# SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MAAGEMET DISTRICT

Final Environmental Assessment:

Proposed Amended Rule 1144 – Vanishing Oil s 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) f or Proposed Amended Rule (PAR) 1144 – Metalworking Fluids and Direct-Contact Lubricant s. The Draft EA was released for a 30-day public review and comment period from F ebruary 16, 2010, to March 17, 2010. Five comment letters were received from the public; howeve r, only one of the comment

letters addressed the Draft EA. The comment letter that addr essed the Draft EA and response to comments are included in Appendix C. The other comment letters th at 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 am es Subsequent to the release of the Draft EA for public review, PAR 1144 was modif ied:

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

.

• The January 1, 2015, VOC content limit requirement of 50 grams per lit er for metalworking fluids was removed;

• The metalworking fluids category has been split into four sub-c ategories: metal forming, metal removal, metal treating and metal protecting. The rust inhibitor category requirements (general and military specified preservative) have been pla ced under the new metal protecting category.

• The military specified preservative sub-sub-category VO C 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 Januar y 1, 2012, has been applied to the metal protecting sub-category; metal forming sub-c ategory; and metal removal subcategory, general sub-sub-categories;

• The VOC content for the precision metal removal sub-sub-categ ory under the metal removal category would have a 130 gram per liter VOC content limit, eff ective January 1, 2012, which is the same VOC content limit as the metalworking fluid c ategory circulated in the Draft EA; and

• The direct-contact lubricant interim VOC content limit of 70 gra ms 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 wi th quality assurance and quality control procedures conducted using SCAQMD Additional Requirement s to ASTM Standard Test Method E 1868-10 for Metalworking Fluids and Direct-Contac t Lubricants; or SCAQMD Method 319-10 Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Metalworking Fluids and Lubricants by Thermogravimetry; or the option t o use either ASTM E 1868-10 with quality assurance and quality control procedures conducte d using SCAQMD Additional Requirements to ASTM Standard Test Method E 1868-10 for Metal working Fluids and Direct-Contact Lubricants or SCAQMD Method 319-10. The Gove rning 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 cutt ing 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 environment al 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 issue s 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 industr y standards. The proposed 50 grams per liter limits effective in January 2015 were wit hdrawn 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 tre nds.

An exemption has been added to allow the use of dimethyl carbonate (DMC) as a cooling solvent in computerized numerically controlled (CNC) machines where perm eable 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 bui lding.

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 w ater-soluble or vegetable-based oils to comply with PAR 1144. However, the sales weighted average V OC content for direct-contact lubricants is 25 grams per liter; therefore, based on the sal es weighted average VOC content, it is likely that currently used direct-contact lubricants currentl y comply with the proposed VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter. Since existing direct-c ontact lubricants already comply with the proposed final VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter, no incremental environmental impacts are expected. Therefore, previous impacts evaluate d from reformulation of directcontact lubricants in the Draft EA circulated for public review no long er apply.

Adverse toxic air contaminant (TAC) emission impacts were p resented 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 ref ormulation would be needed to comply with direct-contact lubricant requirements in PAR 1144, the re would be no increase in triethanolamine and monoethanolamine and, therefore, no adverse TAC impact s. 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 nap hthenic oils with heavier naphthenic oils. Replacing light naphthenic oils with heavier naphth enic oils in metalworking fluids was evaluated in the draft EA. Both light and heavy napht henic oils are supplied from the same refinery in Bakersfield, California. Since heavier naphth enic oils would be transported in the same quantities from the same refinery in Bakersfield, Ca lifornia; the environmental impacts from replacement of light naphthenic oils with heavier naphthenic oi ls would be the same. Therefore, it was concluded that there would be no incremental envi ronmental impacts from replacing light naphthenic oils with heavier naphthenic oils in t he Draft EA. Consequently, the conclusion in the draft EA would be the same (i.e., no incremental incr ease in potential environmental impacts).

The draft EA evaluated increased environmental impacts (air qual ity and energy from rail car transportation) from replacing naphthenic oils in metalworking fl uids with paraffinic oils produced in Richmond, California and Texas. In the metalworking fluid c ategory, excluding general metal protecting fluids, the proposed final VOC conte nt limit has been modified to 75 grams per liter instead of 50 grams per liter. Based up on available VOC content data, it is expected that the 75 grams per liter VOC content limit can b e 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 applic able. Since heavier naphthenic oils would continue to be transported in the same quantities from the same refinery in Bakersfield, California; the environmental impacts from replace ment 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 p ermeable media are used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in place during c utting, because the company that has a CNC machine stated that dimethyl carbonate was t he only solvent found that can replace the currently used denatured ethyl alcohol and meet both t he VOC limits under PAR 1144 and performance requirements needed by facility operators.

A comment letter was received on this exemption that was conce rned about health risk to on-site workers, because the CNC machine is currently vented into the room w here it is housed. The commenter asked that health risks to the workers be analyzed. He alth risks to occupational workers could not be directly analyzed, because occupational heal th values have not been published by a regulatory agency. Therefore, to address this iss ue 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 c ooling solvent in computerized numerically controlled (CNC) machines where permeable media a re used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in place during cutting. Because of the capi tal cost of this type of CNC machines, it is not believed that another such machine would be instal led either at the affected

## Final Environmental Assessment: Preface

PAR 1144 iv June 2010 

# facility or at any other facility. The existing CNC machi ne is enclosed, but would need an exhaust fan to discharge the exhaust air from the equipment out of t he building. The installation of ducting is not expected to require heavy duty construction equipment so no adverse construction impacts are expected. OEHHA has established inte rim acute and chronic reference exposure level (REL) values of 18,000 and 5,500 micrograms per cubic m eter respectively for DMC. EPA has developed a unit risk factor for carcinogenic h ealth risk of 1E-6 cubic meters per microgram for methanol that is under public review. Sinc e DMC can be metabolized into methanol, a carcinogenic health risk can be estimated for the max imum 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 recept ors. 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 me thanol concentration modeled at a worker receptor was estimated to be 3.3 in one mi llion, 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, whic h is less than the significance threshold of 10 in one million. The health risk from DMC would be the only health risk fr om the proposed project, because no other health effects were identified from P AR 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 r evision 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 measure s 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 adde d after circulation of the EA which are not required by CEQA and do not create new significant environment al 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 meta l 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 imp acts or increase the severity of any existing impacts.

Other Minor Changes to PAR 1144 Definitions for metal forming fluid, metal protecting fluid, meta l removal fluid, metal treating fluid, and precision metal removal fluid have been added. A requirement for metalworking fluid/direct-contact lubricant manufacturers/suppliers to sub mit an annual quantity and emissions report for fluids subject to the rule sold within the district be ginning 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 categori es 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 t on per day. Reformulation or replacement of existing metalworking fluids and di rect-contact lubricants was identified as the component of the proposed project generating pot entially significant adverse secondary environmental impacts analyzed in the Draft EA circula ted for public review. Modifications made to PAR 1144 subsequent to the release of the Dra ft EA for public review, result in less reformulation or replacement of existing metal working 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 ve rsion of PAR 1144 revised after the draft EA was released for public comment. The replacem ent 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 e nvironmental 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 fa n discharges the exhaust air from the equipment out of the building. Health risk were evalu ated for this exemption and found to be less than significant.

Therefore, the changes to PAR 1144 after the draft EA was re lease for public comment would have fewer or less significant environmental impacts than those p resented in the draft EA. No new adverse impacts would be introduced by these proposed chang es. 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 s ignificant, no new or additional mitigation would be required. Therefore, the proposed chan ges to PAR 1144 are not considered a “substantial revision” under CEQA Guidelines §15073.5 (b) a nd 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 1977 1 

# as the agency responsible for developing and enforcing air p ollution control rules and regulations in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) a nd portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin and Mojave Desert Air Basin (collectively known as t he “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 standa rds for the district 2 

# . Furthermore, the SCAQMD must adopt rules and regulations that carry out the AQMP 3 

# . 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 nat ional ambient air quality standards for ozone, particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 mi crons 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 great est 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 adop ted establishing VOC content limits for vanishing oils and rust inhibitors used during meta lworking 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 metalworki ng 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 bro aching, drilling, drawing, heading, honing, forging, milling, stamping, tapping, threading and turning operat ions.

While EPA Method 24 is the default method for determining VOC content , it is unreliable for semi-volatile materials typically found in lubricants and met alworking fluids. During the rule development process for Rule 1144, it was decided not to include limi ts 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 antici pated. With development of the TGA, method VOC content can be established for these widely used f luids, 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 requirem ents. In addition, if approved, the

1 

## The Lewis-Presley Air Quality Management Act, 19 76 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-E mission Reduction from Lubricants in the 2007 Air Quality Management Plan.

The proposed amended rule would add VOC content limits for two new sub-metal working 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 inhibitormetal 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 ha s 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). SCA QMD 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 Regulat ory 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 Age ncy has certified the regulatory program. SCAQMD's regulatory program was certified by th e 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 impac ts 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 inte nt 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, decis ion makers and the general public with information on the environmental effects of the propos ed project; and, (b) be used as a tool by decision makers to facilitate decision making on the proposed proje ct.

SCAQMD’s review of the proposed project shows that the prop osed 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 environment al impacts.

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

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

comment letters addressed the Draft EA. The comment letter t hat addressed the Draft EA and response to comments are included in Appendix C. The other comment le tters 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 in dustrial metalworking facilities located throughout the SCAQMD’s jurisdiction. The SC AQMD has jurisdiction over an area of 10,473 square miles, consisting of the four-county South Coast Ai r 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 Ba sin, which is a subarea of the district, is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabrie l, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east. The 6,745 square-mile Basin i ncludes all of Orange County and the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Ber nardino counties. The Riverside County portion of the SSAB and MDAB is bounded by the S an Jacinto Mountains in the west and spans eastward up to the Palo Verde Valley. T he 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 ea stern 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 contr ol 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 ass ist the SCAQMD’s efforts to attain and maintain applicable national and state ambient air qua lity standards. The proposed amended rule would achieve additional VOC emission reductions by adding V OC 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-metal working fluid categories: metal forming, metal removal, metal t reating;

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; requirin g record keeping of affected working fluid; and revising the test method used to determine V OC content.

PROJECT BACKGROUD In March 2009, Rule 1144 was adopted establishing VOC content limi ts for vanishing oils and rust inhibitors used during metalworking and metal-forming operat ions. Vanishing oils and solvent cutback rust inhibitors consist entirely or nearly entire ly of mineral spirit type solvents. While they are a significant source of VOC emissions, they rep resent 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 c utback rust inhibitors, metalworking fluids and lubricants mainly consist of semi-volati le compounds for which a reliable VOC content test method was not available by the Ma rch 2009 rule adoption date. However, recently a thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) method wa s developed and validation is anticipated . With the development of the TGA method VOC content limits can b e established for these widely used fluids, facilitating the inclusion of direc t-contact lubricants and metalworking fluids into Rule 1144.

Over 7,200 facilities, predominantly small businesses, use vanishing oi ls, direct-contact lubricants, metalworking fluids or rust inhibitors in the South Coas t Air Basin. Affected facilities are classified as fabricated metal product m anufacturing [North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code 332], machinery manufacturi ng (NAICS 333), transportation equipment manufacturing (NAICS 336), and petroleum and coal products manufacturing (NAICS 324) sectors in the AQMD. Typical industri es 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 fr iction to prolong the life of industrial tools used at affected facilities, to improve product qua lity, 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” par ts. If the depth of the formed cup is equal to or greater than the radius of the cup, the process is called de ep 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 frequentl y used to produce fasteners such as bolts and screws without adding heat.

• Honing - Manufacture of precision bores to improve the geometry, s urface finish and dimensional control of the finished part.

• Forging - Shaping metal by using localized compressive forc es. Cold forging is done at room temperature or near room temperature. Hot forging is done a t a high temperature, which makes metal easier to shape and less likely to fracture. Common forgi ng processes include: roll forging, swaging, cogging, open-die forging, impre ssion-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 workpie ce move relative to each other, generating a toolpath along which material is removed.

• Rust Preventative/Inhibitor - Prevention of corrosion on ferrous materi als 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 pipeline s

• Threading - Thread cutting and thread rolling applications for pipes and b olts

• 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 mi xtures of a base material (oil), and emulsifiers, anti-weld agents, corrosion inhibitors, extreme pre ssure additives, buffers (alkaline reserve), biocides, as well as other additives. The base material may be naphthenic, paraffinic or synthetic. Some products contain extreme pressu re (EP) additives containing chlorinated, sulfurized, or phosphorus-type extreme pressure ingredient s. There are numerous formulations, ranging from straight oils (such as naphthenic and par affinic petroleum oils) to water-dilutable fluids, which include soluble oils and semi-synthet ic/synthetic fluids. In general, higher oil content provides better lubricity while higher wate r 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 perc ent to 30 percent), more emulsifiers, and 30 percent to 50 percent wat er. The concentrate is further diluted with 10 to 40 parts water.

