Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report APPENDIX R

Transcription

1 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report APPENDIX R AIR QUALITY IMPACTS AND HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM State Clearinghouse Number:

2

3 APPENDIX R Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Attachment A Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Transportation Conformity Working Group of the Southern California Association of Governments September 24, 2013 Minutes

4

5 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum July 1, 2014 Prepared for Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority One Gateway Plaza Los Angeles, CA State Clearinghouse Number:

6 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum This technical memorandum was prepared by: CDM Smith 523 West Sixth Street Suite 400 Los Angeles, California /1/2014 Page ii

7 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum TABLE OF CONTENTS This addendum contains updates of all sections of the Air Quality Technical Memorandum except as indicated by No Updates below. 1.0 Summary Operational Emissions Results CEQA Analysis NEPA Analysis CO Hot Spots Construction Emission Results Regional Construction Emissions SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) Mitigation Measures A Introduction (No Updates) A Methodology for Impact Evaluation A Regulatory Framework A Federal A Local A Thresholds of Significance A NEPA Guidelines A CEQA Guidelines A Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Guidance for Air Quality Conformity A Methodology A Regional Operational Emissions A Health Risk Assessment /1/2014 Page iii

8 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A CO Hot Spots A Construction Emissions A Affected Environment A Area of Analysis A Existing Operational Emissions A Criteria Pollutant Emissions A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions A CO Hot Spots A Impacts A No Build Alternative A Operational Impacts A Criteria Pollutant Emissions A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions A CO Hot Spots A Construction Impacts A Cumulative Impacts A Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative A Operational Impacts A Criteria Pollutant Emissions A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions A CO Hot Spots A Construction Impacts A Cumulative Impacts A State Route 60 (SR 60) Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative /1/2014 Page iv

9 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A Operational Impacts A Criteria Pollutant Emissions A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions A CO Hot Spots A Construction Impacts A Criteria Pollutants A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions A Cumulative Impacts A Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative A Operational Impacts A Criteria Pollutant Emissions A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions A CO Hot Spots A Construction Impacts A Criteria Pollutants A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions A Cumulative Impacts A Potential Mitigation Measures A Conclusions A No Build Alternative A NEPA Finding A CEQA Determination A Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative A NEPA Finding /1/2014 Page v

10 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A CEQA Determination A State Route 60 (SR 60) Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative A NEPA Finding A CEQA Determination A Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative A NEPA Finding A CEQA Determination A References Cited Attachment A Emission Calculations TABLES Table 1-1A. Incremental Daily Operational Emissions Compared to Baseline Year (2010)... 2 Table 1-2A. Incremental Daily Operational Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035)... 1 Table 1-3A. Incremental Daily Project Operational Emissions as Built in 2010 Compared to the Baseline Year (2010)... 4 Table 1-4A. Incremental Annual Operational Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035) 4 Table 1-5A. Incremental Annual Regional Highway TAC Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035)... 6 Table 1-6A. Summary of CO Hot Spots Analysis (Localized Concentrations of CO)... 8 Table 1-7A. Summary of Unmitigated Peak Daily Construction Emissions Table 1-8A. Summary of Construction TAC Emissions and Tier 1 Health Risk Assessment Table 3-1A. National and California Ambient Air Quality Standards Table 3-2A. Federal and State Attainment Status Table 3-3A. Federal Thresholds Table 3-4A. SCAQMD Mass Daily Thresholds Table 4-1A. Existing Conditions (2010) Highway Traffic Emissions Table 4-2A. Existing Conditions (2010) Transit Bus Operations Emissions /1/2014 Page vi

11 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 4-3A. Existing Conditions (2010) Total Operational Emissions Table 4-4A. Existing Conditions (2010) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic Table 4-5A. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Baseline (2010). 26 Table 5-1A. No Build Alternative (2035) Highway Traffic Emissions Table 5-2A. No Build Alternative (2035) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Table 5-3A. No Build Alternative (2035) Total Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic and Buses Table 5-4A. No Build Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic Table 5-5A. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the No Build Alternative (2035) Table 5-6A. TSM Alternative (2035) Highway Traffic Emissions Table 5-7A. TSM Alternative (2035) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Table 5-8A. TSM Alternative (2035) Total Operational Emissions Table 5-9A. TSM Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic.. 34 Table 5-10A. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the TSM Alternative (2035) Table 5-11A. SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Highway Traffic Emissions Table 5-12A. SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Parking Lot Emissions Table 5-13A. SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Table 5-14A. SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Total Operational Emissions Table 5-15A. SR 60 LRT Alternative Total Operational Emissions as Built in Table 5-16A. SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic Table 5-17A. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Table 5-18A. SR 60 LRT Alternative ( ) Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Table 5-19A. SR 60 LRT Alternative Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) for Construction Emissions Table 5-20A. SR 60 LRT Alternative ( ) Construction Health Risk Assessment Table 5-21A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Highway Traffic Emissions /1/2014 Page vii

12 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 5-22A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Parking Lot Emissions Table 5-23A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Table 5-24A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Total Operational Emissions Table 5-25A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Total Operational Emissions as Built in Table 5-26A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic Table 5-27A. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Table 5-28A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) with Santa Fe Springs Maintenance Yard Option Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Table 5-29A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) with Commerce Maintenance Yard Option Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Table 5-30A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) with Mission Junction Maintenance Yard Option Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Table 5-31A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) for Construction Emissions Table 5-32A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative with the Santa Fe Springs Maintenance Yard ( ) Construction Health Risk Assessment Table 5-33A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative with the Commerce Maintenance Yard ( ) Construction Health Risk Assessment /1/2014 Page viii

13 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS LIST AQMP BAAQMD CAA CAAQS Caltrans CARB CAS CCAA CEQA CFR CO DPM EMFAC FHWA FR FTA g/mi HRA lbs/day lbs/hr lbs/yr LRT LRTP Air Quality Management Plan Bay Area Air Quality Management District Federal Clean Air Act California Ambient Air Quality Standards California Department of Transportation California Air Resources Board Chemical Abstracts Service California Clean Air Act California Environmental Quality Act Code of Federal Regulations Carbon Monoxide Diesel Particulate Matter Emissions Factor Model Federal Highway Administration Federal Register Federal Transit Administration grams per mile Health Risk Assessment pounds per day pounds per hour pounds per year Light Rail Transit Long Range Transportation Plan 7/1/2014 Page ix

14 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum LRV µg/m 3 N/A NAAQS NEPA NO 2 NOx O 3 Pb PM 10 PM 2.5 ppm RTP SIP SCAG SCAQMD SCS SO 2 SoCAB SOx Light Rail Vehicle micrograms per cubic meter Not Applicable National Ambient Air Quality Standards National Environmental Policy Act Nitrogen Dioxide Nitrogen Oxides Ozone Lead Inhalable Particulate Matter Fine Particulate Matter parts per million Regional Transportation Plan State Implementation Plan Southern California Association of Governments South Coast Air Quality Management District Sustainable Communities Strategy Sulfur Dioxide South Coast Air Basin Sulfur Oxides SR 60 State Route 60 TAC TOG TSM Toxic Air Contaminant Total Organic Gases Transportation System Management 7/1/2014 Page x

15 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum tpy USEPA VMT VOC tons per year U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Vehicle Miles Traveled Volatile Organic Compounds 7/1/2014 Page xi

16 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum 1.0 SUMMARY Addenda have been prepared to technical memoranda on environmental topics that have had substantive updates during preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR). The addenda are meant to supplement the original technical memoranda, and, where relevant, the information provided in the addenda supersede obsolete information in the original memoranda. Substantive updates occurred as a result of, but not limited to, the following reasons substantive input provided by cooperating agencies; Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), which was adopted after the original technical memoranda were prepared; updates to the project construction schedule and methods which were refined based on project evolution and input from cooperating agencies; 2011 Whittier Narrows Dam Basin Master Plan, which was adopted after the original technical memoranda were prepared; and 2010 Census update, which was unavailable at the time the original technical memoranda were prepared. The addenda follow the same outline as the original technical memoranda. An A is included after each section number in this addendum to differentiate sections in the addenda from sections in the original technical memorandum. Only discussions where updates have been made are included in this addendum. This addendum includes the update of emissions inventories for operations and carbon monoxide (CO) hot spots analysis based on the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) and updated vehicle emission model, EMFAC2011. Additionally, emissions associated with construction activities were revised to use the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version CalEEMod replaces the URBEMIS model, which was previously used, and incorporates the EMFAC2011 emission model and updated emission factors for off-road construction equipment. This addendum also includes the following updates to the Methodology for Impact Evaluation Section: updates to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) and sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ); updates to the federal attainment status for nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), and lead (Pb); updates to the current, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)-approved state implementation plans (SIP) for each federal nonattainment or maintenance pollutant in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB); and updates to the air quality modeling methodology. This analysis discusses criteria pollutants and toxic air contaminants (TACs). Criteria pollutants, which are regulated by human health-based permissible levels (hence, criteria ), include six common pollutants: particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ), ozone (O 3 ) 1 (commonly known as smog ), CO, SO 2, NO 2, and lead Pb. Several common TACs associated with mobile sources, such as passenger vehicles, include: toluene, xylenes, acrolein, and diesel particulate matter (DPM). In assessing the difference in vehicle-related air pollutant emissions for future conditions with and without the project, the amount of change was compared to thresholds of significance developed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to evaluate project significance under CEQA. The increment between a proposed future alternative (2035) and the No Build Alternative (2035) was also compared against general conformity thresholds established in 40 Code of Federal 1 Ozone is a secondary pollutant, formed from precursor compounds - volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) - in the presence of sunlight. Since the formation of ozone is complex and difficult to assess on a project level, air quality impact analyses address ozone by analyzing emissions of the NOx and VOC precursors instead. 7/1/2014 Page 1

17 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Regulations (CFR) 93 Subpart B. A transportation conformity analysis was also completed and was focused on CO. Updated construction emissions findings for all the alternatives remain the same as the findings in the original technical memorandum. Updated operational emissions findings are now less than significant for the TSM, SR 60 LRT Alternative, and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative for all criteria pollutants. The findings for operational emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) are now not adverse or significant under NEPA and CEQA prior to incorporation of mitigation for any of the build alternatives. 1.1 Operational Emissions Results CEQA Analysis Table 1-1A summarizes the updated incremental increase in daily emissions associated with each alternative, as measured against the 2010 baseline year. Detailed emissions for each alternative are shown in Section 5.0.A. Future emission levels will be affected primarily by regional growth and associated increases in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) that are projected to occur between 2010 and Despite the increase in VMT, improvements in engine technology are expected to reduce emission rates of several pollutants in future years, including volatile organic compounds (VOCs), CO, and NOx. These reductions are shown in parentheses in Table 1-1A. As shown in Table 1-2A, compared to the No Build Alternative, the updated daily incremental operational emissions associated with each alternative would decrease for all pollutants under all alternatives. Emissions from new bus routes under each of the alternatives would increase the contribution of bus emissions. However, overall, vehicular travel from the highway network would decrease as a result of the project. This result would be consistent with air quality goals in the region. Table 1-1A. 1. Incremental Daily Operational Emissions Compared to Baseline Year (2010) Alternative Incremental Emissions 1,2 (lbs/day) VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 No Build (43,817) (1,251,496) (205,129) 1, ,235 34,067 TSM (43,858) (1,252,462) (205,225) 1, ,882 33,970 SR 60 LRT (43,853) (1,252,473) (205,252) 1, ,870 33,966 Washington Boulevard LRT (43,853) (1,252,470) (205,239) 1, ,872 33,967 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Incremental emissions are determined by subtracting the given alternative emissions from the Baseline (2010) emissions. 2 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Key: CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day LRT = light rail transit NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide TSM = Transportation System Management VOC = volatile organic compounds 7/1/2014 Page 2

18 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 1-2A. 1. Incremental Daily Operational Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035) Alternative Incremental Emissions 1,2 (lbs/day) VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TSM (41) (966) (96) (5) (353) (96) SR 60 LRT (36) (977) (123) (5) (364) (101) Washington Boulevard LRT (36) (974) (110) (5) (363) (100) CEQA Threshold Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Incremental emissions are determined by subtracting the given alternative emissions from the No Build Alternative emissions. 2 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. 3 SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds (SCAQMD 2011) Key: CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day LRT = light rail transit NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide TSM = Transportation System Management VOC = volatile organic compounds Table 1-3A summarizes the updated incremental daily operational emissions associated with the State Route 60 (SR 60) Light Rail Transit (LRT) and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives if built in 2010 as compared to existing conditions. The effect of the proposed project on the existing regional traffic conditions is quantified. The daily incremental operational emissions associated with both of the build alternatives decrease for all pollutants; thus all operational emission impacts are less than significant under CEQA. Overall, vehicular travel would decrease as a result of the project, which would be consistent with air quality goals in the region. Updates to emission inventories as part of this addendum resulted in no increase in emissions. Therefore, the Health risk under the proposed project was not evaluated because there would be no increase in emissions. No mitigation measures are required for the operation of either of the build alternatives NEPA Analysis Table 1-4A summarizes the updated incremental annual operational emissions compared to the No Build Alternative. Each of the alternatives would reduce highway VMT, but would increase VMT associated with new bus routes when compared to the No Build Alternative. Total operational emissions of criteria pollutants would decrease for all alternatives compared to those under the No Build Alternative. 7/1/2014 Page 1

19 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 1-3A. 1. Incremental Daily Project Operational Emissions as Built in 2010 Compared to the Baseline Year (2010) Alternative Incremental Emissions 1,2 (lbs/day) VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 SR 60 LRT (71,805) (1,705,483) (340,205) (2) (4,888) (4,992) Washington Boulevard LRT (71,803) (1,705,418) (340,180) (1) (4,860) (4,984) CEQA Threshold Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Incremental emissions are determined by subtracting the given alternative emissions from the 2010 existing emissions. Emission factors used in analysis were based on 2010 conditions for existing conditions and 2035 for future build alternatives. 2 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. 3 SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds (SCAQMD 2011) Key: CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day LRT = light rail transit NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide VOC = volatile organic compounds Table 1-4A. 1. Incremental Annual Operational Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035) Alternative Incremental Emissions (tpy) 1,2 VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TSM (6) (154) (15) (1) (56) (15) SR 60 LRT (6) (155) (19) (1) (58) (16) Washington Boulevard LRT (6) (154) (17) (1) (57) (16) NEPA Threshold Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Incremental emissions are determined by subtracting the given alternative emissions from the No Build Alternative emissions. 2 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. 3 NEPA thresholds from 40 CFR Key: CO = carbon monoxide LRT = light rail transit NEPA = National Environmental Policy Act NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year TSM = Transportation System Management VOC = volatile organic compounds 7/1/2014 Page 4

20 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum As shown in Table 1-5A, updated incremental emissions of TACs would be less than those under the No Build Alternative for all pollutants and alternatives. As a result, it was not necessary to complete an HRA for the updated operational emissions and there would be no impacts from TACs under CEQA or NEPA. The TAC analysis was based only on regional traffic and assumed that the majority of vehicles would be gasoline fueled. Although many vehicles would also use diesel or alternative fuels, assuming all equipment would be gasoline fueled provides conservative estimate of organic emissions. Increases in DPM would not occur between each alternative and the No Build Alternative because of the reduction in VMT. Furthermore, although there would be an increase in transit bus VMT, Metro s current fleet uses only compressed natural gas and associated TAC emissions would be minimal. Table 1-5A. 1. Incremental Annual Regional Highway TAC Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035) Pollutant Incremental Emissions 1 (lbs/year) CAS # TSM SR 60 LRT Washington Boulevard LRT Organic Compounds Butadiene, (120) (124) (124) Acetaldehyde (53) (54) (55) Acrolein (30) (30) (31) Benzene (576) (595) (596) Ethylbenzene (234) (242) (243) Formaldehyde (371) (384) (384) Methyl alcohol (89) (92) (92) Methyl ethyl ketone (4) (4) (4) Methyl t-butyl ether (424) (438) (439) Xylene, m (796) (822) (824) Naphthalene (10) (11) (11) Hexane, n (346) (358) (358) Xylene, o (277) (286) (286) Propylene (684) (706) (708) Styrene (28) (28) (29) Toluene (1,285) (1,328) (1,331) 7/1/2014 Page 6

21 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 1-5A. 1. Incremental Annual Regional Highway TAC Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035) Pollutant Incremental Emissions 1 (lbs/year) CAS # TSM SR 60 LRT Washington Boulevard LRT Inorganic Compounds Arsenic (1) (2) (2) Cadmium (<1) (<1) (<1) Chlorine (257) (266) (266) Copper (180) (186) (186) Lead (14) (14) (14) Manganese (107) (110) (110) Mercury (1) (1) (1) Nickel (12) (12) (12) Selenium (1) (1) (1) Source: CDM Smith 2013 Note: 1 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Key: CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/year = pounds per year LRT = light rail transit TAC = toxic air contaminant TSM = Transportation System Management CO Hot Spots This technical memorandum evaluates the significance of localized concentrations of CO under the proposed project using methodology in the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines (1999) and the requirements of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (CO Protocol) (1997). The screening analysis estimates worst-case CO concentrations by evaluating the lane configurations and traffic volumes. The five intersections with the most potential for adverse impacts, based on peak hourly traffic volume, were selected for further analysis using the screening analysis. The SR 60 LRT and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives cover different geographic areas; therefore, in addition to the five worst-volume intersections, which are in the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative area, the intersection with the highest volume that would be affected by the SR 60 LRT Alternative was analyzed. 7/1/2014 Page 7

