SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MAAGEMET DISTRICT 

Final Environmental Assessment: 

Proposed Amended Rule 1144 – Vanishing Oils Metalworking Fluids and,

Direct-Contact Lubricants, Metal Working 

Fluids and Rust Inhibitors

June 2010 

SCH o. 2008101054 

SCAQMD o. 090205JK 

Executive Officer 

Barry R. Wallerstein, D. Env. 

Deputy Executive Officer 

Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources 

Elaine Chang, DrPH 

Assistant Deputy Executive Officer 

Planning, Rules, and Area Sources 

Laki Tisopulos, Ph.D., P.E. 

Planning and Rules Manager 

Susan Nakamura 

Author: James Koizumi Air Quality Specialist 

Technical 

Assistance: Michael Morris Air Quality Specialist 

Reviewed By: Steve Smith, Ph.D. Program Supervisor, CEQA 

 Michael Krause Program Supervisor, CEQA Special Projects 

 Naveen Berry Planning and Rules Manager 

 William Wong Principal Deputy District Counsel 

 Barbara Baird District Counsel 

 Jean Ospital, Dr. P.H. Health Effects Officer 
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MAAGEMET DISTRICT 

GOVERIG BOARD 

Chairman: DR. WILLIAM A. BURKE

Speaker of the Assembly Appointee 

Vice Chairman: DENNIS YATES 

 Mayor, Chino 

 Cities of San Bernardino 

MEMBERS: 

MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH 

Supervisor, Fifth District 

County of Los Angeles 

MARION ASHLEY 

Supervisor, Fifth District 

County of Riverside 

MICHAEL A. CACCIOTTI 

Councilmember, South Pasadena 

Cities of Los Angeles County/Eastern Region 

BILL CAMPBELL 

Supervisor, Third District 

County of Orange 

JANE W. CARNEY 

Senate Rules Appointee 

JOSIE GONZALES 

Supervisor, Fifth District 

County of San Bernardino 

RONALD O. LOVERIDGE 

Mayor, Riverside 

Cities of Riverside County 

JOSEPH K. LYOU, Ph. D. 

Governor’s Appointee 

JUDITH MITCHELL 

Councilmember, Rolling Hills Estates 

Cities of Los Angeles County/Western Region 

JAN PERRY 

Councilmember, Ninth District 

City of Los Angeles 

MIGUEL A. PULIDO 

Mayor, Santa Ana 

Cities of Orange County 

EXECUTIVE OFFICER:

BARRY R. WALLERSTEIN, D.Env. 
PAR 1144 i June 2010

PREFACE 

This document constitutes the Final Environmental Assessment (EA) for Proposed Amended 

Rule (PAR) 1144 – Metalworking Fluids and Direct-Contact Lubricants. The Draft EA was 

released for a 30-day public review and comment period from February 16, 2010, to March 17, 

2010. Five comment letters were received from the public; however, only one of the comment 

letters addressed the Draft EA. The comment letter that addressed the Draft EA and response to 

comments are included in Appendix C. The other comment letters that address rule issues will 

be responded to in the Final Staff Report for PAR 1144. 

Changes in VOC Content Limits to PAR 1144 and Metalworking Fluid Category ames 

Subsequent to the release of the Draft EA for public review, PAR 1144 was modified: 

• PAR 1144 was renamed Metalworking Fluids and Direct-Contact Lubricants. 

• The January 1, 2015, VOC content limit requirement of 50 grams per liter for metalworking 

fluids was removed; 

• The metalworking fluids category has been split into four sub-categories: metal forming, 

metal removal, metal treating and metal protecting. The rust inhibitor category requirements 

(general and military specified preservative) have been placed under the new metal 

protecting category. 

• The military specified preservative sub-sub-category VOC content limit of 340 grams per 

liter effective date has been moved forward from January 1, 2012, to January 1, 2011; 

• A new VOC content limit of 75 grams per liter, effective January 1, 2012, has been applied 

to the metal protecting sub-category; metal forming sub-category; and metal removal subcategory, general sub-sub-categories; 

• The VOC content for the precision metal removal sub-sub-category under the metal removal 

category would have a 130 gram per liter VOC content limit, effective January 1, 2012, 

which is the same VOC content limit as the metalworking fluid category circulated in the 

Draft EA; and 

• The direct-contact lubricant interim VOC content limit of 70 grams per liter, effective 

January 1, 2012 has been removed, and replaced with the Final VOC content limit of 50 

gram per liter, effective January 1, 2012, instead of January 1, 2015. 

• The VOC content test method has been changed from ASTM E1968-09 to ASTM E 1868-10 

Standard Test Method for Loss-On-Drying by Thermogravimetry with quality assurance and 

quality control procedures conducted using SCAQMD Additional Requirements to ASTM 

Standard Test Method E 1868-10 for Metalworking Fluids and Direct-Contact Lubricants; or 

SCAQMD Method 319-10 Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in 

Metalworking Fluids and Lubricants by Thermogravimetry; or the option to use either ASTM 

E 1868-10 with quality assurance and quality control procedures conducted using SCAQMD 

Additional Requirements to ASTM Standard Test Method E 1868-10 for Metalworking 

Fluids and Direct-Contact Lubricants or SCAQMD Method 319-10. The Governing Board 

will choose the source test method options for PAR 1193 before adoption. 

• An exemption has been added to allow the use of dimethyl carbonate (DMC) as a cooling 

solvent in computerized numerically controlled (CNC) machines where permeable media are 

used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in place during cutting provided that the 
Final Environmental Assessment: Preface 

PAR 1144 ii June 2010

equipment existed at the time of rule adoption, is enclosed and an exhaust fan discharges the 

exhaust air from the equipment out of the building. 

Effects Evaluated in the Draft EA Circulated to the Public for Review

The draft EA analyzed potentially significant adverse environmental impacts from the following 

three effects of PAR 1144: 

• Light naphthenic-based oils (40 SUS) would be replaced with heavier naphthenic-based oils 

(60 SUS) before the January 1, 2012, effective dates; 

• Naphthenic-based oils would be replaced with paraffinic-based oils before the January 1, 

2015, effective dates; and 

• Metalworking fluids containing naphthenic-based oils that are not replaced with paraffinicbased oils would be replaced with water-soluble or vegetable-based oils. 

Environmental Analysis of Modifications to PAR 1144 Subsequent to the Public Review of 

the Draft EA 

The proposed rule has been modified to address several key issues brought to staff’s attention 

during the rule making period. The terminology used for describing products and processes 

subject to the rule was altered to conform to government and industry standards. The proposed 

50 grams per liter limits effective in January 2015 were withdrawn and staff is committing to 

work with interested parties to explore the feasibility of migrating towards the next generation of 

ultra-low VOC metalworking fluids at 25 grams per liter or less. To facilitate that effort, annual 

surveys will be conducted and a technology symposium will be held to analyze trends. 

An exemption has been added to allow the use of dimethyl carbonate (DMC) as a cooling solvent 

in computerized numerically controlled (CNC) machines where permeable media are used to 

maintain a vacuum that holds the part in place during cutting provided that the equipment is 

enclosed and an exhaust fan discharges the exhaust air from the equipment out of the building. 

Direct-contact Lubricants

The draft EA assumed that direct-contact lubricants containing naphthenic-based oils that are not 

replaced with paraffinic-based oils would be replaced with water-soluble or vegetable-based oils 

to comply with PAR 1144. However, the sales weighted average VOC content for direct-contact 

lubricants is 25 grams per liter; therefore, based on the sales weighted average VOC content, it is 

likely that currently used direct-contact lubricants currently comply with the proposed VOC 

content limit of 50 grams per liter. Since existing direct-contact lubricants already comply with 

the proposed final VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter, no incremental environmental 

impacts are expected. Therefore, previous impacts evaluated from reformulation of directcontact lubricants in the Draft EA circulated for public review no longer apply. 

Adverse toxic air contaminant (TAC) emission impacts were presented in the draft EA from 

possible increased usage of triethanolamine and monoethanolamine in water-based direct-contact 

lubricants. Since data now indicates that no replacement or reformulation would be needed to 

comply with direct-contact lubricant requirements in PAR 1144, there would be no increase in 

triethanolamine and monoethanolamine and, therefore, no adverse TAC impacts. The draft EA 

evaluated secondary adverse impacts from transportation of reformulated or replacement directcontact lubricants. Since it is likely that no reformulated or replacement products are needed to 
Final Environmental Assessment: Preface 

PAR 1144 iii June 2010

comply with PAR 1144, there would be no secondary adverse impacts from transporting 

reformulated products. 

Metalworking Fluids

No modifications are being proposed that would alter replacing light naphthenic oils with heavier 

naphthenic oils. Replacing light naphthenic oils with heavier naphthenic oils in metalworking 

fluids was evaluated in the draft EA. Both light and heavy naphthenic oils are supplied from the 

same refinery in Bakersfield, California. Since heavier naphthenic oils would be transported in 

the same quantities from the same refinery in Bakersfield, California; the environmental impacts 

from replacement of light naphthenic oils with heavier naphthenic oils would be the same. 

Therefore, it was concluded that there would be no incremental environmental impacts from 

replacing light naphthenic oils with heavier naphthenic oils in the Draft EA. Consequently, the 

conclusion in the draft EA would be the same (i.e., no incremental increase in potential 

environmental impacts). 

The draft EA evaluated increased environmental impacts (air quality and energy from rail car 

transportation) from replacing naphthenic oils in metalworking fluids with paraffinic oils 

produced in Richmond, California and Texas. In the metalworking fluid category, excluding 

general metal protecting fluids, the proposed final VOC content limit has been modified to 75 

grams per liter instead of 50 grams per liter. Based upon available VOC content data, it is 

expected that the 75 grams per liter VOC content limit can be met by reformulating affected 

products with heavier naphthenic oils instead of reformulating with paraffinic oils. Therefore, 

impacts from transport of non-naphthenic oils are no longer applicable. Since heavier 

naphthenic oils would continue to be transported in the same quantities from the same refinery in 

Bakersfield, California; the environmental impacts from replacement of light naphthenic oils 

with heavier naphthenic oils would be similar to the existing setting. 

An exemption has been added to PAR 1144 to allow the use of dimethyl carbonate (DMC) as a 

cooling solvent in computerized numerically controlled (CNC) machines where permeable media 

are used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in place during cutting, because the company 

that has a CNC machine stated that dimethyl carbonate was the only solvent found that can 

replace the currently used denatured ethyl alcohol and meet both the VOC limits under PAR 

1144 and performance requirements needed by facility operators. 

A comment letter was received on this exemption that was concerned about health risk to on-site 

workers, because the CNC machine is currently vented into the room where it is housed. The 

commenter asked that health risks to the workers be analyzed. Health risks to occupational 

workers could not be directly analyzed, because occupational health values have not been 

published by a regulatory agency. Therefore, to address this issue the exemption was modified 

to require that CNC machines must be enclosed with an exhaust fan that discharges the exhaust 

air from the equipment out of the building. 

SCAQMD has identified only one facility that uses DMC as a cooling solvent in computerized 

numerically controlled (CNC) machines where permeable media are used to maintain a vacuum 

that holds the part in place during cutting. Because of the capital cost of this type of CNC 

machines, it is not believed that another such machine would be installed either at the affected 
Final Environmental Assessment: Preface 

PAR 1144 iv June 2010

facility or at any other facility. The existing CNC machine is enclosed, but would need an 

exhaust fan to discharge the exhaust air from the equipment out of the building. The installation 

of ducting is not expected to require heavy duty construction equipment so no adverse 

construction impacts are expected. OEHHA has established interim acute and chronic reference 

exposure level (REL) values of 18,000 and 5,500 micrograms per cubic meter respectively for 

DMC. EPA has developed a unit risk factor for carcinogenic health risk of 1E-6 cubic meters 

per microgram for methanol that is under public review. Since DMC can be metabolized into 

methanol, a carcinogenic health risk can be estimated for the maximum amount of methanol that 

can be degraded from the DMC emitted. 

Health risk was analyzed from the projected usage of 327 gallons of DMC per year at the 

affected facility upon off-site sensitive and worker receptors. The non-carcinogenic acute and 

chronic hazard indices for worker and sensitive receptors were each less than the significance 

threshold of 1.0. The carcinogenic health risk based on the maximum methanol concentration 

modeled at a worker receptor was estimated to be 3.3 in one million, which is less than the 

significance threshold of 10 in one million. The maximum carcinogenic health risk for a 

residential receptor was estimated to be 2.1 in one million, which is less than the significance 

threshold of 10 in one million. The health risk from DMC would be the only health risk from the 

proposed project, because no other health effects were identified from PAR 1144. 

Based on the above analysis the incremental increase in acute and chronic non-carcinogenic and 

carcinogenic health risks remain below the significance thresholds; therefore, there is no change 

in conclusion. Adverse impacts from DMC are not a substantial revision of the negative 

declaration according to CEQA Guidelines §15073.5(b) because adverse impacts would not 

result in avoidable significant effects and mitigation measures or project revisions were not 

needed in order to reduce the effect to insignificance. Therefore, recirculation is not required 

according to CEQA Guidelines §15073.5(c) because no mitigation measures were replaced; new 

project revisions were added in response to comments, but are not new avoidable significant 

effects; measures or conditions of project approval were added after circulation of the EA which 

are not required by CEQA and do not create new significant environmental effects and are not 

necessary to mitigate to an avoidable significant effect; and new information has been added to 

the EA which clarifies, amplifies or makes insignificant modification to the EA. 

Metal Protecting Fluid 

The VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter for general metal protecting fluids was previously 

required by the existing Rule 1144 under the rust inhibitor category, PAR 1144 would only 

rename this category and place it as a sub-sub category under the metalworking fluid category. 

This modification is administrative in nature and would not generate any new impacts or increase 

the severity of any existing impacts. 

Other Minor Changes to PAR 1144 

Definitions for metal forming fluid, metal protecting fluid, metal removal fluid, metal treating 

fluid, and precision metal removal fluid have been added. A requirement for metalworking 

fluid/direct-contact lubricant manufacturers/suppliers to submit an annual quantity and emissions 

report for fluids subject to the rule sold within the district beginning in 2011 and ending in 2013 
Final Environmental Assessment: Preface 

PAR 1144 v June 2010

has been added. Changes in language have also been made to clarify PAR 1144. These changes 

are administrative in nature and do not affect any environmental topic. 

Conclusion 

The modifications to the VOC content limits for several categories of metalworking fluids or 

direct-contact lubricants, which were made after the Draft EA was circulated for public review, 

would increase the VOC emissions reductions from 0.75 ton per day to 0.86 ton per day. 

Reformulation or replacement of existing metalworking fluids and direct-contact lubricants was 

identified as the component of the proposed project generating potentially significant adverse 

secondary environmental impacts analyzed in the Draft EA circulated for public review. 

Modifications made to PAR 1144 subsequent to the release of the Draft EA for public review, 

result in less reformulation or replacement of existing metalworking fluids and direct-contact 

lubricants. With the exception of replacing light naphthenic oils with heavier naphthenic oils in 

metalworking fluid, based on the VOC contents of existing affected products no reformulation is 

expected to be required to meet the VOC content limits in the version of PAR 1144 revised after 

the draft EA was released for public comment. The replacement of light naphthenic oils with 

heavier naphthenic oils in metalworking fluid was evaluated in the draft EA circulated for public 

review and was determined not to have any incremental adverse environmental impacts. An 

exemption has been added to allow the use of DMC as a cooling solvent in an existing CNC 

machine where permeable media are used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in place 

during cutting provided that the equipment is enclosed and an exhaust fan discharges the exhaust 

air from the equipment out of the building. Health risk were evaluated for this exemption and 

found to be less than significant. 

Therefore, the changes to PAR 1144 after the draft EA was release for public comment would 

have fewer or less significant environmental impacts than those presented in the draft EA. No 

new adverse impacts would be introduced by these proposed changes. Therefore, there would be 

no proposed change to the non-significance determination conclusions in the Draft EA. Since 

the adverse impacts from the proposed project would remain not significant, no new or 

additional mitigation would be required. Therefore, the proposed changes to PAR 1144 are not 

considered a “substantial revision” under CEQA Guidelines §15073.5 (b) and would not require 

recirculation under CEQA Guidelines §15073.5 (a). 
PAR 1144 vi June 2010

TABLE OF COTETS 

CHAPTER 1 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 

Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1-1 

California Environmental Quality Act ................................................................................... 1-2 

Project Location ..................................................................................................................... 1-3 

Project Objective .................................................................................................................... 1-3 

Project Background ................................................................................................................ 1-4 

Project Description................................................................................................................. 1-6 

Emissions Inventory............................................................................................................... 1-9 

Compliance ............................................................................................................................ 1-12 

CHAPTER 2 - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 

Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 2-1 

General Information ............................................................................................................... 2-1 

Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .......................................................................... 2-3 

Environmental Checklist and Discussion .............................................................................. 2-4 

Figures 

Figure 1-1 - Boundaries of the South Coast Air Quality Management District .................... 1-3 

Tables 

Table 1-1 – Ratio of National Sales to South Coast Air Basin Sales .................................... 1-10 

Table 1-2 – Surveyed Emission Inventory ............................................................................ 1-11 

Table 1-3 – Existing Rule Emissions Inventory .................................................................... 1-12 

Table 2-1 – SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds ................................................ 2-9 

Table 2-2 – Emissions Reductions Effective 2015 ................................................................ 2-14 

APPENDIX A - PROPOSED AMENDED RULE 1144 

APPENDIX B – ASSUMPTIONS AND CALCULATIONS 

APPENDIX C – COMMENT LETTER AND RESPONSE TO COMMENTS 

 
C H A P T E R 1 - P R O J E C T D E S C R I P T I O  

 Introduction 

 California Environmental Quality Act 

 Project Location 

 Project Objective 

 Project Background 

 Project Description 

 Emissions Inventory 

 Compliance 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-1 June 2010

ITRODUCTIO 

The California Legislature created the South Coast Air Quality Management District 

(SCAQMD) in 19771 as the agency responsible for developing and enforcing air pollution 

control rules and regulations in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) and portions of the Salton Sea 

Air Basin and Mojave Desert Air Basin (collectively known as the “district”). By statute, the 

SCAQMD is required to adopt an air quality management plan (AQMP) demonstrating 

attainment of all federal and state ambient air quality standards for the district2. Furthermore, the 

SCAQMD must adopt rules and regulations that carry out the AQMP3. The 2007 AQMP 

concluded that major reductions in emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides 

of nitrogen (NOx) are necessary to attain the state and national ambient air quality standards for 

ozone, particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10) and 

particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5). Ozone, a 

criteria pollutant, is formed when VOCs react in the presence of life light with NOx in the 

atmosphere and has been shown to adversely affect human health. VOC emissions also 

contribute to the formation of PM10 and PM2.5. The former federal one-hour and the federal 

eight-hour ozone standards were exceeded in all four counties and in the Salton Sea Air Basin in 

2008. The Central San Bernardino Mountain area recorded the greatest number of exceedences 

of the one-hour state standard (79 days), eight-hour state standard (115 days), eight-hour federal 

standard (97 days), as well as, health advisory days (two days). Altogether, in 2008, the South 

Coast Air Basin exceeded the federal eight-hour standard on 120 days, the state one-hour 

standard on 102 days, and the state eight-hour standard on 140 days. 

In March 2009, Rule 1144 – Vanishing Oils and Rust Inhibitors, was adopted establishing VOC 

content limits for vanishing oils and rust inhibitors used during metalworking and metal-forming 

operations. Vanishing oils are a small subset of metalworking fluids designed to evaporate 

shortly after use. Rust inhibitors are inhibitors, preventatives or protectants used to prevent the 

corrosion of metal substrates. However, the vast majority of fluids used during metalworking 

and/or metal forming operations are lubricants and metalworking fluids. These fluids are used at 

steel tube and spring manufacturers, steel mills, aerospace manufacturers, automobile part 

manufacturers and rebuilders, as well as machine shops for broaching, drilling, drawing, 

heading, honing, forging, milling, stamping, tapping, threading and turning operations. 

While EPA Method 24 is the default method for determining VOC content, it is unreliable for 

semi-volatile materials typically found in lubricants and metalworking fluids. During the rule 

development process for Rule 1144, it was decided not to include limits for metal lubricants and 

metalworking fluids until a more reliable method was tested and validated. Recently a 

thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) method was developed and was determined to be an accurate 

and reliable test method, so validation of the TGA method is anticipated. With development of 

the TGA, method VOC content can be established for these widely used fluids, facilitating the 

inclusion of lubricants and metalworking fluids into Rule 1144. The rule title would be amended 

to reflect the updated applicability of the proposed requirements. In addition, if approved, the 

 

1

 The Lewis-Presley Air Quality Management Act, 1976 Cal. Stats., ch 324 (codified at Health & Safety Code, 

§§40400-40540). 

2

 Health & Safety Code, §40460 (a). 

3

 Health & Safety Code, §40440 (a). 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-2 June 2010

proposed amended rule would fully implement control measure CTS-01-Emission Reduction 

from Lubricants in the 2007 Air Quality Management Plan. 

The proposed amended rule would add VOC content limits for two new sub-metalworking fluid 

categories: metal forming, metal removal, metal treating; and direct-contact lubricants and metal 

working fluids; add a VOC content limit for a new rust inhibitor metal protecting fluid subcategory, military specified preservative; require record keeping of affected working fluid and 

revising the test method used to determine VOC content. 

The proposed future VOC content limits would reduce VOC emissions by 1,500 1,720 pounds 

(0.75 0.86 tons) per day. Staff estimates that more than 7,000 shops would be subject to the 

requirements of the proposed amended rule. 

CALIFORIA EVIROMETAL QUALITY ACT 

Proposed amended Rule (PAR) 1144 is a discretionary action, which has potential for resulting 

in direct or indirect changes to the environment and, therefore, is considered a “project” as 

defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). SCAQMD is the lead agency for 

the proposed project and has prepared this draft final environmental assessment (EA) with no 

significant adverse impacts pursuant to its Certified Regulatory Program and SCAQMD Rule 

1110. California Public Resources Code §21080.5 allows public agencies with regulatory 

programs to prepare a plan or other written document in lieu of an environmental impact report 

or negative declaration once the Secretary of the Resources Agency has certified the regulatory 

program. SCAQMD's regulatory program was certified by the Secretary of the Resources 

Agency on March 1, 1989, and is codified as SCAQMD Rule 110. 

CEQA and Rule 110 require that potential adverse environmental impacts of proposed projects 

be evaluated and that feasible methods to reduce or avoid significant adverse environmental 

impacts of these projects be identified. To fulfill the purpose and intent of CEQA, the SCAQMD 

has prepared this draft final EA to address the potential adverse environmental impacts 

associated with the proposed project. The draft final EA is a public disclosure document 

intended to: (a) provide the lead agency, responsible agencies, decision makers and the general 

public with information on the environmental effects of the proposed project; and, (b) be used as 

a tool by decision makers to facilitate decision making on the proposed project. 

SCAQMD’s review of the proposed project shows that the proposed project would not have a 

significant adverse effect on the environment. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15252, 

no alternatives or mitigation measures are required to be included in this draft final EA. The 

analysis in Chapter 2 supports the conclusion of no significant adverse environmental impacts. 

Comments received on the Draft EA during the public comment period will be addressed in the 

Final EA. Five comment letters were received from the public; however, only one of the 

comment letters addressed the Draft EA. The comment letter that addressed the Draft EA and 

response to comments are included in Appendix C. The other comment letters that address rule 

issues will be responded to in the Final Staff Report for PAR 1144.
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-3 June 2010

PROJECT LOCATIO 

PAR 1144 would affect manufacturing and assembly operations at industrial metalworking 

facilities located throughout the SCAQMD’s jurisdiction. The SCAQMD has jurisdiction over 

an area of 10,473 square miles, consisting of the four-county South Coast Air Basin (Basin) and 

the Riverside County portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) and the Mojave Desert Air 

Basin (MDAB) referred to hereafter as the district. The Basin, which is a subarea of the district, 

is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San 

Jacinto Mountains to the north and east. The 6,745 square-mile Basin includes all of Orange 

County and the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. 

The Riverside County portion of the SSAB and MDAB is bounded by the San Jacinto Mountains 

in the west and spans eastward up to the Palo Verde Valley. The federal non-attainment area 

(known as the Coachella Valley Planning Area) is a subregion of both Riverside County and the 

SSAB and is bounded by the San Jacinto Mountains to the west and the eastern boundary of the 

Coachella Valley to the east (Figure 1-1). 

Figure 1-1 

Boundaries of the South Coast Air Quality Management District 

PROJECT OBJECTIVE 

One objective of PAR 1144 is to fully implement the 2007 AQMP control measure CTS-01 – 

Emission Reductions from Lubricants. A second objective of PAR 1144 is to achieve additional 

VOC emission reductions from affected facilities, which would assist the SCAQMD’s efforts to 

attain and maintain applicable national and state ambient air quality standards. The proposed 

amended rule would achieve additional VOC emission reductions by adding VOC content limits 

S outh C oast

A ir Q uality M anagem ent D istrict

 SC AQ M D Ju risdiction

M o jave D esert

A ir B asin

S alto n S ea

A ir B asin

S an D ieg o

A ir B asin

S ou th

 C en tral

 C o ast A ir B asin

S o uth C o ast

 A ir B asin

San D iego C ounty

Im perial C ounty

R iverside C ounty

Los A ngeles

 C ounty

K ern C ounty San B ernardino C ounty

O range

 C ounty

Santa 

 B arbara

 C ounty

V entura 

 C ounty

S an Jo aq u in

 V alley

 A ir B asin
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-4 June 2010

for two new sub-metalworking fluid categories: metal forming, metal removal, metal treating; 

and direct-contact lubricant and metalworking fluid; adding a VOC content limit for a new rust 

inhibitor metal protecting fluid sub-category, military specified preservative; requiring record 

keeping of affected working fluid; and revising the test method used to determine VOC content. 

PROJECT BACKGROUD 

In March 2009, Rule 1144 was adopted establishing VOC content limits for vanishing oils and 

rust inhibitors used during metalworking and metal-forming operations. Vanishing oils and 

solvent cutback rust inhibitors consist entirely or nearly entirely of mineral spirit type solvents. 

While they are a significant source of VOC emissions, they represent only a small fraction of the 

overall volume of fluids used by machine shops. The bulk of the volumes used are 

metalworking fluids and lubricants. Unlike vanishing oils and solvent cutback rust inhibitors, 

metalworking fluids and lubricants mainly consist of semi-volatile compounds for which a 

reliable VOC content test method was not available by the March 2009 rule adoption date. 

However, recently a thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) method was developed and validation is 

anticipated. With the development of the TGA method VOC content limits can be established 

for these widely used fluids, facilitating the inclusion of direct-contact lubricants and 

metalworking fluids into Rule 1144. 

Over 7,200 facilities, predominantly small businesses, use vanishing oils, direct-contact 

lubricants, metalworking fluids or rust inhibitors in the South Coast Air Basin. Affected 

facilities are classified as fabricated metal product manufacturing [North American Industry 

Classification System (NAICS) Code 332], machinery manufacturing (NAICS 333), 

transportation equipment manufacturing (NAICS 336), and petroleum and coal products 

manufacturing (NAICS 324) sectors in the AQMD. Typical industries using lubricants, 

metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors include: 

• Aerospace 

• Machine Shop (Job Shop) 

• Steel Mills 

• Auto Rebuild 

• Screw Machine 

• Steel Tubes (Pipes) 

• Steel Springs 

• Maintenance 

• Captive 

Captive machine shops are machine shops located inside of another type of business (aerospace, 

automotive, etc.) that supports the business, but is not the primary aspect of that business. 

Lubricants and metalworking fluids are used to reduce heat and friction to prolong the life of 

industrial tools used at affected facilities, to improve product quality, and carry away debris. 

Typical operations affected by PAR 1144 include: 

• Broaching – Keyway, slots or spline utilized in gear manufacturing 

• Drilling – Producing cylindrical holes 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-5 June 2010

• Drawing - Forming flat sheet metal into “cup-shaped” parts. If the depth of the formed 

cup is equal to or greater than the radius of the cup, the process is called deep drawing. 

• Heading – A metal forging process which involves rapidly punching a blank into a die to 

form a desired shape without adding heat. Cold heading is most frequently used to 

produce fasteners such as bolts and screws without adding heat. 

• Honing - Manufacture of precision bores to improve the geometry, surface finish and 

dimensional control of the finished part. 

• Forging - Shaping metal by using localized compressive forces. Cold forging is done at 

room temperature or near room temperature. Hot forging is done at a high temperature, 

which makes metal easier to shape and less likely to fracture. Common forging processes 

include: roll forging, swaging, cogging, open-die forging, impression-die forging, press 

forging, automatic hot forging and upsetting. 

• Milling – A precisely controlled rotating cutter which rotates about the spindle axis and a 

table to which the workpiece is affixed. The cutter and workpiece move relative to each 

other, generating a toolpath along which material is removed. 

• Rust Preventative/Inhibitor - Prevention of corrosion on ferrous materials and some 

nonferrous materials 

• Stamping – A process by which sheet metal strips are punched using a press tool which is 

loaded on a press to form the sheet into a desired shape. 

• Tapping – Creating threaded holes in parts or boring into parts and pipelines 

• Threading - Thread cutting and thread rolling applications for pipes and bolts 

• Turning - Operation that produces cylindrical parts 

• Wire drawing - Reducing or changing the diameter of a wire or rod by pulling the wire or 

rod through a single or series of drawing die(s). 

The fluids used in the above industrial operations are complex mixtures of a base material (oil), 

and emulsifiers, anti-weld agents, corrosion inhibitors, extreme pressure additives, buffers 

(alkaline reserve), biocides, as well as other additives. The base material may be naphthenic, 

paraffinic or synthetic. Some products contain extreme pressure (EP) additives containing 

chlorinated, sulfurized, or phosphorus-type extreme pressure ingredients. There are numerous 

formulations, ranging from straight oils (such as naphthenic and paraffinic petroleum oils) to 

water-dilutable fluids, which include soluble oils and semi-synthetic/synthetic fluids. In general, 

higher oil content provides better lubricity while higher water content allows more rapid cooling. 

The following bullets briefly describe the most common types of fluids.

• Straight oil (neat oil) fluids are refined naphthenic and paraffinic petroleum or vegetable 

oils. Straight oils are not designed to be diluted with water. Light oils are naphthenic oils 

with a viscosity of 4.28 centistokes (40 SUS) or lower. 

• Soluble oil (emulsifiable oil) fluids are combinations of 30 percent to 85 percent straight 

oils and emulsifiers that may include other performance additives. Soluble oils may be 

diluted with 5 to 40 parts water. 

• Semi-synthetic fluids contain a lower amount of straight oil in the concentrate (5 percent 

to 30 percent), more emulsifiers, and 30 percent to 50 percent water. The concentrate is 

further diluted with 10 to 40 parts water. 

• Synthetic fluids contain no petroleum oils and may be water soluble or water dispersible. 

The synthetic concentrate is diluted with 10 to 40 parts water. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-6 June 2010

In 2006, the AQMD and U.S. EPA Region IX co-sponsored a report by the Institute for Research 

and Technical Assistance to identify, test and demonstrate alternative low-VOC materials for 

vanishing oils and rust inhibitors. The final report, entitled Assessment, Development and 

Demonstration of Alternatives to VOC-Emitting Lubricants, Vanishing Oil and Rust Inhibitors

concludes that “alternative low-VOC materials for a variety of different types of metalworking 

operations are available and cost effective”. Thirteen facilities participated in the study that 

reviewed stamping, honing, cutting, forming and rust inhibitor applications. In each high-VOC 

application, a low-VOC alternative was demonstrated to have equivalent performance. Some of 

the participants found that their cost increased with the alternatives, but the majority realized a 

cost-savings. 

PROJECT DESCRIPTIO 

The following summarizes requirements of the proposed amended rule. A copy of PAR 1144 is 

included in Appendix A. The title of PAR 1144 has been changed from Vanishing Oils, DirectContact Lubricants, Metalworking Fluids and Rust Inhibitors to Metalworking Fluids and DirectContact Lubricants.

Purpose and Applicability (Subdivisions (a) and (b))

The purpose and applicability of the rule would be expanded to include direct-contact lubricants 

and metalworking fluids. The terms vanishing oils and rust inhibitors have been removed from 

the applicability, since vanishing oils are now defined as direct-contact or metalworking fluids 

and rust inhibitors have been renamed metal protecting fluids and placed as a sub-category under 

metalworking fluids. These products represent the bulk of fluids used for metalworking and 

metal-forming operations. Including these products would reduce VOC emissions and provide 

clarity with respect to applicability for the most widely used metalworking and metal-forming 

fluids. 

Metal forming and metal treating have been added to the examples of metalworking in the 

applicability section. Blanking, coining, marquenching, piercing and roll forming have been 

added to the examples of specific metalworking operations.

Definitions of Terms (Subdivision (c))

The definitions for metal forming fluid, metal protecting fluid, metal removing fluid, metal 

treating fluid, military specified preservative, precision metal removing fluid, super compliant 

material and working fluid would be added. Reducing heat has been removed as a property from 

the direct-contact lubricant definition. A sentence stating that a direct-contact lubricant is not a 

metal forming fluid or a metal removal fluid has been added to the definition of direct-contact 

lubricant. The definition of metalworking fluid has been changed to state that it is a fluid that 

facilitates operations involving the working or modification of metals, including metal forming, 

protecting, treating and removal. The phrase “function in the tool and workpiece interface used 

to improve product quality and carry away debris” has been removed from the definition of 

metalworking fluid. Soluble oils have been replaced with emulsifiable oils in the definition of 

metalworking fluid. The definition of rust inhibitor has been replaced with metal protecting 

fluid. Vanishing oil was defined as a direct-contact lubricant, metalworking fluid or oil, but now 

is defined only as direct-contact lubricant or metalworking fluid.

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-7 June 2010

Requirements (Subdivision (d))

The rule requirements would reflect the expansion of the rule to include direct-contact lubricants 

and metalworking fluids. Where “vanishing oils and rust inhibitors” were named in general 

terms, they have been replaced with “metalworking fluids and direct-contact lubricants.” Table 

A has been expanded to add new VOC content limits for direct-contact lubricants and 

metalworking fluids. The direct-contact VOC content limit would be 70 grams per liter effective 

January 1, 2012, and then reduce to 50 grams per liter effective January 1, 20152012. The metal 

working fluid VOC content limit would be 130 grams per liter effective January 1, 2012, and 

then reduce to 50 grams per liter effective January 1, 2012. Metalworking has become a 

category with sub-categories and sub-sub-categories with specific VOC content limits and 

effective dates. Metal forming was added as a sub-category under metalworking fluid with a 

VOC content limit of 75 grams per liter effective January 1, 2012. Metal treating was added as a 

sub-category under metalworking fluid with a VOC content limit of 75 grams per liter effective 

January 1, 2012. A metal removal sub-category has been added under metalworking fluid with 

two sub-sub-categories: general and precision metal removal. General metal removal fluid 

would have a VOC content limit of 75 grams per liter effective January 1, 2012. Precision metal 

removal fluid would have a VOC content limit of 130 grams per liter effective January 1, 2012. 

The rust inhibitor category would be renamed metal protecting and further defined into general 

rust inhibitors and military specified preservative. The general metal protecting fluid rust 

inhibitor VOC content limit would retain the current VOC limit of 300 grams per liter, and then 

would drop to 50 grams per liter effective January 1, 2012. The military specified preservative 

metal protecting fluid rust inhibitor would not have a VOC content limit until January 1, 

20112012, at which point the VOC limit would be 340 grams per limit. No change to the 

vanishing oil VOC content limit is proposed. 

Additional language has been added to the prohibition of sale. The existing rule states that the 

prohibition of sale shall not apply to any manufacturer or supplier provided the product was sold 

to an independent distributor that was informed in writing by the manufacturer about the 

compliance status of the product with Rule 1144. The language has been modified to state that 

the prohibition of sale shall not apply to any manufacturer or supplier provided the product was 

sold to an independent distributor that was informed in writing by the manufacturer or supplier 

that the metalworking fluid or direct-contact lubricant is not to be used in the SCAQMD.

A new exclusion has been added that states that the prohibition of sale would not apply to any 

manufacturer or supplier of metalworking fluid or direct-contact lubricant used in an emission 

control system pursuant to PAR 1144.

Control Equipment (Subdivision (e))

No changes are proposed. The existing rule states that in lieu of complying with the 

requirements as presented in section (d) Requirements, a person may operate an emission control 

system. The language has been changed to state that a person may use metalworking fluids and 

direct-contact lubricants in excess of the limits provided all metalworking fluids and directcontact lubricants are controlled by an emission control system.

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-8 June 2010

Administrative Requirements (Subdivision (f))

A new administrative requirement would be added. The requirement would necessitate the 

display of the VOC content of any working fluid subject to PAR 1144 and the date of 

manufacture of the working fluid or a code indicating the date of manufacture of the working 

fluid on working fluid containers for sale or distribution. If date codes are used, then 

manufactures would need to file an explanation of each date code with the SCAQMD Executive 

Officer. A new requirement has been added that states for each calendar year beginning with 

2011 and continuing with each subsequent calendar year until 2013, a metalworking fluid or 

direct-contact lubricant manufacturer or supplier would need to submit to SCAQMD by April 1 

of the following calendar year, an annual quantity and emissions report for the products subject 

to the rule sold within the district. The report format would need to be approved by the 

Executive Officer, and shall include the annual sales volume and VOC content of metalworking 

fluids and direct-contact lubricants sold or distributed.

Recordkeeping Requirements (Subdivision (g))

The existing rule requires that records be kept pursuant to Rule 109 and state that vanishing oils 

and rust inhibitors that contain 50 grams of VOC per liter of material or less are considered super 

compliant materials per Rule 109 (b)(6). PAR 1144 would move the definition of super 

compliant materials to the definitions subdivision (c) of PAR 1144. PAR 1144 would replace the 

reference to Rule 109 recordkeeping requirements with rule-specific (i.e., PAR 1144) 

recordkeeping requirements. PAR 1144 would require that owners or operators to prepare and 

maintain a VOC list of all VOC-containing metalworking fluids purchased for use at the facility. 

The list would need to be kept in a format specified by SCAQMD or in an equivalent format 

with the name of the facility, SCAQMD identification number of the stationary source if 

applicable. The working fluid VOC list would need to include the manufacturer, manufacturer 

product number, ID, or code, PAR 1144 working fluid category and VOC content in grams of 

VOC per liter of material. The VOC list would need to be updated within seven calendar days 

from receipt of a new working fluid at the facility. The owner/operator would be required to 

keep a monthly log that records the facility name and SCAQMD facility identification number; 

manufacturer product number, ID, code from the VOC list; monthly amount of each working 

fluid used; initials of the person recording the data; and the date the data was recorded. The 

owner operator of a stationary source would be required to maintain and make available upon 

SCAQMD request all of the information necessary to verify the amount of working fluid used at 

the facility including, but not limited to: purchase records identifying the supplier’s name, date 

and amount of working fluid purchased; and waste manifests identifying the waste working 

fluid’s source and address, name and address of the company responsible for removing the 

waste, and amount of waste working fluid disposed. In lieu of the above recordkeeping 

requirements, records can be maintained pursuant to Rule 109 for all applications subject to PAR 

1144. Manufacturers or suppliers of metalworking fluids and direct-contact lubricants shall 

maintain records to verify data used to determine VOC content in preparing their annual quantity 

and emissions report. The records would be required to be maintained for five years and made 

available upon request. Such records would include laboratory reports or VOC calculations.

Test Methods and Procedures (Subdivision (h))

PAR 1144 would remove the requirement for the use of USEPA Reference Method 24 or 

SCAQMD Method 304 to determine VOC content. PAR 1144 would require VOC content to be 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-9 June 2010

determined by the use of a thermogravimetric method. If approved by ASTM International, 

VOC content would be determined by ASTM E1868 – 10 09 Standard Test Method for Loss-OnDrying by Thermogravimetry tested at 81 degrees Celsius for 110 minutes with quality assurance 

and quality control procedures conducted using SCAQMD Additional Requirements to ASTM 

Standard Test Method E 1868-10 for Metalworking Fluids and Direct-Contact Lubricants; or 

SCAQMD Method 319-10 Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in 

Metalworking Fluids and Lubricants by Thermogravimetry; or the option to use either ASTM E 

1868-10 with quality assurance and quality control procedures conducted using SCAQMD 

Additional Requirements to ASTM Standard Test Method E 1868-10 for Metalworking Fluids 

and Direct-Contact Lubricants or SCAQMD Method 319-10. The Governing Board will choose 

the test method options for PAR 1193 before adoption. Water content would be required to be 

determined by ASTM D 4017 – Standard Test Method for Water in Paints and Paint Materials by 

the Karl Fischer Method. 

