San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area 

### APPENDIX D:

NO 2 

### Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements a nd Selection Process for the Bakersfield Core Based Statistical AreaSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area This page is intentionally blank.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-i NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction ...................................

................................................... ........................... 1

2. Site Selection Process ........................

................................................... .................... 2

2.1 Traffic Count Data ............................

................................................... ................... 2

2.1.1 AADT ........................................

................................................... ................... 2

2.1.2 AADTT .......................................

................................................... .................. 3

2.1.3 Fleet Mix....................................

................................................... ................... 3 2.1.4 Fleet Equivalent AADT .......................

................................................... .......... 3

2.1.5 Postmile ....................................

................................................... ................... 3 2.1.6 Traffic Congestion ..........................

................................................... .............. 4 2.2 Physical Characteristics of Near-Road Sites ...

................................................... ... 4 2.2.1 Roadway design or configuration and clear zon es .......................................... 4 2.2.2 Roadside structures and vegetation ..........

................................................... ... 7

2.2.3 Terrain .....................................

................................................... ..................... 7 2.2.4 Meteorology .................................

................................................... ................ 7 2.3 Spatial scales and population exposure ........

................................................... ..... 7 2.4 Safety ........................................

................................................... ......................... 8

3. Site Selections for Bakersfield CBSA ..........

................................................... ............ 8

3.1 Introduction ..................................

................................................... ....................... 8

3.2 Traffic Count Data ............................

................................................... ................... 9 3.2.1 Road Segment Ranking ........................

................................................... ....... 9 3.2.2 The top 10 road segments ....................

................................................... ..... 10 3.2.2.1 Segment 1: Bakersfield, California Ave . .............................................. 11 3.2.2.2 Segment 2: Bakersfield, Ming Ave ....... ................................................ 12 3.2.2.3 Segment 3: JCT RTE 58 East ............. ................................................ 12 3.2.2.4 Segment 4: Bakersfield, White Lane...... .............................................. 12 3.2.2.5 Segment 5: Buck Owens Blvd ............. ................................................ 12 3.2.2.7 Segment 7: Panama Lane .................

.................................................. 13 3.2.2.8 Segment 8: JCT. RTE. 99 North .......... ................................................ 14 3.2.2.9 Segment 9: Oil Junction ................

................................................... .... 15 3.2.2.10 Segment 10: Olive Drive ...............

................................................... .. 15 3.3 Meteorological Considerations..................

................................................... ........ 15 3.4 Terrain through Bakersfield CBSA ..............

................................................... ...... 16 3.5 Spatial scales and population exposure .......

................................................... ... 17San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-ii NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area 3.6 Correspondence with property owners ...........

................................................... .. 18

4.0 Final Site Selection ..........................

................................................... ..................... 18 Appendix A —Traffic Data Tables ...................

................................................... ........... 22 Appendix B—Site Details ...........................

................................................... ................ 24 Appendix C—Maps of Segments .......................

................................................... ........ 25 Segment 1 .........................................

................................................... ..................... 26 Segment 2 .........................................

................................................... ..................... 27 Segment 3 .........................................

................................................... ..................... 28 Segment 4 .........................................

................................................... ..................... 29 Segment 5 .........................................

................................................... ..................... 30 Segment 6 .........................................

................................................... ..................... 31 Segment 7 .........................................

................................................... ..................... 32 Segment 8 .........................................

................................................... ..................... 33 Segment 9 .........................................

................................................... ..................... 34 Segment 10 ........................................

................................................... .................... 35San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-iii NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1: Above Grade Road .......................

................................................... ............... 5 Figure 2: Below grade with up-slope ..............

................................................... ............. 5 Figure 3: At grade roadway .......................

................................................... .................. 6 Figure 4: Junction, interchange, on-ramp, and off- ramp............................................... .. 6 Table 1: Kern County Top Road Segments by Fleet E quivalent AADT 4 ..................... 10 Figures 5a and 5b: General location of the top 10 road segments in the Bakersfield CBSA. .............................................

................................................... ........................... 11 Figure 6: A sample site in Segment 7 that was not pursued because it was on the windward side of the freeway. .....................

................................................... ............... 14 Figures 7a through 7c: Wind Roses ................

................................................... .......... 15 Figure 8a: Map of the Bakersfield Metropolitan Area

.................................................. .. 17 Figure 8b: Map of the Interstate 5 – Freeway 99 JCT Area ........................................... 1 7 Figure 9: Final Section—2809 Unicorn Road ........

................................................... .... 19 Figure 10: Selected site located at 2809 Unicorn R oad in Segment 9 ......................... 20San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-iv NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area This page is intentionally blank.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-1 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area 1. Introduction

In 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) established a new 1-hour standard and new minimum monitoring requirements fo r nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ). Additionally, EPA promulgated new NO 2 monitoring network design requirements which consist of three distinct NO 2 air monitoring networks. The first network is the near-road monitoring network which is aimed at capturing the higher NO 2 concentrations that occur near roadways. The second network is the are a-wide monitoring network which will represent NO 2 concentrations characteristic of large neighborhood or urban areas. The third network, which is called the Regional Adm inistrator Required Monitoring Network, requires Regional Administrators to work w ith states to site a network of 40 NO 2 monitors throughout the nation in locations aimed a t protecting susceptible and vulnerable communities.

