lead concentrations exceeded the CHHSL of 80 mg/Kg at two of the four sampling locations,
but none exceeded the total threshold limit concentration (TTLC) for hazardous waste of 1,000
mg/Kg. None of the samples were analyzed for soluble lead during the Ph ase II sampling and
therefore additional hazardous waste may be identified when waste characterization is being
performed.
1.3.2.2 Building Perimeters
The residence and other structures date back to 1939 and 1950. Because the structures date
back several decades, they may have been treated with insecticides/herbicides around the
building perimeters. Lead-based paint may have been used and flaking of paint to soil around
these building was also a potential environmental concern. To evaluate these potentia l
concerns, soil samples were collected from adjacent to the outside walls, from a depth of 0- ½
Page | 5
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
feet, and at a frequency of one sample along each wall. These ten samples were analyzed for
OCPs, lead and arsenic.
Concrete located on the eastern side of the residence and the northern side of the garage
appears to be placed sometime after 1968 and the soil conditions beneath the concrete was a
potential environmental concern. To evaluate the soil under the concrete, the concrete was
cored in two locations adjacent to the structures and soil samples were collected and analyzed
for OCPs, lead and arsenic.
The results indicate that pesticide concentrations were present around the building perimeter s
of each of the three existing structures. As summarized in Table 1, Appendix A, concentrations
of chlordane, 4,4’-DDD, 4,4’-DDE, 4,4’-DDT, dieldrin, heptachlor, heptachlor epoxide, and
methoxychlor were detected in at least one of the samples collected. All of the samples had
detectible concentrations of chlordane ranging from 0.0814 mg/Kg to 4.46 mg/Kg. Six of the
concentrations detected exceed the single compound California HHRA HERO Note 3 of 0.43
mg/kg for residential uses. One of the chlordane concentrations exceeded the hazardous waste
threshold of 2.5 mg/Kg. 4,4’-DDE was detected in 11 of the 12 soil samples at concentrations
ranging from 0.0045 mg/kg to 0.187 mg/kg. None of the concentrations detected exceed the
single compound USEPA RSL of 2.0 mg/kg for residential uses. 4,4’-DDT was detected in ten of
the 12 soil samples at concentrations ranging from 0.0125 mg/kg to 0.437 mg/kg. None of the
concentrations detected exceed the single compound USEPA RSL of 1.9 mg/Kg for residential
uses. Dieldrin was detected in ten of the 12 soil samples at a concentration of ranging from
0.00194 mg/kg to 0.503 mg/kg. Two of the concentration detected exceeded the single
compound USEPA RSL of 0.034 mg/Kg for residential use s. Heptachlor was detected in one of
the soil samples at a concentration of 0.00958 mg/kg. The concentration detected did not
exceed the single compound USEPA RSL of 0.130 mg/kg for residential uses. Heptachlor
epoxide was detected exceeding the laboratory reporting limit in five of the 12 samples at
concentrations ranging from 0.00228 mg/kg to 0.0548 mg/kg. These concentrations are below
the single compound USEPA RSL of 0.07 mg/kg for residential uses. Methoxychlor was detected
in one of the soil samples at a concentration of 0.01099 mg/kg. This concentration is well
below the single compound USEPA RSL of 320 mg/kg for residential uses.
Arsenic was detected in every soil sample collected from around the building perimeter s and
ranged from 3.02 mg/kg to 23.2 mg/Kg. All of the arsenic concentrations detected exceed the
USEPA RSL for sensitive uses. Only the arsenic concentration of 23.2 mg/kg collected from
adjacent to the northern side of the residence exceeded the calculated maximum naturally-
occurring background concentration of 13.0 mg/kg. The elevated arsenic concentration was co-
located with elevated lead and pesticides.
Page | 6
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
Lead concentrations were detected in every sample collected from around the building
perimeters and ranged from 66.6 mg/kg to 925 mg/kg. Lead concentrations exceeded the
CHHSL of 80 mg/Kg at 11 of the 12 sampling locations, but none exceeded the total threshold
limit concentration (TTLC) for hazardous waste of 1,000 mg/Kg. None of the samples were
analyzed for soluble lead during the Phase II sampling and therefore additional hazardous
waste may be identified when waste characterization is performed.
1.3.2.3 Previous Sampling Locations
Elevated lead concentrations were detected during the initial soil sampling at a location next to
the concrete slab behind the residence. This is likely from flaking lead -based paint in rain
runoff. A second sample with elevated lead was detected in the back of the property where
there reportedly was an area where debris was burned many years ago. To further evaluate
these locations, three step-out samples next to the concrete slab, and four step-out samples
next to the burn area were collected around the previous sampling locations. In addition, a
sample from 1-1.5 feet deep was collected from each of the previous samples to evaluate the
vertical extent of elevated lead concentrations. All of the samples collected were analyzed for
lead. The resample of the burn area and the deeper burn area sample were also analyzed for
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) (EPA Test Method 8270 SIM) to detect toxic
combustion by-products commonly associated with burning.
Lead concentrations were detected in every shallow step-out sample around the burn area and
adjacent to the concrete slab and at concentrations exceeding the CHHSL of 80 mg/kg. Lead
was detected in one of the two deeper samples collected in these areas but the concentration
did not exceed the CHHSL of 80 mg/kg for residential uses. A concentration of 7,200 mg/kg
near the burn area exceeded the total threshold limit concentration (TTLC) for hazardous waste
of 1,000 mg/Kg. None of the samples were analyzed for soluble lead during the Phase II
sampling and therefore additional testing of excavated soils is recommended after excavation
to determine is the soils exceed the California hazardous waste criteria.
Several PAHs were detected in the shallow sample collected from the burn area , but none of
the concentrations detected exceed their respective USEPA RSL for residential uses. No PAHs
were detected in the deeper sample collected exceeding the laboratory reporting limit.
1.3.2.4 Supplemental Sampling
Supplemental sampling was performed to evaluate the lateral and vertical extent of the
elevated arsenic, lead and pesticide concentrations detected in some of the shallow soils.
Elevated arsenic concentrations were primarily detected on the southern portion of the Site.
Elevated lead concentrations were primarily detected at sampling locations around each of the
Page | 7
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
existing buildings, the reported burn pit area, and other previous sampling locations scattered
around the Site. Elevated pesticide concentrations were primary detected around the existing
buildings.
To further evaluate the elevated arsenic concentrations, six additional shallow soil samples (SS-
8 through SS-13) were collected at locations south and west of the existing buildings and
analyzed for arsenic. Two of the additional samples (SS-8 and SS-9) closest to the existing
buildings were also analyzed for lead. In addition, a sample from 1-1½ feet deep was collected
from the previous sample (AG-2/Surface C) to evaluate the vertical extent of elevated arsenic
concentrations.
Arsenic was detected in every supplemental soil sample collected and ranged from 1.32 mg/kg
to 11.5 mg/kg. All of the arsenic concentrations detected exceed the USEPA RSL for sensitive
uses, but none of the concentrations exceed the calculated naturally-occurring background
concentration of 13 mg/kg (Appendix B). Regulatory agencies do not require mitigation for
concentrations that are less than naturally-occurring concentrations. Arsenic was also detected
in the deeper sample collected from the previous sample (AG-2/Surface C) but at a
concentration of 1.10 mg/kg.
An elevated lead concentration was detected in one of the two samples (SS-9) at a
concentration of 94.8 mg/kg.
To further evaluate the elevated lead concentrations, nine additional shallow soil samples were
collected primarily across northern and northeastern portion of the Site. Four step-out samples
were also collected approximately 4 feet from previous locations BP-1, BP-4, BP-8 and BP-10,
adjacent to the existing structures. To evaluate the vertical extent of elevated lead
concentrations, samples were collected from 1-1½ feet deep at previous sampling locations BP-
1 and BP-5, adjacent to the existing buildings. Lead concentrations exceeding the CHHSL of 80
mg/kg were detected at nine of the 13 sampling locations, but none exceeded the total
threshold limit concentration (TTLC) for hazardous waste of 1,000 mg/kg. Lead was also
detected in the two deeper samples but at concentrations less than the CHHSL. Neither of the
lead concentrations detected in the deeper samples exceeded the regulatory threshold. None
of the samples were analyzed for soluble lead during the Phase II sampling and therefore
additional testing of excavated soils is recommended after excavation to determine is the soils
exceed the California hazardous waste criteria.
To evaluate pesticide concentrations on the northwestern portion of the Site, two of the
samples collected for lead (SS-2 and S.O.-A5) were also analyzed for OCPs and arsenic. One of
Page | 8
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
the step-out samples (BP-10) collected on the southeastern portion of the Site was also
analyzed for OCPs.
The lab results indicate that pesticide concentrations are present around the northwestern
portion of the Site, and northern side of the southeastern building. Concentrations of several
different OCPs were detected in at least one of the samples collected, as shown in Table 1,
Appendix A. One of the concentrations detected exceed the chlordane single compound
California HHRA HERO Note 3 (Cal/EPA 2015) of 0.43 mg/kg for residential uses. 4,4’-DDD was
detected in only one of the soil samples but at a concentration that does not exceed the single
compound USEPA RSL of 2.3 mg/kg for residential uses. 4,4’-DDE was detected in all three of
the soil samples collected but at concentrations that do not exceed the single compound USEPA
RSL of 2.0 mg/kg for residential uses. Likewise, 4,4’-DDT was detected in all three of the soil
samples but at concentrations that do not exceed the single compound USEPA RSL of 1.9 mg/Kg
for residential uses. Dieldrin was detected in two of the three soil samples but at
concentrations that do not exceed the single compound USEPA RSL of 0.034 mg/Kg for
residential uses. Heptachlor epoxide was detected in two of the three soil samples but at
concentrations that do not exceed the single compound USEPA RSL of 0.070 mg/kg for
residential uses. Methoxychlor was detected in two of the three soil samples but at
concentrations that do not exceed single compound USEPA RSL 320 mg/kg for residential uses.
Toxaphene was detected in one of the soil samples at a concentration of 1.34 mg/kg (SS-2)
which exceeds the single compound USEPA RSL of 0.49 mg/kg for residential uses.
The elevated pesticides and metals concentrations identified in shallow soils will be mitigated
by excavation. The soil would be off-hauled and disposed of at an appropriately-licensed
landfill prior to Site development. Some of this soil contains lead that should be resampled and
tested for soluble lead after excavation and stockpiling to determine appropriate transportation
and landfill disposal options.
1.4 Contact Information
Mr. Thomas Adamo, Co-Successor Trustee
Joseph and Doris C. Adamo Revocable Trust
21060 Homestead Road, Suite 120
Cupertino, CA 95014
(650)279-3905
Thomas F. McCloskey, P.G., C.E.G., C.Hg
President and Principal Geologist
McCloskey Consultants, Inc.
420 Sycamore Valley Road West
Danville, CA 94526
(925) 786-2667
Page | 9
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
2.0 REMEDIATION SITE MANAGEMENT
The main objective of the SRP is to provide the Site management protocols for handling
impacted soil at the Site during the remedial activities to minimize the threat to human health
and the environment. Proposed remediation activities will require a licensed hazardous waste
contractor (Class A) and contractor personnel that have 40-hour OSHA hazardous waste
training.
2.1 Contaminants of Concern and Exposure Routes
The contaminants of concern (COCs) present in the soil around the Site are several OCPs
including dieldrin, toxaphene, and the metals arsenic, and lead. Soil contamination is generally
encountered in the surface soils to an estimated maximum depth of 1 foot below ground
surface, but may be present in deeper soils in limited areas. The major potential route of
exposure for these chemicals includes ingestion through hand to mouth activities such as
eating, smoking, and chewing tobacco. Inhalation of dust is a lesser concern because the soil
concentrations are so low and a very dense cloud of dust would be needed to approach an
inhalation hazards. Dermal adsorption is also a lesser potential route of exposure because the
metals are not readily absorbed through the skin though for chlordane and dieldrin is
somewhat greater. Measures to minimize these routes of exposure are summarized below and
are included in Health and Safety Plans (HSP) in Appendix C.
The proposed single compound, maximum concentrations remediation goals concentrations for
the Site COCs are summarized below.
Single Compound Site Remediation Goals
Compound
Greatest Concentration
Detected
(mg/kg)
Goal
(mg/kg)
Chlordane 4.46 0.431
Dieldrin 0.503 0.0342
Toxaphene 1.49 0.492
Arsenic 23.2 133
Lead 7,200 804
1 DTSC Human and Ecological Risk Office (HERO) Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Note 3, DTSC-
Modified Screening Levels, October 2015.
2 Based on USEPA Regional Screening Levels for sensitive uses (June 2017).
3 Based on the Calculated Site Background Concentration (Appendix B).
4 Based on California Human Health Screening levels for sensitive uses.
Page | 10
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
The areas and depth of soils to be removed are included on Figure 3. The total amount to soil is
estimated to be up to 300 cubic yards which includes a conservative 30% additional excavation
that is possible after confirmation sampling of the excavations.
2.2 Site-Specific Health and Safety Worker Requirements
A Site-specific Health and Safety Plan (HSP), included as Appendix C, has been developed to
inform personnel of the potential hazards associated with implementing the SRP and to
minimize exposure to Site contaminants. Contractors are responsible for the health and safety
of their own employees and are required to have their own HSPs and Injury and Illness
Prevention Plans (IIPPs) to comply with OSHA. The HSP will be in force at the Site, and the
contractors can utilize that HSP as a template to create their company-specific HSP.
The HSPs will provide general health and safety guidance such that field activities can be
conducted in a safe manner. Per Cal/OSHA requirements (California Code of Regulations, Title
8), each contractor working at this Site must prepare a health and safety plan that addresses
the safety and health hazards during each phase of Site operations that includes the
requirements and procedures for employee protection. The HSP s will provide standard
operating procedures for personnel involved in activities that may expose them to chemical and
physical hazards associated with the removal of impacted soil at the Site. The plan must be
kept on-Site during soil removal and loading activities. Prior to conducting work on-Site, project
management and field staff must be familiar with the contents of the HSP.
2.3 Pre-Field Activities
Several pre-field activities will be required prior to the initiation of Site activities, as discussed
below. The removal activities must be performed by a California-certified contractor with a
Class A license.
2.3.1 Permitting
The selected contractors will obtain all applicable permits and notification required for
performing soil excavation and off-haul from all the appropriate agencies. There is currently no
current USEPA identification number for this Site, and the removal action contractor hired by
the Trust may have to obtain a temporary EPA ID number from the USEPA for the generation,
transportation and offsite disposal of soils containing pesticides and metals if stockpile
sampling determines that soils with hazardous waste concentrations will need to be off-hauled
and disposed at a Class I Hazardous Waste landfill. An Air Monitoring Plan and a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) are not necessary for the soil excavation activities.
Page | 11
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
2.3.2 Utility Clearance
To attempt to locate public underground utilities, the remediation contractor will mark the
work area with white spray paint and contact Underground Service Alert (USA) at least 48 hours
prior to the initiation of remediation activities.
2.3.3 Work Zones
Work zones will be cordoned off prior to the initiation of Site activities, and ingress and egress
from these areas will be controlled. A more detailed discussion of work zones at the Site is
presented in Section 2.4
2.3.4 Support Zone/Staging Area
The support/staging area will be set up on-Site prior to starting operations and will be in a
contaminant-free area, as shown on Figure 4. This area will provide for administrative and
support functions (first-aid station, rest area, drinking facility, equipm ent recharging facilities,
etc.) necessary to keep the field activities running smoothly. The contractor shall provide
potable water and wash facilities for the field personnel in this location. The support/staging
zone will be established prior to the initiation of removal activities.
2.4 Site Control
Site control is intended to control the potential spread of contamination from the Site. The
affected area will need to be separated from the public by a fence along Orange Avenue, to be
installed by the remediation contractor. Ingress to and egress from the exclusion zone will be
controlled via locking gates. The excavated soil will be stockpiled at the closest available area
on plastic sheeting.
2.4.1 Exclusion Zone
The entire Site will be considered the exclusion zone. Unauthorized individuals will not be
allowed within the exclusion zone.
On the fencing to be installed along Orange Avenue will be posted the following notice that
reads:
Page | 12
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
WARNING
CONTAMINATED WORK
AREA NO SMOKING OR
EATING
WARNING
This Site contains chemicals
known to the State of
California to cause cancer or
other reproductive toxicity.
AUTHORIZED
PERSONNEL ONLY
2.4.2 Support Zone/Staging Area
As described in Section 2.3.4 the support zone/staging area will be established prior to the
initiation of removal activities.
2.5 Excavation of Impacted Soil
The removal action is estimated to consist of the excavation of up to approximately 300 cubic
yards (in-place yardage) of pesticide and metals containing soil and transportation of the
material to off-Site disposal facilities. Excavation confirmation sampling requirements are
included in Section 2.9. The areas to be excavated are shown on Figure 3. For the lead and
pesticide removal areas, the excavations are estimated 1 feet deep and include most of the
northern portion of the Site and the southeastern corner of the Site . For the arsenic removal
areas, the excavations are estimated to be approximately 1-foot deep and cover an area on the
southwestern portion of the Site. The depths of the excavations are estimated and
contamination may be present in deeper soils in limited areas. These areas will be determined
after the initially planned excavations and confirmat ion sampling.
The estimated yardage is based on the assumption that additional soil (up to 30%) will need to
be excavated based on confirmation sampling results. The actual yardage may less and is
unlikely to be more.
2.5.1 Construction Equipment
Excavation, soil stockpiling, and loading are the anticipated activities for the soil remediation.
Backhoes or mini excavators likely will be used to excavate the soil and rubber-tire loaders used
to stockpile and move the material. A water truck or a fire hose connected to a City water
meter on the fire hydrant adjacent to the Site will be used for dust control.
Page | 13
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
2.5.2 Excavation/Relocation Procedures
The contaminated soils will need to be excavated and temporarily stockpiled on Site for
sampling and landfill profiling before off-haul can take place except for the area affected by
only arsenic which can be direct loaded if approval by the receiving landfill. Stockpiles will be
kept covered with plastic sheeting and anchored at all times except when the soil is actively
being added or removed. Stockpiling will take place on plastic at the closest , convenient
locations to the excavations.
The approximate limits and depths of the excavation areas necessary to remove the impacted
soil with concentrations exceeding the regulatory thresholds are presented on Figure 3. The
final excavation dimensions may be larger if the confirmation sampling results indicate that
additional soil excavation is needed to reach the Site remedial goals . The lead impacted soils
will be managed as a hazardous waste and will be stockpiled and resampled separately for
landfill review and acceptance. Based on the more elevated lead concentrations detected
around the former fire pit, the soil on the eastern/northeastern portion of the Site will be
excavated, stockpiled and resampled separately from the soil excavated from around the other
portions of the Site.