ASTM E 1868-10 Standard Test Method for Loss-On-Drying by Thermogravimetry with quality 

assurance and quality control procedures conducted using SCAQMD Additional Requirements to 

ASTM Standard Test Method E 1868-10 for Metalworking Fluids and Direct-Contact 

Lubricants; or SCAQMD Method 319-10 Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 

in Metalworking Fluids and Lubricants by Thermogravimetry; or the option to use either of 

ASTM E 1868-10 with quality assurance and quality control procedures conducted using 

SCAQMD Additional Requirements to ASTM Standard Test Method E 1868-10 for 

Metalworking Fluids and Direct-Contact Lubricants or SCAQMD Method 319-10.

Exemptions (Subdivision (i))

The exemptions to rule requirements would reflect the expansion of the rule to include directcontact lubricants and metalworking fluids. Where “vanishing oils and rust inhibitors” were 

named in general terms, they have been replaced with “metalworking fluids and direct–contact 

lubricants”. 

An exemption from PAR 1144 recordkeeping requirements (subdivision g) would be included 

for metalworking fluids that are considered “Super Compliant” used at facilities whose owners 

or operators demonstrate that total permitted and non-permitted facility VOC emission do not 

exceed four tons in any calendar year, including VOC emission from super compliant materials, 

as shown by annual purchase records. 

VOC content and prohibition of sale exemptions have been added for the use of dimethyl 

carbonate (DMC) used as a cooling solvent in computerized numerically controlled (CNC) 

machines where permeable media are used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in place 

during cutting provided that the equipment existed at the time of rule adoption, is enclosed and 

an exhaust fan discharges the exhaust air from the equipment outside of the building.

EMISSIOS IVETORY 

The emission inventory for the proposed amended rule was prepared by reviewing national sales 

and comparing the number of shops nationally versus the number of shops in the district. 

Information was supplemented by a survey of local manufacturers and distributors. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-10 June 2010

The overall national inventory of metalworking fluids was taken from the International Lubricant 

Manufacturers Association (ILMA, 2003).4 National sales were 117.2 million gallons. EPA 

estimates 10.2 percent of the fabricated metal industry are located in California in its Fabricated 

Metal Sector Notebook (EPA, 1995).5 According to listings in the California Manufacturers 

Register, the district accounts for approximately 70 percent of the industry in California. This 

would indicate that 8.3 million gallons of MWF were sold in the district (see Table 1-1). 

Table 1-1 

Ratio of ational Sales to South Coast Air Quality Management District Sales 

Metalworking Fluid 

Type 

Amount Sold 

ationwide 

(millions of 

gallons/year) 

Amount Sold in 

California 

(millions of 

gallons/year) 

Amount Sold in 

South Coast 

(millions of 

gallons/year) 

Straight 27.3 2.8 2.0 

Soluble 49.3 5.0 3.5 

Semi-Synthetic 21.7 2.2 1.5 

Synthetic 18.9 1.9 1.3 

Total 117.2 11.9 8.3 

To supplement these estimates, in 2006, the SCAQMD conducted a survey of local MWF 

manufacturers, distributors and users. The survey data indicated that those local manufacturers 

and distributors annually sold 4.1 million gallons of lubricants (including direct-contact 

lubricants), metalworking fluids, rust inhibitors and solvent. It is assumed that the solvents are 

used as vanishing oils, rust preventatives, for thinning other metalworking fluids or cleaning. 

The sales weighted average VOC content was determined using TGA robustness testing and 

TGA simulation analysis. Solvents used for cleaning applications subject to Rule 1124 were 

removed from the inventory (see Table 1-2). 

Rule 1144 regulated the emissions from vanishing oils, rust inhibitors and solvent in the previous 

rule making activity. Rule 1144 has reduced VOC emissions by two tons per day from 

lubricants, low-VOC metalworking fluids, and vanishing oils. An additional 0.71 ton per year 

was expected to be reduced by January 1, 2012 from rust inhibitors. The emission inventory, 

taking the already regulated categories into account, is provided below in Table 1-3. 

 

 

4

.ILMA, Comments of the Independent Lubricant Manufacturers Association (ILMA) on ‘Metalworking Fluids:

Summary of Nomination for Review: NTP 12th Report on Carcinogens, September 2003 Submitted by Report on 

Carcinogens Group, NIEHS’, www.ilma.org/about/ntp_comments.pdf 

5

 EPA Office of Compliance, Sector Notebook Project Profile of the Fabricated Metal Products Industry, EPA/310-

R-95-007, September 1995. http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/assistance/sectors/notebooks/ 

fabric.html. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-11 June 2010

Table 1-2 

Surveyed Emission Inventory 

Metalworking Fluid Type 

Volume Surveyed

 (thousand 

gallons) 

Sales Weighted 

Average 

 VOC Content 

(grams per liter) 

Total VOC 

Emission 

 (tons per day) 

Lubricants* 661.0 25 0.19 

Direct-contact Lubricants 211.1 60 25 0.14 0.06

Naphthenic-based 

Metalworking Fluids** 1,472. 745.5 75 58 1.26 0.49

Super Compliant 

Metalworking Fluids LowVOC Metal Working Fluids

1,339.7 25 0.38 

Heavy Naphthenic-based Oil 727.0 25 0.21

Light Naphthenic-based Oil 48.9 128.4 718 0.40 1.05

Vanishing Oil 64.1 710 0.52 

Metal Protecting Fluids Rust 

Inhibitors 140.1 660 1.06 

Military Specified 

Preservatives 15.6 660 0.12 

Solvent 167.0 790 1.51 1.21

Total 4,119.5 N/A 5.57 5.29

*Excludes direct-contact lubricants 

**Excludes light oil and vanishing oil 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-12 June 2010

Table 1-3 

Existing Rule Emission Inventory 

Metalworking Fluid Type 

Volume Surveyed

 (thousand 

gallons) 

Sales Weighted 

Average 

 VOC Content 

(grams per liter) 

Total VOC 

Emission 

 (tons per day) 

Lubricants* 661.0 25 0.19 

Direct-contact Lubricants 211.1 60 25 0.14 0.06

Naphthenic-based 

Metalworking Fluids** 1,472. 745.5 75 58 1.26 0.49

Super Compliant 

Metalworking Fluids LowVOC Metal Working Fluids1,339.7 25 0.38 

Heavy Naphthenic-based Oil 727.0 25 0.21

Light Naphthenic-based Oil 48.9 128.4 718 0.40 1.05

Vanishing Oil 64.1 50 0.04 0.02

Metal Protecting Fluids Rust 

Inhibitors 140.1 50 0.08 0.09

Military Specified 

Preservatives 15.6 660 0.12 0.01

Solvent 167.0 50 0.10 0.08

Total 4,119.5 N/A 2.60 2.58

*Excludes direct-contact lubricants 

**Excludes light oil and vanishing oil 

COMPLIACE 

The proposed amended rule would establish a VOC limit of 130 grams per liter of material for 

metalworking fluids effective January 1, 2012. Nearly 90 percent of metalworking fluids already 

in use today are expected to meet the proposed limit. Annually, more than two million gallons of 

soluble, semi-synthetic and synthetic metalworking fluids are used that have low VOC contents 

according to the applicable test methods. The remaining fluids are light, naphthenic oils based 

metalworking fluids with viscosities lower than five centistokes at 40 degrees Celsius. Light oils 

are used as blending materials along with much higher viscosity lubricants (greater than 38 

centistokes at 40 degrees Celsius) to form a medium viscosity metalworking fluid (10 centistokes 

at 40 degrees Celsius). Light oils are used in older high speed spindle machines and as 

metalworking fluids for aluminum cutting applications. Newer spindle machines use heavily 

water-diluted products and are designed to be resistant to water. According to industry 

stakeholders, the light oils were used in the blend because the medium oils were more expensive 

at the time. Decreased demand for medium oils, because replacement of medium oils in electric 

transformers unrelated to Rule 1144 and PAR 1144, has leveled the prices and formulators can 

now eliminate the light oils without impacting costs. 

Direct-contact lubricants differ from general lubricants in that the lubricants freely mix with 

metalworking fluids during the manufacturing process. Direct-contact lubricants have 

traditionally been formulated with heavier petroleum oils or water soluble, semi-synthetic and 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-13 June 2010

synthetic compounds with relatively low VOC content. Because direct-contact lubricants that 

meet the proposed amended rule limit are currently used, reformulation is not expected to be 

required to reduce emissions; however, it is possible that operators would move to more waterdilutable or vegetable-based lubricants. 

Future limits are proposed to reduce the metalworking fluid and direct-contact lubricant limits. 

The final VOC content limit would become 50 grams per liter, effective January 1, 2015. This

These limits would require that owner/operators that use metalworking fluids would to transition 

from lighter naphthenic oils to paraffinic or synthetic heavier naphthenic oils as the base 

material. In some cases the transition would be a simple substitution. Many paraffinic and 

synthetic PAR 1144 compliant direct-contact lubricants and metalworking fluids are available 

and in use today. Paraffinic base material costs approximately ten percent more than a 

naphthenic base material and in many cases the current practice of using naphthenic oils may 

strictly be based on cost. The market share of direct-contact lubricants and metalworking fluids 

that meet the proposed final VOC limit is approximately 44 percent. 

However, substantial obstacles may need to be overcome to completely transition away from 

naphthenic oils. Some fluids are specifically formulated for a particular operation and may 

contain a complex blend of additives. As some additives are not readily soluble in paraffinic 

oils, substantial reformulation may be necessary. Overall performance is unlikely to be impacted 

by the use of paraffinic oils compared to naphthenic oil as paraffinic oils provide better lubricity, 

greater oxidation resistance, more water resistance and better compatibility with machinery and 

parts. However, in some cases a loss of a key additive because of its insolubility in paraffinic oil 

could adversely impact desired performance. The types of parts impacted by this proposal are 

typically high value parts made from aluminum, stainless steel, copper, brass, and titanium. 

Therefore, three additional years, until January 1, 2015, are provided to allow for reformulation, 

testing and further market penetration of the paraffinic and synthetic oils. 

PAR 1144 would create two new sub-categories from the rust inhibitor category, military 

specified rust preservatives and general metal protecting metalworking fluids rust inhibitors. 

The general metal protecting rust inhibitor category would continue to be subject to the existing 

rust inhibitor VOC content requirements then drop to 50 grams per liter, effective January 1, 

2012. The new military specified preservative category would be subject to a new limit of 340 

grams per liter effective January 1, 2011. The proposed limit would be consistent with Mil-PRF16173E Class II for solvent cutback corrosion preventatives on military equipment. The higher 

limit would be restricted to military applications qualified under a military specification. Four of 

the six manufacturers who provide military specified rust preservatives offer products with VOC 

content below the proposed 340 grams per liter limit. This proposed limit would forgo 

previously expected emission reductions of 0.06 tons (120 pounds) per day. 

Test Methods and Procedures 

The existing rule requires that either U.S. EPA Reference Method 24 (Method 24) or the 

equivalent SCAQMD Method 303 (Determination of Exempt Compounds), be used to estimate 

the VOC content of affected fluids. During rule development, it was determined that the 

methods could not provide reliable and reproducible results for many direct-contact lubricants 

and metalworking fluids, because they are largely comprised of semi-volatile constituents. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1 

PAR 1144 1-14 June 2010

Subsequent to the release of the Draft EA for PAR 1144, ASTM E1868 – 10 Standard Test 

Method for Loss-On-Drying by Thermogravimetry tested at 81 degrees Celsius for 110 minutes 

was submitted for approval by ASTM International. If approved, this test method would be 

required to be used to determine VOC content in PAR 1144. Otherwise, SCAQMD Method 

319-10 Determination of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) in Metalworking Fluids and 

Lubricants by Thermogravimetry would be used. 

ASTM E1868 – 09 Standard Test Method for Loss-On-Drying by Thermogravimetry was 

developed by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) for pesticides which 

primarily consist of paraffinic oils to address the semi-volatile nature of the oils. Their method 

requires the sample to be held at 115 degrees Celsius for 60 minutes. 

The DPR method was tested on naphthenic oils but the oils did not stabilize at 115 degrees 

Celsius. The extended test was performed but the results differed significantly from the short 

term test. Additionally, manufacturers felt that an 11-hour test would be cost-prohibitive. In 

response, the Independent Lubricant Manufacturers Association (ILMA), in cooperation with 

District staff, developed the TGA method as a more reasonable alternative with temperature and 

duration parameters that would replicate the results from a six-month evaporation test. 

An alternative method is SCAQMD Method 313L – Determination of VOC Hydrocarbon 

Compounds in Lubricants uses a gas chromatograph (GC) equipped with a flame ionization 

detector (FID). A liquid sample is injected into the GC/FID and the concentrations of the 

individual compounds that elute prior to methyl palmitate are summed. This method is currently 

undergoing validation testing and may be included at a later date. 
C H A P T E R 2 - E  V I R O  M E  T A L C H E C K L I S T 

 Introduction 

 General Information 

 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 

 Determination 

 Environmental Checklist and Discussion 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-1 June 2010 

ITRODUCTIO 

The environmental checklist provides a standard evaluation tool to identify a project's potential 

adverse environmental impacts. This checklist identifies and evaluates potential adverse 

environmental impacts that may be created by the proposed project. 

GEERAL IFORMATIO 

Project Title: Draft Final Environmental Assessment (EA) for Proposed 

Amended Rule (PAR) 1144 –Vanishing Oils

Metalworking Fluids, and Direct-Contact Lubricants, 

Metal Working Fluids and Rust Inhibitors

Lead Agency Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District 

Lead Agency Address: 21865 Copley Drive 

Diamond Bar, CA 91765 

CEQA Contact Person: Mr. James Koizumi (909) 396-3234 

PAR 1144 Contact Person Mr. Michael Morris (909) 396-3282 

Project Sponsor's Name: South Coast Air Quality Management District 

Project Sponsor's Address: 21865 Copley Drive 

Diamond Bar, CA 91765 

General Plan Designation: Not applicable 

Zoning: Not applicable 

Description of Project: Adoption of PAR 1144 would fully implement the 2007 

AQMP control measure CTS-01 – Emission Reductions 

from Lubricants. The proposed amended rule would 

accomplish this by adding VOC content limits for two new 

metalworking fluid sub-categories: metal forming, metal 

removal, metal treating; and direct-contact lubricants and 

metal working fluids; creating two new sub-sub-categories 

for the rust inhibitor metal protecting metalworking subcategory (general and military specified preservative) with 

new a VOC content limit for military specified 

preservatives; requiring record keeping of affected 

metalworking fluids and revising the test method used to 

determine VOC content. 

Surrounding Land Uses and 

Setting: 

Not applicable 

Other Public Agencies 

Whose Approval is 

Required: 

Not applicable 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-2 June 2010 

EVIROMETAL FACTORS POTETIALLY AFFECTED 

The following environmental impact areas have been assessed to determine their potential to be 

affected by the proposed project. As indicated by the checklist on the following pages, 

environmental topics marked with an "" may be adversely affected by the proposed project. 

An explanation relative to the determination of impacts can be found following the checklist for 

each area. 

Aesthetics Agriculture Resources  Air Quality 

Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy 

Geology/Soils  Hazards & Hazardous 

Materials 

 Hydrology/ 

Water Quality 

Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise 

Population/Housing Public Services Recreation 

Solid/Hazardous Waste Transportation/ 

Traffic 

 Mandatory 

Findings of 

Significance 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-3 June 2010 

DETERMIATIO 

On the basis of this initial evaluation: 

 I find the proposed project, in accordance with those findings made pursuant to 

CEQA Guideline §15252, COULD NOT have a significant effect on the

environment, and that an ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT with no 

significant impacts will be prepared. 

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 

environment, there will NOT be significant effects in this case because 

revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project 

proponent. An ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT with no significant 

impacts will be prepared. 

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the 

environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT will be prepared. 

I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" 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 ASSESSMENT 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 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT pursuant to 

applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that 

earlier ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, including revisions or mitigation 

measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is 

required. 

Date: February 12, 2010 Signature:

 Steve Smith, Ph.D. 

 Program Supervisor 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-4 June 2010 

EVIROMETAL CHECKLIST AD DISCUSSIO 

As discussed in Chapter 1, the objectives of PAR 1144 are to implement the 2007 AQMP control 

measure CTS-01 – Emission Reductions from Lubricants and further reduce VOC emissions 

from these products. The proposed amended rule would accomplish these objectives by adding 

VOC content limits for two new metalworking fluid sub-categories: metal forming, metal 

removal, metal treating; and direct-contact lubricants and metal working fluids; creating two new 

sub-sub-categories for the rust inhibitor metal protecting metalworking sub-category (general 

and military specified preservative) with a new VOC content limit for military specified 

preservatives; requiring record keeping of affected metalworking fluids and revising the test 

method used to determine VOC content. The proposed amended rule would affect metalworking 

operators that use direct-contact lubricants, and metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors during 

manufacturing and assembly operations. 

PAR 1144 would affect the direct-contact lubricant category, naphthenic oils, and military 

specified preservatives: 

• Direct-contact lubricants are metalworking fluids that come into contact with parts during the 

manufacturing process. Traditionally, direct-contact fluids been formulated with heavier 

petroleum oils or water soluble, semi-synthetic and synthetic compounds with relatively low 

VOC content. Because compliant direct-contact lubricants are currently used and the sales 

weighted average VOC content is currently at 25 grams per liter, owners/operators are not 

expected to reformulate to meet the interim VOC content limit of 70 50 grams per liter. 

SCAQMD staff expects that owners/operators would need to use reformulated or 

replacement direct contact lubricants to meet the final VOC content limit of 50 grams per 

liter. 

• The reduction in metalworking fluid VOC content is expected to affect naphthenic oils. 

Light oils are low viscosity naphthenic oils used in older high speed spindle machines and as 

metalworking fluids for aluminum cutting applications. Newer spindle machines use heavily 

water-diluted products and are designed to be resistant to water. To meet the January 1, 

2012, interim VOC content limits of 70 75 grams per liter for metal forming, general metal 

removal and metal treating or 130 gram per liter for precision metal removal, SCAQMD staff 

expects owners/operators to switch from 40 (Saybolt Universal Seconds) SUS naphthenic oil 

to 60 SUS naphthenic oil. To meet the January 1, 2015, final VOC content limit of 50 grams 

per liter all metal working naphthenic oils are expected to be replaced with paraffinic oils, 

water-dilutable oils or vegetable-based oils. Paraffinic oils provide better lubricity, greater 

oxidation resistance, more water resistance and better compatibility with machinery and 

parts. Some niche metal working operations may move to water-dilutable or vegetable-based 

oils because they cost less than paraffinic oils.

• A new military specified rust preservatives sub-sub-category would be created in the rust 

inhibitor for the metal protecting metalworking fluid sub-category and a new VOC content 

limit of 340 grams per liter would be established for it. Military specified rust preservatives 

at the proposed VOC limit are currently in use. 

PAR 1144 is expected to result in facility owners/operators initially replacing light naphthenic 

oils with heavier naphthenic oils in metal working fluids; and then replacing direct-contact 

lubricants and naphthenic oils with paraffinic oils, water-dilutable oils or vegetable oils to 

comply with VOC content limits. Some replacement is expected to be simple replacement. 

Other products may require reformulation. Heavy and light naphthenic oils are manufactured at 

the same refinery in Bakersfield, so replacing light naphthenic oils with heavy naphthenic oils in 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-5 June 2010 

metalworking fluids would not result in a change in mode, frequency or length of transportation. 

Based on the sales weighted average VOC content, it is expected that metalworking facility 

owners/operators that do not use naphthenic oil based products would be able to comply with 

PAR 1144 using existing metalworking fluids and direct-contact lubricants. Therefore, all 

transportation related adverse impacts reported in the draft EA would no longer be expected to 

occur. 

Based on discussions with industry, staff expects that replacement and reformulated oils would 

be compatible with existing metalworking processes. Therefore, no additional construction or 

equipment replacement is expected. 

PAR 1144 includes an exemption that would allow the use of DMC as a cooling solvent in 

computerized numerically controlled (CNC) machines where permeable media are used to 

maintain a vacuum that holds the part in place during cutting , because the company that has a 

CNC machine stated that dimethyl carbonate was the only solvent found that can replace the 

currently used denatured ethyl alcohol and meet both the VOC limits under PAR 1144 and 

performance requirements needed by facility operators. No other facilities were identified that 

use a CNC machine where permeable media are used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in 

place during cutting. Since the exemption applies only to affected CNC machines that exist at 

the date of adoption of PAR 1144, the exemption would not apply to new CNC machines. 

A comment letter was received on this exemption that was concerned about health risk to on-site 

workers, because the CNC machine is currently vented into the room where it is housed. The 

commenter asked that health risks to the workers be analyzed. Health risks to occupational 

workers could not be directly analyzed, because occupational health values have not been 

published by a regulatory agency. Therefore, to address this issue the exemption was modified 

to require that CNC machines must be enclosed with an exhaust fan that discharges the exhaust 

air from the equipment out of the building. 

SCAQMD staff is only aware of one facility that has a CNC machine where permeable media are 

used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in place during cutting. Because of the capital cost 

of this type of CNC machines, it is not believed that another such machine would be installed

either at the affected facility or at any other facility. Based on discussions with facility operators 

DMC would be a one to one replacement for the denatured alcohol that is currently used at the 

facility. The facility operator has stated that the CNC machine would be exhausted to the 

exterior of the building. Diesel construction equipment is not expected to be used to duct the 

CNC machine to the outside. The DMC would be provided by the same company that currently 

supplies denatured alcohol to the affected facility. 

Labeling, recordkeeping and test method requirements are not expected to adversely affect any 

environmental topic. 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-6 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

II) AESTHETICS. Would the project: 

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? 



Significance Criteria 

The proposed project impacts on aesthetics will be considered significant if: 

- The project will block views from a scenic highway or corridor. 

- The project will adversely affect the visual continuity of the surrounding area. 

- The impacts on light and glare will be considered significant if the project adds 

lighting which would add glare to residential areas or sensitive receptors.

Discussion 

I.a), b), c) & d) PAR 1144 would not require any new development or require modifications to 

buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed VOC content limits for direct-contact 

lubricants, and metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors. It is expected that PAR 1144 would not 

change existing operations except that different types of metalworking fluids would be used. 

Further, since all of the affected activities occur within existing structures, there would be no 

change to the visual character of the existing setting at any of the 7,000 existing affected 

facilities. For the same reason, PAR 1144 is not expected to adversely affect scenic vistas or 

substantially damage scenic resources. 

Additional light or glare would not be created which would adversely affect day or nighttime 

views in the area since no light generating equipment would be required to comply with the VOC 

content requirements of the proposed amended rule. Similarly, the proposed amended rule does 

not require nighttime activities at affected facilities. 

Based upon these considerations, significant adverse aesthetics impacts are not anticipated and 

will not be further analyzed in this Draft Final EA. Since no significant adverse aesthetics 

impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-7 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

II) AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the 

project: 

 

a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or 

Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as 

shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the 

Farmland mapping and Monitoring Program of 

the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? 



b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, 

or a Williamson Act contract? 



c) Involve other changes in the existing environment 

which, due to their location or nature, could result 

in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural 

use? 



Significance Criteria 

Project-related impacts on agricultural resources will be considered significant if any of the 

following conditions are met: 

- The proposed project conflicts with existing zoning or agricultural use or Williamson Act 

contracts. 

- The proposed project will convert prime farmland, unique farmland or farmland of statewide 

importance as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the farmland mapping and monitoring 

program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use. 

- The proposed project would involve changes in the existing environment, which due to their 

location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. 

II.a), b), & c) PAR 1144 would not require any new development or require modifications to 

buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed VOC content limits for direct-contact 

lubricants, and metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors. All of the affected operations occur 

within existing structures, so new land use designations, including agricultural designations, are 

not expected to be altered by the proposed project. Therefore, since PAR 1144 affects operations 

at 7,000 existing facilities located only in commercial or industrial areas, it is not expected to 

convert any classification of farmland to non-agricultural use or conflict with zoning for 

agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. 

Based upon these considerations, significant agricultural resource impacts are not anticipated and 

will not be further analyzed in this Draft Final EA. Since no significant adverse agriculture 

resources impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-8 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

III. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: 

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 

applicable air quality plan? 



b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 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 that exceed quantitative 

thresholds for ozone precursors)? 

 

d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 

concentrations? 

 

e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial 

number of people? 

 

f) Diminish an existing air quality rule or future 

compliance requirement resulting in a significant 

increase in air pollutant(s)? 

 

III.a) PAR 1144 would fully implement 2007 AQMP control measure CTS-01 – Emission 

Reductions from Lubricants. The proposed amended rule would accomplish these objectives by 

adding VOC content limits for two new metalworking fluid categories: direct-contact lubricants 

and metalworking fluids; creating two new subcategories to the rust inhibitor category (general 

and military specified preservative) with a new VOC content limit for military specified 

preservatives; requiring record keeping of affected metalworking fluids and revising the test 

method used to determine VOC content. Since PAR 1144 would fully implement 2007 AQMP 

control measure CTS-01, it would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable 

air quality control plan. 

III. b), c), and f) For a discussion of these items, refer to the following analysis. 

Air Quality Significance Criteria 

Attainment of the state and federal ambient air quality standards protects sensitive receptors and 

the public in general from the adverse effects of criteria pollutants, which are known to have 

adverse human health effects. Evaluation of the proposed project indicates that it could generate 

adverse air quality impacts not only in the district, but also in the Bay Area Air Quality 

Management District (BAAQMD), Kern County Air Pollution Control District (KCAPCD), 

Monterrey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD), Mojave Desert Air Basin 

(MDAB), Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD), San Luis Obispo 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-9 June 2010 

County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD), San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control

District (SJVAPCD) and Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD). For this 

reason, air quality significance criteria used by SCAQMD and other affected air districts are 

provided. To determine whether or not air quality impacts from adopting and implementing the 

proposed amendments are significant, impacts are evaluated and compared to the criteria listed in 

Tables 2-1 for the district and 2-2 for other air districts. The project would be considered to have 

significant adverse air quality impacts if any one of the thresholds in Tables 2-1 or 2-2 are 

equaled or exceeded. 

Table 2-1 

SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds 

Mass Daily Thresholds

Pollutant Construction Operation 

NOx 100 lb/day 55 lb/day 

VOC 75 lb/day 55 lb/day 

PM10 150 lb/day 150 lb/day 

PM2.5 55 lb/day 55 lb/day 

SOx 150 lb/day 150 lb/day 

CO 550 lb/day 550 lb/day 

Lead 3 lb/day 3 lb/day 

Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) and Odor Thresholds

TACs 

(including carcinogens 

and non-carcinogens) 

Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk ≥ 10 in 1 million 

Hazard Index ≥ 1.0 (project increment) 

Odor Project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402 

Ambient Air Quality for Criteria Pollutants a

NO2 

1-hour average 

annual average 

SCAQMD is in attainment; project is significant if it causes or contributes 

to an exceedance of the following attainment standards: 

0.10 ppm (federal) 

0.03 ppm (state) 

PM10 

24-hour average 

annual geometric average 

annual arithmetic mean 

10.4 μg/m3 (recommended for construction) b & 2.5 μg/m3 (operation) 

1.0 μg/m3

20 μg/m3

Sulfate 

24-hour average 1 ug/m3

CO 

1-hour average 

8-hour average 

SCAQMD is in attainment; project is significant if it causes or contributes 

to an exceedance of the following attainment standards: 

20 ppm (state) 

9.0 ppm (state/federal) 

a

Ambient air quality thresholds for criteria pollutants based on SCAQMD Rule 1303, Table A-2 unless otherwise stated. 

b

Ambient air quality threshold based on SCAQMD Rule 403.

KEY: lb/day = pounds per day ppm = parts per million ug/m3

 = microgram per cubic meter ≥ greater than or equal to
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-10 

Table 2-2

Other Air District Operational Air Quality Significance Thresholds

BAAQMD KCAPCD MBUAPCD MDAQMD SBCAPCD SJVAPCD SLOCA

Pollutant Significance Threshold

Max. 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Max. 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Max. 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Max 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Max. 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Max. 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Max. 

Daily 

(lb/day)

ROG 80 15 N/A 25 137 N/A 137 25 240 N/A N/A 10 25* 

NOx 80 15 N/A 25 137 N/A 137 25 240 N/A N/A 10 25* 

SOx N/A N/A 27 150 N/A 137

25

N/A

0.04 ppm (24-hour 

avg.); 

0.25 ppm (1-hour 

average)

N/A 

PM10 80 15 N/A 15 82 N/A 82 15 80 N/A N/A 25 

PM2.5 none N/A N/A 82 15 N/A N/A N/A** 

CO

9.0 ppm (8-hour 

average);

20.0 ppm (1-hour 

average)

N/A 550 N/A 548

100

none

9.0 ppm (8-hour 

average);

20.0 ppm (1-hour 

average)

550 

TAC Cancer Risk > 10 in a million; Non-Cancer Hazard Index > 1.0

* Significance threshold is based on ROG and NOx combined value.

** Diesel Particulate Matter- Maximum Daily 1.25 lb/day.

KEY: lb/day = pounds per day ton/yr = tons per year ppm = parts per million
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-11 June 2010 

Air Quality Impacts 

Construction Emissions

With the exception of the replacement of denatured alcohol with DMC at a single facility, 

Ccompliance with PAR 1144 is expected to be achieved by existing, or replacement solvents or 

reformulation of solvents within the affected direct-contact lubricants, and metalworking fluids 

and rust inhibitors. Based on discussions with industry, SCAQMD staff expects that 

replacement and reformulated oils would be compatible with existing metalworking processes 

and can be used as “drop-in” replacements. No With the exception of the facility where DMC 

would be used, no modification of equipment requiring construction expected to be necessary for 

owners/operators to use replacement or reformulated direct-contact lubricants, metalworking 

fluids and rust inhibitors. 

The exemption for DMC usage would require that the facility operators at the affected facility 

duct the CNC machine to outside the facility. The CNC machine would be ducted to a nearby 

duct at the facility. Construction related to ducting the CNC machine to the outside is not 

expected to require any diesel construction equipment. Therefore, no additional construction 

emissions are expected from the facility than would be generated by existing routine 

maintenance. 

As explained in the following subsection construction emissions related to installing control 

equipment are not anticipated because control equipment are not expected to be used to comply 

with PAR 1144. Therefore, no adverse construction air quality impacts are expected from PAR 

1144.

Operational Emissions

Control equipment, such as thermal oxidizers or carbon adsorption, can be used to control VOC 

emissions under Rule 1144. No control equipment was installed to comply with the existing 

Rule 1144, because of cost considerations. Control equipment could also be used to meet the 

new requirements of PAR 1144. However, since the cost to replace or reformulate metalworking 

fluids is similar to the costs of existing metalworking fluids or direct-contact lubricants and no 

control equipment was installed to comply with Rule 11441114; no control equipment is 

expected to be installed to comply with PAR 1144. Since the increased use of control equipment 

is considered unlikely, it is expected that there would be no emissions from use of control 

equipment to comply with PAR 1144. 

VOC Emission Reductions 

The current Rule 1144 has reduced VOC emissions by two tons per year from lubricants, lowVOC metalworking fluids, and vanishing oils. An additional 0.71 ton per year was expected to 

be reduced by January 1, 2012 from rust inhibitors. 

PAR 1144 would establish new categories and VOC limits for direct-contact lubricants and 

metalworking fluids. It would also create two sub-sub-categories for metal protecting fluids rust 

inhibitors: military specified preservatives and a general category for all other rust inhibitors

metal protecting fluids (i.e., rust inhibitors metal protecting fluids that are not military specified 

preservatives). A new VOC limit would be established for the military specified preservatives 

sub-sub-category. The VOC limits for the general rust inhibitors metal protecting fluid category 

would remain the same as those in the existing rule for rust inhibitors metal protecting fluids. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-12 June 2010 

Table 2-2 3 presents metalworking fluid categories, volumes surveyed, sales weighted average 

VOC content (existing VOC content), proposed VOC content, percent reduction in VOC content, 

VOC emissions inventory and VOC emission reductions expected for the affected metalworking 

fluid categories. 

Direct-contact Lubricants

The direct-contact lubricant category is currently unregulated. The proposed amended rule 

would establish an interim VOC content limit of 70 50 grams per liter for direct-contact 

lubricants effective January 1, 2012. Most products currently comply with the interim limit. No

Since the sales weight average VOC content limit is 25 grams per liter, no reformulation or 

replacement of direct-contact lubrications are expected to be needed to meet the interim VOC 

content limit. Therefore, no VOC emissions reductions are expected from direct-contact 

lubricants. Compliance with final VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter, effective January 1, 

2015, is also expected to be met by using existing direct-contact lubricants. Although there are 

direct-contact lubricant available that currently comply with the 2015 VOC content limit, some 

owners/operators that do not currently use future compliant materials are expected to need to

reformulate or replace their existing direct-content lubricants. The new direct-contact lubricant 

VOC content limit is expected to result in a VOC emissions reduction of 0.02 tons per day, 

which is 40 pounds per day.

Metalworking Fluids

Metalworking fluids other than vanishing oil and rust inhibitors metal protecting metalworking

fluids are not currently regulated. Metalworking fluids are comprised of four sub-categories: 

metal forming, metal removal, metal treating and metal protecting. The metal removal subcategory is further divided into general and precision removal sub-sub-categories. PAR 1144 

would establish a VOC content limit of 75 grams per liter for metal forming, general metal 

removal and metal treating. The proposed amended rule would establish an interim VOC 

content limit of 130 grams per liter effective January 1, 2012 for the precision metal removal 

sub-sub-category. Most products currently comply with the interim metalworking VOC content 

limits. Light naphthenic oils (40 SUS) are expected to be replaced with 60 SUS naphthenic oils 

to comply with the interim VOC content limit. Compliance with the final VOC content limit of 

50 grams per liter, effective January 1, 2015, is expected to be met by reformulated or 

replacement oils (paraffinic oil, water-dilutable oil or vegetable oil). Water-dilutable oils or 

vegetable-based oils are preferred by owners/operators because they cost less than paraffinic oils; 

however, paraffinic oil could likely be used because it provides better performance than waterdilutable and vegetable-based oils. The new metalworking fluids VOC content limit is are 

expected to result in a VOC emissions reduction of 0.79 0.91 ton per day (0.42 ton from 

replacing naphthenic metal working fluids and 0.37 ton from light naphthenic oils 0.57 ton per 

day from replacing light with heavy naphthenic oil-based metalworking fluids and 0.34 from 

replacing light with heavy naphthenic oil-based precision metal removal fluids) per day, which is 

1,580 1,820 pounds per day. 

Metal Protecting Metalworking Fluids Rust Inhibitors 

Rust inhibitors Metal protecting fluids are currently regulated by Rule 1144. Rule 1144 

established an interim VOC content limit for all rust inhibitors metal protecting fluids at 300 

grams per liter. Rule 1144 included an exemption for rust inhibitors used in association with a 

military specification, military standard, Department of Defense document or Production Part 

Approval Process (PPAP) until January 1, 2011. Compliant military specified preservatives have 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-13 June 2010 

not been identified that can meet the existing rust inhibitor VOC content limit of 300 grams per 

liter. PAR 1144 would establish a new rust inhibitors metal protecting fluids subcategory for 

military preservatives with a VOC content limit of 340 grams per liter. Four of the six 

manufacturers who provide military specified rust preservatives offer products with VOC 

content below the proposed 340 gram per liter limit. SCAQMD staff believes that 

owners/operators would use existing military specified rust preservatives to comply with the 

proposed VOC content limit. The proposed VOC content limit would forgo previously expected 

VOC emission reductions of 120 100 pounds (0.06 0.05 ton) per day. 

The existing VOC content limit for all other rust inhibitors metal protecting fluids (i.e., nonmilitary specified rust preservatives) would remain the same as presented in the existing rule 

(300 grams per liter currently, 50 grams per liter January 1, 2015 2012). 

The proposed future VOC content limits would overall reduce VOC emissions by 0.75 0.86 tons 

per day, which is 1,500 1,720 pounds per day (see Table 2-23) that would benefit air quality. 

Table 2-23 also includes the VOC emission reductions foregone from establishing the new 

military specified preservative with a higher VOC content limit than it was subject to when it 

was under the previous rust inhibitor category; however, the foregone emissions would be offset 

by the emission reductions. 

Secondary Criteria Pollutant Emissions 

Secondary criteria pollutant emissions would be generated by the delivery of direct-contact 

lubricants, metal working fluids and rust inhibitors. The incremental change in criteria pollutant 

emissions were estimated from transport of direct-contact lubricants, metal working fluids and 

rust inhibitors in each affected air district and compared the CEQA thresholds associated with 

each air district. Light naphthenic oil-based metalworking fluids would need to be reformulated 

or replaced with heavy naphthenic oil-based metalworking fluids. No other reformulation or 

replacement is expected. Since heavy and light naphthenic oils are supplied by the same refinery 

in Bakersfield, California, no secondary criteria pollutant emissions from transportion are

expected.

Direct-contact Lubricants

The proposed amended rule would establish an interim VOC content limit of 70 grams per liter 

for direct-contact lubricants effective January 1, 2012. Most products currently comply with the 

interim limit. No reformulation or replacement of direct-contact lubrications is expected to be 

needed to meet the interim VOC content limit. The existing direct-contact lubricants are 

manufactured in the Midwest and delivered by rail. Direct-contact lubricants that meet the PAR 

1144 VOC content limits are available. Since the sales weighted average VOC content for 

direct-contact lubricants is 25 grams per liter, reformulation or replacement is not required and 

that existing compliant lubricants would be used to comply with PAR 1144. Therefore, no 

secondary criteria emissions are expected to comply with direct-contact lubricant requirements in 

PAR 1144.

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-14 June 2010 

Table 2-2 3

Emission Reductions Effective 2015 

Metalworking 

Fluid Type 

Volume 

Surveyed 

(thousand 

gallons) 

Sales 

Weighted 

Ave VOC 

Content 

(grams per 

liter) 

Proposed 

VOC 

Content 

Percent 

Reduction

Total 

VOC 

Emission 

Inventory 

(tons per 

day) 

Total 

VOC 

Emission 

Reduction 

(tons per 

day) 

Direct-contact 

lubricants 211.1 60 50 17 0 0.14 0 0.02 0

Light 

Naphthenic-Oil 

based 

Metalworking 

Fluids 

1,472 78.4 75 718 50 75 33 88 1.26 0.64 0.42 0.57

Light 

Naphthenic-Oil –

Precision Metal 

Removal

48.9 50.0 718 50 130 93 82 0.40 0.41 0.37 0.34

Military 

Specified 

Preservatives 

15.6 660 340 340* N/A 0.12 0.01 -0.06 -0.05

Total 4,120 N/A N/A 1.92 0.75 0.86

*Previous limit was 50 grams per liter. 

Compliance with final VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter, effective January 1, 2015, is also 

expected to be met by using existing direct-contact lubricants. Although there are direct-contact 

lubricant available that currently comply with the 2015 VOC content limit, some 

owners/operators that do not currently use future compliant materials are expected to need to 

reformulate or replace their existing direct-content lubricants. Proposed project reformulated or 

replacement direct-contact lubricants are expected to be water-dilutable, vegetable-based or 

paraffinic-based. Water-dilutable lubricants are concentrated (i.e., water would be added at the 

metal working facility to dilute the concentrated lubricant before use) and, therefore; would be 

shipped in smaller quantities than existing lubricants. Water-dilutable and vegetable-based 

lubricants are expected to be supplied from the Midwest. Paraffinic-based lubricants are 

expected to be supplied from Texas or Richmond, California. All reformulated or replacement 

lubricants are expected to be delivered by rail. Since the reformulated or replacement lubricants 

would be supplied from suppliers that are either equidistant or nearer than existing suppliers and 

in lower volumes, secondary emissions from delivery of reformulated or replacement lubricants 

are expected to be less than existing secondary criteria pollutant emissions. These criteria

pollutant emissions reductions were not quantified for this analysis.

Metal Protecting Fluids Rust Inhibitor

PAR 1144 would establish a new VOC content limit for military specified preservatives effective 

January 1, 2012. Since existing military specified preservatives already comply with this 

proposed VOC content limit are available and in use, no change in mode, distance or frequency 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-15 June 2010 

of transportation of rust inhibitors are expected. Therefore, no additional secondary criteria 

pollutant emissions from rust inhibitors are expected from PAR 1144. 