The monitoring requirements for the first two monit oring networks mentioned above for the new NO 2 1-hour standard are based upon the population of Co re Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs) as well as the annual average daily t raffic (AADT) counts. The intent of the NO 2 near-road network is placing the monitoring statio ns near major roads where maximum hourly NO 2 concentrations are expected. As noted in Section 4 .3 of Appendix D of 40 CFR Part 58, one microscale near-road NO 2 monitoring station is required in each CBSA with a population of 500,000 or more. Da ta such as traffic volumes, fleet mix, roadway design, traffic congestion patterns, a nd characteristics such as local terrain or topography, and meteorology are among th e criteria that must be considered when determining areas which have the highest NO 2 concentrations. Additionally, population exposure, near-road siting criteria, saf ety, surrounding land use, and other factors are also considered during the location sel ection process. NO 2 monitors that are required under this new standard are to be operatio nal by January 1, 2013; however EPA recently released a proposed rule that will mov e this date to January 1, 2017. To assist agencies with the siting selection process, EPA provided the Near-Road NO 2 Monitoring Technical Assistance Document (TAD) whic h outlines recommendations and ideas on how to successfully meet the revised NO 2 near-road monitoring requirements 1.

EPA requires air monitoring agencies to submit a re port which describes the site selection process for each NO 2 near-road monitoring station that will be establish ed. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution District (Dist rict) is required to install four nearroad air monitoring stations, one in each of the fo llowing CBSAs: Stockton, Modesto, Fresno, and Bakersfield. Accordingly, a report of the site selection process will be submitted by the District for each of the aforement ioned stations.

With considerable assistance provided by the Califo rnia Air Resources Board (CARB), the District carried out a detailed process of sele cting a site for a near-road monitoring

1 Near-Road NO 2 Monitoring Technical Assistance Document (TAD) – A document that provides state and local air agencies with recommendations and ideas on how to successfully implement near-road NO2 monitors in o rder to meet the NO 2 minimum monitoring requirements that were revised in 2010. http://www.epa.gov/ttnamti1/files/nearroad/NearRoad TAD.pdfSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-2 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area station in the Bakersfield CBSA. This report descr ibes the site selection process conducted by the District and CARB for the purpose of establishing a new NO 2 nearroad monitoring station.

2

. Site Selection Process

The District conducted a site selection process tha t involved assistance from the CARB in gathering traffic count data, and determining ca ndidate road segments and the positive and negative attributes of each. Road des ign, and wind direction associated with each road segment were also considered during the process. Once the acceptable land parcels were decided upon, a lease was negotia ted between the District and one of the property owners and the final site selection wa s made. In addition to following the guidance provided in the TAD, the District also con sidered PM2.5 so the site could potentially accommodate a PM2.5 monitor in the futu re.

2.1 Traffic Count Data

In order to determine the road segments that theore tically have the highest NO 2 concentrations, CARB and the District assessed all available traffic count data available from the California Department of Transportation (C altrans) for Kern County. The data included AADT, Fleet mix, FE-AADT, and congestion d ata. Following the guidance found in the TAD, the District and CARB used FE-AAD T to determine and rank the road segments.

2.1.1 AADT

Traffic counts represent AADT which is the total tr affic volume for one year divided by the number of days in the year. AADT usually depic ts the traffic volume along a given road segment. All traffic count figures listed inc lude traffic in both directions. Ahead AADT typically refers to traffic north and east of a traffic count location, and Back AADT typically refers to traffic south and west of a tra ffic location. To avoid overlapping data, the Ahead AADT was used in the District’s site sele ction process.

Caltrans typically collects traffic counts on freew ays. The majority of continuous traffic count sampling is conducted by moving the electroni c counting instruments from location to location throughout the state. Traffic counts are adjusted estimates of AADT which compensate for seasonal influence, weekly var iation, and other variables.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-3 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area 2.1.2 AADTT

Truck traffic is classified by the number of axles trucks have. For example, 11⁄2 -ton trucks with dual rear tires are included in the two -axle class but pickups and vans with only four tires are not. Annual average daily truc k traffic (AADTT) is the total truck traffic volume for one year divided by the number of days i n the year. Continuous truck count sampling consists of vehicle classification counts that are conducted throughout California. This program includes partial day and 24-hour counts on high volume, urban freeways, and 7-day counts on low volume, rural fre eways. Truck counts are adjusted estimates of AADTT which compensate for seasonal in fluence, weekly variation, and other variables.

2.1.3 Fleet Mix

Fleet mix pertains to a specific count or percentag e of the total volume of traffic and differentiates between light-duty (LD) vehicles and heavy-duty (HD) vehicles. Differences between LD and HD vehicles include the type of fuel they run on (gasoline vs. diesel), and the vehicle’s weight, length, or n umber of axles. NO 2 emissions vary for all vehicles depending on vehicle type; load, speed , and freeway grade, however, diesel fueled HD vehicles typically emit far higher amount s of NO 2 than do gasoline fueled LD vehicles. Fleet mix is important in determining wh ere the emission differences occur.

2.1.4 Fleet Equivalent AADT

FE-AADT is a metric 2 that accounts for total traffic volume and fleet m ix in order to compare road segments, especially when the amount o f total traffic volume and HD volume on those road segments varies. FE-AADT give s a better indication of estimated NO2 emissions than does AADT. The FE-AADT values shown in Table 1 below were determined using Ahead AADT and AADTT in the equati on below:

FE-AADT = (Ahead AADT – AADTT) + (AADTT*10)

This equation gives truck traffic 10 times the weig ht of non-truck traffic in determining rank because the NO 2 emissions are approximately 10 times as great as n on-truck traffic. The segments with the highest levels of N O 2 should be those with the greatest truck traffic.