Following excavation of the pesticide and metals impacted soils; confirmation soil samples will
be collected from the sidewalls and the bottom of the excavations to evaluate if sufficient
impacted soil has been removed. Excavation activities will be considered complete when the
confirmation samples collected from the remaining in-place soil do not contain COC
concentrations that exceed the respective remedial goals, as discussed in Section 2.1.
Confirmation sampling is described in more detail in Section 2.11.
2.5.3 Stockpile Profiling
The stockpiles of excavated soils will be sampled for landfill profiling purposes and to
accumulate a sufficient quantity of soil to avoid truck standby and partial loads. To profile the
material for off-Site disposal, composite soil samples will be collected from the stockpiled soil
and analyzed prior to landfill acceptance. The sampling frequency and analyses will vary by
disposal facility. Stockpile soil sample collection and laboratory analysis will be performed by
MCI. Solubility and leaching testing during the stockpile profile sampling may cause the
analytical results to be received as much as 5 days from the collection of the samples. If any
contaminants exceed hazardous waste threshold concentrations, the soil will need to be
disposed at a Class I hazardous waste landfill, or possibly out of state as a non-hazardous waste
if it can be done at a lesser cost.
Page | 14
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
2.5.4 Truck Loading Procedures
Once the soil is approved for landfill disposal, t he truck loading will be carefully done and
supervised such that minimal spillage occurs during loading and trucks do not come into
contact with the impacted soils. As an added measure of protection, heavy plastic sheeting will
be placed beneath the trucks to collect any spilled so il. Any spilled soil will be immediately
removed and placed back into the truck trailer to avoid the spreading of impacted soil onto the
truck tires which could result in track-out of contaminated soils.
2.5.5 Transportation Procedures
This section outlines the requirements and procedures for transportation of the excavated soil
to an off-Site disposal facility (Class I hazardous waste landfill, a Class II or III non-hazardous
waste landfill). The appropriate disposal facility will be determined based on the results of the
stockpile soil profiling.
It is anticipated that large end-dump trucks will be used which hold 10-12 cubic yards of soil
depending on the weight of the material. Therefore, there would be up to 30 truckloads of
material to be off-hauled. Any Class I material would need to be hauled and disposed
separately from Class II or Class III soils.
The soil will be transported by an appropriately licensed transporter. The necessary documents,
such as the bills of lading and/or waste manifest for ms, will be completed and accompany the
truck driver to the landfill. The trucks will be loaded at the Site and appropriately covered
(tarped) in accordance with Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations.
All the trucks will be rinsed, the load wetted to minimize dust generation and covered with a
tarp before leaving the Site.
2.6 Dust and Erosion Control
Site control procedures will be established to control the potential generation of dust and
exposure to worker and Site neighbors. These controls include a variety of dust control
methods and practices designed to minimize the generation and spread of dust. A water truck
or other source of water will be used to deliver water to the Site for dust control p urposes.
2.6.1 Disturbed Surfaces and Stockpile Control Measures
During site activities, disturbed soil surfaces will be kept adequately wetted to control dust
generation. Areas of exposed soils will be wetted at least daily or more to inhibit dust
generation. The excavated soil will be placed on visqueen, covered with visqueen at the end of
the day, anchored, and uncovered only during movement of the soil.
Page | 15
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
2.6.2 Control for Earthmoving Activities
During soil removal/relocation activities, the ground will be pre -wetted prior to excavation. The
relocation operations will be suspended when wind speeds are great enough to result in dust
emissions from the point-of-origin or crossing the exclusion zone boundary, despite the
application of dust control mitigation measures. Drop heights will be minimized during the
excavation of the soil and the loading of the haul trucks to minimize the creation and dispersion
of dust.
2.6.3 Control for Off-Site Transport
The trucks used for off-Site transport will be either be special trucks for the hauling of
hazardous soils or other suitable trucks for the hauling of Class II or III soil, and handling
practices will include wetting and covering with tarps to contro l dust emissions.
2.7 Decontamination
2.7.1 Equipment Decontamination and Track-Out Controls
Decontamination procedures for equipment will utilize wet methods such as pressure washing
after the excavation of the impacted soils. The heavy equipment buckets used during the
excavation and loading of the impacted soils can be cleaned by pressure washing over the
stockpiled impacted soils to avoid generation of rinse water.
As previously described, truck loading will be carefully done and supervised such that minimal
spillage occurs during loading and trucks do not come into contact with the impacted soils. As
an added measure of protection, heavy plastic sheeting will be placed beneath the trucks to
collect any spilled soil. Any spilled soil will be immediately removed to avoid the spreading of
impacted soil on the truck tires. It is anticipated that no additional decontamination procedures
will be necessary based on the above precautions and the limited number of trucks necessary
for off-haul of the soils.
2.7.2 Worker Protection and Decontamination
Protective Tyvek suites, rubber boots and chemically resistant gloves will be required for
personnel who could contact affected soils because some of the contaminate concentrations
exceed worker safety levels. This clothing will need to be removed and properly disposed in the
designated exit corridors leading to the support zone. The location and size of the
decontamination corridors for personnel may change as Site conditions and operations dictate.
Personnel will remove Tyvek suites and nitrile gloves and rinse their boots and wash their hands
when exiting the work area for any reason. Disposable equipment intended for one-time use
will not be decontaminated, but will be bagged for appropriate disposal. Reusable equipment,
such as shovels, can be rinsed over contaminated soil stockpiles.
Page | 16
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
2.8 Field Documentation
2.8.1 Field Oversight and Reporting
A MCI field engineer will be present on-Site on an as-needed basis during the chemically-
affected soil excavation and handling activities. This individual will monitor the soil excavation
work, collect confirmation soil samples, and collect stockpile soil samples. As part of this
process, a field log will be used to document Site activities and a scaled Site map will be used to
document the removal areas and confirmation sampling locations.
2.8.2 Photographs
Photographs of Site activities will be taken periodically by MCI to further document the removal
action implementation. The photographs will be made available for inspection by authorized
personnel for the duration of the project, and included in the Removal Action Completion
Report.
2.9 Confirmation Soil Sampling
To document adequate removal of soil with the COCs concentrations that exceed the Site
remedial goals, confirmation soil samples will be collected from the bottom and sidewalls in the
excavation areas. The base confirmation samples will be collected at an approximate frequency
of one sample for every approximately 250 square feet with a minimum of one bottom sample
per excavation area. The sidewall confirmation samples will be collected at an approximate
frequency of one sample for every approximately 40 lineal feet of excavation sidewall, with a
minimum of one sample per sidewall. Duplicate samples will also be collected at a rate of one
sample for every 20 samples for Quality Assurance/Quality Control.
2.9.1 Confirmation Soil Sample Locations and Depths
The confirmation sample locations will be randomly selected in the base and sidewalls of the
excavations in accordance with the above-mentioned frequencies. The samples will generally
be collected from the outer or upper 6 inches of soils present in the sidewall or base.
2.9.2 Soil Sampling Procedure
Soil samples will be obtained by manually scraping new, disposable, laboratory supplied 4 -
ounce glass jars or 9-ounce glass jars into freshly exposed soil in the bottom and the sidewalls
of the excavations. After sample collection, the Teflon-lined lid will be securely fastened on the
jar and the jar will be labeled with a unique sample identification number. New gloves will be
worn by the sampling personnel and will be changed between sampling locations and
discarded. The samples will then be placed in an insulated cooler chilled to 4 degrees +/- 2
degrees Celsius and hand delivered by MCI personnel to ESC Lab Science personnel to be
shipped via Fed-Ex to their facility. ESC Lab Science is a California-certified analytical laboratory.
Page | 17
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
It is anticipated that no sampling equipment will need to be reused, and therefore no
decontamination of sampling equipment will be needed. Should hard soils be encountered
cannot be scraped to collect a sample, as pick or trowel may have to be used. Such tools would
be cleaned thoroughly between uses with liquinox and water followed by a distilled water rinse.
2.9.3 Laboratory Analyses
All soil analyses would be performed on an accelerated response time to attempt to reduce
project delays. The analyses for metals will take up to 3 days to receive results because of soil
digestion procedures. An additional 2 days would be needed to test stockpile soils for soluble
lead should that be necessary. Although the samples will be analyzed on an accelerated
response time, the contractor should anticipate results to take about 72 hours from the day of
collection. The landfill(s) may also require additional testing that is difficult to anticipate but
could result in additional time.
2.9.4 Additional Excavation and Confirmation Sampling
If concentrations of the contaminants are detected exceeding their Site remedial goals or
cumulative risk goals should multiple compounds be detected, additional excavation will be
performed. In removal areas where lead is the COC, the City of Cupertino is allowing the lead
cleanup decisions based on the 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) of lead confirmation sample
concentrations. The 95% UCL will be calculated with the lead confirmation sampling results and
additional excavations will only be performed on the areas that exceed the 80 mg/kg based on
the 95% UCL. A similar 95% UCL will be calculated for arsenic concentrations using the
maximum naturally-occurring concentration of 13 mg/kg.
Multiple pesticides have been identified at the Site and will be identified in confirmation soil
samples collected during removal actions in the pesticide-affected area. The cumulative risk
will be calculated in the confirmation samples collected from this area using the ratio sum
method recommended by the CHHSL guidance (Cal/EPA, 2005) which is identical to USEPA
methods. If a base excavation sample exceeds the cleanup goal, an additional 1 foot of soil will
be excavated from that area. Similarly, if a sidewall sample exceeds the cleanup remedial goals,
the excavation will be extended an additional 2 feet into the sidewall along the length of the
sidewall, unless the sidewall is the property line. This process will be repeated as necessary.
3.0 IMPORT SOIL EVALUATION
Although soil import is not anticipated during the remediation activities for this Site, should it
be necessary the following describes what is needed if import is required during the future
development. To prevent the potential import of contaminated fill onto the Site, all possible
sources of import fill must have adequate documentation so it can be verified that the soils are
Page | 18
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
appropriate for the Site. Documentation should include detailed information on the previous
land use of the fill source, any environmental Site assessments performed and the findings, and
the results of any testing performed. If no documentation is available or the documentation is
inadequate, samples of the potential fill material will be collected and chemically analyzed. The
analyses selected will be based on the fill source and knowledge of the previous l and use. The
project environmental consultant MCI would perform this review of potential soil import
sources.
4.0 LIMITATIONS
This Soil Remediation Plan (SRP) was prepared for the use of the Joseph and Doris C. Adamo
Revocable Trust in evaluating the proposed remedial action. We make no warranty, expressed
or implied, except that our services have been performed in accordance with environmental
principles generally accepted at this time and location. The chemical and other data presented
in this report can change over time and are applicable only to the time this SRP was prepared.
5.0 REFERENCES
Bradford, G.R., Chang, A.C., Page, A.L., Bakhtar, D., Frampton, J.A., Wright, H. March 1996,
Background Concentrations of Trace and Major Elements in California Soils. Kearney
Foundation of Soil Science
Cal/EPA, January 2005. Use of California Human Health Screening Levels (CHHSLs) in Evaluation
of Contaminated Properties.
Cal/EPA, September 12, 2006. Interim Guidance, Evaluation of School Sites with Potential Soil
Contamination as a Results of Lead from Lead-Based Paint, Organochlorine Pesticides
from Termiticides, and Polychlorinated Biphenyls from Electrical Transformers.
Cal/EPA, March 21, 2007. Arsenic Strategies, Determination of Arsenic Remediation,
Development of Arsenic Cleanup Goals for Proposed and Existing School Sites.
Cal/EPA, April 30, 2008. Interim Guidance for Sampling Agricultural Properties (Third Revision).
Cal/EPA, September 2009. Revised California Human Health Screening Levels for Lead.
Cal/EPA, Human and Ecologic Risk Office (HERO), October, 2015. Human Health Risk
Assessment (HHRA), Note Number: 3, DTSC-modified Screening Levels.
Duverge’. D.J., December 2011. Establishing Background Arsenic in Soil of the Urbanized San
Francisco Bay Region. Master of Science Thesis, San Francisco State University.
Page | 19
Soil Remediation Plan, 10206 Orange Avenue
Running Moose, LLC., June 27, 2016. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10206 & 10208
Orange Avenue, Cupertino, California.
United States Environmental Protection Agency Regional Screening Levels, June 2017.
FIGURES
Vicinity
Map
10206
Orange
Avenue
Cupertino,
California
FIGURE
1
cc
6"-Surface A
8/15/2016
6"- Surface B
12"- #2
9/9/2016
Approximate Soil
Sample Location
Soil Sample Location Plan
10206 Orange Avenue
Cupertino, CAOrange Avenue6"- Surface C
12"- #3 C
9/9/2016
LEGEND:
Approximate
Site
Boundary
Approximate
Location
of
Sample
that
Exceeds
Regulatory
Thresholds
Summary
Results
10206
Orange
Avenue
Cupertino,
California
FIGURE
2
cc
Approximate
Graphical
Scale
(Ft.)
0
15
30
Notes:
mg/kg
–
milligrams
per
kilogram
Bold
-‐
Indicates
exceedance
of
regulatory
threshold
Base
Map
from
Drawing
provided
x x
x x
BP -‐3
mg/kg
Lead
92.2
Arsenic
3.02
BP-‐2
mg/kg
Lead
196
Arsenic
23.1
Chlordane
4.46
Dieldrin
0.503
S.O.-‐A1
mg/kg
Lead
416
Arsenic
S.O.-‐B1
mg/kg
Lead
403
AG-‐3
mg/kg
Lead
176
Arsenic
5.63
Chlordane
0.509
BP-‐11
mg/kg
Lead
586
Arsenic
5.75
Chlordane
1.69
BP-‐12
mg/kg
Lead
286
Arsenic
4.02
Chlordane
0.611
BP -‐9
mg/kg
Lead
207
Arsenic
4.18
Dieldrin
0.0342
BP -‐6
mg/kg
Lead
66.6
Arsenic
9.67
AG-‐1
mg/kg
Lead
66.3
Arsenic
15.0
S.O.-‐A2
mg/kg
Lead
94.7
S.O.-‐A3
mg/kg
Lead
416
S.O.-‐B2
mg/kg
Lead
529
S.O.-‐B3
mg/kg
Lead
550
S.O.-‐B4
mg/kg
Lead
7,200
BP-‐7
mg/kg
Lead
511
Arsenic
11.5
SA-‐1
(Surface
A)
mg/Kg
Sample
Depth
1-‐1½’
Lead
<0.202
SB-‐1
(Surface
B)
mg/Kg
Sample
Depth
0-‐½’
1-‐1½’
Lead
590
60.9
Arsenic
6.78
-‐-‐
Approximate
Location
of
Structures
Approximate
Location
of
Concrete
Deeper
Sampling
Location
that
Does
Not
Exceed
Regulatory
Threshold
SS-‐1
mg/kg
Lead
101
SS-‐2
mg/kg
Lead
46.4
Arsenic
6.73
Chlordane
1.59
Toxaphene
1.34
SS-‐3
mg/kg
Lead
107
SS-‐4
mg/kg
Lead
525
SS-‐5
mg/kg
Lead
201
SS-‐6
mg/kg
Lead
716
SS-‐7
mg/kg
Lead
270
SS-‐8
mg/kg
Lead
64.7
Arsenic
11.5
SS-‐9
mg/kg
Lead
94.8
Arsenic
11.3
SS-‐10
mg/kg
Arsenic
9.45
SS-‐11
mg/kg
Arsenic
3.99
SS-‐12
mg/kg
Arsenic
1.28
SS-‐13
mg/kg
Arsenic
2.55
BP-‐1
mg/Kg
Step-‐Out
0’
0’
4’
Sample
Depth
0-‐½’
1-‐1½’
0-‐½’
Lead
141
4.17
108
Arsenic
5.75
-‐-‐
-‐-‐
BP-‐5
mg/Kg
Sample
Depth
0-‐½’
1-‐1½’
Lead
558
7.41
Arsenic
15.0
-‐-‐
BP-‐4
mg/Kg
Step-‐Out
0’
4’
Lead
237
28.2
Arsenic
7.61
-‐-‐
Chlordane
0.465
-‐-‐
BP-‐8
mg/Kg
Step-‐Out
0’
4’
Lead
925
169
Arsenic
9.78
-‐-‐
Chlordane
0.539
-‐-‐
BP-‐10
mg/Kg
Step-‐Out
0’
4’
Lead
256
67.1
Arsenic
3.52
-‐-‐
Chlordane
0.851
-‐-‐
AG-‐2
(Surface
C)
mg/Kg
Sample
Depth
0-‐½’
1-‐1½’
Lead
46.6
-‐-‐
Arsenic
17.6
1.10
Approximate
Location
of
Sample
that
Does
Not
Exceed
Regulatory
Thresholds
S.O.-‐A5
mg/kg
Lead
68.6
Arsenic
2.81
Chlordane
0.170
Dieldrin
0.0082
S.O.-‐A6
mg/kg
Lead
187
~5,264
sq.ft.
6"-Surface A
8/15/2016
6"- Surface B
12"- #2
9/9/2016
Approximate Soil
Sample Location
Soil Sample Location Plan
10206 Orange Avenue
Cupertino, CAOrange Avenue6"- Surface C
12"- #3 C
9/9/2016
LEGEND:
Approximate
Site
Boundary
Approximate
Location
of
Sample
that
Exceeds
Regulatory
Thresholds
Proposed
Removal
Areas
10206
Orange
Avenue
Cupertino,
California
FIGURE
3
cc
Approximate
Graphical
Scale
(Ft.)