General Metalworking Fluids

Existing naphthenic oil (light oil and general naphthenic based working fluid) is shipped 

primarily by diesel truck from Bakersfield. It was assumed that 10 percent of existing 

naphthenic oils are shipped by rail and 90 percent are shipped by diesel truck. 

All naphthenic oil metalworking fluids, except for light naphthenic oil (40 SUS) metalworking 

fluids, are expected to already comply with the interim metalworking fluid VOC content limits

of 75 and 130 grams per liter. To comply with the interim metalworking fluid VOC content 

limits, light naphthenic oil metalworking fluid users are expected to replace light naphthenic oils 

with medium naphthenic oils (60 SUS). The 40 SUS and 60 SUS naphthenic oil are produced at 

the same facility in Bakersfield. Therefore, no changes in mode, length or frequency of 

transportation are expected (i.e., no change in secondary emissions from transportation of 

naphthenic oil). 

DMC and the currently used denatured alcohol are provided by the same supplier. Therefore, 

there would be no change secondary criteria emissions from the delivery of DMC.

To comply with the final metal working fluid VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter, all metal 

working fluid naphthenic oil users are expected to need reformulated products or replace to

naphthenic oils in metal working fluids with other types of compliant products. Water-dilutable

and vegetable-based oils are expected to be preferred because they are cost less than paraffinic 

oils. SCAQMD staff estimates that approximately 30 percent of naphthenic oils may be replaced 

by water-dilutable (20 percent) or vegetable-based (10 percent) metal working fluids. Waterdilutable oils would be shipped by rail from Cleveland, Ohio. Vegetable oils would be shipped 

by rail from Des Moines, Iowa. Water-dilutable lubricants are concentrated (i.e., water would be 

added at the metal working facility to dilute the concentrated lubricant before use) and, therefore; 

would be shipped in smaller quantities that existing lubricants. Based on a review of technical 

data sheets, it was assumed that water-dilutable oils and vegetable-based oils would be 20 

percent the volume of existing products. The remaining 70 percent of naphthenic oils are

expected to be replaced by paraffinic oils because they provide better performance then waterdilutable and vegetable-based oils. The replacement paraffinic oil would be shipped by rail from 

Richmond, California or Texas. Based on cost, it was assumed that 30 percent of the paraffinic 

oil would be shipped from Texas and 70 percent would be shipped from Richmond, California. 

Rail from Richmond, California would be expected to travel along one of three routes: the Union 

Pacific US-101 route, the Union Pacific SR-99 route or the Burlington Northern Santa Fe SR-99 

route. The Union Pacific US-101 route travels along the US-101. Both the Union Pacific SR-99 

route and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe SR-99 route travel along the SR-99 from northern 

California to Bakersfield, from Bakersfield to Barstow, then from Barstow along the I-15 and I10 through the district. Rail from out of state (Texas, Iowa and Ohio) would be expected to 

travel from Arizona through San Bernardino, CA. 

SCAQMD Secondary Criteria Pollutant Emissions from Metal Working Fluids

Existing criteria pollutant emissions from truck travel of existing naphthenic oil based metal 

working fluid were estimated using Burden emission factors from the EMFAC2007 model. 

Diesel trucks travel from Bakersfield along the SR-99 and I-5. Rail cars would travel from 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-16 June 2010 

Bakersfield to Barstow, then along the I-15 and I-10. In addition, because truck and rail 

transport covers a number of different air districts or basins, transport emissions are quantified 

during travel in each air district or basin and the separate results for each district or basin are 

compared to the applicable significance thresholds in effect in each air district or basin.

The analysis of rail transport included the following assumptions. Given the low volumes of 

replacement solvents expected to be needed to comply with PAR 1144, it is assumed that all 

compliant products from the different locations could be transported in one railcar. Further, the 

rail car transporting compliant products would be attached to an existing train traveling to 

southern California. Therefore, rail emissions are the incremental emissions resulting from 

locomotives as a result of pulling a heavier load, i.e., one extra railcar.

Transport emissions in the district are based on the existing naphthenic oil volumes in Table 2-3

and weekly delivery, ten diesel trucks would travel from near Labec, California (the northern 

border of the district that crosses the I-5) through the district on a peak day. The peak day would 

also include one rail car traveling from Cajon along the I-15 and I-10. 

Proposed project transport emissions in the district were also estimated from rail transportation 

of replacement solvents from Texas, Iowa and Ohio along the segment starting at the 

MDAB/SCAQMD border San Bernardino, California through the district. Proposed project 

emissions were estimated from rail transportation of replacement solvents from Richmond, 

California along one of three routes: the Union Pacific US-101 route, the Union Pacific SR-99 

route or the Burlington Northern Santa Fe SR-99 route. The Union Pacific US-101 route would 

travel along the US-101 from near Westlake Village into the district. Both the Union Pacific SR99 route and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe SR-99 route travel from Cajon along I-15 and I10 through the district.

Two secondary criteria emissions scenarios were developed one where all rail cars from 

Richmond would travel along the Union Pacific US-101 route and another where all rail cars 

from Richmond would travel along either the Union Pacific SR-99 or the Burlington Northern 

Santa Fe SR-99 routes. Since all rail cars originate from the same refinery in Richmond, it was 

assumed that only one car per day would be need to transport compliant materials to the district. 

In both rail scenarios, it was also assumed that three rail cars would arrive from out of state: one 

from Texas, one from Iowa and one from Ohio. The Union Pacific SR-99/Burlington Northern 

Santa Fe SR-99 route scenario was used for peak day emissions because it generated greater

emissions (see Appendix B).

The difference between the emissions from the existing transportation of naphthenic oil metal 

working fluid and the emissions from the transportation of replacement or reformulated metal 

working fluid were compared to the SCAQMD significance thresholds in Table 2-4. The 

difference between the secondary criteria pollutant emissions from transportation of existing 

fluid and the expected replacement/reformulated fluids within the SCAQMD are below the 

operational significance thresholds in Table 2-4. The paraffinic oil, water-dilutable and 

vegetable-based working fluid suppliers are further from the district than the naphthenic oil 

suppliers, but emissions from rail would be less than by diesel truck, because rail tankers are 

larger than truck tankers (resulting in fewer trips). Detailed operational criteria pollutant 

emission calculations can be found in Appendix B. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-17 June 2010 

Table 2-4

Secondary Criteria Pollutant Operation Emissions in the District

Pollutant CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

ROG

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

PM10

lb/day

PM2.5

lb/day

Existing Fluid Truck and Rail Transportation 8.21 28.2 2.14 0.076 1.27 1.13

Proposed Fluid Rail Transportation 3.35 19.8 1.10 0.24 0.59 0.57

Difference in Daily Secondary Emissions -4.86 -8.40 -1.04 0.16 -0.68 -0.55

Operational Significance Threshold 550 55 55 150 150 150

Significant? No No No No No No

Secondary Criteria Pollutant Emissions from Transport of Metal Working Fluids in Other Air 

Districts

Secondary criteria emissions were estimated using EPA emission factors for locomotives. 

Existing emissions from naphthenic oil based metal working fluids transported from Bakersfield 

to Los Angeles by both rail and diesel truck were estimated. Proposed project emissions from 

rail transportation of replacement solvents from the segment in each air district were estimated 

for each rail route and compared to the CEQA thresholds in Table 2-2.

Two secondary criteria emissions scenarios were developed one where all rail cars from 

Richmond would travel along the Union Pacific US-101 route and another where all rail cars 

from Richmond would travel along either the Union Pacific SR-99 or the Burlington Northern 

Santa Fe SR-99. Since all rail cars originate from the same refinery in Richmond, it was 

assumed that only one car per day would be sent to the district. In both scenarios, it was also 

assumed that three rail cars would arrive from out of state: one from Texas, one from Iowa and 

one from Ohio. The Union Pacific SR-99/Burlington Northern Santa Fe SR-99 route scenario 

was used for peak day emissions for the KCAPCD and MDAQMD, because it generated larger 

secondary criteria emissions (see Appendix B) in those air districts. The Union Pacific US-101 

route scenario was used for peak day emissions for the BAAQMD, MBUAPCD, SBCAPCD, 

SJVAPCD, SLOCAPCD and VACAPCD, because it generated greater secondary criteria 

emissions (see Appendix B) in those air districts. Tables 2-5 through 2-12 present the peak day 

and peak annual emissions in each air district and associated significance thresholds. Tables 2-5 

and 2-12 show that all secondary emissions are below the significance thresholds for criteria 

pollutants in each associated air district.

Metalworking fluids contain oil, grease and trace amounts of metal that make them unsuitable 

for direct discharge into the sewer system, and which make them hazardous wastes. It is 

assumed that existing and proposed metalworking fluids would be disposed of as hazardous 

wastes at the same hazardous waste treatment sites (see Environmental Topic VIII. Hazardous 

and Hazardous Materials for further discussion). Since the same volume would be disposed of at 

the same hazardous waste treatment sites, there would be no increase in secondary emissions 

from hazardous waste disposal. 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-18 June 2010 

Table 2-5

Daily Secondary Criteria Pollutant Operation Emissions in the BAAQMD

Air District Pollutant Significance Thresholds Operational Mass 

Emissions Significant

BAAQMD

Maximum 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Maximum 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

ROG 80 15 0.18 0.002 o

NOx 80 15 3.31 0.041 o

PM10 80 15 0.1 0.001 o

PM2.5 none none 0.1 0.001 o

CO 9.0 ppm (8-hour average); 

20.0 ppm (1-hour average) 0.56 0.007 o

Table 2-6

Annual Secondary Criteria Pollutant Operation Emissions in the KCAPCD

Air District Pollutant Significance Thresholds Operational Mass 

Emissions Significant

KCAPCD

Maximum 

Daily (lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Maximum 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

VOC N/A 25 -0.03 0.001 o

NOx N/A 25 -0.52 0.016 o

SOx N/A 27 -0.01 0.0002 o

PM10 N/A 15 -0.02 0.0005 o

PM2.5 N/A N/A -0.02 0.0005 o

CO N/A -0.09 0.003 o

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-19 June 2010 

Table 2-7

Annual Secondary Criteria Pollutant Operation Emissions in the MBUAPCD

Air District Pollutant Significance Thresholds Operational Mass 

Emissions Significant

MBUAPCD

Maximum 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Maximum 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

VOC 137 N/A 0.43 0.004 o

NOx 137 N/A 7.7 0.067 o

PM10 82 N/A 0.23 0.002 o

PM2.5 N/A N/A 0.22 0.0019 o

SOx 150 N/A 0.09 0.0008 o

CO 550 N/A 1.31 0.011 o

Table 2-8

Annual Secondary Criteria Pollutant Operation Emissions in the MDAQMD

Air District Pollutant Significance Thresholds Operational Mass 

Emissions Significant

MDAQMD

Maximum 

Daily (lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Maximum 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

ROG 137 25 0.23 0.006 o

NOx 137 25 4.2 0.10 o

SOx 137 15 0.05 0.001 o

PM10 82 15 0.13 0.003 o

PM2.5 82 10 0.12 0.003 o

CO 548 100 0.71 0.017 o

Table 2-9

Annual Secondary Criteria Pollutant Operation Emissions in the SBCAPCD

Air District Pollutant Significance Thresholds Operational Mass 

Emissions Significant

SBCAPCD

Maximum 

Daily (lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Maximum 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

ROC 240 N/A 0.33 0.006 o

NOx 240 N/A 6.0 0.011 o

PM10 80 N/A 0.18 0.003 o

PM2.5 N/A N/A 0.17 0.003 o

CO none 1.0 0.019 o
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-20 June 2010 

Table 2-10

Annual Secondary Criteria Pollutant Operation Emissions in the SLOCAPCD

Air District Pollutant Significance Thresholds Operational Mass 

Emissions Significant

SLOCAPCD

Maximum 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Maximum 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

ROG + NOx 25* 25* 1.6 0.10 o

PM10 25 25 0.16 0.003 o

PM2.5 N/A N/A 0.15 0.003 o

DPM** 1.25 N/A 0.16 0.003 o

CO 550 N/A 0.9 0.017 o

* Significance threshold is based on ROG and NOx combined value.

** Diesel Particulate Matter

Table 2-11

Annual Secondary Criteria Pollutant Operation Emissions in the SLVAPCD

Air District Pollutant Significance Thresholds Operational Mass 

Emissions Significant

SJVAPCD

Maximum 

Daily (lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Maximum 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

ROG N/A 10 -0.23 -0.014 o

NOx N/A 10 1.8 -0.10 o

PM10 N/A N/A -0.19 -0.01 o

PM2.5 N/A N/A -0.13 -0.01 o

SOx 0.04 ppm (24-hour avg.); 

0.25 ppm (1-hour average) 0.04 0.17 0.003

CO 9.0 ppm (8-hour average); 

20.0 ppm (1-hour average) 4.6 -1.7 -0.06

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-21 June 2010 

Table 2-12

Annual Secondary Criteria Pollutant Operation Emissions in the SLVAPCD

Air District Pollutant Significance Thresholds Operational Mass 

Emissions Significant

VCAPCD

Maximum 

Daily (lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

Maximum 

Daily 

(lb/day)

Annual 

(ton/yr)

ROC 5 N/A 0.19 0.0035 o

NOx 5 N/A 3.3 0.0621 o

PM10 N/A N/A 0.1 0.0019 o

PM2.5 N/A N/A 0.1 0.0018 o

CO 9.0 ppm (8-hour average); 

20.0 ppm (1-hour average) 0.56 0.011 o

Greenhouse Gases 

In addition to criteria pollutant emissions, combustion processes generate GHG emissions that 

have the potential to affect global climate. Reducing the VOC content of direct-contact 

lubricants, metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors does not produce GHGs. However, mobile 

sources used to deliver compliant products during the operational phase are expected to generate 

GHG emissions in combustion exhaust. The following GHG analysis focuses primarily on CO2 

emissions because CO2 is the primary GHG pollutant emitted during the combustion process and 

is the GHG pollutant for which emission factors are most readily available. CARB EMFAC2007

emission factors for on-road mobile sources were used to determine carbon dioxide (CO2) and 

methane (CH4) emission factors. EMFAC2007 does not include nitrous oxide (N2O) emission 

factors. EPA’s emission factors for locomotives were used to determine CO2 emission factors

from locomotives. Neither N2O nor CH4 emission factors were identified and; therefore, not 

available for locomotives. Since N2O and CH4 emission factors for locomotives were not 

found, only CO2 could be analyzed. Therefore, only CO2 emissions were estimated for both 

trucks and rail cars. Detailed calculations of the GHG emissions are included in Appendix B. 

The analysis of GHGs is a much different analysis than the analysis of criteria pollutants for the 

following reasons. For criteria pollutants, significance thresholds are based on daily emissions 

because attainment or non-attainment is based on daily exceedances of applicable ambient air 

quality standards. Further, several ambient air quality standards are based on relatively shortterm exposure effects on human health, e.g., one-hour and eight-hour. Since the half-life of CO2 

is approximately 100 years, the effects of GHGs are longer-term, affecting global climate over a 

relatively long time frame. As a result, GHG emission impacts are considered to be cumulative 

impacts rather than project-specific impacts. 

Direct-contact Lubricants 

The proposed amended rule would establish an interim VOC content limit of 70 50 grams per 

liter for direct-contact lubricants effective January 1, 2012. Most products currently comply with 

the interim VOC content limit. No reformulation or replacement of direct-contact lubrications 

are expected to be needed to meet the interim VOC content limit. The existing direct-contact 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-22 June 2010 

lubricants are manufactured in the Midwest and delivered by rail. Therefore, direct-contact 

lubrication VOC content limits would not generate any secondary GHG emissions.

Compliance with the final VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter, effective January 1, 2015, is 

also expected to be met by using existing direct-contact lubricants. Although there are directcontact lubricant available that currently comply with the 2015 VOC content limit, some 

owners/operators that do not currently use future compliant materials are expected to need to 

reformulate or replace their existing direct-content lubricants. Proposed project reformulated or 

replacement direct-contact lubricants are expected to be water-dilutable, vegetable-based or 

paraffinic-based. Water-dilutable lubricants are concentrated (i.e., water would be added at the 

metal working facility to dilute the concentrated lubricant before use) and, therefore; would be 

shipped in smaller quantities than existing lubricants. Water-dilutable and vegetable-based 

lubricants are expected to be supplied from the Midwest. Paraffinic-based lubricants are 

expected to be supplied from Texas or Richmond, California. All reformulated or replacement 

lubricants are expected to be delivered by rail. Since the reformulated or replacement lubricants 

would be supplied from suppliers that are either equidistant or nearer than existing suppliers and 

in lower volumes, secondary GHG emissions from delivery of reformulated or replacement 

lubricants are expected to be less than existing secondary GHG emissions. These GHG 

emissions reductions were not quantified for this analysis.

Metal Protecting Fluids Rust Inhibitors

PAR 1144 would establish a new VOC content limit for military specified preservatives effective 

January 1, 2012. Since existing military specified preservatives that already comply with this 

proposed VOC content limit are available and in use, no change in mode, distance or frequency 

of transportation of rust inhibitors are expected. Therefore, no additional secondary GHG 

emissions from rust inhibitors are expected from PAR 1144. 

General Metalworking Fluids 

Existing naphthenic oil (light oil and general naphthenic based working fluid) is shipped 

primarily by diesel truck from Bakersfield. It was assumed that 10 percent of existing 

naphthenic oil is shipped by rail and 90 percent is shipped by diesel truck. 

All naphthenic oil metalworking fluids, except for light naphthenic oil (40 SUS) metalworking 

fluids, are expected to already comply with the interim metalworking fluid VOC content limits

of 75 and 130 grams per liter. To comply with the interim metalworking fluid VOC content 

limit, light naphthenic oil metalworking fluid users would replace light naphthenic oil with 

medium naphthenic oil (60 SUS). The 40 SUS and 60 SUS naphthenic oil are produced at the 

same facility in Bakersfield. Therefore, no changes in mode, length or frequency of 

transportation are expected (i.e., no change in secondary emissions from transportation of 

naphthenic oil). Therefore, the new metalworking fluid VOC content limits would not generate 

any secondary GHG emissions.

DMC and the currently used denatured alcohol are provided by the same supplier. Therefore, 

there would be no change secondary GHG emissions from the delivery of DMC.

To comply with the final metal working fluid VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter, all metal 

naphthenic oil based metal working fluid users are expected to need reformulated materials or to 

replace naphthenic oils in metal working fluids with compliant products. Water-dilutable and 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-23 June 2010 

vegetable-based oils are expected to be preferred because they cost less than paraffinic oils. 

SCAQMD staff estimates that approximately 30 percent of the naphthenic oil may be replaced 

by water-dilutable (20 percent) or vegetable-based (10 percent) metal working fluids. Waterdilutable oil would be shipped by rail from Cleveland, Ohio. Vegetable oil would be shipped by 

rail from Des Moines, Iowa. The remaining 70 percent of the naphthenic oil is expected to be 

replaced by paraffinic oil. The replacement paraffinic oil would be shipped by rail from 

Richmond, California or Texas. Based on cost, it was assumed that 30 percent of the paraffinic 

oil would be shipped from Texas and 70 percent would be shipped from Richmond, California. 

Rail from Richmond, California would be expected to travel along one of three routes: the Union 

Pacific US-101 route, the Union Pacific SR-99 route or the Burlington Northern Santa Fe SR-99 

route. Both the Union Pacific SR-99 route and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe SR-99 route 

travel along the SR-99 from northern California to Bakersfield, from Bakersfield to Barstow, 

then from Barstow along the I-15 and I-10 through the district. Rail from Texas, Iowa and Ohio 

would be expected to travel from Arizona through San Bernardino, California. GHG emissions 

along the entire trip length from source (Bakersfield, Richmond, Texas, Iowa and Ohio) through 

district were estimated. Table 2-13 presents the existing and proposed metal working fluid 

transportation GHG emissions. Detailed calculations are presented in Appendix B. PAR 1144 is 

expected to result in an incremental increase of 0.53 metric ton of CO2 emissions per year. An 

incremental increase of 0.53 ton per year of CO2 emissions is less than the significance threshold 

of 10,000 metric tons of CO2eq per year. No primary or secondary GHG emissions would be 

generated by PAR 1144. PAR 1144 would fully implement 2007 AQMP control measure CTS01 – Emission Reductions from Lubricants, which along with other control measures in the 2007 

AQMP, are a comprehensive ongoing regulatory program that would reduce overall GHGs 

emissions. Therefore, PAR 1144 is not considered significant for adverse GHG impacts. 

Table 2-13

Annual CO2 Emission Reductions Resulting from PAR 1144

Description CO2 Emissions,

metric tons per year

Existing Fluid Truck and Rail Transportation 117

Proposed Fluid Rail Transportation 118

Total GHG Increase 0.53

Significance Threshold 10,000

Significant? No

Criteria and Greenhouse Gas Conclusions 

By establishing a new military specified preservative subcategory with a higher VOC content 

limit than is currently the case, PAR 1144 would forego previously expected VOC reductions; 

however, PAR 1144 as a whole would result in overall VOC reductions. PAR 1144 would not 

generate any direct emissions. Secondary emissions are not expected from PAR 1144 from the 

difference in mode, frequency and distance of transport to deliver existing and expected 

replacement fluids are less than the operational significance thresholds in Tables 2-1 and 2-2. 

Therefore, PAR 1144 would not diminish an existing air quality rule or future compliance 

requirement resulting in a significant increase in any air pollutant. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-24 June 2010 

Because secondary criteria emissions are not significant, they are not cumulatively considerable 

per CEQA Guidelines §15064(h)(1) and; therefore not cumulatively significant. Also, 

implementing all SCAQMD rules (including PAR 1144) is expected to result in overall emission 

reductions. 

Since PAR 1144 would result in a VOC emissions reduction, it would not violate any air quality 

standard; contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation; or result in a cumulative 

considerable net increase in any criteria pollutant for which the region is in non-attainment under 

an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. 

GHG emissions are considered cumulative impacts. GHG emissions from PAR 1144 (0.53

metric ton of CO2 per year) are less than the significance threshold of 10,000 metric tons of CO2

per year; and together with other control measures in the 2007 AQMP, which is a comprehensive 

ongoing regulatory program that would reduce overall GHGs emissions PAR 1144 would not 

generate any new GHG emissions; therefore, cumulative adverse GHG impacts from PAR 1144 

are not considered significant. 

III.d) PAR 1144 may result in toxic air contaminants (TAC) emissions from direct and indirect 

sources. Direct sources would include replacement or reformulated direct-contact lubricants, 

metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors. Replacement or reformulated direct-contact lubricants, 

metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors may contain TACs. Therefore, the use of replacement or 

reformulated direct-contact lubricants, metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors may increase 

health risks to nearby receptors. 

Indirect sources would include emission from diesel trucks or related to rail cars used to 

transport both existing and replacement or reformulated direct-contact lubricants, metalworking 

fluids and rust inhibitors. 

Direct-contact Lubricants 

Owner/operators are expected to already comply with the interim VOC content limit for directcontact lubricants. Therefore, no change in TAC emissions is expected from the interim VOC 

content limit for direct-contact lubricants. Although there are direct-contact lubricant available 

that currently comply with the 2015 VOC content limit, some owners/operators that do not 

currently use future compliant materials (water-dilutable, vegetable-based or paraffinic oil-based 

direct-contact lubricants) are expected to need to reformulate or replace their existing directcontent lubricants. Water-dilutable and vegetable-based direct-contact lubricants may contain 

triethanolamine and monoethanolamine. Health risks from increase used of triethanolamine and 

monoethanolamine are evaluated below. Naphthenic and paraffinic oils may contain additives 

that have short-chain chlorinated paraffins (SCCPs). 

General Metalworking Fluids 

Metalworking fluids other than vanishing oil and rust inhibitors are not currently regulated. The 

proposed amended rule would establish and interim VOC content limits of 75 and 130 grams per 

liter effective January 1, 2012. There are products currently available that comply with the 

interim proposed VOC content limits. Some owners/operators that use light naphthenic oils (40 

SUS) are expected replace them with 60 SUS naphthenic oils to comply with the interim VOC 

content limits. The TAC content of 60 SUS and 40 SUS naphthenic oils are expected to be 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-25 June 2010 

similar. Therefore, no change in TAC emissions is expected from the interim VOC content limit 

for general metalworking fluids. 

Compliance with the final VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter, effective, January 1, 2015, is 

expected to be met by reformulated or replacement oils (paraffinic oils, water-dilutable oils or 

vegetable oils). Water-dilutable oils or vegetable-based oils are preferable because of the cost; 

however, paraffinic oils would likely be used because they provide better performance than 

water-dilutable and vegetable-based oils. Water-dilutable and vegetable-based direct-contact 

lubricants may contain triethanolamine and monoethanolamine. Health risks from increase used

of triethanolamine and monoethanolamine are evaluated below. Naphthenic and paraffinic oils 

may contain additives that have short-chain chlorinated paraffins (SCCPs). Health risk from 

replacement of naphthenic and paraffinic oils are evaluated below. 

Metal Protecting Fluids Rust Inhibitors

Owner/operators would comply with the new military specified preservatives VOC content limit 

by using existing military specified preservatives; therefore, no change in TAC emissions from 

this category is expected. Since, there would be no change in TAC emissions; there would be no 

change in health risk from this category. 

Toxic Air Contaminant Assessment 

Dimethyl Carbonate

Subsequent to the release of the Draft EA for public review, an exemption was added to allow 

the use of dimethyl carbonate (DMC) as a cooling solvent in computed numerically controlled 

(CNC) machines where permeable media are used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in 

place during cutting. There is only one facility that was identified that currently uses such a 

machine. The exemption applies only to affected machines existing at the time of the adoption 

of PAR 1144 and requires that the facility operators vent the machine out of the building. Since 

the CNC machine would be enclosed and vented out of the building, there would be no health 

risk from DMC to the workers. Off-site receptors would be exposed to the emissions vented 

outside of the building; therefore, health risk was estimated for the off-site receptors.

Interim Health Risk Health Risk Values

The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment has developed interim non-carcinogenic 

acute and chronic reference exposure level (REL) values of 18,000 and 5,500 micrograms per 

cubic meter respectively for DMC.6 No carcinogenic health values have been developed for 

DMC. However, EPA has developed a pre-external peer review unit risk factor of 1E-6 cubic 

meters per microgram for methanol.7 Since DMC can be metabolized into methanol, a 

carcinogenic health risk can be estimated for the maximum amount of methanol that can be 

degraded from the DMC emitted. 

EPA’s methanol unit risk factor is under public review, so this value may change or be 

withdrawn. The same is true with OEHHA’s developed interim non-carcinogenic acute and 

 

6

 OEHHA, Revised Assessment of Health Effects of Exposure to Dimethyl Carbonate, a Chemical Petitioned for 

Exemption from VOC Rules, memo from Richard Corey to Melanie Marty, Ph.D., December 8, 2009. 

7

 EPA, Toxicological Review of Methanol (CAS No. 67-56-1) In Support of Summary Information on the 

Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), December 2009. EPA/635/R-09. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-26 June 2010 

chronic REL values. Therefore, health risk estimates from these interim values is considered 

conservative. 

5on-Carcinogenic Health Risk

The existing facility would use a maximum of 327 gallons (2,917 pounds) of DMC annually. 

Non-carcinogenic health risk from DMC was estimated according to the Tier 2 methodology 

presented in the SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedures for Rules 1401 and 212, Package L, 

July 2008. The nearest sensitive receptor is 100 meters from the affected facility. The nearest 

off-site worker receptor is within 25 meters. Worst-case point source parameters were used. 

Since the facility is within Source Receptor Area 1, Downtown Los Angeles meteorology was 

used. Detailed calculations are presented in Appendix B. The maximum chronic hazard indices 

would be 0.0069 for the worker receptor and 0.0006 for sensitive receptor. The maximum acute 

hazard indices would be 0.16 for the worker receptor and 0.03 for sensitive receptor. Hazard 

indices below 1.0 are not considered significant; therefore, PAR 1144 would not be significant 

for non-carcinogenic health risk.

Carcinogenic Health Risk

Therefore, 2,917 pounds per year of DMC would form 2,701 pounds per year of methanol. The 

DMC would be vented at ambient temperature from a 37 foot high, eight inch diameter stack at a 

flow rate of 300 cubic feet per minute. The building is L-shaped and 35 feet tall. The stack 

would be centered in the western portion of the building. Building downwash was estimated 

using EPA’s BIP model. DMC concentrations were estimated at receptors placed at 20 meter 

spacing along the fence-line and in a 50 meter by 50 meter grid surrounding the facility. Central 

Los Angeles meteorological data was used. A maximum DMC concentration of 24.9

micrograms per cubic meter was estimated at a worker receptor on the southwest fence line of 

the affected facility. A maximum DMC concentration 3.1 micrograms per cubic meter was 

estimated at a residential receptor to the south of the affected facility.

The stoichiometric rate of dimethyl carbonate to methanol is two-to-one (two moles of methanol 

are formed from each mole of dimethyl carbonate) based on the degradation formula:

C3H6O3 + 2 H2O → 2 CH3OH + H2CO3

 

To convert the molar rate of methanol to a mass rate of methanol, the molar rate of methanol is 

converted to a mass rate by multiplying the molar rate of methanol by its molecular weight of 32 

grams per mole. So for every gram of dimethyl carbonate 0.71 grams of methanol would be 

formed.

(1 gram C3H6O3)/(90 gram C3H6O3/mole C3H6O3) x (2 mole CH3OH/mole C3H6O3) x 

(32 gram CH3OH/mole CH3OH) = 0.71 gram CH3OH

To estimate the exposure to DMC that has metabolized into methanol, the maximum modeled 

DMC concentration of 24.9 micrograms per cubic meter at a worker was multiplied by 0.71 to 

yield an effective methanol concentration of 17.7 micrograms per cubic meter. The maximum 

methanol concentration for a resident would be 2.2 micrograms per cubic meter.

The area on this side of the facility is set aside for overhead electrical lines and trail along the 

Los Angeles River. Receptors in this area would not be classified either as sensitive or worker 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-27 June 2010 

receptors, because workers and people using the trail are not expected to stay at this location for 

long periods of time. However, since workers may visit the site to be conservative the receptor 

was treated as a worker receptor. A carcinogenic health risk of 3.3 in one million was estimated

using worker receptor parameters (149 liters per kilogram-day breathing rate, of 245 days per 

year exposure frequency and exposure duration of 40 years). The maximum carcinogenic health 

risk at a residential receptor was estimated to be 2.1 in one million (302 liters per kilogram-day 

breathing rate, of 350 days per year exposure frequency and exposure duration of 70 years). 

Incremental increases in carcinogenic health risk that are less than ten in a million are not 

considered significant; therefore, PAR 1144 is not expected to generate significant carcinogenic 

health risk.

Chlorinated Paraffins Evaluation 

Both nNaphthenic and paraffinic metalworking fluids may contain additives with chlorinated 

paraffins. On January 19, 2010, EPA released a short-chain chlorinated paraffins (SCCPs) 

Action Plan. SCCPs are persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic to aquatic organisms at low 

concentrations. They can remain in the environment for a significant amount of time and can 

bioaccumulate in animal tissues, increasing the probability and duration of exposure. Even 

relatively small releases of these chemicals from individual manufacturing, processing, or waste 

management facilities have the potential to accumulate over time to higher levels and cause 

significant adverse impacts on the environment. EPA intends to further evaluate whether 

medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (MCCPs) and long-chain chlorinated paraffins (LCCPs) also 

should be addressed. These chemicals appear to present similar concerns, although data on them 

are not as comprehensive as data on SCCPs. 

PAR 1144 is designed to reduce VOC emissions from affected operations, but is not directly 

designed to reduce TACs. However, to the extent VOCs used in affected operations are toxic, 

PAR 1144 could result in a slight reduction in TAC emissions. Individual rules in SCAQMD 

Regulation XIV are designed to reduce TACs. As a VOC rule, PAR 1144 does not limit the use 

of low- or non-VOC additives directly. PAR 1144 controls VOC emissions by establishing VOC 

content limits for metalworking fluids, which include components such as additives. To comply 

with the VOC content limits, 50 70 or 130 grams per liter, in the working fluid category; affected 

metalworking owners/operators are expected to replace light naphthenic oil based metalworking 

fluids with paraffinic heavy naphthenic oils-based, water-dilutable oils-based or vegetable oilbased metalworking fluids. Replacing light naphthenic oils with heavy naphthenic oils in 

metalworking fluids is not expected to increase the amount of SCCP additives. Since no other 

replacement or reformulation of products is expected to be required to comply with PAR 1144, 

no change in SCCP additives is expected. Therefore, no increase in health risk from SCCP 

additives is expected from PAR 1144.

Because of its paraffin content, paraffinic oil cannot contain the same amount of chlorinate 

paraffin additive as naphthenic oil without the additive forming a solid, which would precipitate 

out of the metal working fluid. Water-dilutable oil or vegetable oil based metal working fluids 

would not contain any chlorinate paraffin. 

Therefore, by replacing naphthenic oil with paraffinic oil, is expected to reduce the amount of 

chlorinate paraffin additive used. Reducing the amount of chlorinate paraffin additive would 

reduce health risk.
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-28 June 2010 

Triethanolamine and Monoethanolamine Evaluation 

Monoethanolamine and triethanolamine are only expected to be found in non naphthenic oilbased metalworking fluids. Since PAR 1144 compliant non-naphthenic metalworking fluids and 

direct-contact lubricants are already in use and the sales weighed average VOC content for these 

products is below the proposed VOC content limit, SCAQMD staff does not expect 

metalworking owner/operators would reformulate or replace products. Since PAR 1144 is not 

expected to result in replacement or reformulation of non-naphthenic oil-based metalworking 

fluids no increase in monoethanolamine and triethanolamine is expected. Therefore, no increase 

in health risk from monoethanolamine and triethanolamine is expected from PAR 1144.

PAR 1144 is expected to increase the use of water-dilutable metal working fluid, but such fluids 

currently meet the VOC content limits proposed for PAR 1144. Some direct-contact lubricants, 

and naphthenic oils might be replaced with water-dilutable oils or vegetable oils. 

Triethanolamine and monoethanolamine are components of some water-dilutable metal working 

fluid. Based on a review of material safety data sheets (MSDSs), the highest triethanolamine 

content in an identified potential alternative compliant metal working fluid was 20 percent, and 

the highest monoethanolamine content in an identified potential alternative compliant metal 

working fluid was five percent. Triethanolamine has been identified as causing occupational 

asthma by the Association of Environmental and Occupational Health Clinics. The American 

Conference of Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Values (TLV) of five milligrams 

per cubic meter is associated with eye and skin irritation, and contact dermatitis. The Cal/OSHA 

permissible exposure limit (PEL) is also five milligrams per cubic meter. TLV and Cal/OSHA 

PELs are short-term concentration averages (eight-hour averages). The National Toxicology 

Program concluded that triethanolamine caused liver tumors in female mice and may have

caused a slight increase in hemanogiosarcomas of the liver in male mice. However, no cancer 

potency values were identified in the Assessment, Development and Demonstration of 

Alternatives to VOC-Emitting Lubricants, Vanishing Oils and Rust Inhibitors Report.

Monoethanolamine causes eye and skin irritation in animal testing and an ACGIH TLV of three 

ppm has been established to minimize skin and eye irritation in workers. The Cal/OSHA PEL is 

also three ppm. 

Cancer potency and reference exposure limits for triethanolamine and monoethanolamine have 

not been established by OEHHA. SCAQMD staff does not typically evaluate cancer and noncancer health risks from chemicals that do not have cancer potency and reference exposure limits 

provided by OEHHA. A similar analysis to the following analysis was prepared in response to a 

request from the public during the public workshop prior to the adoption of Rule 1144. For 

consistency the following TAC analysis has been prepared for PAR 1144. It should be noted 

that SCAQMD staff does not normally evaluate health risks using the following methodology 

because it is not consistent with SCAQMD HRA procedures in the SCAQMD’s Risk 

Assessment Procedures for Rules 1401 and 212.

The largest amount of metal working fluid used at a single facility is 32,000 gallons of fluid per 

year. Metal working fluid is used in aluminum metal working processes. As a worst-case

analysis it was assumed that the alternative metal working fluid with the highest content of 

triethanolamine or monoethanolamine identified in MSDSs would be used at this facility. The 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-29 June 2010 

MSDS for alternative fluids show a maximum dilution rate of 10 to 1. Therefore, only 3,200 

gallons of alternative metal working fluid would be expected. 

Since OEHHA cancer potency and reference exposure limits have not been established, but 

Cal/OSHA PELs and ACGIH TLVs are available, triethanolamine and monoethanolamine 

concentrations were evaluated against the Cal/OSHA PELs/ACGIH TLVs. Any compound that 

exceeds the applicable PEL or TLV concentration at the receptor could cause adverse health 

effects and would, therefore, be considered a significant adverse health impact.

Based on the above assumptions, a receptor at 25 meters or less from facility with the largest 

metal working fluid use would be exposed to a concentration of 2.9 milligrams per cubic meter 

of triethanolamine and 0.7 ppm of monoethanolamine. These concentrations are less than the 

TLVs and Cal/OSHA PELs of five milligrams per cubic meter for triethanolamine and three ppm 

for monoethanolamine. 

Diesel Particulate Exhaust 

The same supplier that currently supplies the CNC machine operator denatured alcohol would 

supply the operator with DMC. The same suppliers provide both 60 SUS naphthenic oils and the 

currently used light naphthenic oils. No other solvent substitutions or replacements are expected.

Since no change in mode, distance or frequency of transportation is expected to be necessary for 

affected operators to comply with PAR 1144, no increase in diesel particulate exhaust is 

expected. Therefore, no increase in health risk is expected from transportation related to PAR 

1144.

Two secondary toxic air contaminate (TAC) emissions scenarios were developed one where all 

rail cars from Richmond would travel along the Union Pacific US-101 route and another where 

all rail cars from Richmond would travel along either the Union Pacific SR-99 or the Burlington 

Northern Santa Fe SR-99. Since all rail cars originate from the same refinery in Richmond, it 

was assume that only one car per day would be sent to the district. In both scenarios, it was also 

assumed that three rail cars would arrive from out of state: one from Texas, one from Iowa and 

one from Ohio. The Union Pacific SR-99/Burlington Northern Santa Fe SR-99 route scenario 

was used for annual emissions for the KCAPCD and MDAQMD, because it generated greater 

TAC emissions per mile (see Appendix B) in those air districts. The Union Pacific US-101 route 

scenario was used for annual emissions for the district, BAAQMD, MBUAPCD, SBCAPCD, 

SJVAPCD, SLOCAPCD and VACAPCD, because it generated greater TAC emissions per mile 

(see Appendix B) in those air districts. 

Secondary TAC exposures were also evaluated from exposure to diesel particulate matter from 

rail transportation of compliant products. Since health risk assessment is a local impact, these 

emissions cannot be offset by the existing truck and rail emissions, which occur along a different 

route. Health risk is typically required for sensitive receptors within a quarter mile of a source. 

Therefore, the localized affected around a sensitive receptor would be a half mile (quarter mile 

on each side). There are three distinct rail car routes proposed: the Union Pacific US 101 route, 

the Union Pacific SR-99/Burlington Northern Santa Fe SR-99 route, and the out of state route. 

Emissions per half mile along the Union Pacific US 101 route was estimated to be 0.04 pounds 

of DPM per year. Emissions per half mile along the Union Pacific SR-99/Burlington Northern 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-30 June 2010 

Santa Fe SR-99 route were estimated to 0.03 pounds of DPM per year. Emissions per half mile 

along the out of state route were estimated to be 0.02 pounds of DPM per year.

The screening emission level in Table 1 of the Risk Assessment Procedures for Rules 1401 and 

212, Version 7.0 is 0.12 pounds of DPM per year at the closest receptor distance (25 meters). 

The expected DPM emissions increase of 0.04 pounds per year per half mile to any receptor 

along the rail route through SCAQMD is below the screening threshold value of 0.12 pounds of 

DPM per year. 

Conclusion 

Since triethanolamine and monoethanolamine concentrations would not cause exposure 

exceeding the applicable PELs or TLVs and diesel mass emissions are below significance 

thresholds, significant adverse air quality impacts to sensitive receptors are not expected from 

implementing PAR 1144. The health risk from DMC would be the only health risk from the 

proposed project, because no other health effects were identified from PAR 1144. Since all 

health risk from DMC would be less than significant, PAR 1144 is not expected to generate 

significant for health risk.