2.1.5 Postmile

Caltrans has identified Postmile values as breakpoi nts on Freeways that usually increase from South to North or West to East depend ing on the direction the route follows within the county. Postmile values increas e from the beginning of the route to the next county line and then start over. The tota l AADT values shown in the tables below apply to the freeway immediately ahead of the Postmile.

2 For more information on the equation that defines F E-AADT, go to http://www.epa.gov/ttnamti1/files/nearroad/NearRoad TAD.pdf

.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-4 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area 2.1.6 Traffic Congestion

Traffic congestion can lead to stop-and-go traffic conditions and per-vehicle emissions may increase as a result. A notable and constant r eduction in speed between two points on a freeway is defined as a bottleneck. The congestion values shown the tables below are annual vehicle hourly delay (AVHD) in tho usand hours and represent the sum of the delay from the morning and evening peak peri ods and from the midday period.

2.2 Physical Characteristics of Near-Road Sites

The physical characteristics of candidate road segm ents must be considered in order to determine which segments are adequate for near-road monitor placement. The characteristics to be assessed and accounted for in clude roadway design, roadside structures and vegetation, terrain, and meteorology

. 2.2.1 Roadway design or configuration and clear zon es

Road design or configuration is important in determ ining acceptable locations for nearroad monitors because it can impact the dispersion and transport of pollutants. Road designs can be characterized as above-grade, below- grade, or at-grade. Additionally, road designs that contain features such as intercha nges and toll plazas can influence vehicle acceleration and deceleration rates which i n turn affect pollutant concentrations and plumes.

Above-grade or elevated road configurations can be open or have solid fill material beneath them (see Figure 1). Roads that are open u nderneath are subject to wind from all directions, increased dispersion, turbulence, a nd dilution of the air as it flows over and under the road. These affects can cause pollut ant concentrations to be lower downwind of the elevated roadway. Roads that are o ver solid fill material can have winds normal with the road and forces that keep the traffic plume near at the surface while others can cause the plume to loft above the ground when it meets the vertical filled material or wall beneath.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-5 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Figure 1: Above Grade Road

Roads that are configured below-grade can have vert ical or sloped walls that facilitate the funneling of air parallel to the road (see Figu re 2). As the air streams through the corridor it can cause pollutant plumes to loft and be carried away as the air flows through, up, and out of the below-grade roadway.

Figure 2: Below grade with up-slope

Roadways that are generally at the same elevation a s the immediate surrounding terrain are referred to as at-grade roadways (see F igure 3). Other than structures or obstacles near the roadside, at-grade roadways pose the least amount of impact on pollutant dispersion. As stated in the TAD, at-gra de or near at-grade roads are the most desirable road configurations for siting near-road monitors.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-6 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Figure 3: At grade roadway

As stated above, EPA requires that NO 2 near-road monitoring stations be placed in areas representative of high NO 2 levels. According to the TAD, road areas that go uphill or downhill, and roads that contain on-ramps and off-ramps, interchanges, or unique features such as toll plazas, and tunnel ent rances and exits should not be considered for NO 2 near-road monitor placement because they are desig ned for rapid vehicle accelerations and decelerations (see exampl es in Figure 4). These areas and road designs do not produce representative NO 2 concentrations. The most suitable place to locate an NO 2 near-road monitoring station is one that is at gra de with immediate flat surrounding terrain.

Figure 4: Junction, interchange, on-ramp, and off- rampSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-7 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Clear zones denote roadside areas that are availabl e to drivers who need to pull over and stop safely or regain control if a vehicle leav es the road. Such zones extend from the road’s outside traffic edge to an obstacle furt her off the road. The roadway’s traffic volume, design speeds, and the slope of the terrain adjacent to and beneath the roadway are used to determine the width of the clea r zone. Near-road monitoring stations are placed outside of clear zones.

2.2.2 Roadside structures and vegetation

Roadside structures such as sound walls or noise ba rriers can affect dispersion by blocking it or causing turbulence which can mix pol lutants. Roadside structures can channel pollutants downwind and inhibit or reduce n ormal dispersion along the roadway. Vegetation can also affect pollutant tran sport and dispersion by mixing and diluting air as it blows through the branches and l eaves of trees, and by blocking wind and slowing dispersion down. Additionally, polluta nt concentrations in traffic plumes can decrease when particulate pollutants get deposi ted onto the surfaces of branches and leaves. Locations that are void of roadside st ructures and vegetation are therefore more acceptable for near-road monitor placement.

2.2.3 Terrain

Local terrain can affect dispersion and pollutant t ransport so it is important to have a good understanding of the large scale terrain featu res that characterize the air basin when considering locations for near-road monitor pl acement. For example, valleys may be more susceptible to high NO 2 concentrations because the surrounding terrain and temperature inversions tend to inhibit dispersion w hereas open terrain areas allow for better air flow which can aid in lower pollutant co ncentrations.

2.2.4 Meteorology

The TAD states that evaluating historical meteorolo gical data can be helpful in determining locations that may be directly impacted by traffic emissions from particular road segments due to local winds. Understanding th e local meteorology can also indicate which side of a road segment may be more i mpacted by the traffic emissions. Research studies have shown that locations very clo se to the roadway on the downwind side of a given road segment can adequately capture peak pollutant concentrations.