22 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum The updated concentrations of CO at the analyzed intersections would not exceed the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) or National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Thus, the CO hot spots would not be significant. The results of the analysis are provided in Table 1-6A. Table 1-6A. 1. Summary S of CO Hot Spots Analysis (Localized Concentrations of CO) ID Intersection Max. CO Conc. (ppm) 1 Significant? 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 2 8-Hour 3 Existing Conditions (2010) 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue No No 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard No No 35 Washington Boulevard & Rosemead Boulevard No No 36 Washington Boulevard & Passons Boulevard No No 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard No No 38 Washington Boulevard & Norwalk Boulevard No No No Build Alternative (2035) 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue No No 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard No No 35 Washington Boulevard & Rosemead Boulevard No No 36 Washington Boulevard & Passons Boulevard No No 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard No No 38 Washington Boulevard & Norwalk Boulevard No No TSM Alternative (2035) 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue No No 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard No No 35 Washington Boulevard & Rosemead Boulevard No No 36 Washington Boulevard & Passons Boulevard No No 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard No No 7/1/2014 Page 8

23 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 1-6A. 1. Summary S of CO Hot Spots Analysis (Localized Concentrations of CO) ID Intersection Max. CO Conc. (ppm) 1 Significant? 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 2 8-Hour 3 38 Washington Boulevard & Norwalk Boulevard No No LRT Alternatives (2035) 4 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue No No 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard No No 35 Washington Boulevard & Rosemead Boulevard No No 36 Washington Boulevard & Passons Boulevard No No 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard No No 38 Washington Boulevard & Norwalk Boulevard No No Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Maximum concentrations for a given year include the ambient background CO concentrations (1-hour and 8-hour) for that year. 2 1-Hour CAAQS = 9.0 ppm; 1-Hour NAAQS = 9 ppm 3 8-Hour CAAQS = 20 ppm; 8-Hour NAAQS = 35 ppm 4 Intersection 11 was analyzed only for the proposed SR 60 LRT Alternative. Intersections 33, 35, 36, 37 and 38 would not be affected by the proposed SR 60 LRT Alternative and were only analyzed for the proposed Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative. Key: CO = carbon monoxide LRT = Light Rail Transit ppm = parts per million TSM = Transportation System Management 1.2 Construction Emission Results Since preparation of the original technical memorandum, updates to the project construction schedule and methods have been made. This addendum contains updated potential construction emissions based on updates to the construction schedule and methods and compares them to thresholds of significance published by the SCAQMD as well as evaluates localized impacts for significance. Thus, this section summarizes updated construction air quality impacts locally and regionally Regional Construction Emissions Updated emissions from construction of the project were analyzed under CEQA. Thresholds of significance developed for CEQA were also used for the NEPA analysis, since CEQA requirements are at least as stringent as NEPA requirements. Construction emissions would not occur if not for the project; therefore, baseline emissions (No Build Alternative) were assumed to be zero. Although the TSM Alternative would have minimal construction activities, emissions were not quantified because they are expected to be negligible. Updated, short-term, peak, daily emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, SO 2, 7/1/2014 Page 9

24 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum PM 10, and PM 2.5 would not exceed thresholds of significance for CEQA under all build alternatives. Emissions are summarized in Table 1-7A. Construction activities would result in an increase in TAC emissions as compared to the No Build Alternative; therefore, an updated HRA was completed for acute health effects from construction. Since the TSM Alternative would only involve minimal construction activities that were not quantified, only updated emissions from the SR 60 and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives are provided. Table 1-8A summarizes updated TAC emissions from the project and the results of the SCAQMD s Tier 1 HRA. The Tier 1 evaluation essentially compares TAC emissions to a series of look-up tables published by the SCAQMD. If the application screening index (ASI) is less than 1, then impacts would be less than significant (SCAQMD 2005). Since the ASI is less than 1 for both the SR 60 and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives, then updated health risk-related impacts would be less than significant. Table 1-7A 1 7A.. Summary of Unmitigated Peak Daily Construction Emissions Alternative SR 60 LRT Alternative with Mission Junction Yard Option Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative with Santa Fe Springs Yard Option Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative with Commerce Yard Option Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative with Mission Junction Yard Option Unmitigated Peak Daily Construction Emissions (lbs/day) 1 VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM < < < < Threshold of Significance Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Emissions shown are for all phases of construction, including street widening and construction of the guideways, stations, parking facilities, and maintenance yard. 2 SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds (SCAQMD 2011) Key: CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day LRT = light rail transit NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide VOC = volatile organic compounds 7/1/2014 Page 10

25 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 1-8A. 1. Summary of Construction TAC Emissions and Tier 1 Health Risk Assessment Pollutant CAS Emissions (lbs/hr) Acute PSL (lbs/hr) Acute PSI SR 60 LRT Alternative Arsenic Chlorine Copper Mercury Nickel ASI 0.11 Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative 1 Arsenic Chlorine Copper Mercury Nickel ASI 0.10 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Note: 1 Maximum emissions from the three Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives (with Mission Junction, Commerce, and Santa Fe Springs maintenance yard options) summarized in table. Key: TAC = toxic air contaminants CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/hr = pounds per hour PSL = pollutant screening level PSI = pollutant screening index SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) Updated maximum daily emissions for each project construction activity, considering their locations, were compared to relevant LSTs. The construction phases included in the LST analysis included street widening and construction of the elevated guideways, parking facilities, and the maintenance yard. The comparison assumes a one-acre site for each construction activity and a distance of 25 meters (82 feet) to the nearest sensitive receptor. This approach provides conservative results for the LST analysis. 7/1/2014 Page 11

26 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Construction of the Mission Junction maintenance yard for the SR 60 LRT and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives would result in significant emissions of PM 10 ; however, construction of the Commerce or Santa Fe Springs maintenance yards would not result in significant impacts for any pollutant. After mitigation measures, emissions of all pollutants would be less than LST thresholds. Thus, construction-related pollutant concentrations would not be significant. 1.3 Mitigation Measures Updated operational and construction emissions are anticipated to be less than significant or not adverse for all alternatives; therefore, no mitigation would be required. 7/1/2014 Page 12

27 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A.A INTRODUCTION (NO UPDATES) There are no updates to this section. 7/1/2014 Page 13

28 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum 3.0.A.A METHODOLOGY FOR IMPACT EVALUATION This section describes the methodology and assumptions for analysis of potential impacts to air quality and assessment of health risks. This section includes the following updates, which supersedes information from the original technical memorandum where applicable: updates to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) and sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ); updates to the federal attainment status for nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), and lead (Pb); updates to the current, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)-approved state implementation plans (SIP) for each federal nonattainment or maintenance pollutant in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB); and updates to the air quality modeling methodology. All other air quality regulations and thresholds are included in this addendum as background information and to allow comparison of updated emissions generated by each alternative to the appropriate threshold A.A Regulatory Framework Federal, state, and local governments all share responsibility for air quality management. The Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) are the primary statutes that establish ambient air quality standards. They establish regulatory authorities to design and enforce air quality regulations A.A Federal Table 3-1A presents the current NAAQS for criteria air pollutants. The CAA specifies dates for achieving compliance with NAAQS and mandates that states submit, implement, and enforce a SIP to attain and maintain the NAAQS. SIPs must include pollution control measures and demonstrate how standards will be met. The CAA identifies specific emission reduction goals for areas not meeting NAAQS. The CAA requires a demonstration of reasonable further progress toward attainment and provides additional sanctions for failure to attain or meet interim milestones. The SoCAB is designated as a federal nonattainment area for O 3, PM 2.5, and Pb. Nonattainment designations are classified into levels of severity based on the pollutant concentration levels that determine the mandated attainment date. In 1998, the USEPA designated the SoCAB as an attainment/maintenance area for NO 2 because NO 2 levels in SoCAB dropped below NAAQS in the early 1990s. The USEPA designated SoCAB as a maintenance area for CO in 2007 and PM 10 in An attainment/maintenance designation means a pollutant was previously in nonattainment but was redesignated as attainment. It indicates measures included in the SIP are intended to ensure that the NAAQS for a pollutant are not exceeded. Table 3-2A presents the attainment designation and classification, where applicable, for each of the federal criteria air pollutants. 7/1/2014 Page 14

29 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 3-1A. National and California Ambient Air Quality Standards Pollutant Averaging Time CAAQS NAAQS Primary NAAQS Secondary Ozone (O 3) Inhalable particulate matter (PM 10) Fine particulate matter (PM 2.5) 1 Carbon monoxide (CO) 1-Hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg /m 3 ) NS NS 8-Hour ppm (137 µg /m 3 ) ppm (147 µg/m 3 ) Same as primary 24-Hour 50 µg /m µg/m 3 Same as primary Annual 20 µg /m 3 NS NS 24-Hour No separate State standard 35 µg/m 3 Same as primary Annual 12 µg /m µg/m µg/m 3 1-Hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m 3 ) 35 ppm (40 mg/m 3 ) NS 8-Hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m 3 ) 9 ppm (10 mg/m 3 ) NS Nitrogen 1-Hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m ) ppm (188 µg/m 3 ) NS dioxide (NO 2) 2 Annual ppm (57 µg/m 3 ) ppm (100 µg/m 3 ) Same as primary 1-Hour 0.25 ppm (655 µg/m 3 ) ppm (196 µg/m3) NS Sulfur dioxide (SO 2) 3 3-Hour NS NS 0.5 ppm (1,300 µg/m 3 ) 24-Hour 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m 3 ) 0.14 ppm (366 µg/m 3 ) NS Annual NS ppm (79 µg/m 3 ) NS 30-Day Average 1.5 µg/m 3 NS NS Lead (Pb) 4 Calendar Quarter NS 1.5 µg/m 3 Same as primary Rolling 3-Month Average NS 0.15 µg/m 3 Same as primary Source: CARB 2013c Notes: 1 On January 15, 2013, the USEPA published a final rule to lower the annual PM 2.5 NAAQS to 12.0 µg/m 3. The final rule is effective on March 18, 2013 (78 FR 3086). 2 On February 9, 2010, the USEPA finalized a rule to supplement the current annual NO 2 standard by establishing a new 1-hour NO 2 standard at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), based on the three-year average of the 98 th percentile of the yearly distribution of the 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. The final rule was effective on April 12, 2010 (75 FR 6474). 3 On June 22, 2010, the USEPA finalized a rule to establish a new 1-hour primary SO 2 NAAQS of 75 parts per billion by volume (ppbv), based on the 3-year average of the annual 99 th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations (75 FR 35520). The USEPA also revoked the previous 24-hour and annual primary SO 2 NAAQS. The 1971 SO 2 NAAQS (0.14 parts per million [ppm] and ppm for 24-hour and annual averaging periods) remain in effect until one year after an area is designated for the hour primary standard. The USEPA is not currently prepared to propose designation action in California and is deferring action related to area designations (78 FR 47191). 4 On November 12, 2008, the USEPA revised the primary Pb standard to 0.15 µg/m 3 and revised the averaging period to a rolling three-month period with a not-to-be-exceeded form, evaluated over a three-year period (73 FR 66964). The 1978 Pb NAAQS (1.5 µg/m 3 as a quarterly average) remained in effect until one year after an area is designated for the 2008 standard. On December 31, 2010, final area designations for the 2008 Pb standards became effective; therefore, the 1978 Pb NAAQS is no longer in effect in California (75 FR 71033). Key: NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standard CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standard ppm = parts per million µg/m 3 = micrograms per cubic meter mg/m 3 = milligrams per cubic meter NS = no standard 7/1/2014 Page 15

30 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 3-2A. Federal and State Attainment Status Pollutant State Status Federal Status O 3 Nonattainment, Extreme 1 Nonattainment, Extreme 2 PM 10 Nonattainment Maintenance 3 PM 2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment 4 CO Attainment Maintenance NO 2 Nonattainment Maintenance SO 2 Attainment Attainment Pb Nonattainment Nonattainment 5 Source: CARB 2013b; USEPA 2013 Notes: 1 The area classification (extreme) is only applicable to the 1-hour O 3 CAAQS. The SoCAB is classified as a nonattainment area for both the 1-hour and 8-hour O 3 CAAQS. 2 On May 5, 2010, the USEPA issued a final Federal Register notice to reclassify the SoCAB nonattainment area from severe-17 to extreme (75 FR 24409). The area is designated nonattainment extreme for the 1997 and hour ozone standards. 3 On June 26, 2013, the USEPA issued a final Federal Register notice to redesignate the SoCAB PM 10 nonattainment area to attainment (78 FR 38223). 4 On November 13, 2009, the USEPA issued a final Federal Register notice designating the attainment status for the 24-hour NAAQS for PM 2.5 (74 FR 58688). The rule was effective on December 14, On November 22, 2010, the USEPA issued a final Federal Register notice designating the attainment status for the 2008 Pb NAAQS (75 FR 71033). The Los Angeles County portion of the SoCAB was designated as nonattainment for the Pb NAAQS. The rule was effective on December 31, Key: O 3 = ozone PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter CO = carbon monoxide NO 2 = nitrogen dioxide SO 2 = sulfur dioxide Pb = lead A Local The SCAQMD has adopted a series of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) to meet the CAAQS and NAAQS. These plans mandate control technology for existing sources, control programs for area sources and indirect sources, a permitting system designed to ensure no net increase in emissions from any new or modified permitted sources of emissions, transportation control measures, sufficient control strategies to achieve a five percent or more annual reduction in emissions (or 15 percent or more in a three-year period) for VOC, NOx, CO, and PM 10, and demonstration of compliance with California Air Resources Board s (CARB s) established reporting periods for compliance with air quality goals. The current, USEPA-approved SIPs for each federal nonattainment or maintenance pollutant in the SoCAB are summarized below: O 3 No USEPA-approved SIP previous approvals were withdrawn on March 28, 2013 (78 FR 18849) 7/1/2014 Page 16

31 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum PM maintenance plan and request for re-designation to attainment status approved by USEPA on June 26, 2013 (78 FR 38223). PM 2.5 Partially USEPA-approved SIP (76 FR 69928). CO 2005 maintenance plan and request for re-designation to attainment status, approved by USEPA on May 11, 2007 (72 FR 26718) NO 2 SIP approved by USEPA on July 24, 1998 (63 FR 39747), based on the 1997 AQMP. In this SIP approval, USEPA also re-designated the SoCAB from nonattainment to attainment/maintenance for NO 2. Pb 2012 Lead SIP was approved by CARB on May 4, On June 1, 2007, SCAQMD adopted a comprehensive update, the 2007 AQMP for the SoCAB. The 2007 AQMP outlines air pollution control measures needed to meet federal O 3 and PM 2.5 standards. The 2007 AQMP was approved by CARB and submitted to USEPA for its final approval on September 27, The USEPA approved in part and disapproved in part the 2007 AQMP (76 FR 69928). The SCAQMD adopted the 2012 AQMP on December 7, 2012 and CARB approved the 2012 AQMP on January 25, CARB submitted the 2012 AQMP to the USEPA for approval on February 13, 2013 (CARB 2013a) A.A Thresholds of Significance This section presents the thresholds of significance for the NEPA analysis and CEQA analysis. In addition, a discussion of the CAA Conformity Evaluation methodology is also provided A.A NEPA Guidelines Potentially adverse impacts may occur if project emissions exceed the thresholds shown in Table 3-3A. Project emissions are defined as the increment between a future alternative and a future no action alternative. If project emissions do not exceed these thresholds, then it would indicate that the project would not cause or contribute to emission levels that exceed a NAAQS; thus, emissions would not be significant under NEPA. Table 3-3A. Federal Thresholds Pollutants Attainment Status Emissions Increase (tpy) Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 1,2 Nonattainment, Extreme (Ozone) 10 Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) 1,3 Nonattainment, Extreme (Ozone) 10 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Maintenance 100 Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2) 4 Attainment, PM 2.5 precursor 100 Inhalable Particulate Matter (PM 10) 5 Maintenance 100 7/1/2014 Page 17