III.e) Historically, the SCAQMD has enforced odor nuisance complaints through SCAQMD 

Rule 402 - Nuisance. Affected facilities are not expected to create objectionable odors affecting 

a substantial number of people for the following reasons: 1) operators currently use 

metalworking fluids; 2) the odors of existing and replacement solvents is expected to be similar; 

and 3) the operations occur at facilities that are typically located in industrial zones. 

Conclusion 

Based on the preceding discussions, PAR 1144 is expected to reduce VOC emissions, which is 

an air quality benefit. 

The proposal has no provision that would cause a violation of any air quality standard or directly 

contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. The lower VOC emission would 

assist in reducing overall VOC, PM, and ozone concentrations throughout the district. 

Since VOC air quality effects from implementing PAR 1144 are seen as benefits, and PAR 1144 

would not cause an exceedance of any of the air quality significance thresholds in Table 2-1, air 

quality impacts are not considered to be cumulatively considerable as defined in CEQA 

Guidelines §15065(h)(1). The analysis of GHGs also concluded that PAR 1144 would not 

generate significant adverse cumulative GHG impacts. Therefore, the proposed project is not 

expected to result in significant adverse cumulative impacts for any criteria or GHG pollutant. 

Thus, PAR 1144 is not expected to result in significant adverse air quality impacts, and 

mitigation measures are not required. 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-31 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the 

project: 

 

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 Game 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, or 

regulations, or by the California Department of 

Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 



c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally 

protected wetlands as defined by §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 

native resident or migratory fish or wildlife 

species or with established native resident or 

migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of 

native wildlife nursery sites? 



e) Conflicting 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 Community 

Conservation Plan, or other approved local, 

regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 



 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-32 June 2010 

Significance Criteria 

Impacts on biological resources will be considered significant if any of the following criteria 

apply: 

- The project results in a loss of plant communities or animal habitat considered to be rare, 

threatened or endangered by federal, state or local agencies. 

- The project interferes substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory wildlife 

species. 

- The project adversely affects aquatic communities through construction or operation of the 

project. 

Discussion 

IV.a), b), c), & d) PAR 1144 would not require any new development or require modifications 

to buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed VOC content limits for directcontact lubricants, metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors. As a result, PAR 1144 would not 

directly or indirectly affect any species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status 

species, riparian habitat, federally protected wetlands, or migratory corridors. For these same 

reasons, PAR 1144 is not expected to adversely affect special status plants, animals, or natural 

communities. 

IV.e) & f) PAR 1144 would not conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological 

resources or local, regional, or state conservation plans because it would only affect directcontact lubricants, and metalworking fluids and rust inhibitor operations at 7,000 existing 

facilities. Additionally, PAR 1144 would not conflict with any adopted local policies, 

ordinances protecting biological resources, Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community 

Conservation Plan, or any other relevant habitat conservation plan for the same reason identified 

in Item IV. a), b), c), and d) above. 

The SCAQMD, as the Lead Agency for the proposed project, has found that, when considering 

the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for any 

new adverse effects on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. 

Accordingly, based upon the preceding information, the SCAQMD has, on the basis of 

substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect contained in §753.5 (d), Title 14 

of the California Code of Regulations. 

Based upon these considerations, significant adverse biological resources impacts are not 

anticipated and will not be further analyzed in this Draft Final EA. Since no significant adverse 

biological resources impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-33 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the 

project: 

 

a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 

significance of a historical resource as defined in 

§15064.5? 



b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 

significance of an archaeological resource as 

defined in §15064.5? 



c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique 

paleontological resource or site or unique 

geologic feature? 



d) Disturb any human remains, including those 

interred outside a formal cemeteries?



Significance Criteria 

Impacts to cultural resources will be considered significant if: 

- The project results in the disturbance of a significant prehistoric or historic archaeological 

site or a property of historic or cultural significance to a community or ethnic or social group. 

- Unique paleontological resources are present that could be disturbed by construction of the 

proposed project. 

- The project would disturb human remains. 

V. a), b), c), & d) PAR 1144 would not require any new development or require modifications 

to buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed VOC content limits for directcontact-lubricants, and metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors. All of the affected activities 

occur within existing structures. No construction is expected to meet the requirements of PAR 

1144, except at a facility that would be required to duct an existing CNC machine to the outside. 

The construction would occur within a building at the affected facility and is not expected to 

involve any heavy-duty construction equipment and will occur on existing paved surfaces. As a 

result, no impacts to historical resources are anticipated to occur as a result of implementing the 

proposed project. PAR 1144 is not expected to require physical changes to the environment, 

which may disturb historical, paleontological or archaeological resources. Since all construction 

or physical modifications related to PAR 1144 would occur within the facility boundaries and 

within structures of 7,000 existing facilities, it is not expected to disturb any human remains. 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-34 June 2010 

Based upon these considerations, significant adverse cultural resources impacts are not expected 

from the implementing PAR 1144 and will not be further assessed in this Draft Final EA. Since 

no significant adverse cultural resources impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are 

necessary or required. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

VI. EERGY. Would the project: 

a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 

b) Result in the need for new or substantially altered 

power or natural gas utility systems? 



c) Create any significant effects on local or regional 

energy supplies and on requirements for additional 

energy? 



d) Create any significant effects on peak and base 

period demands for electricity and other forms of 

energy? 



e) Comply with existing energy standards? 

Significance Criteria 

Impacts to energy and mineral resources will be considered significant if any of the following 

criteria are met: 

- The project conflicts with adopted energy conservation plans or standards.

- The project results in substantial depletion of existing energy resource supplies. 

- An increase in demand for utilities impacts the current capacities of the electric and natural 

gas utilities. 

- The project uses non-renewable resources in a wasteful and/or inefficient manner. 

Discussion 

VI.a), b), c), d) & e) PAR 1144 would only affect the VOC content of direct-contact lubricants, 

metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors at 7,000 existing facilities. Replacement of solvents is 

not expected to increase any electricity or for natural gas demand in any way. 

With the exception of requiring duct work to vent an existing CNC machine to existing duct 

work, no construction is expected to comply with PAR 1144. The construction of the additional 

duct work is not expected to require gasoline or diesel-fueled construction equipment. Any 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-35 June 2010 

electricity usage is not expected to be greater than that used for routine maintenance at the 

facility, so no adverse energy impacts are expected from construction.

Diesel fuel is consumed during transport of metalworking fluids. 

Direct-contact Lubricants 

The proposed amended rule would establish an interim VOC content limit of 70 50 grams per 

liter for direct-contact lubricants effective January 1, 2012. Most products currently comply with 

the interim proposed VOC content limit. No reformulation or replacement of direct-contact 

lubrications are expected to be needed to meet the interim VOC content limit. Therefore, no 

change in fuel consumption is expected. The existing direct-contact lubricants are manufactured 

in the Midwest and delivered by rail. 

Compliance with final VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter, effective January 1, 2015, is also 

expected to be met by using existing direct-contact lubricants. Although there are direct-contact 

lubricant available that currently comply with the 2015 VOC content limit, some 

owners/operators that do not currently use future compliant materials are expected to need to 

reformulate or replace their existing direct-content lubricants. Proposed project reformulated or 

replacement direct-contact lubricants are expected to be water-dilutable, vegetable-based or 

paraffinic-based. Water-dilutable lubricants are concentrated (i.e., water would be added at the 

metal working facility to dilute the concentrated lubricant before use) and, therefore; would be 

shipped in smaller quantities that existing lubricants. Water-dilutable and vegetable-based 

lubricants are expected to be supplied from the Midwest. Paraffinic-based lubricants are 

expected to be supplied from Texas or Richmond, California. All reformulated or replacement 

lubricants are expected to be delivered by rail. Since the reformulated or replacement lubricants 

would be supplied from suppliers that are either equidistant or nearer than existing suppliers and 

in lower volumes, diesel fuel consumption from delivery of reformulated or replacement 

lubricants is expected to be less than existing diesel fuel consumption. These diesel fuel 

consumption reductions were not quantified for this analysis.

Metal Protecting Fluids Rust Inhibitors

PAR 1144 would establish a new VOC content limit for military specified preservatives effective 

January 1, 2012. Since existing military specified preservatives already comply with this 

proposed VOC content limit are available and in use, no change in mode, distance or frequency 

of transportation of rust inhibitors are expected. Therefore, no additional diesel fuel 

consumption from rust inhibitors is expected from PAR 1144. 

General Metalworking Fluids 

Existing naphthenic oil (light oil and general naphthenic based working fluid) is shipped 

primarily by diesel truck from Bakersfield. It was assumed that 10 percent of existing 

naphthenic oil is shipped by rail and 90 percent is shipped by diesel truck. 

All naphthenic oil metalworking fluids, except for light naphthenic oil (40 SUS) metalworking 

fluids, are expected to already comply with the interim metalworking fluid VOC content limits

of 75 or 130 grams per liter. To comply with the interim metalworking fluid VOC content 

limits, light naphthenic oil metalworking fluids are expected to be replaced by metalworking 

fluids with medium naphthenic oil (60 SUS). The 40 SUS and 60 SUS naphthenic oil are 

produced at the same facility in Bakersfield. Therefore, no changes in mode, length or frequency 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-36 June 2010 

of transportation are expected (i.e., no change in secondary emissions from transportation of 

naphthenic oil). 

To comply with the final metal working fluid VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter, all 

naphthenic oils in metal working fluids are expected to be reformulated or replaced with

paraffinic oils, water-dilutable oils or vegetable oils. Water-dilutable oils and vegetable-based 

oils are expected to be preferred because they are cost less than paraffinic oils. SCAQMD staff 

estimates that approximately 30 percent of the naphthenic oils may be replaced by waterdilutable (20 percent) or vegetable-based (10 percent) metal working fluids. Water- dilutable 

oils would be shipped by rail from Cleveland, Ohio. Vegetable oils would be shipped by rail 

from Des Moines, Iowa. The remaining 70 percent of the naphthenic oils are expected to be 

replaced by paraffinic oils. The replacement paraffinic oils would be shipped by rail from in 

from Richmond, California or Texas. Based on cost, it was assumed that 30 percent of the 

paraffinic oils would be shipped from Texas and 70 percent would be shipped from Richmond, 

California. Rail from Richmond, California would be expected to travel along one of three 

routes: the Union Pacific US-101 route, the Union Pacific SR-99 route or the Burlington 

Northern Santa Fe SR-99 route. The Union Pacific US-101 route travels along the US-101. 

Both the Union Pacific SR-99 route and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe SR-99 route travel 

along the SR-99 from northern California to Bakersfield, from Bakersfield to Barstow, then from 

Barstow along the I-15 and I-10 through the district. Rail from Texas, Iowa and Ohio would be 

expected to travel from Arizona through San Bernardino, California. Diesel fuel consumption

emissions along the entire trip length from source through district were estimated. Table 2-14

presents the existing and proposed metal working fluid transportation diesel fuel consumption. 

Detailed calculations are presented in Appendix B. Since PAR 1144 is expected to result in an 

incremental decrease of diesel fuel consumption, diesel fuel consumption is not considered 

significant. 

Table 2-14

Diesel Fuel Consumption

Working Fluid Diesel Usage,

gal/year

Existing Fluid Truck and Rail Transportation 12,415

Proposed Fluid Rail Transportation 2,403

Difference in Annual Diesel Fuel Consumption -10,013

Based on the above information, PAR 1144 is not expected to conflict with adopted energy 

conservation plans or standards; cause substantial depletion of existing energy resource supplies; 

increase demand for utilities, which would adversely impact the current capacities of the electric 

and natural gas utilities or use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and/or inefficient manner. 

Operators affected by PAR 1144 are expected to continue to comply with all existing and 

applicable energy standards and/or conservation plans and/or programs.

PAR 1144 is not expected to generate significant adverse energy resources impacts and will not 

be discussed further in this Draft Final EA. Since no significant energy impacts were identified, 

no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-37 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

VII. GEOLOGY AD SOILS. Would the project: 

a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial 

adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, 

or death involving: 



• 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 or based on other 

substantial evidence of a known fault? 



• Strong seismic ground shaking? 

• Seismic–related ground failure, including 

liquefaction? 



•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 

offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, 

liquefaction or collapse? 



d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 

18-1-B 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 waste water 

disposal systems where sewers are not available 

for the disposal of waste water? 



Significance Criteria 

Impacts on the geological environment will be considered significant if any of the following 

criteria apply: 

- Topographic alterations would result in significant changes, disruptions, displacement, 

excavation, compaction or over covering of large amounts of soil. 

- Unique geological resources (paleontological resources or unique outcrops) are present that 

could be disturbed by the construction of the proposed project. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-38 June 2010 

- Exposure of people or structures to major geologic hazards such as earthquake surface 

rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction or landslides. 

- Secondary seismic effects could occur which could damage facility structures, e.g., 

liquefaction. 

- Other geological hazards exist which could adversely affect the facility, e.g., landslides, 

mudslides. 

Discussion 

VII.a) PAR 1144 would not require any new development or require modifications to buildings 

or other structures to comply with the proposed VOC content limits for direct-contact lubricants,

and metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors. All of the affected activities occur within existing 

structures. No With the exception of installing a duct to vent an existing CNC machine to 

existing ductwork, no construction is expected to meet the requirements of PAR 1144. The 

installing of the duct would occur on paved surfaces. As a result, substantial exposure of people 

or structure to the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related activities, such as strong 

seismic shaking, landslides, etc. beyond what currently may exist is not anticipated as a result of 

implementing PAR 1144 and will not be further analyzed in this Draft Final EA. 

VII.b), c), d) & e) PAR 1144 is not expected to require new development or construction of 

new structures. Therefore, PAR 1144 would not significantly impact soils or result in locating 

new structures on geologic units or soils that are unstable or could potential results in landslides, 

subsidence, etc. PAR 1144 would not affect soil erosion or loss of soils. 

Based on the above discussion, the proposed project is not expected to have an adverse impact 

on geology or soils. Since no significant adverse impacts are anticipated, this environmental 

topic will not be further analyzed in the Draft Final EA. No mitigation measures are necessary 

or required. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

VIII. HAZARDS AD HAZARDOUS 

MATERIALS. Would the project: 

a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 

environment through the routine transport, use, 

disposal of hazardous materials? 



b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 

environment through reasonably foreseeable upset 

and accident conditions involving the release of 

hazardous materials into the environment? 


Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-39 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

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 §65962.5 and, as a result, 

would 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 a significant risk of 

loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, 

including where wildlands are adjacent to 

urbanized areas or where residences are 

intermixed with wildlands? 



i) Significantly increased fire hazard in areas with 

flammable materials? 



Significance Criteria 

Impacts associated with hazards will be considered significant if any of the following occur: 

- Non-compliance with any applicable design code or regulation. 

- Non-conformance to National Fire Protection Association standards. 

- Non-conformance to regulations or generally accepted industry practices related to operating 

policy and procedures concerning the design, construction, security, leak detection, spill 

containment or fire protection. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-40 June 2010 

- Exposure to hazardous chemicals in concentrations equal to or greater than the Emergency 

Response Planning Guideline (ERPG) 2 levels. 

VIII.a, b) c) & i) Hazardous properties of existing and replacement solvents were also 

evaluated. Unfortunately, lower and upper explosive limits were not presented on most MSDSs. 

One MSDS for a alternative fluid reported the lower and upper explosive limits are one and 10 

percent respectively. MSDSs for two existing fluids reported lower and upper explosive limits 

between one and 10 percent and 0.7 and five percent. Vapor pressures and densities were 

typically listed as less than a certain value; therefore, comparison is difficult. Existing and 

proposed alternative fluids typically had Hazardous Materials Information System (HMIS) 

ratings of one for both health and flammability. Only a single alternative fluid had a HMIS 

rating of one for reactivity, while the MSDSs for all existing had a HMIS rating for reactivity of 

zero. Based on a review of MSDSs the hazardous properties of alternative fluids are similar to 

existing fluids. A summary of the comparison of hazardous properties is included in Appendix 

B. 

Water-dilutable metalworking fluids may contain triethanolamine and monoethanolamine. 

Ethanolamine, commonly known as monoethanolamine is an organic chemical compound that is 

a flammable, corrosive, colorless, viscous liquid with an odor similar to that of ammonia. 

Monoethanolamine is produced by reacting ethylene oxide with aqueous ammonia, a reaction 

that produces triethanolamine. Based on a review of MSDSs of known aqueous metalworking 

fluids replacements, one metalworking fluid has a 20 percent triethanolamine content and 

another has a five percent monoethanolamine. Triethanolamine has been identified as causing 

occupational asthma by the Association of Environmental and Occupational Health Clinics. The 

American Conference of Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Values (TLV) of five 

milligrams per cubic meter is associated with eye and skin irritation, and contact dermatitis. The 

Cal/OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL) is also five milligrams per cubic meter. TLV and 

Cal/OSHA PELs are short-term concentration averages (eight-hour averages). The National 

Toxicology Program concluded that triethanolamine caused liver tumors in female mice and may 

have caused a slight increase in hemanogiosarcomas of the liver in male mice. However, no 

cancer potency values were identified in the Assessment, Development and Demonstration of 

Alternatives to VOC-Emitting Lubricants, Vanishing Oils and Rust Inhibitors report.8

Monoethanolamine causes eye and skin irritation in animal testing and an ACGIH TLV of three 

ppm has been established to minimize skin and eye irritation in workers. The Cal/OSHA PEL 

for monethanolamine is also three ppm. 

Monoethanolamine and triethanolamine are only expected to be found in non naphthenic oilbased metalworking fluids. Since PAR 1144 is not expected to require or result in replacement 

or reformation of non-naphthenic oil-based metalworking fluids no increase in 

monoethanolamine and triethanolamine is expected.

To determine the potential hazard and exposure to the public from fluids reformulate with 

monethanolamine and triethanolamine, the largest usr of metal working fluids was evaluated to 

 

8

 Institute for Research and Technical Assistance, Assessment, Development and Demonstration of Alternatives to 

VOC-Emitting Lubricants, Vanishing Oils and Rust Inhibitors, August 2006 

http://www.irta.us/South%20Coast%20Lube,%20Vanish,%20Rust.pdf 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-41 June 2010 

determine the “worst-case” scenario and the most conservative analysis. The largest amount of 

working fluid used at a single facility is 32,000 gallons per year. The facility does not use waterdilutable metal working fluids and is not likely to convert to water-dilutable metal working 

fluids. However, as a worst-case, if the facility were to use the working fluid with the largest 

concentration of triethanolamine approximately 5,600 pounds of triethanolamine would be used. 

Since, the alternative lubricant contained monoethanolamine in a fourth of the concentration of 

triethanolamine, approximately 1,400 pounds of monoethanolamine would be used per year. An 

evaluation of the health risk from these TACs is presented in the Air Quality Section. The 

concentrations of triethanolamine and monoethanolamine are expected to below the ACGIH 

TLV and Cal/OSHA PEL of three ppm for monoethanolamine and five micrograms per cubic 

meter for triethanolamine; therefore, it was concluded that the potential health risks are less than 

significant. 

Since the triethanolamine and monoethanolamine are used in dilute water-dilutable lubricants 

and these lubricants are expected to be delivered in a single 55 gallon drum at any one time, the 

amount of triethanolamine and monoethanolamine that might be accidentally released is small. 

Aqueous waste containing triethanolamine and monoethanolamine would be sent to hazardous 

waste disposal sites.

PAR 1144 includes an exemption that would allow the use of DMC in a machine at a facility that 

currently uses denatured alcohol. No other facility was identified that has a CNC machine where 

permeable media are used to maintain a vacuum that holds a part in place during cutting. Since 

the exemption applies only to CNC machines that exist at the date of adoption of PAR 1144, the 

exemption would not apply to new CNC machines. The facility would replace 327 gallons of 

denatured alcohol with 327 gallons of DMC. DMC has a higher flashpoint than denatured 

alcohol (18 oC for DMC and 13 oC for denatured alcohol). DMC has a higher autoignition 

temperature than denatured alcohol (458oC for DMC and 363oC for denatured alcohol). The 

explosive range is smaller for DMC than for denatured alcohol (4.2 percent to 12.9 percent for 

DMC and 3.3 percent to 19 percent for denatured alcohol). DMC has a lower vapor pressure 

than denatured alcohol (42 millimeters of mercury for DMC and 44.6 millimeters of mercury for 

denatured alcohol. DMC has a higher vapor density than denatured alcohol (3.1 for DMC and 

1.6 for denatured alcohol). Both have similar National Fire Protection Association Ratings 

(Health: 1, Flammability:3, Reactivity:0 for DMC and Health: 0, Flammability:3, Reactivity:0 

for denatured alcohol). Both are have a DOT Hazard Class No. of 3. DMC is insoluble in water

and short term biodegradation is not expected. Denatured alcohol is soluble in water and readily 

biodegradable. With the exception of health hazards, DMC and denatured alcohol are expected 

to have similar adverse hazard impacts (e.g., flammability, explosivity, etc.). Health risks from 

DMC on off-site receptors are present in the Air Quality Section of this EA, and determined to 

be less than significant. Health risks to on-site workers would be minimal because, the CNC 

operation would be enclosed and vented out of the building. Based on the above discussion, 

DMC is not expected to cause an increase in hazard impacts possible exposure during routine 

transport, use or disposal of hazardous material from accidental releases of toxic substances.

 

The shift to lower VOC content metalworking fluids under PAR 1144 is not expected in general 

to reduce change the amount of toxics in the reformulation of metalworking fluids and solvent 

cleaning, which would reduce exposure to the public; including sensitive receptors such as, 

existing or proposed schools; hospitals, etc., and releases into the environment of toxic or 

flammable substances. A reduction in the use of toxic formulations would reduce No change in 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-42 June 2010 

the possible exposure during routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous material from 

accidental releases of toxic substances is expected. 

VIII.d) Government Code §65962.5 typically refers to a list of facilities that may be subject to 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permits. Although some of the 7,000 

facilities regulated by PAR 1144 may be on such a list, facilities affected by the proposed new 

VOC content limits are not expected to be on this list, and would not typically generate large 

quantities of hazardous waste. For any facilities affected by the proposed amended rule that are 

on the Government Code §65962.5 list, it is anticipated that they would continue to manage any 

and all hazardous materials and hazardous waste, in accordance with federal, state and local 

regulations 

VIII.e), & f) Since PAR 1144 would reduce with the exception of health risk from DMC which 

is addressed in the Air Quality Section of this EA, is not expected to change the amount of TACs 

through increase use of lower VOC content metalworking fluids, implementation of PAR 1144 is 

not expected to increase or create any new hazardous emissions in general, which could 

adversely affect public/private airports located in close proximity to the affected sites. PAR 

1144 may increase or introduce the use of triethanolamine and monoethanolamine in small 

amounts. However, as stated above, the adverse impacts from the use of triethanolamine and 

monoethanolamine is expected to be less than significant to off-site receptors. DMC is the only 

TAC that would be emitted in greater amounts because of PAR 1144. DMC is only expected to 

be emitted from a single facility. The closest airport or airstrip to this facility is Burbank 

Airport, which is nine miles away. Health risk was determined to be less than significant near 

the facility. At nine miles away, the health risk DMC usage at this facility is expected to be too

small to accurately calculate. Therefore, their use at facilities adverse impacts from PAR 1144 

near public/private airports or airfields is not expected to be significant. 

VIII.g) PAR 1144 has no provisions that dictate the use of any specific metalworking fluid 

formulation. Operators who use metalworking fluids have the flexibility of choosing 

metalworking fluids that are best suited for their operations. With the exception of the use of 

DMC at a single facility, no change in direct-contact lubricants and non-naphthenic oil-based 

metal working fluids is expected. No change in toxicity is expected from the replacement of 

heavy naphthenic oils with light naphthenic oils in metalworking fluids. As described above, 

DMC is expected to have hazard characteristic similar that are similar to denatured alcohol, 

which it would replace. Hence, DMC is expected to be treated similarly to denatured alcohol in 

emergency response plans and emergency evacuation plans. Therefore, PAR 1144 is not 

expected to impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency 

response plan or emergency evaluation plan. If available, it is likely that operators would 

choose a compliant formulation that does not pose a substantial safety hazard. As shown in the 

discussion under item VIII.a), c), & i) above, it is expected that replacement metalworking fluid

would generally be less toxic than currently used solvents. Increased or new use of metal 

working fluids that contain the only identified hazardous materials, triethanolamine and 

monoethanolamine, is expected to be less than significant. 

In addition, Health and Safety Code §25506 specifically requires all businesses handling 

hazardous materials to submit a business emergency response plan to assist local administering 

agencies in the emergency release or threatened release of a hazardous material. Business 

emergency response plans generally require the following: 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-43 June 2010 

1. Identification of individuals who are responsible for various actions, including reporting, 

assisting emergency response personnel and establishing an emergency response team; 

2. Procedures to notify the administering agency, the appropriate local emergency rescue 

personnel, and the California Office of Emergency Services; 

3. Procedures to mitigate a release or threatened release to minimize any potential harm or 

damage to persons, property or the environment; 

4. Procedures to notify the necessary persons who can respond to an emergency within the 

facility; 

5. Details of evacuation plans and procedures; 

6. Descriptions of the emergency equipment available in the facility; 

7. Identification of local emergency medical assistance; and 

8. Training (initial and refresher) programs for employees in: 

a. The safe handling of hazardous materials used by the business; 

b. Methods of working with the local public emergency response agencies; 

c. The use of emergency response resources under control of the handler; and 

d. Other procedures and resources that will increase public safety and prevent or 

mitigate a release of hazardous materials. 

In general, every county or city and all facilities using a minimum amount of hazardous materials 

are required to formulate detailed contingency plans to eliminate, or at least minimize, the 

possibility and effect of fires, explosion, or spills. In conjunction with the California Office of 

Emergency Services, local jurisdictions have enacted ordinances that set standards for area and 

business emergency response plans. These requirements include immediate notification, 

mitigation of an actual or threatened release of a hazardous material, and evacuation of the 

emergency area. 

Although PAR 1144 might would not require minor modifications to emergency response plans 

to eliminate the use of potentially hazardous solvents, it is not anticipated that PAR 1144 would 

impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted or modified emergency 

response plan or emergency evacuation plan. 

VIII.h) Since the use of PAR 1144 compliant metalworking fluids would generally be expected 

to occur at 7,000 existing industrial sites in urban areas where wildlands are typically not 

prevalent, risk of loss or injury associated with wildland fires is not expected as a result of 

implementing PAR 1144. 

In conclusion, potentially significant adverse hazard or hazardous material impacts resulting 

from adopting and implementing PAR 1144 are not expected and will not be considered further. 

No mitigation measures are necessary or required. 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-44 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

IX. HYDROLOGY AD WATER QUALITY. 

Would the project:

 

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 (e.g. 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 alteration of the 

course of a stream or river, or substantially 

increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a 

manner that would result in flooding on- or 

offsite? 



d) 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? 



e) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?  

f) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area 

as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary 

or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood 

hazard delineation map? 



g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area 

structures which would impede or redirect flood 

flaws? 



h) 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? 


Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-45 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

i) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 

j) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the 

applicable Regional Water Quality Control 

Board? 

 

k) Require or result in the construction of 

wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of 

existing facilities, the construction of which could 

cause significant environmental effects? 

 

l) 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? 



m) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve 

the project from existing entitlements and 

resources, or are new or expanded entitlements 

needed, the construction of which could cause 

significant environmental effects. 

 

n) Require 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? 

 

Significance Criteria 

Potential impacts on water resources will be considered significant if any of the following 

criteria apply: 

Water Quality: 

- The project will cause degradation or depletion of ground water resources substantially 

affecting current or future uses. 

- The project will cause the degradation of surface water substantially affecting current or 

future uses. 

- The project will result in a violation of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) permit requirements. 

- The capacities of existing or proposed wastewater treatment facilities and the sanitary sewer 

system are not sufficient to meet the needs of the project. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-46 June 2010 

- The project results in substantial increases in the area of impervious surfaces, such that 

interference with groundwater recharge efforts occurs. 

- The project results in alterations to the course or flow of floodwaters. 

Water Demand: 

- The existing water supply does not have the capacity to meet the increased demands of the 

project, or the project would use a substantial amount of potable water.

- The project increases demand for water by more than five million gallons per day. 

Discussion 

IX.a), e), j) & k) 

Direct-contact Lubricant 

Based on the sales weighted VOC content, it is likely that existing direct-contact lubricants 

would continue to be used to comply with PAR 1144. Therefore, no change in water use or 

quality is expected.

Table 1-4 presents an existing inventory of 211,000 gallons of direct-contact lubricant per year. 

Based on discussions with the affected industry, SCAQMD assumes that 20 percent of the 

existing 211,000 gallons per year could be replaced by water-dilutable direct-contact lubricant to 

comply with PAR 1144. Twenty percent of 211,000 gallons per year would be 42,200 gallons of 

water-dilutable direct-contact lubricant per year. The water-dilutable direct-contact lubricant 

concentrates can be diluted in ratios up to 40 parts water to one part concentrate, which would be 

97.5 percent water. If mixed at ratio of 40 to one, 41,145 gallons of water per year could be used 

to comply with direct-contact lubricant VOC content limits in PAR 1144. 

General Metalworking Fluids 

The VOC content limits proposed for metalworking fluids are expected to result in the 

replacement or reformulation of light naphthenic oil-based metalworking fluids with heavy

naphthenic oil-based metalworking fluids. No additional water is expected to be needed to 

because of the reformulation with heavy naphthenic oil-based metalworking fluids. Since 

existing non- naphthenic oil-based metalworking fluids have a sales weight VOC content below 

the proposed VOC content limits of 75 and 130 grams per liter, no additional replacement or 

reformulation is expected to be needed to comply with PAR 1144. Therefore, no change to 

water use or water quality from metalworking fluid requirements is expected.

No water is expected to be associated with the use of DMC in CNC machinery, so no adverse 

water impacts are expected from the use of DMC.

Table 1-4 presents and existing inventory of 1,520,900 gallons of naphthenic based metal 

working fluids per year (1,472,000 gallons of naphthenic based metal working fluids and 48,900 

gallons of light naphthenic oil). Based on discussions with the affected industry, SCAQMD 

assumes that 20 percent of the existing 1,520,900 gallons per year could be replaced by waterdilutable metal working fluids to comply with PAR 1144. Twenty percent of 1,520,900 gallons 

per year would be 304,180 gallons of water-dilutable metal working fluid per year. The waterdilutable metal working fluid concentrates can be diluted in ratios up to 40 parts water to one 

part concentrate, which would be 97.5 percent water. If mixed at ratio of 40 to one, 296,575 

gallons of water per year could be used to comply with direct-contact lubricant VOC content 

limits in PAR 1144. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-47 June 2010 

Metal Protecting Fluids Rust Inhibitor

Existing military specified preservatives are expected to comply with PAR 1144. Therefore, no 

additional water use is expected to be needed to comply with the military specified preservatives 

VOC content limits PAR 1144. 

Conclusion

Based on the information above a total of 337,720 gallons per year of water (41,145 gallons of 

water per year from water-dilutable direct-contact lubricant and 296,575 gallons of water per 

year from water-dilutable metal working fluid) may be needed to comply with PAR 1144. Once 

expended the water-dilutable metal working fluid would be considered an aqueous hazardous 

waste and sent in 55 gallon barrels to appropriate hazardous treatment facilities to remove 

hazardous constituents. The oils, grease and metal would be removed and the pH of the water 

would be adjusted. After treatment the water would be sent to publicly owned treatment works 

(POTW) facilities. 

The capacity of POTWs in the district to treat wastewater is approximately 2,000,000,000 

gallons per day (SCAG 2005).9 It is expected that POTWs have the capacity to treat and 

additional 337,720 gallons per day (0.02 percent) of sewage generated by PAR 1144. Therefore, 

PAR 1144 is not expected to violate any water quality standard or waste discharge requirement, 

degrade water quality or exceed the wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable 

Regional Water Quality Control Board.

IX.b), & n) PAR 1144 is not expected to substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere 

with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering 

of the local groundwater table level. PAR 1144 would not significantly increase demand for 

water from existing entitlements and resources and would not require new or expanded 

entitlements because no change in water use or quality is expected the amount of water used 

would be very small (337,720 gallons of water per year, which is 1,299 gallons of water per day 

based on a 260 hour work year) compared to the significance threshold of five million gallons 

per day. Therefore, no water demand impacts are expected as the result of implementing the 

proposed project. 

IX c), d), & l) Operations affected by PAR 1144 are housed within structures that already have 

stormwater structures in place, as necessary. All PAR 1144 related operations are expected to 

occur within the existing structures, therefore, PAR 1144 is not expected to create or contribute 

to additional runoff water. Therefore, PAR 1144 would not create or contribute runoff water that 

would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide 

substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. 

As detailed above, the proposed rule is not expected to require more than 337,720 gallons per 

year of any additional wastewater disposal capacity, violate any water quality standard or 

wastewater discharge requirements, or otherwise substantially degrade water quality, because no 

additional wastewater is expected would be collected and transferred to appropriate reclamation 

or disposal facilities. As a result, no changes to storm water runoff, drainage patterns, 

 

9

 SCAG, 2004 Regional Transportation Plan Program Environmental Impact Report, 

http://www.scag.ca.gov/RTPpeir2004/ 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-48 June 2010 

groundwater characteristics, or flow are expected. Therefore, potential adverse impacts to 

drainage patterns, etc., are not expected as a result of implementing PAR 1144. 

IX.f), g), h) & i) PAR 1144 would not require any development or construction of additional 

structures; therefore, PAR 1144 is not expected to generate construction of any new structures in 

100-year flood areas as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate 

Map or other flood delineation map. As a result, PAR 1144 is not expected to expose people or 

structures to new significant flooding risks. Compliance with PAR 1144 at the 7,000 existing 

affected facilities will not affect any existing risks from flood, inundation, etc. Consequently, 

PAR 1144 would not affect in any way any potential existing flood hazards inundation by seiche, 

tsunami, or mud flow that may already exist relative to the 7,000 existing affected facilities. 

IX. m) PAR 1144 would not require any new development or require modifications to buildings 

or other structures to comply with the proposed VOC content limits for direct-contact lubricants, 

metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors. 

The soluble, semi-synthetic and synthetic metal working fluids have low VOC contents because 

of the existing high water content of those fluids. The affected metal working fluids are typically 

sold in concentrate from and the water is added at the metal working facilities. PAR 1144 would 

increase the amount of water usage from product reformulation. It is estimated that 

approximately 337,720 gallons of water per year (1,299 gallons of water per day) would be used 

with reformulate products to comply with PAR 1144. 

Since 1,299 gallons per day is less than the significance threshold of five million gallons per day, 

sufficient water supplies are expected to be available. No additional water use is expected to 

comply with PAR 1144. As a result, implementing PAR 1144 would not require the 

construction of additional water resource, be the need for new or expanded water entitlements, or 

an alteration of drainage patterns. Since the proposed project is not expected to require 

additional water uses less than five million gallons of water, the project would not substantially 

deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. 

Based upon the above considerations, significant hydrology and water quality impacts are not 

expected from the implementation of PAR 1144 and will not be further analyzed in this Draft 

Final EA. Since no significant hydrology and water quality impacts were identified, no 

mitigation measures are necessary or required. 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-49 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

X. LAD USE AD PLAIG. Would the 

project: 

 

a) Physically divide an established community? 

b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, 

or regulation 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 

or natural community conservation plan? 



Significance Criteria 

Land use and planning impacts will be considered significant if the project conflicts with the 

land use and zoning designations established by local jurisdictions. 

Discussion 

X.a) PAR 1144 would not require any new development or require modifications to buildings or 

other structures to comply with the proposed VOC content limits for direct-contact lubricants,

and metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors. All of the affected activities occur within existing 

structures. Therefore, PAR 1144 does not include any components that would require physically 

dividing an established community. 

X.b) & c) There are no provisions in PAR 1144 that would affect land use plans, policies, or 

regulations. Land use and other planning considerations are determined by local governments 

and no land use or planning requirements would be altered by reducing the VOC content of 

affected metalworking fluids. Therefore, PAR 1144 would not affect in any habitat conservation 

or natural community conservation plans, agricultural resources or operations, and would not 

create divisions in any existing communities. Present or planned land uses in the region would 

not be significantly adversely affected as a result of implementing the proposed amended rule. 

Based upon these considerations, significant adverse land use and planning impacts are not 

expected from the implementation of PAR 1144 and will not be further analyzed in this Draft 

Final EA. Since no significant land use and planning impacts were identified, no mitigation 

measures are necessary or required. 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-50 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

XI. MIERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: 

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 locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site 

delineated on a local general plan, specific plan 

or other land use plan? 



Significance Criteria 

Project-related impacts on mineral resources will be considered significant if any of the 

following conditions are met: 

- The project would 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. 

- The proposed project results 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 

XI.a) & b) There are no provisions in PAR 1144 that would result in the loss of availability of a 

known mineral resource of value to the region and the residents of the state, or of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other 

land use plan because compliance with PAR 1144 does not require mineral resources such as 

sand, gravel, etc. 

Based upon the above considerations, significant adverse mineral resources impacts are not 

expected from the implementation of PAR 1144 and will not be further analyzed in this Draft 

Final EA. Since no significant mineral resources impacts were identified, no mitigation 

measures are necessary or required. 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-51 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

XII. OISE. Would the project result in: 

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 

airship, would the project expose people 

residing or working in the project area to 

excessive noise levels? 



Significance Criteria 

Impacts on noise will be considered significant if: 

- Construction noise levels exceed the local noise ordinances or, if the noise threshold is 

currently exceeded, project noise sources increase ambient noise levels by more than three 

decibels (dBA) at the site boundary. Construction noise levels will be considered significant 

if they exceed federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) noise 

standards for workers. 

- The proposed project operational noise levels exceed any of the local noise ordinances at the 

site boundary or, if the noise threshold is currently exceeded, project noise sources increase 

ambient noise levels by more than three dBA at the site boundary. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-52 June 2010 

Discussion 

XII.a) PAR 1144 would only affect VOC content of metalworking fluids at 7,000 existing 

facilities. PAR 1144 would not require any new development or require modifications to 

buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed amended rule. All of the affected 

activities occur within existing structures. Replacement of solvents to meet VOC requirements 

of PAR 1144 are not expected to affect operations at affected facilities. Ducting an existing 

DNC machine to existing ductwork is not expected to generate more noise or groundborne 

vibration than existing routine maintenance at the affected facility. Thus, the proposed project is 

not expected to expose persons to the generation of excessive noise levels above current facility 

levels. It is expected that any facility affected by PAR 1144 would continue complying with all 

existing local noise control laws or ordinances. 

In commercial environments Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and 

California-OSHA have established noise standards to protect worker health. It is expected that 

operators at affected facilities will continue complying with applicable OSHA or Cal/OSHA 

noise standards, which would limit noise impacts to workers, patrons and neighbors.

XII.b) PAR 1144 is not anticipated to expose people to, or generate excessive groundborne 

vibration or groundborne noise levels since complying with PR 1144 is not expected to alter 

operations at affected facilities. Therefore, any existing noise or vibration levels at affected 

facilities are not expected to change as a result of implementing PAR 1144. Since existing 

operations are not expected to generate excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels, and 

PAR 1144 is not expected to alter physical operations, no groundborne vibration or noise levels 

is expected from the proposed amended rule. 

XII.c) A permanent increase in ambient noise levels at the 7,000 existing affected facilities 

above existing levels as a result of implementing the proposed project is unlikely to occur 

because the physical operations are not expected to change greatly at affected facilities. The 

existing noise levels are unlikely to change and raise ambient noise levels in the vicinities of the 

existing facilities to above a level of significance, because changes to VOC contents in directcontact-lubricants, metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors and associated cleaning equipment are 

not expected to generate higher noise levels than are already occurring. 

XII.d) No increase in periodic or temporary ambient noise levels in the vicinity of affected 

facilities above levels existing prior to PAR 1144 is anticipated because the proposed project 

would not require construction or substantial changes to metalworking fluid processes. As 

indicated earlier, construction noise levels are expected to be minimal and operational noise 

levels are expected to be equivalent to existing noise levels. 

XII.e) & f) Even if an affected facility is located near a public/private airport, there are no new 

noise impacts expected from any of the existing facilities as a result of complying with the 

proposed project. Similarly, any existing noise levels at affected facilities are not expected to 

increase appreciably. Thus, PAR 1144 is not expected to expose people residing or working in 

the vicinities of public airports to excessive noise levels. 