0
15
30
Notes:
mg/kg
–
milligrams
per
kilogram
Bold
-‐
Indicates
exceedance
of
regulatory
threshold
Base
Map
from
Drawing
provided
x x
x x
BP -‐3
mg/kg
Lead
92.2
Arsenic
3.02
BP-‐2
mg/kg
Lead
196
Arsenic
23.1
Chlordane
4.46
Dieldrin
0.503
S.O.-‐A1
mg/kg
Lead
416
Arsenic
S.O.-‐B1
mg/kg
Lead
403
AG-‐3
mg/kg
Lead
176
Arsenic
5.63
Chlordane
0.509
BP-‐11
mg/kg
Lead
586
Arsenic
5.75
Chlordane
1.69
BP-‐12
mg/kg
Lead
286
Arsenic
4.02
Chlordane
0.611
BP -‐9
mg/kg
Lead
207
Arsenic
4.18
Dieldrin
0.0342
BP -‐6
mg/kg
Lead
66.6
Arsenic
9.67
AG-‐1
mg/kg
Lead
66.3
Arsenic
15.0
S.O.-‐A2
mg/kg
Lead
94.7
S.O.-‐A3
mg/kg
Lead
416
S.O.-‐B2
mg/kg
Lead
529
S.O.-‐B3
mg/kg
Lead
550
S.O.-‐B4
mg/kg
Lead
7,200
BP-‐7
mg/kg
Lead
511
Arsenic
11.5
SA-‐1
(Surface
A)
mg/Kg
Sample
Depth
1-‐1½’
Lead
<0.202
SB-‐1
(Surface
B)
mg/Kg
Sample
Depth
0-‐½’
1-‐1½’
Lead
590
60.9
Arsenic
6.78
-‐-‐
Approximate
Location
of
Structures
Approximate
Location
of
Concrete
Deeper
Sampling
Location
that
Does
Not
Exceed
Regulatory
Threshold
SS-‐1
mg/kg
Lead
101
SS-‐2
mg/kg
Lead
46.4
Arsenic
6.73
Chlordane
1.59
Toxaphene
1.34
SS-‐3
mg/kg
Lead
107
SS-‐4
mg/kg
Lead
525
SS-‐5
mg/kg
Lead
201
SS-‐6
mg/kg
Lead
716
SS-‐7
mg/kg
Lead
270
SS-‐8
mg/kg
Lead
64.7
Arsenic
11.5
SS-‐9
mg/kg
Lead
94.8
Arsenic
11.3
SS-‐10
mg/kg
Arsenic
9.45
SS-‐11
mg/kg
Arsenic
3.99
SS-‐12
mg/kg
Arsenic
1.28
SS-‐13
mg/kg
Arsenic
2.55
BP-‐1
mg/Kg
Step-‐Out
0’
0’
4’
Sample
Depth
0-‐½’
1-‐1½’
0-‐½’
Lead
141
4.17
108
Arsenic
5.75
-‐-‐
-‐-‐
BP-‐5
mg/Kg
Sample
Depth
0-‐½’
1-‐1½’
Lead
558
7.41
Arsenic
15.0
-‐-‐
BP-‐4
mg/Kg
Step-‐Out
0’
4’
Lead
237
28.2
Arsenic
7.61
-‐-‐
Chlordane
0.465
-‐-‐
BP-‐8
mg/Kg
Step-‐Out
0’
4’
Lead
925
169
Arsenic
9.78
-‐-‐
Chlordane
0.539
-‐-‐
BP-‐10
mg/Kg
Step-‐Out
0’
4’
Lead
256
67.1
Arsenic
3.52
-‐-‐
Chlordane
0.851
-‐-‐
AG-‐2
(Surface
C)
mg/Kg
Sample
Depth
0-‐½’
1-‐1½’
Lead
46.6
-‐-‐
Arsenic
17.6
1.10
Approximate
Location
of
Sample
that
Does
Not
Exceed
Regulatory
Thresholds
S.O.-‐A5
mg/kg
Lead
68.6
Arsenic
2.81
Chlordane
0.170
Dieldrin
0.0082
S.O.-‐A6
mg/kg
Lead
187
Approximate
Location
Elevated
Lead/Pesticide
Removal
Areas
Approximate
Location
of
Elevated
Arsenic
Removal
Area
~1,000
sq.ft.
~240
sq.ft.
~306
sq.ft.
~1,150
sq.ft.
~5,264
sq.ft.
~361
sq.ft.
Approximate
Construction
Entrance
/
Exit
-‐Track
Out
Controls
Approximate
Exclusion
Zone
Approximate
Support/Staging
Area
With
Personnel
Decontamination
Areas
Appendix A
Phase II Summary Results Tables and
Analytical Results
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 66.3 15.0 <0.00145 <0.00146 <0.00172 <0.00154 <0.00156 0.055 <0.00168 0.0385 0.0226 0.0046 <0.0016 <0.00172 <0.00162 <0.00169 <0.00139 <0.00178 <0.00133 <0.00166 0.00178 <0.00191 <0.0387 0.0611
½
bgs 9/6/16 23.7 13.0 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.020 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -‐-‐<0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.050 <0.002
1
bgs 9/6/16 13.7 11.3 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.020 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -‐-‐<0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.050 <0.002
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 46.6 17.7 <0.00139 <0.0014 <0.00164 <0.00147 <0.00149 <0.04 <0.0016 0.00477 0.00261 <0.00156 <0.00153 <0.00164 <0.00155 <0.00161 <0.00132 <0.00169 <0.00127 <0.00158 <0.00165 <0.00183 <0.037 0.00738
1-‐1½
bgs 7/18/17 -‐-‐1.10 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 176 5.63 <0.0014 <0.00141 <0.00165 <0.00148 <0.0015 0.509 <0.00161 0.14 0.0687 <0.00157 <0.00154 <0.00165 <0.00156 <0.00162 <0.00133 <0.00171 <0.00128 <0.00159 <0.00167 <0.00184 <0.0372 0.2087
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 141 5.75 <0.00223 <0.00224 <0.00264 <0.00236 <0.00239 0.0874 <0.00257 0.0045 <0.0033 0.0051 <0.00246 <0.00264 <0.00249 <0.00259 <0.00213 <0.00272 <0.00205 <0.00254 <0.00266 <0.00294 <0.0594 0.0045
1-‐1½
bgs 7/18/17 4.17 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 108 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 196 23.2 <0.00148 <0.00149 <0.00175 <0.00157 <0.00159 4.46 <0.00171 0.187 0.437 0.503 <0.00163 <0.00175 <0.00165 <0.00172 <0.00141 <0.00181 <0.00136 0.00958 0.0548 <0.00195 <0.0394 0.624
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 92.2 3.02 <0.00157 <0.00159 <0.00187 <0.00167 <0.00169 1.04 <0.00182 0.176 0.0595 <0.00177 <0.00174 <0.00187 <0.00176 <0.00183 <0.0015 <0.00192 <0.00145 <0.0018 0.048 <0.00207 <0.042 0.2355
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 237 7.61 <0.00161 <0.00162 <0.0019 <0.0017 <0.00173 0.465 <0.00186 0.0278 <0.00238 0.00722 <0.00177 <0.0019 <0.0018 <0.00187 <0.00154 <0.00196 <0.00148 <0.00183 <0.00192 <0.00212 <0.0429 0.0278
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 28.2 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 558 7.28 <0.00156 <0.00157 <0.00184 <0.00165 <0.00167 0.163 <0.0018 0.0371 0.047 0.00254 <0.00172 <0.00184 <0.00174 <0.00181 <0.00149 <0.0019 <0.00143 <0.00178 <0.00186 <0.00205 <0.0415 0.0841
1-‐1½
bgs 7/18/17 7.41 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 66.6 9.67 <0.0015 <0.00151 <0.00178 <0.00159 <0.00161 0.255 <0.00173 0.0495 0.0486 0.0108 <0.00165 <0.00178 <0.00168 <0.00174 <0.00143 <0.00183 <0.00138 <0.00171 0.0113 <0.00197 <0.0399 0.0981
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 511 11.5 <0.0016 <0.00161 <0.00189 <0.00169 <0.00171 0.0814 <0.00184 0.0155 0.0409 0.00201 <0.00176 <0.00189 <0.00179 <0.00186 <0.00153 <0.00195 <0.00147 <0.00182 0.00228 <0.0021 <0.0426 0.0564
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 925 9.78 <0.00151 <0.00152 <0.00179 <0.0016 <0.00162 0.539 <0.00174 0.0567 0.0559 0.0092 <0.00166 <0.00179 <0.00169 <0.00175 <0.00144 <0.00184 <0.00138 <0.00172 <0.0018 <0.00199 <0.0402 0.1126
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 169 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 207 4.18 <0.00139 <0.0014 <0.00165 <0.00147 <0.00149 0.292 <0.00161 <0.00792 0.388 0.0342 <0.00153 <0.00165 <0.00155 <0.00162 <0.00133 <0.0017 <0.00128 <0.00158 <0.00166 0.0199 <0.0371 0.388
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 256 3.52 <0.00138 <0.00139 <0.00164 <0.00146 <0.00148 0.851 <0.0016 0.0366 0.0125 <0.00156 <0.00152 <0.00164 <0.00155 <0.00161 <0.00132 <0.00169 <0.00127 <0.00158 <0.00165 <0.00182 <0.0368 0.0491
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 67.1 -‐-‐<0.0207 <0.0207 <0.0207 <0.0207 <0.0207 <0.207 0.00411 0.275 0.127 0.00194 <0.0207 <0.0207 <0.0207 <0.0207 <0.0207 <0.0207 <0.0207 <0.0207 <0.0207 <0.0207 <0.415 0.40611
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 586 5.75 <0.00141 <0.00142 <0.00167 <0.0015 <0.00152 1.69 <0.00163 0.0407 0.38 0.0171 <0.00156 <0.00167 <0.00158 <0.00164 <0.00135 <0.00173 <0.0013 <0.00161 0.0232 <0.00186 <0.0377 0.4207
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 286 4.02 <0.00136 <0.00137 <0.00162 <0.00145 <0.00147 0.611 <0.00158 0.0537 0.158 0.0108 <0.00151 <0.00162 <0.00153 <0.00159 <0.0013 <0.00167 <0.00125 <0.00156 <0.00163 <0.0018 <0.0364 0.2117
½
bgs 9/6/16 541 12.6 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 <0.080 0.0104 0.252 0.0703 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 <0.008 -‐-‐<0.008 0.00291 <0.008 <0.200 0.3327
1
bgs 9/6/16 78.6 11.4 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.0296 <0.002 0.0237 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.020 0.0237
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 590 6.78 <0.0019 <0.00192 <0.00225 <0.00201 <0.00204 0.0896 <0.0022 0.0426 0.00905 <0.00214 <0.0021 <0.00225 <0.00213 <0.00221 <0.00182 <0.00232 <0.00175 <0.00217 <0.00227 <0.00251 <0.0507 0.05165
1-‐1½
bgs 6/5/17 60.9 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 403 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 529 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 550 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 7,200 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
½
bgs 8/15/16 351 12.7
1-‐1½
bgs 6/5/17 <0.202 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 161 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 94.7 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 416 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 68.6 2.81 <0.0226 <0.0226 <0.0226 <0.0226 <0.0226 0.17 <0.0226 0.0316 0.0152 0.00822 <0.0226 <0.0226 <0.0226 <0.0226 <0.0226 <0.0226 <0.0226 <0.0226 0.0134 0.00491 <0.452 0.0468
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 187 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
80 0.07*NA NE NE NE NA NA NA NA NA NA NE NE NE 21 NE NE NE NA NE NA NA NE
400 0.61*0.039 0.086 0.30 NE 0.57 1.7 2.3 2.0 1.9 0.034 470**470**NE 19 NE NE 0.21 0.13 0.07 320 0.49 NE
NE 0.067*NE NE NE NE NE 0.430 NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE
1,000 500 1.4 NE NE NE 4.0 2.5 NE NE NE 8.0 NE NE NE 0.2 NE NE NE 4.7 NE 100.0 5.0 1.0
Total
DDT Sum
of
the
concentrations
of
4,4’-‐DDD+4,4’-‐DDE+4,4’-‐DDT CHHSL California
Human
Health
Screening
Levels,
Residential
Land
Uses,
Cal/EPA,
January
2005
and
updates.-‐-‐Not
Analyzed
<D.L.Indicates
that
the
compound
was
not
detected
at
or
above
stated
laboratory
detection
limits.USEPA
RSL United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Regional
Screening
Levels
for
Residenial
Uses
(May
2016)*
NE Not
established.HERO
HHRA
Note
3 DTSC
Human
and
Ecological
Risk
Office
(HERO)
Human
Health
Risk
Assessment
(HHRA)
Note
3,
DTSC-‐Modified
Screening
Levels,
October
2015.**RSL
for
Endosulfan
NA Not
Applicable TTLC
Total
threshold
limit
concentration
for
hazardous
waste
classification.BOLD Indicates
exceedance
of
regulatory
threshold
1 Samples
collected
by
Valcon
Existing
Structure
Sampling
BP-‐3
Sample
ID Date
Sampled
S.O.-‐A1
BP-‐2
BP-‐4
S.O.-‐B1
S.O.-‐B2
S.O.-‐B3
S.O.-‐B4
BP-‐6
BP-‐7
BP-‐8
BP-‐9
BP-‐10
Surface
B1
BP-‐11
BP-‐12
SB-‐1
Resampling
BP-‐1
S.O.
BP-‐4
S.O.
BP-‐8
S.O.
Table
1.
Summary
Results
for
Pesticide
&
Pesticide-‐Related
Metals
Sampling
Agricultural
Samples
AG-‐1
AG-‐3
(Concentrations
in
milligrams
per
kilogram
[mg/kg])
Approximate
Location delta-‐BHC 4,4’-‐DDD Endosulfan
Sulfate
Heptachlor
Epoxide MethoxychlorDieldrin ToxapheneLead
Aldrin
Approximate
Sampling
Depth
AG-‐2/
Surface
C
Surface
C1
Surface
C1
Endosulfan
II
SA-‐1
(Surface
A
Resample)
S.O.-‐A6
BP-‐1
BP-‐5
BP-‐10
S.O.
Total
DDTHeptachlorEndrin
Ketone
Endrin
AldehydeEndrin
Surface
A1
SB-‐1
(Surface
B
Resample)
Surface
B1
4,4’-‐DDE 4,4’-‐DDTChlordaneArsenicbeta-‐BHC gamma-‐
BHCalpha-‐BHC Hexachloro
Benzene
Endosulfan
I
S.O.-‐A3
S.O.-‐A5
S.O.-‐A2
CHHSL
-‐
Residential
USEPA
RSL
-‐
Residential
HERO
HHRA
Note
3
TTLC
Cal/EPA
does
not
require
cleanup
of
soil
to
less
than
background
concentrations.
Natural
background
concentrations
of
arsenic
often
exceeds
the
health-‐based
goals
in
soil.
Table
1.
Summary
Results
for
Pesticide
&
Pesticide-‐Related
Metals
Sampling
(Concentrations
in
milligrams
per
kilogram
[mg/kg])
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 101 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 46.4 6.73 <0.0214 <0.0214 <0.0214 0.00292 <0.0214 1.59 <0.0214 0.153 0.121 <0.0214 <0.0214 <0.0214 <0.0214 <0.0214 <0.0214 <0.0214 <0.0214 <0.0214 0.0693 0.0345 1.34 0.274
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 107 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 525 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 201 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 716 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 270 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 64.7 11.5 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 94.8 11.3 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 -‐-‐9.45 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 -‐-‐3.99 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 -‐-‐1.28 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
0-‐½
bgs 7/18/17 -‐-‐2.55 -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
80 0.07*NA NE NE NE NA NA NA NA NA NA NE NE NE 21 NE NE NE NA NE NA NA NE
400 0.61*0.039 0.086 0.30 NE 0.57 1.7 2.3 2.0 1.9 0.034 470**470**NE 19 NE NE 0.21 0.13 0.07 320 0.49 NE
NE 0.067*NE NE NE NE NE 0.430 NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE
1,000 500 1.4 NE NE NE 4.0 2.5 NE NE NE 8.0 NE NE NE 0.2 NE NE NE 4.7 NE 100.0 5.0 1.0
Total
DDT Sum
of
the
concentrations
of
4,4’-‐DDD+4,4’-‐DDE+4,4’-‐DDT CHHSL California
Human
Health
Screening
Levels,
Residential
Land
Uses,
Cal/EPA,
January
2005
and
updates.-‐-‐Not
Analyzed
<D.L.Indicates
that
the
compound
was
not
detected
at
or
above
stated
laboratory
detection
limits.USEPA
RSL United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Regional
Screening
Levels
for
Residenial
Uses
(May
2016)*
NE Not
established.HERO
HHRA
Note
3 DTSC
Human
and
Ecological
Risk
Office
(HERO)
Human
Health
Risk
Assessment
(HHRA)
Note
3,
DTSC-‐Modified
Screening
Levels,
October
2015.**RSL
for
Endosulfan
NA Not
Applicable TTLC
Total
threshold
limit
concentration
for
hazardous
waste
classification.BOLD Indicates
exceedance
of
regulatory
threshold
4,4’-‐DDT Dieldrin Methoxychlor ToxapheneApproximate
Location Sample
ID
Approximate
Sampling
Depth
Date
Sampled Lead
Arsenic Aldrin alpha-‐BHC 4,4’-‐DDD 4,4’-‐DDE Endosulfan
I
Endosulfan
II
Endosulfan
Sulfate
Endrin
Ketone
Hexachloro
Benzene Total
DDT
SS-‐1
Heptachlor Heptachlor
EpoxideEndrinEndrin
Aldehyde
SS-‐11
SS-‐12
beta-‐BHC delta-‐BHC gamma-‐
BHC Chlordane
SS-‐13
Supplemental
Sampling
Cal/EPA
does
not
require
cleanup
of
soil
to
less
than
background
concentrations.
Natural
background
concentrations
of
arsenic
often
exceeds
the
health-‐based
goals
in
soil.
SS-‐6
SS-‐7
SS-‐8
SS-‐9
SS-‐10
USEPA
RSL
-‐
Residential
SS-‐5
HERO
HHRA
Note
3
TTLC
CHHSL
-‐
Residential
SS-‐2
SS-‐4
SS-‐3
SB-‐1 0-‐½
bgs 6/5/17 <0.000845 <0.000845 <0.000845 0.00144 0.00158 0.00253 0.00207 0.00106 0.00189 <0.000845 0.0029 <0.000845 0.00148 0.00625 0.00189 0.00278 0.00387 0.00426 <0.00282
SP-‐1 1-‐1½
bgs 6/5/17 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.00224 <0.000673 <0.000673 <0.00224 <0.00224 <0.00224
18,000 3,600 NE 1.1 0.11 1.1 NE 11 110 0.11 2,400 2,400 1.1 3.8 NE 1,800 18 240 4,800
18,000 3,600 NE 0.16 0.016 0.16 NE 1.6 15 0.016 2,400 2,400 0.16 3.3 NE 1,800 NE 240 NE
<D.L.Indicates
that
the
compound
was
not
detected
at
or
above
stated
laboratory
detection
limits.
NE Not
established.
USEPA
RSL United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Regional
Screening
Levels
for
Residential
Uses
(June
2017)
1
USEPA
RSL
Burn
Pit
Area
ESLs
Direct
Exposure
Human
Health
Risk
Levels
(Table
S-‐1)
-‐
Residential
Shallow
Soil1
San
Francisco
Regional
Water
Quality
Control
Board
Environmental
Screening
Levels
–
Table
S-‐1:
Direct
Exposure
Human
Health
Risk
Levels
-‐
Residential
Shallow
Soil
Exposure
–
February
2016
(Rev.
3).
Table
2.