32 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 3-3A. Federal Thresholds Pollutants Attainment Status Emissions Increase (tpy) Fine Particulate Matter (PM 2.5) Nonattainment 100 Ammonia 6 Attainment, PM 2.5 precursor 100 Lead(Pb) Nonattainment 25 Source: 40 CFR Notes: 1 On May 5, 2010, the USEPA reclassified the SoCAB from severe-17 nonattainment to extreme nonattainment for ozone (75 FR 24409). This action reduced the threshold of significance from 25 tpy to 10 tpy for VOC and NOx. 2 As a precursor to PM 2.5, VOC also has a threshold of 100 tpy. Since the 10 tpy threshold for VOC as an O 3 precursor is more conservative, that value is used in the analysis. 3 As a precursor to both NO 2 and PM 2.5, NOx also has a threshold of 100 tpy. Since the 10 tpy threshold for NOx as an O 3 precursor is more conservative, that value is used in the analysis. 4 Although the SoCAB is in attainment of SO 2, any precursors to nonattainment pollutants are also subject to de minimis thresholds; therefore, since SO 2 is a precursor to PM 2.5, which is in nonattainment, it is subject to the given emissions threshold. 5 On June 26, 2013, the USEPA issued a final Federal Register notice to redesignate the SoCAB PM 10 nonattainment area to attainment (78 FR 38223). This action increased the threshold of significance from 70 tpy to 100 tpy for PM Ammonia, although not a criteria pollutant, is a precursor to PM 2.5, and as such has a threshold of 100 tpy. Incremental project emissions were determined for motor vehicles based on the change in regional VMT between each alternative and the No Build Alternative. Changes in VMT were obtained for each alternative for passenger vehicles and transit buses. It was assumed that the electric LRT motors would not generate any local exhaust emissions. The analysis included CO concentration impacts at six intersections. Screening assessments, based on traffic volume, were used to identify the intersections that would be expected to have the highest potential CO concentrations. The worst five of these intersections were analyzed for CO concentrations for comparison to the CO NAAQS. If the impacts at those intersections would be less than significant, then it was assumed that CO concentrations at the remaining intersections in the project area would be less than significant A.A CEQA Guidelines The SCAQMD is the agency given primary responsibility for developing plans, programs, rules and regulations that will improve the air quality in the SoCAB. The SCAQMD published CEQA significance thresholds for analyzing the significance of project air quality impacts in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SCAQMD 1993). Regular updates are published on the SCAQMD website (SCAQMD 2012). The SCAQMD thresholds for operational emissions are summarized in Table 3-4A. Project emissions greater than thresholds for a given air pollutant would be considered significant under CEQA. 7/1/2014 Page 18

33 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 3-4A.. SCAQMD Mass Daily Thresholds Pollutant Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Inhalable Particulate Matter (PM 10) Fine Particulate Matter (PM 2.5) Oxides of Sulfur (SOx) Carbon Monoxide (CO) Lead (Pb) Operation 55 lbs/day 55 lbs/day 150 lbs/day 55 lbs/day 150 lbs/day 550 lbs/day 3 lbs/day Source: SCAQMD A.A Federal Transit Administration (FTA( FTA) Guidance for Air Quality Conformity Approval, funding, or implementation of Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and FTA projects is subject to the transportation conformity regulations under the CAA (40 CFR 93 Subpart A). The SoCAB is defined as a nonattainment area for O 3, PM 2.5, and Pb and as a maintenance area for CO, PM 10, and NO 2. If a potential project is included in a conforming RTP and Regional Transportation Improvement Program, then the project is already included in the emission budgets developed for the region. Thus, a unique, regional analysis of project emissions would not be required; however, analysis regarding possible localized impacts is still required. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) adopted the RTP/ SCS and 2013 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). The FHWA/FTA made a positive transportation conformity determination in June 2012 for the RTP/SCS and December 2012 for the FTIP. The RTP/SCS and FTIP include the following project description for the Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 (Project ID LA0G626; RTP ID 1TR0704): Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension from its existing terminus at Atlantic Station in East Los Angeles farther east. In order for a FHWA/FTA project to be found to conform, regardless of whether it is in a conforming transportation plan or transportation improvement program or not, the following criteria and procedures must be followed: The conformity determination must be based upon the most recent planning assumptions in force at the time the conformity analysis begins The conformity determination must be based on the latest emission estimation model available, including EMFAC for California-based projects. 7/1/2014 Page 19

34 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Conformity must be determined according to the consultation procedures in 40 CFR 93 Subpart A; SCAG will be consulted regarding this project There must be a currently conforming Transportation Plan and currently conforming Transportation Improvement Program at the time of project approval The project must not cause or contribute to any new localized CO, PM 10, and/or PM 2.5 violations or increase the frequency of severity of any existing CO, PM 10, and PM 2.5 violations The project must comply with any PM 10 and PM 2.5 control measures in the applicable SIP. Because the Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Project is included in the RTP/SCS and the 2013 FTIP, it is considered to be a conforming project under transportation conformity. Answers to questions in Figures 1 of the Caltrans CO Protocol (UC Davis 1997) result in a requirement to examine local impacts. Although transportation conformity requires localized impacts of CO, PM 10, and PM 2.5 to be analyzed, PM hot spot analyses are only required for highway and transit projects that involve significant levels of diesel vehicle traffic. Additionally, the SCAG Transportation Conformity Working Group (TCWG) determined that the project is not a project of air quality concern and does not require project-level PM hot spot analyses for PM 10 and PM 2.5. Since the proposed project would not increase diesel traffic, PM hot spot analyses were not conducted and the localized impacts evaluation was focused on CO. 3.3.A.A Methodology A.A Regional Operational Emissions Regional emissions were calculated from projected VMT for each of the project alternatives. Regional VMT data was obtained for each alternative from the project traffic consultants. This analysis used the current USEPA-approved version of EMFAC to develop emission factors for different vehicle classes. EMFAC was also used to describe the on-road fleet mix (relative ratio of passenger cars, buses, delivery trucks, heavy duty diesel trucks, motorcycles, recreational vehicles, etc.) for the SoCAB in each year of the analysis. Emission factors for 30 miles per hour were used for traffic emissions based on 2010 VMT, and emission factors for 20 miles per hour were used for traffic emissions based on 2035 VMT. The build alternatives would include the addition of several parking spaces to accommodate passengers at several of the stations. The new parking spaces would result in a new source of VOC emissions from evaporative leaks from the fuel tanks. Evaporative emissions from vehicles left in the parking lots throughout the day were also estimated using EMFAC ROG emissions for Los Angeles County. SCAQMD average emission factors for urban buses from EMFAC were also used to estimate emissions from changes in transit buses. Emissions from powering the electric LRT vehicles were not assumed to occur locally and were therefore not estimated. However, operation of maintenance yards for LRT for the build alternatives were quantified (see Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum dated December 11, 2011). 7/1/2014 Page 20

35 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum The same emissions model, EMFAC2011, was used to estimate operational vehicle emissions for both NEPA and CEQA analyses A.A Health Risk Assessment CEQA analysis typically includes an HRA for sensitive receptors (e.g., residents, workers, school children) near the project site that are likely to be exposed to TACs emitted from project activities. Most TACs are categorized as organic (primarily volatile) or inorganic (primarily particulate) emissions. Therefore, emissions of TACs are typically calculated by applying chemical-specific mass fractions (also called speciation profiles) to the total organic gases (TOG) or PM 10 emission rates calculated for criteria pollutant emission inventories. CARB developed speciation profiles (CARB 2012) for a variety of sources, including diesel and gasoline motor vehicles and paved road dust. These speciation profiles were used with projected TOG and PM 10 emission levels to determine TAC emissions for each alternative. SCAQMD Rule 1401 was used to determine the TACs to be evaluated for risk. Twenty-five TACs were identified from the speciation profiles for mobile emission sources. Several common TACs from mobile sources include benzene, 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, acrolein, and DPM. This analysis calculated speciated emissions for exhaust, evaporation, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road dust. The proposed project is expected to have a long-term beneficial impact on TAC emissions. Therefore, additional health risk analysis was not conducted A.A CO Hot Spots To determine if a CO hot spot (high localized ambient concentration) is created due to activities of the proposed project, an analysis must be conducted to predict ambient CO concentrations from the near-field dispersion of the emissions. Figure 3 of the CO Protocol shows specific procedures and requirements for a local CO analysis. This analysis used the CO hotspots screening methodology in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines (1999), supported by information on CO concentrations in the SCAQMD CEQA Guidelines (1993), and the requirements of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (CO Protocol) (1997). Five intersections with the most potential for adverse impacts, based on peak hourly traffic volume, were selected for further analysis using the screening analysis. The SR 60 LRT and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives cover different geographic areas; therefore, in addition to the five worst-volume intersections, which are in the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative area, the intersection with the highest volume that would be affected by the SR 60 LRT Alternative was analyzed. The analysis estimates 1-hour intersection CO concentrations by scaling a reference case concentration (based on roadway type, number of lanes, elevation, and receptor distance) with 1,000 vehicles per hour and emission factor of 100 grams per mile to the intersection of interest based on its traffic volume and emission factor. The intersection configuration and traffic volumes were obtained from the traffic analysis completed for this proposed project. The average emission factors for Los Angeles County for years 2010 and 2035 were calculated using EMFAC2011. For a most conservative analysis, based on the reference concentration table in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, 7/1/2014 Page 21

36 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum the receptor was assumed to be at the edge of the road and when necessary, the number of lanes was rounded down. Ambient CO concentrations for the existing conditions (2010) were based on the maximum measured concentrations in South San Gabriel Valley between 2008 and For 2035, projected ambient CO concentrations for 1-hour and 8-hour averaging periods in the project area in year 2020 from the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook were used (5.1 ppm and 4.1 ppm, respectively) (SCAQMD, 1993). Based on historical CO data from the South San Gabriel Valley, the ratio of 8-hour CO concentration to 1-hour CO concentration is approximately hour intersection CO concentration was multiplied by 0.8 to convert to 8-hour CO concentration. Background concentrations were added to the calculated intersection concentrations and compared to the NAAQS and CAAQS A.A Construction Emissions Construction emissions were estimated for all components of each alternative including construction of stations and parking, rail lines, and the maintenance yard. Emissions from construction of the project were estimated using CalEEMod, Version Fugitive dust and engine exhaust emissions were characterized into the following main categories: Grading and excavation, Heavy-duty equipment on unpaved areas, Paved road dust (haul/delivery trucks), Loading/unloading of trucks, Architectural coatings, Vehicle trips (including construction worker commuting and haul/delivery trucks), and Asphalt paving. Emission reductions associated with applicable rules and regulations, such as SCAQMD Rule 403, were incorporated into the analysis. Additional mitigation measures and the potential reductions associated with those measures were identified for those pollutant emissions that were found to be significant. 7/1/2014 Page 22

37 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A.A AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT This section describes the area of analysis and the updated existing conditions. The existing operational emissions presented in the sections below supersede existing operational emissions presented in the original technical memorandum A.A Area of Analysis The air quality area of analysis includes the four-county region covered by the SoCAB (all of Orange County and the urban, non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties). 4.2.A.A Existing Operational Emissions A.A Criteria Pollutant P Emissions Table 4-1A provides a summary of highway (regional) traffic emissions in the project area. Table 4-2A summarizes the estimated emissions from transit buses for existing conditions. Total operational emissions from highway traffic and transit bus are presented in Table 4-3A. Table 4-1A.. Existing Conditions ( ) Highway Traffic Emissions Emissions VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 1 PM2.5 1 Emission Factor (g/mi) Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 3 96,360 2,356, ,963 3, ,408 83,149 Annual Emissions (tpy) 3 15, ,726 73, ,380 13,221 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 The emission factors for particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5) include engine exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road dust. 2 The EMFAC emission factors are based on the SoCAB geographic area fleet mix and an average vehicle speed of 30 miles per hour (based on traffic modeling information). 3 Daily and annual emissions are based on a regional daily estimate of 358,752,000 VMT (AECOM 2013a). An annualization factor of 318 days per year was used to estimate annual emissions. Key: CO = carbon monoxide g/mi = grams per mile lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds 7/1/2014 Page 23

38 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 4-2A.. Existing Conditions ( ) ) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Emissions VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 1 PM2.5 1 Emission Factor (g/mi) Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Annual Emissions (tpy) < Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 The emission factors for particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5) include engine exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road dust. 2 The EMFAC emission factors are based on the SCAQMD geographic area. 3 Daily miles traveled by the buses were estimated at approximately 24,120 (AECOM 2013b). 4 Annual miles traveled by buses were estimated at approximately 7,698,000 (AECOM 2013b). Key: CO = carbon monoxide g/mi = grams per mile lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds Table 4-3A. Existing Conditions ( ) Total Operational Emissions Emission Source VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Regional Traffic 96,360 2,356, ,963 3, ,408 83,149 Transit Buses Total 96,407 2,357, ,731 3, ,473 83,180 Annual Emissions (tpy) Regional Traffic 15, ,726 73, ,380 13,221 Transit Buses < Total 15, ,780 73, ,390 13,226 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Key: CO = carbon monoxide g/mi = grams per mile lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds A.A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions Operation of vehicles associated with this project would result in emissions of TACs. Table 4-4A summarizes TAC emissions from regional traffic. 7/1/2014 Page 24

39 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 4-4A.. Existing Conditions ( ) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic TAC CAS # (lbs/hr) Emissions (lbs/yr) Volatile Organic Compounds 1,3-Butadiene ,878 Acetaldehyde ,717 Acrolein ,497 Benzene ,025,058 Ethyl benzene ,867 Formaldehyde ,687 Methanol ,881 Methyl ethyl ketone ,389 Methyl t-butyl ether ,794 m-xylene ,415,482 Naphthalene ,666 n-hexane ,968 o-xylene ,918 Propylene ,216,381 Styrene ,997 Toluene ,286,548 Inorganic Compounds Arsenic <1 1,083 Cadmium <1 226 Chlorine ,783 Copper ,812 Lead ,215 7/1/2014 Page 25

40 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 4-4A.. Existing Conditions ( ) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic TAC CAS # (lbs/hr) Emissions (lbs/yr) Manganese ,475 Mercury <1 679 Nickel ,240 Selenium <1 400 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Key: TAC = toxic air contaminant CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/hr = pounds per hour lbs/yr = pounds per year A.A CO Hot Spots This study conducted a CO hot spots analysis for six intersections. As shown in Table 4-5A, under existing conditions, none of the study intersections would exceed the 1-hour or 8-hour CO CAAQS of 9 and 20 ppm, respectively. (The 8-hour CO NAAQS is 35 ppm and likewise would not be exceeded.) Table 4-5A.. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Baseline (2010) ID Intersection Traffic CO Conc. (ppm) 1 Max. CO Conc. (ppm) 2 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 3 8-Hour 4 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard Washington Boulevard & Rosemead Boulevard Washington Boulevard & Passons Boulevard Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard Washington Boulevard & Norwalk Boulevard Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: Key: 1 Traffic CO concentration from screening analysis. CO = carbon monoxide 2 Maximum CO concentration is traffic CO plus background concentration. ppm = parts per million 3 1-Hour CAAQS = 9.0 ppm; 1-Hour NAAQS = 9 ppm 4 8-Hour CAAQS = 20 ppm; 8-Hour NAAQS = 35 ppm 7/1/2014 Page 26

41 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A.A IMPACTS This section describes the results of the updated impact analysis conducted for the proposed Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Project. More detailed emission calculations and model outputs can be found in Attachment A of this addendum. The information presented in the sections below supersedes information provided in the original technical memorandum, where applicable A.A No Build Alternative The No Build Alternative would not create new emissions or have negative operational air quality impacts. Operational emissions could occur from exhaust emissions associated with regional traffic and buses A.A Operational Impacts A.A Criteria Pollutant Emissions Tables 5-1A and 5-2A summarize highway and transit bus operational emissions associated with the No Build Alternative. Table 5-3A summarizes the estimated total operational emissions. Table 5-1A.. No Build Alternative ( ) Highway Traffic Emissions Emissions VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 1 PM2.5 1 Exhaust Emission Factor (g/mi) Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 3 52,574 1,105, ,322 5, , ,223 Annual Emissions (tpy) 3 8, ,776 40, ,771 18,638 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 The emission factors for particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5) include engine exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road dust. 2 The EMFAC emission factors are based on the SoCAB geographic area and an average vehicle speed of 20 miles per hour (based on traffic modeling information). 3 Daily and annual emissions are based on a regional daily estimate of 524,869,000 vehicle miles traveled (AECOM 2013a). An annualization factor of 318 days per year was used to estimate annual emissions. Key: CO = carbon monoxide g/mi = grams per mile lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds 7/1/2014 Page 27

42 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 5-2A.. No Build Alternative ( ) ) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Emissions VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 1 PM2.5 1 Emission Factor (g/mi) Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Annual Emissions (tpy) <1 9 4 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 The emission factors for particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5) include engine exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road dust. 2 The EMFAC emission factors are based on the SCAQMD geographic area. 3 Daily miles traveled by the buses were estimated at approximately 23,240 (AECOM 2013b). 4 Annual miles traveled by buses were estimated at approximately 7,413,000 (AECOM 2013b). Key: CO = carbon monoxide g/mi = grams per mile lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds Table 5-3A.. No Build Alternative ( ) Total Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic and Buses Emission Source VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Regional Traffic 52,574 1,105, ,322 5, , ,223 Transit Buses Total 52,590 1,105, ,602 5, , ,246 Annual Emissions (tpy) Regional traffic 8, ,776 40, ,771 18,638 Transit Buses <1 9 4 Total 8, ,792 40, ,779 18,642 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Key: CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds 7/1/2014 Page 28