Based upon these considerations, significant adverse noise impacts are not expected from the 

implementation of PAR 1144 and are not further evaluated in this Draft Final EA. Since no 

significant noise impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-53 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

XIII. POPULATIO AD HOUSIG. Would the 

project: 

 

a) Induce substantial growth in an area either 

directly (for example, by proposing new homes 

and businesses) or indirectly (e.g. through 

extension of roads or other 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? 



Significance Criteria 

Impacts of the proposed project on population and housing will be considered significant if the 

following criteria are exceeded: 

- The demand for temporary or permanent housing exceeds the existing supply. 

- The proposed project produces additional population, housing or employment inconsistent 

with adopted plans either in terms of overall amount or location. 

Discussion 

XIII.a) The proposed project is not anticipated to generate any significant adverse effects, either 

direct or indirect, on the district's population or population distribution as no additional workers 

are anticipated to be required for affected facilities to comply with the proposed amendments. 

Human population within the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD is anticipated to grow regardless of 

implementing PAR 1144. As such, PAR 1144 would not result in changes in population 

densities or induce significant growth in population. 

XIII.b) & c) Because the proposed project affects VOC contents of direct-contact lubricants,

and metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors, PAR 1144 is not expected to result in the creation of 

any industry that would affect population growth, directly or indirectly, induce the construction 

of single- or multiple-family units, or require the displacement of people elsewhere. 

Based upon these considerations, significant adverse population and housing impacts are not 

expected from the implementation of PAR 1144 and are not further evaluated in this Draft Final
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-54 June 2010 

EA. Since no significant population and housing impacts were identified, no mitigation 

measures are necessary or required. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal 

result in substantial adverse physical impacts 

associated with the provision of new or 

physically altered governmental facilities, need 

for new or physically altered government 

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 following public services: 

 

 a) Fire protection? 

 b) Police protection? 

 c) Schools? 

 d) Parks? 

 e) Other public facilities? 

Significance Criteria 

Impacts on public services will be considered significant if the project results in substantial 

adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered 

governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered government facilities, the 

construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain 

acceptable service ratios, response time or other performance objectives. 

Discussion 

XIV.a) & b) PAR 1144 would only affect VOC content of metalworking fluids at 7,000 existing 

facilities. PAR 1144 would not require any new development or require modifications to 

buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed amended rule. All of the affected 

activities occur within existing structures. Because compliant products are currently available, 

many facility operators currently use PAR 1144 compliant materials. As shown in the Section 

VIII - Hazards and Hazardous Material section of this Draft Final EA, the use of PAR 1144 

compliant metalworking fluids are not expected to generate significant explosion or fire hazard 

impacts, because compliant products are no more flammable than conventional fluids. 

Therefore, PAR 1144 is not expected to increase the chances for fires or explosions requiring a 

response from local fire departments, but would more than likely reduce the chances of fires or 

explosions. PAR 1144 is not expected to have any adverse effects on local police departments 

for the following reasons. Police would be required to respond to accidental releases of 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-55 June 2010 

hazardous materials during transport. Since hazards impacts from implementing PAR 1144 were 

concluded to be less than significant, potential impacts to local police departments are also 

expected to be less than significant. 

XIV.c) & d) As indicated in discussion under item XIII. Population and Housing, implementing 

PAR 1144 would not induce population growth or dispersion because no additional workers are 

expected to be needed at the 7,000 existing affected facilities. Therefore, with no increase in 

local population anticipated as a result of adopting and implementing PAR 1144, additional 

demand for new or expanded schools or parks is also not anticipated. As a result, no significant 

adverse impacts are expected to local schools or parks. 

XIV.e) Besides building permits, there is typically no need for other government services at 

affected facilities. The proposal would not result in the need for new or physically altered 

government facilities and, as a result, is not expected to affect in any way acceptable service 

ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. There would be no increase in 

population and, as a result of implementing the proposed project, no need for physically altered 

government facilities. 

Based upon these considerations, significant adverse public services impacts are not expected 

from the implementation of PAR 1144 and are not further evaluated in this Draft Final EA. 

Since no significant public services impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are 

necessary or required. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

XV. RECREATIO. 

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 that might have an adverse 

physical effect on the environment? 



Significance Criteria 

Impacts to recreation will be considered significant if: 

- The project results in an increased demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other 

recreational facilities. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-56 June 2010 

- The project adversely affects existing recreational opportunities. 

Discussion 

XV.a) & b) As discussed under “Land Use and Planning” above, there are no provisions in the 

PAR 1144 that would affect land use plans, policies, or regulations. Land use and other planning 

considerations are determined by local governments and no land use or planning requirements 

will be altered by the proposed amended rule. The proposed project would not increase the 

demand for, or use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities or 

require the construction of new or expansion of existing recreational facilities that might create 

an adverse physical effect on the environment because it will not directly or indirectly increase 

or redistribute population. 

Based upon these considerations, significant recreation impacts are not expected from the 

implementation of PAR 1144 and are not further evaluated in this Draft Final EA. Since no 

significant recreation impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or required. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

XVI. SOLID/HAZARDOUS WASTE. Would the 

project: 

 

a) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted 

capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste 

disposal needs? 



b) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and 

regulations related to solid and hazardous waste? 



Significance Criteria 

The proposed project impacts on solid/hazardous waste will be considered significant if the 

following occurs: 

- The generation and disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous waste exceeds the capacity of 

designated landfills. 

Discussion 

XVI.a) Landfills are permitted by the local enforcement agencies with concurrence from the 

California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). Local agencies establish the 

maximum amount of solid waste which can be received by a landfill each day and the 

operational life of a landfill. PAR 1144 is not expected to generate any solid waste; therefore, 

would not affect solid waste landfills. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-57 June 2010 

XVI.b) It is assumed that existing metalworking facility operators currently dispose of 

hazardous waste from the waste of direct-contact lubricants, metalworking fluids and/or waste 

rust inhibitors. It is further assumed that facility operators at these affected facilities comply 

with all applicable local, state, or federal waste disposal regulations. 

With the exception of the replacement of denatured alcohol with DMC at one affected facility 

and the replacement of light naphthenic oils with 60 SUS naphthenic oils, no reformulation or 

change in direct-contact lubricants, metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors is expected to comply 

with PAR 1144. DMC would replace denatured alcohol in the same amount. Light naphthenic 

oils are also expected be replaced with 60 SUS naphthenic oils on a one to one basis. Both 

replacements are expected to have similar hazard characteristics to the solvents that they are 

replacing. 

Since the volume of the reformulation or replacement direct-contact lubricants, metalworking 

fluids and rust inhibitors is not expected to be different than the existing volume of direct-contact 

lubricants, and metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors, PAR 1144 is not expected to 

substantially change hazardous waste handling and disposal volumes. 

Metalworking facility operators currently dispose of water and solvent based waste directcontact lubricants, metalworking fluids and/or waste rust inhibitors with contamination (i.e., oil, 

grease and trace amounts of metals) as hazardous waste. At the disposal facility, large 

metalworking shavings or chippings in disposed direct-contact lubricants, metalworking fluids 

and rust inhibitors can be separated and recycled. Fine metal shavings in direct-contact 

lubricants, metalworking fluids and/or waste rust inhibitors will form a foam called swarf, which 

is skimmed off for disposal as hazardous waste. Used direct-contact lubricants, metalworking 

fluids and rust inhibitors can be recycled and reused. Used wastewater would be sent to POTW 

facilities (see Environmental Topic IX. Hydrology and Water Quality). Tramp or sump oil is 

unwanted oil that mixes with direct-contact in lubricants, metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors 

and is skimmed off for disposal as hazardous waste. 

Direct-contact Lubricants and Metalworking Fluids 

Existing direct-contact lubricants are expected to meet the interim VOC content limits; therefore, 

no change in operations is expected. Some affected facility owners/operators may need to 

replace existing direct-contact lubricants with water-dilutable or vegetable based lubricants to 

meet the final VOC content limits. 

Large metal shavings or chippings in disposed of replacement or reformulated direct-contact 

lubricants are expected to still be separated and recycled. Since the metal shavings or clippings 

are related to the parts manufactured and not to the direct-contact lubricants, the amount 

collected is not expected to change. For the same reason, the amount of swarf disposed of is not 

expected to change as the new VOC limit requirements are not expected to change the 

production level at the affected facilities and the fluid quantity is not expected to change between 

existing and reformulated products as used. The ratio of water to solvent in metal working fluid 

oils may change. Used direct-contact lubricants would be recycled. Used wastewater would be 

sent to POTW facilities (see Environmental Topic IX. Hydrology and Water Quality). Tramp or 

sump oil is expected to be skimmed off and disposed of as hazardous waste. The amount of 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-58 June 2010 

tramp or sump oil is expected to be similar since the volumes of replacement or reformulated 

direct-contact lubricants are expected to be similar. 

General Metalworking Fluids 

General metalworking fluids are expected to meet the interim VOC content limits for both 

categories with the exception of light naphthenic oils (40 SUS) would need to be replaced with 

60 SUS naphthenic oils. Waste light naphthenic oils and 60 SUS naphthenic oils are expected to 

be disposed of in a similar matter. Affected facility owners/operators may need to replace 

existing naphthenic oils with paraffinic oils, water-dilutable oils or vegetable based oils. Metal 

shavings or chippings in disposed replaced or reformulated fluids containing paraffinic oils, 

water-dilutable oils or vegetable based oils are expected to still be separated and recycled. Since 

the metal shavings or clippings are related to the parts manufactured and not to the existing 

naphthenic working fluid; or replacement/ reformulated paraffinic oils, water-dilutable oils or 

vegetable based oils; the amount collected is not expected to change. For the same reason, the 

amount of swarf disposed of is not expected to change. The ratio of water to solvent used metal 

working fluid oils may change. Used metal working fluid oils would be recycled and reused. 

Used wastewater would be sent to POTW facilities (see Environmental Topic IX. Hydrology and 

Water Quality). Tramp or sump oil is expected to be skimmed off and disposed as hazardous 

waste. The amount of tramp or sump oil is expected to be similar since the volumes of 

replacement or reformulated direct-contact lubricants are expected to be similar. 

DMC would replace denatured alcohol at one affected facility. As detailed in the Hazards and 

Hazardous Materials section of this EA, DMC and denatured alcohol have similar hazardous 

properties. DMC is expected to be a one to one replacement, so the amount of hazardous waste 

generated is also expected to be the same. Waste DMC would be removed by the same company 

that handles the denatured alcohol. DMC is expected to be disposed in the same fashion as the 

denatured alcohol. Because DMC and denatured alcohol is expected to be disposed in similar 

amounts in the same fashion, no new hazardous waste adverse impacts are expected. Since 

DMC and denatured alcohol are both hazardous solvents, no impacts to solid waste disposal 

facilities are expected.

Metal Protecting Fluids Rust Inhibitor

Existing military specified rust preservatives are expected to meet the new VOC content limit. 

Therefore, since complaint military specified rust preservatives are currently used no change in 

hazardous waste is expected from the new VOC content limit for military specified rust 

preservatives. 

SCAQMD staff also believes that affected metalworking operators would continue to comply 

with all applicable local, state, or federal waste disposal regulations regarding hazardous waste 

containing oil, grease and trace amounts of metals. 

There are three Class I landfills in California: Chemical Waste Management Kettleman Hills in 

Kettleman City, CA; Clean Harbors Buttonwillow in Buttonwillow, CA, and Clean Harbors 

Westmorland in Westemorland, CA. Chemical Waste Management Kettleman Hills has a 

remaining capacity of 7,360,000 cubic yards with an estimated closure date of 2037. Clean 

Harbors Buttonwillow and Westmorland have a remaining capacity of 12,731,000 cubic yards 

with an estimated closure date of 2036. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-59 June 2010 

The amount of solid hazardous waste removed from replacement or reformulated direct-contact 

lubricants and metalworking fluids at hazardous waste landfill beyond what is currently disposed 

is expected, because the amount of oil, grease and metals in the replacement or reformulated 

direct-contact lubricants and metalworking fluids is expected to be the same as in existing directcontact lubricants, metalworking fluids waste from current metalworking operations. Therefore, 

based on the existing capacity and the fact that PAR 1144 is not expected to change the amount 

of hazardous waste disposed, PAR 1144 is not expected to result in the disposal of hazardous 

wastes that would exceed the capacity of designated hazardous waste landfills. 

Based on these considerations, PAR 1144 is not expected to significantly increase the volume of 

solid or hazardous wastes disposed at existing municipal or hazardous waste disposal facilities or 

require additional waste disposal capacity. Further, implementing PAR 1144 is not expected to 

interfere with any affected facility’s ability to comply with applicable local, state, or federal 

waste disposal regulations. Since no solid/hazardous waste impacts were identified, no 

mitigation measures are necessary or required. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

XVII. TRASPORTATIO/TRAFFIC. Would the 

project: 

 

a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in 

relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of 

the street system (i.e., result in a substantial 

increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the 

volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at 

intersections)? 



b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a 

level of service standard 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 a design 

feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous 

intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm 

equipment)? 



e) Result in inadequate emergency access or? 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-60 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 

g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs 

supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus 

turnouts, bicycle racks)? 



Significance Criteria 

Impacts on transportation/traffic will be considered significant if any of the following criteria 

apply: 

- Peak period levels on major arterials are disrupted to a point where level of service (LOS) is 

reduced to D, E or F for more than one month. 

- An intersection’s volume to capacity ratio increase by 0.02 (two percent) or more when the 

LOS is already D, E or F. 

- A major roadway is closed to all through traffic, and no alternate route is available. 

- There is an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and 

capacity of the street system. 

- The demand for parking facilities is substantially increased. 

- Water borne, rail car or air traffic is substantially altered. 

- Traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians are substantially increased. 

- The need for more than 350 employees 

- An increase in heavy-duty transport truck traffic to and/or from the facility by more than 350 

truck round trips per day 

- Increase customer traffic by more than 700 visits per day. 

Discussion 

XVII.a) & b) 

It is expected that owner/operators may need to replace or reformulate metalworking fluids to 

comply with PAR 1144. SCAQMD staff does not expects that reformulated solvents would have 

different sources than existing solvents. 

Direct-contact Lubricants 

Existing direct-contact lubricants are provided by suppliers in the Midwest. Existing directcontact lubricants currently meet the interim VOC content limits proposed in PAR 1144; 

therefore, no change in direct-contact lubricants is expected. Since there is no change in directcontact lubricant usage, no change in transportation is expected. To comply with the final VOC 

content limit for direct-contact, some owners/operators are expected to reformulate with waterdilutable oils, vegetable oils or paraffinic oils. Water-dilutable oils or vegetable oils are provided 

by suppliers in the Midwest. Paraffinic oils would be provided by suppliers in Richmond, 

California or Texas, which is closer than the Midwest. Since the existing and 

replacement/reformulated direct-contact lubricants are supplied from the same or closer areas, no 

change in traffic or transportation is expected to comply with the final VOC content limits for 

direct-contact lubricants.
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-61 June 2010 

General Metalworking Fluids 

Naphthenic oil is currently provided from manufacturers and supplier in Bakersfield, California. 

To comply with the interim VOC content limit in PAR 1144, owners/operators are expected to 

switch from light naphthenic oil (40SUS) to 60 SUS naphthenic oil. Both grades of naphthenic 

oil are supplied by the same refinery in Bakersfield. Therefore, no change in traffic or 

transportation is expected to comply with the interim VOC content limits for general 

metalworking fluids. 

To comply with the final VOC content limit in PAR 1144, naphthenic oils in metal working 

fluids are expected to be replaced with paraffinic oils, water-dilutable oils or vegetable oils. 

Paraffinic oils can be obtained from refineries in Richmond, California or Texas. Naphthenic oil 

is typically delivered by tanker trucks. However, paraffinic oil is expected to be delivered by 

rail. Therefore, PAR 1144 is expected to reduce the number of diesel trucks on the road 

(approximately 500 diesel truck trips per year). PAR 1144 is expected to require 68 additional 

railcars (21 from out of state and 37 from Richmond, California) per year. These additional rail 

cars are not expected to increase the number of trains, but are expected to be carried by existing 

locomotives. Given that affected facilities are dispersed throughout the district, it is unlikely that 

truck or rail traffic from different affected facilities would overlap. As a result, implementing 

PAR 1144 is not expected to substantially affect the level of service (LOS) of any intersection in 

the district and could increase the LOS since less diesel trucks would be needed.

Metal Protecting Fluids Rust Inhibitor

Existing military specified preservatives meet the proposed VOC content limit in PAR 1144. 

Therefore, no change in traffic or transportation is expected to comply with the VOC content 

limits for military specified preservative. 

Therefore, PAR 1144 is not expected to adversely affect traffic or transportation systems. The 

proposed amended rule would not change or substantially increase operational transportation 

demands or services. Therefore, the implementation of PAR 1144 is not expected to 

significantly adversely affect circulation patterns on local roadways or the level of service at 

intersections near affected facilities. 

XVII.c) Since PAR 1144 would not require substantial construction or operations outside 

existing structures, it would not affect air traffic. Further, PAR 1144 would not affect in any way 

air traffic in the region as no direct-contact lubricants, metalworking fluids or rust inhibitors 

would need to be transported by plane. 

XVII.d) Since PAR 1144 only affects VOC contents of direct-contact lubricants, and 

metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors, no offsite modifications to roadways are anticipated for 

the proposed project that would result in additional design hazards or incompatible uses. 

XVII.e) Since PAR 1144 only affects VOC contents of direct-contact lubricants, and 

metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors at 7,000 existing facilities, no changes are expected to 

emergency access at or in the vicinity of the affected facilities. The proposed project is not 

expected to adversely impact emergency access because it primarily requires replacement of 

non-compliant direct-contact lubricants, and metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors with 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-62 June 2010 

compliant products. Using compliant products is not expected to substantially modify a facility’s 

physical layout that would affect emergency access. 

XVII.f) Since PAR 1144 only affects VOC contents of direct-contact lubricants, metalworking 

fluids and rust inhibitors at 7,000 existing facilities, no changes are expected to the parking 

capacity at or in the vicinity of the affected facilities. PAR 1144 is not expected to require 

additional workers, so additional parking capacity will not be required. Therefore, the project is 

not expected to adversely impact on- or off-site parking capacity. 

XVII.g) Since PAR 1144 only affects VOC contents of direct-contact lubricants, and 

metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors at 7,000 existing facilities, the implementation of PAR 

1144 would not result in conflicts with alternative transportation, such as bus turnouts, bicycle 

racks, et cetera. 

Based upon these considerations, PAR 1144 is not expected to generate significant adverse 

transportation/traffic impacts and, therefore, this topic will not be considered further. Since no 

significant transportation/traffic impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are necessary or 

required. 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

XVII. MADATORY FIDIGS OF 

SIGIFICACE 

 

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 selfsustaining 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) 



 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-63 June 2010 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

o Impact 

 

c) Does the project have environmental effects that 

will cause substantial adverse effects on human 

beings, either directly or indirectly? 

 

XVIII.a) As discussed in the “Biological Resources” section, PAR 1144 is not expected to 

significantly adversely affect plant or animal species or the habitat on which they rely because 

PAR 1144 affects the VOC contents of direct-contact lubricants, and metalworking fluids and 

rust inhibitors used in metalworking operations, which typically occur in existing structures at 

7,000 existing affected facilities. The 7,000 affected facilities are located at sites that have 

already been greatly disturbed and that currently do not support such habitats. PAR 1144 is not 

expected to induce construction of any new land use projects that could affect biological 

resources. 

XVIII.b) Based on the foregoing analyses, cumulative impacts in conjunction with other 

projects that may occur concurrently with or subsequent to the proposed project are not expected 

to adversely impact any environmental topic. Related projects to the currently proposed project 

include existing and proposed amended rules and regulations, as well as AQMP control 

measures, which produce emission reductions from most industrial and commercial sectors. 

Furthermore, because PAR 1144 does not generate project-specific impacts, cumulative impacts 

are not considered to be "cumulatively considerable” as defined by CEQA guidelines 

§15065(a)(3). For example, the environmental topics checked ‘No Impact’ (e.g., aesthetics, 

agriculture resources, biological resources, cultural resources energy, geology and soils, land use 

and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, 

solid/hazardous waste and transportation and traffic) would not be expected to make any 

contribution to potential cumulative impacts whatsoever. For the environmental topic checked 

‘Less than Significant Impact’ (e.g., air quality, hazards and hazardous materials, and hydrology 

and water quality), the analysis indicated that project impacts would not exceed any projectspecific significance thresholds. These conclusions are based on the fact that the analyses for 

each of these environmental areas concluded that the incremental effects of the proposed project 

would be minor and, therefore, not considered to be cumulatively considerable. Also, in the case 

of air quality impacts, the net effect of implementing the proposed project with other proposed 

amended rules and regulations, and AQMP control measures is an overall reduction in districtwide emissions, thus, contributing to the attainment of state and national ambient air quality 

standards. Therefore, it is concluded that PAR 1144 has no potential for significant cumulative 

or cumulatively considerable impacts in any environmental areas. 

XVIII.c) Based on the foregoing analyses, PAR 1144 is not expected to cause significant 

adverse effects to human beings. Significant adverse air quality impacts are not expected from 

the implementation of PAR 1144. Based on the preceding analyses, no significant adverse 

impacts to aesthetics, agriculture resources, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, 

geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and 

planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, 

solid/hazardous waste and transportation and traffic are expected as a result of the 

implementation of PAR 1144. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2 

PAR 1144 2-64 June 2010 

As discussed in items I through XVIII above, the proposed project would have no potential to 

cause significant adverse environmental effects. 
A P P E  D I X A 

P R O P O S E D A M E  D E D R U L E 1 1 4 4 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix A

PAR 1144 A-1 June 2010

In order to save space and avoid repetition, please refer to the latest version of Proposed Amended 

Rule 1144 located elsewhere in the rule adoption package.

The version “PAR 1144 012010” of the proposed amended rule was circulated with the Draft 

Environmental Assessment that was released on February 16, 2010 for a 30-day public review 

and comment period ending March 17, 2010.

Original hard copies of the Draft Environmental Assessment, which include the version “PAR 

1144 012010” of the proposed rule, can be obtained through the SCAQMD Public Information 

Center at the Diamond Bar headquarters or by calling (909) 396-2039.
A P P E  D I X B 

A S S U M P T I O  S A  D C A L C U L A T I O  S 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-1 

Table B-1

Diemethyl Carbonate on-Carcinogenic Health Risk Analysis

Tier II - on-carcinogenic Chronic Health Risk Evaluation of Dimethyl Carbonate

Receptor

Total 

DMC 

Usage,

gal/yr

DMC 

Density, 

lb/gal

DMC 

Emissions,

ton/year

X/Q MET

DMC C

REL

ug/m

Sensitive 327 8.92 1.5 4.51 0.51 5,50Off-site Worker 327 8.92 1.5 51.18 0.51 5,50

Tier II - on-carcinogenic Acute Health Risk Evaluation of Dimethyl Carbonate

Receptor

Total 

DMC 

Usage,

gal/yr

DMC 

Density, 

lb/gal

DMC 

Emissions,

lb/day

DMC 

Emissions,

lb/hr

X/Qhr

DMC A

RE

ug/m

Sensitive 327 8.92 11.2 1.4 373.5 18,0Off-site Worker 327 8.92 11.2 1.4 2,000 18,0SCAQMD, Risk Assessment Procedures for Rules 1401 and 212, Package L, July 2008.

MET - Downtown Los Angeles X/Q values estimated at 100 meters downwind distance

Dimethyl Carbonate (DMC) Usage, gal/year from facilityDMC Emissions, ton/year= (DMC Usage, gal/year x DMC Density, lb/gal)/(2,000 lb/ton)

DMC Emissions, lb/day = (DMC Usage, gal/year x DMC Density, lb/gal)/(260 day/year)/(8 hour/day)DMC Acute and Chronic REL from OEHHA (interim values)

DMC Chronic HI = (Emissions, ton/year x (X/Q) x MET)/Chronic REL, ug/m3

DMC Acute HI = (Emissions, lb/hr x (X/Q)hr)/Acute REL, ug/m3
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-2 June 2010

Table B-2

AERMOD Input File for Diemethyl Carbonate Carcinogenic Health Risk Analysis

** 

**************************************** 

** 

** AERMOD Input Produced by: 

** AERMOD View Ver. 6.4.0 

** Lakes Environmental Software Inc. 

** Date: 5/13/2010 

** File: C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.ADI 

** 

**************************************** 

** 

** 

**************************************** 

** AERMOD Control Pathway 

**************************************** 

** 

** 

CO STARTING 

 TITLEONE C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is 

 MODELOPT CONC NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT FLAT ELEV 

 AVERTIME PERIOD 

 URBANOPT 9862049 Los_Angeles 

 POLLUTID OTHER 

 RUNORNOT RUN 

CO FINISHED 

** 

**************************************** 

** AERMOD Source Pathway 

**************************************** 

** 

** 

SO STARTING 

** Source Location ** 

** Source ID - Type - X Coord. - Y Coord. ** 

 LOCATION STCK1 POINT 384922.589 3775005.071 110.830 

** Source Parameters ** 

 SRCPARAM STCK1 1.0 11.278 0.000 0.03032 2.438 

** Building Downwash ** 

 BUILDHGT STCK1 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 

 BUILDHGT STCK1 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 

 BUILDHGT STCK1 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 

 BUILDHGT STCK1 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 

 BUILDHGT STCK1 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 

 BUILDHGT STCK1 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 10.67 

 BUILDWID STCK1 233.32 240.23 243.13 238.65 226.91 208.28 

 BUILDWID STCK1 183.32 163.38 146.74 125.65 158.32 192.21 

 BUILDWID STCK1 220.26 241.61 255.63 261.87 260.16 250.55 

 BUILDWID STCK1 233.32 240.23 243.13 238.65 226.91 208.28 

 BUILDWID STCK1 183.32 163.38 146.74 125.65 158.32 192.21 

 BUILDWID STCK1 220.26 241.61 255.63 261.87 260.16 250.55 

 BUILDLEN STCK1 125.65 158.32 192.21 220.26 241.61 255.63 

 BUILDLEN STCK1 261.87 260.16 250.55 233.32 240.23 243.13 

 BUILDLEN STCK1 238.65 226.91 208.28 183.32 163.38 146.74 

 BUILDLEN STCK1 125.65 158.32 192.21 220.26 241.61 255.63 

 BUILDLEN STCK1 261.87 260.16 250.55 233.32 240.23 243.13 

 BUILDLEN STCK1 238.65 226.91 208.28 183.32 163.38 146.74 

 XBADJ STCK1 -39.81 -43.74 -50.61 -55.95 -59.59 -61.41 

 XBADJ STCK1 -61.37 -59.47 -55.76 -50.35 -54.76 -59.14 

 XBADJ STCK1 -61.72 -62.43 -61.24 -58.19 -63.96 -76.06 

 XBADJ STCK1 -85.84 -114.58 -141.60 -164.31 -182.03 -194.22 

 XBADJ STCK1 -200.50 -200.70 -194.79 -182.97 -185.47 -183.99 

 XBADJ STCK1 -176.92 -164.48 -147.04 -125.13 -99.42 -70.69 

 YBADJ STCK1 -66.31 -65.35 -62.43 -57.60 -51.02 -42.90 

 YBADJ STCK1 -33.47 -17.73 2.68 23.02 35.42 45.49 

 YBADJ STCK1 54.18 61.22 66.40 69.56 70.61 69.52 

 YBADJ STCK1 66.31 65.35 62.43 57.60 51.02 42.90 

 YBADJ STCK1 33.47 17.73 -2.68 -23.02 -35.42 -45.49 

 YBADJ STCK1 -54.18 -61.22 -66.40 -69.56 -70.61 -69.52 

 URBANSRC STCK1 

 SRCGROUP ALL 

SO FINISHED 

** 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-3 June 2010

**************************************** 

** AERMOD Receptor Pathway 

**************************************** 

** 

** 

RE STARTING 

 INCLUDED NNP.rou 

RE FINISHED 

** 

**************************************** 

** AERMOD Meteorology Pathway 

**************************************** 

** 

** 

ME STARTING 

 SURFFILE C:\Meteorology\AERMOD\cela.SFC 

 PROFFILE C:\Meteorology\AERMOD\cela.PFL 

 SURFDATA 0 2006 

 UAIRDATA 3190 2006 

 PROFBASE 10 METERS 

ME FINISHED 

** 

**************************************** 

** AERMOD Output Pathway 

**************************************** 

** 

** 

OU STARTING 

** Auto-Generated Plotfiles 

 PLOTFILE PERIOD ALL NNP.AD\PE00GALL.PLT 

OU FINISHED 

 *********************************** 

 *** SETUP Finishes Successfully *** 

 *********************************** 

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 1 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** MODEL SETUP OPTIONS SUMMARY *** 

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 **Model Is Setup For Calculation of Average CONCentration Values. 

 

 -- DEPOSITION LOGIC -- 

 **NO GAS DEPOSITION Data Provided. 

 **NO PARTICLE DEPOSITION Data Provided. 

 **Model Uses NO DRY DEPLETION. DRYDPLT = F 

 **Model Uses NO WET DEPLETION. WETDPLT = F 

 

 **Model Uses URBAN Dispersion Algorithm for the SBL for 1 Source(s), 

 for Total of 1 Urban Area(s): 

 Urban Population = 9862049.0 ; Urban Roughness Length = 1.000 m 

 

 **Model Allows User-Specified Options: 

 1. Stack-tip Downwash. 

 2. Allow FLAT/ELEV Terrain Option by Source, 

 with 0 FLAT and 1 ELEV Source(s). 

 3. Use Calms Processing Routine. 

 4. Use Missing Data Processing Routine. 

 5. No Exponential Decay. 

 6. Urban Roughness Length of 1.0 Meter Used. 

 

 **Model Assumes No FLAGPOLE Receptor Heights. 

 

 **Model Calculates PERIOD Averages Only 

 

 **This Run Includes: 1 Source(s); 1 Source Group(s); and 655 Receptor(s) 

 

 **The Model Assumes A Pollutant Type of: OTHER 

 

 **Model Set To Continue RUNning After the Setup Testing. 

 

 **Output Options Selected: 

 Model Outputs Tables of PERIOD Averages by Receptor 

 Model Outputs External File(s) of High Values for Plotting (PLOTFILE Keyword) 

 

 **NOTE: The Following Flags May Appear Following CONC Values: c for Calm Hours 

 m for Missing Hours 

 b for Both Calm and Missing Hours 

 

 **Misc. Inputs: Base Elev. for Pot. Temp. Profile (m MSL) = 10.00 ; Decay Coef. = 0.000 ; Rot. Angle = 0.0 

 Emission Units = GRAMS/SEC ; Emission Rate Unit Factor = 0.10000E+07 

 Output Units = MICROGRAMS/M**3 

 

 **Approximate Storage Requirements of Model = 3.6 MB of RAM. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-4 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 2 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** POINT SOURCE DATA *** 

 NUMBER EMISSION RATE BASE STACK STACK STACK STACK BLDG URBAN CAP/ EMIS RATE 

 SOURCE PART. (GRAMS/SEC) X Y ELEV. HEIGHT TEMP. EXIT VEL. DIAMETER EXISTS SOURCE HOR SCALAR 

 ID CATS. (METERS) (METERS) (METERS) (METERS) (DEG.K) (M/SEC) (METERS) VARY BY 

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 STCK1 0 0.10000E+01 384922.6 3775005.1 110.8 11.28 0.00 0.03 2.44 YES YES NO 

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 3 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** SOURCE IDs DEFINING SOURCE GROUPS *** 

 GROUP ID SOURCE IDs 

 ALL STCK1 , 

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 4 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** DIRECTION SPECIFIC BUILDING DIMENSIONS *** 

 SOURCE ID: STCK1 

 IFV BH BW BL XADJ YADJ IFV BH BW BL XADJ YADJ 

 1 10.7, 233.3, 125.6, -39.8, -66.3, 2 10.7, 240.2, 158.3, -43.7, -65.3, 

 3 10.7, 243.1, 192.2, -50.6, -62.4, 4 10.7, 238.7, 220.3, -55.9, -57.6, 

 5 10.7, 226.9, 241.6, -59.6, -51.0, 6 10.7, 208.3, 255.6, -61.4, -42.9, 

 7 10.7, 183.3, 261.9, -61.4, -33.5, 8 10.7, 163.4, 260.2, -59.5, -17.7, 

 9 10.7, 146.7, 250.6, -55.8, 2.7, 10 10.7, 125.6, 233.3, -50.3, 23.0, 

 11 10.7, 158.3, 240.2, -54.8, 35.4, 12 10.7, 192.2, 243.1, -59.1, 45.5, 

 13 10.7, 220.3, 238.7, -61.7, 54.2, 14 10.7, 241.6, 226.9, -62.4, 61.2, 

 15 10.7, 255.6, 208.3, -61.2, 66.4, 16 10.7, 261.9, 183.3, -58.2, 69.6, 

 17 10.7, 260.2, 163.4, -64.0, 70.6, 18 10.7, 250.6, 146.7, -76.1, 69.5, 

 19 10.7, 233.3, 125.6, -85.8, 66.3, 20 10.7, 240.2, 158.3, -114.6, 65.3, 

 21 10.7, 243.1, 192.2, -141.6, 62.4, 22 10.7, 238.7, 220.3, -164.3, 57.6, 

 23 10.7, 226.9, 241.6, -182.0, 51.0, 24 10.7, 208.3, 255.6, -194.2, 42.9, 

 25 10.7, 183.3, 261.9, -200.5, 33.5, 26 10.7, 163.4, 260.2, -200.7, 17.7, 

 27 10.7, 146.7, 250.6, -194.8, -2.7, 28 10.7, 125.6, 233.3, -183.0, -23.0, 

 29 10.7, 158.3, 240.2, -185.5, -35.4, 30 10.7, 192.2, 243.1, -184.0, -45.5, 

 31 10.7, 220.3, 238.7, -176.9, -54.2, 32 10.7, 241.6, 226.9, -164.5, -61.2, 

 33 10.7, 255.6, 208.3, -147.0, -66.4, 34 10.7, 261.9, 183.3, -125.1, -69.6, 

 35 10.7, 260.2, 163.4, -99.4, -70.6, 36 10.7, 250.6, 146.7, -70.7, -69.5, 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-5 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 5 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** 

 (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) 

 (METERS) 

 ( 384381.8, 3774397.2, 125.7, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384431.8, 3774397.2, 117.3, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384481.8, 3774397.2, 117.3, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384531.8, 3774397.2, 117.1, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384581.8, 3774397.2, 116.8, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384631.8, 3774397.2, 116.9, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384681.8, 3774397.2, 117.0, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384731.8, 3774397.2, 124.2, 124.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384781.8, 3774397.2, 116.6, 126.6, 0.0); ( 384831.8, 3774397.2, 115.7, 115.7, 0.0); 

 ( 384881.8, 3774397.2, 114.9, 114.9, 0.0); ( 384931.8, 3774397.2, 114.0, 114.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384981.8, 3774397.2, 113.2, 113.2, 0.0); ( 385031.8, 3774397.2, 112.4, 112.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385081.8, 3774397.2, 111.7, 111.7, 0.0); ( 385131.8, 3774397.2, 110.8, 110.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3774397.2, 110.0, 110.0, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3774397.2, 108.8, 108.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3774397.2, 107.2, 107.2, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3774397.2, 105.5, 105.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3774397.2, 101.9, 110.6, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3774397.2, 102.8, 110.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3774397.2, 109.7, 109.7, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3774397.2, 110.9, 110.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3774397.2, 111.4, 111.4, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3774447.2, 117.5, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3774447.2, 117.9, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3774447.2, 117.4, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3774447.2, 116.8, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3774447.2, 116.5, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384631.8, 3774447.2, 117.2, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3774447.2, 117.1, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3774447.2, 118.6, 125.8, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3774447.2, 116.0, 126.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384831.8, 3774447.2, 115.7, 115.7, 0.0); ( 384881.8, 3774447.2, 114.9, 114.9, 0.0); 

 ( 384931.8, 3774447.2, 114.1, 114.1, 0.0); ( 384981.8, 3774447.2, 113.3, 113.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385031.8, 3774447.2, 112.4, 112.4, 0.0); ( 385081.8, 3774447.2, 111.7, 111.7, 0.0); 

 ( 385131.8, 3774447.2, 110.9, 110.9, 0.0); ( 385181.8, 3774447.2, 110.1, 110.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385231.8, 3774447.2, 108.9, 108.9, 0.0); ( 385281.8, 3774447.2, 107.8, 107.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385331.8, 3774447.2, 105.2, 105.2, 0.0); ( 385381.8, 3774447.2, 102.1, 110.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385431.8, 3774447.2, 104.9, 111.1, 0.0); ( 385481.8, 3774447.2, 110.9, 110.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385531.8, 3774447.2, 111.3, 111.3, 0.0); ( 385581.8, 3774447.2, 111.6, 111.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384381.8, 3774497.2, 118.1, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384431.8, 3774497.2, 117.9, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384481.8, 3774497.2, 116.9, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384531.8, 3774497.2, 116.2, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384581.8, 3774497.2, 116.1, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384631.8, 3774497.2, 116.8, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384681.8, 3774497.2, 116.9, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384731.8, 3774497.2, 115.8, 115.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384781.8, 3774497.2, 115.8, 115.8, 0.0); ( 384831.8, 3774497.2, 115.4, 115.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384881.8, 3774497.2, 114.5, 114.5, 0.0); ( 384931.8, 3774497.2, 113.7, 113.7, 0.0); 

 ( 384981.8, 3774497.2, 113.1, 113.1, 0.0); ( 385031.8, 3774497.2, 112.3, 112.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385081.8, 3774497.2, 111.5, 111.5, 0.0); ( 385131.8, 3774497.2, 110.5, 110.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3774497.2, 109.8, 109.8, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3774497.2, 108.9, 108.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3774497.2, 107.8, 107.8, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3774497.2, 104.0, 104.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3774497.2, 102.6, 111.0, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3774497.2, 109.9, 109.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3774497.2, 111.2, 111.2, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3774497.2, 111.6, 111.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3774497.2, 112.1, 112.1, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3774547.2, 117.9, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3774547.2, 117.5, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3774547.2, 116.4, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3774547.2, 115.7, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3774547.2, 115.5, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384631.8, 3774547.2, 116.0, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3774547.2, 116.1, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3774547.2, 114.5, 114.5, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3774547.2, 114.9, 114.9, 0.0); 

 ( 384831.8, 3774547.2, 114.7, 114.7, 0.0); ( 384881.8, 3774547.2, 113.8, 113.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384931.8, 3774547.2, 113.2, 113.2, 0.0); ( 384981.8, 3774547.2, 112.6, 112.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385031.8, 3774547.2, 112.0, 112.0, 0.0); ( 385081.8, 3774547.2, 111.3, 111.3, 0.0); 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-6 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 6 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** 

 (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) 

 (METERS) 

 ( 385131.8, 3774547.2, 110.7, 110.7, 0.0); ( 385181.8, 3774547.2, 109.8, 109.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385231.8, 3774547.2, 108.6, 108.6, 0.0); ( 385281.8, 3774547.2, 107.1, 107.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385331.8, 3774547.2, 102.6, 110.9, 0.0); ( 385381.8, 3774547.2, 103.5, 111.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385431.8, 3774547.2, 111.0, 111.0, 0.0); ( 385481.8, 3774547.2, 111.5, 111.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385531.8, 3774547.2, 112.0, 112.0, 0.0); ( 385581.8, 3774547.2, 112.5, 112.5, 0.0); 

 ( 384381.8, 3774597.2, 117.2, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384431.8, 3774597.2, 116.7, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384481.8, 3774597.2, 115.8, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384531.8, 3774597.2, 115.2, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384581.8, 3774597.2, 114.8, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384631.8, 3774597.2, 115.1, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384681.8, 3774597.2, 114.9, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384731.8, 3774597.2, 113.3, 113.3, 0.0); 

 ( 384781.8, 3774597.2, 113.5, 113.5, 0.0); ( 384831.8, 3774597.2, 113.5, 113.5, 0.0); 

 ( 384881.8, 3774597.2, 112.7, 112.7, 0.0); ( 384931.8, 3774597.2, 112.3, 112.3, 0.0); 