• Synthetic fluids contain no petroleum oils and may be water soluble or water dispersibl e. 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 I nstitute for Research and Technical Assistance to identify, test and demonstrate altern ative low-VOC materials for vanishing oils and rust inhibitors. The final report, entitled Asse ssment, Development and Demonstration of Alternatives to VOC-Emitting Lubricants, Vanis hing 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 faci lities participated in the study that reviewed stamping, honing, cutting, forming and rust inhibitor applica tions. In each high-VOC application, a low-VOC alternative was demonstrated to have equiva lent performance. Some of the participants found that their cost increased with the alterna tives, 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, Dir ectContact Lubricants, Metalworking Fluids and Rust Inhibitors to Meta lworking Fluids and DirectContact Lubricants.

Purpose and Applicability (Subdivisions (a) and (b)) The purpose and applicability of the rule would be expanded to incl ude 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 p laced 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 widel y used metalworking and metal-forming

fluids.

Metal forming and metal treating have been added to the example s of metalworking in the applicability section. Blanking, coining, marquenching, piercing a nd 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, me tal removing fluid, metal treating fluid, military specified preservative, precision metal removing fl uid, super compliant material and working fluid would be added. Reducing heat has been r emoved 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 m etals, 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 emulsif iable oils in the definition of metalworking fluid. The definition of rust inhibitor has been replac ed with metal protecting fluid. Vanishing oil was defined as a direct-contact lubricant, m etalworking 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 inc lude direct-contact lubricants and metalworking fluids. Where “vanishing oils and rust inhibitors” were named in general terms, they have been replaced with “metal working fluids and direct-contact lubricants .” Table A has been expanded to add new VOC content limits for direct-conta ct lubricants and metalworking fluids. The direct-contact VOC content limit would b e 70 grams per liter ef fective January 1, 2012, and then reduce to 50 grams per liter effective January 1, 2015 2012 . The metal working fluid VOC content limit would be 130 grams per liter eff ective 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 spe cific 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 remova l. 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 J anuary 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 p rotecting fluid rust
inhibitor VOC content limit would retain the current VOC limit of 300 gra ms per liter, and then would drop to 50 grams per liter effective January 1, 2012. The mil itary specified preservative metal protecting fluid rust inhibitor would not have a VOC content limit until January 1,

2011 2012 , 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 exis ting rule states that the prohibition of sale shall not apply to any manufacturer or suppli er provided the product was sold to an independent distributor that was informed in writing by the ma nufacturer about the compliance status of the product with Rule 1144. The language has be en 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-contac t 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 th e requirements as presented in section (d) Requirements, a person ma y operate an emission control system. The language has been changed to state that a pe rson 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 wi th the SCAQMD Executive Officer. A new requirement has been added that states for ea ch calendar year beginning with 2011 and continuing with each subsequent calendar year until 2013, a metal working fluid or direct-contact lubricant manufacturer or supplier would need to su bmit to SCAQMD by April 1 of the following calendar year, an annual quantity and emissions rep ort for the products subject to the rule sold within the district. The report format would need t o 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 R ule 109 and state that vanishing oils and rust inhibitors that contain 50 grams of VOC per liter of mat erial or less are considered super compliant materials per Rule 109 (b)(6). PAR 1144 would move the defi nition of super compliant materials to the definitions subdivision (c) of PAR 1144. PAR 1144 would repl ace the reference to Rule 109 recordkeeping requirements with rule-spec ific (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 p urchased 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 t he stationary source if applicable. The working fluid VOC list would need to include the ma nufacturer, 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 up dated within seven calendar days from receipt of a new working fluid at the facility. The owne r/ 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 a mount 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 a mount of working fluid used at the facility including, but not limited to: purchase records ident ifying 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 a ddress 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-c ontact lubricants shall maintain records to verify data used to determine VOC content i n preparing their annual quantity and emissions report. The records would be required to be maintai ned for five years and made available upon request. Such records would include laboratory reports or VOC c alculations.

Test Methods and Procedures (Subdivision (h)) PAR 1144 would remove the requirement for the use of USEPA Referenc e 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 approve d 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 Require ments 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 (VO C) 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 usi ng SCAQMD Additional Requirements to ASTM Standard Test Method E 1868-10 for Metal working 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 Thermogr avimetry with quality assurance and quality control procedures conducted using SCAQMD Additional Requi rements to ASTM Standard Test Method E 1868-10 for Metalworking Fluids and Direct -Contact Lubricants; or SCAQMD Method 319-10 Determination of Volatile Orga nic 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 “metalw orking 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” us ed at facilities whose owners or operators demonstrate that total permitted and non-permitte d 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 t he 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 r ule 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 prepare d 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 distrib utors.

## 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 l ocated 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 (includi ng 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 metalw orking fluids or cleaning. The sales weighted average VOC content was determined using T GA robustness testing and TGA simulation analysis. Solvents used for cleaning applications s ubject 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 t ons per day from lubricants, low-VOC metalworking fluids, and vanishing oils. An additi onal 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 bel ow in Table 1-3.

4 

## .ILMA, Comments of the Independent Lubricant Manufa cturers Association (ILMA) on ‘Metalworking Fluids: Summary of Nomination for Review: NTP 12th Report o n Carcinogens, September 2003 Submitted by Report o n Carcinogens Group, NIEHS’, www.ilma.org/about/ntp_c omments.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/compli ance/resources/publications/assistance/sectors/note books/

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 Low

VOC 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 Low

VOC 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 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 gram s per liter of material for metalworking fluids effective January 1, 2012. Nearly 90 percent of metalworki ng 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 us ed that have low VOC contents according to the applicable test methods. The remaining fluids a re 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 spindl e 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 medi um oils were more expensive at the time. Decreased demand for medium oils, because repla cement of medium oils in electric transformers unrelated to Rule 1144 and PAR 1144, has leveled the pric es 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-conta ct lubricants have traditionally been formulated with heavier petroleum oils or wat er soluble, semi-synthetic and

## Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 1

PAR 1144 1-13 June 2010 

# synthetic compounds with relatively low VOC content. Because direc t-contact lubricants that meet the proposed amended rule limit are currently used, refo rmulation is not expected to be required to reduce emissions; however, it is possible that operat ors would move to more water

dilutable or vegetable

- based lubricants

.

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

The final V OC 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 sub stitution. Many paraffinic and synthetic PAR 1144 compliant direct-contact lubricants and metalworking fluids are availab le and in use today. Paraffinic base material costs approximatel y ten percent more than a naphthenic base material and in many cases the current pract ice of using naphthenic oils may strictly be based on cost. The market share of direct

- contact lubricants and metalw orking fluids that meet the proposed final VOC limit is approximately 44 percent.

However, substantial obstacles may need to be overcome to compl etely transition away from naphthenic oils. Some fluids are specifically formulated for a particular operati on and may contain a complex blend of additives. As some additives are not rea dily soluble in paraffinic oils, substantial reformulation may be necessary. Overall p erformance 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 bett er compatibility with machinery and parts. However, in some cases a loss of a key additive because of its insolubility in para ffinic oil

could ad versely impact desired performance. The types of parts impacted by this proposa l 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 refor mulation, 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 meta lworking 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 militar y 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 pre servatives offer products with VOC content below the proposed 340 grams per liter limit. This pro posed 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 Me thod 24 (Method 24) or the equivalent SCAQMD Method 303 (Determination of Exempt Compounds), be us ed to estimate the VOC content of affected fluids. During rule development, it w as 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-vol atile 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 degr ees Celsius for 110 minutes was submitted for approval by ASTM International. If approve d, this test method would be required to be used to determine VOC content in PAR 1144. Otherwise, S CAQMD Method 319-10 Determination of Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) in Metalworki ng Fluids and Lubricants by Thermogravimetry would be used.

ASTM E1868

– 09 Standard Test Method for Loss

- On

- Drying by Thermogravimetry was

deve loped 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 stab ilize at 115 degrees Celsius. The extended test was performed but the results diff ered significantly from the short term test. Additionally, manufacture r s 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 sum med. This method is currently undergoing validation testing and may be included at a later dat e

.

# 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 identi fy a project's potential adverse environmental impacts. This checklist identifies and eva luates 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 W orking 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 Distric t

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) wi th 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 det ermine their potential to be affected by the proposed project. As indicated by the checkl ist 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 f ound 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 m ade 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 significa nt effect on the environment, there will NOT be significant effects in this cas e because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the p roject proponent. An ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT with no significant impacts will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effec t(s) on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially sig nificant impact" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately anal yzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) ha s been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysi s 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 significa nt effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) ha ve been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pu rsuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, including revisions or mit igation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing furt her 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 r educe VOC emissions from these products. The proposed amended rule would accomplish th ese 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 fluid s ; 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 metalwor king fluids and revising the test method used to determine VOC content. The proposed amended rule would a ffect 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, napht henic 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 lit er , 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 replacem ent 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 af fect naphthenic oils. Light oils are low viscosity naphthenic oils used in older high sp eed 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 wate r. 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 m etal 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 oil s are expected to be replaced with paraffinic oils,

water

- dilutable oils or vegetable

- based oils. Paraffinic oils provide better lu bricity, greater oxidation resistance, more water resistance and better compat ibility 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. Mil itary specified rust preservatives at the proposed VOC limit are currently in use.

PAR 1144 is expected to result in facility owners/operators i nitially 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 expect ed 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 l ength of transportation. Based on the sales weighted average VOC content, it is expe cted 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 lubr icants. 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 replacem ent and reformulated oils would be compatible with existing metalworking processes. There fore, no additional construction or equipment replacement is expected.

PAR 1144 includes an exemption that would allow the use of DMC as a c ooling solvent in computerized numerically controlled (CNC) machines where permea ble media are used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in place during cutting , be cause the company that has a CNC machine stated that dimethyl carbonate was the only solve nt 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 othe r facilities were identified that use a CNC machine where permeable media are used to maintai n a vacuum that holds the part in place during cutting. Since the exemption applies only to affec ted 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 conce rned about health risk to on-site workers, because the CNC machine is currently vented into the room w here it is housed. The commenter asked that health risks to the workers be analyzed. He alth risks to occupational workers could not be directly analyzed, because occupational heal th values have not been published by a regulatory agency. Therefore, to address this iss ue 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 w here permeable media are used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in place during cutti ng. Because of the capital cost of this type of CNC machines, it is not believed that another suc h 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 i s 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 exp ected 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 expe cted 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 signif icant 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 pro ject 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 conte nt 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 exi sting structures, there would be no change to the visual character of the existing setting at an y of the 7,000 existing affected facilities. For the same reason, PAR 1144 is not expected to adver sely affect scenic vistas or substantially damage scenic resources.

Additional light or glare would not be created which would adversely a ffect day or nighttime views in the area since no light generating equipment would be required to comply w ith the VOC content requirements of the proposed amended rule. Similarly, the p roposed 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 re quired.

## 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 ofthe 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 consider ed significant if any of the following conditions are met:

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

contracts.

- The proposed project will convert prime farmland, unique farmland or far mland of statewide importance as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the farmland mapping and monit oring program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use.

- The proposed project would involve changes in the existing environment, which due t o 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 modificat ions to buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed VOC conte nt 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 agr icultural 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 industri al 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 necessa ry 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 – Emis sion Reductions from Lubricants. The proposed amended rule would accompl ish these objectives by adding VOC content limits for two new metalworking fluid categori es: 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 metalwor king fluids and revising the test method used to determine VOC content. Since PAR 1144 would fully imple ment 2007 AQMP control measure CTS-01, it would not conflict with or obstruct impl ementation 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 standa rds 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 (BAAQ MD), 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 Co ntrol District (SBCAPCD), San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) and Ventura County Air Pollution Control Dist rict (VCAPCD) . For this reason, air quality significance criteria used by SCAQMD a nd other affected air districts are provid ed. To determine whether or not air quality impacts from adopting and i mplementing the proposed amendments are significant, impacts are evaluated and compared t o 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 t hresholds 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 S CAQMD 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 standa rds:

0.10 ppm (federal) 0.03 ppm (state)

PM10 24-hour average annual geometric average

annual arithmetic mean 10.4 μ g/m 3 

## (recommended for construction) b 

## & 2.5 μ g/m 3 

## (operation)

1.0 μ g/m 3



## 20 μ g/m 3



## Sulfate
24-hour average 1 ug/m 3



## 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 standa rds:

20 ppm (state) 9.0 ppm (state/federal)

a 

## Ambient air quality thresholds for criteria polluta nts based on SCAQMD Rule 1303, Table A-2 unless oth erwise stated.

b 

## Ambient air quality threshold based on SCAQMD Rule 403.

KEY: lb/day = pounds per day ppm = parts per million ug/m 3 

### = microgram per cubic meter ≥ greater than or equal toFinal Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2PAR 11442-10June 2010Table 2-2Other Air DistrictOperationalAir Quality Significance ThresholdsBAAQMDKCAPCDMBUAPCDMDAQMDSBCAPCDSJVAPCDSLOCAPCDVCAPCDPollutantSignificance ThresholdMax.Daily(lb/day)Annual(ton/yr)Max.Daily(lb/day)Annual(ton/yr)Max.Daily(lb/day)Annual(ton/yr)MaxDaily(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)ROG8015N/A25137N/A13725240N/AN/A1025*2525N/ANOx8015N/A25137N/A13725240N/AN/A1025*2525N/ASOxN/AN/A27150N/A13725N/A0.04 ppm (24-houravg.);0.25 ppm (1-houraverage)N/AN/APM108015N/A1582N/A821580N/AN/A2525N/APM2.5noneN/AN/A8215N/AN/AN/A**N/AN/ACO9.0 ppm (8-houraverage);20.0 ppm (1-houraverage)N/A550N/A548100none9.0 ppm (8-houraverage);20.0 ppm (1-houraverage)550N/A9.0 ppm (8-houraverage);20.0 ppm (1-houraverage)TACCancer 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 dayton/yr = tons per yearppm = 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,

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

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

and rust inhibitors . Based on discussions with industry, SCAQMD staff expects that replacement and reformulated oils would be compatible with ex isting 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 nece ssary for owners/operators to use replacement or reformulated direct-cont act lubricants, metalworking

fluids and rust inhibitors.