43 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A.A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions TAC emissions from regional highway traffic for the No Build Alternative are shown in Table 5-4A. Table 5-4A.. No Build Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic TAC CAS # (lbs/hr) Emissions (lbs/yr) Volatile Organic Compounds 1,3-Butadiene ,644 Acetaldehyde ,246 Acrolein ,067 Benzene ,140 Ethyl benzene ,636 Formaldehyde ,570 Methanol ,439 Methyl ethyl ketone ,513 Methyl t-butyl ether ,054 m-xylene ,623 Naphthalene ,402 n-hexane ,254 o-xylene ,480 Propylene ,006 Styrene ,929 Toluene ,396,700 Inorganic Compounds Arsenic <1 1,588 Cadmium <1 331 Chlorine ,715 7/1/2014 Page 29

44 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 5-4A.. No Build Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic TAC CAS # (lbs/hr) Emissions (lbs/yr) Copper ,540 Lead ,994 Manganese ,931 Mercury <1 993 Nickel ,850 Selenium <1 596 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Key: TAC = toxic air contaminant CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/hr= pounds per hour lbs/yr = pounds per year A.A CO Hot Spots Table 5-5A shows the results of the CO hot spots analysis under the No Build Alternative. As indicated in Table 5-5A, the maximum CO concentrations at each of the intersections would not exceed the established thresholds for both NEPA and CEQA A.A Construction Impacts The No Build Alternative would not result in any construction emissions. Table 5-5A.. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the No Build Alternative (2035) ID Intersection Traffic CO Conc. (ppm) 1 Max. CO Conc. (ppm) 2 Exceeds Threshold? 1-Hr 8-Hr 1-Hr 8-Hr 1-Hr 3 8-Hr 4 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue No No 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard No No 35 Washington Boulevard & Rosemead Boulevard No No 36 Washington Boulevard & Passons Boulevard No No 7/1/2014 Page 30

45 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 5-5A.. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the No Build Alternative (2035) ID Intersection Traffic CO Conc. (ppm) 1 Max. CO Conc. (ppm) 2 Exceeds Threshold? 1-Hr 8-Hr 1-Hr 8-Hr 1-Hr 3 8-Hr 4 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard No No 38 Washington Boulevard & Norwalk Boulevard No No Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Traffic CO concentration from screening analysis. 2 Maximum CO concentration is traffic CO plus future background concentration. 3 1-Hour CAAQS = 9.0 ppm; 1-Hour NAAQS = 9 ppm 4 8-Hour CAAQS = 20 ppm; 8-Hour NAAQS = 35 ppm Key: CO = carbon monoxide ppm = parts per million A Cumulative Impacts The No Build Alternative would be inconsistent with the 2012 RTP because it would not lower VMT; however, since the RTP air quality analysis indicated that there would be a net cumulative beneficial effect to regional air quality from the reduction in passenger vehicle use from other transit projects, there would be no cumulative impacts under the No Build Alternative A.A Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative The TSM Alternative would improve mobility in the region, but without the construction of a fixed guideway facility. The TSM Alternative would therefore result in an increase in bus mileage as compared to the No Build Alternative but would have a corresponding reduction in regional traffic from passengers changing transportation modes. In other words, it is expected that drivers in single occupancy vehicles would switch to transit with the proposed improvements to public transportation A.A Operational Impacts A.A Criteria Pollutant Emissions Table 5-6A shows operational emissions from regional highway. The TSM Alternative would not result in the construction of any additional parking spaces. Bus services would be added under the TSM Alternative and emissions for transit buses are shown in Table 5-7A. Table 5-8A shows total regional operational emissions under this alternative. Emissions of criteria pollutants would be less than significant under the TSM Alternative. Although transit bus emissions are expected to increase with this alternative, the decrease in highway traffic over the No Build Alternative would counteract the bus emission increase. 7/1/2014 Page 31

46 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 5-6A.. TSM Alternative ( ) Highway Traffic Emissions Emissions VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 1 PM2.5 1 Emission Factors (g/mi) Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 3 52,526 1,104, ,086 5, , ,115 Annual Emissions (tpy) 3 8, ,614 40, ,710 18,621 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 The emission factors for particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5) include engine exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road dust. 2 The EMFAC emission factors are based on the SoCAB geographic area and an average vehicle speed of 20 miles per hour (based on traffic modeling information). 3 Daily and annual emissions are based on a regional daily estimate of 524,386,000 VMT (AECOM 2013a). An annualization factor of 318 days per year was used to estimate annual emissions. Key: CO = carbon monoxide g/mi = grams per mile lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds Table 5-7A.. TSM Alternative ( ) ) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Emissions VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 1 PM2.5 1 Emission Factor (g/mi) Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Annual Emissions (tpy) Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 The emission factors for particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5) include engine exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road dust. 2 The EMFAC emission factors are based on the SCAQMD geographic area. 3 Daily miles traveled by the buses were estimated at approximately 34,820 (AECOM 2013b). 4 Annual miles traveled by buses were estimated at approximately 11,123,000 (AECOM 2013b). Key: CO = carbon monoxide g/mi = grams per mile lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds 7/1/2014 Page 32

47 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 5-8A. TSM Alternative ( ) Total Operational Emissions Emission Source VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 1 Regional Traffic 52,526 1,104, ,086 5, , ,115 Transit Buses Total 52,549 1,104, ,506 5, , ,150 Increment Above No Build Alternative (41) (966) (96) (5) (353) (96) CEQA Threshold Significant? No No No No No No Annual Emissions (tpy) Regional traffic 8, ,614 40, ,710 18,621 Transit Buses < Total 8, ,639 40, ,723 18,627 Increment Above No Build Alternative (6) (154) (15) (1) (56) (15) NEPA Threshold Significant? No No No No No No Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Key: CO = carbon monoxide g/mi = grams per mile lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds A.A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions Table 5-9A shows a summary of TAC emissions associated with the TSM Alternative and the increment against the No Build Alternative. 7/1/2014 Page 33

48 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 5-9A.. TSM Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic TAC CAS # Emissions Incremental Emissions 1 (lbs/hr) (lbs/yr) (lbs/hr) (lbs/yr) Volatile Organic Compounds 1,3-Butadiene ,523 (<1) (120) Acetaldehyde ,193 (<1) (53) Acrolein ,038 (<1) (30) Benzene ,564 (<1) (576) Ethyl benzene ,402 (<1) (234) Formaldehyde ,198 (<1) (371) Methanol ,350 (<1) (89) Methyl ethyl ketone ,509 (<1) (4) Methyl t-butyl ether ,629 (<1) (424) m-xylene ,828 (<1) (796) Naphthalene ,391 (<1) (10) n-hexane ,908 (<1) (346) o-xylene ,204 (<1) (277) Propylene ,322 (<1) (684) Styrene ,902 (<1) (28) Toluene ,395,414 (<1) (1,285) Inorganic Compounds Arsenic <1 1,586 (<1) (1) Cadmium <1 331 (<1) (<1) Chlorine ,457 (<1) (257) Copper ,360 (<1) (180) Lead ,980 (<1) (14) 7/1/2014 Page 34

49 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 5-9A.. TSM Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic TAC CAS # Emissions Incremental Emissions 1 (lbs/hr) (lbs/yr) (lbs/hr) (lbs/yr) Manganese ,825 (<1) (107) Mercury <1 992 (<1) (1) Nickel ,838 (<1) (12) Selenium <1 595 (<1) (1) Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Incremental emissions are compared to the No Build Alternative. 2 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Key: TAC = toxic air contaminant CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/hr = pounds per hour lbs/yr = pounds per year A.A CO Hot Spots Table 5-10A shows the results of the CO hot spots analysis under the TSM Alternative. As indicated in Table 5-10A, the maximum CO concentrations at each of the intersections would not exceed the established thresholds for both NEPA and CEQA A.A Construction Impacts The TSM Alternative would involve minimal construction from the addition of new bus stops, shelters, and other related facilities. As a result, emissions associated with construction would be negligible and were not quantified A Cumulative Impacts The TSM Alternative would be consistent with the 2012 RTP because it expands bus services and improve public transportation. In addition to the TSM Alternative, other transit projects identified in Metro s 2009 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) would also be implemented by These projects would have a net cumulative beneficial effect to regional air quality operational emissions from the reduction in passenger vehicle use expected under the various transit improvements. Therefore, under CEQA, emissions associated with the TSM Alternative would not be cumulatively considerable. 7/1/2014 Page 35

50 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the TSM Alternative (2035) ID Intersection Traffic CO Conc. (ppm) 1 Max. CO Conc. (ppm) 2 Exceeds Threshold? 1-Hr 8-Hr 1-Hr 8-Hr 1-Hr 3 8-Hr 4 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue No No 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard No No 35 Washington Boulevard & Rosemead Boulevard No No 36 Washington Boulevard & Passons Boulevard No No 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard No No 38 Washington Boulevard & Norwalk Boulevard No No Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Traffic CO concentration from screening analysis. 2 Maximum CO concentration is traffic CO plus background concentration. 3 1-Hour CAAQS = 9.0 ppm; 1-Hour NAAQS = 9 ppm 4 8-Hour CAAQS = 20 ppm; 8-Hour NAAQS = 35 ppm Key: CO = carbon monoxide ppm = parts per million A.A State Route 60 (SR 60) Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative A.A Operational Impacts A.A Criteria Pollutant Emissions Tables 5-11A through 5-13A summarize highway, parking lot, and transit bus operational emissions associated with the SR 60 LRT Alternative, respectively. Total operational emissions from the operation of buses, highway emissions, parking, and a maintenance yard associated with the SR 60 LRT Alternative are presented in Table 5-14A. Table 5-14A compares daily and annual operational emissions against the No Build Alternative. Table 5-15A presents a comparison of daily operational emissions from the SR 60 LRT Alternative to the 2010 existing conditions. All incremental emissions are negative; therefore, operational emissions from the SR 60 LRT Alternative are less than significant or not adverse. 7/1/2014 Page 36

51 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. SR 60 LRT Alternative ( ) Highway Traffic Emissions Emissions VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 1 PM2.5 1 Exhaust Emission Factor (g/mi) Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 3 52,524 1,104, ,079 5, , ,111 Annual Emissions (tpy) 3 8, ,609 40, ,708 18,621 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 The emission factors for particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5) include engine exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road dust. 2 The EMFAC emission factors are based on the SoCAB geographic area and an average vehicle speed of 20 miles per hour (based on traffic modeling information). 3 Daily and annual emissions are based on a regional daily estimate of 524,370,000 VMT (AECOM 2013a). An annualization factor of 318 days per year was used to estimate annual emissions. Key: CO = carbon monoxide g/mi = grams per mile lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds Table A. SR 60 LRT Alternative ( ) Parking Lot Emissions Station Parking Spaces (lbs/day) VOC Emissions 1 (tpy) Garfield Avenue 344 <1 <1 Shops at Montebello <1 Santa Anita Avenue <1 Peck Road 1,983 2 <1 Total 3, Source: CDM Smith 2013 Note: 1 A daily loss emission factor of gram per hour for each vehicle (parking space) was used to estimate emissions. Key: lbs/day = pounds per day tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compound 7/1/2014 Page 37

52 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. SR 60 LRT Alternative ( ) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Emissions VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 1 PM2.5 1 Emission Factor (g/mi) Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Annual Emissions (tpy) Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 The emission factors for particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5) include engine exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road dust. 2 The EMFAC emission factors are based on the SCAQMD geographic area. 3 Daily miles traveled by the buses were estimated at approximately 32,870 (AECOM 2013b). 4 Annual miles traveled by buses were estimated at approximately 10,498,000 (AECOM 2013b). Key: CO = carbon monoxide g/mi = grams per mile lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds Table 5-14A.. SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Total Operational Emissions Emission Source VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Regional Traffic 52,524 1,104, ,079 5, , ,111 Parking 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Transit Buses LRT Maintenance Yard <1 6 1 Total 52,554 1,104, ,479 5, , ,146 Increment Above No Build Alternative (36) (977) (123) (5) (364) (101) CEQA Threshold Significant? No No No No No No Annual Emissions (tpy) Regional traffic 8, ,609 40, ,708 18,621 Parking <1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 7/1/2014 Page 38

53 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 5-14A.. SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Total Operational Emissions Emission Source VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Transit Buses < LRT Maintenance Yard <1 6 <1 <1 1 <1 Total 8, ,638 40, ,722 18,626 Increment Above No Build Alternative (6) (155) (19) (1) (58) (16) NEPA Threshold Significant? No No No No No No Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. 2 Emissions greater than threshold of significance are shown in bold and italics. Key: CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds Table A.. SR 60 LRT Alternative Total Operational Emissions as Built in 2010 Emission Source VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 1,2 Regional Traffic 24, , ,125 3, ,500 78,153 Parking 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Transit Buses LRT Maintenance Yard <1 6 1 Total 24, , ,526 3, ,585 78,188 Increment Above No Build Alternative (71,805) (1,705,483) (340,205) (2) (4,888) (4,992) CEQA Threshold Significant? No No No No No No Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 The regional traffic emission factors are based on the 2035 SoCAB geographic area and an average vehicle speed of 30 miles per 7/1/2014 Page 39

54 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. SR 60 LRT Alternative Total Operational Emissions as Built in 2010 Emission Source VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 1,2 hour (based on traffic modeling information).emissions are based on a regional daily estimate of 358,563,000 VMT (AECOM2013).No other emission sources have been altered. 2 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Key: CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds A.A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions Table 5-16A shows a summary of TAC emissions associated with the SR 60 LRT Alternative and compares them to TAC emissions from the No Build Alternative. Table A.. SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic TAC CAS # Emissions Incremental Emissions (lbs/hr) (lbs/yr) (lbs/hr) (lbs/yr) Volatile Organic Compounds 1,3-Butadiene ,520 (<1) (124) Acetaldehyde ,191 (<1) (54) Acrolein ,037 (<1) (30) Benzene ,544 (<1) (595) Ethyl benzene ,394 (<1) (242) Formaldehyde ,186 (<1) (384) Methanol ,347 (<1) (92) Methyl ethyl ketone ,509 (<1) (4) Methyl t-butyl ether ,615 (<1) (438) m-xylene ,801 (<1) (822) Naphthalene ,391 (<1) (11) n-hexane ,896 (<1) (358) 7/1/2014 Page 40

55 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic TAC CAS # Emissions Incremental Emissions (lbs/hr) (lbs/yr) (lbs/hr) (lbs/yr) o-xylene ,194 (<1) (286) Propylene ,300 (<1) (706) Styrene ,901 (<1) (28) Toluene ,395,372 (<1) (1,328) Inorganic Compounds Arsenic <1 1,586 (<1) (2) Cadmium <1 331 (<1) (<1) Chlorine ,449 (<1) (266) Copper ,354 (<1) (186) Lead ,980 (<1) (14) Manganese ,821 (<1) (110) Mercury <1 992 (<1) (1) Nickel ,838 (<1) (12) Selenium <1 595 (<1) (1) Source: CDM Smith 2013 Note: 1 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Key: TAC = toxic air contaminant CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/hr = pounds per hour lbs/yr = pounds per year A.A CO Hot Spots Table 5-17A shows the results of the CO hot spots analysis under the SR 60 LRT Alternative. Intersections that were not modeled for an alternative are shown as not applicable ( N/A ) on the table. As indicated in Table 5-17A, the maximum CO concentrations at each of the intersections would not exceed the established thresholds for both NEPA and CEQA. 7/1/2014 Page 41

56 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) ID Intersection Traffic CO Conc. (ppm) 1 Max. Conc. (ppm) 2 Exceeds Threshold? 1-Hr 8-Hr 1-Hr 8-Hr 1-Hr 3 8-Hr 4 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue No No 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 35 Washington Boulevard & Rosemead Boulevard N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 36 Washington Boulevard & Passons Boulevard N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 38 Washington Boulevard & Norwalk Boulevard N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Traffic CO concentration from screening analysis. 2 Maximum CO concentration is traffic CO plus background concentration. 3 1-Hour CAAQS = 9.0 ppm; 1-Hour NAAQS = 9 ppm 4 8-Hour CAAQS = 20 ppm; 8-Hour NAAQS = 35 ppm 5 Intersections 33, 35, 36, 37, and 38 would not be affected by the SR 60 LRT Alternative and intersection data was not provided; concentrations are expected to be similar to the No Build Alternative. Key: CO = carbon monoxide ppm = parts per million A.A Construction Impacts The SR 60 LRT Alternative would result in temporary emissions associated with construction. Construction activities are anticipated to occur over a period of four to six years, depending on which LRT alternative is selected, with construction commencing in Since the SR 60 LRT Alternative is expected to require the least amount of construction of the build alternatives, it was assumed that construction would occur over a period of four years, which would maximize peak daily emissions and would provide a conservative analysis. Construction would therefore occur between and including the years 2027 and A.A Criteria Pollutants Regional Construction Emissions SCAQMD requires an analysis of construction-related emissions. This analysis estimated emissions from off-road construction equipment, fugitive dust, construction worker commuting vehicles, and haul trucks. Table 5-18A shows construction emissions by peak day of operation. All phases of construction, including street widening and construction of the elevated guideway, stations, parking facilities, and the Mission Junction maintenance yard are included in the totals shown in Table 5-18A. 7/1/2014 Page 42