Summary
Results
for
PAHs
Sampling
(Concentrations
in
milligrams
per
kilogram
[mg/kg])
Approximate
Location Sample
ID Date
Sampled NaphthaleneAcenapthylene 1-‐Methyl
napthalene
Dibenzo(a,h)
anthracene
Benzo(ghi)
perylene
Indeno(1,2,3-‐cd)
pyrene
Benzo(a)
pyrene PhenanthreneAnthracene
Approximate
Sampling
Depth
Fluoranthene 2-‐Chloro
naphthaleneFluorenePyreneAcenaphtheneBenz(a)
anthracene ChryseneBenzo(b)
fluoranthene
Benzo(k)
fluoranthene
2-‐Methyl
napthalene
ANALYTICAL REPORT
June 16, 2017
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA
Sample Delivery Group:L914302
Samples Received:06/07/2017
Project Number:
Description:10206 Orange Avenue
Report To:Tom McCloskey
420 Sycamore Valley Rd West
Danville, CA 94526
Entire Report Reviewed By:
June 16, 2017
[Preliminary Report]
Brian Ford
Technical Service Representative
Results relate only to the items tested or calibrated and are reported as rounded values. This test report shall not be
reproduced, except in full, without written approval of the laboratory. Where applicable, sampling conducted by ESC is
performed per guidance provided in laboratory standard operating procedures: 060302, 060303, and 060304.
12065 Lebanon Rd Mount Juliet, TN 37122 615-758-5858 800-767-5859 www.esclabsciences.com
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cp: Cover Page 1
Tc: Table of Contents 2
Ss: Sample Summary 3
Cn: Case Narrative 7
Sr: Sample Results 8
BP-1 L914302-01 8
BP-2 L914302-02 9
BP-3 L914302-03 10
BP-4 L914302-04 11
BP-5 L914302-05 12
BP-6 L914302-06 13
BP-7 L914302-07 14
BP-8 L914302-08 15
BP-9 L914302-09 16
BP-10 L914302-10 17
BP-11 L914302-11 18
BP-12 L914302-12 19
S.O.-A1 L914302-13 20
S.O.-A2 L914302-14 21
S.O.-A3 L914302-15 22
SA-1@1-1.5' L914302-16 23
AG-1 L914302-17 24
AG-2/SURFACE C L914302-18 25
AG-3 L914302-19 26
S.O.-B1 L914302-20 27
S.O.-B2 L914302-21 28
S.O.-B3 L914302-22 29
S.O.-B4 L914302-23 30
SB-1 L914302-24 31
SB-1@1-1.5 L914302-25 33
Qc: Quality Control Summary 34
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 34
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B 39
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 42
Semi Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) by Method 8270C-SIM 45
Gl: Glossary of Terms 47
Al: Accreditations & Locations 48
Sc: Chain of Custody 49
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 2 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE SUMMARY
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-1 L914302-01 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 10:50 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987356 1 06/09/17 09:12 06/09/17 09:21 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 14:24 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 16:10 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-2 L914302-02 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 10:53 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987279 1 06/09/17 09:25 06/09/17 09:34 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 14:37 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 16:23 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/15/17 14:08 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 5 06/14/17 08:28 06/16/17 11:38 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-3 L914302-03 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 11:03 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987356 1 06/09/17 09:12 06/09/17 09:21 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 14:39 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 16:35 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/15/17 14:20 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-4 L914302-04 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 10:55 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987279 1 06/09/17 09:25 06/09/17 09:34 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 14:47 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 16:48 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/15/17 14:33 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-5 L914302-05 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 11:09 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987356 1 06/09/17 09:12 06/09/17 09:21 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 14:50 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 17:00 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/15/17 14:45 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-6 L914302-06 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 11:11 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987356 1 06/09/17 09:12 06/09/17 09:21 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 14:52 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 17:13 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/15/17 14:58 VKS
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 3 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE SUMMARY
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-7 L914302-07 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 11:13 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987356 1 06/09/17 09:12 06/09/17 09:21 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 14:55 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 17:25 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/15/17 15:10 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-8 L914302-08 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 11:15 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987356 1 06/09/17 09:12 06/09/17 09:21 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 14:57 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 17:25 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-9 L914302-09 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 11:23 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987356 1 06/09/17 09:12 06/09/17 09:21 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 15:00 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 16:35 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/16/17 12:40 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 5 06/14/17 08:28 06/16/17 12:03 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-10 L914302-10 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 11:25 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987356 1 06/09/17 09:12 06/09/17 09:21 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 15:03 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 17:00 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 10 06/14/17 08:28 06/16/17 12:15 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 5 06/14/17 08:28 06/16/17 13:43 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-11 L914302-11 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 11:27 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987282 1 06/09/17 09:14 06/09/17 09:22 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 15:05 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 17:12 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/16/17 13:05 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 5 06/14/17 08:28 06/16/17 12:28 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-12 L914302-12 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 11:30 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987282 1 06/09/17 09:14 06/09/17 09:22 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 15:08 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 16:47 VKS
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 4 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE SUMMARY
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
S.O.-A1 L914302-13 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 11:50 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987279 1 06/09/17 09:25 06/09/17 09:34 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 15:11 NJB
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
S.O.-A2 L914302-14 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 11:52 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987279 1 06/09/17 09:25 06/09/17 09:34 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 15:18 NJB
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
S.O.-A3 L914302-15 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 11:55 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987282 1 06/09/17 09:14 06/09/17 09:22 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 15:21 NJB
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SA-1@1-1.5' L914302-16 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 13:07 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987282 1 06/09/17 09:14 06/09/17 09:22 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988576 1 06/13/17 13:48 06/13/17 16:18 ST
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
AG-1 L914302-17 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 12:07 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987282 1 06/09/17 09:14 06/09/17 09:22 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 15:24 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 17:38 VKS
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/15/17 15:23 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
AG-2/SURFACE C L914302-18 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 12:10 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987356 1 06/09/17 09:12 06/09/17 09:21 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 15:26 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 15:58 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
AG-3 L914302-19 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 12:13 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987356 1 06/09/17 09:12 06/09/17 09:21 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 15:29 NJB
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 16:10 VKS
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 5 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE SUMMARY
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
S.O.-B1 L914302-20 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 12:37 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987367 1 06/09/17 11:36 06/09/17 11:46 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988572 1 06/13/17 11:24 06/13/17 15:32 NJB
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
S.O.-B2 L914302-21 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 12:40 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987282 1 06/09/17 09:14 06/09/17 09:22 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988571 1 06/13/17 14:43 06/13/17 22:22 ST
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
S.O.-B3 L914302-22 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 12:43 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987279 1 06/09/17 09:25 06/09/17 09:34 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988571 1 06/13/17 14:43 06/13/17 22:25 ST
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
S.O.-B4 L914302-23 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 12:45 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987282 1 06/09/17 09:14 06/09/17 09:22 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988571 1 06/13/17 14:43 06/13/17 22:33 ST
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SB-1 L914302-24 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 12:47 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987282 1 06/09/17 09:14 06/09/17 09:22 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988571 1 06/13/17 14:43 06/13/17 22:35 ST
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG988762 1 06/14/17 08:28 06/14/17 16:23 VKS
Semi Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) by Method 8270C-SIM WG988102 1 06/14/17 08:52 06/15/17 04:35 CLG
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SB-1@1-1.5 L914302-25 Solid Chris Vertin 06/05/17 13:14 06/07/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG987272 1 06/09/17 09:50 06/09/17 09:57 KDW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG988571 1 06/13/17 14:43 06/13/17 22:38 ST
Semi Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) by Method 8270C-SIM WG988102 1 06/14/17 08:52 06/15/17 04:57 CLG
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 6 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.CASE NARRATIVE
All sample aliquots were received at the correct temperature, in the proper containers, with the
appropriate preservatives, and within method specified holding times. All MDL (LOD) and RDL (LOQ)
values reported for environmental samples have been corrected for the dilution factor used in the
analysis. All Method and Batch Quality Control are within established criteria except where addressed
in this case narrative, a non-conformance form or properly qualified within the sample results. By my
digital signature below, I affirm to the best of my knowledge, all problems/anomalies observed by the
laboratory as having the potential to affect the quality of the data have been identified by the
laboratory, and no information or data have been knowingly withheld that would affect the quality of the
data.
[Preliminary Report]
Brian Ford
Technical Service Representative
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 7 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 01
L914302
BP-1
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 10:50
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 60.6 J3 1 06/09/2017 09:21 WG987356
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 5.75 1.07 3.30 1 06/13/2017 14:24 WG988572
Lead 141 J3 J5 J6 O1 0.313 0.825 1 06/13/2017 14:24 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00223 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00224 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00264 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00236 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00239 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Chlordane 0.0874 J 0.0643 0.330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00257 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.00450 J 0.00254 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
4,4-DDT U P 0.00330 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Dieldrin 0.00510 J 0.00251 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00246 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00264 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00249 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00259 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00213 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00272 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00205 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00254 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00266 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00294 0.0330 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0594 0.660 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 30.9 10.0-148 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 54.9 21.0-146 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 8 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 02
L914302
BP-2
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 10:53
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 91.3 1 06/09/2017 09:34 WG987279
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 23.2 0.712 2.19 1 06/13/2017 14:37 WG988572
Lead 196 0.208 0.547 1 06/13/2017 14:37 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00148 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00149 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00175 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00157 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00159 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Chlordane 4.46 0.213 1.09 5 06/16/2017 11:38 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00171 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.187 0.00169 0.0219 1 06/15/2017 14:08 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.437 0.00219 0.0219 1 06/15/2017 14:08 WG988762
Dieldrin 0.503 0.00832 0.109 5 06/16/2017 11:38 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00163 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00175 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00165 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00172 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00141 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00181 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00136 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Heptachlor 0.00958 J 0.00169 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0548 0.00176 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00195 0.0219 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0394 0.438 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 122 10.0-148 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 85.5 10.0-148 06/16/2017 11:38 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 107 10.0-148 06/15/2017 14:08 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 81.5 21.0-146 06/16/2017 11:38 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 82.3 21.0-146 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 95.2 21.0-146 06/15/2017 14:08 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 9 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 03
L914302
BP-3
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 11:03
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 85.8 1 06/09/2017 09:21 WG987356
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 3.02 0.758 2.33 1 06/13/2017 14:39 WG988572
Lead 92.2 0.221 0.583 1 06/13/2017 14:39 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00157 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00159 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00187 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00167 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00169 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Chlordane 1.04 0.0455 0.233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00182 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.176 0.00180 0.0233 1 06/15/2017 14:20 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.0595 0.00233 0.0233 1 06/15/2017 14:20 WG988762
Dieldrin U 0.00177 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00174 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00187 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00176 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00183 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00150 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00192 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00145 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00180 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0480 0.00188 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00207 0.0233 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0420 0.466 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 54.6 10.0-148 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 103 10.0-148 06/15/2017 14:20 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 76.4 21.0-146 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 94.9 21.0-146 06/15/2017 14:20 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 10 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 04
L914302
BP-4
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 10:55
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 84.0 1 06/09/2017 09:34 WG987279
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 7.61 0.774 2.38 1 06/13/2017 14:47 WG988572
Lead 237 0.226 0.595 1 06/13/2017 14:47 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00161 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00162 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00190 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00170 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00173 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Chlordane 0.465 0.0464 0.238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00186 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.0278 0.00183 0.0238 1 06/15/2017 14:33 WG988762
4,4-DDT U P 0.00238 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Dieldrin 0.00722 J 0.00181 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00177 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00190 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00180 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00187 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00154 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00196 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00148 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00183 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00192 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00212 0.0238 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0429 0.476 1 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 40.2 10.0-148 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 72.9 10.0-148 06/15/2017 14:33 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 91.3 21.0-146 06/15/2017 14:33 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 70.4 21.0-146 06/14/2017 16:48 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 11 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 05
L914302
BP-5
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 11:09
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 86.7 1 06/09/2017 09:21 WG987356
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 7.28 0.749 2.31 1 06/13/2017 14:50 WG988572
Lead 558 0.219 0.577 1 06/13/2017 14:50 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00156 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00157 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00184 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00165 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00167 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Chlordane 0.163 J 0.0450 0.231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00180 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.0371 0.00178 0.0231 1 06/15/2017 14:45 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.0470 0.00231 0.0231 1 06/15/2017 14:45 WG988762
Dieldrin 0.00254 J P 0.00175 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00172 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00184 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00174 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00181 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00149 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00190 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00143 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00178 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00186 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00205 0.0231 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0415 0.461 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 113 10.0-148 06/15/2017 14:45 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 63.5 10.0-148 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 77.8 21.0-146 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 97.9 21.0-146 06/15/2017 14:45 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 12 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 06
L914302
BP-6
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 11:11
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 90.1 1 06/09/2017 09:21 WG987356
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 9.67 0.721 2.22 1 06/13/2017 14:52 WG988572
Lead 66.6 0.211 0.555 1 06/13/2017 14:52 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00150 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00151 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00178 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00159 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00161 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Chlordane 0.255 0.0433 0.222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00173 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.0495 0.00171 0.0222 1 06/15/2017 14:58 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.0486 0.00222 0.0222 1 06/15/2017 14:58 WG988762
Dieldrin 0.0108 J 0.00169 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00165 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00178 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00168 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00174 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00143 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00183 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00138 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00171 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0113 J 0.00179 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00197 0.0222 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0399 0.444 1 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 128 10.0-148 06/15/2017 14:58 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 71.9 10.0-148 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 79.5 21.0-146 06/14/2017 17:13 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 102 21.0-146 06/15/2017 14:58 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 13 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 07
L914302
BP-7
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 11:13
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 84.6 1 06/09/2017 09:21 WG987356
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 11.5 0.769 2.36 1 06/13/2017 14:55 WG988572
Lead 511 0.225 0.591 1 06/13/2017 14:55 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00160 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00161 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00189 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00169 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00171 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Chlordane 0.0814 J 0.0461 0.236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00184 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.0155 J 0.00182 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.0409 0.00236 0.0236 1 06/15/2017 15:10 WG988762
Dieldrin 0.00201 J 0.00180 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00176 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00189 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00179 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00186 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00153 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00195 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00147 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00182 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide 0.00228 J 0.00190 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00210 0.0236 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0426 0.473 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 113 10.0-148 06/15/2017 15:10 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 68.1 10.0-148 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 99.1 21.0-146 06/15/2017 15:10 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 76.9 21.0-146 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 14 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 08
L914302
BP-8
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 11:15
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 89.5 1 06/09/2017 09:21 WG987356
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 9.78 0.726 2.23 1 06/13/2017 14:57 WG988572
Lead 925 0.212 0.558 1 06/13/2017 14:57 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00151 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00152 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00179 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00160 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00162 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Chlordane 0.539 0.0436 0.223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00174 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.0567 P 0.00172 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.0559 0.00223 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Dieldrin 0.00920 J P 0.00170 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00166 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00179 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00169 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00175 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00144 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00184 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00138 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00172 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00180 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00199 0.0223 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0402 0.447 1 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 149 J1 10.0-148 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 111 21.0-146 06/14/2017 17:25 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 15 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 09