The exemption for DMC usage would require that the facility ope rators at the affected facility duct the CNC machine to outside the facility. The CNC machine woul d 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 generat ed by existing routine

maintenance.

As explained in the following subsection construction emissions rel ated to installing control equipment are not anticipated because control equipment are not ex pected 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 reformulat e metalworking

fluids is similar to the costs of existing metalworking fluids or dire ct-contact lubricants and no control equipment was installed to comply with Rule 1144 1114 ; no control equipment is expected to be installed to comply with PAR 1144. Since the incre ased use of control equipment is considered unlikely, it is expected that there would be no emiss ions 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 yearfrom lubricants, lowVOC metalworking fluids, and vanishing oils. An additional 0.71 ton per ye ar was expected to be reduced by January 1, 2012 from rust inhibitors.

PAR 1144 would establish new categories and VOC limits for direc t-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 t he 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 inhib itors 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 w eighted average VOC content (existing VOC content), proposed VOC content, percent reducti on 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 comp ly with the interim limi t. No Since the sales weight average VOC content limit is 25 gram s 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 expect ed from direct-contact

lubricants. Compliance with final VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter , eff ective 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 fu ture 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 0.0 2 tons per day

, which is 4 0 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 comprise d of four sub-categories: metal forming, metal removal, metal treating and metal protec ting. 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 w ith 60 SUS naphthenic oils to comply with the interim VOC content limit. Compliance with the final VOC content limi t 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 oil s or vegetable

- based oil s ar e preferred by owners/operators because they cost less than paraffinic oils ; however, paraffinic oil c ould likely be used because it provides better performance than water

dilutable and vegetable

- based oils. The new metalworking fluids VOC content limit i s 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 meta lworking fluids and 0.34 from replacing light with heavy naphthenic oil-based precision met al removal fluids ) per day, which is 1,58 0 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 inhibitor s metal protecting fluids at 300 grams per liter. Rule 1144 included an exemption for rust inhibi tors used in association with a military specification, military standard, Department of Def ense 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 VO C 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 preservative s 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 p reservatives 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 inh ibitors metal protecting fluids (i.e., nonmilitary specified rust preservatives) would remain the sam e 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 2-2 3 ) that would benefit air quality.

Table 2-2 3 also includes the VOC emission reductions foregone from establishi ng the new military specified preservative with a higher VOC content l imit than it was subject to when it was under the previous rust inhibitor category; however, the foregon e 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, meta l 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 refo rmulated or replaced with heavy naphthenic oil-based metalworking fluids. N o 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 emiss ions 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 current ly comply with the

interim limit. No refor

mulation or replacement of direct

- contact lubrications is expected to be needed to meet the interim VOC content limit. The existing dire ct

- 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 weight ed average VOC content for direct-contact lubricants is 25 grams per liter, reformulati on 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-cont act 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 conte nt limit, some owners/operators that do not currently use future compliant mater ials are expected to need to reformulate or replace their existing direct

- con tent 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 small er quantities tha n existing lubricants. Water

- dilutable and vegetable

- based lubricants are expected to be supplied from the Midwest. Paraffinic

- based lubri cants are expected to be supplied from Texas or Richmond, California. All reformulated or replacement lubricants are expected to be delivered by rail. Since t he reformulated or replacement lubricants would be supplied from suppliers that are either equid istant 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 red

uctions were not quantified for this analysis.

Metal Protecting Fluids Rust Inhibitor PAR 1144 would establish a new VOC content limit for military specified pr eservatives effective January 1, 2012. Since existing military specified preservative s already comply with this proposed VOC content limit are available and in use, no change i n mode, distance or frequency

## Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2

PAR 1144 2-15 June 2010 

# of transportation of rust inhibitors are expected. Therefore, no addi tional 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 assume d 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 r eplace light naphthenic oils with medium naphthenic oils (60 SUS). The 40 SUS and 60 SUS naphthenic oi l are produced at the same facility in Bakersfield. Therefore, no changes in m ode, length or frequency of transportation are expected (i.e., no change in secondary emissions f rom 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, al l metal working fluid naphthenic oil users are expected to need reformulate d products or replac e to naphthenic oil s in metal working fluids with other types of compliant products . Water

- dilutable and vegetable

- based oil s are expected to be preferred becau se they are cost less than paraffinic

oil s . SCAQMD staff estimates that approximately 30 percent of na phthenic oil s may be replaced by water

- dilutable (20 percent) or vegetable

- based (10 percent) metal working fluids. Water

dilutable oil s would be shipped by rail from Cleveland, Ohio. Vegetable oil s 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 be fo re 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. Th e remaining 70 percent of naphthenic oil s are expected to be replaced by paraffinic oil s because they provide better performance then water

dilutable and vegetable

- based oils

. The replacement paraffinic oil would be shipped by rail from Richmond, Californ ia 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 Ri chmond, 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 fr om Barstow along the I

- 15 and I

10 through the district. Rail from out of state ( Texas, Iowa and Ohio ) would be expected to

travel from Arizon a 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 facto rs from the EMFAC2007 model.

D iesel trucks tr avel 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 r esults for each district or basin are compared to the applicable significance thresholds in effect in each air di strict or basin.

The ana lysis of rail transport included the following assumptions. Giv en 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 rai lcar. Further, the rail car transporting compliant products would be attached to a n existing train traveling to southern California. Therefore, rail emissions are the increment al emissions resulting from locomotives as a result of pulling a heavier load, i.e., one extra railcar.

Transport emissions in the district are b ased 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 t he 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 solv ents 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 replac ement solvents from Richmond,

California alon g 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 SR

99 route and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe SR

- 99 route travel from Cajon along I

- 15 and I

10 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 sa me refinery in Ri chmond, it was

assume d that only one car per day would be need to transport compliant materials to the district.

In both rail scenario s, it was also assumed that three rail car s would arrive from out of state: one

from Texas, one from Iowa and one from Oh io. The Union Pacific SR

- 99/ Burlington Northern

Santa Fe SR

- 99 route scenario was used for peak day emissions because it gene rated greater emissions (see Appendix B).

The difference between the emissions from the existing transpor tation of naphthenic oil metal working fluid and the emissions from the transportation of replaceme nt 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 para ffinic 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, be cause rail tankers are larger than truck tankers (resulti ng 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 c riteria e missions were estimated using EPA emission factors for locomotives

. E xisting emissions from naphthenic oil based metal working fluid s 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 whe re 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 Burling ton Northern

Santa Fe SR

- 99. Since all rail cars originate from the same refinery in Richmond, it was

assume d 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 st ate: 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, beca use it generated larger secondary criteria emissions (see Append ix 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

- 1 2 present the peak day and peak annual emissions in each air district and associated signi ficance thresholds. Tables 2

- 5

and 2

- 1 2 show that all secondary emissions are below the significance thr esholds for criteria pollut ants 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 ha zardous wastes. It is assumed that existing and proposed metalworking fluids would be disp osed 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 vol ume would be disposed of at the same hazardous waste treatment sites, there would be no incre ase 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 KCAP CD

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 MBUA PCD

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 M DAQMD

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 SBCA PCD

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 co mbined 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

- 1 2 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 GH Gs. However, mobile

sources used to deliver compliant product s during the operational phase are expected to generate

GHG emission s 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

met hane (CH4) emission factors. EMFAC2007 does not include nitrous oxide (N 2 O) 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 factor s 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 emissio ns are included in Appendix B

.

The analysis of GHGs is a much different analysis than the an alysis 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 exceedanc es of applicable ambient air quality standards. Further, several ambient air quality sta ndards 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-ter m, affecting global climate over a relatively long time frame. As a result, GHG emission impac ts 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 lubri cations 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 rai l. Therefore, direct-contact lubrication VOC content limits would not generate any secondary GHG emiss ions.

Compliance with the final VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter, effective Ja nuary 1, 2015, is also expected to be met by using existing direct

- contact lubricants. Although there are dire ct

contact lubricant available that currently comply with the 2015 VOC content limit, some owners/operators that do not currently use future compliant mater ials are expected to need to reformulate or replace their existing direct

- content lubricants. Propo sed 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 a t the metal working facility to dilute the concentrated lubricant before use) and, therefore; would be shipped in smaller quantities tha n existing lubricants. Water

- dilutable and vegetable

- based lubricants are expected to be supplied from the Midwest. Paraffinic

- based lubricants are expected to b e supplied from Texas or Richmond, California. All reformulated or replacement lubricants are expected to be delivered by rail. Since t he reformulated or replacement lubricants would be supplied from suppliers that are either equidistant or ne arer than e xisting 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 pr eservatives effective January 1, 2012. Since existing military specified preservative s that already comply with this proposed VOC content limit are available and in use, no change i n 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 assume d 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 ar e produced at the same facility in Bakersfield. Therefore, no changes in mode, leng th or frequency of transportation are expected (i.e., no change in secondary emissions f rom 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 met al naphthenic oil based metal working fluid users are expected to need reformulate d materials or to replace naphthenic oil s in metal working fluids with compliant products . Water

- dilutable and

## Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2

PAR 1144 2-23 June 2010 

# vegetable

- based oil s are expected to be preferred because they cost less than paraffinic oil s

. SCAQMD staff estimates that approximately 30 percent of t he naphthenic oil may be replaced by water

- dilutable (20 percent) or vegetable

- based (10 percent) metal working fluids. Water

dilutable 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, Cali fornia 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 Ri chmond, California. Rail from Richmond, California would be expected to travel along on e 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 Nort hern Santa Fe SR

- 99 route travel along the SR

- 99 from northern California to Bakersfield, from Bakersfield to Bars tow, 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, C alifornia

. 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 a n incremental increase of 0.53 metric ton of CO2 emissions per year. An

incr emental increase of 0.53 ton per year of CO2 emissions is less than the signifi cance threshold

of 10 ,000 metric tons of CO2 eq 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 contr ol 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 imp acts.

Table 2

- 1 3

Annual CO2 Emission Reducti ons Resulting from PAR 1144

Description CO2 Emissions,

metric ton s per y ea r 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 sub category with a higher VOC content limit than is currently the case, PAR 1144 would forego previously e xpected VOC reductions; however, PAR 1144 as a whole would result in overall VOC reductions. PA R 1144 would not generate any direct emissions. Secondary emissions are not ex pected from PAR 1144 from the

difference in mode , frequency and distance of transport to deliver existing and exp ected replacement fluids are less than the operational significanc e thresholds in Table s 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 signif icant. Also, implementing all SCAQMD rules (including PAR 1144) is expecte d to result in overall emission

reductions.

Since PAR 1144 would result in a VOC emissions reduction, it would not viol ate any air quality standard; contribute to an existing or projected air quality viola tion; 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 emissi ons 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 over all 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 reformulat ed direct-contact lubricants, metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors may contain TACs. Therefore , the use of replacement or reformulated direct-contact lubricants, metalworking fluids and r ust inhibitors may increase health risks to nearby receptors.

Indirect sources would include emission from diesel trucks or relate d to rail cars used to transport both existing and replacement or reformulated direct-c ontact lubricants, metalworking

fluids and rust inhibitors.