57 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. SR 60 LRT Alternative ( ) 2030) Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Daily Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Peak Emissions < Threshold Significant No No No No No No Source: CDM Smith Notes: Excavation of 83 cubic yards within the Whittier Narrows Flood Control Basin as part of compensatory mitigation for the SR 60 LRT Alternative would result in five truck trips. Given that the soil would be used on a nearby segment of the alignment outside the Whittier Narrows Flood Control Basin, the additional five truck trips would result in minimal emissions and would not result in an increase in maximum daily construction emissions that would exceed air quality thresholds. Key: CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide VOC = volatile organic compounds Emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, SO 2, PM 10, and PM 2.5 would not be significant, and mitigation measures would not need to be implemented. Localized Significance Thresholds This analysis evaluated construction emissions on a regional level and compared them to SCAQMD s LSTs. The analysis used a series of look-up tables for NOx, CO, PM 10, and PM 2.5. These tables show maximum allowable emission levels, which vary based on project location, size (acreage), and distance to the nearest receptor. Emissions were compared to the LSTs for the South San Gabriel Valley SRA. Most project construction sites would be over five acres in size and located within 25 meters (82 feet) of the nearest receptors. Although receptors in the project area may be closer than 25 meters (82 feet) to construction, it is the minimum distance allowed in the LST. Furthermore, the use of LST is not recommended by the SCAQMD for project sites that are larger than five acres. Although the majority of construction associated with the SR 60 LRT Alternative is associated with areas larger than five acres, the thresholds were still used as a preliminary estimate regarding significance. This approach provides a conservative analysis of localized impacts without resorting to air dispersion modeling. For these sites, peak daily emissions were decreased to represent a five-acre site by applying the ratio of five acres to the actual project site to total project emissions. Table 5-19A shows on-site emissions for each construction activity and location. 7/1/2014 Page 43

58 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. SR 60 LRT Alternative Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) for Construction Emissions ID Phase Maximum Daily On-site Emissions (lbs/day) NOx CO PM10 PM2.5 1 Street Widening <1 <1 2 Elevated Guideway Parking Facilities Mission Junction Maintenance Yard Allowable Emissions (1-acre site) Allowable Emissions (5-acre site) , Source: CDM Smith Notes: 1 Street widening is required for certain streets accompanying the alignments to accommodate the guideway. 2 Project sizes exceed five acres and maximum daily emissions are decreased by a ratio of five acres to total project site. 3 Threshold applicable to street widening only. 4 Threshold applicable to all phases except for street widening. Key: CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter The LST evaluation indicates that emissions would not exceed the maximum allowable levels during construction of the maintenance yard A.A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions Construction of the SR 60 LRT Alternative would indirectly result in increased emissions of TACs. Projected emissions under this alternative were compared to the No Build Alternative (2035) for CEQA analysis. The analysis includes a Tier 1 HRA, which compares emission levels to published screening limits. The pollutant screening index (PSI) for each pollutant is calculated by dividing the maximum annual and hourly emissions of each pollutant by the pollutant screening level (PSL) for the given pollutant. The PSLs are published by the SCAQMD and are emission thresholds that are not expected to result in exceedances of the various risk levels. The summation of the PSIs for all pollutants is known as the ASI; if the ASI is less than 1, then the emissions source is compliant with the SCAQMD s risk thresholds. The analysis considered only acute risks because construction impacts would be temporary. Speciation profiles from CARB were used to estimate emissions of TACs from construction. Since the OFFROAD model only provides emission results for criteria pollutants, it is necessary to use published profiles of the individual compounds emitted in the exhaust to create an inventory of TACs. 7/1/2014 Page 44

59 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum The analysis used profiles for diesel vehicle exhaust (profile no. 425) and construction dust (profile no. 420). Although DPM is a TAC, it does not cause documented acute health effects and was not included in the analysis. Table 5-20A shows a summary of project-related emissions and Tier 1 HRA results. Diesel exhaust does not have an organic profile in CARB s speciation profiles; therefore, the analysis was restricted to inorganic emissions. As shown in Table 5-20A, the ASI is less than the threshold of 1; therefore, impacts from construction TAC emissions under the SR 60 LRT Alternative would not be significant under CEQA. Table A.. SR 60 LRT Alternative ( ) 2030) Construction Health Risk Assessment TAC CAS # Emissions (lbs/hr) PSL (lbs/hr) PSI Arsenic Chlorine Copper Mercury Nickel ASI 0.10 Threshold 1 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Key: ASI = application screening index (total PSI) CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/hr = pounds per hour PSI = pollutant screening index (PSL divided by project emissions) PSL = pollutant screening level (minimum level expected to exceed health risk) TAC = toxic air contaminant A.A Cumulative Impacts Operational emissions from the SR 60 LRT Alternatives are less than significant under NEPA and CEQA. The SR 60 LRT Alternative would be consistent with the 2012 RTP because it would improve regional transit by expanding the region s light rail service. In addition to the SR 60 LRT Alternative, other transit projects identified in the LRTP and the Cumulative Impacts Technical Memorandum would also be implemented by Therefore, under CEQA, emissions associated with the SR 60 LRT Alternative would not be cumulatively considerable. 7/1/2014 Page 45

60 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A.A Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative The Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative includes options for either at-grade or aerial crossings at Rosemead Boulevard and the I-605/San Gabriel River. For this analysis, it was assumed that there would only be minimal differences in operational impacts; therefore, only one set of calculations for the analysis is provided. Operational emissions associated with the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative include emissions from highway traffic, buses, a light rail maintenance yard, and parking lots that would exist after this project alternative is operational. The proposed project would provide an alternative to automobile transportation in the region; therefore, it was necessary to evaluate highway traffic to assess how the proposed project would increase or decrease operational emissions from passenger vehicles A.A Operational Impacts A.A Criteria Pollutant Emissions Tables 5-21A through 5-23A summarize highway, parking lot, and transit bus operational emissions associated with the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative. Total operational emissions associated with the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative are presented in Table 5-24A and compared against the No Build Alternative. Comparison of daily project emissions to existing conditions is presented in Table 5-25A. Emissions would be less than significant under the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative. Table A.. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) Highway Traffic Emissions Emissions VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 1 PM2.5 1 Exhaust Emission Factor (g/mi) Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 3 52,524 1,104, ,078 5, , ,111 Annual Emissions (tpy) 3 8, ,608 40, ,708 18,621 Source: CDM Smith 2011 Notes: 1 The emission factors for particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5) include engine exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road dust. 2 The EMFAC emission factors are based on the SoCAB geographic area and an average vehicle speed of 20 miles per hour (based on traffic modeling information). 3 Daily and annual emissions are based on a regional daily estimate of 524,369,000 VMT (AECOM 2013a). An annualization factor of 318 days per year was used to estimate annual emissions. Key: CO = carbon monoxide g/mi = grams per mile lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds 7/1/2014 Page 46

61 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) Parking Lot Emissions Station Parking Spaces (lbs/day) VOC Emissions 1 (tpy) Garfield Avenue <1 Whittier Boulevard 0 N/A N/A Greenwood Avenue 151 <1 <1 Rosemead Boulevard 353 <1 <1 Norwalk Boulevard <1 Lambert Road 1,008 1 <1 Total 2, Source: CDM Smith 2013 Note: 1 A daily loss emission factor of gram per hour for each vehicle (parking space) was used to estimate emissions. Key: lbs/day = pounds per day tpy = tons per year Table A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Emissions VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 1 PM2.5 1 Emission Factor (g/mi) Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Annual Emissions (tpy) Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 The emission factors for particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5) include engine exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road dust. 2 The EMFAC emission factors are based on the SCAQMD geographic area. 3 Daily miles traveled by the buses were estimated at approximately 33,980 (AECOM 2013b). 4 Annual miles traveled by buses were estimated at approximately 10,855,000 (AECOM 2013b). Key: CO = carbon monoxide g/mi = grams per mile lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds 7/1/2014 Page 47

62 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) Total Operational Emissions Emission Source VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 1 Regional Traffic 52,524 1,104, ,078 5, , ,111 Parking 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Transit Buses LRT Maintenance Yard <1 6 1 Total 52,554 1,104, ,492 5, , ,147 Increment Above No Build Alternative (36) (974) (110) (5) (363) (100) CEQA Threshold Significant? No No No No No No Annual Emissions (tpy) 1 Regional traffic 8, ,608 40, ,708 18,621 Parking <1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Transit Buses < LRT Maintenance Yard <1 6 <1 <1 1 <1 Total 8, ,638 40, ,722 18,626 Increment Above No Build Alternative (6) (154) (17) (1) (57) (16) NEPA Threshold Significant? No No No No No No Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Key: CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds 7/1/2014 Page 48

63 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Total Operational Emissions as Built in 2010 Emission Source VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 1 Regional Traffic 24, , ,136 3, ,526 78,160 Parking 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Transit Buses LRT Maintenance Yard <1 6 1 Total 24, , ,550 3, ,613 78,196 Increment Above No Build Alternative (71,803) (1,705,418) (340,180) (1) (4,860) (4,984) CEQA Threshold Significant? No No No No No No Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 The regional traffic emission factors are based on the 2035 SoCAB geographic area and an average vehicle speed of 30 miles per hour (based on traffic modeling information).emissions are based on a regional daily estimate of 358,596,000 VMT (AECOM2013).No other emission sources have been altered. 2 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Key: CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year VOC = volatile organic compounds A.A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions The Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative would result in emissions of TACs from regional traffic operations. Emissions from the maintenance yard and parking lots would be negligible and were not quantified. This alternative would indirectly result in decreased TAC emissions from highway vehicles as compared to the No Build Alternative. Table 5-26A shows a summary of TAC emissions associated with the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative A.A CO Hot Spots Table 5-24A shows the results of the CO hot spots analysis under the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative. As indicated in Table 5-27A, the maximum CO concentrations at each of the intersections would not exceed the established thresholds for both NEPA and CEQA. 7/1/2014 Page 49

64 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic TAC CAS # Emissions Incremental Emissions (lbs/hr) (lbs/yr) (lbs/hr) (lbs/yr) Volatile Organic Compounds 1,3-Butadiene ,519 (<1) (124) Acetaldehyde ,191 (<1) (55) Acrolein ,037 (<1) (31) Benzene ,543 (<1) (596) Ethyl benzene ,394 (<1) (243) Formaldehyde ,185 (<1) (384) Methanol ,347 (<1) (92) Methyl ethyl ketone ,509 (<1) (4) Methyl t-butyl ether ,614 (<1) (439) m-xylene ,800 (<1) (824) Naphthalene ,391 (<1) (11) n-hexane ,895 (<1) (358) o-xylene ,194 (<1) (286) Propylene ,298 (<1) (708) Styrene ,901 (<1) (29) Toluene ,395,369 (<1) (1,331) Inorganic Compounds Arsenic <1 1,586 (<1) (2) Cadmium <1 331 (<1) (<1) Chlorine ,448 (<1) (266) Copper ,354 (<1) (186) Lead ,980 (<1) (14) 7/1/2014 Page 50

65 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic TAC CAS # Emissions Incremental Emissions (lbs/hr) (lbs/yr) (lbs/hr) (lbs/yr) Manganese ,821 (<1) (110) Mercury <1 992 (<1) (1) Nickel ,838 (<1) (12) Selenium <1 595 (<1) (1) Source: CDM Smith 2013 Note: 1 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Key: TAC = toxic air contaminant CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/hr = pounds per hour lbs/yr = pounds per year Table A.. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) ID Intersection Traffic CO Conc. (ppm) 1 Max. Conc. (ppm) 2 Exceeds Threshold? 1-Hr 8-Hr 1-Hr 8-Hr 1-Hr 3 8-Hr 4 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue No No 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard No No 35 Washington Boulevard & Rosemead Boulevard No No 36 Washington Boulevard & Passons Boulevard No No 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard No No 38 Washington Boulevard & Norwalk Boulevard No No Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Traffic CO concentration from screening analysis. 2 Maximum CO concentration is traffic CO plus background concentration. 3 1-Hour CAAQS = 9.0 ppm; 1-Hour NAAQS = 9 ppm 4 8-Hour CAAQS = 20 ppm; 8-Hour NAAQS = 35 ppm Key: CO = carbon monoxide ppm = parts per million 7/1/2014 Page 51

66 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A.A Construction Impacts A.A Criteria Pollutants Regional Construction Emissions SCAQMD requires an analysis of construction-related emissions. This analysis estimated emissions from off-road construction equipment, fugitive dust, construction worker commuting vehicles, and haul trucks. Tables 5-28A through 5-30A show construction emissions by peak day of operation. All phases of construction, including street widening and construction of the elevated guideway, parking facilities, and a maintenance yard are included in the totals shown in Tables 5-28A through 5-30A. Since the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative includes three options for the maintenance yard (Mission Junction, Commerce, and Santa Fe Springs options), each table shows cumulative emissions for each maintenance yard option. Table A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) with Santa Fe Springs Maintenance Yard Option Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Daily Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Peak Emissions < Threshold Significant No No No No No No Source: CDM Smith 2013 Note: Emissions shown include all phases of construction, including street widening and construction of the elevated guideway, stations, parking facilities, and the Santa Fe Springs (nine-acre) yard option. The emissions shown do not represent emissions from only the maintenance yard. Key: CO = carbon monoxide PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter lbs/day = pounds per day SO 2 = sulfur dioxide NOx = nitrogen oxides VOC = volatile organic compounds PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter 7/1/2014 Page 52

67 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) 2031) with Commerce Maintenance Yard Option Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Daily Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Peak Emissions < Threshold Significant No No No No No No Source: CDM Smith 2013 Note: Emissions shown include all phases of construction, including street widening and construction of the elevated guideway, stations, parking facilities, and the Commerce (12-acre) yard option. The emissions shown do not represent emissions from only the maintenance yard. Key: CO = carbon monoxide PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter lbs/day = pounds per day SO 2 = sulfur dioxide NOx = nitrogen oxides VOC = volatile organic compounds PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter Table A.. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) 2031) with Mission Junction Maintenance Yard Option Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Daily Emissions (lbs/day) VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Peak Emissions < Threshold Significant No No No No No No Source: CDM Smith 2013 Note: Emissions shown include all phases of construction, including street widening and construction of the elevated guideway, stations, parking facilities, and the Mission Junction (11-acre) yard option. The emissions shown do not represent emissions from only the maintenance yard. Key: CO = carbon monoxide PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter lbs/day = pounds per day SO 2 = sulfur dioxide NOx = nitrogen oxides VOC = volatile organic compounds PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter Daily criteria pollutant emissions from construction activities would not be significant for any of the maintenance yard scenarios and mitigation measures would not need to be implemented. 7/1/2014 Page 53

68 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Localized Significance Thresholds This analysis evaluated construction emissions on a regional level and compared them to SCAQMD s LSTs. The analysis used a series of look-up tables for NOx, CO, PM 10, and PM 2.5. These tables show maximum allowable emission levels, which vary based on project location, size (acreage), and distance to the nearest receptor. Emissions were compared to the LSTs for the Southeast L.A. County SRA. The project construction sites would be over five acres in size and located within 25 meters (82 feet) of the nearest receptors. Although receptors in the project area may be closer than 25 meters (82 feet) to construction, it is the minimum distance allowed in the LST. Furthermore, the use of LST is not recommended by the SCAQMD for project sites that are larger than five acres. Although construction associated with the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative is associated with areas larger than five acres, the thresholds were still used as a preliminary estimate regarding significance. This approach provides a conservative analysis of localized impacts without resorting to air dispersion modeling. For these sites, peak daily emissions were decreased to represent a five-acre site by applying the ratio of five acres to the actual project site to total project emissions. Table 5-31A shows on-site emissions for each construction activity and location for the Mission Junction (11-acre) maintenance yard (worst-case). It is important to understand that the values shown in Tables 5-28A through 5-30A represent peak daily emissions. It is assumed that not all construction activities will overlap during the same time and different pollutants could peak under the different maintenance yard variations. The LST evaluation indicates that emissions would not exceed maximum allowable levels during construction of this alternative A.A Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions Construction of the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative would indirectly result in increased emissions of TACs. Projected emissions under this alternative were compared to the No Build Alternative for CEQA analysis. The analysis includes a Tier 1 HRA, which compares emission levels to published screening limits. Table A.. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) for Construction Emissions ID Phase Maximum Daily On-site Emissions (lbs/day) NOx CO PM10 PM2.5 1 Street Widening <1 <1 2 Elevated Guideway Parking Facilities Mission Junction Maintenance Yard Allowable Emissions (5-acre site) 172 1, /1/2014 Page 54

69 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Source: CDM Smith 2013 Notes: 1 Street widening is required for certain streets accompanying the alignments to accommodate the guideway. 2 Project sizes exceed five acres and maximum daily emissions decreased by a ratio of five acres to total project site. 3 Table summarizes worst-case emissions; therefore, only emissions from the Mission Junction (11-acre) maintenance yard are provided. Key: CO = carbon monoxide NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter lbs/day = pounds per day Tables 5-32A through 5-34A show a summary of project-related emissions and Tier 1 HRA results. The ASI is less than the risk threshold of 1; therefore, impacts from construction TAC emissions under the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative would not be significant under CEQA. Table A.. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative with the Santa Fe Springs Maintenance Yard ( ) 2031) Construction Health Risk Assessment TAC CAS # Emissions (lbs/hr) PSL (lbs/hr) PSI Arsenic Chlorine Copper Mercury Nickel ASI 0.10 Threshold 1 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Key: ASI = application screening index (total PSI) CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/hr = pounds per hour PSI = pollutant screening index (PSL divided by project emissions) PSL = pollutant screening level (minimum level expected to exceed health risk) TAC = toxic air contaminant 7/1/2014 Page 55