 ( 384981.8, 3774597.2, 112.1, 112.1, 0.0); ( 385031.8, 3774597.2, 111.5, 111.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385081.8, 3774597.2, 110.9, 110.9, 0.0); ( 385131.8, 3774597.2, 110.2, 110.2, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3774597.2, 109.1, 109.1, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3774597.2, 107.8, 107.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3774597.2, 103.0, 107.8, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3774597.2, 102.6, 111.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3774597.2, 110.2, 110.2, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3774597.2, 111.3, 111.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3774597.2, 111.8, 111.8, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3774597.2, 112.3, 112.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3774597.2, 112.8, 112.8, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3774647.2, 116.2, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3774647.2, 115.9, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3774647.2, 115.1, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3774647.2, 114.5, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3774647.2, 114.0, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384631.8, 3774647.2, 114.1, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3774647.2, 113.8, 113.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3774647.2, 112.1, 112.1, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3774647.2, 112.1, 112.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384831.8, 3774647.2, 112.3, 112.3, 0.0); ( 384881.8, 3774647.2, 111.6, 111.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384931.8, 3774647.2, 111.1, 111.1, 0.0); ( 384981.8, 3774647.2, 111.1, 111.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385031.8, 3774647.2, 110.8, 110.8, 0.0); ( 385081.8, 3774647.2, 110.0, 110.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385131.8, 3774647.2, 109.2, 109.2, 0.0); ( 385181.8, 3774647.2, 108.0, 108.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385231.8, 3774647.2, 104.0, 107.8, 0.0); ( 385281.8, 3774647.2, 102.9, 111.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385331.8, 3774647.2, 107.6, 111.1, 0.0); ( 385381.8, 3774647.2, 111.2, 111.2, 0.0); 

 ( 385431.8, 3774647.2, 111.9, 111.9, 0.0); ( 385481.8, 3774647.2, 112.5, 112.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385531.8, 3774647.2, 112.8, 112.8, 0.0); ( 385581.8, 3774647.2, 113.2, 113.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384381.8, 3774697.2, 115.1, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384431.8, 3774697.2, 114.7, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384481.8, 3774697.2, 114.1, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384531.8, 3774697.2, 113.5, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384581.8, 3774697.2, 113.1, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384631.8, 3774697.2, 113.2, 113.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384681.8, 3774697.2, 112.9, 112.9, 0.0); ( 384731.8, 3774697.2, 111.3, 111.3, 0.0); 

 ( 384781.8, 3774697.2, 111.1, 111.1, 0.0); ( 384831.8, 3774697.2, 110.9, 110.9, 0.0); 

 ( 384881.8, 3774697.2, 110.8, 110.8, 0.0); ( 384931.8, 3774697.2, 110.2, 110.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384981.8, 3774697.2, 110.3, 110.3, 0.0); ( 385031.8, 3774697.2, 110.6, 110.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385081.8, 3774697.2, 109.1, 109.1, 0.0); ( 385131.8, 3774697.2, 107.8, 107.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3774697.2, 103.7, 108.2, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3774697.2, 102.9, 111.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3774697.2, 106.0, 111.1, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3774697.2, 111.0, 111.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3774697.2, 111.8, 111.8, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3774697.2, 112.5, 112.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3774697.2, 113.3, 113.3, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3774697.2, 113.4, 113.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3774697.2, 113.8, 113.8, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3774747.2, 113.6, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3774747.2, 113.3, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3774747.2, 112.9, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3774747.2, 112.4, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3774747.2, 112.1, 112.1, 0.0); 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-7 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 7 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** 

 (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) 

 (METERS) 

 ( 384631.8, 3774747.2, 112.3, 112.3, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3774747.2, 112.2, 112.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3774747.2, 110.8, 110.8, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3774747.2, 110.5, 110.5, 0.0); 

 ( 384831.8, 3774747.2, 110.1, 110.1, 0.0); ( 384881.8, 3774747.2, 109.6, 109.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384931.8, 3774747.2, 109.3, 109.3, 0.0); ( 384981.8, 3774747.2, 109.5, 109.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385031.8, 3774747.2, 109.4, 109.4, 0.0); ( 385081.8, 3774747.2, 105.9, 109.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385131.8, 3774747.2, 103.6, 103.6, 0.0); ( 385181.8, 3774747.2, 103.3, 111.2, 0.0); 

 ( 385231.8, 3774747.2, 107.5, 110.9, 0.0); ( 385281.8, 3774747.2, 110.9, 110.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385331.8, 3774747.2, 111.6, 111.6, 0.0); ( 385381.8, 3774747.2, 112.3, 112.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385431.8, 3774747.2, 113.0, 113.0, 0.0); ( 385481.8, 3774747.2, 113.8, 113.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385531.8, 3774747.2, 114.3, 114.3, 0.0); ( 385581.8, 3774747.2, 114.9, 114.9, 0.0); 

 ( 384381.8, 3774797.2, 112.1, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384431.8, 3774797.2, 112.1, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384481.8, 3774797.2, 111.8, 161.0, 0.0); ( 384531.8, 3774797.2, 111.1, 111.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384581.8, 3774797.2, 111.0, 111.0, 0.0); ( 384631.8, 3774797.2, 111.4, 111.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384681.8, 3774797.2, 111.1, 111.1, 0.0); ( 384731.8, 3774797.2, 110.6, 110.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384781.8, 3774797.2, 109.9, 109.9, 0.0); ( 384831.8, 3774797.2, 109.0, 109.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384881.8, 3774797.2, 108.4, 108.4, 0.0); ( 384931.8, 3774797.2, 107.7, 107.7, 0.0); 

 ( 384981.8, 3774797.2, 107.0, 108.0, 0.0); ( 385031.8, 3774797.2, 104.0, 110.7, 0.0); 

 ( 385081.8, 3774797.2, 103.5, 110.4, 0.0); ( 385131.8, 3774797.2, 103.9, 111.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3774797.2, 107.3, 111.2, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3774797.2, 111.1, 111.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3774797.2, 111.6, 111.6, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3774797.2, 112.2, 112.2, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3774797.2, 112.9, 112.9, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3774797.2, 113.6, 113.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3774797.2, 114.3, 114.3, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3774797.2, 115.0, 115.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3774797.2, 115.9, 115.9, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3774847.2, 108.4, 161.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3774847.2, 108.6, 110.8, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3774847.2, 108.6, 110.7, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3774847.2, 108.2, 108.2, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3774847.2, 108.2, 110.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384631.8, 3774847.2, 108.5, 108.5, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3774847.2, 108.7, 108.7, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3774847.2, 107.8, 110.5, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3774847.2, 106.2, 109.9, 0.0); 

 ( 384831.8, 3774847.2, 105.4, 108.1, 0.0); ( 384881.8, 3774847.2, 104.7, 107.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384931.8, 3774847.2, 103.9, 103.9, 0.0); ( 384981.8, 3774847.2, 103.7, 111.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385031.8, 3774847.2, 103.6, 111.6, 0.0); ( 385081.8, 3774847.2, 106.6, 111.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385131.8, 3774847.2, 110.1, 110.9, 0.0); ( 385181.8, 3774847.2, 111.7, 111.7, 0.0); 

 ( 385231.8, 3774847.2, 112.3, 112.3, 0.0); ( 385281.8, 3774847.2, 112.4, 112.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385331.8, 3774847.2, 112.7, 112.7, 0.0); ( 385381.8, 3774847.2, 113.4, 113.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385431.8, 3774847.2, 114.1, 114.1, 0.0); ( 385481.8, 3774847.2, 114.8, 114.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385531.8, 3774847.2, 115.6, 115.6, 0.0); ( 385581.8, 3774847.2, 116.5, 116.5, 0.0); 

 ( 384381.8, 3774897.2, 107.0, 109.9, 0.0); ( 384431.8, 3774897.2, 107.0, 107.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384481.8, 3774897.2, 106.7, 106.7, 0.0); ( 384531.8, 3774897.2, 106.4, 106.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384581.8, 3774897.2, 105.8, 105.8, 0.0); ( 384631.8, 3774897.2, 105.0, 105.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384681.8, 3774897.2, 104.6, 104.6, 0.0); ( 384731.8, 3774897.2, 103.8, 117.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384781.8, 3774897.2, 104.0, 117.2, 0.0); ( 384831.8, 3774897.2, 104.2, 117.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384881.8, 3774897.2, 103.8, 110.8, 0.0); ( 384931.8, 3774897.2, 105.7, 110.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384981.8, 3774897.2, 106.7, 111.1, 0.0); ( 385031.8, 3774897.2, 110.8, 110.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385081.8, 3774897.2, 111.4, 111.4, 0.0); ( 385131.8, 3774897.2, 112.2, 112.2, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3774897.2, 113.2, 113.2, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3774897.2, 113.5, 113.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3774897.2, 113.0, 113.0, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3774897.2, 113.1, 113.1, 0.0); 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-8 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 8 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** 

 (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) 

 (METERS) 

 ( 385381.8, 3774897.2, 113.9, 113.9, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3774897.2, 114.6, 114.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3774897.2, 115.4, 115.4, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3774897.2, 116.2, 116.2, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3774897.2, 117.4, 117.4, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3774947.2, 110.8, 110.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3774947.2, 110.7, 110.7, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3774947.2, 110.1, 110.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3774947.2, 109.7, 109.7, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3774947.2, 109.1, 109.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384631.8, 3774947.2, 108.0, 108.0, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3774947.2, 106.9, 111.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3774947.2, 105.5, 118.4, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3774947.2, 105.6, 119.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384831.8, 3774947.2, 107.9, 118.4, 0.0); ( 384881.8, 3774947.2, 110.3, 110.3, 0.0); 

 ( 384931.8, 3774947.2, 110.8, 110.8, 0.0); ( 385131.8, 3774947.2, 113.2, 113.2, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3774947.2, 113.8, 113.8, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3774947.2, 114.0, 114.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3774947.2, 113.7, 113.7, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3774947.2, 113.6, 113.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3774947.2, 114.3, 114.3, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3774947.2, 115.1, 115.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3774947.2, 115.8, 115.8, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3774947.2, 116.9, 116.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3774947.2, 118.4, 118.4, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3774997.2, 111.6, 111.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3774997.2, 111.6, 111.6, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3774997.2, 111.4, 111.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3774997.2, 111.2, 111.2, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3774997.2, 111.0, 111.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384631.8, 3774997.2, 111.2, 111.2, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3774997.2, 111.1, 111.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3774997.2, 111.5, 117.1, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3774997.2, 113.4, 118.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3774997.2, 114.1, 114.1, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3774997.2, 114.3, 114.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3774997.2, 114.2, 114.2, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3774997.2, 114.3, 114.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3774997.2, 114.9, 114.9, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3774997.2, 115.6, 115.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3774997.2, 116.4, 116.4, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3774997.2, 117.7, 117.7, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3774997.2, 119.2, 119.2, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3775047.2, 112.2, 112.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3775047.2, 112.1, 112.1, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3775047.2, 112.1, 112.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3775047.2, 112.0, 112.0, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3775047.2, 111.9, 111.9, 0.0); 

 ( 384631.8, 3775047.2, 112.0, 112.0, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3775047.2, 112.3, 112.3, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3775047.2, 114.6, 114.6, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3775047.2, 117.7, 117.7, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3775047.2, 114.5, 114.5, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3775047.2, 114.7, 114.7, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3775047.2, 114.8, 114.8, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3775047.2, 115.1, 115.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3775047.2, 115.5, 115.5, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3775047.2, 116.2, 116.2, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3775047.2, 117.0, 117.0, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3775047.2, 118.4, 118.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3775047.2, 120.0, 120.0, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3775097.2, 112.7, 112.7, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3775097.2, 112.8, 112.8, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3775097.2, 112.8, 112.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3775097.2, 112.8, 112.8, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3775097.2, 112.7, 112.7, 0.0); 

 ( 384631.8, 3775097.2, 113.0, 113.0, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3775097.2, 113.4, 113.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3775097.2, 114.1, 114.1, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3775097.2, 116.3, 116.3, 0.0); 

 ( 384831.8, 3775097.2, 120.3, 120.3, 0.0); ( 384881.8, 3775097.2, 121.4, 126.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384931.8, 3775097.2, 114.0, 127.0, 0.0); ( 385181.8, 3775097.2, 115.1, 115.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385231.8, 3775097.2, 115.6, 115.6, 0.0); ( 385281.8, 3775097.2, 115.6, 115.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385331.8, 3775097.2, 115.6, 115.6, 0.0); ( 385381.8, 3775097.2, 115.9, 115.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385431.8, 3775097.2, 116.6, 116.6, 0.0); ( 385481.8, 3775097.2, 117.6, 117.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385531.8, 3775097.2, 118.8, 118.8, 0.0); ( 385581.8, 3775097.2, 120.4, 120.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384381.8, 3775147.2, 113.4, 113.4, 0.0); ( 384431.8, 3775147.2, 113.6, 113.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384481.8, 3775147.2, 113.7, 113.7, 0.0); ( 384531.8, 3775147.2, 113.8, 113.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384581.8, 3775147.2, 113.8, 113.8, 0.0); ( 384631.8, 3775147.2, 114.1, 114.1, 0.0); 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-9 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 9 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** 

 (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) 

 (METERS) 

 ( 384681.8, 3775147.2, 114.2, 114.2, 0.0); ( 384731.8, 3775147.2, 114.4, 114.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384781.8, 3775147.2, 115.2, 126.1, 0.0); ( 384831.8, 3775147.2, 116.8, 127.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384881.8, 3775147.2, 125.3, 125.3, 0.0); ( 384931.8, 3775147.2, 124.5, 126.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384981.8, 3775147.2, 116.4, 127.0, 0.0); ( 385031.8, 3775147.2, 114.0, 127.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385131.8, 3775147.2, 115.4, 115.4, 0.0); ( 385181.8, 3775147.2, 116.0, 116.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385231.8, 3775147.2, 116.5, 116.5, 0.0); ( 385281.8, 3775147.2, 116.1, 116.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385331.8, 3775147.2, 116.1, 116.1, 0.0); ( 385381.8, 3775147.2, 116.4, 116.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385431.8, 3775147.2, 116.5, 116.5, 0.0); ( 385481.8, 3775147.2, 117.1, 117.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385531.8, 3775147.2, 118.5, 118.5, 0.0); ( 385581.8, 3775147.2, 120.1, 120.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384381.8, 3775197.2, 114.0, 114.0, 0.0); ( 384431.8, 3775197.2, 114.4, 114.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384481.8, 3775197.2, 114.6, 114.6, 0.0); ( 384531.8, 3775197.2, 114.8, 114.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384581.8, 3775197.2, 115.1, 115.1, 0.0); ( 384631.8, 3775197.2, 115.2, 115.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384681.8, 3775197.2, 115.0, 115.0, 0.0); ( 384731.8, 3775197.2, 114.9, 114.9, 0.0); 

 ( 384781.8, 3775197.2, 115.2, 115.2, 0.0); ( 384831.8, 3775197.2, 115.6, 127.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384881.8, 3775197.2, 116.0, 127.0, 0.0); ( 384931.8, 3775197.2, 124.0, 124.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384981.8, 3775197.2, 126.1, 126.1, 0.0); ( 385031.8, 3775197.2, 115.9, 126.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385081.8, 3775197.2, 115.3, 126.3, 0.0); ( 385131.8, 3775197.2, 116.1, 116.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3775197.2, 117.3, 117.3, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3775197.2, 117.6, 117.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3775197.2, 116.3, 116.3, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3775197.2, 116.5, 116.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3775197.2, 116.9, 116.9, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3775197.2, 116.9, 116.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3775197.2, 116.5, 116.5, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3775197.2, 117.8, 117.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3775197.2, 119.6, 119.6, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3775247.2, 114.5, 114.5, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3775247.2, 114.9, 114.9, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3775247.2, 115.3, 115.3, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3775247.2, 115.6, 115.6, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3775247.2, 115.9, 115.9, 0.0); 

 ( 384631.8, 3775247.2, 116.2, 116.2, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3775247.2, 115.9, 115.9, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3775247.2, 115.6, 115.6, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3775247.2, 115.7, 115.7, 0.0); 

 ( 384831.8, 3775247.2, 115.9, 127.0, 0.0); ( 384881.8, 3775247.2, 116.0, 127.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384931.8, 3775247.2, 117.2, 127.0, 0.0); ( 384981.8, 3775247.2, 118.7, 126.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385031.8, 3775247.2, 116.3, 126.3, 0.0); ( 385081.8, 3775247.2, 116.0, 122.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385131.8, 3775247.2, 119.0, 120.0, 0.0); ( 385181.8, 3775247.2, 119.6, 119.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385231.8, 3775247.2, 118.7, 118.7, 0.0); ( 385281.8, 3775247.2, 116.6, 116.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385331.8, 3775247.2, 116.8, 116.8, 0.0); ( 385381.8, 3775247.2, 117.6, 117.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385431.8, 3775247.2, 117.4, 117.4, 0.0); ( 385481.8, 3775247.2, 116.6, 116.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385531.8, 3775247.2, 116.8, 116.8, 0.0); ( 385581.8, 3775247.2, 119.4, 119.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384381.8, 3775297.2, 115.0, 115.0, 0.0); ( 384431.8, 3775297.2, 115.3, 115.3, 0.0); 

 ( 384481.8, 3775297.2, 115.8, 115.8, 0.0); ( 384531.8, 3775297.2, 116.1, 116.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384581.8, 3775297.2, 116.5, 116.5, 0.0); ( 384631.8, 3775297.2, 116.8, 116.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384681.8, 3775297.2, 116.8, 116.8, 0.0); ( 384731.8, 3775297.2, 116.4, 116.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384781.8, 3775297.2, 116.1, 116.1, 0.0); ( 384831.8, 3775297.2, 116.4, 116.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384881.8, 3775297.2, 116.5, 116.5, 0.0); ( 384931.8, 3775297.2, 116.7, 116.7, 0.0); 

 ( 384981.8, 3775297.2, 117.0, 125.0, 0.0); ( 385031.8, 3775297.2, 117.5, 117.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385081.8, 3775297.2, 119.8, 122.6, 0.0); ( 385131.8, 3775297.2, 122.6, 122.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3775297.2, 122.0, 122.0, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3775297.2, 120.2, 120.2, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3775297.2, 118.0, 118.0, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3775297.2, 117.5, 117.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3775297.2, 118.0, 118.0, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3775297.2, 117.9, 117.9, 0.0); 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-10 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 10 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** 

 (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) 

 (METERS) 

 ( 385481.8, 3775297.2, 117.0, 117.0, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3775297.2, 116.9, 116.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3775297.2, 119.6, 119.6, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3775347.2, 115.4, 115.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3775347.2, 115.8, 115.8, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3775347.2, 116.2, 116.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3775347.2, 116.6, 116.6, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3775347.2, 117.0, 117.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384631.8, 3775347.2, 117.3, 117.3, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3775347.2, 117.4, 117.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3775347.2, 117.0, 117.0, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3775347.2, 116.6, 116.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384831.8, 3775347.2, 116.8, 116.8, 0.0); ( 384881.8, 3775347.2, 116.8, 116.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384931.8, 3775347.2, 116.6, 116.6, 0.0); ( 384981.8, 3775347.2, 117.5, 117.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385031.8, 3775347.2, 118.5, 118.5, 0.0); ( 385081.8, 3775347.2, 121.3, 121.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385131.8, 3775347.2, 122.6, 122.6, 0.0); ( 385181.8, 3775347.2, 122.6, 122.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385231.8, 3775347.2, 121.9, 121.9, 0.0); ( 385281.8, 3775347.2, 120.5, 120.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385331.8, 3775347.2, 118.9, 118.9, 0.0); ( 385381.8, 3775347.2, 118.4, 118.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385431.8, 3775347.2, 118.1, 118.1, 0.0); ( 385481.8, 3775347.2, 117.8, 117.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385531.8, 3775347.2, 117.9, 117.9, 0.0); ( 385581.8, 3775347.2, 119.5, 119.5, 0.0); 

 ( 384381.8, 3775397.2, 115.9, 115.9, 0.0); ( 384431.8, 3775397.2, 116.2, 116.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384481.8, 3775397.2, 116.7, 116.7, 0.0); ( 384531.8, 3775397.2, 117.1, 117.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384581.8, 3775397.2, 117.5, 117.5, 0.0); ( 384631.8, 3775397.2, 117.7, 117.7, 0.0); 

 ( 384681.8, 3775397.2, 117.8, 117.8, 0.0); ( 384731.8, 3775397.2, 117.6, 117.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384781.8, 3775397.2, 117.4, 117.4, 0.0); ( 384831.8, 3775397.2, 117.4, 117.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384881.8, 3775397.2, 117.3, 117.3, 0.0); ( 384931.8, 3775397.2, 117.4, 117.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384981.8, 3775397.2, 117.7, 117.7, 0.0); ( 385031.8, 3775397.2, 118.5, 118.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385081.8, 3775397.2, 119.7, 119.7, 0.0); ( 385131.8, 3775397.2, 121.6, 121.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3775397.2, 122.5, 122.5, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3775397.2, 122.6, 122.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3775397.2, 120.6, 120.6, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3775397.2, 119.5, 119.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3775397.2, 119.5, 119.5, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3775397.2, 119.5, 119.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3775397.2, 119.6, 119.6, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3775397.2, 119.8, 119.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3775397.2, 120.6, 120.6, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3775447.2, 116.5, 116.5, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3775447.2, 116.8, 116.8, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3775447.2, 117.2, 117.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3775447.2, 117.8, 117.8, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3775447.2, 118.0, 118.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384631.8, 3775447.2, 118.3, 118.3, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3775447.2, 118.3, 118.3, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3775447.2, 118.4, 118.4, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3775447.2, 118.3, 118.3, 0.0); 

 ( 384831.8, 3775447.2, 118.1, 118.1, 0.0); ( 384881.8, 3775447.2, 118.0, 118.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384931.8, 3775447.2, 118.1, 118.1, 0.0); ( 384981.8, 3775447.2, 118.1, 118.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385031.8, 3775447.2, 118.5, 118.5, 0.0); ( 385081.8, 3775447.2, 119.0, 119.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385131.8, 3775447.2, 119.8, 119.8, 0.0); ( 385181.8, 3775447.2, 120.7, 120.7, 0.0); 

 ( 385231.8, 3775447.2, 121.0, 121.0, 0.0); ( 385281.8, 3775447.2, 120.2, 120.2, 0.0); 

 ( 385331.8, 3775447.2, 120.2, 120.2, 0.0); ( 385381.8, 3775447.2, 121.1, 121.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385431.8, 3775447.2, 121.4, 121.4, 0.0); ( 385481.8, 3775447.2, 120.9, 120.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385531.8, 3775447.2, 121.0, 121.0, 0.0); ( 385581.8, 3775447.2, 121.6, 121.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384381.8, 3775497.2, 117.2, 117.2, 0.0); ( 384431.8, 3775497.2, 117.5, 117.5, 0.0); 

 ( 384481.8, 3775497.2, 117.9, 117.9, 0.0); ( 384531.8, 3775497.2, 118.3, 118.3, 0.0); 

 ( 384581.8, 3775497.2, 118.5, 118.5, 0.0); ( 384631.8, 3775497.2, 118.7, 118.7, 0.0); 

 ( 384681.8, 3775497.2, 119.1, 119.1, 0.0); ( 384731.8, 3775497.2, 119.0, 119.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384781.8, 3775497.2, 119.1, 119.1, 0.0); ( 384831.8, 3775497.2, 119.0, 119.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384881.8, 3775497.2, 118.7, 118.7, 0.0); ( 384931.8, 3775497.2, 118.6, 118.6, 0.0); 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-11 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 11 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** 

 (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) 

 (METERS) 

 ( 384981.8, 3775497.2, 118.7, 118.7, 0.0); ( 385031.8, 3775497.2, 118.8, 118.8, 0.0); 

 ( 385081.8, 3775497.2, 119.0, 119.0, 0.0); ( 385131.8, 3775497.2, 119.4, 119.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3775497.2, 119.8, 119.8, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3775497.2, 120.0, 120.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3775497.2, 120.1, 120.1, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3775497.2, 120.6, 120.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3775497.2, 122.0, 122.0, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3775497.2, 122.5, 122.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3775497.2, 121.9, 121.9, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3775497.2, 121.5, 121.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3775497.2, 121.8, 121.8, 0.0); ( 384381.8, 3775547.2, 118.4, 118.4, 0.0); 

 ( 384431.8, 3775547.2, 118.5, 118.5, 0.0); ( 384481.8, 3775547.2, 118.8, 118.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384531.8, 3775547.2, 118.9, 118.9, 0.0); ( 384581.8, 3775547.2, 119.2, 119.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384631.8, 3775547.2, 119.4, 119.4, 0.0); ( 384681.8, 3775547.2, 119.7, 119.7, 0.0); 

 ( 384731.8, 3775547.2, 119.9, 119.9, 0.0); ( 384781.8, 3775547.2, 119.9, 119.9, 0.0); 

 ( 384831.8, 3775547.2, 119.9, 119.9, 0.0); ( 384881.8, 3775547.2, 119.6, 119.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384931.8, 3775547.2, 119.4, 119.4, 0.0); ( 384981.8, 3775547.2, 119.3, 119.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385031.8, 3775547.2, 119.4, 119.4, 0.0); ( 385081.8, 3775547.2, 119.3, 119.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385131.8, 3775547.2, 119.4, 119.4, 0.0); ( 385181.8, 3775547.2, 119.5, 119.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385231.8, 3775547.2, 119.8, 119.8, 0.0); ( 385281.8, 3775547.2, 120.1, 120.1, 0.0); 

 ( 385331.8, 3775547.2, 120.7, 120.7, 0.0); ( 385381.8, 3775547.2, 122.0, 122.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385431.8, 3775547.2, 122.7, 122.7, 0.0); ( 385481.8, 3775547.2, 122.6, 122.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385531.8, 3775547.2, 122.4, 122.4, 0.0); ( 385581.8, 3775547.2, 122.0, 122.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384381.8, 3775597.2, 119.4, 119.4, 0.0); ( 384431.8, 3775597.2, 119.5, 119.5, 0.0); 

 ( 384481.8, 3775597.2, 119.7, 119.7, 0.0); ( 384531.8, 3775597.2, 119.8, 119.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384581.8, 3775597.2, 120.0, 120.0, 0.0); ( 384631.8, 3775597.2, 120.2, 120.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384681.8, 3775597.2, 120.4, 120.4, 0.0); ( 384731.8, 3775597.2, 120.6, 120.6, 0.0); 

 ( 384781.8, 3775597.2, 120.7, 120.7, 0.0); ( 384831.8, 3775597.2, 120.8, 120.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384881.8, 3775597.2, 120.6, 120.6, 0.0); ( 384931.8, 3775597.2, 120.1, 120.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384981.8, 3775597.2, 120.1, 120.1, 0.0); ( 385031.8, 3775597.2, 120.0, 120.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385081.8, 3775597.2, 119.8, 119.8, 0.0); ( 385131.8, 3775597.2, 119.6, 119.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385181.8, 3775597.2, 119.7, 119.7, 0.0); ( 385231.8, 3775597.2, 119.9, 119.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385281.8, 3775597.2, 120.2, 120.2, 0.0); ( 385331.8, 3775597.2, 120.7, 120.7, 0.0); 

 ( 385381.8, 3775597.2, 121.4, 121.4, 0.0); ( 385431.8, 3775597.2, 122.5, 122.5, 0.0); 

 ( 385481.8, 3775597.2, 122.6, 122.6, 0.0); ( 385531.8, 3775597.2, 122.7, 122.7, 0.0); 

 ( 385581.8, 3775597.2, 122.4, 122.4, 0.0); ( 384806.8, 3774976.4, 109.2, 119.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385122.3, 3774915.8, 112.5, 112.5, 0.0); ( 385163.4, 3775122.1, 115.4, 115.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385103.5, 3775167.5, 115.2, 115.2, 0.0); ( 384825.0, 3775049.2, 117.8, 117.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384825.3, 3774972.8, 109.9, 118.4, 0.0); ( 384843.9, 3774969.2, 110.3, 117.2, 0.0); 

 ( 384862.5, 3774965.7, 110.6, 110.6, 0.0); ( 384881.0, 3774962.1, 110.5, 110.5, 0.0); 

 ( 384899.6, 3774958.6, 110.6, 110.6, 0.0); ( 384918.1, 3774955.0, 110.8, 110.8, 0.0); 

 ( 384936.7, 3774951.4, 110.9, 110.9, 0.0); ( 384955.3, 3774947.9, 111.1, 111.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384973.8, 3774944.3, 111.2, 111.2, 0.0); ( 384992.4, 3774940.8, 111.4, 111.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385011.0, 3774937.2, 111.5, 111.5, 0.0); ( 385029.5, 3774933.6, 111.6, 111.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385048.1, 3774930.1, 111.7, 111.7, 0.0); ( 385066.6, 3774926.5, 111.9, 111.9, 0.0); 

 ( 385085.2, 3774923.0, 112.0, 112.0, 0.0); ( 385103.8, 3774919.4, 112.2, 112.2, 0.0); 

 ( 385126.0, 3774934.6, 112.9, 112.9, 0.0); ( 385129.8, 3774953.3, 113.2, 113.2, 0.0); 

 ( 385133.5, 3774972.1, 113.5, 113.5, 0.0); ( 385137.3, 3774990.8, 113.7, 113.7, 0.0); 

 ( 385141.0, 3775009.6, 113.9, 113.9, 0.0); ( 385144.7, 3775028.3, 114.1, 114.1, 0.0); 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-12 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 12 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS *** 

 (X-COORD, Y-COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) 

 (METERS) 

 ( 385148.5, 3775047.1, 114.2, 114.2, 0.0); ( 385152.2, 3775065.8, 114.4, 114.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385156.0, 3775084.6, 114.7, 114.7, 0.0); ( 385159.7, 3775103.3, 115.0, 115.0, 0.0); 

 ( 385148.5, 3775133.4, 115.4, 115.4, 0.0); ( 385133.5, 3775144.8, 115.4, 115.4, 0.0); 

 ( 385118.5, 3775156.2, 115.3, 115.3, 0.0); ( 385086.1, 3775160.1, 114.7, 126.3, 0.0); 

 ( 385068.7, 3775152.8, 114.3, 126.3, 0.0); ( 385051.3, 3775145.3, 114.0, 126.6, 0.0); 

 ( 385033.9, 3775138.0, 113.6, 127.0, 0.0); ( 385016.5, 3775130.6, 113.2, 127.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384999.1, 3775123.2, 112.6, 127.0, 0.0); ( 384981.7, 3775115.8, 112.1, 127.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384964.3, 3775108.4, 112.8, 127.0, 0.0); ( 384946.9, 3775101.0, 112.9, 127.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384929.5, 3775093.6, 113.7, 127.0, 0.0); ( 384912.0, 3775086.2, 115.7, 127.0, 0.0); 

 ( 384894.6, 3775078.8, 116.0, 127.0, 0.0); ( 384877.2, 3775071.4, 117.5, 126.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384859.8, 3775064.0, 116.3, 126.1, 0.0); ( 384842.4, 3775056.6, 116.8, 126.1, 0.0); 

 ( 384820.5, 3775031.0, 116.9, 116.9, 0.0); ( 384815.9, 3775012.8, 116.3, 116.3, 0.0); 

 ( 384811.3, 3774994.6, 113.1, 118.4, 0.0); 

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 13 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** METEOROLOGICAL DAYS SELECTED FOR PROCESSING *** 

 (1=YES; 0=NO) 

 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

 NOTE: METEOROLOGICAL DATA ACTUALLY PROCESSED WILL ALSO DEPEND ON WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE DATA FILE. 

 *** UPPER BOUND OF FIRST THROUGH FIFTH WIND SPEED CATEGORIES *** 

 (METERS/SEC) 

 1.54, 3.09, 5.14, 8.23, 10.80, 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-13 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 14 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** UP TO THE FIRST 24 HOURS OF METEOROLOGICAL DATA *** 

 Surface file: C:\Meteorology\AERMOD\cela.SFC Met Version: 06341 

 Profile file: C:\Meteorology\AERMOD\cela.PFL 

 Surface format: FREE 

 Profile format: FREE 

 Surface station no.: 0 Upper air station no.: 3190 

 Name: UNKNOWN Name: UNKNOWN 

 Year: 2006 Year: 2006 

 First 24 hours of scalar data 

 YR MO DY JDY HR H0 U* W* DT/DZ ZICNV ZIMCH M-O LEN Z0 BOWEN ALBEDO REF WS WD HT REF TA HT 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 06 01 01 1 01 -0.9 0.040 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 18. 6.3 0.65 1.00 1.00 0.70 347. 21.3 286.4 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 02 -3.0 0.086 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 58. 19.1 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.50 82. 21.3 286.4 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 03 -1.3 0.057 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 31. 12.7 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.00 66. 21.3 286.4 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 04 -1.9 0.069 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 41. 15.2 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.20 23. 21.3 285.9 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 05 -3.5 0.080 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 52. 13.1 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.40 61. 21.3 285.4 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 06 -3.0 0.086 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 58. 19.0 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.50 83. 21.3 285.4 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 07 -6.1 0.103 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 76. 16.2 0.65 1.00 1.00 1.80 64. 21.3 285.4 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 08 -3.3 0.080 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 52. 14.1 0.65 1.00 0.55 1.40 46. 21.3 285.4 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 09 26.6 0.304 0.644 0.005 362. 385. -95.4 0.65 1.00 0.32 2.30 87. 21.3 286.4 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 10 21.0 0.227 0.732 0.005 675. 250. -50.2 0.65 1.00 0.24 1.60 76. 21.3 286.4 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 11 35.8 0.197 0.912 0.005 766. 201. -19.2 0.65 1.00 0.21 1.20 66. 21.3 287.5 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 12 14.9 0.281 0.686 0.005 785. 343. -135.5 0.65 1.00 0.20 2.20 79. 21.3 287.5 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 13 26.4 0.376 0.842 0.009 818. 530. -181.6 0.65 1.00 0.20 3.00 76. 21.3 287.5 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 14 39.0 0.385 0.979 0.014 867. 549. -131.8 0.65 1.00 0.21 3.00 80. 21.3 288.1 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 15 11.4 0.277 0.653 0.014 881. 341. -168.4 0.65 1.00 0.25 2.20 86. 21.3 287.5 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 16 0.1 0.343 0.135 0.014 881. 462. -8888.0 0.65 1.00 0.33 3.00 75. 21.3 287.0 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 17 -13.7 0.266 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 319. 125.0 0.65 1.00 0.60 2.90 82. 21.3 286.4 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 18 -10.2 0.183 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 183. 54.5 0.65 1.00 1.00 2.50 101. 21.3 286.4 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 19 -16.1 0.289 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 358. 135.6 0.65 1.00 1.00 3.10 97. 21.3 285.9 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 20 -25.2 0.450 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 693. 326.1 0.65 1.00 1.00 4.30 92. 21.3 284.9 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 21 -27.3 0.487 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 781. 381.9 0.65 1.00 1.00 4.60 88. 21.3 284.2 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 22 -28.0 0.499 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 812. 402.5 0.65 1.00 1.00 4.70 91. 21.3 284.9 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 23 -36.1 0.645 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 1191. 673.0 0.65 1.00 1.00 5.90 82. 21.3 285.4 17.7 

 06 01 01 1 24 -35.3 0.633 -9.000 -9.000 -999. 1160. 649.7 0.65 1.00 1.00 5.80 84. 21.3 285.9 17.7 

 First hour of profile data 

 YR MO DY HR HEIGHT F WDIR WSPD AMB_TMP sigmaA sigmaW sigmaV 

 06 01 01 01 17.7 0 -999. -99.00 286.5 99.0 -99.00 -99.00 

 06 01 01 01 21.3 1 347. 0.70 -999.0 99.0 -99.00 -99.00 

 F indicates top of profile (=1) or below (=0) 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-14 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 15 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** THE PERIOD ( 17520 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** 

 INCLUDING SOURCE(S): STCK1 , 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** 

 ** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** 

 X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC 

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 384381.85 3774397.16 4.63827 384431.85 3774397.16 4.91148 

 384481.85 3774397.16 5.63421 384531.85 3774397.16 6.25800 

 384581.85 3774397.16 6.66998 384631.85 3774397.16 6.76113 

 384681.85 3774397.16 6.38052 384731.85 3774397.16 5.54712 

 384781.85 3774397.16 5.27858 384831.85 3774397.16 5.05270 

 384881.85 3774397.16 4.65578 384931.85 3774397.16 4.39892 

 384981.85 3774397.16 4.21402 385031.85 3774397.16 4.05384 

 385081.85 3774397.16 3.90096 385131.85 3774397.16 3.70075 

 385181.85 3774397.16 3.48939 385231.85 3774397.16 3.26827 

 385281.85 3774397.16 3.03758 385331.85 3774397.16 2.80326 

 385381.85 3774397.16 2.54763 385431.85 3774397.16 2.35925 

 385481.85 3774397.16 2.22116 385531.85 3774397.16 2.04659 

 385581.85 3774397.16 1.88466 384381.85 3774447.16 4.39435 

 384431.85 3774447.16 5.29052 384481.85 3774447.16 6.20981 

 384531.85 3774447.16 7.14675 384581.85 3774447.16 7.91735 

 384631.85 3774447.16 8.35232 384681.85 3774447.16 8.09747 

 384731.85 3774447.16 7.22497 384781.85 3774447.16 6.53749 

 384831.85 3774447.16 6.16144 384881.85 3774447.16 5.56233 

 384931.85 3774447.16 5.16424 384981.85 3774447.16 4.90481 

 385031.85 3774447.16 4.69113 385081.85 3774447.16 4.48348 

 385131.85 3774447.16 4.23091 385181.85 3774447.16 3.97108 

 385231.85 3774447.16 3.69977 385281.85 3774447.16 3.41783 

 385331.85 3774447.16 3.11809 385381.85 3774447.16 2.81210 

 385431.85 3774447.16 2.60849 385481.85 3774447.16 2.41838 

 385531.85 3774447.16 2.20940 385581.85 3774447.16 2.01801 

 384381.85 3774497.16 4.45383 384431.85 3774497.16 5.46244 

 384481.85 3774497.16 6.63354 384531.85 3774497.16 7.92694 

 384581.85 3774497.16 9.26029 384631.85 3774497.16 10.21061 

 384681.85 3774497.16 10.29233 384731.85 3774497.16 9.40003 

 384781.85 3774497.16 8.32840 384831.85 3774497.16 7.62328 

 384881.85 3774497.16 6.74507 384931.85 3774497.16 6.10563 

 384981.85 3774497.16 5.71934 385031.85 3774497.16 5.43812 

 385081.85 3774497.16 5.14913 385131.85 3774497.16 4.84123 

 385181.85 3774497.16 4.51820 385231.85 3774497.16 4.19166 

 385281.85 3774497.16 3.83898 385331.85 3774497.16 3.44426 

 385381.85 3774497.16 3.10735 385431.85 3774497.16 2.89795 

 385481.85 3774497.16 2.62635 385531.85 3774497.16 2.37766 

 385581.85 3774497.16 2.15739 384381.85 3774547.16 4.41232 

 384431.85 3774547.16 5.48143 384481.85 3774547.16 6.85030 

 384531.85 3774547.16 8.13003 384581.85 3774547.16 10.09453 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-15 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 16 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** THE PERIOD ( 17520 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** 

 INCLUDING SOURCE(S): STCK1 , 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** 

 ** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** 

 X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC 

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 384631.85 3774547.16 12.28205 384681.85 3774547.16 13.05309 