Direct-contact Lubricants Owner/operators are expected to already comply with the int erim 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 lubri cant 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 re formulate or replace their existing direct

content lubricants. Water

- dilutable and vegetable

- based direct

- contact lubricants may contain

triethanolamine and monoethanolamine. Health risks from increase used of triethanolamine and

monoethanolamine are eva luated 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 a vailable 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 expecte d 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 l iter, effective, January 1, 2015, is expected to be met by reformulated or replacement oils (par affinic oil s , water

- diluta ble oil s or vegetable oil s ). Water

- dilutable oil s or vegetable

- based oil s are preferable because of the cost; however, paraffinic oil s would likely be used because they provide better performance than

water

- dilutable and vegetable

- based oils. Water

- dilut able and vegetable

- based direct

- contact lubricants may contain triethanolamine and monoethanolamine. Health risks from increase used of triethanolamine and monoethanolamine are evaluated below. Naphtheni c and paraffinic oils may contain additives that ha ve 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; there fore, 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 comput ed 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 ident ified that currently uses such a machine. The exemption applies only to affected machines existi ng at the time of the adoption of PAR 1144 and requires that the facility operators vent the mac hine out of the building. Since the CNC machine would be enclosed and vented out of the building, ther e would be no health risk from DMC to the workers. Off-site receptors would be exp osed to the emissions vented outside of the building; therefore, health risk was estimated for the off-sit e receptors.

Interim Health Risk Health Risk Values The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment has develop ed interim non-carcinogenic acute and chronic reference exposure level (REL) values of 18,000 and 5,5 00 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 va lue 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 Ex posure to Dimethyl Carbonate, a Chemical Petitioned for Exemption from VOC Rules, memo from Richard Corey t o 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 thes e 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 accordin g 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 a ffected facility. The nearest off-site worker receptor is within 25 meters. Worst-case poi nt 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 ma ximum 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 w ould 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 m ethanol. The DMC would be vented at ambient temperature from a 37 foot high, ei ght inch diameter stack at a flow rate of 300 cubic feet per minute. The building is L-sha ped 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 s urrounding the facility. Central Los Angeles meteorological data was used. A maximum DMC conc entration of 24.9 micrograms per cubic meter was estimated at a worker rec eptor on the southwest fence line of the affected facility. A maximum DMC concentration 3.1 microgra ms per cubic meter was estimated at a residential receptor to the south of the affected facili ty.

The stoichiometric rate of dimethyl carbonate to methanol is t wo-to-one (two moles of methanol are formed from each mole of dimethyl carbonate) based on the degradation f ormula:

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 me thanol by its molecular weight of 32 grams per mole. So for every gram of dimethyl carbonate 0.71 gra ms of methanol would be

formed.

(1 gram C3H6O3)/(90 gram C3H6O3/mole C3H6O3) x (2 mole CH3OH/mole C3H 6O3) x (32 gram CH3OH/mole CH3OH) = 0.71 gram CH3OH

To estimate the exposure to DMC that has metabolized into metha nol, the maximum modeled DMC concentration of 24.9 micrograms per cubic meter at a wo rker was multiplied by 0.71 to yield an effective methanol concentration of 17.7 micrograms per c ubic meter. The maximum methanol concentration for a resident would be 2.2 micrograms per cubic met er.

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 class ified 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 max imum carcinogenic health risk at a residential receptor was estimated to be 2.1 in one m illion (302 liters per kilogram-day breathing rate, of 350 days per year exposure frequency and ex posure 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 gener ate significant carcinogenic

health risk.

Chlorinated Paraffins Evaluation

Both n Naphthenic and paraffinic metalworking fluids may contain additives with chlorinated paraffins. On January 19, 2010, EPA released a short-chain chlorinated p araffins (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 ti me to higher levels and cause significant adverse impacts on the environment. EPA intends to furt her evaluate whether medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (MCCPs) and long-chain chlorinated paraffins (LCCPs) also should be addressed. These chemicals appear to present similar c oncerns, although data on them are not as comprehensive as data on SCCPs.

PAR 1144 is designed to reduce VOC emissions from affected opera tions, but is not directly designed to reduce TACs. However, to the extent VOCs used in aff ected 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, PA R 1144 does not limit the use of low- or non-VOC additives directly. PAR 1144 controls VOC emissions by estab lishing VOC content limits for metalworking fluids, which include components such a s 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 oil s

- based or vegetable oil

based metalworking fluids. Replacing light naphthenic oils with hea vy 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 requir ed to comply with PAR 1144, no change in SCCP additives is expected. Therefore, no increase i n 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 woul d

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 met alworking 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 product s. 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 expect ed. 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 d irect

- contact lubricants

, and n aphthenic oils might be replaced with water

- dilutable oils or vegetable oils

.

Triethanolamine and m o noethanolamine 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 m o noethanolamine content in an identified potential alternative compliant metal working fluid was five percent. Triet hanolamine has been identified as causin g occupational asthma by the Association of Environmental and Occupational Heal th Clinics. The American Conference of Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Val ues (TLV) of five milligrams per cubic meter is associated with eye and skin irritation, and contact dermatitis

. The Cal/OSHA permissible exposure limit ( PE L) 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 ma le 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 a n ACGIH TLV of three ppm has been established to minimize skin and eye irritation in workers. The Cal/OSHA PEL is

a lso three ppm.

Cancer potency and reference exposure limits for triethanolamine and monoethanolamine have not been established by OEHHA. SCAQMD staff does not typical ly evaluate cancer and non

cancer health risks from chemicals that do not have cancer potency and reference exposure limits provided by OEHHA. A similar analysis to t he 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 a nalysis has been prepared for PAR 1144. It should be noted that SCAQMD staff does not normally evaluate health risks using t he following methodology because it is not consistent with SCAQMD HRA procedures in th e SCAQMD’s Risk

Assessment Procedures for Rul es 1401 and 212.

The largest amount of metal working fluid used at a single facil ity 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 recep tor could cause adverse health effects and would, therefore, be considered a significant adverse health impa ct.

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 t riethanolamine and three ppm

for monoethanolamine

.

Diesel Particulate Exhaust The same supplier that currently supplies the CNC machine op erator 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 replacem ents 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 w ere 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 th e 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 distr ict. In both scenarios, it was also

assumed that three ra il 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 mi le (see Appendix B) in those air districts.

Secondary TAC exposures were also evaluated from exposure to di esel 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 wi thin a quarter mile of a source.

Therefore

, the localized affected around a sensitive receptor would be a h alf mile (quarter mile on each side). There are three dist inct 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 Pacif ic 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 met ers).

The e xpected DPM emissions increase of 0. 0 4 pounds per year per half mile to any receptor along the rail route through SC AQMD 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 recept ors are n ot 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 identif ied 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 t hrough 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 solvent s is expected to be similar; and 3) the operations occur at facilities that are typically located in indust rial zones.

Conclusion Based on the preceding discussions, PAR 1144 is expected to reduce VO C 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 s een as benefits, and PAR 1144 would not cause an exceedance of any of the air quality significan ce 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. There fore, the proposed project is not expected to result in significant adverse cumulative impacts for any c riteria or GHG pollutant.

Thus, PAR 1144 is not expected to result in significant adverse a ir 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 an y of the following criteria apply:

- The project results in a loss of plant communities or animal habitat conside red 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 constructi on or operation of the project.

Discussion

IV.a), b), c), & d) PAR 1144 would not require any new development or require modificat ions to buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed VOC c ontent 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 m igratory corridors. For these same reasons, PAR 1144 is not expected to adversely affect special st atus plants, animals, or natural

communities.

IV.e) & f) PAR 1144 would not conflict with local policies or ordinances prote cting biological resources or local, regional, or state conservation plans becaus e 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 adop ted local policies, ordinances protecting biological resources, Habitat Conservation P lan, 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 p roject will have potential for any new adverse effects on wildlife resources or the habitat upon whi ch 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 r esources impacts are not anticipated and will not be further analyzed in this Dr aft Final EA. Since no significant adverse biological resources impacts were identified, no mitigation measures a re 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 hi storic archaeological site or a property of historic or cultural significance to a community or e thnic or social group.

- Unique paleontological resources are present that could be disturbed b y 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 modificati ons to buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed VOC c ontent 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 existi ng CNC machine to the outside. The construction would occur within a building at the affected facil ity 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 r esources. 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 a ny human remains.

## Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2

PAR 1144 2-34 June 2010 

# Based upon these considerations, significant adverse cultural re sources impacts are not expected from the implementing PAR 1144 and will not be further assessed i n this Draft Final EA. Since no significant adverse cultural resources impacts were identif ied, 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 resour ce supplies.

- An increase in demand for utilities impacts the current capacities of the e lectric and natural gas utilities.

- The project uses non-renewable resources in a wasteful and/or inefficie nt 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 an y way.

With the exception of requiring duct work to vent an existing CNC m achine to existing duct work, no construction is expected to comply with PAR 1144. The constru ction of the additional duct work is not expected to require gasoline or diesel-fueled c onstruction equipment. Any

## Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2

PAR 1144 2-35 June 2010 

# electricity usage is not expected to be greater than that us ed 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 t he 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 th at currently comply with the 2015 VOC content limit, some owners/operators that do not currently use future compliant mater ials are expected to need to reformulate or replace their existing direct

- content lubricants. Proposed project reformulated or repla cement 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 a t the metal working facility to dilute the concentrated lubricant b efore 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 t he reformulated or replacement lubricants would be supplied from suppliers that are either equidistant or ne arer than existing suppliers and

in lower vo lumes, 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 pr eservatives effective January 1, 2012. Since existing military specified preservative s already comply with this proposed VOC content limit are available and in use, no change i n mode, distance or frequency of transportation of rust inhibitors are expected. Therefore, no addi tional 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 assume d 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 rep laced by metalworking fluids with medium naphthenic oil (60 SUS). The 40 SUS and 60 SUS naphthe nic 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 emi ssions from transportation of naphthenic oil).

To comply with the final metal working fluid VOC content limit of 50 grams per liter, all naphthenic oil s in metal working fluids are expected to be reformulate d or replace d with paraffinic oil s, water

- dilutable oils or vegetable oils . Water

- dilutable oils and vegetable

- based

oil s are expected to be preferred because they are cost less than p araffinic oil s . SCAQMD staff estimates that approximately 30 percent of the naphthenic oil s may be replaced by water

dilutable (20 percent) or vegetable

- based (10 percent) metal working fluids. W ater

- dilutable

oil s would be shipped by rail from Cleveland, Ohio. Vegetable oil s would be shipped by rail from Des Moines, Iowa. The remaining 70 percent of the naphthenic oil s are expected to be replaced by paraffinic oil s . The replacement paraffinic oil s would be shipped by rail from in from Richmond, California or Texas. Based on cost, it was assumed that 30 percent of the paraffinic oil s would be shipped from Texas and 70 percent would be shipped from Richmond,

California. Rail from Richmond, Cal ifornia 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 Ba rstow, 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 transport ation 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 consump tion is not considered significant.

Table 2

- 14

Diesel Fuel C onsumption

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 w ith adopted energy conservation plans or standards; cause substantial depletion of existing energy resource supplies; increase demand for utilities, which would adversely impact the cu rrent capacities of the electric and natural gas utilities or use non-renewable resources in a wast eful 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 re sources 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 signific ant if any of the following criteria apply:

- Topographic alterations would result in significant changes, disru ptions, displacement, excavation, compaction or over covering of large amounts of soil.

- Unique geological resources (paleontological resources or unique outc rops) 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 a s 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 modificat ions to buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed VOC content limit s 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-r elated 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 expecte d to have an adverse impact on geology or soils. Since no significant adverse impacts are a nticipated, 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 r elated to operating policy and procedures concerning the design, construction, security, leak dete ction, 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 Emer gency Response Planning Guideline (ERPG) 2 levels.

VIII.a, b) c) & i) Hazardous properties of existing and replacement solvents w ere 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 e xplosive limits are one and 10 percent respectively. MSDSs for two existing fluids report ed lower and upper explosive limits between one and 10 percent and 0.7 and five percent. Vapor pressures a nd densities were typically listed as less than a certain value; therefore, com parison is difficult. Existing and proposed alternative fluids typically had Hazardous Material s Information System (HMIS) ratings of one for both health and flammability. Only a singl e alternative fluid had a HMIS rating of one for reactivity, while the MSDSs for all exis ting had a HMIS rating for reactivity of zero. Based on a review of MSDSs the hazardous properties of al ternative fluids are similar to existing fluids. A summary of the comparison of hazardous proper ties is included in Appendix

B.

Water-dilutable metalworking fluids may contain triethanolamine and monoethanolamine. Ethanolamine, commonly known as monoethanolamine is an organic chemical com pound that is a flammable, corrosive, colorless, viscous liquid with an odor simila r to that of ammonia. Monoethanolamine is produced by reacting ethylene oxide with aqueous amm onia, a reaction that produces triethanolamine. Based on a review of MSDSs of known aqueous metalworking fluids replacements, one metalworking fluid has a 20 percent trie thanolamine content and another has a five percent monoethanolamine. Triethanolamine has been identified as causing occupational asthma by the Association of Environmental and Occupa tional Health Clinics. The American Conference of Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold L imit Values (TLV) of five milligrams per cubic meter is associated with eye and ski n 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, Deve lopment and Demonstration of Alternatives to VOC-Emitting Lubricants, Vanishing Oils and Rust Inhib itors 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 i n 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 requir e or result in replacement or reformation of non-naphthenic oil-based metalworking fluids no incre ase in monoethanolamine and triethanolamine is expected.