70 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table A.. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative e with the Commerce Maintenance Yard ( ) 2031) Construction Health Risk Assessment TAC CAS # Emissions (lbs/hr) PSL (lbs/hr) PSI Arsenic Chlorine Copper Mercury Nickel ASI 0.10 Threshold 1 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Key: ASI = application screening index (total PSI) CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/hr = pounds per hour PSI = pollutant screening index (PSL divided by project emissions) PSL = pollutant screening level (minimum level expected to exceed health risk) TAC = toxic air contaminant Table A. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative with the Mission Junction Maintenance Yard ( ) Construction Health Risk Assessment TAC CAS # Emissions (lbs/hr) PSL (lbs/hr) PSI Arsenic Chlorine Copper Mercury Nickel ASI 0.10 Threshold 1 Source: CDM Smith 2013 Key: ASI = application screening index (total PSI) CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/hr = pounds per hour PSI = pollutant screening index (PSL divided by project emissions) PSL = pollutant screening level (minimum level expected to exceed health risk) TAC = toxic air contaminant 7/1/2014 Page 56

71 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A.A Cumulative Impacts The Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative would be consistent with the 2012 RTP because it would improve regional transit by expanding the region s light rail service. In addition to the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative, other transit projects identified in the LRTP and the Cumulative Impacts Technical Memorandum would also be implemented by Emissions from operations would be less than significant for the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative, and other transit projects in the area, as identified in the LRTP and the RTP, would result in a net decrease in emissions. Therefore, under CEQA, emissions associated with the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative would not be cumulatively considerable. 7/1/2014 Page 57

72 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A.A POTENTIAL MITIGATION MEASURES There are no substantive updates to this section. 7/1/2014 Page 58

73 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A.A CONCLUSIONS This section provides a summary of conclusions based on the results of the updated air quality impacts analysis for both NEPA and CEQA. Information contained in this section supersedes information provided in the original technical memorandum, where applicable A.A No Build Alternative The No Build Alternative assumes that improvements to the regional transit system would not be made. As a result, it represents a future condition where any changes from existing conditions would occur from growth in regional traffic and other planned service changes A.A NEPA Finding The No Build Alternative is used to calculate the increments between the future alternatives and does not have its own NEPA threshold for adverse effects A.A CEQA Determination Operational emissions from the proposed project were compared to the No Build Alternative and the Existing Conditions. The No Build Alternative was not compared against any other conditions; therefore, no conclusions regarding CEQA were made for the No Build Alternative A.A Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative The TSM Alternative represents a scenario where improvements in regional traffic were made by improvements in the bus system, rather than by extension of the light rail transit system A.A NEPA Finding Updated operational emissions for the TSM Alternative, including both the operation of the buses and regional traffic, would not have adverse effects under NEPA. Since the alternative is only expected to have minimal construction activities, emissions from those activities are expected to be negligible and were not quantified. Construction-related air quality impacts would not be adverse under NEPA A.A CEQA Determination Updated operational emissions for the TSM Alternative, including both the operation of the buses and regional traffic, were found to be less than significant for all pollutants under CEQA. The CO hot spots analysis under the TSM Alternative was found to be less than significant. Since the TSM Alternative is only expected to have minimal construction activities, emissions from those activities are expected to be negligible and were not quantified. Construction-related air quality impacts are expected to be less than significant. 7/1/2014 Page 59

74 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A.A State Route 60 (SR 60) Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative The SR 60 LRT Alternative represents one possible build alternative for the proposed light rail extension A.A NEPA Finding Updated operational emissions for the SR 60 LRT Alternative would have no adverse effects under NEPA. Unmitigated regional construction emissions, which have been updated, for the SR 60 LRT Alternative would not be adverse under NEPA and therefore do not need to be mitigated A.A CEQA Determination Updated operational emissions for the SR 60 LRT Alternative would be less than significant under CEQA. Unmitigated regional and localized construction emissions, which have been updated, for the SR 60 LRT Alternative would not be significant under CEQA and therefore do not need to be mitigated. The result of the updated CO hot spots analysis and the HRA completed for construction emissions were both less than significant. An HRA was not completed for operational emissions because TAC emissions were less than those under the No Build Alternative and an HRA was not required A.A Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative The Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative represents one possible build alternative for the proposed light rail extension A.A NEPA Finding Updated operational emissions would have no adverse effects under NEPA. Unmitigated regional construction emissions, which have been updated, for the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative would not be adverse under NEPA and therefore do not need to be mitigated A.A CEQA Determination Updated operational emissions for the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative, including the operation of the buses, light rail maintenance yard, parking structures, and regional traffic, were less than significant under CEQA. Unmitigated regional and localized construction emissions, which have been updated, for the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative would not be significant under CEQA and therefore do not need to be mitigated. 7/1/2014 Page 60

75 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum The result of the updated CO hot spots analysis and the HRA completed for construction emissions were both less than significant. An HRA was not completed for operational emissions because TAC emissions were less than those under the No Build Alternative and an HRA was not required. 7/1/2014 Page 61

76 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum A.A REFERENCES CITED AECOM. 2013a. Metro Eastside Alternatives Analysis: Highway Vehicle Miles, Vehicle Hours and Average Speed. August 6. AECOM. 2013b. Metro Eastside Alternatives Analysis: Summary of Route Miles, Vehicle Miles, and Vehicle Hours. August 26. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines: Assessing the Air Quality Impacts of Projects and Plans. December. California Air Resources Board (CARB) Home Page: Speciation Profiles Used in ARB Modeling. December 12. Available at: Accessed August 27, California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2013a. Letter to U.S. EPA Region 9 Regarding the Submittal of South Coast 2012 Air Quality Management Plan. February 13. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2013b. Area Designations Maps/State and National Homepage. April 22. Available at: Accessed August 27, California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2013c. Ambient Air Quality Standards Chart. June 4. Available at: Accessed August 27, South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook. April (with Errata May 1993). South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan. June 1. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. March. Available at: Accessed August 27, South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook website. March 30. Available at: Accessed August 27, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Towards a Sustainable Future. April. University of California Davis (UC Davis) Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol. Prepared for California Department of Transportation. UCD-ITS-RR December. (with memorandum to users of CO Protocol on October 13, 2010) 7/1/2014 Page 62

77 E a s t s i d e T r a n s i t C o r r i d o r P h a s e 2 Addendum to the Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) The Green Book Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants Homepage. July 31. Available at: greenbook/. Accessed August 27, /1/2014 Page 63

78 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum (2012 RTP Update) Attachment A

79 Summary of Incremental Daily Operational Emissions Table 1 Daily Operational Emissions Change Compared to Baseline Year (2010) Emissions (pounds per day) VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 No Build (43,817) (1,251,496) (205,129) 1, ,235 34,067 TSM (43,858) (1,252,462) (205,225) 1, ,882 33,970 SR-60 (43,853) (1,252,473) (205,252) 1, ,870 33,966 Washington (43,853) (1,252,470) (205,239) 1, ,872 33,967 CEQA Threshold Table 2 Daily Operational Emissions Change Compared to No Build Scenario (2035) Emissions (pounds per day) VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TSM (41) (966) (96) (5) (353) (96) SR-60 (36) (977) (123) (5) (364) (101) Washington (36) (974) (110) (5) (363) (100) CEQA Threshold Table 3 Daily Operational Emissions Change as Built in 2010 Compared to Baseline Scenario Emissions (pounds per day) VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM SR-60 (71,805) (1,705,483) (340,205) (2) (4,888) (4,992) 2010 Washington (71,803) (1,705,418) (340,180) (1) (4,860) (4,984) CEQA Threshold Note: All alternatives include emissions from regional highway traffic and operation of CNG buses. Light rail alternatives include emissions from maintenance yard operation. Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Shading indicates that emissions exceed the threshold of significance.

80 Summary of Daily Operational Emissions Table 4 Summary of Operational Emissions for Each Alternative Daily Operational Criteria Pollutant Emissions (pounds per day) Alternative VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Existing Conditions (2010) 1 Regional Traffic 96,360 2,356, ,963 3, ,408 83,149 Transit Buses Total 96,407 2,357, ,731 3, ,473 83,180 No Build Alternative (2035) 1 Regional Traffic 52,574 1,105, ,322 5, , ,223 Transit Buses Total 52,590 1,105, ,602 5, , ,246 TSM Alternative (2035) 2 Regional Traffic 52,526 1,104, ,086 5, , ,115 Transit Buses Total 52,549 1,104, ,506 5, , ,150 SR60 LRT Alternative (2035) Regional Traffic 52,524 1,104, ,079 5, , ,111 Transit Buses Parking Lots Maintenance Yard Total 52,554 1,104, ,479 5, , ,146 Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Regional Traffic 52,524 1,104, ,078 5, , ,111 Transit Buses Parking Lots Maintenance Yard Total 52,554 1,104, ,492 5, , ,147 Notes: 1 Operational emissions only include those associated with regional traffic and bus operations. 2 The TSM Alternative would add bus rapid transit (BRT) lanes and additional bus routes but would not include improvements to the light rail network.

81 Summary of Daily Operational Emissions as Built in 2010 Table 5 Summary of Operational Emissions as Built in 2010 for Each Alternative Daily Operational Criteria Pollutant Emissions (pounds per day) Alternative VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Existing Conditions (2010) 1 Regional Traffic 96,360 2,356, ,963 3, ,408 83,149 Transit Buses Total 96,407 2,357, ,731 3, ,473 83,180 No Build Alternative (2035) 1 Regional Traffic 24, , ,189 3, ,648 78,194 Transit Buses Total 24, , ,469 3, ,703 78,218 TSM Alternative (2035) 2 Regional Traffic 24, , ,141 3, ,536 78,163 Transit Buses Total 24, , ,560 3, ,619 78,199 SR60 LRT Alternative (2035) Regional Traffic 24, , ,125 3, ,500 78,153 Transit Buses Parking Lots Maintenance Yard Total 24, , ,526 3, ,585 78,188 Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Regional Traffic 24, , ,136 3, ,526 78,160 Transit Buses Parking Lots Maintenance Yard Total 24, , ,550 3, ,613 78,196 Notes: 1 Operational emissions only include those associated with regional traffic and bus operations. 2 The TSM Alternative would add bus rapid transit (BRT) lanes and additional bus routes but would not include improvements to the light rail network. 3 Operational emissions for future years are calculated using future emission factors but regional traffic volumes are based on baseline year traffic.

82 Summary of Incremental Annual Operational Emissions Table 6 Annual Operational Emissions Change Compared to No Build Scenario Emissions (tons per year) VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TSM (6) (154) (15) (1) (56) (15) SR-60 (6) (155) (19) (1) (58) (16) Washington (6) (154) (17) (1) (57) (16) NEPA Threshold Note: All alternatives include emissions from regional highway traffic and operation of CNG buses. Light rail alternatives include emissions from maintenance yard operation. Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses.

83 Summary of Annual Operational Emissions Table 7 Summary of Operational Emissions for Each Alternative Annual Operational Criteria Pollutant Emissions (tons per year) Alternative VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Existing Conditions (2010) 1 Regional Traffic 15, ,726 73, ,380 13,221 Transit Buses Total 15, ,780 73, ,390 13,226 No Build Alternative (2035) 1 Regional Traffic 8, ,776 40, ,771 18,638 Transit Buses Total 8, ,792 40, ,779 18,642 TSM Alternative (2035) 2 Regional Traffic 8, ,614 40, ,710 18,621 Transit Buses Total 8, ,639 40, ,723 18,627 SR60 LRT Alternative (2035) Regional Traffic 8, ,609 40, ,708 18,621 Transit Buses Parking Lots Maintenance Yard Total 8, ,638 40, ,722 18,626 Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Regional Traffic 8, ,608 40, ,708 18,621 Transit Buses Parking Lots Maintenance Yard Total 8, ,638 40, ,722 18,626 Notes: 1 Operational emissions only include those associated with regional traffic and bus operations. 2 The TSM Alternative would add bus rapid transit (BRT) lanes and additional bus routes but would not include improvements to the light rail network.

84 Summary of Incremental Traffic Emissions Table 8 Daily Traffic Emissions Change Compared to Baseline Year Emissions (pounds per day) PM ROG CO NOx SO 10 PM total total No Build (43,786) (1,251,259) (204,641) 1, ,244 34,074 TSM (43,834) (1,252,276) (204,877) 1, ,863 33,966 SR-60 (43,836) (1,252,310) (204,885) 1, ,851 33,962 Washington (43,836) (1,252,312) (204,885) 1, ,850 33,962 CEQA Threshold Table 9 Daily Traffic Emissions Change Compared to No Build Scenario Emissions (pounds per day) PM ROG CO NOx SO 10 PM total total TSM (48) (1,017) (236) (5) (381) (108) SR-60 (50) (1,051) (244) (5) (393) (111) Washington (50) (1,053) (244) (6) (394) (112) CEQA Threshold Table 10 Annual Traffic Emissions Change Compared to No Build Scenario Emissions (tons per year) PM ROG CO NOx SO 10 PM total total TSM (8) (162) (38) (1) (61) (17) SR-60 (8) (167) (39) (1) (63) (18) Washington (8) (167) (39) (1) (63) (18) NEPA Threshold Table 11 Daily 2010 Traffic Emissions Change Compared to Baseline Year Emissions (pounds per day) PM ROG CO NOx SO 10 PM total total No Build (71,775) (1,704,976) (339,774) 0 (4,760) (4,955) TSM (71,784) (1,705,235) (339,822) (2) (4,872) (4,986) SR-60 (71,788) (1,705,319) (339,838) (2) (4,908) (4,996) Washington (71,785) (1,705,260) (339,827) (2) (4,882) (4,989) CEQA Threshold Note: Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Shading indicates that emissions exceed the threshold of significance.

85 Summary of Traffic Emissions Table 12 Highway Traffic Criteria Pollutant Emission Factors Emission factors (grams per mile) Alternatives ROG TOG CO NOx SO 2 PM 10 total PM 10 exhaust PM 10 tire wear PM 10 brake wear PM 10 paved road dust PM 2.5 total PM 2.5 exhaust PM 2.5 tire wear PM 2.5 brake wear PM 2.5 paved road dust Existing Conditions No Build TSM SR Washington Assume 20 mph. Table 13 Highway Traffic Daily Criteria Pollutant Emissions Emissions (pounds per day) Alternatives ROG TOG CO NOx SO 2 PM 10 total PM 10 exhaust PM 10 tire wear PM 10 brake wear PM 10 paved road dust PM 2.5 total PM 2.5 exhaust PM 2.5 tire wear PM 2.5 brake wear PM 2.5 paved road dust Existing Conditions 96, ,286 2,356, ,963 3, ,408 9,035 6,870 32, ,155 83,149 8,279 1,717 13,864 59,289 No Build 52,574 74,696 1,105, ,322 5, ,652 7,696 10,712 48, , ,223 7,113 2,678 20,690 86,742 TSM 52,526 74,628 1,104, ,086 5, ,271 7,689 10,702 48, , ,115 7,106 2,675 20,671 86,662 SR-60 52,524 74,625 1,104, ,079 5, ,259 7,688 10,701 48, , ,111 7,106 2,675 20,670 86,659 Washington 52,524 74,625 1,104, ,078 5, ,258 7,688 10,701 48, , ,111 7,106 2,675 20,670 86,659 Table 14 Highway Traffic Annual Criteria Pollutant Emissions Emissions (tons per year) Alternatives ROG TOG CO NOx SO 2 PM 10 total PM 10 exhaust PM 10 tire wear PM 10 brake wear PM 10 paved road dust PM 2.5 total PM 2.5 exhaust PM 2.5 tire wear PM 2.5 brake wear PM 2.5 paved road dust Existing Conditions 15,321 19, ,726 73, ,380 1,437 1,092 5,143 36,855 13,221 1, ,204 9,214 No Build 8,359 11, ,776 40, ,771 1,224 1,703 7,676 53,921 18,638 1, ,290 13,480 TSM 8,352 11, ,614 40, ,710 1,223 1,702 7,669 53,871 18,621 1, ,287 13,468 SR-60 8,351 11, ,609 40, ,708 1,222 1,702 7,669 53,870 18,621 1, ,287 13,467 Washington 8,351 11, ,608 40, ,708 1,222 1,702 7,669 53,870 18,621 1, ,287 13,467 Scaling Factor References 318 days per year EMFAC2011 model US EPA AP-42 Section Paved Roads (January 2011)