L914302
BP-9
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 11:23
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 97.2 1 06/09/2017 09:21 WG987356
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 4.18 0.669 2.06 1 06/13/2017 15:00 WG988572
Lead 207 0.196 0.515 1 06/13/2017 15:00 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00139 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00140 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00165 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00147 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00149 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Chlordane 0.292 0.0401 0.206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00161 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
4,4-DDE U 0.00792 0.103 5 06/16/2017 12:03 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.388 0.00206 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Dieldrin 0.0342 0.00156 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00153 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00165 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00155 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00162 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00133 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00170 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00128 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00158 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00166 0.0206 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
Methoxychlor 0.0199 J 0.00183 0.0206 1 06/16/2017 12:40 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0371 0.412 1 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 139 10.0-148 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 84.0 10.0-148 06/16/2017 12:03 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 100 10.0-148 06/16/2017 12:40 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 103 21.0-146 06/14/2017 16:35 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 81.6 21.0-146 06/16/2017 12:40 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 77.0 21.0-146 06/16/2017 12:03 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 16 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 10
L914302
BP-10
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 11:25
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 97.7 1 06/09/2017 09:21 WG987356
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 3.52 0.665 2.05 1 06/13/2017 15:03 WG988572
Lead 256 0.194 0.512 1 06/13/2017 15:03 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00138 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00139 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00164 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00146 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00148 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Chlordane 0.851 0.0399 0.205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00160 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.0366 J 0.0158 0.205 10 06/16/2017 12:15 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.0125 J 0.0102 0.102 5 06/16/2017 13:43 WG988762
Dieldrin U 0.00156 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00152 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00164 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00155 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00161 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00132 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00169 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00127 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00158 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00165 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00182 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0368 0.409 1 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 126 10.0-148 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 99.6 10.0-148 06/16/2017 12:15 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 99.6 10.0-148 06/16/2017 13:43 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 86.6 21.0-146 06/16/2017 12:15 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 91.1 21.0-146 06/14/2017 17:00 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 86.6 21.0-146 06/16/2017 13:43 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 17 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 11
L914302
BP-11
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 11:27
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 95.6 1 06/09/2017 09:22 WG987282
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 5.75 0.680 2.09 1 06/13/2017 15:05 WG988572
Lead 586 0.199 0.523 1 06/13/2017 15:05 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00141 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00142 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00167 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00150 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00152 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Chlordane 1.69 0.0408 0.209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00163 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.0407 J P 0.00806 0.105 5 06/16/2017 12:28 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.380 0.00209 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Dieldrin 0.0171 J P 0.00159 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00156 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00167 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00158 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00164 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00135 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00173 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00130 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00161 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0232 0.00168 0.0209 1 06/16/2017 13:05 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00186 0.0209 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0377 0.419 1 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 128 10.0-148 06/16/2017 12:28 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 186 J1 10.0-148 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 150 J1 10.0-148 06/16/2017 13:05 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 71.1 21.0-146 06/16/2017 13:05 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 78.5 21.0-146 06/16/2017 12:28 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 105 21.0-146 06/14/2017 17:12 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 18 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 12
L914302
BP-12
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 11:30
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 99.0 1 06/09/2017 09:22 WG987282
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 4.02 0.657 2.02 1 06/13/2017 15:08 WG988572
Lead 286 0.192 0.505 1 06/13/2017 15:08 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00136 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00137 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00162 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00145 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00147 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Chlordane 0.611 P 0.0394 0.202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00158 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.0537 0.00156 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.158 0.00202 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Dieldrin 0.0108 J P 0.00154 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00151 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00162 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00153 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00159 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00130 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00167 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00125 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00156 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00163 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00180 0.0202 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0364 0.404 1 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 210 J1 10.0-148 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 95.9 21.0-146 06/14/2017 16:47 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 19 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 13
L914302
S.O.-A1
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 11:50
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 96.1 1 06/09/2017 09:34 WG987279
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 161 0.198 0.520 1 06/13/2017 15:11 WG988572
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 20 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 14
L914302
S.O.-A2
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 11:52
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 97.1 1 06/09/2017 09:34 WG987279
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 94.7 0.196 0.515 1 06/13/2017 15:18 WG988572
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 21 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 15
L914302
S.O.-A3
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 11:55
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 94.3 1 06/09/2017 09:22 WG987282
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 416 0.202 0.530 1 06/13/2017 15:21 WG988572
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 22 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 16
L914302
SA-1@1-1.5'
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 13:07
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 92.1 1 06/09/2017 09:22 WG987282
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead U 0.206 0.543 1 06/13/2017 16:18 WG988576
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 23 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 17
L914302
AG-1
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 12:07
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 93.0 1 06/09/2017 09:22 WG987282
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 15.0 0.699 2.15 1 06/13/2017 15:24 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00145 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00146 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00172 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00154 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00156 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Chlordane 0.0550 J 0.0420 0.215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00168 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.0385 0.00166 0.0215 1 06/15/2017 15:23 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.0226 0.00215 0.0215 1 06/15/2017 15:23 WG988762
Dieldrin 0.00460 J P 0.00164 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00160 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00172 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00162 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00169 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00139 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00178 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00133 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00166 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide 0.00178 J 0.00173 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00191 0.0215 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0387 0.430 1 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 110 10.0-148 06/15/2017 15:23 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 60.1 10.0-148 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 72.8 21.0-146 06/14/2017 17:38 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 93.7 21.0-146 06/15/2017 15:23 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 24 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 18
L914302
AG-2/SURFACE C
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 12:10
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 97.4 1 06/09/2017 09:21 WG987356
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 17.7 0.667 2.05 1 06/13/2017 15:26 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00139 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00140 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00164 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00147 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00149 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Chlordane U 0.0400 0.205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00160 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.00477 J 0.00158 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.00261 J 0.00205 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Dieldrin U 0.00156 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00153 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00164 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00155 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00161 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00132 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00169 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00127 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00158 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00165 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00183 0.0205 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0370 0.411 1 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 131 10.0-148 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 96.3 21.0-146 06/14/2017 15:58 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 25 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 19
L914302
AG-3
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 12:13
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 96.7 1 06/09/2017 09:21 WG987356
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 5.63 0.672 2.07 1 06/13/2017 15:29 WG988572
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00140 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00141 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00165 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00148 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00150 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Chlordane 0.509 0.0403 0.207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00161 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.140 0.00159 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.0687 0.00207 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Dieldrin U 0.00157 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00154 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00165 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00156 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00162 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00133 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00171 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00128 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00159 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00167 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00184 0.0207 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0372 0.414 1 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 145 10.0-148 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 95.1 21.0-146 06/14/2017 16:10 WG988762
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 26 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 20
L914302
S.O.-B1
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 12:37
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 65.3 1 06/09/2017 11:46 WG987367
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 403 0.291 0.765 1 06/13/2017 15:32 WG988572
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 27 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 21
L914302
S.O.-B2
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 12:40
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 86.6 1 06/09/2017 09:22 WG987282
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 529 0.220 0.578 1 06/13/2017 22:22 WG988571
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 28 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 22
L914302
S.O.-B3
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 12:43
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 89.1 1 06/09/2017 09:34 WG987279
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 550 0.213 0.561 1 06/13/2017 22:25 WG988571
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 29 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 23
L914302
S.O.-B4
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 12:45
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 84.1 1 06/09/2017 09:22 WG987282
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 7200 0.226 0.595 1 06/13/2017 22:33 WG988571
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 30 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 24
L914302
SB-1
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 12:47
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 71.0 1 06/09/2017 09:22 WG987282
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 6.78 0.915 2.82 1 06/13/2017 22:35 WG988571
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00190 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Alpha BHC U 0.00192 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Beta BHC U 0.00225 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Delta BHC U 0.00201 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Gamma BHC U 0.00204 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Chlordane 0.0896 J 0.0549 0.282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
4,4-DDD U 0.00220 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
4,4-DDE 0.0426 0.00217 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
4,4-DDT 0.00905 J 0.00282 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Dieldrin U 0.00214 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Endosulfan I U 0.00210 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Endosulfan II U 0.00225 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00213 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Endrin U 0.00221 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00182 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Endrin ketone U J4 0.00232 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00175 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Heptachlor U 0.00217 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00227 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Methoxychlor U 0.00251 0.0282 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Toxaphene U 0.0507 0.563 1 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 95.0 10.0-148 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 104 21.0-146 06/14/2017 16:23 WG988762
Semi Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) by Method 8270C-SIM
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Anthracene U 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Acenaphthene U 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Acenaphthylene U 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Benzo(a)anthracene 0.00144 J 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Benzo(a)pyrene 0.00158 J 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.00253 J 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.00207 J 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.00106 J 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Chrysene 0.00189 J 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene U 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Fluoranthene 0.00290 J 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Fluorene U 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.00148 J 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Naphthalene 0.00625 J 0.00282 0.0282 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Phenanthrene 0.00189 J 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
Pyrene 0.00278 J 0.000845 0.00845 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
1-Methylnaphthalene 0.00387 J 0.00282 0.0282 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 31 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 24
L914302
SB-1
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 12:47
Semi Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) by Method 8270C-SIM
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
2-Methylnaphthalene 0.00426 J 0.00282 0.0282 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
2-Chloronaphthalene U 0.00282 0.0282 1 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
(S) p-Terphenyl-d14 54.5 23.0-120 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
(S) Nitrobenzene-d5 77.7 14.0-149 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
(S) 2-Fluorobiphenyl 74.2 34.0-125 06/15/2017 04:35 WG988102
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 32 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 25
L914302
SB-1@1-1.5
Collected date/time: 06/05/17 13:14
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 89.1 1 06/09/2017 09:57 WG987272
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 60.9 0.213 0.561 1 06/13/2017 22:38 WG988571
Semi Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) by Method 8270C-SIM
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Anthracene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Acenaphthene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Acenaphthylene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Benzo(a)anthracene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Benzo(a)pyrene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Benzo(b)fluoranthene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Benzo(k)fluoranthene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Chrysene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Fluoranthene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Fluorene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Naphthalene U 0.00224 0.0224 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Phenanthrene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
Pyrene U 0.000673 0.00673 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
1-Methylnaphthalene U 0.00224 0.0224 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
2-Methylnaphthalene U 0.00224 0.0224 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
2-Chloronaphthalene U 0.00224 0.0224 1 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
(S) p-Terphenyl-d14 63.2 23.0-120 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
(S) Nitrobenzene-d5 72.8 14.0-149 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
(S) 2-Fluorobiphenyl 74.5 34.0-125 06/15/2017 04:57 WG988102
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 33 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG987272
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 L914302-25
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3224559-1 06/09/17 09:57
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte %%%
Total Solids 0.000800
L914219-01 Original Sample (OS) • Duplicate (DUP)
(OS) L914219-01 06/09/17 09:57 • (DUP) R3224559-3 06/09/17 09:57
Original Result DUP Result Dilution DUP RPD DUP Qualifier DUP RPD Limits
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 79.7 79.1 1 0.708 5
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)
(LCS) R3224559-2 06/09/17 09:57
Spike Amount LCS Result LCS Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 50.0 50.0 100 85.0-115
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 34 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG987279
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 L914302-02,04,13,14,22
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3224557-1 06/09/17 09:34
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte %%%
Total Solids 0.000600
L914302-14 Original Sample (OS) • Duplicate (DUP)
(OS) L914302-14 06/09/17 09:34 • (DUP) R3224557-3 06/09/17 09:34
Original Result DUP Result Dilution DUP RPD DUP Qualifier DUP RPD Limits
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 97.1 96.8 1 0.368 5
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)
(LCS) R3224557-2 06/09/17 09:34
Spike Amount LCS Result LCS Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 50.0 50.0 99.9 85.0-115
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 35 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG987282
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 L914302-11,12,15,16,17,21,23,24
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3224556-1 06/09/17 09:22
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte %%%
Total Solids 0.000300
L914302-16 Original Sample (OS) • Duplicate (DUP)
(OS) L914302-16 06/09/17 09:22 • (DUP) R3224556-3 06/09/17 09:22
Original Result DUP Result Dilution DUP RPD DUP Qualifier DUP RPD Limits
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 92.1 93.1 1 1.04 5
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)
(LCS) R3224556-2 06/09/17 09:22
Spike Amount LCS Result LCS Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 50.0 50.0 100 85.0-115
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 36 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG987356
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 L914302-01,03,05,06,07,08,09,10,18,19
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3224572-1 06/09/17 09:21
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte %%%
Total Solids 0.00140
L914302-01 Original Sample (OS) • Duplicate (DUP)
(OS) L914302-01 06/09/17 09:21 • (DUP) R3224572-3 06/09/17 09:21
Original Result DUP Result Dilution DUP RPD DUP Qualifier DUP RPD Limits
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 60.6 64.0 1 5.39 J3 5
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)
(LCS) R3224572-2 06/09/17 09:21
Spike Amount LCS Result LCS Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 50.0 49.9 99.9 85.0-115
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 37 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG987367
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 L914302-20
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3224583-1 06/09/17 11:46
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte %%%
Total Solids 0.00100
L914199-01 Original Sample (OS) • Duplicate (DUP)
(OS) L914199-01 06/09/17 11:46 • (DUP) R3224583-3 06/09/17 11:46
Original Result DUP Result Dilution DUP RPD DUP Qualifier DUP RPD Limits
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 83.4 84.1 1 0.940 5
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)
(LCS) R3224583-2 06/09/17 11:46
Spike Amount LCS Result LCS Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 50.0 50.0 100 85.0-115
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 38 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG988571
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B L914302-21,22,23,24,25
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3225359-1 06/13/17 21:30
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
Arsenic U 0.65 2.00
Lead U 0.19 0.500
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) • Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)
(LCS) R3225359-2 06/13/17 21:33 • (LCSD) R3225359-3 06/13/17 21:35
Spike Amount LCS Result LCSD Result LCS Rec.LCSD Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier LCSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Arsenic 100 93.9 92.1 94 92 80-120 2 20
Lead 100 94.7 93.6 95 94 80-120 1 20
L914219-01 Original Sample (OS) • Matrix Spike (MS) • Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD)
(OS) L914219-01 06/13/17 21:38 • (MS) R3225359-6 06/13/17 21:45 • (MSD) R3225359-7 06/13/17 21:48
Spike Amount
(dry)
Original Result
(dry)MS Result (dry)MSD Result
(dry)MS Rec.MSD Rec.Dilution Rec. Limits MS Qualifier MSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Arsenic 125 10.3 136 131 100 96 1 75-125 4 20