2.3 Spatial scales and population exposure

40 CFR Part 58 Appendix D requires that the spatial scale of a NO 2 near-road air monitoring site be classed as a microscale site. M icroscale sites measure peak concentrations in an area with of a radius 100 mete rs. Concentrations decrease significantly as distance increases outside of this area. This being the case, EPA requires near-road monitoring stations to be placed as close as practicable but no further than 50 meters from the target road segment . Additionally, EPA requires that the sampling inlet be within 2 to 7 meters from the road’s surface.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-8 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area As specified in 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix D, Section 4.3.2(a)(1), state and local air monitoring agencies shall consider the potential fo r population exposure when making their final near-road monitoring site selections wh en there are multiple acceptable sites in the same ranked segment.

2.4 Safety

As specified in the TAD, NO 2 near-road monitoring stations must be safely sited for motorists traveling the roadway and for the monitor ing station operators. The sites are required to be safely and legally accessible to sta tion operators and pose no safety hazards to drivers as well as people walking or liv ing nearby. In addition, some sites will require the installation of permanent safety b arriers, such as guardrails.

3. Site Selections for Bakersfield CBSA

3.1 Introduction

As stated in Section 2.0 above, the District starte d with traffic count data to select the freeway segments that were to be considered for a s ite. Meteorology, terrain, road structures, parcels with locations acceptable for b uilding a site on, and landowner willingness to host a site on their property all pl ayed a role determining site selection. Since the segments were nearly continuo us the District looked at them as a whole, focusing on finding acceptable locations. I t quickly became apparent that the highest ranked segments in the urban core did not h ave any available land for constructing a site. These segments in central Bak ersfield were typically above or below grade with sound walls which prevented placem ent of the site close enough to the edge of the freeway to capture peak values. In fact, the District found that there are only a few locations along the top ten segments tha t could meet all of EPA’s siting criteria.

At this juncture, the District decided to contact a ll landowners of parcels with acceptable locations in the top ten segments and prioritize wo rking with the landowners who responded positively within the highest ranked segm ents before moving further down the list.

The District process in locating a NO 2 near-road site can be summed as follows:

• Rank all road segments

• Determine the top 10 segments

• Find locations were a site can be built (acceptabl e locations or parcels)

o Take into account meteorology, structures, obstacl es, grade, and other criteria.

o Take into account near-road exposure.

• Contact property owners by sending a letter

• Contact those property owners that are willing to work with us starting with those in the highest ranked segmentsSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-9 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area • Negotiate a lease with a willing property owner in the highest ranked segment

• Present site selection to the Governing Board for approval, and include the opportunity for public comments.

3.2 Traffic Count Data

Traffic count data determined which road segments w ould likely have the highest NO 2 concentrations in the Bakersfield CBSA. Because tr uck traffic accounts for the highest NO 2 emissions, the road segments were ranked by Fleet Equivalent Annual Average Truck Traffic (FE-AADT) counts. Areas that did not have recent truck traffic counts had to be estimated.

While the percentage of statewide annual vehicle ho urs of delay caused by traffic congestion is far less in the San Joaquin Valley th an in other areas of the state, the District included traffic congestion with the traff ic count data as per the requirements outlined in the TAD. Caltrans District 6, which in cludes the Bakersfield CBSA, has less than 2% of the statewide annual vehicle hours of de lay due to traffic congestion in the entire district. The highest ranking bottleneck lo cations where freeway speed dropped and remained below 60 mph are shown in Table 1 in b elow. Because so little traffic congestion occurs in the Bakersfield CBSA, congesti on did not factor into site selection.

3.2.1 Road Segment Ranking

After the traffic data was examined, each road segm ent was ranked by FE-AADT from the highest traffic count to the lowest for the CBS A. The list was narrowed to the top 30 road segments (see Appendix A) then reduced to the top 10 segments (see Table 1 below). District staff surveyed the areas within e ach segment, and identified which locations could support a near-road monitoring stat ion.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-10 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Table 1: Kern County Top Road Segments by Fleet E quivalent AADT 4