86 Summary of Traffic Emissions Table 15 Highway Traffic Criteria Pollutant Emission Factors Emission factors (grams per mile) Alternatives ROG TOG CO NOx SO 2 PM 10 total PM 10 exhaust PM 10 tire wear PM 10 brake wear PM 10 paved road dust PM 2.5 total PM 2.5 exhaust PM 2.5 tire wear PM 2.5 brake wear PM 2.5 paved road dust Existing Conditions No Build TSM SR Washington Assume 30 mph. Table Highway Traffic Daily Criteria Pollutant Emissions Emissions (pounds per day) Alternatives ROG TOG CO NOx SO 2 PM 10 total PM 10 exhaust PM 10 tire wear PM 10 brake wear PM 10 paved road dust PM 2.5 total PM 2.5 exhaust PM 2.5 tire wear PM 2.5 brake wear PM 2.5 paved road dust Existing Conditions 96, ,286 2,356, ,963 3, ,408 9,035 6,870 32, ,155 83,149 8,279 1,717 13,864 59,289 No Build 24,585 33, , ,189 3, ,648 3,174 7,321 32, ,155 78,194 2,933 1,830 14,142 59,289 TSM 24,575 33, , ,141 3, ,536 3,173 7,319 32, ,061 78,163 2,932 1,830 14,136 59,265 SR-60 24,572 33, , ,125 3, ,500 3,172 7,318 32, ,030 78,153 2,932 1,829 14,134 59,258 Washington 24,574 33, , ,136 3, ,526 3,173 7,318 32, ,052 78,160 2,932 1,830 14,136 59,263 References EMFAC2011 model US EPA AP-42 Section Paved Roads (January 2011)

87 Regional Highway Traffic Data Table 17 Highway Vehicle Miles, Vehicle Hours and Average Speeds 2010 No Build 2035 No Build 2035 TSM 2035 SR Washington to Lambert 2010 TSM 2010 SR Washington Regional Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 358,751, ,869, ,386, ,370, ,369, ,609, ,563, ,595,724 Daily Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) 12,890,069 27,378,000 27,297,000 27,294,000 27,294,000 12,872,000 12,869,862 12,868,138 Daily Average Vehicle Speed (mph) AM Peak Vehicle Trips 7,119,172 9,214,000 9,209,000 9,208,000 9,207,000 7,116,759 7,115,759 7,115,621 PM Peak Vehicle Trips 12,360,172 15,630,000 15,624,000 15,624,000 15,623,000 12,357,621 12,356,759 12,356,621 Notes: VMTs and VHTs include model centroid connectors Source: Eastside Highway VMT-VHT Summary _ xlsx

88 Summary of Incremental Transit Bus Emissions Table 18 Daily Bus Emissions Change Compared to Baseline Year Emissions (pounds per day) ROG CO NOx SO 2 PM 10 total PM 2.5 total No Build Alternative (32) (237) (488) (0) (9) (7) TSM Alternative (24) (186) (348) SR 60 LRT Alternative (25) (195) (372) WA Blvd LRT Alternative (24) (190) (358) CEQA Threshold Table 19 Daily Bus Emissions Change Compared to No Build Scenario Emissions (pounds per day) ROG CO NOx SO 2 PM 10 total PM 2.5 total TSM Alternative SR 60 LRT Alternative WA Blvd LRT Alternative CEQA Threshold Table 20 Annual Bus Emissions Change Compared to No Build Scenario Emissions (pounds per day) ROG CO NOx SO 2 PM 10 total PM 2.5 total TSM Alternative SR 60 LRT Alternative WA Blvd LRT Alternative NEPA Threshold Note: Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Shading indicates that emissions exceed the threshold of significance.

89 Summary of Transit Bus Emissions by Alternative Table 21 Transit Bus Daily Criteria Pollutant Emissions Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Alternative ROG CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 Total Total Existing Conditions No Build Alternative TSM Alternative SR 60 LRT Alternative WA Blvd LRT Alternative Table 22 Transit Bus Annual Criteria Pollutant Emissions Annual Emissions (tons/year) Alternative ROG CO NOx SOx PM10 PM2.5 Total Total Existing Conditions No Build Alternative TSM Alternative SR 60 LRT Alternative WA Blvd LRT Alternative

90 Summary of Transit Bus Emissions by Alternative Year ROG TOG CO NOx SOx Table 23 Transit Bus Emission Factors by Analysis Year Emission Factors for Urban Buses, grams per mile PM10 Total PM10 Exhaust PM10 Tire Wear PM10 Brake Wear PM10 Paved Road Dust PM2.5 Total PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Tire Wear PM2.5 Brake Wear PM2.5 Paved Road Dust

91 Summary of Transit Bus VMT Alternative Table 24 Transit Bus Daily and Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled 2010 Base 2035 No-Build 2035 TSM 2035 SR-60 LRT 2035 Washington LRT Daily VMT Annual VMT Daily VMT Annual VMT Daily VMT Annual VMT Daily VMT Annual VMT Daily VMT Annual VMT TSM Buses , ,421, , ,796, , ,153,576.0 Metro Bus 18, ,071, , ,694, , ,482, , ,482, , ,482,303.5 Montebello Bus 3, ,266, , ,341, , ,842, , ,842, , ,842,312.7 Norwalk Bus , , , , ,869.4 Monterey Park , , , , ,388.1 Foothill Bus , , , , ,006.0 Total 24, ,697, , ,413, , ,123, , ,498, , ,855,455.6 Incremental VMT (873.3) (284,818.5) 11, ,710,294.3 (1,947.4) (625,007.6) (834.6) (267,871.1) (1) Incremental VMT of TSM Alternative is relative to the No-Build Alternatives. (2) Incremental VMT of the build alternatives is relative to TSM Alternative. Source: Eastside Bus VMT Aug 2013.xlsx

92 Paved Road Dust Emission Factors Predictive Emission Factor Equation E k sl 0.91 W with natural mitigation due to precipitation (for annual emissions): E P k sl W 1 4N where: E = particulate emission factor (g/vmt) k = particle size multiplier for particle size range (dimensionless) sl = road surface silt loading (g/m2) W = average weight (tons) of the vehicles traveling the road P = number of wet days with at least 0.01 in of precipitation during the averaging period N = number of days in the averaging period Particle Size Multipliers for Paved Road Equation Particle Size Multiplier Size Range g/vkt g/vmt lb/vmt PM PM PM PM Source: U.S. EPA, AP-42 Section Paved Roads, January sl = 0.1 g/m2 W = 2.4 tons P = 33 days N = 365 days Note: CalEEMod v default assumptions Emission Factors Paved Road With Natural Dust Mitigation g/vmt g/vmt PM PM

93 Parking Space Emissions Table 25 SR 60 LRT Alternative Parking Emissions Parking ROG Emissions Station Spaces (lb/day) (ton/year) Garfield Avenue Shops at Montebello Santa Anita Avenue Peck Road 1, Total 3, Table 26 Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Parking Emissions Parking ROG Emissions Station Spaces (lb/day) (ton/year) Garfield Avenue Whittier Boulevard Greenwood Avenue Rosemead Boulevard Norwalk Boulevard Lambert Road 1, Total 2, Evaporative Loss Emission Factors (ROG) g/hr Average Time Vehicles are Parked 10 hr/day (assumed) Source: Description of Alternatives Technical Memo (July 19, 2010) EMFAC - Regional Traffic Aug 2013.xlsx

94 Highway Toxic Air Contaminants Table 27 Existing Condition 2010 Highway Traffic TAC Emissions TOG PM10 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) --> 122,286 9,035 6,870 32, ,155 Fraction of PM10 Emissions Toxic Air Contaminant CAS # Fraction of TOG Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Paved Road Dust (lb/hr) (lb/yr) Organic Compounds 1,3-butadiene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,878 acetaldehyde n/a n/a n/a n/a 12 93,717 acrolein (2-propenal) n/a n/a n/a n/a 7 52,497 benzene n/a n/a n/a n/a 134 1,025,058 ethylbenzene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,867 formaldehyde n/a n/a n/a n/a ,687 methyl alcohol n/a n/a n/a n/a ,881 methyl ethyl ketone (mek) (2-butanone) n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 7,389 methyl t-butyl ether (mtbe) n/a n/a n/a n/a ,794 m-xylene n/a n/a n/a n/a 185 1,415,482 naphthalene n/a n/a n/a n/a 2 18,666 n-hexane n/a n/a n/a n/a ,968 o-xylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,918 propylene n/a n/a n/a n/a 159 1,216,381 styrene n/a n/a n/a n/a 6 48,997 toluene n/a n/a n/a n/a 300 2,286,548 Particulate Matter ARSENIC n/a n/a ,083 CADMIUM n/a n/a n/a n/a CHLORINE n/a ,783 COPPER n/a ,812 LEAD n/a n/a ,215 MANGANESE n/a ,475 MERCURY n/a n/a n/a n/a NICKEL n/a ,240 SELENIUM n/a n/a Source: Eastside Highway CP - Aug 2013.xlsx, CARB Speciation Profiles. Key: CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service PM10 = respirable particulate matter lb/hr = pounds per hour TOG = total organic gases lb/yr = pounds per year Operating Schedule: 24 hr/day 318 days/year 7632 hr/yr Distance to nearest receptor: 25 m Note: The minimum distance allowed in SCAQMD screening calculations is 25 meters.

95 Highway Toxic Air Contaminants TOG Table 28 No-Build Alternative 2035 Highway Traffic TAC Emissions PM10 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) --> 74,696 7,696 10,712 48, ,968 Incremental Emissions Fraction of PM10 Emissions No Build - Existing Toxic Air Contaminant CAS # Fraction of TOG Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Paved Road Dust (lb/hr) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/yr) Organic Compounds 1,3-butadiene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,644 (11) (83,234) acetaldehyde n/a n/a n/a n/a 8 57,246 (5) (36,472) acrolein (2-propenal) n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 32,067 (3) (20,430) benzene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,140 (52) (398,919) ethylbenzene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,636 (21) (162,231) formaldehyde n/a n/a n/a n/a ,570 (34) (257,118) methyl alcohol n/a n/a n/a n/a 13 96,439 (8) (61,442) methyl ethyl ketone (mek) (2-butanone) n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 4,513 (0) (2,875) methyl t-butyl ether (mtbe) n/a n/a n/a n/a ,054 (38) (293,741) m-xylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,623 (72) (550,858) naphthalene n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 11,402 (1) (7,264) n-hexane n/a n/a n/a n/a ,254 (31) (239,714) o-xylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,480 (25) (191,438) propylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,006 (62) (473,375) styrene n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 29,929 (2) (19,068) toluene n/a n/a n/a n/a 183 1,396,700 (117) (889,848) Particulate Matter ARSENIC n/a n/a , CADMIUM n/a n/a n/a n/a CHLORINE n/a , ,932 COPPER n/a , ,728 LEAD n/a n/a , ,779 MANGANESE n/a , ,457 MERCURY n/a n/a n/a n/a NICKEL n/a , ,610 SELENIUM n/a n/a Source: Eastside Highway CP - Aug 2013.xlsx, CARB Speciation Profiles. Key: CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service PM10 = respirable particulate matter lb/hr = pounds per hour TOG = total organic gases lb/yr = pounds per year Operating Schedule: 24 hr/day 318 days/year 7632 hr/yr Distance to nearest receptor: 25 m Note: The minimum distance allowed in SCAQMD screening calculations is 25 meters.

96 Highway Toxic Air Contaminants TOG Table 29 TSM 2035 Highway Traffic TAC Emissions PM10 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) --> 74,628 7,689 10,702 48, ,648 Incremental Emissions Incremental Emissions Fraction of PM10 Emissions TSM - Existing Project - No Build Toxic Air Contaminant CAS # Fraction of TOG Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Paved Road Dust (lb/hr) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/yr) Organic Compounds 1,3-butadiene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,523 (11) (83,354) (0) (120) acetaldehyde n/a n/a n/a n/a 7 57,193 (5) (36,524) (0) (53) acrolein (2-propenal) n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 32,038 (3) (20,460) (0) (30) benzene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,564 (52) (399,495) (0) (576) ethylbenzene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,402 (21) (162,465) (0) (234) formaldehyde n/a n/a n/a n/a ,198 (34) (257,489) (0) (371) methyl alcohol n/a n/a n/a n/a 13 96,350 (8) (61,531) (0) (89) methyl ethyl ketone (mek) (2-butanone) n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 4,509 (0) (2,880) (0) (4) methyl t-butyl ether (mtbe) n/a n/a n/a n/a ,629 (39) (294,165) (0) (424) m-xylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,828 (72) (551,654) (0) (796) naphthalene n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 11,391 (1) (7,275) (0) (10) n-hexane n/a n/a n/a n/a ,908 (31) (240,061) (0) (346) o-xylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,204 (25) (191,715) (0) (277) propylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,322 (62) (474,059) (0) (684) styrene n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 29,902 (3) (19,096) (0) (28) toluene n/a n/a n/a n/a 183 1,395,414 (117) (891,134) (0) (1,285) Particulate Matter ARSENIC n/a n/a , (0) (1) CADMIUM n/a n/a n/a n/a (0) (0) CHLORINE n/a , ,674 (0) (257) COPPER n/a , ,548 (0) (180) LEAD n/a n/a , ,765 (0) (14) MANGANESE n/a , ,350 (0) (107) MERCURY n/a n/a n/a n/a (0) (1) NICKEL n/a , ,598 (0) (12) SELENIUM n/a n/a (0) (1) Source: Eastside Highway CP - Aug 2013.xlsx, CARB Speciation Profiles. Key: CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service PM10 = respirable particulate matter lb/hr = pounds per hour TOG = total organic gases lb/yr = pounds per year Operating Schedule: 24 hr/day 318 days/year 7632 hr/yr Distance to nearest receptor: 25 m Note: The minimum distance allowed in SCAQMD screening calculations is 25 meters.

97 Highway Toxic Air Contaminants TOG Table 30 SR-60 LRT 2035 Highway Traffic TAC Emissions PM10 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) --> 74,625 7,688 10,701 48, ,638 Incremental Emissions Incremental Emissions Fraction of PM10 Emissions Project - Existing Project - No Build Toxic Air Contaminant CAS # Fraction of TOG Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Paved Road Dust (lb/hr) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/yr) Organic Compounds 1,3-butadiene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,520 (11) (83,358) (0) (124) acetaldehyde n/a n/a n/a n/a 7 57,191 (5) (36,526) (0) (54) acrolein (2-propenal) n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 32,037 (3) (20,461) (0) (30) benzene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,544 (52) (399,514) (0) (595) ethylbenzene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,394 (21) (162,473) (0) (242) formaldehyde n/a n/a n/a n/a ,186 (34) (257,501) (0) (384) methyl alcohol n/a n/a n/a n/a 13 96,347 (8) (61,534) (0) (92) methyl ethyl ketone (mek) (2-butanone) n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 4,509 (0) (2,880) (0) (4) methyl t-butyl ether (mtbe) n/a n/a n/a n/a ,615 (39) (294,179) (0) (438) m-xylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,801 (72) (551,680) (0) (822) naphthalene n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 11,391 (1) (7,275) (0) (11) n-hexane n/a n/a n/a n/a ,896 (31) (240,072) (0) (358) o-xylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,194 (25) (191,724) (0) (286) propylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,300 (62) (474,081) (0) (706) styrene n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 29,901 (3) (19,097) (0) (28) toluene n/a n/a n/a n/a 183 1,395,372 (117) (891,176) (0) (1,328) Particulate Matter ARSENIC n/a n/a , (0) (2) CADMIUM n/a n/a n/a n/a (0) (0) CHLORINE n/a , ,666 (0) (266) COPPER n/a , ,542 (0) (186) LEAD n/a n/a , ,765 (0) (14) MANGANESE n/a , ,346 (0) (110) MERCURY n/a n/a n/a n/a (0) (1) NICKEL n/a , ,598 (0) (12) SELENIUM n/a n/a (0) (1) Source: Eastside Highway CP - Aug 2013.xlsx, CARB Speciation Profiles. Key: CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service PM10 = respirable particulate matter lb/hr = pounds per hour TOG = total organic gases lb/yr = pounds per year Operating Schedule: 24 hr/day 318 days/year 7632 hr/yr Distance to nearest receptor: 25 m Note: The minimum distance allowed in SCAQMD screening calculations is 25 meters.