To determine the potential hazard and exposure to the public fr om fluids reformulate with

monethanolamine and triethanolamine , the largest usr of metal working fluids was evaluated to

8 

## Institute for Research and Technical Assistance, A ssessment, Development and Demonstration of Alterna tives to VOC-Emitting Lubricants, Vanishing Oils and Rust In hibitors, 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 use d at a single facility is 32,000 gallons per year

. The facility does not use water

dilutable 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 la rgest
concentration of triethanolamine approximately 5,6 00 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 healt h risk from these TACs is presented in the Air Quality Section. The concentrations of triethanolamine and monoethanolamine are expected to b elow the ACGIH

TLV and Cal/OSHA PEL of three ppm for monoethanolamine and five micrograms per cubic

meter for triet hanolamine ; 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 accidental ly 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 faci lity that currently uses denatured alcohol. No other facility was identifie d 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 da te of adoption of PAR 1144, the exemption would not apply to new CNC machines. The facility would r eplace 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 highe r autoignition temperature than denatured alcohol (458oC for DMC and 363oC for denatur ed 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 mil limeters of mercury for denatured alcohol. DMC has a higher vapor density than denatured alc ohol (3.1 for DMC and 1.6 for denatured alcohol). Both have similar National Fire Protect ion 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 denature d alcohol are expected to have similar adverse hazard impacts (e.g., flammability, ex plosivity, etc.). Health risks from DMC on off-site receptors are present in the Air Quality Se ction of this EA, and determined to be less than significant. Health risks to on-site workers woul d be minimal because, the CNC operation would be enclosed and vented out of the building. Based on the ab ove discussion, DMC is not expected to cause an increase in hazard impacts p ossible exposure during routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous material from accidental releases of t oxic 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 to xic formulation s 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 haz ardous 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 s ome of the 7,000 facilities regulated by PAR 1144 may be on such a list, facili ties affected by the proposed new

VOC content limi ts 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 conti nue to manage any and all hazardous materials and hazardous waste, in accordance wi th 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 expec ted 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 th e use of triethanolamine and

mon oethanolamine 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 determi ned 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 signi ficant.

VIII.g) PAR 1144 has no provisions that dictate the use of any specific metalworking fluid formulation. Operators who use metalworking fluids have the flexib ility 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 lubri cants 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 fl uids. As described above, DMC is expected to have hazard characteristic similar t hat 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. The refore, PAR 1144 is not expected to impair implementation of or physically interfer e 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 saf ety hazard. As shown in the discussion under item VIII.a), c )

, & i ) above, it is expected that replacement metalworking fluid would generall y 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 pl an to assist local administering agencies in the emergency release or threatened release of a ha zardous 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 acti ons, including reporting, assisting emergency response personnel and establishing an emergency r esponse team;

2. Procedures to notify the administering agency, the appropriate l ocal 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 em ergency 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 saf ety and prevent or mitigate a release of hazardous materials.

In general, every county or city and all facilities using a minimum amount of haz ardous materials are required to formulate detailed contingency plans to elimina te, or at least minimize, the possibility and effect of fires, explosion, or spills. In conjunc tion with the California Office of Emergency Services, local jurisdictions have enacted ordinances t hat set standards for area and business emergency response plans. These requirements include im mediate notification, mitigation of an actual or threatened release of a hazardous mat erial, 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 ado pted or modified emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

VIII.h) Since the use of PAR 1144 compliant metalworking fluids would gene rally be expected to occur at 7,000 existing industrial sites in urban areas where w ildlands are typically not prevalent, risk of loss or injury associated with wildland fire s is not expected as a result of implementing PAR 1144.

In conclusion, potentially significant adverse hazard or hazardous ma terial 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 signif icant if any of the following criteria apply:

Water Quality:

- The project will cause degradation or depletion of ground water re sources substantially affecting current or future uses.

- The project will cause the degradation of surface water subs tantially affecting current or

future uses.

- The project will result in a violation of National Pollutant Di scharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements.

- The capacities of existing or proposed wastewater trea tment 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 mee t 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 p er day.

Discussion IX.a), e), j) & k)

Direct

- contact Lubricant Based on the sales weighted VOC content, it is likely that exis ting direct-contact lubricants would continue to be used to comply with PAR 1144. Therefore, no change in wa ter 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 wate r 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 exp ected to result in the replacement or reformulation of light naphthenic oil-based metal working fluids with heavy naphthenic oil-based metalworking fluids. No additional water is ex pected to be needed to because of the reformulation with heavy naphthenic oil-based m etalworking 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 addi tional replacement or reformulation is expected to be needed to comply with PAR 1144. The refore, no change to water use or water quality from metalworking fluid requirements is expe cted.

No water is expected to be associated with the use of DMC i n 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 worki ng fluids and 48,900 gallons of light naphthenic o il). 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 water

dilutable metal working fluids to comply with PAR 1144. Twenty per cent of 1,520,900 gallons

per yea r would be 304,180 gallons of water

- dilutable metal working fluid per year. The water

dilutable 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 r atio o f 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 p er 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 aqueo us hazardous waste and sent in 55 gallon barrels to appropriate hazardous tre atment facilities to remove hazardous constituents. The oils, grease and metal would be removed an d the pH of the water would be adjusted. After treatment the water would be sen t to publicly owned treatment works (POTW) facilities.

The capacity of POTWs in the district to treat wastewate r 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 ga llons 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 requi rements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board.

IX.b), & n) PAR 1144 is not expected to substantially deplete groundwater suppl ies 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 exp ected 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) compare d to the significance threshold of five million gallons per day . Therefore, no water demand impacts are expected as the res ult of implementing the proposed project.

IX c), d), & l) Operations affected by PAR 1144 are housed within structures t hat already have stormwater structures in place, as necessary. All PAR 1144 r elated operations are expected to occur within the existing structures, therefore, PAR 1144 is not expec ted to create or contribute to additional runoff water. Therefore, PAR 1144 would not create or contrib ute 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 mor e than 337,720 gallons per year of any additional wastewater disposal capacity, violate any water quality standard or wastewater discharge requirements, or otherwise substantial ly 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 En vironmental 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. Therefor e, potential adverse impacts to drainage patterns, etc., are not expected as a result of implementing PA R 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 construct ion of any new structures in 100-year flood areas as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or F lood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map. As a result, PAR 1144 is not expe cted 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 inundati on by seiche, tsunami, or mud flow that may already exist relative to the 7,000 existing affec ted facilities.

IX. m) PAR 1144 would not require any new development or require modificati ons to buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed VOC content limit s 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 pe r 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 groundwa ter 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 modificat ions 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 pla ns, 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 i n any habitat conservation or natural community conservation plans, agricultural resources or op erations, 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 plan ning impacts are not expected from the implementation of PAR 1144 and will not be further analyzed in this Dra ft

Final EA. Since no significant land use and planning impacts were ident ified, 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 sig nificant if any of the following conditions are met:

- The project would result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resourc e 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 othe r 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 s tate, or of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local ge neral plan, specific plan or other land use plan because compliance with PAR 1144 does not require miner al resources such as sand, gravel, etc.

Based upon the above considerations, significant adverse mineral re sources 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 i dentified, 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 w ill be considered significant if they exceed federal Occupational Safety and Health Adminis tration (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, proj ect 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 requir e modifications to buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed amended rul e. All of the affected activities occur within existing structures. Replacement of s olvents 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 facil ity. Thus, the proposed project is not expected to expose persons to the generation of excessive nois e levels above current facility levels. It is expected that any facility affected by PA R 1144 would continue complying with all existing local noise control laws or ordinances.

In commercial environments Occupational Safety and Health Admini stration (OSHA) and California-OSHA have established noise standards to protect worke r 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 e xcessive 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 imple menting PAR 1144. Since existing operations are not expected to generate excessive groundborne vib ration or noise levels, and PAR 1144 is not expected to alter physical operations, no groundborn e vibration or noise levels is expected from the proposed amended rule.

XII.c) A permanent increase in ambient noise levels at the 7,000 exis ting affected facilities above existing levels as a result of implementing the propos ed project is unlikely to occur because the physical operations are not expected to change g reatly at affected facilities. The existing noise levels are unlikely to change and raise ambient noi se 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 assoc iated 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 antici pated because the proposed project would not require construction or substantial changes to metalworking flui d processes. As indicated earlier, construction noise levels are expected to be m inimal 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 faciliti es 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 p eople 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 Draf t Final EA. Since no significant noise impacts were identified, no mitigation measures are nece ssary 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 considere d 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 s ignificant adverse effects, either direct or indirect, on the district's population or population distr ibution as no additional workers are anticipated to be required for affected facilities to c omply with the proposed amendments. Human population within the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD is anticipa ted 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 dire ct-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 indire ctly, induce the construction of single- or multiple-family units, or require the displacement of peop le elsewhere.

Based upon these considerations, significant adverse population and hous ing impacts are not expected from the implementation of PAR 1144 and are not further eva luated in this Draft Final

## Final Environmental Assessment: Chapter 2

PAR 1144 2-54 June 2010 

# EA. Since no significant population and housing impacts were ident ified, 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 al tered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response time or other performance object ives.

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 requir e modifications to buildings or other structures to comply with the proposed amended rul e. All of the affected activities occur within existing structures. Because compliant products are currently available, many facility operators currently use PAR 1144 compliant mate rials. 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 si gnificant explosion or fire hazard impacts, because compliant products are no more flammable than conventiona l fluids.

Therefore, PAR 1144 is not expected to increase the chances for fir es or explosions requiring a response from local fire departments, but would more than likely r educe the chances of fires or explosions . PAR 1144 is not expected to have any adverse effects on local p olice departments for the following reasons. Police would be required to respond to ac cidental 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, i mplementing PAR 1144 would not induce population growth or dispersion because no additiona l 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 implem enting 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 f or new or physically altered government facilities and, as a result, is not expected to affec t 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 projec t, no need for physically altered government facilities.

Based upon these considerations, significant adverse public ser vices impacts are not expected from the implementation of PAR 1144 and are not further evaluated in thi s Dra ft Final EA. Since no significant public services impacts were identifie d, 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 opportuniti es.

Discussion

XV.a) & b) As discussed under “Land Use and Planning” above, there are no provi sions in the PAR 1144 that would affect land use plans, policies, or regulations. La nd 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 pr oject 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 Dra ft 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 considere d significant if the following occurs:

- The generation and disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous waste exceeds the capaci ty 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 landfi ll each day and the operational life of a landfill. PAR 1144 is not expected to gene rate 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 opera tors 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 operat ors at these affected facilities comply with all applicable local, state, or federal waste disposal regulati ons.

With the exception of the replacement of denatured alcohol with DM C at one affected facility and the replacement of light naphthenic oils with 60 SUS naphthenic oi ls, 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 oil s on a one to one basis. Both replacements are expected to have similar hazard characteri stics to the solvents that they are replacing.

Since the volume of the reformulation or replacement direct-contac t lubricants, metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors is not expected to be different than the e xisting 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 waterand solvent based waste directcontact lubricants, metalworking fluids and/or waste rust inhibitor s with contamination (i.e., oil, grease and trace amounts of metals) as hazardous waste. A t the disposal facility, large metalworking shavings or chippings in disposed direct-contact lubri cants, metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors can be separated and recycled. Fine metal s havings 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-co ntact lubricants, metalworking fluids and rust inhibitors can be recycled and reused. Used waste water would be sent to POTW facilities (see Environmental Topic IX. Hydrology and Water Q uality). Tramp or sump oil is unwanted oil that mixes with direct-contact in lubricants, metal working 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 m etal shavings or chippings in disposed of replacement or reformulated direct

- contact lubricants are expected to still be separated and recycl ed. Since the metal shavings or clippings are related to the parts manufactured and not to the direct

- contact lubricants, the a mount 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 i s 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 En vironmental 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

- cont act 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) w ould need to be replaced with 60 SUS naphthenic oils. Waste light naphthenic oils and 60 SUS naphthe nic oils are expected to be disposed of in a similar matter. A ffected 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 replace d 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 e xisting 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 reas on, the amount of swarf disposed of is not expected to change. The ratio of water to solvent used metal working fluid oils may change . Use d metal working fluid oils would be recycled and reused. Used wastewater would be sent to POTW facilities (see Envi ronmental 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 sinc e the volumes of replacement or reformulated direct-contact lubricants are expected t o 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 replacem ent, so the amount of hazardous waste generated is also expected to be the same. Waste DMC would b e 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 soli d waste disposal facilities are expected.