Route Postmile 5 Description Ahead AADT 1 AADT

Rank AADTT AADTT

Rank Congestion 2 FE AADT 6 FE

Rank

99 24.599 BAKERSFIELD,

CALIFORNIA AVE 132,000 2 28,188 1 385,692 1

99 22.604 BAKERSFIELD,

MING AVE 133,000 1 27,720 2 1 382,480 2

99 23.514 JCT. RTE. 58

EAST 129,000 3 23,400 3 339,600 3

99 21.082 BAKERSFIELD,

WHITE LANE 114,500 4 17,500 5 272,000 4

99 25.654 JCT. RTE. 58 W,

JCT. RTE. 178 E 102,500 5 18,300 4 267,200 5

99 26.776 BUCK OWENS

BLVD 102,500 6 15,904 8 245,636 6

99 19.541 PANAMA LANE 92,600 8 16,240 7 238,760 7

5 15.858 3 JCT. RTE. 99

NORTH 72,000 11 17,410 6 228,690 8

99 28.556 OIL JUNCTION 78,000 9 14,960 9 212,640 9 99 27.866 OLIVE DRIVE 74,000 10 13,783 11 2 198,047 10

1 The Total AADT numbers shown apply to the freeway immediately ahead of the postmile.
2 Congestion data is in annual vehicle delay in thou sand hours. Caltrans District 6 (which includes Ke rn County) has less 2% of the statewide annual vehicle hours of delay.
3 Postmile 15.858 – Data for AADT was double countin g the adjacent road segment. Caltrans has determine d that the data is erroneous for this location and request ed that the District use 2009 data. The annual tra ffic volume data shows that state freeway traffic decreased 0.2% in 2010 from 2009.
4 The Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) is defined as the total volume for the year divided by 365 day s. Very few locations in California are actually counted cont inuously. Traffic Counting is generally performed b y electronic counting instruments that are moved from location to location throughout the state in a program of c ontinuous traffic count sampling. The resulting counts ar e adjusted to an estimate of annual average daily t raffic by compensating for seasonal influence, weekly varia tion and other variables which may be present. All traffic volume figures that are listed include traffic in both d irections.
5 Postmile – Each breakpoint is identified by the pos tmile value corresponding to that point on the free way. The postmile values increase from the beginning of a route within a county to the next county line. The postmile values start over again at each county line. Postmile va lues usually increase from South to North or West t o East depending upon the general direction the route fo llows within the state.
6 The equation FE AADT = (Ahead AADT-AADTT)+(AADTT*1 0) is defined in the TAD: http://www.epa.gov/ttnamti1/files/nearroad/NearRoad TAD.pdf

.

3.2.2 The top 10 road segments

With the exception of the road segment located on I nterstate 5 from the Interstate 5/Freeway 166 interchange to the Interstate 5/Freew ay 99 interchange, the rest of the top 10 road segments are located along Freeway 99 t hrough Bakersfield. The red lines in Figures 5a and 5b below demark the general locat ion of the top 10 road segments. Gaps between the red lines along Freeway 99 depict locations of road segments that were ranked outside of the top ten and were not con sidered during the site selection process. This section contains descriptions of the 10 road segments and images of the segments are provided in Appendix B below.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-11 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Figures 5a and 5b: General location of the top 10 road segments in the Bakersfield CBSA.

As shown in the TAD Matrix in Appendix A, road segm ent evaluations were based on many categories of criteria, however some of the ca tegories were more critical to the decision-making process than others. In addition t o meteorological considerations, the most important criteria included road design, road structures, and available space for an air monitoring site. Below are descriptions of the top 10 road segments and the reasons why they were acceptable or unacceptable for site c onsideration.

3.2.2.1 Segment 1: Bakersfield, California Ave Segment 1 is located along Freeway 99 from Californ ia Avenue northward to Rosedale Freeway (JCT RTE 58). The southern and northern en ds of segment are above grade and not acceptable for near-road monitor siting whi le the middle portion of segment is at grade with obstructions and space limitation issues along the segment. Trees align much of the segment and obstruct the air flow, and the above grade portion of theSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-12 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area segment consists of a bridge over a railroad yard a nd a river. The issues with this segment made it unacceptable for siting a near-road monitor.

3.2.2.2 Segment 2: Bakersfield, Ming Ave Segment 2 is located along Freeway 99 from Ming Ave nue northward to Highway 58 (JCT RTE 58). The entire segment is below grade an d characterized by upward slopes on both sides of the Freeway. Additionally, sound walls line the top of the slopes, and the interchange area is covered with mixed vegetati on and trees. These characteristics of this segment made it unacceptable for siting a n ear-road monitor.

3.2.2.3 Segment 3: JCT RTE 58 East Segment 3 is located along Freeway 99 from Highway 58 (JCT RTE 58) northward to California Avenue. The entire segment is below gra de and both sides of the Freeway characterized by upward slopes with trees and groun d vegetation on them. Additionally, sound walls line the top of the slopes on the west side of the freeway. These characteristics of this segment made it unacceptabl e for siting a near-road monitor.

3.2.2.4 Segment 4: Bakersfield, White Lane Segment 4 is located along Freeway 99 from White La ne northward to Ming Avenue. The southern end of segment is at grade with sound wall limiting space on the east side of the freeway. The remainder of segment is below grade characterized by upward slopes on both sides of the freeway. Trees align m ost of the segment causing space limitation and air flow obstruction issues. These characteristics of this segment made it unacceptable for siting a near-road monitor.

3.2.2.5 Segment 5: Buck Owens Blvd Segment 5 is located along Freeway 99 from Rosedale Freeway northward to Airport Drive. The central and southern sections of segmen t are above grade and serve as an overpass so there are no areas to consider along th is stretch of the segment. The northern end of the segment is at grade but parcels that appear acceptable are too close to the slope of the above grade portion of th e segment. Additionally, trees and bushes present space limitations and air flow obstr uctions along the remainder of the at grade portion of the segment. The issues with this segment made it unacceptable for siting a near-road monitor.

3.2.2.6 Segment 6: JCT RTE 204 / Airport Drive Segment 6 is located along Freeway 99 from Airport Drive northward to Route 204. The southern tip of the segment is slightly above grade due to a small downward slope from the Freeway shoulder to the adjacent frontage road on the east side of the Freeway. The segment then levels to at grade until upward sl oping of an overpass at the northern end of the segment creates a below grade area. Tre es, bushes, and shrubs align much of the segment causing space limitations and air fl ow obstruction. The characteristics of this segment made it unacceptable for siting a near -road monitor.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-13 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area 3.2.2.7 Segment 7: Panama Lane Segment 7 is located along Freeway 99 from Panama L ane northward to White Lane. Figure 6 shows concentric circles depicting 100, 40 0, and 1,000 meters radii around the parcels in the segment. The 100 meter circle is th e maximum extent of a microscale site. These concentric circles show the land uses a round the parcels. Any of the parcels adjacent to these would have similar charac teristics

. The southern end and the center section of the segm ent are at grade and the northern end of the segment is above grade. With the except ion of southern and northern tips of the segment, a sound wall and trees align the east side of the segment and pose space limitations. On the west side of the segment space intermittent trees along the segment and a sound wall aligning the southern tip of the s egment prior to the off-ramp are the only space limitations. The District identified se veral parcels adequate for building a monitoring station however they were on the wrong s ide of the freeway with regard to the prevailing wind direction (see sample site in F igure 6). The space limitations and the prevailing wind issue make the segment unaccept able for siting a near-road monitor.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-14 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Figure 6: A sample site in Segment 7 that was not pursued because it was on the windward side of the freeway.