 384731.85 3774547.16 12.34067 384781.85 3774547.16 10.78916 

 384831.85 3774547.16 9.59543 384881.85 3774547.16 8.28070 

 384931.85 3774547.16 7.25954 384981.85 3774547.16 6.70061 

 385031.85 3774547.16 6.30018 385081.85 3774547.16 5.91098 

 385131.85 3774547.16 5.52839 385181.85 3774547.16 5.14545 

 385231.85 3774547.16 4.72943 385281.85 3774547.16 4.28555 

 385331.85 3774547.16 3.78994 385381.85 3774547.16 3.43707 

 385431.85 3774547.16 3.16789 385481.85 3774547.16 2.84145 

 385531.85 3774547.16 2.55333 385581.85 3774547.16 2.30424 

 384381.85 3774597.16 4.30730 384431.85 3774597.16 5.36552 

 384481.85 3774597.16 6.56527 384531.85 3774597.16 8.61403 

 384581.85 3774597.16 11.22330 384631.85 3774597.16 14.05349 

 384681.85 3774597.16 16.18525 384731.85 3774597.16 16.49036 

 384781.85 3774597.16 14.46174 384831.85 3774597.16 12.33490 

 384881.85 3774597.16 10.37191 384931.85 3774597.16 8.73524 

 384981.85 3774597.16 7.88892 385031.85 3774597.16 7.31472 

 385081.85 3774597.16 6.80594 385131.85 3774597.16 6.31555 

 385181.85 3774597.16 5.83147 385231.85 3774597.16 5.29825 

 385281.85 3774597.16 4.66291 385331.85 3774597.16 4.17620 

 385381.85 3774597.16 3.86118 385431.85 3774597.16 3.43749 

 385481.85 3774597.16 3.06590 385531.85 3774597.16 2.74018 

 385581.85 3774597.16 2.45989 384381.85 3774647.16 4.20390 

 384431.85 3774647.16 5.22560 384481.85 3774647.16 6.56994 

 384531.85 3774647.16 8.70973 384581.85 3774647.16 11.81581 

 384631.85 3774647.16 15.79368 384681.85 3774647.16 19.76758 

 384731.85 3774647.16 21.74714 384781.85 3774647.16 19.91461 

 384831.85 3774647.16 16.37259 384881.85 3774647.16 13.30038 

 384931.85 3774647.16 10.66625 384981.85 3774647.16 9.38066 

 385031.85 3774647.16 8.51161 385081.85 3774647.16 7.77986 

 385131.85 3774647.16 7.16178 385181.85 3774647.16 6.52649 

 385231.85 3774647.16 5.77977 385281.85 3774647.16 5.14047 

 385331.85 3774647.16 4.70671 385381.85 3774647.16 4.20521 

 385431.85 3774647.16 3.71553 385481.85 3774647.16 3.29460 

 385531.85 3774647.16 2.93563 385581.85 3774647.16 2.62849 

 384381.85 3774697.16 4.25178 384431.85 3774697.16 5.15844 

 384481.85 3774697.16 6.49502 384531.85 3774697.16 8.48106 

 384581.85 3774697.16 11.70512 384631.85 3774697.16 16.50475 

 384681.85 3774697.16 22.58285 384731.85 3774697.16 27.68341 

 384781.85 3774697.16 27.68894 384831.85 3774697.16 22.61248 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-16 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 17 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** THE PERIOD ( 17520 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** 

 INCLUDING SOURCE(S): STCK1 , 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** 

 ** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** 

 X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC 

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 384881.85 3774697.16 17.54186 384931.85 3774697.16 13.22650 

 384981.85 3774697.16 11.23763 385031.85 3774697.16 9.94107 

 385081.85 3774697.16 8.90009 385131.85 3774697.16 8.01195 

 385181.85 3774697.16 7.03884 385231.85 3774697.16 6.28446 

 385281.85 3774697.16 5.73377 385331.85 3774697.16 5.16378 

 385381.85 3774697.16 4.54066 385431.85 3774697.16 3.99888 

 385481.85 3774697.16 3.54190 385531.85 3774697.16 3.15280 

 385581.85 3774697.16 2.82533 384381.85 3774747.16 4.35456 

 384431.85 3774747.16 5.20121 384481.85 3774747.16 6.38567 

 384531.85 3774747.16 8.16903 384581.85 3774747.16 11.05672 

 384631.85 3774747.16 15.86898 384681.85 3774747.16 23.46075 

 384731.85 3774747.16 32.70487 384781.85 3774747.16 37.67516 

 384831.85 3774747.16 32.71726 384881.85 3774747.16 24.13686 

 384931.85 3774747.16 16.83471 384981.85 3774747.16 13.67431 

 385031.85 3774747.16 11.60366 385081.85 3774747.16 9.83960 

 385131.85 3774747.16 8.56647 385181.85 3774747.16 7.62966 

 385231.85 3774747.16 7.05820 385281.85 3774747.16 6.31150 

 385331.85 3774747.16 5.54120 385381.85 3774747.16 4.87715 

 385431.85 3774747.16 4.31169 385481.85 3774747.16 3.83065 

 385531.85 3774747.16 3.41309 385581.85 3774747.16 3.05775 

 384381.85 3774797.16 4.49374 384431.85 3774797.16 5.34092 

 384481.85 3774797.16 6.43840 384531.85 3774797.16 7.97142 

 384581.85 3774797.16 10.36088 384631.85 3774797.16 14.43086 

 384681.85 3774797.16 21.95533 384731.85 3774797.16 34.39199 

 384781.85 3774797.16 47.82396 384831.85 3774797.16 48.63348 

 384881.85 3774797.16 35.44585 384931.85 3774797.16 22.20082 

 384981.85 3774797.16 16.74624 385031.85 3774797.16 12.80074 

 385081.85 3774797.16 10.67486 385131.85 3774797.16 9.29829 

 385181.85 3774797.16 8.54102 385231.85 3774797.16 7.65890 

 385281.85 3774797.16 6.74602 385331.85 3774797.16 5.97700 

 385381.85 3774797.16 5.29798 385431.85 3774797.16 4.70867 

 385481.85 3774797.16 4.19720 385531.85 3774797.16 3.74537 

 385581.85 3774797.16 3.15874 384381.85 3774847.16 4.63966 

 384431.85 3774847.16 5.50273 384481.85 3774847.16 6.57093 

 384531.85 3774847.16 7.97213 384581.85 3774847.16 9.94282 

 384631.85 3774847.16 13.11813 384681.85 3774847.16 18.89622 

 384731.85 3774847.16 30.30060 384781.85 3774847.16 49.44936 

 384831.85 3774847.16 65.26028 384881.85 3774847.16 54.59292 

 384931.85 3774847.16 32.44194 384981.85 3774847.16 25.93354 

 385031.85 3774847.16 21.14391 385081.85 3774847.16 14.33506 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-17 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 18 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** THE PERIOD ( 17520 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** 

 INCLUDING SOURCE(S): STCK1 , 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** 

 ** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** 

 X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC 

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 385131.85 3774847.16 10.91620 385181.85 3774847.16 9.54180 

 385231.85 3774847.16 8.35621 385281.85 3774847.16 7.39120 

 385331.85 3774847.16 6.58155 385381.85 3774847.16 5.89672 

 385431.85 3774847.16 5.26658 385481.85 3774847.16 4.69714 

 385531.85 3774847.16 4.17586 385581.85 3774847.16 3.54355 

 384381.85 3774897.16 4.76143 384431.85 3774897.16 5.67223 

 384481.85 3774897.16 6.78398 384531.85 3774897.16 8.18783 

 384581.85 3774897.16 9.96508 384631.85 3774897.16 12.37909 

 384681.85 3774897.16 16.37023 384731.85 3774897.16 23.98947 

 384781.85 3774897.16 42.66259 384831.85 3774897.16 79.13664 

 384881.85 3774897.16 103.38064 384931.85 3774897.16 57.74007 

 384981.85 3774897.16 29.94076 385031.85 3774897.16 24.49861 

 385081.85 3774897.16 21.97998 385131.85 3774897.16 14.98653 

 385181.85 3774897.16 11.36306 385231.85 3774897.16 9.81029 

 385281.85 3774897.16 8.67728 385331.85 3774897.16 7.72141 

 385381.85 3774897.16 6.88125 385431.85 3774897.16 6.11313 

 385481.85 3774897.16 5.38982 385531.85 3774897.16 4.58075 

 385581.85 3774897.16 4.04412 384381.85 3774947.16 4.77947 

 384431.85 3774947.16 5.74646 384481.85 3774947.16 6.95110 

 384531.85 3774947.16 8.52024 384581.85 3774947.16 10.54224 

 384631.85 3774947.16 13.22280 384681.85 3774947.16 17.06135 

 384731.85 3774947.16 23.21892 384781.85 3774947.16 37.76747 

 384831.85 3774947.16 116.34807 384881.85 3774947.16 343.50737 

 384931.85 3774947.16 171.30043 385131.85 3774947.16 27.27075 

 385181.85 3774947.16 16.19384 385231.85 3774947.16 13.06515 

 385281.85 3774947.16 11.14602 385331.85 3774947.16 9.64577 

 385381.85 3774947.16 8.35336 385431.85 3774947.16 7.20404 

 385481.85 3774947.16 6.06180 385531.85 3774947.16 5.28282 

 385581.85 3774947.16 4.60065 384381.85 3774997.16 4.58820 

 384431.85 3774997.16 5.46976 384481.85 3774997.16 6.60115 

 384531.85 3774997.16 8.04093 384581.85 3774997.16 9.95397 

 384631.85 3774997.16 12.60698 384681.85 3774997.16 16.53153 

 384731.85 3774997.16 23.18003 384781.85 3774997.16 36.21053 

 385181.85 3774997.16 22.17849 385231.85 3774997.16 16.90286 

 385281.85 3774997.16 13.99159 385331.85 3774997.16 11.74524 

 385381.85 3774997.16 9.90663 385431.85 3774997.16 8.34240 

 385481.85 3774997.16 6.95108 385531.85 3774997.16 5.96429 

 385581.85 3774997.16 5.16250 384381.85 3775047.16 4.35565 

 384431.85 3775047.16 5.14627 384481.85 3775047.16 6.12543 

 384531.85 3775047.16 7.36354 384581.85 3775047.16 8.94245 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-18 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 19 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** THE PERIOD ( 17520 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** 

 INCLUDING SOURCE(S): STCK1 , 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** 

 ** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** 

 X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC 

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 384631.85 3775047.16 10.99214 384681.85 3775047.16 13.82669 

 384731.85 3775047.16 17.75218 384781.85 3775047.16 19.57147 

 385181.85 3775047.16 23.45473 385231.85 3775047.16 18.64949 

 385281.85 3775047.16 15.41714 385331.85 3775047.16 12.89039 

 385381.85 3775047.16 10.83783 385431.85 3775047.16 8.94644 

 385481.85 3775047.16 7.60187 385531.85 3775047.16 6.50011 

 385581.85 3775047.16 5.59824 384381.85 3775097.16 4.10510 

 384431.85 3775097.16 4.80520 384481.85 3775097.16 5.67716 

 384531.85 3775097.16 6.76164 384581.85 3775097.16 8.11982 

 384631.85 3775097.16 9.80402 384681.85 3775097.16 11.93299 

 384731.85 3775097.16 14.89361 384781.85 3775097.16 16.86313 

 384831.85 3775097.16 20.98301 384881.85 3775097.16 55.49800 

 384931.85 3775097.16 103.53916 385181.85 3775097.16 19.86563 

 385231.85 3775097.16 16.80367 385281.85 3775097.16 14.44085 

 385331.85 3775097.16 12.42733 385381.85 3775097.16 10.39695 

 385431.85 3775097.16 8.93958 385481.85 3775097.16 7.67698 

 385531.85 3775097.16 6.62113 385581.85 3775097.16 5.75160 

 384381.85 3775147.16 3.87492 384431.85 3775147.16 4.51446 

 384481.85 3775147.16 5.30327 384531.85 3775147.16 6.27616 

 384581.85 3775147.16 7.45655 384631.85 3775147.16 8.88039 

 384681.85 3775147.16 10.65830 384731.85 3775147.16 13.20681 

 384781.85 3775147.16 17.27024 384831.85 3775147.16 19.20254 

 384881.85 3775147.16 23.97148 384931.85 3775147.16 47.70332 

 384981.85 3775147.16 50.38853 385031.85 3775147.16 32.13127 

 385131.85 3775147.16 17.93810 385181.85 3775147.16 13.98016 

 385231.85 3775147.16 12.41564 385281.85 3775147.16 11.30520 

 385331.85 3775147.16 10.24635 385381.85 3775147.16 9.11304 

 385431.85 3775147.16 8.12145 385481.85 3775147.16 7.16232 

 385531.85 3775147.16 6.27521 385581.85 3775147.16 5.56006 

 384381.85 3775197.16 3.66209 384431.85 3775197.16 4.23325 

 384481.85 3775197.16 4.92279 384531.85 3775197.16 5.74641 

 384581.85 3775197.16 6.72010 384631.85 3775197.16 7.89257 

 384681.85 3775197.16 9.37285 384731.85 3775197.16 11.36782 

 384781.85 3775197.16 13.92690 384831.85 3775197.16 17.73426 

 384881.85 3775197.16 24.98629 384931.85 3775197.16 32.58270 

 384981.85 3775197.16 28.04732 385031.85 3775197.16 22.53907 

 385081.85 3775197.16 16.77977 385131.85 3775197.16 12.36902 

 385181.85 3775197.16 10.55952 385231.85 3775197.16 9.52487 

 385281.85 3775197.16 8.99015 385331.85 3775197.16 8.27964 

 385381.85 3775197.16 7.64125 385431.85 3775197.16 6.97610 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-19 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 20 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** THE PERIOD ( 17520 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** 

 INCLUDING SOURCE(S): STCK1 , 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** 

 ** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** 

 X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC 

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 385481.85 3775197.16 6.32348 385531.85 3775197.16 5.66622 

 385581.85 3775197.16 5.08129 384381.85 3775247.16 3.43030 

 384431.85 3775247.16 3.91983 384481.85 3775247.16 4.49763 

 384531.85 3775247.16 5.17892 384581.85 3775247.16 5.02398 

 384631.85 3775247.16 5.76772 384681.85 3775247.16 6.84838 

 384731.85 3775247.16 9.55390 384781.85 3775247.16 11.19637 

 384831.85 3775247.16 12.12216 384881.85 3775247.16 19.29650 

 384931.85 3775247.16 30.09476 384981.85 3775247.16 28.47538 

 385031.85 3775247.16 19.57716 385081.85 3775247.16 13.12857 

 385131.85 3775247.16 9.55249 385181.85 3775247.16 8.22266 

 385231.85 3775247.16 7.64922 385281.85 3775247.16 7.41118 

 385331.85 3775247.16 6.84737 385381.85 3775247.16 6.30609 

 385431.85 3775247.16 5.84962 385481.85 3775247.16 5.43740 

 385531.85 3775247.16 4.96194 385581.85 3775247.16 4.49451 

 384381.85 3775297.16 3.18349 384431.85 3775297.16 3.59826 

 384481.85 3775297.16 4.08153 384531.85 3775297.16 3.86886 

 384581.85 3775297.16 4.35767 384631.85 3775297.16 4.94392 

 384681.85 3775297.16 5.70883 384731.85 3775297.16 6.65685 

 384781.85 3775297.16 7.75917 384831.85 3775297.16 9.85023 

 384881.85 3775297.16 15.25473 384931.85 3775297.16 23.70564 

 384981.85 3775297.16 24.94769 385031.85 3775297.16 17.40390 

 385081.85 3775297.16 10.78137 385131.85 3775297.16 7.54562 

 385181.85 3775297.16 6.53555 385231.85 3775297.16 6.18527 

 385281.85 3775297.16 6.08687 385331.85 3775297.16 5.73239 

 385381.85 3775297.16 5.30006 385431.85 3775297.16 4.97616 

 385481.85 3775297.16 4.65916 385531.85 3775297.16 4.31865 

 385581.85 3775297.16 3.92515 384381.85 3775347.16 2.94137 

 384431.85 3775347.16 3.29252 384481.85 3775347.16 3.07088 

 384531.85 3775347.16 3.40944 384581.85 3775347.16 3.80830 

 384631.85 3775347.16 4.27029 384681.85 3775347.16 4.80639 

 384731.85 3775347.16 5.46825 384781.85 3775347.16 6.40289 

 384831.85 3775347.16 8.24339 384881.85 3775347.16 12.48670 

 384931.85 3775347.16 18.75555 384981.85 3775347.16 20.64289 

 385031.85 3775347.16 15.58896 385081.85 3775347.16 9.75912 

 385131.85 3775347.16 6.87067 385181.85 3775347.16 5.62814 

 385231.85 3775347.16 5.10186 385281.85 3775347.16 4.87394 

 385331.85 3775347.16 4.76245 385381.85 3775347.16 4.51903 

 385431.85 3775347.16 4.25698 385481.85 3775347.16 4.00472 

 385531.85 3775347.16 3.73201 385581.85 3775347.16 3.43190 

 384381.85 3775397.16 2.27855 384431.85 3775397.16 2.50036 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-20 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 21 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** THE PERIOD ( 17520 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** 

 INCLUDING SOURCE(S): STCK1 , 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** 

 ** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** 

 X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC 

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 384481.85 3775397.16 2.73589 384531.85 3775397.16 3.00790 

 384581.85 3775397.16 3.31893 384631.85 3775397.16 3.69019 

 384681.85 3775397.16 4.07748 384731.85 3775397.16 4.55592 

 384781.85 3775397.16 5.33637 384831.85 3775397.16 6.95326 

 384881.85 3775397.16 10.30888 384931.85 3775397.16 14.78222 

 384981.85 3775397.16 17.10777 385031.85 3775397.16 14.06030 

 385081.85 3775397.16 9.51888 385131.85 3775397.16 6.54718 

 385181.85 3775397.16 5.09668 385231.85 3775397.16 4.39573 

 385281.85 3775397.16 4.20880 385331.85 3775397.16 4.04367 

 385381.85 3775397.16 3.81773 385431.85 3775397.16 3.59935 

 385481.85 3775397.16 3.39261 385531.85 3775397.16 3.18143 

 385581.85 3775397.16 2.97121 384381.85 3775447.16 2.06167 

 384431.85 3775447.16 2.24832 384481.85 3775447.16 2.43898 

 384531.85 3775447.16 2.64202 384581.85 3775447.16 2.90309 

 384631.85 3775447.16 3.17336 384681.85 3775447.16 3.47520 

 384731.85 3775447.16 3.84320 384781.85 3775447.16 4.53374 

 384831.85 3775447.16 5.96225 384881.85 3775447.16 8.51615 

 384931.85 3775447.16 11.89802 384981.85 3775447.16 14.07300 

 385031.85 3775447.16 12.46910 385081.85 3775447.16 9.02611 

 385131.85 3775447.16 6.41505 385181.85 3775447.16 4.89683 

 385231.85 3775447.16 4.11204 385281.85 3775447.16 3.75605 

 385331.85 3775447.16 3.47600 385381.85 3775447.16 3.21337 

 385431.85 3775447.16 3.03580 385481.85 3775447.16 2.90283 

 385531.85 3775447.16 2.74666 385581.85 3775447.16 2.57973 

 384381.85 3775497.16 1.84620 384431.85 3775497.16 2.00063 

 384481.85 3775497.16 2.16582 384531.85 3775497.16 2.33853 

 384581.85 3775497.16 2.54149 384631.85 3775497.16 2.74568 

 384681.85 3775497.16 2.95139 384731.85 3775497.16 3.30903 

 384781.85 3775497.16 3.92455 384831.85 3775497.16 5.11300 

 384881.85 3775497.16 7.13849 384931.85 3775497.16 9.65958 

 384981.85 3775497.16 11.53773 385031.85 3775497.16 10.83091 

 385081.85 3775497.16 8.33926 385131.85 3775497.16 6.09473 

 385181.85 3775497.16 4.67247 385231.85 3775497.16 3.86238 

 385281.85 3775497.16 3.39500 385331.85 3775497.16 3.07100 

 385381.85 3775497.16 2.78825 385431.85 3775497.16 2.61014 

 385481.85 3775497.16 2.51319 385531.85 3775497.16 2.40388 

 385581.85 3775497.16 2.27566 384381.85 3775547.16 1.63225 

 384431.85 3775547.16 1.76836 384481.85 3775547.16 1.90282 

 384531.85 3775547.16 2.06434 384581.85 3775547.16 2.21727 

 384631.85 3775547.16 2.37737 384681.85 3775547.16 2.56056 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-21 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 22 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** THE PERIOD ( 17520 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** 

 INCLUDING SOURCE(S): STCK1 , 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** 

 ** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** 

 X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC 

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 384731.85 3775547.16 2.86227 384781.85 3775547.16 3.41997 

 384831.85 3775547.16 4.41416 384881.85 3775547.16 5.97062 

 384931.85 3775547.16 7.90638 384981.85 3775547.16 9.43080 

 385031.85 3775547.16 9.27948 385081.85 3775547.16 7.56130 

 385131.85 3775547.16 5.71548 385181.85 3775547.16 4.41216 

 385231.85 3775547.16 3.59303 385281.85 3775547.16 3.10000 

 385331.85 3775547.16 2.77380 385381.85 3775547.16 2.50242 

 385431.85 3775547.16 2.31956 385481.85 3775547.16 2.20725 

 385531.85 3775547.16 2.10899 385581.85 3775547.16 2.02259 

 384381.85 3775597.16 1.45004 384431.85 3775597.16 1.56115 

 384481.85 3775597.16 1.67689 384531.85 3775597.16 1.80721 

 384581.85 3775597.16 1.92951 384631.85 3775597.16 2.06559 

 384681.85 3775597.16 2.23822 384731.85 3775597.16 2.51476 

 384781.85 3775597.16 3.01936 384831.85 3775597.16 3.84304 

 384881.85 3775597.16 5.07603 384931.85 3775597.16 6.51675 

 384981.85 3775597.16 7.78660 385031.85 3775597.16 7.89417 

 385081.85 3775597.16 6.75312 385131.85 3775597.16 5.28340 

 385181.85 3775597.16 4.13569 385231.85 3775597.16 3.36095 

 385281.85 3775597.16 2.86510 385331.85 3775597.16 2.53712 

 385381.85 3775597.16 2.29867 385431.85 3775597.16 2.10736 

 385481.85 3775597.16 1.98299 385531.85 3775597.16 1.88449 

 385581.85 3775597.16 1.80750 384806.79 3774976.36 55.08386 

 385122.31 3774915.85 22.21907 385163.43 3775122.08 18.15801 

 385103.55 3775167.54 18.36940 384825.01 3775049.22 31.25858 

 384825.35 3774972.80 112.53287 384843.91 3774969.24 174.09640 

 384862.47 3774965.68 263.01712 384881.03 3774962.12 339.10383 

 384899.59 3774958.56 387.71227 384918.15 3774955.00 304.49186 

 384936.71 3774951.44 158.18425 384955.27 3774947.88 76.19981 

 384973.83 3774944.33 49.65911 384992.39 3774940.77 37.83489 

 385010.95 3774937.21 31.55719 385029.51 3774933.65 27.44480 

 385048.07 3774930.09 24.30143 385066.63 3774926.53 21.46259 

 385085.19 3774922.97 19.33792 385103.75 3774919.41 24.17011 

 385126.05 3774934.60 25.73138 385129.79 3774953.35 27.55468 

 385133.52 3774972.09 27.76594 385137.26 3774990.84 27.32227 

 385141.00 3775009.59 30.21971 385144.74 3775028.34 33.41662 

 385148.48 3775047.09 37.39117 385152.22 3775065.84 37.71273 

 385155.95 3775084.58 31.44032 385159.69 3775103.33 21.33019 

 385148.46 3775133.45 17.94832 385133.49 3775144.81 18.02487 

 385118.52 3775156.17 18.33862 385086.14 3775160.15 23.11857 

 385068.73 3775152.75 28.19306 385051.32 3775145.35 30.14917 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-22 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 23 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** THE PERIOD ( 17520 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL *** 

 INCLUDING SOURCE(S): STCK1 , 

 *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** 

 ** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 ** 

 X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC 

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 385033.91 3775137.96 32.36756 385016.51 3775130.56 40.28427 

 384999.10 3775123.17 53.86546 384981.69 3775115.77 84.12516 

 384964.28 3775108.38 101.21829 384946.87 3775100.99 119.83881 

 384929.46 3775093.59 109.32096 384912.05 3775086.20 77.33630 

 384894.65 3775078.80 63.35872 384877.24 3775071.41 60.79985 

 384859.83 3775064.01 53.06004 384842.42 3775056.62 42.37093 

 384820.46 3775031.00 37.84316 384815.90 3775012.79 45.36494 

 384811.34 3774994.58 58.89438 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-23 June 2010

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 24 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** THE SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM PERIOD ( 17520 HRS) RESULTS *** 

 ** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 **

 NETWORK 

GROUP ID AVERAGE CONC RECEPTOR (XR, YR, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG) OF TYPE GRID-ID 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

ALL 1ST HIGHEST VALUE IS 387.71227 AT ( 384899.59, 3774958.56, 110.65, 110.65, 0.00) DC 

 2ND HIGHEST VALUE IS 343.50737 AT ( 384881.85, 3774947.16, 110.34, 110.34, 0.00) DC 

 3RD HIGHEST VALUE IS 339.10383 AT ( 384881.03, 3774962.12, 110.55, 110.55, 0.00) DC 

 4TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 304.49186 AT ( 384918.15, 3774955.00, 110.76, 110.76, 0.00) DC 

 5TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 263.01712 AT ( 384862.47, 3774965.68, 110.57, 110.57, 0.00) DC 

 6TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 174.09640 AT ( 384843.91, 3774969.24, 110.31, 117.25, 0.00) DC 

 7TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 171.30043 AT ( 384931.85, 3774947.16, 110.83, 110.83, 0.00) DC 

 8TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 158.18425 AT ( 384936.71, 3774951.44, 110.90, 110.90, 0.00) DC 

 9TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 119.83881 AT ( 384946.87, 3775100.99, 112.91, 127.03, 0.00) DC 

 10TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 116.34807 AT ( 384831.85, 3774947.16, 107.90, 118.40, 0.00) DC 

 *** RECEPTOR TYPES: GC = GRIDCART 

 GP = GRIDPOLR 

 DC = DISCCART 

 DP = DISCPOLR 

 *** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jkoizumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\NNP.is *** 05/13/10 

 *** *** 12:01:03 

 PAGE 25 

 **MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV 

 NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT 

 *** Message Summary : AERMOD Model Execution *** 

 --------- Summary of Total Messages -------- 

 

 A Total of 0 Fatal Error Message(s) 

 A Total of 0 Warning Message(s) 

 A Total of 113 Informational Message(s) 

 A Total of 17520 Hours Were Processed 

 A Total of 0 Calm Hours Identified 

 A Total of 113 Missing Hours Identified ( 0.64 Percent) 

 

 

 ******** FATAL ERROR MESSAGES ******** 

 *** NONE *** 

 

 

 ******** WARNING MESSAGES ******** 

 *** NONE *** 

 

 ************************************ 

 *** AERMOD Finishes Successfully *** 

 ************************************ 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-24 June 2010

** AERMAP - VERSION 09040 05/13/10 

** 11:59:23 

** Project: NNP 

** 

** A total of 1 NED files were used 

** A total of 655 receptors were processed 

** DOMAINLL -118.254735 34.103093 -118.239374 34.115870 

** ANCHORXY 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11 3 

** TERRHGTS EXTRACT 

 

RE ELEVUNIT METERS 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774397.16 125.72 161.01 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774397.16 117.31 161.01 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774397.16 117.34 161.01 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774397.16 117.15 161.01 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774397.16 116.79 161.01 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774397.16 116.90 161.01 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774397.16 117.02 161.01 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774397.16 124.16 124.16 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774397.16 116.57 126.56 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3774397.16 115.74 115.74 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3774397.16 114.89 114.89 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3774397.16 114.03 114.03 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3774397.16 113.17 113.17 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3774397.16 112.36 112.36 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3774397.16 111.68 111.68 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3774397.16 110.81 110.81 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774397.16 110.02 110.02 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774397.16 108.83 108.83 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774397.16 107.24 107.24 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774397.16 105.53 105.53 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774397.16 101.94 110.56 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774397.16 102.83 110.94 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774397.16 109.71 109.71 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774397.16 110.92 110.92 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774397.16 111.40 111.40 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774447.16 117.54 161.01 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774447.16 117.94 161.01 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774447.16 117.43 161.01 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774447.16 116.77 161.01 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774447.16 116.46 161.01 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774447.16 117.25 161.01 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774447.16 117.06 161.01 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774447.16 118.64 125.76 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774447.16 115.95 126.56 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3774447.16 115.73 115.73 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3774447.16 114.91 114.91 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3774447.16 114.07 114.07 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3774447.16 113.27 113.27 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3774447.16 112.42 112.42 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3774447.16 111.69 111.69 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3774447.16 110.90 110.90 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774447.16 110.10 110.10 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774447.16 108.89 108.89 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774447.16 107.76 107.76 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774447.16 105.20 105.20 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774447.16 102.12 110.80 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774447.16 104.92 111.15 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774447.16 110.90 110.90 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774447.16 111.32 111.32 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774447.16 111.63 111.63 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774497.16 118.06 161.01 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774497.16 117.89 161.01 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774497.16 116.89 161.01 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774497.16 116.25 161.01 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774497.16 116.09 161.01 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774497.16 116.79 161.01 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774497.16 116.88 161.01 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774497.16 115.85 115.85 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774497.16 115.75 115.75 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3774497.16 115.39 115.39 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3774497.16 114.52 114.52 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3774497.16 113.74 113.74 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3774497.16 113.08 113.08 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3774497.16 112.34 112.34 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3774497.16 111.46 111.46 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3774497.16 110.52 110.52 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774497.16 109.81 109.81 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774497.16 108.94 108.94 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774497.16 107.82 107.82 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774497.16 104.00 104.00 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774497.16 102.58 110.99 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774497.16 109.88 109.88 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774497.16 111.16 111.16 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774497.16 111.64 111.64 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774497.16 112.11 112.11 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774547.16 117.93 161.01 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774547.16 117.52 161.01 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774547.16 116.39 161.01 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-25 June 2010

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774547.16 115.67 161.01 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774547.16 115.48 161.01 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774547.16 116.02 161.01 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774547.16 116.08 161.01 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774547.16 114.50 114.50 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774547.16 114.87 114.87 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3774547.16 114.70 114.70 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3774547.16 113.78 113.78 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3774547.16 113.21 113.21 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3774547.16 112.63 112.63 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3774547.16 112.01 112.01 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3774547.16 111.32 111.32 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3774547.16 110.71 110.71 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774547.16 109.76 109.76 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774547.16 108.61 108.61 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774547.16 107.07 107.59 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774547.16 102.60 110.88 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774547.16 103.49 111.38 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774547.16 110.96 110.96 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774547.16 111.45 111.45 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774547.16 111.97 111.97 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774547.16 112.45 112.45 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774597.16 117.24 161.01 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774597.16 116.68 161.01 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774597.16 115.82 161.01 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774597.16 115.19 161.01 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774597.16 114.84 161.01 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774597.16 115.09 161.01 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774597.16 114.92 161.01 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774597.16 113.29 113.29 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774597.16 113.48 113.48 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3774597.16 113.48 113.48 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3774597.16 112.69 112.69 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3774597.16 112.30 112.30 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3774597.16 112.06 112.06 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3774597.16 111.46 111.46 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3774597.16 110.91 110.91 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3774597.16 110.18 110.18 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774597.16 109.15 109.15 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774597.16 107.81 107.81 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774597.16 103.03 107.82 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774597.16 102.57 111.40 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774597.16 110.23 110.23 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774597.16 111.31 111.31 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774597.16 111.83 111.83 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774597.16 112.33 112.33 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774597.16 112.81 112.81 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774647.16 116.23 161.01 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774647.16 115.86 161.01 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774647.16 115.14 161.01 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774647.16 114.52 161.01 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774647.16 114.04 161.01 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774647.16 114.08 161.01 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774647.16 113.84 113.84 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774647.16 112.07 112.07 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774647.16 112.10 112.10 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3774647.16 112.26 112.26 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3774647.16 111.64 111.64 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3774647.16 111.14 111.14 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3774647.16 111.13 111.13 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3774647.16 110.81 110.81 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3774647.16 110.01 110.01 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3774647.16 109.20 109.20 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774647.16 108.00 108.00 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774647.16 104.04 107.84 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774647.16 102.89 111.06 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774647.16 107.63 111.06 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774647.16 111.19 111.19 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774647.16 111.86 111.86 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774647.16 112.50 112.50 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774647.16 112.79 112.79 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774647.16 113.16 113.16 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774697.16 115.14 161.01 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774697.16 114.68 161.01 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774697.16 114.08 161.01 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774697.16 113.49 161.01 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774697.16 113.15 161.01 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774697.16 113.22 113.22 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774697.16 112.94 112.94 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774697.16 111.31 111.31 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774697.16 111.14 111.14 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3774697.16 110.93 110.93 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3774697.16 110.75 110.75 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3774697.16 110.18 110.18 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3774697.16 110.32 110.32 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3774697.16 110.60 110.60 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3774697.16 109.14 109.14 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3774697.16 107.77 107.77 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774697.16 103.72 108.22 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-26 June 2010

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774697.16 102.91 111.14 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774697.16 106.00 111.08 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774697.16 111.05 111.05 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774697.16 111.78 111.78 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774697.16 112.53 112.53 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774697.16 113.27 113.27 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774697.16 113.44 113.44 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774697.16 113.77 113.77 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774747.16 113.56 161.01 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774747.16 113.35 161.01 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774747.16 112.87 161.01 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774747.16 112.40 161.01 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774747.16 112.14 112.14 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774747.16 112.35 112.35 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774747.16 112.21 112.21 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774747.16 110.81 110.81 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774747.16 110.54 110.54 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3774747.16 110.10 110.10 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3774747.16 109.65 109.65 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3774747.16 109.35 109.35 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3774747.16 109.46 109.46 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3774747.16 109.40 109.40 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3774747.16 105.89 109.90 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3774747.16 103.57 103.57 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774747.16 103.26 111.21 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774747.16 107.52 110.88 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774747.16 110.91 110.91 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774747.16 111.64 111.64 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774747.16 112.33 112.33 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774747.16 113.05 113.05 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774747.16 113.77 113.77 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774747.16 114.26 114.26 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774747.16 114.92 114.92 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774797.16 112.06 161.01 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774797.16 112.06 161.01 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774797.16 111.85 161.01 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774797.16 111.12 111.12 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774797.16 111.01 111.01 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774797.16 111.41 111.41 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774797.16 111.08 111.08 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774797.16 110.63 110.63 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774797.16 109.93 109.93 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3774797.16 109.05 109.05 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3774797.16 108.39 108.39 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3774797.16 107.73 107.73 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3774797.16 107.00 107.97 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3774797.16 103.96 110.74 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3774797.16 103.54 110.41 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3774797.16 103.90 111.89 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774797.16 107.35 111.21 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774797.16 111.06 111.06 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774797.16 111.64 111.64 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774797.16 112.20 112.20 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774797.16 112.86 112.86 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774797.16 113.56 113.56 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774797.16 114.28 114.28 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774797.16 115.05 115.05 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774797.16 115.87 115.87 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774847.16 108.38 161.01 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774847.16 108.63 110.84 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774847.16 108.57 110.71 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774847.16 108.16 108.16 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774847.16 108.18 110.42 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774847.16 108.55 108.55 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774847.16 108.73 108.73 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774847.16 107.75 110.45 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774847.16 106.24 109.88 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3774847.16 105.37 108.15 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3774847.16 104.67 107.58 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3774847.16 103.93 103.93 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3774847.16 103.68 111.12 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3774847.16 103.63 111.57 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3774847.16 106.59 111.39 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3774847.16 110.10 110.94 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774847.16 111.73 111.73 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774847.16 112.30 112.30 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774847.16 112.37 112.37 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774847.16 112.70 112.70 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774847.16 113.36 113.36 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774847.16 114.08 114.08 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774847.16 114.79 114.79 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774847.16 115.58 115.58 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774847.16 116.49 116.49 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774897.16 107.00 109.94 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774897.16 107.00 107.00 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774897.16 106.69 106.69 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774897.16 106.38 106.38 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774897.16 105.82 105.82 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774897.16 104.98 104.98 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-27 June 2010

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774897.16 104.60 104.60 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774897.16 103.81 117.25 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774897.16 104.04 117.25 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3774897.16 104.16 117.25 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3774897.16 103.85 110.80 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3774897.16 105.67 110.80 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3774897.16 106.71 111.12 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3774897.16 110.77 110.77 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3774897.16 111.43 111.43 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3774897.16 112.19 112.19 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774897.16 113.22 113.22 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774897.16 113.45 113.45 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774897.16 113.04 113.04 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774897.16 113.14 113.14 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774897.16 113.86 113.86 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774897.16 114.58 114.58 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774897.16 115.36 115.36 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774897.16 116.22 116.22 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774897.16 117.37 117.37 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774947.16 110.84 110.84 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774947.16 110.73 110.73 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774947.16 110.14 110.14 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774947.16 109.68 109.68 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774947.16 109.09 109.09 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774947.16 107.95 107.95 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774947.16 106.92 111.10 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774947.16 105.45 118.40 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774947.16 105.65 119.42 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3774947.16 107.90 118.40 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3774947.16 110.34 110.34 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3774947.16 110.83 110.83 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3774947.16 113.16 113.16 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774947.16 113.75 113.75 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774947.16 113.95 113.95 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774947.16 113.70 113.70 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774947.16 113.61 113.61 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774947.16 114.33 114.33 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774947.16 115.07 115.07 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774947.16 115.84 115.84 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774947.16 116.87 116.87 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774947.16 118.40 118.40 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3774997.16 111.59 111.59 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3774997.16 111.57 111.57 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3774997.16 111.37 111.37 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3774997.16 111.17 111.17 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3774997.16 111.05 111.05 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3774997.16 111.19 111.19 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3774997.16 111.09 111.09 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3774997.16 111.49 117.10 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3774997.16 113.36 118.40 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3774997.16 114.09 114.09 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3774997.16 114.29 114.29 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3774997.16 114.18 114.18 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3774997.16 114.33 114.33 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3774997.16 114.93 114.93 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3774997.16 115.58 115.58 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3774997.16 116.38 116.38 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3774997.16 117.68 117.68 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3774997.16 119.23 119.23 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3775047.16 112.21 112.21 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3775047.16 112.15 112.15 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3775047.16 112.09 112.09 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3775047.16 111.98 111.98 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3775047.16 111.91 111.91 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3775047.16 111.98 111.98 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3775047.16 112.31 112.31 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3775047.16 114.60 114.60 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3775047.16 117.73 117.73 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3775047.16 114.48 114.48 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3775047.16 114.68 114.68 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3775047.16 114.85 114.85 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3775047.16 115.06 115.06 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3775047.16 115.54 115.54 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3775047.16 116.17 116.17 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3775047.16 117.04 117.04 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3775047.16 118.37 118.37 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3775047.16 119.99 119.99 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3775097.16 112.70 112.70 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3775097.16 112.81 112.81 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3775097.16 112.84 112.84 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3775097.16 112.80 112.80 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3775097.16 112.67 112.67 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3775097.16 112.98 112.98 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3775097.16 113.37 113.37 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3775097.16 114.15 114.15 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3775097.16 116.31 116.31 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3775097.16 120.35 120.35 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3775097.16 121.42 126.08 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3775097.16 113.95 127.03 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-28 June 2010

 DISCCART 385181.85 3775097.16 115.15 115.15 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3775097.16 115.65 115.65 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3775097.16 115.61 115.61 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3775097.16 115.63 115.63 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3775097.16 115.90 115.90 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3775097.16 116.56 116.56 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3775097.16 117.61 117.61 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3775097.16 118.84 118.84 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3775097.16 120.42 120.42 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3775147.16 113.43 113.43 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3775147.16 113.56 113.56 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3775147.16 113.71 113.71 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3775147.16 113.77 113.77 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3775147.16 113.77 113.77 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3775147.16 114.06 114.06 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3775147.16 114.24 114.24 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3775147.16 114.37 114.37 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3775147.16 115.21 126.08 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3775147.16 116.78 127.03 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3775147.16 125.30 125.30 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3775147.16 124.49 126.57 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3775147.16 116.36 127.03 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3775147.16 113.97 127.03 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3775147.16 115.38 115.38 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3775147.16 116.01 116.01 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3775147.16 116.53 116.53 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3775147.16 116.07 116.07 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3775147.16 116.13 116.13 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3775147.16 116.41 116.41 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3775147.16 116.47 116.47 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3775147.16 117.13 117.13 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3775147.16 118.46 118.46 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3775147.16 120.13 120.13 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3775197.16 114.03 114.03 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3775197.16 114.40 114.40 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3775197.16 114.63 114.63 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3775197.16 114.82 114.82 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3775197.16 115.08 115.08 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3775197.16 115.18 115.18 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3775197.16 114.99 114.99 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3775197.16 114.89 114.89 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3775197.16 115.24 115.24 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3775197.16 115.64 127.03 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3775197.16 115.95 127.03 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3775197.16 123.99 124.58 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3775197.16 126.09 126.09 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3775197.16 115.94 126.31 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3775197.16 115.30 126.31 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3775197.16 116.14 116.14 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3775197.16 117.30 117.30 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3775197.16 117.61 117.61 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3775197.16 116.35 116.35 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3775197.16 116.52 116.52 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3775197.16 116.92 116.92 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3775197.16 116.87 116.87 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3775197.16 116.54 116.54 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3775197.16 117.76 117.76 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3775197.16 119.64 119.64 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3775247.16 114.54 114.54 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3775247.16 114.87 114.87 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3775247.16 115.27 115.27 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3775247.16 115.61 115.61 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3775247.16 115.93 115.93 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3775247.16 116.19 116.19 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3775247.16 115.88 115.88 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3775247.16 115.56 115.56 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3775247.16 115.73 115.73 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3775247.16 115.89 127.03 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3775247.16 116.02 127.03 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3775247.16 117.18 127.03 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3775247.16 118.72 126.31 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3775247.16 116.27 126.31 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3775247.16 115.97 122.76 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3775247.16 119.01 119.95 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3775247.16 119.56 119.56 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3775247.16 118.67 118.67 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3775247.16 116.61 116.61 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3775247.16 116.83 116.83 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3775247.16 117.63 117.63 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3775247.16 117.38 117.38 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3775247.16 116.65 116.65 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3775247.16 116.81 116.81 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3775247.16 119.41 119.41 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3775297.16 115.01 115.01 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3775297.16 115.35 115.35 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3775297.16 115.80 115.80 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3775297.16 116.15 116.15 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3775297.16 116.52 116.52 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3775297.16 116.82 116.82 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-29 June 2010