Metal Protecting Fluids Rust Inhibitor Existing military specified rust preservatives are expec ted to meet the new VOC content limit. Therefore, since complaint military specified rust preserva tives 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 oper ators would continue to comply with all applicable local, state, or federal waste disposa l 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, C A, and Clean Harbors Westmorland in Westemorland, CA. Chemical Waste Management Ket tleman Hills has a remaining capacity of 7,360,000 cubic yards with an estimated closur e 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 refor mulated 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 r eplacement or reformulated

direct

- contact lubricants and metalworking fluids is expected to be the same as in exis ting direct

contact lubricants, metalworking fluids waste from current metalworking operati ons. Therefore, based on the existing capacity and the fact that PAR 1144 is not e xpected to change the amount of hazardous waste disposed, PAR 1144 is not expected to result in t he disposal of hazardous wastes that would exceed the capacity of designated hazardous waste landfi lls.

Based on these considerations, PAR 1144 is not expected to significa ntly increase the volume of solid or hazardous wastes disposed at existing municipal or hazardous waste disposal facilities or require additional waste disposal capacity. Further, implement ing PAR 1144 is not expected to interfere with any affected facility’s ability to compl y with applicable local, state, or federal waste disposal regulations. Since no solid/hazardous waste impact s 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 lev el 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 availa ble.

- There is an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the exis ting 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 sub stantially increased.

- The need for more than 350 employees

- An increase in heavy-duty transport truck traffic to and/or from the facilit y 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 r eformulate 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 lubrica nts 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 expecte d. 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 water

dilutable 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 wit h 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. B oth grades of naphthenic oil are supplied by the same refinery in Bakersfield. Theref ore, 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 oil s in metal working

fluids are expected to be replaced with paraffinic oil s , water

- dilutable oil s or vegetable oils

. Paraffinic oil s 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 i s expected to require 68 additional railcars (21 fr om out of state and 37 from Richmond, California) per year. These additional rail cars are not expected to increase the number of trains, but a re expected to be carried by existing locomotives. Given that affected facilities are dispersed throu ghout the district, it is unlikely that

truck or rail traffic from different affected facilities w ould overlap. As a result, implementing PAR 1144 is not expected to substantially affect the level of s ervice (LOS) of any intersection in

the district and could incre ase the LOS since less diesel trucks would be needed.

Metal Protecting Fluids Rust Inhibitor Existing military specified preservatives meet the prop osed VOC content limit in PAR 1144. Therefore, no change in traffic or transportation is expect ed to comply with the VOC content limits for military specified preservative.

Therefore, PAR 1144 is not expected to adversely affect traffi c 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 r oadways or the level of service at

intersections near affected facilities.

XVII.c) Since PAR 1144 would not require substantial construction or operati ons 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, met alworking fluids or rust inhibitors would need to be transported by plane.

XVII.d) Since PAR 1144 only affects VOC contents of direct-contact lubr icants, 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 incompa tible uses.

XVII.e) Since PAR 1144 only affects VOC contents of direct-contact lub ricants, 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 fac ilities. 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 substantia lly 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 a re 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 requi red. 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 a s 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 wil l not be considered further. Since no significant transportation/traffic impacts were identifie d, 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 fishor 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 i s not expected to significantly adversely affect plant or animal species or t he 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 exis ting structures at 7,000 existing affected facilities. The 7,000 affected facilit ies are located at sites that have already been greatly disturbed and that currently do not support s uch 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 conj unction with other projects that may occur concurrently with or subsequent to the pr oposed project are not expected to adversely impact any environmental topic. Related project s 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 c ommercial sectors. Furthermore, because PAR 1144 does not generate project-specific impacts, cumulative impacts are not considered to be "cumulatively considerable” as defined b y CEQA guidelines §15065(a)(3). For example, the environmental topics checked ‘No Imp act’ (e.g., aesthetics, agriculture resources, biological resources, cultural resources energy, geology and soils, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public se rvices, recreation, solid/hazardous waste and transportation and traffic) would not be exp ected to make any contribution to potential cumulative impacts whatsoever. For the envi ronmental topic checked ‘Less than Significant Impact’ (e.g., air quality, hazards and ha zardous materials, and hydrology and water quality), the analysis indicated that project imp acts 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 ef fects of the proposed project would be minor and, therefore, not considered to be cumulatively considerab le. Also, in the case of air quality impacts, the net effect of implementing the pr oposed 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 nati onal 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 ca use significant adverse effects to human beings. Significant adverse air qua lity impacts are not expected from the implementation of PAR 1144. Based on the preceding analyses, no si gnificant adverse impacts to aesthetics, agriculture resources, biological res ources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and w ater quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public servic es, recreation, solid/hazardous waste and transportation and traffic are expecte d 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 projec t 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 vers ion 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 Draf t Environmental Assessment that was released on February 16, 2010 for a 30-day publi c review and comment period ending March 17, 2010.

Original hard copies of the Draft Environmental Assessment, which include t he version “PAR 1144 012010” of the proposed rule, can be obtained through the SCAQMD Public Informati on 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  SFinal Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-1June 2010Table B-1Diemethyl Carbonate on-Carcinogenic Health Risk AnalysisTier II - on-carcinogenic Chronic Health Risk Evaluation of Dimethyl CarbonateReceptorTotalDMCUsage,gal/yrDMCDensity,lb/galDMCEmissions,ton/yearX/QMETDMC ChronicREL,ug/m3DMCChronic HISensitive3278.921.54.510.515,5000.0006Off-site Worker3278.921.551.180.515,5000.0069Tier II - on-carcinogenic Acute Health Risk Evaluation of Dimethyl CarbonateReceptorTotalDMCUsage,gal/yrDMCDensity,lb/galDMCEmissions,lb/dayDMCEmissions,lb/hrX/QhrDMC AcuteREL,ug/m3DMC AcuteHISensitive3278.9211.21.4373.518,0000.03Off-site Worker3278.9211.21.42,00018,0000.16SCAQMD, Risk Assessment Procedures for Rules 1401 and 212, Package L, July 2008.MET - Downtown Los AngelesX/Q values estimated at 100 meters downwind distanceDimethyl Carbonate (DMC) Usage, gal/year from facilityDMC Emissions, ton/year= (DMC Usage, gal/year x DMCDensity, lb/gal)/(2,000 lb/ton)DMC Emissions, lb/day = (DMC Usage, gal/year x DMCDensity, 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/m3DMC 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 A nalysis

**

****************************************

**
** 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\ISCAR MOD\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 2 38.65 226.91 208.28

BUILDWID STCK1 183.32 163.38 146.74 1 25.65 158.32 192.21

BUILDWID STCK1 220.26 241.61 255.63 2 61.87 260.16 250.55

BUILDWID STCK1 233.32 240.23 243.13 2 38.65 226.91 208.28

BUILDWID STCK1 183.32 163.38 146.74 1 25.65 158.32 192.21

BUILDWID STCK1 220.26 241.61 255.63 2 61.87 260.16 250.55

BUILDLEN STCK1 125.65 158.32 192.21 2 20.26 241.61 255.63

BUILDLEN STCK1 261.87 260.16 250.55 2 33.32 240.23 243.13

BUILDLEN STCK1 238.65 226.91 208.28 1 83.32 163.38 146.74

BUILDLEN STCK1 125.65 158.32 192.21 2 20.26 241.61 255.63

BUILDLEN STCK1 261.87 260.16 250.55 2 33.32 240.23 243.13

BUILDLEN STCK1 238.65 226.91 208.28 1 83.32 163.38 146.74

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 -1 64.31 -182.03 -194.22

XBADJ STCK1 -200.50 -200.70 -194.79 -1 82.97 -185.47 -183.99

XBADJ STCK1 -176.92 -164.48 -147.04 -1 25.13 -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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.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 CONCen tration 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 SB L for 1 Source(s),

for Total of 1 Urban Area(s): Urban Population = 9862049.0 ; Urban Roughnes s Length = 1.000 m

**Model Allows User-Specified Options:
1. Stack-tip Downwash.
2. Allow FLAT/ELEV Terrain Option by Sourc e, 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 Use d.

**Model Assumes No FLAGPOLE Receptor Heights.

**Model Calculates PERIOD Averages Only

**This Run Includes: 1 Source(s); 1 Sou rce Group(s); and 655 Receptor(s)

**The Model Assumes A Pollutant Type of: OTHER

**Model Set To Continue RUNning After the Setup Te sting.

**Output Options Selected:
Model Outputs Tables of PERIOD Averages b y Receptor Model Outputs External File(s) of High Va lues 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 Fact or = 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.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 BLD G URBAN CAP/ EMIS RATE

SOURCE PART. (GRAMS/SEC) X Y ELEV. HEIGHT TEMP. EXIT VEL. DIAMETER EXI STS 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 YE S YES NO

*** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 3

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** SOUR CE IDs DEFINING SOURCE GROUPS ***

GROUP ID SOURCE IDs

ALL STCK1 ,

*** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 4

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** DIREC TION SPECIFIC BUILDING DIMENSIONS ***

SOURCE ID: STCK1

IFV BH BW BL XADJ YADJ IF V 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, 1 0 10.7, 125.6, 233.3, -50.3, 23.0,

11 10.7, 158.3, 240.2, -54.8, 35.4, 1 2 10.7, 192.2, 243.1, -59.1, 45.5,

13 10.7, 220.3, 238.7, -61.7, 54.2, 1 4 10.7, 241.6, 226.9, -62.4, 61.2,

15 10.7, 255.6, 208.3, -61.2, 66.4, 1 6 10.7, 261.9, 183.3, -58.2, 69.6,

17 10.7, 260.2, 163.4, -64.0, 70.6, 1 8 10.7, 250.6, 146.7, -76.1, 69.5,

19 10.7, 233.3, 125.6, -85.8, 66.3, 2 0 10.7, 240.2, 158.3, -114.6, 65.3,

21 10.7, 243.1, 192.2, -141.6, 62.4, 2 2 10.7, 238.7, 220.3, -164.3, 57.6,

23 10.7, 226.9, 241.6, -182.0, 51.0, 2 4 10.7, 208.3, 255.6, -194.2, 42.9,

25 10.7, 183.3, 261.9, -200.5, 33.5, 2 6 10.7, 163.4, 260.2, -200.7, 17.7,

27 10.7, 146.7, 250.6, -194.8, -2.7, 2 8 10.7, 125.6, 233.3, -183.0, -23.0,

29 10.7, 158.3, 240.2, -185.5, -35.4, 3 0 10.7, 192.2, 243.1, -184.0, -45.5,

31 10.7, 220.3, 238.7, -176.9, -54.2, 3 2 10.7, 241.6, 226.9, -164.5, -61.2,

33 10.7, 255.6, 208.3, -147.0, -66.4, 3 4 10.7, 261.9, 183.3, -125.1, -69.6,

35 10.7, 260.2, 163.4, -99.4, -70.6, 3 6 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 5

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** DI SCRETE 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 6

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** DI SCRETE 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 7

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** DI SCRETE 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 8

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** DI SCRETE 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 9

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** DI SCRETE 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 10

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** DI SCRETE 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 11

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** DI SCRETE 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 12

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** DI SCRETE 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 13

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** MET EOROLOGICAL 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 O F 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 14

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** UP TO THE F IRST 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 U pper 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 15

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** THE PERIOD ( 1752 0 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GR OUP: ALL ***

INCLUDING SOURCE( S): STCK1 ,

*** DI SCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***

** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 **

X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CO NC

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 16

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** THE PERIOD ( 1752 0 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GR OUP: ALL ***

INCLUDING SOURCE( S): STCK1 ,

*** DI SCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***

** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 **

X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CO NC

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 17

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** THE PERIOD ( 1752 0 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GR OUP: ALL ***

INCLUDING SOURCE( S): STCK1 ,

*** DI SCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***

** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 **

X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CO NC

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 18

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** THE PERIOD ( 1752 0 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GR OUP: ALL ***

INCLUDING SOURCE( S): STCK1 ,

*** DI SCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***

** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 **

X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CO NC

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 19

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** THE PERIOD ( 1752 0 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GR OUP: ALL ***

INCLUDING SOURCE( S): STCK1 ,

*** DI SCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***

** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 **

X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CO NC

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 20

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** THE PERIOD ( 1752 0 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GR OUP: ALL ***

INCLUDING SOURCE( S): STCK1 ,

*** DI SCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***

** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 **

X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CO NC

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 21

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** THE PERIOD ( 1752 0 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GR OUP: ALL ***

INCLUDING SOURCE( S): STCK1 ,

*** DI SCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***

** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 **

X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CO NC

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 22

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** THE PERIOD ( 1752 0 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GR OUP: ALL ***

INCLUDING SOURCE( S): STCK1 ,

*** DI SCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***

** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 **

X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CO NC

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 23

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** THE PERIOD ( 1752 0 HRS) AVERAGE CONCENTRATION VALUES FOR SOURCE GR OUP: ALL ***