Lead 125 14.6 144 147 103 105 1 75-125 2 20
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 39 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG988572
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B L914302-01,02,03,04,05,06,07,08,09,10,11,12,13,14,15,17,18,19,20
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3225276-1 06/13/17 14:17
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
Arsenic U 0.65 2.00
Lead U 0.19 0.500
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) • Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)
(LCS) R3225276-2 06/13/17 14:19 • (LCSD) R3225276-3 06/13/17 14:22
Spike Amount LCS Result LCSD Result LCS Rec.LCSD Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier LCSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Arsenic 100 103 102 103 102 80-120 1 20
Lead 100 102 101 102 101 80-120 1 20
L914302-01 Original Sample (OS) • Matrix Spike (MS) • Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD)
(OS) L914302-01 06/13/17 14:24 • (MS) R3225276-6 06/13/17 14:32 • (MSD) R3225276-7 06/13/17 14:34
Spike Amount
(dry)
Original Result
(dry)MS Result (dry)MSD Result
(dry)MS Rec.MSD Rec.Dilution Rec. Limits MS Qualifier MSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Arsenic 165 5.75 193 165 113 97 1 75-125 15 20
Lead 165 141 441 250 182 66 1 75-125 J5 J3 J6 55 20
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 40 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG988576
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B L914302-16
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3225329-1 06/13/17 15:40
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
Lead U 0.19 0.500
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) • Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)
(LCS) R3225329-2 06/13/17 15:42 • (LCSD) R3225329-3 06/13/17 15:45
Spike Amount LCS Result LCSD Result LCS Rec.LCSD Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier LCSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Lead 100 101 102 101 102 80-120 1 20
L914268-01 Original Sample (OS) • Matrix Spike (MS) • Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD)
(OS) L914268-01 06/13/17 15:47 • (MS) R3225329-6 06/13/17 15:57 • (MSD) R3225329-7 06/13/17 16:00
Spike Amount
(dry)
Original Result
(dry)MS Result (dry)MSD Result
(dry)MS Rec.MSD Rec.Dilution Rec. Limits MS Qualifier MSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Lead 126 10.0 148 133 110 98 1 75-125 11 20
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 41 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG988762
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 L914302-01,02,03,04,05,06,07,08,09,10,11,12,17,18,19,24
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3225886-1 06/14/17 15:58
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
Aldrin U 0.00135 0.0200
Alpha BHC U 0.00136 0.0200
Beta BHC U 0.00160 0.0200
Delta BHC U 0.00143 0.0200
Gamma BHC U 0.00145 0.0200
4,4-DDD U 0.00156 0.0200
4,4-DDE U 0.00154 0.0200
4,4-DDT U 0.00200 0.0200
Dieldrin U 0.00152 0.0200
Endosulfan I U 0.00149 0.0200
Endosulfan II U 0.00160 0.0200
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00151 0.0200
Endrin U 0.00157 0.0200
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00129 0.0200
Endrin ketone U 0.00165 0.0200
Heptachlor U 0.00154 0.0200
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00161 0.0200
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00124 0.0200
Methoxychlor U 0.00178 0.0200
Chlordane U 0.0390 0.200
Toxaphene U 0.0360 0.400
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 71.9 10.0-148
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 81.3 21.0-146
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3225895-3 06/14/17 15:28
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
Aldrin U 0.00135 0.0200
Alpha BHC U 0.00136 0.0200
Beta BHC U 0.00160 0.0200
Delta BHC U 0.00143 0.0200
Gamma BHC U 0.00145 0.0200
4,4-DDD U 0.00156 0.0200
4,4-DDE U 0.00154 0.0200
4,4-DDT U 0.00200 0.0200
Dieldrin U 0.00152 0.0200
Endosulfan I U 0.00149 0.0200
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 42 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG988762
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 L914302-01,02,03,04,05,06,07,08,09,10,11,12,17,18,19,24
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3225895-3 06/14/17 15:28
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
Endosulfan II U 0.00160 0.0200
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00151 0.0200
Endrin U 0.00157 0.0200
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00129 0.0200
Endrin ketone U 0.00165 0.0200
Heptachlor U 0.00154 0.0200
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00161 0.0200
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00124 0.0200
Methoxychlor U 0.00178 0.0200
Chlordane U 0.0390 0.200
Toxaphene U 0.0360 0.400
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 164 J1 10.0-148
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 124 21.0-146
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) • Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)
(LCS) R3225895-1 06/14/17 15:04 • (LCSD) R3225895-2 06/14/17 15:16
Spike Amount LCS Result LCSD Result LCS Rec.LCSD Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier LCSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Aldrin 0.0667 0.0902 0.0883 135 132 55.0-137 2.06 29
Alpha BHC 0.0667 0.0836 0.0825 125 124 55.0-136 1.35 28
Beta BHC 0.0667 0.0846 0.0812 127 122 53.0-133 4.14 28
Delta BHC 0.0667 0.0729 0.0736 109 110 53.0-139 0.980 29
Gamma BHC 0.0667 0.0785 0.0768 118 115 54.0-136 2.16 29
4,4-DDD 0.0667 0.0891 0.0896 134 134 51.0-141 P 0.590 29
4,4-DDE 0.0667 0.0830 0.0822 124 123 53.0-142 0.910 30
4,4-DDT 0.0667 0.0650 0.0648 97.5 97.1 47.0-143 0.390 30
Dieldrin 0.0667 0.0874 0.0873 131 131 54.0-141 0.0200 29
Endosulfan I 0.0667 0.0873 0.0855 131 128 54.0-141 2.11 29
Endosulfan II 0.0667 0.0874 0.0903 131 135 53.0-140 P 3.23 28
Endosulfan sulfate 0.0667 0.0837 0.0852 125 128 52.0-141 P P 1.74 29
Endrin 0.0667 0.0753 0.0758 113 114 52.0-137 0.650 29
Endrin aldehyde 0.0667 0.0694 0.0646 104 96.9 30.0-127 P 7.10 31
Endrin ketone 0.0667 0.0943 0.0972 141 146 51.0-139 J4 P J4 P 3.04 28
Heptachlor 0.0667 0.0764 0.0759 115 114 53.0-144 0.650 29
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0667 0.0780 0.0785 117 118 54.0-137 0.570 28
Hexachlorobenzene 0.0667 0.0814 0.0803 122 120 50.0-135 1.31 28
Methoxychlor 0.0667 0.0867 0.0853 130 128 49.0-145 1.55 29
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 146 152 10.0-148 J1
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 43 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG988762
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 L914302-01,02,03,04,05,06,07,08,09,10,11,12,17,18,19,24
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) • Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)
(LCS) R3225895-1 06/14/17 15:04 • (LCSD) R3225895-2 06/14/17 15:16
Spike Amount LCS Result LCSD Result LCS Rec.LCSD Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier LCSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 114 117 21.0-146
L914254-22 Original Sample (OS) • Matrix Spike (MS) • Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD)
(OS) L914254-22 06/14/17 19:17 • (MS) R3225895-4 06/14/17 19:30 • (MSD) R3225895-5 06/14/17 19:42
Spike Amount
(dry)
Original Result
(dry)MS Result (dry)MSD Result
(dry)MS Rec.MSD Rec.Dilution Rec. Limits MS Qualifier MSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Aldrin 0.0702 U 0.0969 0.105 138 150 1 19.0-152 P 8.06 24
Alpha BHC 0.0702 U 0.0975 0.105 139 150 1 39.0-152 7.74 21
Beta BHC 0.0702 U 0.0975 0.107 139 153 1 38.0-150 J5 9.70 20
Delta BHC 0.0702 U 0.0913 0.101 130 144 1 34.0-155 9.98 21
Gamma BHC 0.0702 U 0.0950 0.102 135 145 1 38.0-153 6.62 21
4,4-DDD 0.0702 U 0.117 0.138 166 197 1 22.0-160 J5 J5 16.7 25
4,4-DDE 0.0702 U 0.0965 0.106 137 150 1 10.0-160 8.93 27
4,4-DDT 0.0702 U 0.0624 0.0539 88.8 76.7 1 10.0-160 14.6 28
Dieldrin 0.0702 U 0.0993 0.111 141 158 1 30.0-158 P 11.1 25
Endosulfan I 0.0702 U 0.0969 0.108 138 154 1 31.0-155 11.0 25
Endosulfan II 0.0702 U 0.0967 0.112 138 160 1 32.0-156 J5 15.0 25
Endosulfan sulfate 0.0702 U 0.0950 0.109 135 156 1 31.0-158 P 14.0 24
Endrin 0.0702 U 0.0978 0.104 139 148 1 30.0-149 6.14 25
Endrin aldehyde 0.0702 U 0.0941 0.109 134 155 1 20.0-157 14.4 26
Endrin ketone 0.0702 U 0.106 0.122 151 173 1 32.0-154 J5 P 13.4 23
Heptachlor 0.0702 U 0.0916 0.0912 130 130 1 18.0-160 0.440 23
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0702 U 0.0931 0.103 133 147 1 31.0-154 10.2 25
Hexachlorobenzene 0.0702 U 0.0917 0.0993 131 141 1 26.0-146 7.92 21
Methoxychlor 0.0702 U 0.0821 0.0771 117 110 1 10.0-160 6.22 27
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 126 148 10.0-148
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 122 128 21.0-146
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 44 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG988102
Semi Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) by Method 8270C-SIM L914302-24,25
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3226031-3 06/15/17 03:57
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
Anthracene U 0.000600 0.00600
Acenaphthene U 0.000600 0.00600
Acenaphthylene U 0.000600 0.00600
Benzo(a)anthracene U 0.000600 0.00600
Benzo(a)pyrene U 0.000600 0.00600
Benzo(b)fluoranthene U 0.000600 0.00600
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene U 0.000600 0.00600
Benzo(k)fluoranthene U 0.000600 0.00600
Chrysene U 0.000600 0.00600
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene U 0.000600 0.00600
Fluoranthene U 0.000600 0.00600
Fluorene U 0.000600 0.00600
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene U 0.000600 0.00600
Naphthalene U 0.00200 0.0200
Phenanthrene U 0.000600 0.00600
Pyrene U 0.000600 0.00600
1-Methylnaphthalene U 0.00200 0.0200
2-Methylnaphthalene U 0.00200 0.0200
2-Chloronaphthalene U 0.00200 0.0200
(S) Nitrobenzene-d5 81.7 14.0-149
(S) 2-Fluorobiphenyl 86.3 34.0-125
(S) p-Terphenyl-d14 75.4 23.0-120
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) • Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)
(LCS) R3226031-1 06/15/17 03:15 • (LCSD) R3226031-2 06/15/17 03:36
Spike Amount LCS Result LCSD Result LCS Rec.LCSD Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier LCSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Anthracene 0.0800 0.0626 0.0632 78.2 79.0 50.0-125 0.970 20
Acenaphthene 0.0800 0.0656 0.0656 82.0 82.0 52.0-120 0.0800 20
Acenaphthylene 0.0800 0.0655 0.0651 81.9 81.4 51.0-120 0.590 20
Benzo(a)anthracene 0.0800 0.0583 0.0579 72.9 72.3 46.0-121 0.820 20
Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0800 0.0568 0.0567 71.0 70.8 42.0-121 0.230 20
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.0800 0.0557 0.0588 69.6 73.6 42.0-123 5.57 20
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.0800 0.0610 0.0592 76.3 74.0 43.0-128 3.08 20
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.0800 0.0632 0.0595 79.0 74.3 45.0-128 6.12 20
Chrysene 0.0800 0.0622 0.0629 77.8 78.7 48.0-127 1.17 20
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.0800 0.0533 0.0516 66.6 64.5 43.0-132 3.09 20
Fluoranthene 0.0800 0.0666 0.0653 83.2 81.6 49.0-129 2.02 20
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 45 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG988102
Semi Volatile Organic Compounds (GC/MS) by Method 8270C-SIM L914302-24,25
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) • Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)
(LCS) R3226031-1 06/15/17 03:15 • (LCSD) R3226031-2 06/15/17 03:36
Spike Amount LCS Result LCSD Result LCS Rec.LCSD Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier LCSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Fluorene 0.0800 0.0655 0.0649 81.8 81.1 50.0-120 0.910 20
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.0800 0.0576 0.0562 72.0 70.3 44.0-131 2.44 20
Naphthalene 0.0800 0.0660 0.0658 82.5 82.2 50.0-120 0.280 20
Phenanthrene 0.0800 0.0608 0.0605 75.9 75.6 48.0-120 0.500 20
Pyrene 0.0800 0.0647 0.0655 80.9 81.9 48.0-135 1.27 20
1-Methylnaphthalene 0.0800 0.0717 0.0723 89.7 90.3 52.0-122 0.720 20
2-Methylnaphthalene 0.0800 0.0683 0.0685 85.4 85.6 52.0-120 0.270 20
2-Chloronaphthalene 0.0800 0.0644 0.0639 80.5 79.9 50.0-120 0.720 20
(S) Nitrobenzene-d5 87.5 83.0 14.0-149
(S) 2-Fluorobiphenyl 87.6 85.4 34.0-125
(S) p-Terphenyl-d14 75.7 72.7 23.0-120
L914302-25 Original Sample (OS) • Matrix Spike (MS) • Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD)
(OS) L914302-25 06/15/17 04:57 • (MS) R3226031-4 06/15/17 05:18 • (MSD) R3226031-5 06/15/17 05:39
Spike Amount
(dry)
Original Result
(dry)MS Result (dry)MSD Result
(dry)MS Rec.MSD Rec.Dilution Rec. Limits MS Qualifier MSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Anthracene 0.0897 U 0.0566 0.0600 63.1 66.9 1 20.0-136 5.90 24
Acenaphthene 0.0897 U 0.0612 0.0622 68.2 69.3 1 29.0-124 1.71 20
Acenaphthylene 0.0897 U 0.0627 0.0642 69.9 71.6 1 35.0-120 2.37 20
Benzo(a)anthracene 0.0897 U 0.0521 0.0547 58.0 60.9 1 13.0-132 4.85 27
Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0897 U 0.0510 0.0544 56.8 60.6 1 14.0-138 6.57 27
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.0897 U 0.0475 0.0496 52.9 55.3 1 10.0-129 4.40 31
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.0897 U 0.0549 0.0575 61.2 64.1 1 10.0-133 4.71 30
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.0897 U 0.0537 0.0589 59.9 65.6 1 15.0-131 9.11 27
Chrysene 0.0897 U 0.0586 0.0625 65.3 69.6 1 15.0-137 6.37 25
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.0897 U 0.0555 0.0578 61.9 64.4 1 15.0-132 3.91 27
Fluoranthene 0.0897 U 0.0578 0.0586 64.5 65.3 1 13.0-139 1.29 28
Fluorene 0.0897 U 0.0594 0.0610 66.2 67.9 1 27.0-122 2.59 22
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.0897 U 0.0539 0.0565 60.0 62.9 1 11.0-133 4.78 29
Naphthalene 0.0897 U 0.0654 0.0661 72.8 73.7 1 18.0-136 1.11 21
Phenanthrene 0.0897 U 0.0542 0.0551 60.4 61.4 1 15.0-133 1.67 25
Pyrene 0.0897 U 0.0545 0.0562 60.8 62.7 1 11.0-146 3.07 29
1-Methylnaphthalene 0.0897 U 0.0694 0.0697 77.3 77.6 1 24.0-137 0.390 22
2-Methylnaphthalene 0.0897 U 0.0663 0.0660 73.8 73.6 1 23.0-136 0.340 22
2-Chloronaphthalene 0.0897 U 0.0612 0.0627 68.2 69.9 1 36.0-120 2.51 20
(S) Nitrobenzene-d5 79.8 82.2 14.0-149
(S) 2-Fluorobiphenyl 80.2 84.4 34.0-125
(S) p-Terphenyl-d14 66.1 71.3 23.0-120
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 46 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Abbreviations and Definitions
SDG Sample Delivery Group.
MDL Method Detection Limit.
MDL (dry)Method Detection Limit.
RDL (dry)Reported Detection Limit.
RDL Reported Detection Limit.
U Not detected at the Reporting Limit (or MDL where applicable).
RPD Relative Percent Difference.
(dry)Results are reported based on the dry weight of the sample. [this will only be present on a dry
report basis for soils].
Original Sample The non-spiked sample in the prep batch used to determine the Relative Percent Difference (RPD)
from a quality control sample. The Original Sample may not be included within the reported SDG.
(S)Surrogate (Surrogate Standard) - Analytes added to every blank, sample, Laboratory Control
Sample/Duplicate and Matrix Spike/Duplicate; used to evaluate analytical efficiency by measuring
recovery. Surrogates are not expected to be detected in all environmental media.
Rec.Recovery.
Qualifier Description
J The identification of the analyte is acceptable; the reported value is an estimate.
J1 Surrogate recovery limits have been exceeded; values are outside upper control limits.
J3 The associated batch QC was outside the established quality control range for precision.
J4 The associated batch QC was outside the established quality control range for accuracy.
J5 The sample matrix interfered with the ability to make any accurate determination; spike value is
high.
J6 The sample matrix interfered with the ability to make any accurate determination; spike value is
low.
O1 The analyte failed the method required serial dilution test and/or subsequent post-spike criteria.
These failures indicate matrix interference.
P RPD between the primary and confirmatory analysis exceeded 40%.
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 47 of 51
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.ACCREDITATIONS & LOCATIONS
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L914302 06/16/17 14:38 48 of 51
Our Locations
Alabama 40660
Alaska UST-080
Arizona AZ0612
Arkansas 88-0469
California 01157CA
Colorado TN00003
Conneticut PH-0197
Florida E87487
Georgia NELAP
Georgia 1 923
Idaho TN00003
Illinois 200008
Indiana C-TN-01
Iowa 364
Kansas E-10277
Kentucky 1 90010
Kentucky 2 16
Louisiana AI30792
Maine TN0002
Maryland 324
Massachusetts M-TN003
Michigan 9958
Minnesota 047-999-395
Mississippi TN00003
Missouri 340
Montana CERT0086
Nebraska NE-OS-15-05
Nevada TN-03-2002-34
New Hampshire 2975
New Jersey–NELAP TN002
New Mexico TN00003
New York 11742
North Carolina Env375
North Carolina 1 DW21704
North Carolina 2 41
North Dakota R-140
Ohio–VAP CL0069
Oklahoma 9915
Oregon TN200002
Pennsylvania 68-02979
Rhode Island 221
South Carolina 84004
South Dakota n/a
Tennessee 1 4 2006
Texas T 104704245-07-TX
Texas 5 LAB0152
A2LA – ISO 17025 1461.01
Canada 1461.01
EPA–Crypto TN00003
State Accreditations
Third Party & Federal Accreditations
ESC Lab Sciences is the only environmental laboratory accredited/certified to support your work nationwide from one location. One phone call, one point of contact, one laboratory. No other
lab is as accessible or prepared to handle your needs throughout the country. Our capacity and capability from our single location laboratory is comparable to the collective totals of the
network laboratories in our industry. The most significant benefit to our “one location” design is the design of our laboratory campus. The model is conducive to accelerated productivity,
decreasing turn-around time, and preventing cross contamination, thus protecting sample integrity. Our focus on premium quality and prompt service allows us to be YOUR LAB OF CHOICE.
ESC Lab Sciences has sixty-four client support centers that provide sample pickup and/or the delivery of sampling supplies. If you would like assistance from one of our support offices, please
contact our main office. ESC Lab Sciences performs all testing at our central laboratory.
1. Drinking Water 2. Underground Storage Tanks 3. Aquatic Toxicity 4.
Utah 6157585858
Vermont VT2006
Virginia 109
Washington C1915
West Virginia 233
Wisconsin 9980939910
Wyoming A2LA
AIHA-LAP,LLC 100789
DOD 1461.01
USDA S-67674
Chemical/Microbiological 5. Mold n/a Accreditation not applicable
1461.02A2LA – ISO 17025 5
* Not all certifications held by the laboratory are applicable to the results reported in the attached report.
ANALYTICAL REPORT
July 27, 2017
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA
Sample Delivery Group:L923795
Samples Received:07/20/2017
Project Number:
Description:10206 Orange Avenue
Report To:Tom McCloskey
420 Sycamore Valley Rd West
Danville, CA 94526
Entire Report Reviewed By:
July 27, 2017
[Preliminary Report]
Brian Ford
Technical Service Representative
Results relate only to the items tested or calibrated and are reported as rounded values. This test report shall not be
reproduced, except in full, without written approval of the laboratory. Where applicable, sampling conducted by ESC is
performed per guidance provided in laboratory standard operating procedures: 060302, 060303, and 060304.
12065 Lebanon Rd Mount Juliet, TN 37122 615-758-5858 800-767-5859 www.esclabsciences.com
July 27, 2017
Brian Ford
Technical Service Representative
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cp: Cover Page 1
Tc: Table of Contents 2
Ss: Sample Summary 3
Cn: Case Narrative 7
Sr: Sample Results 8
SS-1 L923795-01 8
SS-2 L923795-02 9
SS-3 L923795-03 10
SS-4 L923795-04 11
SS-5 L923795-05 12
SS-6 L923795-06 13
SS-7 L923795-07 14
SS-8 L923795-08 15
SS-9 L923795-09 16
SS-10 L923795-10 17
SS-11 L923795-11 18
SS-12 L923795-12 19
SS-13 L923795-13 20
BP-1 S.O. L923795-14 21
BP-1 L923795-15 22
BP-4 S.O. L923795-16 23
BP-5 L923795-17 24
BP-8 S.O. L923795-18 25
BP-10 S.O. L923795-19 26
AG-2/SURFACE C L923795-20 27
S.O. A5 L923795-21 28
S.O. A6 L923795-22 29
Qc: Quality Control Summary 30
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 30
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B 33
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 35
Gl: Glossary of Terms 37
Al: Accreditations & Locations 38
Sc: Chain of Custody 39
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 2 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 2 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE SUMMARY
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-1 L923795-01 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 11:35 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001306 1 07/21/17 10:34 07/21/17 10:42 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 14:52 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-2 L923795-02 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 11:37 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001306 1 07/21/17 10:34 07/21/17 10:42 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 14:40 CCE
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG1001896 1 07/26/17 00:28 07/26/17 12:41 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-3 L923795-03 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 11:49 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001306 1 07/21/17 10:34 07/21/17 10:42 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 14:55 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-4 L923795-04 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 11:52 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001306 1 07/21/17 10:34 07/21/17 10:42 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:02 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-5 L923795-05 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 11:54 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001306 1 07/21/17 10:34 07/21/17 10:42 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:09 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-6 L923795-06 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 11:57 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001306 1 07/21/17 10:34 07/21/17 10:42 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:11 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-7 L923795-07 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 12:00 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001306 1 07/21/17 10:34 07/21/17 10:42 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:14 CCE
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 3 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 3 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE SUMMARY
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-8 L923795-08 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 12:04 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001306 1 07/21/17 10:34 07/21/17 10:42 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:17 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-9 L923795-09 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 12:10 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001306 1 07/21/17 10:34 07/21/17 10:42 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:19 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-10 L923795-10 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 12:13 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001306 1 07/21/17 10:34 07/21/17 10:42 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:22 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-11 L923795-11 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 12:25 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001311 1 07/21/17 13:46 07/21/17 13:55 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:24 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-12 L923795-12 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 12:22 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001311 1 07/21/17 13:46 07/21/17 13:55 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:27 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
SS-13 L923795-13 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 12:16 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001311 1 07/21/17 13:46 07/21/17 13:55 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:29 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-1 S.O. L923795-14 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 11:40 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001311 1 07/21/17 13:46 07/21/17 13:55 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:37 CCE
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 4 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 4 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE SUMMARY
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-1 L923795-15 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 13:00 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001311 1 07/21/17 13:46 07/21/17 13:55 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:39 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-4 S.O. L923795-16 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 12:36 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001311 1 07/21/17 13:46 07/21/17 13:55 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:42 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-5 L923795-17 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 13:08 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001311 1 07/21/17 13:46 07/21/17 13:55 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:44 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-8 S.O. L923795-18 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 12:39 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001311 1 07/21/17 13:46 07/21/17 13:55 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:47 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
BP-10 S.O. L923795-19 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 12:02 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001311 1 07/21/17 13:46 07/21/17 13:55 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:50 CCE
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG1001896 1 07/26/17 00:28 07/26/17 12:56 VKS
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
AG-2/SURFACE C L923795-20 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 13:13 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001311 1 07/21/17 13:46 07/21/17 13:55 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1001949 1 07/26/17 14:54 07/27/17 15:52 CCE
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
S.O. A5 L923795-21 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 11:45 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001315 1 07/21/17 13:19 07/21/17 13:45 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1003083 1 07/26/17 18:19 07/27/17 17:24 CCE
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 WG1001896 1 07/26/17 00:28 07/26/17 13:10 VKS
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 5 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 5 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE SUMMARY
Collected by Collected date/time Received date/time
S.O. A6 L923795-22 Solid Chris Vertin 07/18/17 11:47 07/20/17 08:45
Method Batch Dilution Preparation Analysis Analyst
date/time date/time
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 WG1001315 1 07/21/17 13:19 07/21/17 13:45 MLW
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B WG1003083 1 07/26/17 18:19 07/27/17 17:32 CCE
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 6 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 6 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.CASE NARRATIVE
All sample aliquots were received at the correct temperature, in the proper containers, with the
appropriate preservatives, and within method specified holding times. All MDL (LOD) and RDL (LOQ)
values reported for environmental samples have been corrected for the dilution factor used in the
analysis. All Method and Batch Quality Control are within established criteria except where addressed
in this case narrative, a non-conformance form or properly qualified within the sample results. By my
digital signature below, I affirm to the best of my knowledge, all problems/anomalies observed by the
laboratory as having the potential to affect the quality of the data have been identified by the
laboratory, and no information or data have been knowingly withheld that would affect the quality of the
data.