The image in Figure 6 shows the other area that the District investigated in some detail. This area is on the west side of the freeway. The meteorological analysis ruled this site out because of the westerly winds. Start ing from the north, the east side of the freeway is elevated and gradually comes down to the ground level where a s ound wall starts. The sound wall continues all the way to th e shopping center. The shopping center is too clos e to the freeway on-ramp to have a site placed there and they have p lanted trees along their fence line. Nearly the ent ire section of the west side of the freeway has space for an air monit oring station, initial contact with these landowner s was made and the meteorological analysis removed them from consi deration.

3.2.2.8 Segment 8: JCT. RTE. 99 North Segment 8 is located along Interstate 5 from the In terstate 5 – Freeway 99 JCT northwestward to Maricopa Freeway 166. The road is above grade on the interchange then descends to at-grade for remainder of segment to Maricopa Freeway 166. There are no roadside structures or space limitations alo ng the segment. However, the surrounding land use is agricultural farming so pro perty and not in an urban area. The District removed this segment from consideration be cause of the lack of population in the area. Given the relatively low population expo sure in this rural segment, thisSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-15 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area segment may not be representative of near-road expo sure levels that occur in more urban areas with higher populations in the Bakersfi eld CBSA.

3.2.2.9 Segment 9: Oil Junction Segment 9 is located along Freeway 99 from Norris R oad northward to JCT Freeway 65. The southern end of segment is above grade the n descends to at grade for remainder of segment. While there are some space l imitations along the segment, the District identified a few parcels in the central po rtion of the segment that are acceptable for near-road monitor placement.

3.2.2.10 Segment 10: Olive Drive Segment 10 is located along Freeway 99 from Olive D rive northward to Norris Rd. The segment is at grade with intermittent trees and bus hes aligning the segment. Space limitations are minimal however the frontage road a djacent to the freeway and the parcels and businesses located on the frontage road present accessibility issues which make the segment unacceptable for siting a near-roa d monitor.

3.3 Meteorological Considerations

As shown in the wind roses below, local winds in Ba kersfield and along Interstate 5 blow primarily from the northwest to the southeast. The Freeway 99 corridor runs through the city of Bakersfield in a north-south or ientation. Interstate 5 runs from northwest to southeast along the west side of the V alley to the Freeway 99 interchange located south of Bakersfield. Given that the preva iling winds have a westerly component to them, the District determined that loc ations on the east side of Freeway 99 and Interstate 5 were the most appropriate for n ear-road monitor placement and focused our efforts only on the east side of the fr eeway once the District made this determination. Air pollution from the freeway and the interstate would generally blow away from any monitor located on the west side of t he freeway and interstate.

Figures 7a through 7c: Wind Roses

7a. Bakersfield-Golden State Hwy 7b. Bakersfield-California Avenue

Source: District EMC Data Program Source: District EMC Data ProgramSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-16 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area 7c. Mettler Station AU491

Source: University of Utah Meso West http://mesowest.utah.edu/cgi-bin/droman/download_nd b.cgi?stn=KSLC

3.4 Terrain through Bakersfield CBSA

The terrain through Bakersfield CBSA is generally f lat couple of bluffs caused by rivers. The Freeway 99 is generally at grade at the norther n and southern limits of the city of Bakersfield and either elevated or below grade in t he urban area of city. The Interstate 5 segment is flat with farm fields on either side. There are sloughs and other low areas along this part of Interstate 5. Figure 8a shows a satellite image of the area under consideration in the city of Bakersfield and Figure 8b shows a satellite image of the terrain of the Interstate 5 segment.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-17 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Figure 8a: Map of the Bakersfield Metropolitan Area

Figure 8b: Map of the Interstate 5 – Freeway 99 JCT Area

3.5 Spatial scales and population exposure

As stated above, NO 2 near-road sites are intended to be microscale site s. This means that these sites measure representative concentrati ons within 100 meters. Representative concentrations measured over areas g reater than this do not fit the definition of a microscale site. The TAD states th at the highest concentrations can be found within 20 meters of the freeway, so the Distr ict focused efforts on locations that can handle an air monitoring site within 20 meters. Additionally, the required range forSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-18 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area the station’s probe height is 2 to 7 meters in orde r to capture the highest NO 2 concentrations. While the preferred probe height i s 2 meters, it will not be possible due to the structure and orientation of the monitoring station so, the District will place the probe as close to the 2 meter height as possible.

As referenced above, population exposure as one of the criteria that should be considered during the site selection if you have mu ltiple acceptable sites in the same road segment. For the Bakersfield CBSA there are o nly two segments that have potential multiple acceptable sites, segments 7 and 9. Segment 7 sites were eliminated due to wind direction and only one landowner in seg ment 9 was willing to negotiate a lease with us.

Segment 8 was removed from consideration because it was not in an urban area and there were no population sources nearby. The Distr ict believes that people that are living, working, or commuting daily within and adja cent to the Bakersfield metropolitan area will have a more significant exposure than tho se using the segment of Interstate 5.