INCLUDING SOURCE( S): STCK1 ,

*** DI SCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***

** CONC OF OTHER IN MICROGRAMS/M**3 **

X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CONC X-COORD (M) Y-COORD (M) CO NC

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.is *** 05/13/10

*** *** 12:01:03

PAGE 24

**MODELOPTs: NonDFAULT CONC FLAT and ELEV

NODRYDPLT NOWETDPLT

*** THE SUM MARY OF MAXIMUM PERIOD ( 17520 HRS) RESULTS ***

** CONC OF OTHE R 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 ( 3 84899.59, 3774958.56, 110.65, 110.65, 0.00) DC
2ND HIGHEST VALUE IS 343.50737 AT ( 3 84881.85, 3774947.16, 110.34, 110.34, 0.00) DC
3RD HIGHEST VALUE IS 339.10383 AT ( 3 84881.03, 3774962.12, 110.55, 110.55, 0.00) DC
4TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 304.49186 AT ( 3 84918.15, 3774955.00, 110.76, 110.76, 0.00) DC
5TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 263.01712 AT ( 3 84862.47, 3774965.68, 110.57, 110.57, 0.00) DC
6TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 174.09640 AT ( 3 84843.91, 3774969.24, 110.31, 117.25, 0.00) DC
7TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 171.30043 AT ( 3 84931.85, 3774947.16, 110.83, 110.83, 0.00) DC
8TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 158.18425 AT ( 3 84936.71, 3774951.44, 110.90, 110.90, 0.00) DC
9TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 119.83881 AT ( 3 84946.87, 3775100.99, 112.91, 127.03, 0.00) DC
10TH HIGHEST VALUE IS 116.34807 AT ( 3 84831.85, 3774947.16, 107.90, 118.40, 0.00) DC

*** RECEPTOR TYPES: GC = GRIDCART

GP = GRIDPOLR

DC = DISCCART

DP = DISCPOLR

*** AERMOD - VERSION 09292 *** *** C:\Users\jko izumi\Documents\Lakes\ISCARMOD\2010\NamePlate\NNP\N NP.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 34.11 5870