[Preliminary Report]
Brian Ford
Technical Service Representative
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 7 of 41
Brian Ford
Technical Service Representative
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 7 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 01
L923795
SS-1
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 11:35
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 59.8 1 07/21/2017 10:42 WG1001306
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 101 0.318 0.837 1 07/27/2017 14:52 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 8 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 8 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 02
L923795
SS-2
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 11:37
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 93.5 1 07/21/2017 10:42 WG1001306
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 6.73 0.695 2.14 1 07/27/2017 14:40 WG1001949
Lead 46.4 0.203 0.535 1 07/27/2017 14:40 WG1001949
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00144 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Alpha BHC U 0.00145 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Beta BHC U 0.00171 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Delta BHC 0.00292 J 0.00153 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Gamma BHC U 0.00155 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Chlordane 1.59 0.0417 0.214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
4,4-DDD U 0.00167 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
4,4-DDE 0.153 0.00165 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
4,4-DDT 0.121 0.00214 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Dieldrin U 0.00163 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Endosulfan I U 0.00159 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Endosulfan II U 0.00171 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00162 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Endrin U 0.00168 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00138 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Endrin ketone U 0.00176 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00133 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Heptachlor U 0.00165 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0693 0.00172 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Methoxychlor 0.0345 P 0.00190 0.0214 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
Toxaphene 1.34 0.0385 0.428 1 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 78.2 10.0-148 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 68.5 21.0-146 07/26/2017 12:41 WG1001896
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 9 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 9 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 03
L923795
SS-3
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 11:49
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 94.6 1 07/21/2017 10:42 WG1001306
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 107 0.201 0.529 1 07/27/2017 14:55 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 10 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 10 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 04
L923795
SS-4
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 11:52
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 94.1 1 07/21/2017 10:42 WG1001306
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 525 0.202 0.531 1 07/27/2017 15:02 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 11 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 11 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 05
L923795
SS-5
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 11:54
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 95.9 1 07/21/2017 10:42 WG1001306
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 201 0.198 0.521 1 07/27/2017 15:09 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 12 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 12 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 06
L923795
SS-6
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 11:57
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 99.0 1 07/21/2017 10:42 WG1001306
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 716 0.192 0.505 1 07/27/2017 15:11 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 13 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 13 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 07
L923795
SS-7
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 12:00
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 98.1 1 07/21/2017 10:42 WG1001306
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 270 0.194 0.510 1 07/27/2017 15:14 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 14 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 14 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 08
L923795
SS-8
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 12:04
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 93.1 1 07/21/2017 10:42 WG1001306
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 11.5 0.698 2.15 1 07/27/2017 15:17 WG1001949
Lead 64.7 0.204 0.537 1 07/27/2017 15:17 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 15 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 15 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 09
L923795
SS-9
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 12:10
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 97.9 1 07/21/2017 10:42 WG1001306
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 11.3 0.664 2.04 1 07/27/2017 15:19 WG1001949
Lead 94.8 0.194 0.511 1 07/27/2017 15:19 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 16 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 16 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 10
L923795
SS-10
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 12:13
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 97.7 1 07/21/2017 10:42 WG1001306
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 9.45 0.665 2.05 1 07/27/2017 15:22 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 17 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 17 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 11
L923795
SS-11
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 12:25
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 98.4 1 07/21/2017 13:55 WG1001311
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 3.99 0.661 2.03 1 07/27/2017 15:24 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 18 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 18 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 12
L923795
SS-12
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 12:22
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 97.2 1 07/21/2017 13:55 WG1001311
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 1.28 J 0.669 2.06 1 07/27/2017 15:27 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 19 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 19 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 13
L923795
SS-13
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 12:16
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 96.5 1 07/21/2017 13:55 WG1001311
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 2.55 0.673 2.07 1 07/27/2017 15:29 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 20 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 20 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 14
L923795
BP-1 S.O.
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 11:40
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 68.7 1 07/21/2017 13:55 WG1001311
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 108 0.276 0.728 1 07/27/2017 15:37 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 21 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 21 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 15
L923795
BP-1
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 13:00
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 94.1 1 07/21/2017 13:55 WG1001311
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 4.17 0.202 0.531 1 07/27/2017 15:39 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 22 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 22 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 16
L923795
BP-4 S.O.
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 12:36
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 97.2 1 07/21/2017 13:55 WG1001311
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 28.2 0.195 0.514 1 07/27/2017 15:42 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 23 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 23 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 17
L923795
BP-5
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 13:08
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 95.1 1 07/21/2017 13:55 WG1001311
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 7.41 0.200 0.526 1 07/27/2017 15:44 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 24 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 24 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 18
L923795
BP-8 S.O.
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 12:39
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 97.4 1 07/21/2017 13:55 WG1001311
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 169 0.195 0.514 1 07/27/2017 15:47 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 25 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 25 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 19
L923795
BP-10 S.O.
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 12:02
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 96.5 1 07/21/2017 13:55 WG1001311
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 67.1 0.197 0.518 1 07/27/2017 15:50 WG1001949
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00140 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Alpha BHC U 0.00141 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Beta BHC U 0.00166 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Delta BHC U 0.00148 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Gamma BHC U 0.00150 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Chlordane U 0.0404 0.207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
4,4-DDD 0.00411 J 0.00162 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
4,4-DDE 0.275 0.00160 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
4,4-DDT 0.127 0.00207 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Dieldrin 0.00194 J 0.00158 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Endosulfan I U 0.00154 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Endosulfan II U 0.00166 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00157 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Endrin U 0.00163 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00134 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Endrin ketone U 0.00171 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00129 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Heptachlor U 0.00160 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00167 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Methoxychlor U 0.00185 0.0207 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
Toxaphene U 0.0373 0.415 1 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 73.0 10.0-148 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 75.7 21.0-146 07/26/2017 12:56 WG1001896
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 26 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 26 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 20
L923795
AG-2/SURFACE C
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 13:13
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 94.7 1 07/21/2017 13:55 WG1001311
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 1.10 J 0.686 2.11 1 07/27/2017 15:52 WG1001949
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 27 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 27 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 21
L923795
S.O. A5
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 11:45
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 88.4 1 07/21/2017 13:45 WG1001315
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Arsenic 2.81 0.735 2.26 1 07/27/2017 17:24 WG1003083
Lead 68.6 0.215 0.565 1 07/27/2017 17:24 WG1003083
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Aldrin U 0.00153 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Alpha BHC U 0.00154 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Beta BHC U 0.00181 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Delta BHC U 0.00162 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Gamma BHC U 0.00164 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Chlordane 0.170 J 0.0441 0.226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
4,4-DDD U 0.00176 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
4,4-DDE 0.0316 0.00174 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
4,4-DDT 0.0152 J 0.00226 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Dieldrin 0.00822 J 0.00172 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Endosulfan I U 0.00169 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Endosulfan II U 0.00181 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00171 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Endrin U 0.00178 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00146 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Endrin ketone U 0.00187 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00140 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Heptachlor U 0.00174 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0134 J 0.00182 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Methoxychlor 0.00491 J 0.00201 0.0226 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
Toxaphene U 0.0407 0.452 1 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 67.4 10.0-148 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 75.4 21.0-146 07/26/2017 13:10 WG1001896
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 28 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 28 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.SAMPLE RESULTS - 22
L923795
S.O. A6
Collected date/time: 07/18/17 11:47
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011
Result Qualifier Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte %date / time
Total Solids 96.6 1 07/21/2017 13:45 WG1001315
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B
Result (dry)Qualifier MDL (dry)RDL (dry)Dilution Analysis Batch
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg date / time
Lead 187 0.197 0.518 1 07/27/2017 17:32 WG1003083
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 29 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 29 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG1001306
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 L923795-01,02,03,04,05,06,07,08,09,10
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3235451-1 07/21/17 10:42
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte %%%
Total Solids 0.000500
L923795-10 Original Sample (OS) • Duplicate (DUP)
(OS) L923795-10 07/21/17 10:42 • (DUP) R3235451-3 07/21/17 10:42
Original Result DUP Result Dilution DUP RPD DUP Qualifier DUP RPD Limits
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 97.7 97.4 1 0.262 5
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)
(LCS) R3235451-2 07/21/17 10:42
Spike Amount LCS Result LCS Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 50.0 50.0 100 85.0-115
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 30 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 30 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG1001311
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 L923795-11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3235458-1 07/21/17 13:55
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte %%%
Total Solids 0.00140
L923795-11 Original Sample (OS) • Duplicate (DUP)
(OS) L923795-11 07/21/17 13:55 • (DUP) R3235458-3 07/21/17 13:55
Original Result DUP Result Dilution DUP RPD DUP Qualifier DUP RPD Limits
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 98.4 98.3 1 0.0445 5
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)
(LCS) R3235458-2 07/21/17 13:55
Spike Amount LCS Result LCS Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 50.0 50.0 100 85.0-115
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 31 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 31 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG1001315
Total Solids by Method 2540 G-2011 L923795-21,22
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3235457-1 07/21/17 13:45
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte %%%
Total Solids 0.00130
L923807-03 Original Sample (OS) • Duplicate (DUP)
(OS) L923807-03 07/21/17 13:45 • (DUP) R3235457-3 07/21/17 13:45
Original Result DUP Result Dilution DUP RPD DUP Qualifier DUP RPD Limits
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 81.9 83.4 1 1.82 5
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)
(LCS) R3235457-2 07/21/17 13:45
Spike Amount LCS Result LCS Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier
Analyte %%%%
Total Solids 50.0 50.0 100 85.0-115
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 32 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 32 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG1001949
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B L923795-01,02,03,04,05,06,07,08,09,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3236734-1 07/27/17 14:33
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
Arsenic U 0.65 2.00
Lead U 0.19 0.500
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) • Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)
(LCS) R3236734-2 07/27/17 14:36 • (LCSD) R3236734-3 07/27/17 14:38
Spike Amount LCS Result LCSD Result LCS Rec.LCSD Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier LCSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Arsenic 100 102 97.2 102 97 80-120 5 20
Lead 100 102 97.8 102 98 80-120 4 20
L923795-02 Original Sample (OS) • Matrix Spike (MS) • Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD)
(OS) L923795-02 07/27/17 14:40 • (MS) R3236734-6 07/27/17 14:47 • (MSD) R3236734-7 07/27/17 14:50
Spike Amount
(dry)
Original Result
(dry)MS Result (dry)MSD Result
(dry)MS Rec.MSD Rec.Dilution Rec. Limits MS Qualifier MSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Arsenic 107 6.73 114 110 100 96 1 75-125 4 20
Lead 107 46.4 157 156 103 102 1 75-125 1 20
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 33 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 33 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG1003083
Metals (ICP) by Method 6010B L923795-21,22
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3236804-8 07/27/17 17:02
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
Arsenic U 0.65 2.00
Lead U 0.19 0.500
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) • Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)
(LCS) R3236804-9 07/27/17 17:04 • (LCSD) R3236804-10 07/27/17 17:07
Spike Amount LCS Result LCSD Result LCS Rec.LCSD Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier LCSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Arsenic 100 99.2 98.9 99 99 80-120 0 20
Lead 100 100 99.9 100 100 80-120 0 20
L923771-10 Original Sample (OS) • Matrix Spike (MS) • Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD)
(OS) L923771-10 07/27/17 17:09 • (MS) R3236804-13 07/27/17 17:17 • (MSD) R3236804-14 07/27/17 17:19
Spike Amount Original Result MS Result MSD Result MS Rec.MSD Rec.Dilution Rec. Limits MS Qualifier MSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Arsenic 100 ND 93.7 93.5 92 92 1 75-125 0 20
Lead 100 26.6 124 125 97 99 1 75-125 1 20
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 34 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 34 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG1001896
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 L923795-02,19,21
Method Blank (MB)
(MB) R3236620-3 07/26/17 11:43
MB Result MB Qualifier MB MDL MB RDL
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg
Aldrin U 0.00135 0.0200
Alpha BHC U 0.00136 0.0200
Beta BHC U 0.00160 0.0200
Delta BHC U 0.00143 0.0200
Gamma BHC U 0.00145 0.0200
4,4-DDD U 0.00156 0.0200
4,4-DDE U 0.00154 0.0200
4,4-DDT U 0.00200 0.0200
Dieldrin U 0.00152 0.0200
Endosulfan I U 0.00149 0.0200
Endosulfan II U 0.00160 0.0200
Endosulfan sulfate U 0.00151 0.0200
Endrin U 0.00157 0.0200
Endrin aldehyde U 0.00129 0.0200
Endrin ketone U 0.00165 0.0200
Heptachlor U 0.00154 0.0200
Heptachlor epoxide U 0.00161 0.0200
Hexachlorobenzene U 0.00124 0.0200
Methoxychlor U 0.00178 0.0200
Chlordane U 0.0390 0.200
Toxaphene U 0.0360 0.400
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 84.4 10.0-148
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 76.7 21.0-146
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) • Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)
(LCS) R3236620-1 07/26/17 11:14 • (LCSD) R3236620-2 07/26/17 11:29
Spike Amount LCS Result LCSD Result LCS Rec.LCSD Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier LCSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Aldrin 0.0667 0.0485 0.0542 72.7 81.2 55.0-137 11.1 29
Alpha BHC 0.0667 0.0465 0.0526 69.8 78.9 55.0-136 12.3 28
Beta BHC 0.0667 0.0454 0.0507 68.1 76.0 53.0-133 11.0 28
Delta BHC 0.0667 0.0462 0.0517 69.2 77.5 53.0-139 11.2 29
Gamma BHC 0.0667 0.0469 0.0525 70.4 78.7 54.0-136 11.2 29
4,4-DDD 0.0667 0.0489 0.0546 73.4 81.9 51.0-141 10.9 29
4,4-DDE 0.0667 0.0460 0.0531 69.0 79.6 53.0-142 14.2 30
4,4-DDT 0.0667 0.0497 0.0555 74.5 83.3 47.0-143 11.1 30
Dieldrin 0.0667 0.0486 0.0542 72.9 81.2 54.0-141 10.8 29
Endosulfan I 0.0667 0.0478 0.0532 71.6 79.8 54.0-141 10.7 29
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 35 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 35 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.QUALITY CONTROL SUMMARYWG1001896
Pesticides (GC) by Method 8081 L923795-02,19,21
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) • Laboratory Control Sample Duplicate (LCSD)
(LCS) R3236620-1 07/26/17 11:14 • (LCSD) R3236620-2 07/26/17 11:29
Spike Amount LCS Result LCSD Result LCS Rec.LCSD Rec.Rec. Limits LCS Qualifier LCSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Endosulfan II 0.0667 0.0467 0.0514 70.0 77.1 53.0-140 9.68 28
Endosulfan sulfate 0.0667 0.0468 0.0512 70.2 76.7 52.0-141 8.88 29
Endrin 0.0667 0.0496 0.0552 74.4 82.7 52.0-137 10.6 29
Endrin aldehyde 0.0667 0.0413 0.0391 61.9 58.7 30.0-127 5.35 31
Endrin ketone 0.0667 0.0585 0.0647 87.7 97.0 51.0-139 10.1 28
Heptachlor 0.0667 0.0487 0.0543 73.0 81.5 53.0-144 11.0 29
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0667 0.0471 0.0524 70.6 78.5 54.0-137 10.7 28
Hexachlorobenzene 0.0667 0.0437 0.0489 65.5 73.4 50.0-135 11.4 28
Methoxychlor 0.0667 0.0542 0.0595 81.3 89.2 49.0-145 9.27 29
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 80.5 86.0 10.0-148
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 73.3 78.5 21.0-146
L923069-08 Original Sample (OS) • Matrix Spike (MS) • Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD)
(OS) L923069-08 07/26/17 15:06 • (MS) R3236620-4 07/26/17 16:48 • (MSD) R3236620-5 07/26/17 17:02
Spike Amount
(dry)
Original Result
(dry)MS Result (dry)MSD Result
(dry)MS Rec.MSD Rec.Dilution Rec. Limits MS Qualifier MSD Qualifier RPD RPD Limits
Analyte mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg %%%%%
Aldrin 0.0883 U 0.0567 0.0762 64.2 86.3 1 19.0-152 J3 29.3 24
Alpha BHC 0.0883 U 0.0570 0.0760 64.5 86.2 1 39.0-152 J3 28.7 21
Beta BHC 0.0883 U 0.0557 0.0745 63.1 84.4 1 38.0-150 J3 28.9 20
Delta BHC 0.0883 U 0.0557 0.0742 63.1 84.1 1 34.0-155 J3 28.5 21
Gamma BHC 0.0883 U 0.0570 0.0764 64.6 86.6 1 38.0-153 J3 29.0 21
4,4-DDD 0.0883 U 0.0640 0.0869 72.5 98.5 1 22.0-160 J3 30.4 25
4,4-DDE 0.0883 U 0.0538 0.0735 61.0 83.3 1 10.0-160 J3 30.9 27
4,4-DDT 0.0883 U 0.0436 0.0649 49.4 73.6 1 10.0-160 J3 39.3 28
Dieldrin 0.0883 U 0.0580 0.0787 65.7 89.2 1 30.0-158 J3 30.4 25
Endosulfan I 0.0883 U 0.0572 0.0773 64.8 87.6 1 31.0-155 J3 29.9 25
Endosulfan II 0.0883 U 0.0567 0.0777 64.3 88.0 1 32.0-156 J3 31.2 25
Endosulfan sulfate 0.0883 U 0.0564 0.0782 63.9 88.6 1 31.0-158 J3 32.5 24
Endrin 0.0883 U 0.0582 0.0793 65.9 89.8 1 30.0-149 J3 30.6 25
Endrin aldehyde 0.0883 U 0.0539 0.0742 61.0 84.1 1 20.0-157 J3 31.8 26
Endrin ketone 0.0883 U 0.0657 0.0925 74.4 105 1 32.0-154 J3 33.9 23
Heptachlor 0.0883 U 0.0566 0.0755 64.1 85.5 1 18.0-160 J3 28.5 23
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0883 U 0.0563 0.0753 63.8 85.4 1 31.0-154 J3 28.9 25
Hexachlorobenzene 0.0883 U 0.0513 0.0682 58.1 77.3 1 26.0-146 J3 28.3 21
Methoxychlor 0.0883 U 0.0511 0.0745 57.9 84.4 1 10.0-160 J3 37.3 27
(S) Decachlorobiphenyl 45.8 62.2 10.0-148
(S) Tetrachloro-m-xylene 55.3 71.2 21.0-146
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 36 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 36 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Abbreviations and Definitions
SDG Sample Delivery Group.
MDL Method Detection Limit.
MDL (dry)Method Detection Limit.
RDL (dry)Reported Detection Limit.
RDL Reported Detection Limit.
U Not detected at the Reporting Limit (or MDL where applicable).
RPD Relative Percent Difference.
(dry)Results are reported based on the dry weight of the sample. [this will only be present on a dry
report basis for soils].
Original Sample The non-spiked sample in the prep batch used to determine the Relative Percent Difference (RPD)
from a quality control sample. The Original Sample may not be included within the reported SDG.
(S)Surrogate (Surrogate Standard) - Analytes added to every blank, sample, Laboratory Control
Sample/Duplicate and Matrix Spike/Duplicate; used to evaluate analytical efficiency by measuring
recovery. Surrogates are not expected to be detected in all environmental media.
Rec.Recovery.
Qualifier Description
J The identification of the analyte is acceptable; the reported value is an estimate.
J3 The associated batch QC was outside the established quality control range for precision.
P RPD between the primary and confirmatory analysis exceeded 40%.
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 37 of 41
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 37 of 41
ONE LAB. NATIONWIDE.ACCREDITATIONS & LOCATIONS
1 Cp
2 Tc
3 Ss
4 Cn
5 Sr
6 Qc
7 Gl
8 Al
9 Sc
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 18:51 38 of 41
Our Locations
Alabama 40660
Alaska UST-080
Arizona AZ0612
Arkansas 88-0469
California 01157CA
Colorado TN00003
Conneticut PH-0197
Florida E87487
Georgia NELAP
Georgia 1 923
Idaho TN00003
Illinois 200008
Indiana C-TN-01
Iowa 364
Kansas E-10277
Kentucky 1 90010
Kentucky 2 16
Louisiana AI30792
Maine TN0002
Maryland 324
Massachusetts M-TN003
Michigan 9958
Minnesota 047-999-395
Mississippi TN00003
Missouri 340
Montana CERT0086
Nebraska NE-OS-15-05
Nevada TN-03-2002-34
New Hampshire 2975
New Jersey–NELAP TN002
New Mexico TN00003
New York 11742
North Carolina Env375
North Carolina 1 DW21704
North Carolina 2 41
North Dakota R-140
Ohio–VAP CL0069
Oklahoma 9915
Oregon TN200002
Pennsylvania 68-02979
Rhode Island 221
South Carolina 84004
South Dakota n/a
Tennessee 1 4 2006
Texas T 104704245-07-TX
Texas 5 LAB0152
A2LA – ISO 17025 1461.01
Canada 1461.01
EPA–Crypto TN00003
State Accreditations
Third Party & Federal Accreditations
ESC Lab Sciences is the only environmental laboratory accredited/certified to support your work nationwide from one location. One phone call, one point of contact, one laboratory. No other
lab is as accessible or prepared to handle your needs throughout the country. Our capacity and capability from our single location laboratory is comparable to the collective totals of the
network laboratories in our industry. The most significant benefit to our “one location” design is the design of our laboratory campus. The model is conducive to accelerated productivity,
decreasing turn-around time, and preventing cross contamination, thus protecting sample integrity. Our focus on premium quality and prompt service allows us to be YOUR LAB OF CHOICE.