Maps showing the locations that the District invest igated in some detail are shown in Section 3 and Section 4. The maximum 100 meter rad ius of a microscale site is shown for reference. The 400 and 1,000 meter radii are s hown for informational purposes.

3.6 Correspondence with property owners

The District found 19 acceptable parcels along Free way 99 so letters of interest were sent to each of the property owners. Nine respons es were received, however only seven of the property owners expressed interest. T he District then began making direct contact with the seven interested land owners. Upo n meeting with the representative of a landowner in Segment 7, the District discovered t hat the wind direction would be a problem and that lead to the elimination of all loc ations on the west side of the freeway. This issue left only three potential locations in S egment 9 from which to choose. One of the three potential sites would need extensive chan ges made to the property in order to accommodate an air monitoring station so that site was deemed infeasible. Of the two remaining potential sites, one of the landowners st opped talks with the District after reading the draft lease, but the other was willing to negotiate a lease so the process was able to move forward.

4.0 Final Site Selection

After everything was considered, the road segment w ith the 9th highest FE-AADT located at 2809 Unicorn Road was selected. The sele cted site meets the siting criteria listed in the CFR, and is also acceptable for accom modating placement of a PM2.5 and other air pollution analyzers in the future.

Figure 9 is a map of the final site selection locat ed on Unicorn Road in Segment 9, and. The concentric circles depict 100, 400, and 1 ,000 meters radii around the parcels in the segment. The 100 meter circle is the maximu m extent of a microscale site. TheseSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-19 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area concentric circles show the land uses around the pa rcels. Any of the parcels adjacent to these would have similar characteristics.

Figure 9: Final Section—2809 Unicorn Road

The image in Figure 9 shows the location the Distri ct chose to locate the NO 2 near-road site in Bakersfield CBSA. It is in segment 9 and the landowner is willing to wor k with the District. It is on the west side of the freeway and is in a light commercial area. There is a subdivision near by on the east side of the freeway.

Figure 10 below shows a roadside view of the select ed site for the NO 2 near-road air monitoring station. The site will be as close to t he freeway as practicable. The vacant lot to the right and the adjacent parking lot with the building are on the same parcel.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-20 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Figure 10: Selected site located at 2809 Unicorn R oad in Segment 9San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-21 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area APPENDICESSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-22 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Appendix A —Traffic Data Tables

Below is the list of the top 30 segments in the Bak ersfield CBSA based on Caltrans data.

Table 1: Kern County Top Road Segments by Fleet Equivalent A ADT 5

Route Postmile 6 Description Ahead AADT 2 AADT

Rank AADTT 1 AADTT

Rank Congestion 3 FE AADT 7 FE

Rank

99 24.599 BAKERSFIELD,

CALIFORNIA AVE 132,000 2 28,188 1 385,692 1

99 22.604 BAKERSFIELD,

MING AVE 133,000 1 27,720 2 1 382,480 2

99 23.514 JCT. RTE. 58

EAST 129,000 3 23,400 3 339,600 3

99 21.082 BAKERSFIELD,

WHITE LANE 114,500 4 17,500 5 272,000 4

99 25.654 JCT. RTE. 58 W,

JCT. RTE. 178 E 102,500 5 18,300 4 267,200 5

99 26.776 BUCK OWENS

BLVD 102,500 6 15,904 8 245,636 6

99 19.541 PANAMA LANE 92,600 8 16,240 7 238,760 7

5 15.858^ JCT. RTE. 99

NORTH 72,000 11 17,410 6 228,690 8

99 28.556 OIL JUNCTION 78,000 9 14,960 9 212,640 9 99 27.866 OLIVE DRIVE 74,000 10 13,783 11 2 198,047 10

58 53.519 SOUTH

CHESTER AVE 72,000 12 13,770 12 195,930 11

58 54.419 SOUTH UNION

AVE 71,000 13 13,860 10 195,740 12

99 27.046 JCT RTE

204/AIRPORT DRIVE 102,500 7 10,294 21 195,146 13

58 55.404 COTTONWOOD

RD 70,000 14 13,084 13 187,756 14

5 0.000 LOS

ANGELES/KERN CO LINE 70,000 15 13,020 14 187,180 15

58 53.387 H ST 70,000 16 11,750 15 175,750 16

58 52.360 BAKERSFIELD,

S. JCT RTE 99 68,000 20 11,487 16 171,383 17

5 5.020 FORT

TEJON/DIGIER RD 69,000 17 11,250 17 170,250 18

5 13.523 WHEELER

RIDGE RD 69,000 18 11,000 18 168,000 19

5 1.612 LEBEC RD 69,000 19 10,890 20 167,010 20

178 2.009 BAKERSFIELD,

JCT. RTE. 204 67,000 21 10,962 19 165,658 21

99 17.500 JCT. RTE. 119

WEST 66,500 22 10,500 * 161,000 22San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-23 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Table 1: Kern County Top Road Segments by Fleet Equivalent A ADT 5 (continued)