** 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 3774994.58 113.06 118.40Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-32June 2010Table B-3Diemethyl Carbonate Carcinogenic Health Risk AnalysisDimethyl Carbonate Cancer Potency FactorDescriptionInhalation Unit Risk,(ug/m3)-1DBR,(L/kg-day)DMC Cancer Potency,(mg/kg-day)-1Methanol1.00E-063023.31E-03EPA interim inhalation unit risk value, Toxicological Review of Methanol(CAS No. 67-56-1)in Support ofSummary Information on the Integrated Risk Information System(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 CarbonateReceptorTypeTotalDMCUsage,gal/yrDMCDensity,lb/galDMCEmissions,g/secMaximumModeledDMCConc.,(ug/m3)MaximumModeledDMCConc.,(ug/m3)EffectiveMethanolConc.,(ug/m3)DMCCancerPotency,(mg/kgday)-1DailyBreathingRate,(L/kg-day)ExposureFrequency,day/yearExposureDuration,yearAveragingTimePeriod,dayCancerHealthRisk inOneMillionSensitive3278.920.04248.6 3.1 2.2 0.00333023507025,5502.1Worker3278.920.042387.717.711.60.00331492454025,5503.3C3H603 + 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 CH3OHCentral Los Angeles meteorological dataMaximum 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 modeledDMC concentration x 0.71Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-33June 2010Table B-1MobileEmissionFactorsEMFAC2007 Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck Emission Factors for the 2010 Fleet YearCOlb/mileOxlb/mileROGlb/mileSOxlb/milePM10lb/milePM2.5lb/mileDiesel PMlb/mile0.011954560.038221020.003041570.000041310.001830620.001600830.00168861http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/onroad/onroad.htmlLocomotive Emission Factors for 2010COg/ton-mileOxg/ton-mileVOCg/ton-mileSOxg/ton-milePM10g/ton-milePM2.5g/ton-mileDPMg/ton-mile0.070.390.0220.0050.0120.0110.012http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/locomotv/420f09025.pdfTable B-2ExistingSCAQMDEmissionsRailcar Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid from Bakersfield to KeeneaphthenicMetalWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galaphthenicMetalWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day152,09020,0007.795928250.291.690.090.020.050.050.05Annuallb/yr2.1712.80.710.150.380.370.38Assumed 10 percent of Naphthenic Metal Working fluid is transported by rail.Assumed one rail car sent at a time.Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-34June 2010Table B-2(Continued)Existing SCAQMD EmissionsRailcar Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid from Keene to BoronaphthenicMetalWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galaphthenicMetalWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day152,09020,0007.795928630.724.250.240.050.130.120.13Annuallb/yr5.4832.31.800.390.970.940.97Assumed 10percent 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 CajonaphthenicMetalWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galaphthenicMetalWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day152,09020,0007.795928931.066.270.350.080.190.180.19Annuallb/yr8.0847.72.650.571.431.381.43Assumed 10 percent of Naphthenic Metal Working fluid is transported by rail.Assumed one rail car sent at a time.Railcar Travel for aphthenic MetalWorking Fluid from Cajon to Los AngelesaphthenicMetalWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galaphthenicMetalWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day152,09020,0007.795928620.714.180.230.050.130.120.05Annuallb/yr5.3931.81.770.380.950.920.38Assumed 10 percent of Naphthenic Metal Working fluid is transported by rail.Assumed onerail car sent at a time.Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-35June 2010Table B-2 (Continued)Existing SCAQMD EmissionsDiesel Truck Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid-Bakersfield to LabecaphthenicMetalWorkingFluid,gal/yearTankerCapacity,gal/carTrucks,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day1,368,8103,000456414.3013.751.090.010.660.580.61Annuallb/yr224715570.8343032Assumed 90 percent of Naphthenic Metal Workingfluid is transported by diesel truck.Assumed truck deliveries once a week.Diesel Truck Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid-Labec to Los AngelesaphthenicMetalWorkingFluid,gal/yearTankerCapacity,gal/carTrucks,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day1,368,8103,000456727.5023.981.910.031.151.001.06Annuallb/yr3901,247991.3605255Assumed 90 percent of NaphthenicMetal Working fluid is transported by diesel truck.Assumed truck deliveries once a week.Existing DailyAir DistrictCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/daySJVAB4.615.41.20.00.70.60.7KAB0.724.250.240.050.130.120.13MDAB1.066.270.350.080.190.180.19District8.2128.162.140.081.271.131.11Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-36June 2010Table B-2 (Concluded)Existing SCAQMD EmissionsExisting AnnualAir DistrictCOlb/yrOxlb/yrVOClb/yrSOxlb/yrPM10lb/yrPM2.5lb/yrDPMlb/yrSJVAB226728580.93353032KAB5.4832.31.800.390.970.940.97MDAB8.0847.72.650.571.431.381.43District3951,2791011.7360.753.155.5Table B-3Proposed ProjectReplacement Metal WorkingFluids from Out of StateFluid TypeLocationPercentageAmount,gallonsParaffinic OilTexas21319,389Water-Dilutable OilOhio2060,836Vegetable OilIowa1030,418Total51410,643Assumed all alternative naphthenic oil working fluid is transported by rail.Water-dilutable oil and vegetable oil metal working fluidconcentrate are maximum 20 percent of existing fluid.Railcar Travel for Replacement Metal Working Fluid-Ehrenbergto East District BoundaryParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day410,64320,0007.081,45421560.583.430.190.040.100.100.10Annuallb/yr11.9703.920.842.112.052.11Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-37June 2010Table B-3 (Concluded)Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluids from Out of StateRailcar Travel forWater-dilutable Metal Working Fluid-East District Boundary to Los AngelesParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day410,64320,0008.751,797211992.5615.070.840.180.450.440.45Annuallb/yr52.530917.223.709.268.989.26Daily from Out of StateAir DistrictCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayMDAB0.583.430.190.040.100.100.10District2.5615.070.840.180.450.440.45Annual from Out of StateAir DistrictCOlb/yrOxlb/yrVOClb/yrSOxlb/yrPM10lb/yrPM2.5lb/yrDPMlb/yrDPMlb/halfmile/yearMDAB11.9703.920.842.112.052.110.02District52.530917.23.709.39.09.30.02Table B-4Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluids from Richmond, CA along the Union Pacific US-101 RouteRailcarTravel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-Richmond to AromasParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day745,24120,0007.082,63837991.036.070.340.070.180.180.18Annuallb/yr38.3226.012.582.716.776.566.77Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-38June 2010Table B-4 (Continued)Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluidsfrom Richmond, CA along the Union Pacific US-101 RouteRailcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-Aromas to McKayParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day745,24120,0008.753,260371021.317.720.430.090.230.220.23Annuallb/yr48.8287.816.023.458.618.368.61RailcarTravel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-McKay to 101 and 166ParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day745,24120,0008.753,26037700.905.300.300.060.160.150.16Annuallb/yr33.5197.510.992.365.915.735.91Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-101 and 166 to 101before 150ParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day745,24120,0008.753,26037791.015.980.330.070.180.170.18Annuallb/yr37.8222.912.412.676.676.476.67Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-101 and 166 to 101 before 150ParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day745,24120,0008.753,26037440.563.330.190.040.100.100.10Annuallb/yr21.1124.16.911.493.723.603.72Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-39June 2010Table B-4 (Concluded)Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluids from Richmond, CA along the Union Pacific US-101 RouteRailcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-101 before 150 to Los AngelesParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day745,24120,0008.753,26037390.502.950.160.040.090.090.09Annuallb/yr18.7110.06.131.323.293.203.29Daily-UP US-101 RouteAir DistrictCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayBAAQMD1.036.070.340.070.180.180.18MBUAPCD1.317.720.430.090.230.220.23SLOCAPCD0.905.300.300.060.160.150.16SBCAPCD1.015.980.330.070.180.170.18VACAPCD0.563.330.190.040.100.100.10District0.502.950.160.040.090.090.09Annual-UP US-101 RouteAir DistrictCOlb/yrOxlb/yrVOClb/yrSOxlb/yrPM10lb/yrPM2.5lb/yrDPMlb/yrDPMlb/halfmile/yearBAAQMD38.3226.012.582.716.776.566.770.03MBUAPCD48.8287.816.023.458.618.368.610.04SLOCAPCD33.5197.510.992.365.915.735.910.04SBCAPCD37.8222.912.412.676.676.476.670.04VACAPCD21.1124.16.911.493.723.603.720.04District18.66110.06.131.323.293.203.290.04Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-40June 2010Table B-5Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluids from Richmond, CA along theBurlington orthern Santa FeSR-99/UnionPacificSR-99RouteRailcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-Richmond to OrwoodParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day745,24120,0007.082,63837540.563.310.180.040.100.100.10Annuallb/yr20.9123.36.861.483.693.583.69Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-Orwood to KeeneParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day745,24120,0008.753,260372272.9117.190.960.210.510.500.51Annuallb/yr108.664035.77.6719.218.619.2Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal WorkingFluid-Keen to BoronParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day745,24120,0008.753,26037630.814.770.270.060.140.140.14Annuallb/yr30.11789.92.135.35.25.3Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-Boron to Barstow to CajonParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day745,24120,0008.753,26037931.197.040.390.080.210.200.21Annuallb/yr44.526214.63.147.97.67.9Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-41June 2010Table B-5 (Concluded)Proposed Project Replacement Metal Working Fluids from Richmond, CA along theBurlington orthern Santa FeSR-99/UnionPacific SR-99 RouteRailcar Travelfor Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-Cajon to Los AngelesParaffinicWorkingFluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistrictDistance,mile/dayCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/day745,24120,0008.753,26037620.804.690.260.060.140.140.14Annuallb/yr29.71759.72.095.25.15.2Daily–BSF/UP SR-99 RouteAir DistrictCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayBAAQMD0.563.310.180.040.100.100.10SJVAPCD2.9117.190.960.210.510.500.51KCAPCD0.814.770.270.060.140.140.14MDAQMD1.197.040.390.080.210.200.21District0.804.690.260.060.140.140.14Annual–BSF/UP SR-99 RouteAir DistrictCOlb/yrOxlb/yrVOClb/yrSOxlb/yrPM10lb/yrPM2.5lb/yrDPMlb/yrDPMlb/halfmile/yearBAAQMD20.9123.36.861.483.693.583.690.03SJVAPCD108.664035.77.6719.218.619.20.04KCAPCD30.11789.892.135.325.165.320.04MDAQMD44.526214.613.147.857.627.850.04District29.71759.742.095.245.085.240.04Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-42June 2010Table B-6Proposed ProjectTotalDailyEmissionsBAAQMDCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayProject1.036.070.340.070.180.180.18DistrictCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayExisting8.2128.22.140.0761.271.131.11Project3.0618.01.000.220.540.520.54-5.15-10.14-1.140.14-0.73-0.60-0.57MBUAPCDCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayProject1.317.720.430.090.230.220.23MDAQMDCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayExisting1.066.270.350.080.190.180.19Project0.583.40.190.040.100.100.10-0.48-2.84-0.16-0.03-0.08-0.08-0.08SBCAPCDCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayProject1.015.980.330.070.180.170.18SJVAPCDCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayExisting4.6151.190.040.70.60.7SLOCAPCDCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayProject0.905.300.300.060.160.150.16Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-43June 2010Table B-6(Concluded)Proposed Project Total Daily Emissions–Union Pacific US-101VACAPCDCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayProject0.563.330.190.040.100.100.10Table B-7Proposed Project Total Daily Emissions–Burlington orthern Santa FeSR-99/Union Pacific SR-99 RouteBAAQMDCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayProject0.563.310.180.040.100.100.10DistrictCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayExisting8.2128.22.140.0761.271.131.11Project3.3519.81.100.240.590.570.59-4.86-8.40-1.040.16-0.68-0.55-0.52KCAPCDCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayExisting0.724.250.240.050.130.120.13Project0.814.770.270.060.140.140.14-0.09-0.52-0.03-0.01-0.02-0.02-0.02MDAQMDCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayExisting1.066.270.350.080.190.180.19Project1.7810.50.580.130.310.300.310.714.200.230.050.130.120.13Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-44June 2010Table B-7 (Concluded)Proposed Project Total Daily Emissions–Burlington orthern Santa FeSR-99/Union Pacific SR-99 RouteSJVAPCDCOlb/dayOxlb/dayVOClb/daySOxlb/dayPM10lb/dayPM2.5lb/dayDPMlb/dayExisting4.6151.190.040.70.60.7Project2.9117.20.960.210.510.500.51-1.71.8-0.230.17-0.19-0.13-0.14Table B-8Proposed Project Total Annual Emissions–Union Pacific US-101BAAQMDCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrProject0.0190.1130.0060.0010.0030.0030.003DistrictCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrExisting0.1980.6390.0500.0010.0300.0270.028Project0.0360.2100.0120.0030.0060.0060.006-0.162-0.430-0.0390.002-0.024-0.020-0.021KCAPCDCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrExisting0.0030.0160.0010.00020.00050.00050.0005MBUAPCDCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrProject0.0060.0350.0020.00040.00110.00100.0011Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-45June 2010Table B-8(Continued)Proposed Project Total Annual Emissions–Union Pacific US-101MDABCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrExisting0.0040.0240.0010.0000.0010.0010.001Project0.0060.0350.0020.00040.00110.00100.00110.0020.0110.0010.0000.0000.0000.000SBCAPCDCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrProject0.0190.1110.0060.0010.0030.0030.003SJVAPCDCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrExisting0.1130.3640.0290.0000.0170.0150.016SLOCAPCDCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrProject0.0170.0990.0050.0010.0030.0030.003VACAPCDCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrProject0.01050.06210.00350.00070.00190.00180.0019Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-46June 2010Table B-9Proposed Project Total Annual Emissions–Burlington orthern Santa FeSR-99/Union Pacific SR-99 RouteBAAQMDCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrProject0.0070.0410.0020.0000.0010.0010.001DistrictCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrExisting0.1980.6390.0500.0010.0300.0270.028Project0.0360.2130.0120.0030.0060.0060.006-0.162-0.426-0.0390.002-0.024-0.020-0.021KCAPCDCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrExisting0.0030.0160.0010.00020.00050.00050.0005Project0.0100.0590.0030.0010.0020.0020.0020.0070.0430.0020.0010.0010.0010.001MDAQMDCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrExisting0.0040.0240.0010.0000.0010.0010.001Project0.0210.1230.0070.0010.0040.0040.0040.0170.0990.0060.0010.0030.0030.003SJVAPCDCOton/yrOxton/yrVOCton/yrSOxton/yrPM10ton/yrPM2.5ton/yrDPMton/yrExisting0.1130.3640.0290.0000.0170.0150.016Project0.0440.2610.0150.0030.0080.0080.008-0.069-0.103-0.0140.003-0.010-0.008-0.008Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-47June 2010Table B-10GHG EmissionsFactorsEMFAC2007Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck Emission Factors for the 2010 Fleet YearCO2lb/mileCH4lb/mileDPMlb/mile4.211205780.000142010.00168861http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/onroad/onroad.htmlLocomotive Emission Factors for 2010CO2g/ton-mile25.5http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/locomotv/420f09025.pdfTable B-11GHG EmissionsRailcar Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid-Bakersfield to Los AngelesaphthenicWorking Fluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galaphthenicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistance,mile/tripDistance,mile/yearCO2Mton/year152,09020,0007.7959282491,8943.8Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-Richmond to Los AngelesParaffinicWorking Fluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistance,mile/tripDistance,mile/yearCO2Mton/year745,24120,0007.082,6383754120,15936.5Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-48June 2010Table B-11(Continued)GHG EmissionsRailcarTravel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-Houston, TX to Los AngelesParaffinicWorking Fluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistance,mile/tripDistance,mile/yearCO2Mton/year319,38920,0007.081,131161,54824,72144.7Railcar Travel for Water-dilutable Metal Working Fluid-Cleveland, OH to Los AngelesParaffinicWorking Fluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistance,mile/tripDistance,mile/yearCO2Mton/year60,83620,0008.7526632,3477,13916.0Railcar Travel for Vegetable-based Metal Working Fluid, Des Moines, IA to Los AngelesParaffinicWorking Fluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistance,mile/tripDistance,mile/yearCO2Mton/year30,41820,0008.7513321,6842,5615.7Diesel Truck Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid-Bakersfield to Los Angelesaphthenic WorkingFluid,gal/yearTanker Capacity,gal/carTrucks, yearDistance, mile/tripDistance, mile/yearCO2Mton/year1,368,8103,00045611351,55998Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-49June 2010Table B-12Off-Site Health Risk fromTriethanolamineTriethanolamineCurrentSolventUsage,gal/yearProposedSolventDilutionRateProposedSolventUsage,gal/yearDensity,lb/galWeightFractionEmissions,lb/yearEmissions,lb/hr(X/Q),(ug/m3)/(lb/hr)AF 7-HrConc.,ug/m3Conc.,mg/m332,00010:13,2008.750.25,6001.91,5320.982,9202.9Usage, 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 witha heightless than 20 ftConc.,mg/m3Cal/OSHA PEL,mg/m3Less ThanPEL2.95YesTable B-13Off-Site Health Risk fromMonoethanolamineMonoethanolamineCurrentSolventUsage,gal/yearProposedSolventDilutionRateProposedSolventUsage,gal/yearDensity,lb/galWeightFractionEmissions,lb/yearEmissions,lb/hr(X/Q),(ug/m3)/(lb/hr)AF 7-HrConc.,ug/m3Conc.,mg/m332,00010:13,2008.750.051,4000.51,5320.987300.7Usage, 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 sourcewith a height less than 20 ft.Conc.,mg/m3Cal/OSHA PEL,mg/m3Less ThanPEL0.75YesFinal Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-50June 2010Table B-14Existing Diesel ConsumptionRailcar Travel for aphthenic MetalWorking Fluid-Bakersfield to Los AngelesaphthenicWorking Fluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galRailcarCapacity,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistance,mile/tripDistance,mile/yearFuelEfficiency,gal/ton-mileDieselUsage,gal/year152,09020,0007.7959282431,8480.00252,737Fuel efficiency from EMFAC2007 for 2010Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-Richmond to Los AngelesParaffinicWorking Fluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistance,mile/tripCaliforniaDistance,mile/dayFuelEfficiency,gal/ton-mileDieselUsage,gal/year745,24120,0007.082,638375412550.00251,682Fuel efficiency fromhttp://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/nonroad/locomotv/420f09025.pdf.Railcar Travel for Paraffinic Metal Working Fluid-Houston, TX to Los AngelesParaffinicWorking Fluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistance,mile/tripCaliforniaDistance,mile/dayFuelEfficiency,gal/ton-mileDieselUsage,gal/year319,38920,0007.081,131161,5482550.0025721Railcar Travel for Water-dilutable Metal Working Fluid-Cleveland, OH to Los AngelesParaffinicWorking Fluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistance,mile/tripCaliforniaDistance,mile/dayFuelEfficiency,gal/ton-mileDieselUsage,gal/year60,83620,0008.7526632,4232550.0025170Final Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-51June 2010Table B-14(Continued)Existing Diesel ConsumptionRailcar Travel for Vegetable Oil-based Metal Working Fluid-Des Moines, IA to Los AngelesParaffinicWorking Fluid,gal/yearRailcarCapacity,gal/carDensity,lb/galParaffinicWorkingFluid,ton/yearRailcars,yearDistance,mile/tripCaliforniaDistance,mile/dayFuelEfficiency,gal/ton-mileDieselUsage,gal/year30,41820,0008.7513321,8722550.002585Diesel Truck Travel for aphthenic Metal Working Fluid-Bakersfield to Los Angelesaphthenic WorkingFluid,gal/yearTankerCapacity,gal/carTrucks, yearDistance,mile/tripDistance,mile/yearFuel Efficiency,mile/gallonDiesel Usage,gal/year1,368,8103,00045611251,1025.289,678Table B-15Existing WorkingFluid Hazardous PropertiesExisting Working FluidSpecificGravityDensity,lb/galVaporPressure,kPaVaporDensityFlashPoint°CLFLUFLAuto-ignitionTemperature°CHealthFlammabilityReactivityoteSierra Form Oil 1760.846.98<1850.75220Husky Quenching Oil0.8647.21175Milacron MilPro 740 ACF0.877.26187.8110Shell Fenella CH 4020.8747.27176.67110NFPAPetro Canada Aludraw 8500.88277.37280110Shell Vitrea 680.897.40196.11010NFPAMilacron MilPro 810CF0.97.51123.9110Schaeffer 1280.9027.50<0.01333224110Shell Fenella DS 17900.9087.550.0005> 1220110320010NFPAChampion 17000.947.820.001333>1120110NFPAFinal Environmental Assessment: Appendix BPAR 1144B-52June 2010Table B-216Alternative WorkingFluid Hazardous PropertiesAlternative Working FluidSpecificGravityDensity,lb/galVaporPressure,kPaVaporDensityFlashPoint°CLFLUFLAuto-IgnitionTemperature°CHealthFlammabilityReactivitySinclair Artic Fire Form Oil0.796.57< 55.376110Shell Vitrea 220.857.070.0005> 1204110320010Citgo Quenching 220.867.15<0.01>1202110Milacron MilPro 830 CF0.877.23185110Milacron MilPro 850 CF0.877.23215.6110Milacron MilPro 835 CF0.8727.25201.7110Milacron MilPro 860 CF0.882198.9110Texaco Cleartex CF0.8857.361226010Texaco Sultex0.8897.391202010Milacron MilPro 5000.97.48193.3110Milacron MilPro 60000.97.48215.6110Milacron MilPro 80000.97.48187.8110Accu-Lube 10000.927.650.133322>1175010Accu-Lube 20000.927.650.133322>1204010Citgo Clairo Oil 1600.927.65<0.001>1157110Accu-Lube 61000.937.730.133322>1204010CimFree VG-990M1.038.56100Accu-Lube Synthetic1.048.65<1100101Milacron Cimtap HD1.0899.05204.4110

# 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 sub sequent 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 incl uded 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 e xhaust air vented out of the building. The commenter expresses concern that on-site workers woul d be exposed to DMC concentrations, because of the CNC exemption.

The final version of PAR 1144 includes additional language that requir es that “the equipment existed at the time of rule adoption, is enclosed and an exhaust fa n discharges the exhaust air from the equipment out of the building.” The additional language addresse s the commenter’s concern by capturing the DMC emissions from the CNC machine, p reventing any worker exposure to DMC emissions.

SCAQMD has identified only one facility that uses DMC as a cool ing solvent in a CNC machine where permeable media are used to maintain a vacuum that holds the part in p lace during cutting. The existing CNC machine is enclosed, but would need an exhaust fan t o 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 pe r 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 e xposure 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 mic rogram 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 maxim um 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 he alth risk based on the maximum methanol concentration modeled at a sensitive receptor wa s estimated to be 2.1 in one million, which is less than the significance threshold of 10 in one mi llion. The health risk from

1 

## OEHHA, Revised Assessment of Health Effects of Ex posure to Dimethyl Carbonate, a Chemical Petitioned for Exemption from VOC Rules, memo from Richard Corey t o 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, beca use no other health effects

were identified from PAR 1144. Since all health risk from DMC woul d be less than significant, PAR 1144 is not expected to generate significant for health risk.

Since the adverse impacts from the proposed project would rema in not significant, no new or additional mitigation would be required. Therefore, the proposed chan ges to PAR 1144 are not considered a “substantial revision” under CEQA Guidelines §15073.5 (b) a nd would not require recirculation under CEQA Guidelines §15073.5 (a).