ESC Lab Sciences has sixty-four client support centers that provide sample pickup and/or the delivery of sampling supplies. If you would like assistance from one of our support offices, please
contact our main office. ESC Lab Sciences performs all testing at our central laboratory.
1. Drinking Water 2. Underground Storage Tanks 3. Aquatic Toxicity 4.
Utah 6157585858
Vermont VT2006
Virginia 109
Washington C1915
West Virginia 233
Wisconsin 9980939910
Wyoming A2LA
AIHA-LAP,LLC 100789
DOD 1461.01
USDA S-67674
Chemical/Microbiological 5. Mold n/a Accreditation not applicable
1461.02A2LA – ISO 17025 5
* Not all certifications held by the laboratory are applicable to the results reported in the attached report.
ACCOUNT:PROJECT:SDG:DATE/TIME:PAGE:
McCloskey Consulting - Danville, CA L923795 07/27/17 19:04 38 of 41
Appendix B
B ackground Arsenic
0"
5"
10"
15"
20"
25"
0"5"10"15"20"25"30"Arsenic(Concentra-on(Sample(Number(
Orange(Ave(Arsenic(Data(
Background
Arsenic
Calculation
10206
Orange
Avenue
Cupertino,
California
Figure
B-‐1
cc(Concentrations
in
mg/kg)
Approximate
Break
in
Trend
Line
at
13
mg/kg
Appendix C
Health and Safety Plan
SITE SAFETY PLAN FOR SAMPLING
1
Project Name: 10206 Orange Avenue Date: 08/11/17
Anyone who enters a hazardous waste site must recognize and understand the potential hazards to
health and safety associated with the cleanup/investigation of that site. Personnel actively involved in
the field project must he thoroughly familiar with program and procedures contained in this SSP. This
SSP must be available on-site when performing fieldwork. Periodic inspections may be made to evaluate
if proper safety measures are being followed. In addition, a copy of the SSP must be kept in the job file.
Site Description
Client Contact: Mr. Thomas Adamo
Telephone Number: (650)279-3905
Site Location: 10206 Orange Avenue, Cupertino, California
Site Type (Check if Applicable): Residential ☐ Commercial ☐ Industrial
☐ Undeveloped ☐ Other
Notable Features:
Site Background: The Site is currently improved with a small home, garage, shed and another
small building used as a studio rental that date back to at least the 1940’s . Remedial activities
will take place around the three existing structures, along the northern and northeastern portion
of the Site and the center portion of the Site.
Organizational Structure
Project Manager: Tom McCloskey Site Safety Officer: Chris Vertin
Field Personnel: Chris Vertin Phone Number (925) 895-6628
Regulatory Agency Contact: Phone Number:
All of the above personnel have had 40-hour OSHA training and Project Leader has had 8-hour
Supervisory training.
Work Plan* (check if applicable)
Objective of the proposed work: Remediation of contaminated soil around the Site.
The following would be performed during this project:
Excavation / Trenching
☐ Drilling / Soil Boring
☐ Monitoring Well Installation
☐ Well Gauging
☐ Well Development
☐ Groundwater Sampling
Soil Sampling
☐ Soil Vapor Sampling
☐ Remediation System Installation
☐ Other(s)
2
Chemical Hazards (check if applicable)
Chemical hazards possibly to be on-site in soils and/or groundwater are as follows:
Symptoms of Over-Exposure
☐ Gasoline - Skin irritant, disturbance of eyes. Deep burning in the throat and respiratory tract
and bronchopneumonia. Repeated or chronic dermal contact may result in
drying of the skin, lesions, and other dermalogic conditions.
☐ Diesel - Irritation to skin. Prolonged breathing at high vapor concentrations can effect
central nervous system.
☐ Benzene - Irritation of the eyes, nose, and respiratory system. Headache, giddiness, fatigue,
anorexia, staggered gait, and dermatitis.
☐ Ethylbenzene - Irritation of eyes and mucous membranes, headache, dermatitis, narcosis, and
coma.
☐ Toluene - Irritation of eyes and mucous membranes, headache, dermatitis, narcosis, and
coma.
☐ Xylenes - Dizziness, excitement, drowsiness, staggering gait, irritation of eyes, nose, and
throat, nausea, vomiting, and dermatitis.
Arsenic - Irritation of the skin, possible dermatitis, respiratory distress, diarrhea, kidney
damage, muscular tremors, seizure; possible gastrointestinal tract and
reproductive effects, and possible liver damage.
Lead - Weakness, insomnia, constipation, abdominal pain, colic, anemia, paralysis of the
wrists and ankles, encephalopathy, kidney disease, irritation of the eyes, and
hypotension.
☐ Asbestos - NOA Difficulty breathing, interstitial fibrosis, restricted pulmonary effects, finger
clubbing, and irritation of the eyes.
Chlordane - Blurred vision, conjunctivitis, ataxia, delirium, coughing, abdominal pains,
nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, irritability, and convolutions.
Dieldrin - Headache, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, sweating, myoclonic limb jerks, clonic and
tonic convulsions, and coma.
☐ Total DDT - Irritation of the eyes and skin, paresthesia of the tongue, lips, and face, dizziness,
confusion, headache, fatigue, convulsions, and paresis of the hands
Toxaphene - Convulsions were experienced by some people who accidentally or intentionally
swallowed large amounts of toxaphene. Toxaphene temporarily damages the
liver and kidneys (swollen kidneys have been observed) and negatively effects
the immune system.
☐ DCE - Irritation of eyes and respiratory system, and depression of the central nervous
system.
☐ TCA - Irritation of the eyes, skin, nose, throat, and respiratory system, coughing,
dyspnea, delayed pulmonary edema, eye and skin burns, dermatitis, salivation,
vomiting, and diarrhea.
3
☐ TCE - Irritation of the eyes and skin, headaches, vertigo, giddiness, sleepiness, nausea,
vomiting, dermatitis, cardiac arrhythmia, paresthesia, and liver injury.
☐ H2S Irritation of the eyes and respiratory system, apnea, coma, convolutions,
conjunctivitis, eye pain, lacrimation, photophobia, corneal vesiculation, dizziness,
headaches, fatigue, irritability, insomnia, and gastrointestinal disturbance.
☐ PCBs The most commonly observed health effects in people exposed to extremely high
levels of PCBs are skin conditions, such as chloracne and rashes . Common
symptoms included dermal and ocular lesions, irregular menstrual cycles and
lowered immune responses. Other symptoms included fatigue, headaches,
coughs, and unusual skin sores.
☐ Dioxins
Short-term exposure of humans to high levels of dioxins may result in skin
lesions, such as chloracne and patchy darkening of the skin, and altered liver
function. Long-term exposure is linked to impairment of the immune system, the
developing nervous system, the endocrine system and reproductive functions.
☐ PAHs
Eye irritation, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and confusion. Other symptoms to the
skin include irritation and inflammation.
Exposure to chemicals should be avoided through proper personal hygiene practices. Although some
chemicals can exhibit identifiable acute health effects these exposures are unlikely. Unless the chemical
exposure is excessive, it is unlikely that the exposure will be identifiable or exhibit the above symptoms
of over-exposure. If you think you have been exposed to a chemical notify your supervisor immediately.
If any of the above symptoms occur, please leave the site for a safe location immediately. First aid
should also he given immediately and the Project Manager and Site Safety Officer should be contacted.
If needed, emergency procedures should he followed.
Non-Chemical Hazards (check if applicable)
Non-chemical hazards known or suspected to be on-site are as follows:
Heavy Equipment Heavy equipment should he in good working order and operated by an
experienced and licensed person in accordance with recognized industry
standards. Keep safe distance from heavy machinery so that you would not be in
the path of a moving part if it were to swing suddenly. Always be aware of the
movements of machinery around you. Approach vehicles from the driver's side.
Make sure the vehicle operator sees you. Make eye contact. Personnel working
in the vicinity of construction equipment shall wear orange safety vests for
increased visibility, hard hat, and steel-toed boots at a minimum. Vehicles
should be equipped with a flag, beacon and/or hazard flashers should be
activated per the IIPP when working around heavy equipment.
Slip/Fall Hazards - Wet surfaces, inclines, or other obstacles that make movement on -site difficult;
good housekeeping shall be practiced and shoes with traction shall be worn.
☐ Noise - Excessive noise can make communication difficult or impossible; workers will be
required to wear earplugs for all operations involving the use of power or
pneumatic equipment that generates loud noise levels.
4
Heat/Cold Stress - Physical work in warm weather and/or the use of personal protective equipment
may induce heat issues symptoms including cramps, discomfort, and drowsiness,
resulting in impaired function; can lead to heat stroke and death. Cool drinking
water or other electrolyte replacing liquids shall be available on-site at all times.
Work breaks shall be given as necessary, based on temperature and monitoring
of workers.
☐ Vehicular Traffic - If the work area is in or near traffic areas where vehicular dangers are present,
on-sire workers shall wear orange safety vests or other suitable garments
marked with or made of reflectorized or high-visibility material. The work area
should he clearly marked using signs, barricades, temporary fencing, safety
cones, and/or caution tape. Flaggers are to be used to direct traffic if needed.
Excavation - Excavation areas present a danger of falling and cave-in. For excavations of less
than 5 feet in depth, follow general exca vation safety protocols. Never leave
open excavations unmarked. If possible, avoid entering any excavation. If entry is
necessary and the excavation is greater than 5 feet in depth (even if it is shored),
an OSHA excavation permit must he obtained and a separate excavation safety
plan shall be prepared
Underground
Utilities -
Subsurface utilities are within the work area and may b e encountered during
drilling or any subsurface exploration. Utility companies or owners must he
contacted and asked to determine the location of the underground utility before
excavation. While the excavation is open, underground installations must be
protected, supported, or removed to protect employees. When utility companies
cannot respond to a request to locate underground utility installations, or cannot
establish the exact location of the installations, work may proceed with caution,
only upon approval by the Project Manager and Site Safety Officer. Use of
detection equipment or other methods of locating utility installations may be
additionally required. In an area with suspected underground utilities, all boring
locations must he hand probed to a minimum depth of 5 feet.
Please indicate the following were performed prior to work:
Underground Service Alert (USA)
☐ Private Utility Locator
Please indicate any concerns discussed with wither USA or the private utility
locator:
☐ No Concerns Identified
☐ Concerns (Please Describe Below)
Overhead Lines - Power and electrical lines are present within the work area. Extreme caution
should be used when overhead electrical power or other lines are present. Use of
equipment directly under or near lines should be avoided. If possible, the utility
company or owner should be contacted to temporary turn off line power or
reroute line the path during the course of work in that location.
☐ Lifting Hazards - Proper lifting technique should be used by bending at the knees and using the
legs for strength. Item being lifted should be held close to the body and back-
twisting motions should be avoided.
5
☐ 55-Gallon Drums
& Containers -
Caution should be used when handling drums and other heavy containers. During
movement, the integrity of the drums may be compromised. Drums or
containers on-site may be cracked, dented, or altered such that lids are not
securely attached. If needed, contents should be secured in another drum, or
drums should be placed in drum packers for further protection. Always use the
proper equipment, designed for the specific application, when handling and
moving heavy objects.
☐ High Crime Area - Any area in which one feels threatened or is known to be a high crime area.
Always be aware of your surroundings and never leave equipment unattended.
☐ Hot Surface - Surfaces on-site will be at extreme temperature conditions (i.e. asphalt). Caution
should be used around hot surfaces on-site, and steel-toed hoots should not be
worn when hot surfaces are present. All hot surface hazards should be marked
and taped-off to guard against accidental entry.
☐ Low Lighting
Conditions -
Time or location may introduce inadequately lit work areas. On-site work should
be concluded before dark. If work is anticipated to continue after dark, a light
tower should be used in appropriate areas, as directed by the Project Manager
and Site Safety Officer.
☐ Poisonous /
Dangerous
Animals & Insects
Including but not limited to snakes, wasps, dogs, cattle, etc. Use caution on -site
when dangerous animals and insects are suspected to be present. Avoid contact
when possible and if the situation becomes threatening, leave the site
immediately. If allergic to insect stings, always carry an anaphylactic shock kit.
☐ Confined Space - Any space that limits or constricts entry or exit; is not designed for continuous
employee occupancy; has unfavorable natural ventilation. Examples of possible
confined spaces include tanks, vessels, excavations, silos, storage bins, etc. For
all work in confined spaces, a separate confined space entry program and permit
must be established.
☐ Other -(Specify)
_____________
Emergency Notification
Local Police, 911 or if NA: (408) 868.6600 – Santa Clara County Sheriff Department - West Valley
Division - Non-Emergency Calls
State Police, 911 or if NA:
Fire, 911 or if NA : (408) 378-4010 (Main Administrative Headquarters) – Santa Clara County Fire
Department – Monta Vista Fire Station (Closest Station)
Ambulance, 911 or if NA:
6
Medical (Attach Map--Mandatory)
Nearest Hospital: El Camino Hospital – Emergency Room– 2500 Grant Road, Mountain View, CA
94040
Hospital Telephone Number: (650) 940-7055
Directions: See Attached Map
Local Regulatory Agencies: (For Reference)
San Francisco Bay Regional
Water Quality Control Board
Department of Toxic
Substances Control
Santa Clara County
Environmental Health Division
(510) 622-2300 (800) 728-9642 (408) 918-3400
Other:
Communications
☐ Two-Ways Radios Cellular Phone Verbal
Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
Appropriate on-site personnel have had the 40-hour OSHA class in Hazardous Waste Operations /
Emergency Response.
Level of Protective Equipment ☐ A ☐ B ☐ C D See PPE Below
The following PPE is required to be available on-site and is to be used on an as needed basis:
Hard Hat Safety Eye Wear (Type)
Safety Boots ☐ Respirator (Type)
Orange Vest Filter (Type)
Hearing Protection Gloves (Type) Nitrile
Tyvex Coverall ☐ Other
Monitoring Equipment On-Site
The following monitoring equipment is to be available on-site and is to be used on an as needed basis:
☐ Organic Vapor Meter ☐ Draeger Tube
☐ Oxygen Meter ☐ Passive Dosimeter
7
☐ Combustible Gas Meter ☐ Air Sampling Pump
☐ H2S Meter ☐ Filter Media
All field equipment shall be properly calibrated and functioning normally. If the equipment calibration
date is unknown, the equipment should be taken out of service until calibrated to manufacturers
specifications.
Site Control Procedures
All unauthorized persons shall be kept a safe distance form the work area. The work area shall be
denoted with fencing, barricades, cones, and/or barrier tape.
Decontamination
Unless notified otherwise by the Project Manager and/or Site Safety Officer.
Personnel: Wash with soap and water.
Equipment: All sampling equipment is to be cleaned with a steam cleaner or a liquinox solution and
distilled water prior to use at each sampling location.
Standard Safe Work Practices
1. Eating, drinking, chewing gum or tobacco, and smoking are prohibited in the contaminated or
potentially contaminated area where the possibility for the transfer of contaminants exists.
2. Avoid contact with potentially contaminated substances. Do not walk through puddles, pools,
mud, etc. Avoid, whenever possible, kneeling on the ground and leaning or sitting on equipment or
the ground. Do not place monitoring equipment on potential contaminated surfaces (i.e., ground,
etc.).
3. All field crew members should make use of their senses to alert them to potentially dangerous
situations in which they should not become involved (i.e, the presence of strong, irritating, or
nauseating odors).
4. Prevent spillage to the extent possible. In the event that a spill occurs, contain liquid if possible.
5. Prevent splashing of the contaminated materials.
6. Field crew members shall be familiar with the physical characteristics of the site, including:
• Wind direction in relation to work area contaminant location;
• Accessibility of other workers, equipment, vehicles;
• Communications;
• Exclusion zone (areas of known or suspected contamination);
• Site access;
• Nearest water source;
8
• The location of the nearest telephone;
• The location of the nearest medical facility.
7. The number of personnel and equipment in the contaminated area should be minimized, but only
to the extent consistent with workforce requirements for safe site operations.
8. Personal Protection Equipment must be used properly to their fullest extent.
9. For more information, please review (Injury and Illness Prevention Program).
Standard Site Safety Protocol
1. If the site is located in a neighborhood known for high crime (i.e. East Palo Alto, South-Central Los
Angeles, the Tenderloin in San Francisco, etc.) discuss personal protection, such as hiring of security
personnel, with your Project Manager.
2. Leave the site destination, including address and time expected to return with Project Manager. If
the Project Manager is not in the office, leave the information with another person who has
knowledge of the project.
3. Always take a radio or cellular phone along for quick communication. Keep the radio and/or
cellular phone on your person. (It will not do you any good in the truck).
4. Be aware of your surroundings and trust your instincts. Leave if you feel threatened.
5. Do not stay on-site alone after dark unless the Project Manager is aware.
6. If the site visit will take place in or near a high crime neighborhood, fill the vehicle with gasoline
prior to entering the area, take a map, drive with the doors locked, and avoid stopping in unfamiliar
areas.
7. While performing the site visit, keep the key readily accessible, and the vehicle nearby. If possible,
for quick access.
8. Do not carry large amounts of cash on your person and do not give any money to pan handlers as
this encourages others to approach you.
El Camino Hospital
Address: 2500 Grant Rd, Mountain View, CA 94040
Phone: (650) 940-7055
From the Site head North on Orange Ave towards Lomita Ave;
Turn RIGHT on Lomita Ave; Turn LEFT on Pasadena Ave;
Turn LEFT on Granada Ave; Turn RIGHT on Orange Ave
Turn LEFT onto Stevens Creek Blvd (0.8 miles);
Turn RIGHT on N. Foothill Blvd (1.1 miles);
Turn RIGHT onto Grant Rd (1.7 miles);
Turn LEFT on North Drive (0.1 miles);
Arrive at 2500 Grant Rd, Mountain View, CA 94040
Estimate Distance: 4.7 Miles
Map To The Nearest Hospital
10206 Orange Avenue
Cupertino, California
Health & Safety Plan
Figure C-1
N
W
E
S