 DISCCART 384681.85 3775297.16 116.77 116.77 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3775297.16 116.37 116.37 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3775297.16 116.14 116.14 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3775297.16 116.39 116.39 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3775297.16 116.52 116.52 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3775297.16 116.70 116.70 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3775297.16 116.98 124.97 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3775297.16 117.52 117.52 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3775297.16 119.83 122.64 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3775297.16 122.64 122.64 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3775297.16 121.99 121.99 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3775297.16 120.25 120.25 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3775297.16 117.96 117.96 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3775297.16 117.47 117.47 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3775297.16 118.00 118.00 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3775297.16 117.86 117.86 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3775297.16 116.97 116.97 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3775297.16 116.93 116.93 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3775297.16 119.65 119.65 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3775347.16 115.44 115.44 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3775347.16 115.82 115.82 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3775347.16 116.23 116.23 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3775347.16 116.64 116.64 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3775347.16 116.97 116.97 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3775347.16 117.27 117.27 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3775347.16 117.37 117.37 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3775347.16 117.02 117.02 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3775347.16 116.64 116.64 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3775347.16 116.79 116.79 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3775347.16 116.80 116.80 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3775347.16 116.64 116.64 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3775347.16 117.50 117.50 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3775347.16 118.46 118.46 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3775347.16 121.30 121.30 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3775347.16 122.60 122.60 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3775347.16 122.62 122.62 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3775347.16 121.88 121.88 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3775347.16 120.51 120.51 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3775347.16 118.90 118.90 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3775347.16 118.40 118.40 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3775347.16 118.13 118.13 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3775347.16 117.79 117.79 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3775347.16 117.91 117.91 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3775347.16 119.48 119.48 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3775397.16 115.94 115.94 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3775397.16 116.25 116.25 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3775397.16 116.72 116.72 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3775397.16 117.14 117.14 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3775397.16 117.54 117.54 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3775397.16 117.71 117.71 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3775397.16 117.82 117.82 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3775397.16 117.65 117.65 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3775397.16 117.44 117.44 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3775397.16 117.42 117.42 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3775397.16 117.31 117.31 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3775397.16 117.44 117.44 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3775397.16 117.69 117.69 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3775397.16 118.49 118.49 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3775397.16 119.73 119.73 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3775397.16 121.64 121.64 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3775397.16 122.51 122.51 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3775397.16 122.64 122.64 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3775397.16 120.63 120.63 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3775397.16 119.50 119.50 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3775397.16 119.48 119.48 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3775397.16 119.53 119.53 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3775397.16 119.63 119.63 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3775397.16 119.80 119.80 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3775397.16 120.63 120.63 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3775447.16 116.46 116.46 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3775447.16 116.75 116.75 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3775447.16 117.23 117.23 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3775447.16 117.80 117.80 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3775447.16 118.04 118.04 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3775447.16 118.27 118.27 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3775447.16 118.29 118.29 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3775447.16 118.40 118.40 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3775447.16 118.31 118.31 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3775447.16 118.08 118.08 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3775447.16 117.99 117.99 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3775447.16 118.07 118.07 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3775447.16 118.14 118.14 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3775447.16 118.50 118.50 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3775447.16 119.05 119.05 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3775447.16 119.80 119.80 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3775447.16 120.72 120.72 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3775447.16 121.04 121.04 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3775447.16 120.21 120.21 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3775447.16 120.23 120.23 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-30 June 2010

 DISCCART 385381.85 3775447.16 121.14 121.14 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3775447.16 121.36 121.36 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3775447.16 120.90 120.90 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3775447.16 120.95 120.95 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3775447.16 121.58 121.58 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3775497.16 117.25 117.25 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3775497.16 117.53 117.53 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3775497.16 117.87 117.87 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3775497.16 118.31 118.31 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3775497.16 118.54 118.54 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3775497.16 118.74 118.74 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3775497.16 119.09 119.09 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3775497.16 119.02 119.02 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3775497.16 119.06 119.06 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3775497.16 118.95 118.95 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3775497.16 118.74 118.74 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3775497.16 118.61 118.61 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3775497.16 118.67 118.67 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3775497.16 118.85 118.85 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3775497.16 118.97 118.97 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3775497.16 119.37 119.37 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3775497.16 119.76 119.76 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3775497.16 119.96 119.96 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3775497.16 120.11 120.11 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3775497.16 120.61 120.61 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3775497.16 122.03 122.03 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3775497.16 122.55 122.55 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3775497.16 121.90 121.90 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3775497.16 121.51 121.51 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3775497.16 121.82 121.82 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3775547.16 118.38 118.38 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3775547.16 118.49 118.49 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3775547.16 118.79 118.79 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3775547.16 118.90 118.90 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3775547.16 119.16 119.16 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3775547.16 119.38 119.38 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3775547.16 119.72 119.72 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3775547.16 119.89 119.89 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3775547.16 119.90 119.90 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3775547.16 119.89 119.89 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3775547.16 119.64 119.64 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3775547.16 119.41 119.41 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3775547.16 119.33 119.33 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3775547.16 119.39 119.39 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3775547.16 119.31 119.31 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3775547.16 119.36 119.36 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3775547.16 119.55 119.55 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3775547.16 119.83 119.83 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3775547.16 120.11 120.11 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3775547.16 120.67 120.67 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3775547.16 121.99 121.99 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3775547.16 122.68 122.68 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3775547.16 122.62 122.62 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3775547.16 122.39 122.39 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3775547.16 122.03 122.03 

 DISCCART 384381.85 3775597.16 119.43 119.43 

 DISCCART 384431.85 3775597.16 119.54 119.54 

 DISCCART 384481.85 3775597.16 119.73 119.73 

 DISCCART 384531.85 3775597.16 119.78 119.78 

 DISCCART 384581.85 3775597.16 119.98 119.98 

 DISCCART 384631.85 3775597.16 120.17 120.17 

 DISCCART 384681.85 3775597.16 120.44 120.44 

 DISCCART 384731.85 3775597.16 120.65 120.65 

 DISCCART 384781.85 3775597.16 120.71 120.71 

 DISCCART 384831.85 3775597.16 120.77 120.77 

 DISCCART 384881.85 3775597.16 120.62 120.62 

 DISCCART 384931.85 3775597.16 120.15 120.15 

 DISCCART 384981.85 3775597.16 120.07 120.07 

 DISCCART 385031.85 3775597.16 119.96 119.96 

 DISCCART 385081.85 3775597.16 119.79 119.79 

 DISCCART 385131.85 3775597.16 119.63 119.63 

 DISCCART 385181.85 3775597.16 119.74 119.74 

 DISCCART 385231.85 3775597.16 119.93 119.93 

 DISCCART 385281.85 3775597.16 120.22 120.22 

 DISCCART 385331.85 3775597.16 120.69 120.69 

 DISCCART 385381.85 3775597.16 121.43 121.43 

 DISCCART 385431.85 3775597.16 122.46 122.46 

 DISCCART 385481.85 3775597.16 122.65 122.65 

 DISCCART 385531.85 3775597.16 122.68 122.68 

 DISCCART 385581.85 3775597.16 122.39 122.39 

 DISCCART 384806.79 3774976.36 109.22 119.42 

 DISCCART 385122.31 3774915.85 112.48 112.48 

 DISCCART 385163.43 3775122.08 115.38 115.38 

 DISCCART 385103.55 3775167.54 115.19 115.19 

 DISCCART 384825.01 3775049.22 117.76 117.76 

 DISCCART 384825.35 3774972.80 109.93 118.40 

 DISCCART 384843.91 3774969.24 110.31 117.25 

 DISCCART 384862.47 3774965.68 110.57 110.57 

 DISCCART 384881.03 3774962.12 110.55 110.55 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-31 June 2010

 DISCCART 384899.59 3774958.56 110.65 110.65 

 DISCCART 384918.15 3774955.00 110.76 110.76 

 DISCCART 384936.71 3774951.44 110.90 110.90 

 DISCCART 384955.27 3774947.88 111.11 111.11 

 DISCCART 384973.83 3774944.33 111.19 111.19 

 DISCCART 384992.39 3774940.77 111.38 111.38 

 DISCCART 385010.95 3774937.21 111.54 111.54 

 DISCCART 385029.51 3774933.65 111.63 111.63 

 DISCCART 385048.07 3774930.09 111.74 111.74 

 DISCCART 385066.63 3774926.53 111.89 111.89 

 DISCCART 385085.19 3774922.97 112.05 112.05 

 DISCCART 385103.75 3774919.41 112.21 112.21 

 DISCCART 385126.05 3774934.60 112.87 112.87 

 DISCCART 385129.79 3774953.35 113.21 113.21 

 DISCCART 385133.52 3774972.09 113.52 113.52 

 DISCCART 385137.26 3774990.84 113.70 113.70 

 DISCCART 385141.00 3775009.59 113.86 113.86 

 DISCCART 385144.74 3775028.34 114.06 114.06 

 DISCCART 385148.48 3775047.09 114.24 114.24 

 DISCCART 385152.22 3775065.84 114.43 114.43 

 DISCCART 385155.95 3775084.58 114.72 114.72 

 DISCCART 385159.69 3775103.33 115.04 115.04 

 DISCCART 385148.46 3775133.45 115.37 115.37 

 DISCCART 385133.49 3775144.81 115.36 115.36 

 DISCCART 385118.52 3775156.17 115.30 115.30 

 DISCCART 385086.14 3775160.15 114.71 126.31 

 DISCCART 385068.73 3775152.75 114.28 126.31 

 DISCCART 385051.32 3775145.35 113.96 126.57 

 DISCCART 385033.91 3775137.96 113.65 127.03 

 DISCCART 385016.51 3775130.56 113.21 127.03 

 DISCCART 384999.10 3775123.17 112.56 127.03 

 DISCCART 384981.69 3775115.77 112.14 127.03 

 DISCCART 384964.28 3775108.38 112.75 127.03 

 DISCCART 384946.87 3775100.99 112.91 127.03 

 DISCCART 384929.46 3775093.59 113.69 127.03 

 DISCCART 384912.05 3775086.20 115.68 127.03 

 DISCCART 384894.65 3775078.80 116.05 127.03 

 DISCCART 384877.24 3775071.41 117.46 126.08 

 DISCCART 384859.83 3775064.01 116.33 126.08 

 DISCCART 384842.42 3775056.62 116.80 126.08 

 DISCCART 384820.46 3775031.00 116.93 116.93 

 DISCCART 384815.90 3775012.79 116.35 116.35 

 DISCCART 384811.34 3774994.58 113.06 118.40 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-32 

Table B-3

Diemethyl Carbonate Carcinogenic Health Risk Analysis

Dimethyl Carbonate Cancer Potency FactorDescription Inhalation Unit Risk, (ug/m3)-1 DBR, (L/kg-day) DM

Methanol 1.00E-06 302 EPA interim inhalation unit risk value, Toxicological Review of Methanol(CAS No. 67-56-1)in Support of Summary Information on the Integra(IRIS), EPA/635/R-09/013, December 2009, http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=494156.

Tier IV - Carcinogenic Health Risk Evaluation of Dimethyl Carbonate

Receptor 

Type

Total 

DMC 

Usage,

gal/yr

DMC 

Density, 

lb/gal

DMC 

Emissions,

g/sec

Maximum 

Modeled 

DMC 

Conc.,

(ug/m3)

Maximum 

Modeled 

DMC 

Conc.,

(ug/m3)

Effective 

Methanol 

Conc., 

(ug/m3)

DMC 

Cancer 

Potency,

(mg/kgday)-1

Daily 

Breathing 

Rate,

(L/kg-day)

Exposure 

Frequency,

day/year

Exposu

Durati

year

Sensitive 327 8.92 0.042 48.6 3.1 2.2 0.0033 302 350 70 

Worker 327 8.92 0.042 387.7 17.7 11.6 0.0033 149 245 40 

C3H603 + 2H2O -> 3CH3OH + H2CO3

(1 gram C3H6O3)/(90 gram C3H6O3/mole C3H6O3) x (2 mole CH3OH/mole C3H6O3) x (30 gram CH3OH/mole CH3OH) = 0.71 gram CH3Central Los Angeles meteorological data 

Maximum modeled DMC concentration, ug/m3 from AERMOD output (receptor 384899.59, 3774958.56)

Maximum modeled sensitive receptor DMC concentration, ug/m3 from AERMOD output (receptor 384831.85, 3774797316)

Effective methanol concentration = Maximum modeled DMC concentration x 0.71
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-33 

Table B-1

Mobile Emission Factors

EMFAC2007 Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck Emission Factors for the 2010 Fleet Year

CO

lb/mile

Ox

lb/mile

ROG

lb/mile

SOx

lb/mile

PM10

lb/mile

PM2.5

lb/mile

0.01195456 0.03822102 0.00304157 0.00004131 0.00183062 0.00160083 

http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/onroad/onroad.html

Locomotive Emission Factors for 2010

CO

g/ton-mile

Ox

g/ton-mile

VOC

g/ton-mile

SOx

g/ton-mile

PM10

g/ton-mile

PM2.5

g/ton-mile

0.07 0.39 0.022 0.005 0.012 0.011 

http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/locomotv/420f09025.pdf

Table B-2

Existing SCAQMD Emissions

Railcar Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid from Bakersfield to Keeneaphthenic 

Metal 

Working 

Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

aphthenic 

Metal 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

152,090 20,000 7.79 592 8 25 0.29 1.69 0.09 0.02 

Annual lb/yr 2.17 12.8 0.71 0.15 

Assumed 10 percent of Naphthenic Metal Working fluid is transported by rail.

Assumed one rail car sent at a time.
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-34 

Table B-2 (Continued)

Existing SCAQMD Emissions

Railcar Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid from Keene to Boron

aphthenic 

Metal 

Working 

Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

aphthenic 

Metal 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

152,090 20,000 7.79 592 8 63 0.72 4.25 0.24 0.05 

Annual lb/yr 5.48 32.3 1.80 0.39 

Assumed 10 percent of Naphthenic Metal Working fluid is transported by rail.

Assumed one rail car sent at a time.

Railcar Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid from Boron to Barstow to Cajon

aphthenic 

Metal 

Working 

Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

aphthenic 

Metal 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

152,090 20,000 7.79 592 8 93 1.06 6.27 0.35 0.08 

Annual lb/yr 8.08 47.7 2.65 0.57 

Assumed 10 percent of Naphthenic Metal Working fluid is transported by rail.

Assumed one rail car sent at a time.Railcar Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid from Cajon to Los Angeles

aphthenic 

Metal 

Working 

Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

aphthenic 

Metal 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

152,090 20,000 7.79 592 8 62 0.71 4.18 0.23 0.05 

Annual lb/yr 5.39 31.8 1.77 0.38 

Assumed 10 percent of Naphthenic Metal Working fluid is transported by rail.

Assumed one rail car sent at a time.
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-35 

Table B-2 (Continued)

Existing SCAQMD Emissions

Diesel Truck Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid - Bakersfield to Labec

aphthenic 

Metal 

Working 

Fluid,

gal/year

Tanker 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Trucks, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

PM10

lb/da

1,368,810 3,000 456 41 4.30 13.75 1.09 0.01 0.66 

Annual lb/yr 224 715 57 0.8 34 

Assumed 90 percent of Naphthenic Metal Working fluid is transported by diesel truck.

Assumed truck deliveries once a week.

Diesel Truck Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid - Labec to Los Angeles

aphthenic 

Metal 

Working 

Fluid,

gal/year

Tanker 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Trucks, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

PM10

lb/da

1,368,810 3,000 456 72 7.50 23.98 1.91 0.03 1.15 

Annual lb/yr 390 1,247 99 1.3 60 

Assumed 90 percent of Naphthenic Metal Working fluid is transported by diesel truck.

Assumed truck deliveries once a week.Existing Daily

Air District CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2

lb/da

SJVAB 4.6 15.4 1.2 0.0 0.7 0.6 KAB 0.72 4.25 0.24 0.05 0.13 0.12 MDAB 1.06 6.27 0.35 0.08 0.19 0.18 District 8.21 28.16 2.14 0.08 1.27 1.13 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-36 

Table B-2 (Concluded)

Existing SCAQMD Emissions

Existing Annual

Air District CO lb/yr Ox lb/yr VOC lb/yr SOx lb/yr PM10 lb/yr PM2

lb/y

SJVAB 226 728 58 0.93 35 30 KAB 5.48 32.3 1.80 0.39 0.97 0.94 MDAB 8.08 47.7 2.65 0.57 1.43 1.38 District 395 1,279 101 1.73 60.7 53.1 

Table B-3

Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluids from Out of State

Fluid Type Location Percentage 

Paraffinic Oil Texas 21 Water-Dilutable Oil Ohio 20 Vegetable Oil Iowa 10 Total 51 Assumed all alternative naphthenic oil working fluid is transported by rail. 

Water-dilutable oil and vegetable oil metal working fluid concentrate are maximum 20 percent of existing fluid.

Railcar Travel for Replacement Metal Working Fluid - Ehrenberg to East District Boundary

Paraffinic Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars,

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

410,643 20,000 7.08 1,454 21 56 0.58 3.43 0.19 0.04 

Annual lb/yr 11.9 70 3.92 0.84 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-37 

Table B-3 (Concluded)

Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluids from Out of State

Railcar Travel for Water-dilutable Metal Working Fluid - East District Boundary to Los AngelesParaffinic 

Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars,

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

410,643 20,000 8.75 1,797 21 199 2.56 15.07 0.84 0.18 

Annual lb/yr 52.5 309 17.22 3.70 

Daily from Out of State

Air District CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM

lb/d

MDAB 0.58 3.43 0.19 0.04 0.10 0.1District 2.56 15.07 0.84 0.18 0.45 0.4

Annual from Out of State

Air District CO lb/yr Ox lb/yr VOC lb/yr SOx lb/yr PM10 lb/yr PM2.5 lb/yr D

MDAB 11.9 70 3.92 0.84 2.11 2.05 District 52.5 309 17.2 3.70 9.3 9.0 

Table B-4

Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluids from Richmond, CA along the Union Pacific US

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - Richmond to Aromas

Paraffinic Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars,

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

745,241 20,000 7.08 2,638 37 99 1.03 6.07 0.34 0.07 

Annual lb/yr 38.3 226.0 12.58 2.71 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-38 

Table B-4 (Continued)

Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluids from Richmond, CA along the Union Pacific US

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - Aromas to McKay

Paraffinic Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

745,241 20,000 8.75 3,260 37 102 1.31 7.72 0.43 0.09 

Annual lb/yr 48.8 287.8 16.02 3.45 

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - McKay to 101 and 166

Paraffinic Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

745,241 20,000 8.75 3,260 37 70 0.90 5.30 0.30 0.06 

Annual lb/yr 33.5 197.5 10.99 2.36 

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - 101 and 166 to 101 before 150

Paraffinic Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

745,241 20,000 8.75 3,260 37 79 1.01 5.98 0.33 0.07 

Annual lb/yr 37.8 222.9 12.41 2.67 

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - 101 and 166 to 101 before 150

Paraffinic Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

745,241 20,000 8.75 3,260 37 44 0.56 3.33 0.19 0.04 

Annual lb/yr 21.1 124.1 6.91 1.49 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-39 

Table B-4 (Concluded)

Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluids from Richmond, CA along the Union Pacific US

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - 101 before 150 to Los Angeles

Paraffinic Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

745,241 20,000 8.75 3,260 37 39 0.50 2.95 0.16 0.04 

Annual lb/yr 18.7 110.0 6.13 1.32 

Daily - UP US-101 Route

Air District CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM

lb/d

BAAQMD 1.03 6.07 0.34 0.07 0.18 0.1MBUAPCD 1.31 7.72 0.43 0.09 0.23 0.2SLOCAPCD 0.90 5.30 0.30 0.06 0.16 0.1SBCAPCD 1.01 5.98 0.33 0.07 0.18 0.1VACAPCD 0.56 3.33 0.19 0.04 0.10 0.1District 0.50 2.95 0.16 0.04 0.09 0.0

Annual - UP US-101 Route

Air District CO lb/yr Ox lb/yr VOC lb/yr SOx lb/yr PM10 lb/yr PM2.5 lb/yr D

BAAQMD 38.3 226.0 12.58 2.71 6.77 6.56 MBUAPCD 48.8 287.8 16.02 3.45 8.61 8.36 SLOCAPCD 33.5 197.5 10.99 2.36 5.91 5.73 SBCAPCD 37.8 222.9 12.41 2.67 6.67 6.47 VACAPCD 21.1 124.1 6.91 1.49 3.72 3.60 District 18.66 110.0 6.13 1.32 3.29 3.20 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-40 

Table B-5

Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluids from Richmond, CA along the Burlington orthern San

Pacific SR-99 Route

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - Richmond to Orwood

Paraffinic Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars,

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

745,241 20,000 7.08 2,638 37 54 0.56 3.31 0.18 0.04 

Annual lb/yr 20.9 123.3 6.86 1.48 

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - Orwood to Keene

Paraffinic Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

745,241 20,000 8.75 3,260 37 227 2.91 17.19 0.96 0.21 

Annual lb/yr 108.6 640 35.7 7.67 

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - Keen to Boron

Paraffinic Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

745,241 20,000 8.75 3,260 37 63 0.81 4.77 0.27 0.06 

Annual lb/yr 30.1 178 9.9 2.13 

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - Boron to Barstow to Cajon

Paraffinic Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

745,241 20,000 8.75 3,260 37 93 1.19 7.04 0.39 0.08 

Annual lb/yr 44.5 262 14.6 3.14 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-41 

Table B-5 (Concluded)

Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluids from Richmond, CA along the Burlington orthern San

Pacific SR-99 Route

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - Cajon to Los Angeles

Paraffinic Working Fluid,gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

District 

Distance,

mile/day

CO

lb/day

Ox

lb/day

VOC

lb/day

SOx

lb/day

P

l

745,241 20,000 8.75 3,260 37 62 0.80 4.69 0.26 0.06 

Annual lb/yr 29.7 175 9.7 2.09 

Daily – BSF/UP SR-99 Route

Air District CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM

lb/d

BAAQMD 0.56 3.31 0.18 0.04 0.10 0.1SJVAPCD 2.91 17.19 0.96 0.21 0.51 0.5KCAPCD 0.81 4.77 0.27 0.06 0.14 0.1MDAQMD 1.19 7.04 0.39 0.08 0.21 0.2District 0.80 4.69 0.26 0.06 0.14 0.1

Annual– BSF/UP SR-99 Route

Air District CO lb/yr Ox lb/yr VOC lb/yr SOx lb/yr PM10 lb/yr PM2.5 lb/yr D

BAAQMD 20.9 123.3 6.86 1.48 3.69 3.58 SJVAPCD 108.6 640 35.7 7.67 19.2 18.6 KCAPCD 30.1 178 9.89 2.13 5.32 5.16 MDAQMD 44.5 262 14.61 3.14 7.85 7.62 District 29.7 175 9.74 2.09 5.24 5.08 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-42 

Table B-6

Proposed Project Total Daily Emissions

BAAQMD CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Project 1.03 6.07 0.34 0.07 0.18 0.18 

District CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Existing 8.21 28.2 2.14 0.076 1.27 1.13 Project 3.06 18.0 1.00 0.22 0.54 0.52 

 -5.15 -10.14 -1.14 0.14 -0.73 -0.60 

MBUAPCD CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Project 1.31 7.72 0.43 0.09 0.23 0.22 

MDAQMD CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Existing 1.06 6.27 0.35 0.08 0.19 0.18 Project 0.58 3.4 0.19 0.04 0.10 0.10 

-0.48 -2.84 -0.16 -0.03 -0.08 -0.08 

SBCAPCD CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Project 1.01 5.98 0.33 0.07 0.18 0.17 

SJVAPCD CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Existing 4.6 15 1.19 0.04 0.7 0.6 

SLOCAPCD CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Project 0.90 5.30 0.30 0.06 0.16 0.15 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-43 

Table B-6 (Concluded)

Proposed Project Total Daily Emissions – Union Pacific US-101

VACAPCD CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Project 0.56 3.33 0.19 0.04 0.10 0.10 

Table B-7

Proposed Project Total Daily Emissions – Burlington orthern Santa Fe SR-99/Union Pacific SR-9

BAAQMD CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Project 0.56 3.31 0.18 0.04 0.10 0.10 

District CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Existing 8.21 28.2 2.14 0.076 1.27 1.13 Project 3.35 19.8 1.10 0.24 0.59 0.57 

 -4.86 -8.40 -1.04 0.16 -0.68 -0.55 

KCAPCD CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Existing 0.72 4.25 0.24 0.05 0.13 0.12 Project 0.81 4.77 0.27 0.06 0.14 0.14 

 -0.09 -0.52 -0.03 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 

MDAQMD CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Existing 1.06 6.27 0.35 0.08 0.19 0.18 Project 1.78 10.5 0.58 0.13 0.31 0.30 

0.71 4.20 0.23 0.05 0.13 0.12 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-44 

Table B-7 (Concluded)

Proposed Project Total Daily Emissions – Burlington orthern Santa Fe SR-99/Union Pacific SR-9

SJVAPCD CO lb/day Ox lb/day VOC lb/day SOx lb/day PM10 lb/day PM2.

lb/da

Existing 4.6 15 1.19 0.04 0.7 0.6 Project 2.91 17.2 0.96 0.21 0.51 0.50 

-1.7 1.8 -0.23 0.17 -0.19 -0.13 

Table B-8

Proposed Project Total Annual Emissions – Union Pacific US-101

BAAQMD CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Project 0.019 0.113 0.006 0.001 0.003 0.003 

District CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Existing 0.198 0.639 0.050 0.001 0.030 0.027 Project 0.036 0.210 0.012 0.003 0.006 0.006 

-0.162 -0.430 -0.039 0.002 -0.024 -0.02

KCAPCD CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Existing 0.003 0.016 0.001 0.0002 0.0005 0.000

MBUAPCD CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Project 0.006 0.035 0.002 0.0004 0.0011 0.001
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-45 

Table B-8 (Continued)

Proposed Project Total Annual Emissions – Union Pacific US-101

MDAB CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Existing 0.004 0.024 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.001 Project 0.006 0.035 0.002 0.0004 0.0011 0.001

0.002 0.011 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 

SBCAPCD CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Project 0.019 0.111 0.006 0.001 0.003 0.003 

SJVAPCD CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Existing 0.113 0.364 0.029 0.000 0.017 0.015 

SLOCAPCD CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Project 0.017 0.099 0.005 0.001 0.003 0.003 

VACAPCD CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Project 0.0105 0.0621 0.0035 0.0007 0.0019 0.001
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-46 

Table B-9

Proposed Project Total Annual Emissions – Burlington orthern Santa Fe SR-99/Union Pacific SR-

BAAQMD CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Project 0.007 0.041 0.002 0.000 0.001 0.001 

District CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Existing 0.198 0.639 0.050 0.001 0.030 0.027 Project 0.036 0.213 0.012 0.003 0.006 0.006 

-0.162 -0.426 -0.039 0.002 -0.024 -0.02

KCAPCD CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Existing 0.003 0.016 0.001 0.0002 0.0005 0.000Project 0.010 0.059 0.003 0.001 0.002 0.002 

0.007 0.043 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.001 

MDAQMD CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Existing 0.004 0.024 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.001 Project 0.021 0.123 0.007 0.001 0.004 0.004 

0.017 0.099 0.006 0.001 0.003 0.003 

SJVAPCD CO ton/yr Ox ton/yr VOC ton/yr SOx ton/yr PM10 ton/yr PM2.

ton/y

Existing 0.113 0.364 0.029 0.000 0.017 0.015 Project 0.044 0.261 0.015 0.003 0.008 0.008 

-0.069 -0.103 -0.014 0.003 -0.010 -0.00
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-47 

Table B-10

GHG Emissions Factors

EMFAC2007 Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck Emission Factors for the 2010 Fleet Year

CO2

lb/mile

CH4

lb/mile

DPM

lb/mile

4.21120578 0.00014201 0.00168861

http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/onroad/onroad.html

Locomotive Emission Factors for 2010

CO2

g/ton-mile

25.5

http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/locomotv/420f09025.pdf

Table B-11

GHG Emissions 

Railcar Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid - Bakersfield to Los Angeles

aphthenic 

Working Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

aphthenic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars,

year

Distance, 

mile/trip

Distan

mile/y

152,090 20,000 7.79 592 8 249 1,89

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - Richmond to Los Angeles

Paraffinic 

Working Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars,

year

Distance, 

mile/trip

Distan

mile/y

745,241 20,000 7.08 2,638 37 541 20,1
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-48 

Table B-11 (Continued)

GHG Emissions 

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - Houston, TX to Los Angeles

Paraffinic 

Working Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars,

year

Distance, 

mile/trip

Distan

mile/y

319,389 20,000 7.08 1,131 16 1,548 24,7

Railcar Travel for Water-dilutable Metal Working Fluid - Cleveland, OH to Los Angeles

Paraffinic 

Working Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars,

year

Distance, 

mile/trip

Distan

mile/y

60,836 20,000 8.75 266 3 2,347 7,13

Railcar Travel for Vegetable-based Metal Working Fluid, Des Moines, IA to Los Angeles

Paraffinic 

Working Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars,

year

Distance, 

mile/trip

Distan

mile/y

30,418 20,000 8.75 133 2 1,684 2,56

Diesel Truck Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid - Bakersfield to Los Angeles

aphthenic Working 

Fluid,

gal/year

Tanker Capacity, 

gal/car Trucks, year Distance, mile/trip Distance, mile/year 

1,368,810 3,000 456 113 51,559 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-49 

Table B-12

Off-Site Health Risk from Triethanolamine

Triethanolamine

Current 

Solvent 

Usage,

gal/year

Proposed 

Solvent 

Dilution 

Rate

Proposed 

Solvent 

Usage,

gal/year

Density,

lb/gal

Weight 

Fraction

Emissions, 

lb/year

Emissions, 

lb/hr

(X/Q),

(ug/m3)/

(lb/hr)

AF 7-Hr 

32,000 10:1 3,200 8.75 0.2 5,600 1.9 1,532 0.98 

Usage, lb/hr = usage, lb/year/(260 day/year)/(8 hour/day)

HI = [usage, lb/hr x (X/Q)]/PEL, ug/m3(X/Q) from Table 7 of the Risk Assessment Procedures for Rules 1401 and 212, volume source less than 25 meters away from a source with a 

Conc.,

mg/m3

Cal/OSHA PEL,

mg/m3 Less T

2.9 5 

Table B-13

Off-Site Health Risk from Monoethanolamine

Monoethanolamine

Current 

Solvent 

Usage,

gal/year

Proposed 

Solvent 

Dilution 

Rate

Proposed 

Solvent 

Usage,

gal/year

Density,

lb/gal

Weight 

Fraction

Emissions, 

lb/year

Emissions, 

lb/hr

(X/Q),

(ug/m3)/

(lb/hr)

AF 7-Hr 

32,000 10:1 3,200 8.75 0.05 1,400 0.5 1,532 0.98 

Usage, lb/hr = usage, lb/year/(260 day/year)/(8 hour/day)

HI = [usage, lb/hr x (X/Q)]/PEL, ug/m3(X/Q) from Table 7 of the Risk Assessment Procedures for Rules 1401 and 212, volume source less than 25 meters away from a source with a 

Conc.,

mg/m3

Cal/OSHA PEL,

mg/m3 Less T

0.7 5 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-50 

Table B-14

Existing Diesel Consumption

Railcar Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid - Bakersfield to Los Angeles

aphthenic 

Working Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Railcar 

Capacity, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

Distance, 

mile/trip

Distance, 

mile/year

F

Effic

gal/to

152,090 20,000 7.79 592 8 243 1,848 0.0

Fuel efficiency from EMFAC2007 for 2010

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - Richmond to Los Angeles

Paraffinic 

Working Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

Distance, 

mile/trip

California 

Distance,

mile/day

F

Effi

gal/t

745,241 20,000 7.08 2,638 37 541 255 0.

Fuel efficiency from http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/locomotv/420f09025.pdf.

Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid - Houston, TX to Los Angeles

Paraffinic 

Working Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

Distance, 

mile/trip

California 

Distance,

mile/day

F

Effi

gal/t

319,389 20,000 7.08 1,131 16 1,548 255 0.

Railcar Travel for Water-dilutable Metal Working Fluid - Cleveland, OH to Los Angeles

Paraffinic 

Working Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

Distance, 

mile/trip

California 

Distance,

mile/day

F

Effi

gal/t

60,836 20,000 8.75 266 3 2,423 255 0.
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-51 

Table B-14 (Continued)

Existing Diesel Consumption

Railcar Travel for Vegetable Oil-based Metal Working Fluid - Des Moines, IA to Los Angeles

Paraffinic 

Working Fluid,

gal/year

Railcar 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Density,

lb/gal

Paraffinic 

Working 

Fluid, 

ton/year

Railcars, 

year

Distance, 

mile/trip

California 

Distance,

mile/day

F

Effi

gal/t

30,418 20,000 8.75 133 2 1,872 255 0.

Diesel Truck Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid - Bakersfield to Los Angeles

aphthenic Working 

Fluid,

gal/year

Tanker 

Capacity, 

gal/car

Trucks, year Distance, mile/trip Distance, mile/year Fuel Efficien

mile/gallo

1,368,810 3,000 456 112 51,102 5.28 

Table B-15

Existing Working Fluid Hazardous Properties

Existing Working Fluid Specific Gravity Density, lb/gal Vapor Pressure, kPa Vapor Density Flash Point °C LFL UFL Auto- ignition Temperature °C Health Flamma

Sierra Form Oil 176 0.84 6.98 <1 85 0.7 5 2 2 Husky Quenching Oil 0.864 7.21 175Milacron MilPro 740 ACF 0.87 7.26 187.8 1 1 Shell Fenella CH 402 0.874 7.27 176.67 1 1 Petro Canada Aludraw 850 0.8827 7.37 280 1 1 Shell Vitrea 68 0.89 7.40 196.11 0 1 Milacron MilPro 810CF 0.9 7.51 123.9 1 1 Schaeffer 128 0.902 7.50 <0.01333224 1 1 Shell Fenella DS 1790 0.908 7.55 0.0005 > 1 220 1 10 320 0 1 Champion 1700 0.94 7.82 0.001333 >1 120 1 1 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix B

PAR 1144 B-52 

Table B-2 16

Alternative Working Fluid Hazardous Properties

Alternative Working Fluid Specific Gravity Density, lb/gal Vapor Pressure, kPa Vapor Density Flash Point °C LFL UFL Auto- Ignition Temperature °C Health Fl

Sinclair Artic Fire Form Oil 0.79 6.57 < 5 5.3 76 1 Shell Vitrea 22 0.85 7.07 0.0005 > 1 204 1 10 320 0 Citgo Quenching 22 0.86 7.15 <0.01 >1 202 1 Milacron MilPro 830 CF 0.87 7.23 185 1 Milacron MilPro 850 CF 0.87 7.23 215.6 1 Milacron MilPro 835 CF 0.872 7.25 201.7 1 Milacron MilPro 860 CF 0.882 198.9 1 Texaco Cleartex CF 0.885 7.36 1 226 0 Texaco Sultex 0.889 7.39 1 202 0 Milacron MilPro 500 0.9 7.48 193.3 1 Milacron MilPro 6000 0.9 7.48 215.6 1 Milacron MilPro 8000 0.9 7.48 187.8 1 Accu-Lube 1000 0.92 7.65 0.133322 >1 175 0 Accu-Lube 2000 0.92 7.65 0.133322 >1 204 0 Citgo Clairo Oil 160 0.92 7.65 <0.001 >1 157 1 Accu-Lube 6100 0.93 7.73 0.133322 >1 204 0 CimFree VG-990M 1.03 8.56 1 Accu-Lube Synthetic 1.04 8.65 <1 100 1 Milacron Cimtap HD 1.089 9.05 204.4 1 
A P P E  D I X C 

C O M M E  T L E T T E R A  D R E S P O  S E T O C O M M E  T S 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix C

PAR 1144 C-1 June 2010

1-1 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix C

PAR 1144 C-2 June 2010

Attachment 

TBAC Doc.jpg 

 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix C

PAR 1144 C-3 June 2010

Comment Letter 1 

Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA) 

Dated April 23, 2010 

Response to Comment 1-1

The comment addresses a version of PAR 1144 that was released subsequent to the release of the 

Draft EA for public review, which did not include an exemption for dimethyl carbonate (DMC) 

used in computerized numerically controlled machines (CNC), and the final version of 

PAR 1144. The version of PAR 1144 that is addressed in the comment included the exemption 

for the use of DMC in CNC machines, but did not specify that the equipment needed to be 

existing at the time of the adoption of PAR 1144 and enclosed with exhaust air vented out of the 

building. The commenter expresses concern that on-site workers would be exposed to DMC 

concentrations, because of the CNC exemption. 

The final version of PAR 1144 includes additional language that requires that “the equipment 

existed at the time of rule adoption, is enclosed and an exhaust fan discharges the exhaust air 

from the equipment out of the building.” The additional language addresses the commenter’s 

concern by capturing the DMC emissions from the CNC machine, preventing any worker 

exposure to DMC emissions. 

SCAQMD has identified only one facility that uses DMC as a cooling solvent in a CNC machine 

where permeable media are used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in place during cutting. 

The existing CNC machine is enclosed, but would need an exhaust fan to discharge the exhaust 

air from the equipment out of the building. Off-site receptors would be exposed to DMC 

emissions, since captures DMC emissions from the CNC equipment are vented outside the 

building. A health risk analysis was prepared based on 327 gallons of DMC used per year (based 

on current denatured alcohol usage), parameters proposed for the future vent, facility parameters 

and meteorology). Detailed calculations are included in Appendix B of the Final EA. 

OEHHA has established interim acute and chronic reference exposure level (REL) values of 

18,000 and 5,500 micrograms per cubic meter respectively for DMC.1 EPA has developed a preexternal peer review unit risk factor of 1E-6 cubic meters per microgram for methanol.2

 

Based on the facility-specific information, the maximum chronic hazard indices would be 0.0069 

for the worker receptor and 0.0006 for sensitive receptor. The maximum acute hazard indices 

would be 0.16 for the worker receptor and 0.03 for sensitive receptor. The non-carcinogenic 

acute and chronic hazard indices for worker and sensitive receptors were each less than the 

significance threshold of 1.0. The carcinogenic health risk based on the maximum methanol 

concentration modeled at a worker receptor was estimated to be 3.3 in one million, which is less 

than the significance threshold of 10 in one million. The carcinogenic health risk based on the 

maximum methanol concentration modeled at a sensitive receptor was estimated to be 2.1 in one 

million, which is less than the significance threshold of 10 in one million. The health risk from 

 

1

 OEHHA, Revised Assessment of Health Effects of Exposure to Dimethyl Carbonate, a Chemical Petitioned for 

Exemption from VOC Rules, memo from Richard Corey to Melanie Marty, Ph.D., December 8, 2009. 

2

 EPA, Toxicological Review of Methanol (CAS No. 67-56-1) In Support of Summary Information on the 

Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), December 2009. EPA/635/R-09. 
Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix C

PAR 1144 C-4 June 2010

DMC would be the only health risk from the proposed project, because no other health effects 

were identified from PAR 1144. Since all health risk from DMC would be less than significant, 

PAR 1144 is not expected to generate significant for health risk. 

Since the adverse impacts from the proposed project would remain not significant, no new or 

additional mitigation would be required. Therefore, the proposed changes to PAR 1144 are not 

considered a “substantial revision” under CEQA Guidelines §15073.5 (b) and would not require 

recirculation under CEQA Guidelines §15073.5 (a).