178 0.360 BAKERSFIELD,

OAK ST 62,000 24 10,002 22 152,018 23

99 29.878 JCT. RTE. 65 61,000 25 9,723 23 148,507 24

99 30.532 SEVENTH

STANDARD RD 62,500 23 9,000 * 143,500 25

58 56.410 MT. VERNON

AVE 60,000 26 8,473 24 136,257 26

178 3.402 BAKERSFIELD,

BEALE AVE 56,000 28 7,280 25 121,520 27

99 52.450 POND RD 53,000 29 6,891 26 115,019 28

99 50.410 MC FARLAND,

ELMO HWY 53,000 30 6,749 27 113,741 29

99 36.523 CAWELO,

LERDO FREEWAY 59,500 27 6,000 * 113,500 30

178 0.000 JCT. RTES. 99/58 52,000 31 6,640 28 111,760 31

1 Road segments with no Truck AADT (AADTT) are given substitution with the following: Route 99:

• PM 17.500 using 2/3 of adjacent segment Panama’s v alue = value of 10,500

• PM 30.532 using JCT. RTE. 65, the segment had simi lar AADTT and was estimated at 9,000

• PM 36.523 using JCT. RTE. 65, the segment had a la rge estimated exit volume of 6,000 at Lerdo Hwy
2 The Total AADT numbers shown apply to the freeway immediately ahead of the postmile.
3 Congestion is in annual vehicle delay in thousand hours. Caltrans District 6 (which includes Kern Co unty) has less than 2% of the statewide annual vehicle hours of delay.
4 PM 15.858 - Data for AADT was double counting the adjacent road segment. Caltrans has determined that the data is erroneous for this location and requested tha t the District use 2009 data. The annual traffic v olume data shows that state freeway traffic decreased 0.2% in 201 0 from 2009.
5 The Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) is defined as the total volume for the year divided by 365 day s. Very few locations in California are actually counted cont inuously. Traffic counting is generally performed b y electronic counting instruments that are moved from location to location throughout the State in a program of c ontinuous traffic count sampling. The resulting counts are adjusted to an estimate of annual average daily tra ffic by compensating for seasonal influence, weekly varia tion and other variables which may be present. All traffic volume figures listed include traffic in both directions

. 6 Postmile - Each breakpoint is identified by the pos tmile value corresponding to that point on the free way. The postmile values increase from the beginning of a route within a county to the next county line. The postmile values start over again at each county line. Postmile va lues usually increase from South to North or West t o East depending upon the general direction the route fo llows within the state.
7 The equation FE AADT = (Ahead AADT-AADTT)+(AADTT*1 0) is defined in the TAD: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/nearroad.html Data source: Caltrans - All Vehicle http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/t raffops/saferesr/trafdata/2010all/2010_Traffic_Volu mes.pdf Caltrans - Truck Data http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tra ffops/saferesr/trafdata/truck2010final.pdf Caltrans - Congestion http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tra ffops/sysmgtpl/MPR/pdfs/MPR2009.pdf Data accuracy of Caltrans AADT for 100,000 vehicles is approximately ± 6%San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-24 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Appendix B—Site Details

Below are the site details for the selected site an d the site that was ruled out because of meteorology.

Table 2: Site Details Matrix
Site/Segment Parameter Segment 7 Car Dealership Segment 9 2809 Unicorn Rd Road segment name Segment 7 Segment 7
Road segment end points Panama Lane to White Lane Norris Rd to JCT Hwy 65 Road type Freeway Freeway Interchanges None None Frontage roads None None Roadside design At grade At grade Terrain Flat Flat Current road construction None None Future road construction Not aware of any Not aware of any Roadside structures None None AADT 95,600 78,000 HD counts 16,240 14,960 FE-AADT 238,760 212,640 Congestion information No congestion No congestion Infrastructure At the street At the Street
Surrounding land use Light Commercial/Industrial Light Commercial
Nearby sources Freeway Freeway Meteorology Unacceptable Acceptable
Population exposure Only parcel in segment Only parcel in segment Available space – site footprint 1000 square feet 1000 square feet

Safety features None Will need to be installed Property type Private Property Private Property Property owner Not Applicable Likelihood of access Easy access Easy access Other details/local knowledge Landowner willing to work with us Landowner willing to work with usSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-25 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Appendix C—Maps of Segments

Beginning on the following page, aerial maps show t he top 10 segments, their end points in detail, and the surrounding land use of e ach segment.San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-26 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Segment 1

This segment is located along Freeway 99 from Calif ornia Avenue northward to Rosedale Freeway (JCT RTE 58).

Source: Googl e EarthSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-27 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Segment 2

This segment is located along Freeway 99 from Ming Avenue northward to Highway 58 (JCT RTE 58).

Source: Google EarthSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-28 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Segment 3

This segment is located along Freeway 99 from Highw ay 58 (JCT RTE 58) northward to California Avenue.

Source: Google EarthSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-29 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Segment 4

This segment 4 is located along Freeway 99 from Whi te Lane northward to Ming Avenue.

Source: Google EarthSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-30 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Segment 5

This segment is located along Freeway 99 from Rosed ale Freeway northward to Airport Drive.

Source: Google EarthSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-31 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Segment 6

This segment is located along Freeway 99 from Airpo rt Drive northward to Route 204.

Source: Google EarthSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-32 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Segment 7

Segment 7 is located along Freeway 99 from Panama L ane northward to White Lane.

Source: Google Ear thSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-33 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Segment 8

Segment 8 is located along Interstate 5 from the In terstate 5 – Freeway 99 JCT northwestward to Maricopa Freeway 166.

Source: Google EarthSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-34 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Segment 9

This segment is located along Freeway 99 from Norri s Road northward to JCT Freeway 65.

Source: Google EarthSan Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 25, 2013

D-35 NO 2 Near-Road Monitoring Station Siting Requirements and Selection Process for Bakersfield Core Based St atistical Area Segment 10

This segment is located along Freeway 99 from Olive Drive northward to Norris Rd.

Source: Google Earth