98 Highway Toxic Air Contaminants TOG Table 31 Washington Boulevard LRT 2035 Highway Traffic TAC Emissions PM10 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) --> 74,625 7,688 10,701 48, ,637 Incremental Emissions Incremental Emissions Fraction of PM10 Emissions Project - Existing Project - No Build Toxic Air Contaminant CAS # Fraction of TOG Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Paved Road Dust (lb/hr) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (lb/yr) Organic Compounds 1,3-butadiene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,519 (11) (83,359) (0) (124) acetaldehyde n/a n/a n/a n/a 7 57,191 (5) (36,526) (0) (55) acrolein (2-propenal) n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 32,037 (3) (20,461) (0) (31) benzene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,543 (52) (399,515) (0) (596) ethylbenzene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,394 (21) (162,474) (0) (243) formaldehyde n/a n/a n/a n/a ,185 (34) (257,502) (0) (384) methyl alcohol n/a n/a n/a n/a 13 96,347 (8) (61,534) (0) (92) methyl ethyl ketone (mek) (2-butanone) n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 4,509 (0) (2,880) (0) (4) methyl t-butyl ether (mtbe) n/a n/a n/a n/a ,614 (39) (294,180) (0) (439) m-xylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,800 (72) (551,682) (0) (824) naphthalene n/a n/a n/a n/a 1 11,391 (1) (7,275) (0) (11) n-hexane n/a n/a n/a n/a ,895 (31) (240,073) (0) (358) o-xylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,194 (25) (191,724) (0) (286) propylene n/a n/a n/a n/a ,298 (62) (474,083) (0) (708) styrene n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 29,901 (3) (19,097) (0) (29) toluene n/a n/a n/a n/a 183 1,395,369 (117) (891,179) (0) (1,331) Particulate Matter ARSENIC n/a n/a , (0) (2) CADMIUM n/a n/a n/a n/a (0) (0) CHLORINE n/a , ,665 (0) (266) COPPER n/a , ,542 (0) (186) LEAD n/a n/a , ,765 (0) (14) MANGANESE n/a , ,346 (0) (110) MERCURY n/a n/a n/a n/a (0) (1) NICKEL n/a , ,598 (0) (12) SELENIUM n/a n/a (0) (1) Source: Eastside Highway CP - Aug 2013.xlsx, CARB Speciation Profiles. Key: CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service PM10 = respirable particulate matter lb/hr = pounds per hour TOG = total organic gases lb/yr = pounds per year Operating Schedule: 24 hr/day 318 days/year 7632 hr/yr Distance to nearest receptor: 25 m Note: The minimum distance allowed in SCAQMD screening calculations is 25 meters.

99 LA Metro Eastside Extension Intersection Data Volumes # Intersection Ex AM Ex PM NB AM NB PM TSM AM TSM PM SR60 AM SR 60 PM WA AM WA PM Max Rank 1 Atlantic Blvd & Beverly Blvd 3,063 3,730 5,125 4,544 3,782 4,520 3,782 4,512 3,769 4,508 4, Atlantic Blvd & Pomona Blvd 1,993 3,347 3,664 4,050 3,614 4,021 3,614 4,005 3,604 4,003 4, Atlantic Blvd & SR 60 EB Off Ramp 3,238 3,627 4,067 4,333 4,016 4,295 3,997 4,276 3,997 4,276 4, Atlantic Blvd & 1st St/SR 60 WB Off Ramp 2,776 3,284 3,402 3,948 3,361 3,912 3,351 3,900 3,351 3,900 3, Beverly Blvd & Hillview Ave 1,580 2,024 2,064 2,477 2,047 2,474 2,047 2,478 2,045 2,479 2, Hillview Ave & Pomona Blvd ,219 1,187 1,210 1,183 1,210 1,181 1,216 1,181 1, Gerhart Ave & Via Camp 966 1,400 1,182 1,754 1,160 1,743 1,172 1,740 1,165 1,739 1, Gerhart Ave & Pomona Blvd 1,166 1,172 1,521 1,396 1,508 1,384 1,504 1,381 1,506 1,382 1, Pomona Blvd & Findley Ave 1, ,631 1,037 1,623 1,033 1,620 1,030 1,622 1,030 1, Garfield Ave & Pomona Blvd 3,586 3,501 4,728 4,071 4,705 4,047 4,727 4,082 4,754 4,077 4, Garfield Ave & Via Camp 3,388 4,250 4,101 5,291 4,026 5,261 4,079 5,294 4,117 5,334 5, Garfield Ave & Via San Clemente 2,350 2,540 2,740 2,896 2,709 2, ,717 2,872 2, Garfield Ave & Via Paseo 2,624 2,704 3,069 3,116 3,036 3, ,044 3,096 3, Wilcox Ave & Pomona Blvd 2,610 2,531 3,253 2,997 3,228 2,989 3,232 3, , Wilcox Ave & Via Camp 3,028 3,319 3,671 4,025 3,644 4,007 3,664 4, , Pomona Blvd/Pomona Blvd / SR 60 Off Ramp & 1,549 1,571 1,890 1,824 1,874 1,823 1,879 1, , Garfield Ave & Via Acosta 2,879 2,786 3,414 3,232 3,377 3, ,382 3,212 3, Garfield Ave & Beverly Blvd 3,640 4,064 4,457 4,936 4,415 4, ,412 4,910 4, Garfield Ave & Madison Ave 1,938 2,246 2,250 2,566 2,224 2, ,523 2,559 2, Whittier Blvd & Via San Clemente 1,645 1,789 2,131 2,308 2,113 2, ,106 2,302 2, Garfield Ave & Whittier Blvd 3,656 4,108 4,453 4,962 4,408 4, ,427 4,943 4, Concourse Ave & Whittier Blvd 2,411 2,627 3,056 3,317 3,029 3, ,024 3,299 3, Garfield Ave & Olympic Blvd 3,446 4,068 4,160 4,874 4,119 4, ,117 4,839 4, Garfield Ave & Ferguson Dr 2,604 2,997 3,049 3,488 3,014 3, ,016 3,447 3, Garfield Ave & Flotilla St 2,521 2,884 2,988 3,336 2,953 3, ,958 3,302 3, Garfield Ave & Washington Blvd 3,565 4,010 4,728 5,034 4,697 4, ,633 4,986 4, Yates Ave & Washington Blvd 2,482 2,613 3,147 3,186 3,133 3, ,112 3,172 3, Vail Ave & Washington Blvd 2,792 2,780 3,575 3,395 3,561 3, ,533 3,378 3, Maple Ave & Washington Blvd 2,638 2,768 3,349 3,388 3,336 3, ,314 3,368 3, Greenwood Ave & Washington Blvd 3,534 3,726 4,630 4,643 4,604 4, ,593 4,651 4, Montebello Blvd & Washington Blvd 2,689 2,761 3,418 3,364 3,404 3, ,418 3,383 3, Bluff Rd & Washington Blvd 3,142 3,286 4,003 4,002 3,984 3, ,992 4,014 4, Paramount Blvd & Washington Blvd 4,383 4,976 5,687 6,229 5,658 6, ,627 6,213 6, Crossway Drive/Drossway Dr & Washington Blv 2,688 3,488 3,568 4,508 4,215 4, ,602 4,516 4, Rosemead Blvd & Washington Blvd 4,774 5,241 6,304 6,785 6,266 6, ,310 6,831 6, Passons Blvd & Washington Blvd 4,001 4,148 5,302 5,364 5,273 5, ,332 5,404 5, Pioneer Blvd & Washington Blvd 4,537 4,741 6,014 6,154 5,987 6, ,257 6,456 6, Norwalk Blvd & Washington Blvd 4,546 4,913 5,612 5,958 5,564 5, ,824 6,248 6, Norwalk Blvd & Broadway Blvd 2,291 2,531 2,972 3,225 2,942 3, ,520 3,196 3, Broadway Blvd & Washington Blvd 3,595 3,774 4,393 4,497 4,354 4, ,554 4,723 4, Sorenson Ave & Washington Blvd 3,948 4,228 4,860 4,788 4,821 5, ,995 5,276 5, Lambert Rd & Washington Blvd 2,753 3,275 3,352 3,988 3,321 3, ,450 4,102 4, Santa Fe Springs Rd & Lambert Rd 2,718 3,004 3,405 3,762 3,374 3, ,351 3,754 3, Putnam Rd & Washington Blvd 1,646 1,766 1,981 2,078 1,963 2, ,084 2,185 2,185 56

100 LA Metro Eastside Extension Intersection Data Volumes # Intersection Ex AM Ex PM NB AM NB PM TSM AM TSM PM SR60 AM SR 60 PM WA AM WA PM Max Rank 45 Santa Fe Springs Rd/Pickering Ave & Whittier B 3,834 4,138 4,686 4,950 4,654 4, ,236 4,804 4, Markland Dr & SR 60 WB Off Ramp/Potrero Gr 2,162 2,144 2,587 2,583 2,572 5,755 2,576 2, , Paramount Blvd & SR 60 EB Ramps/Town Cen 1,771 3,439 2,310 4,123 2,288 4,100 2,360 4, , Paramount Blvd & Neil Armstrong St/SR 60 WB 2,233 2,836 2,835 3,448 2,812 3,429 2,866 3, , Montebello Blvd & Paramount Blvd 1,685 3,045 2,192 3,555 2,175 3,544 2,166 3, , Montebello Blvd & Montebello Town Center 478 1, , , , , Montebello Town Center & SR 60 EB Ramps 1,146 1,898 1,476 2,244 1,466 2,233 1,558 2, , Plaza Dr & Montebello Blvd , , , , San Gabriel Blvd & Walnut Grove Ave 2,746 3,240 3,438 3,948 3,417 3,927 3,432 3, , San Gabriel Blvd & SR 60 WB Ramps 2,986 3,557 3,944 4,311 3,917 4,282 3,985 4, , San Gabriel Blvd & Montebello Town Center 2,398 2,956 3,100 3,535 3,074 3,519 3,143 3, , San Gabriel Blvd & Plaza Dr 1,624 2,079 2,127 2,568 2,107 2,554 2,092 2, , Santa Anita Ave & SR 60 EB Ramps 2,156 1,714 2,806 2,058 2,801 2,052 3,079 2, , Santa Anita Ave & Fawcett Ave 2,802 2,456 3,262 2,777 3,251 2,753 3,494 2, , Durfee Ave & SR 60 EB Ramps 2,390 2,258 2,919 2,722 2,914 2,718 2,959 3, , Peck Rd & Slack Rd 2,848 3,189 3,320 3,598 3,309 3,568 3,330 3, , Peck Rd & Farndon St 2,662 3,018 3,096 3,401 3,083 3,371 3,110 3, , Peck Rd & SR 60 WB Ramps 3,069 3,379 3,560 3,827 3,546 3,795 3,888 3, , Peck Rd & Durfee Ave 3,596 3,763 4,489 4,540 4,482 4,523 4,867 4, ,891 11

101 LA Metro Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 CO Hotspots Summary 1-Hour CO 8-Hour CO Intersection Peak Hour Existing Future (2035) Existing Future (2035) (2010) No Build TSM Build (2010) No Build TSM Build 11 Garfield Ave & Via Camp PM Paramount Blvd & Washington Blvd PM Rosemead Blvd & Washington Blvd PM Passons Blvd & Washington Blvd PM Pioneer Blvd & Washington Blvd PM Norwalk Blvd & Washington Blvd PM Exceed Thresholds? NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO For Build, Intersection 11 is SR 60 LRT Alternative and Intersections are Washington Blvd LRT Alternative. Carbon Monoxide Standards California Federal ppm ppm 1-Hr Hr 9 9

102 LA Metro Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Existing Conditions Standard 20 9 Max Total 7 5 Number of Intersection Concentration Lanes N-S Roadway Parameters E-W Roadway Parameters Concentration with Background Peak Through C ri V i EF i C i C ri V i EF i C i 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour Intersection Alternative Hour N-S E-W ppm vol g/mi ppm ppm vol g/mi ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm 33 Paramount Blvd & Washington Blvd Existing PM , , Rosemead Blvd & Washington Blvd Existing PM , , Passons Blvd & Washington Blvd Existing PM , Pioneer Blvd & Washington Blvd Existing PM , , Norwalk Blvd & Washington Blvd Existing PM , , Garfield Ave & Via Camp Existing PM , , The contribution from one road, C i, can be computed by the formula: Cri Vi EFi Ci 100,000 where: C i = concentration from contributing local road (ppm) C ri = reference case concentration for the i-th road (ppm) V i = traffic volume for the i-th roadway (vph) EF i = emission factor for the i-th roadway (g/mi) Conversion from 1-Hour CO to 8-Hour CO Concentration (ppm) Year 1-Hour 8-Hour Ratio Persistence Factor 0.8 Source: Note: SCAQMD CEQA Guidelines (1993) state that the persistence factor is the ratio over the most recent three years between the highest annual max 1-hour and 8-hour CO concentrations Source/Receptor Area = No South San Gabriel Valley 1-Hour Background Concentration (ppm) Hour Background Concentration (ppm) 2.1 Source:

103 LA Metro Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 No Build Scenario Standard 20 9 Max Total 6 5 Number of Intersection Concentration Lanes N-S Roadway Parameters E-W Roadway Parameters Concentration with Background Peak Through C ri V i EF i C i C ri V i EF i C i 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour Intersection Alternative Hour N-S E-W ppm vol g/mi ppm ppm vol g/mi ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm 33 Paramount Blvd & Washington Blvd No Build PM , , Rosemead Blvd & Washington Blvd No Build PM , , Passons Blvd & Washington Blvd No Build PM , , Pioneer Blvd & Washington Blvd No Build PM , , Norwalk Blvd & Washington Blvd No Build PM , , Garfield Ave & Via Camp No Build PM , , The contribution from one road, C i, can be computed by the formula: Cri Vi EFi Ci 100,000 where: C i = concentration from contributing local road (ppm) C ri = reference case concentration for the i-th road (ppm) V i = traffic volume for the i-th roadway (vph) EF i = emission factor for the i-th roadway (g/mi) Conversion from 1-Hour CO to 8-Hour CO Concentration (ppm) Year 1-Hour 8-Hour Ratio Persistence Factor 0.8 Source: Note: SCAQMD CEQA Guidelines (1993) state that the persistence factor is the ratio over the most recent three years between the highest annual max 1-hour and 8-hour CO concentrations Source/Receptor Area = No South San Gabriel Valley 1-Hour Background Concentration (ppm) Hour Background Concentration (ppm) 4.1 Source:

104 LA Metro Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 TSM Alternative Standard 20 9 Max Total 6 5 Number of Intersection Concentration Lanes N-S Roadway Parameters E-W Roadway Parameters Concentration with Background Peak Through C ri V i EF i C i C ri V i EF i C i 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour Intersection Alternative Hour N-S E-W ppm vol g/mi ppm ppm vol g/mi ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm 33 Paramount Blvd & Washington Blvd TSM PM , , Rosemead Blvd & Washington Blvd TSM PM , , Passons Blvd & Washington Blvd TSM PM , , Pioneer Blvd & Washington Blvd TSM PM , , Norwalk Blvd & Washington Blvd TSM PM , , Garfield Ave & Via Camp TSM PM , , The contribution from one road, C i, can be computed by the formula: Cri Vi EFi Ci 100,000 where: C i = concentration from contributing local road (ppm) C ri = reference case concentration for the i-th road (ppm) V i = traffic volume for the i-th roadway (vph) EF i = emission factor for the i-th roadway (g/mi) Conversion from 1-Hour CO to 8-Hour CO Concentration (ppm) Year 1-Hour 8-Hour Ratio Persistence Factor 0.8 Source: Note: SCAQMD CEQA Guidelines (1993) state that the persistence factor is the ratio over the most recent three years between the highest annual max 1-hour and 8-hour CO concentrations Source/Receptor Area = No South San Gabriel Valley 1-Hour Background Concentration (ppm) Hour Background Concentration (ppm) 4.1 Source:

105 LA Metro Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 LRT Build Alternatives Standard 20 9 Max Total 6 5 Number of Intersection Concentration Lanes N-S Roadway Parameters E-W Roadway Parameters Concentration with Background Peak Through C ri V i EF i C i C ri V i EF i C i 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour Intersection Alternative Hour N-S E-W ppm vol g/mi ppm ppm vol g/mi ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm 11 Garfield Ave & Via Camp Washington PM , , Paramount Blvd & Washington Blvd Washington PM , , Rosemead Blvd & Washington Blvd Washington PM , , Passons Blvd & Washington Blvd Washington PM , , Pioneer Blvd & Washington Blvd Washington PM , , Norwalk Blvd & Washington Blvd Washington PM , , Garfield Ave & Via Camp SR60 PM , , The contribution from one road, C i, can be computed by the formula: Cri Vi EFi Ci 100,000 where: C i = concentration from contributing local road (ppm) C ri = reference case concentration for the i-th road (ppm) V i = traffic volume for the i-th roadway (vph) EF i = emission factor for the i-th roadway (g/mi) Conversion from 1-Hour CO to 8-Hour CO Concentration (ppm) Year 1-Hour 8-Hour Ratio Persistence Factor 0.8 Source: Note: SCAQMD CEQA Guidelines (1993) state that the persistence factor is the ratio over the most recent three years between the highest annual max 1-hour and 8-hour CO concentrations Source/Receptor Area = No South San Gabriel Valley 1-Hour Background Concentration (ppm) Hour Background Concentration (ppm) 4.1 Source:

106 Summary of Total Annual Construction Emissions Annual VOC Emissions (tons per year) Exceed Alternative Peak Year Threshold? SR60 LRT Alternative no Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative no 9-acre Maintenance Yard Option no 12-acre Maintenance Yard Option no 20-acre Maintenance Yard Option no Annual NOx Emissions (tons per year) Exceed Alternative Peak Year Threshold? SR60 LRT Alternative no Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative no 9-acre Maintenance Yard Option no 12-acre Maintenance Yard Option no 20-acre Maintenance Yard Option no Annual CO Emissions (tons per year) Exceed Alternative Peak Year Threshold? SR60 LRT Alternative no Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative no 9-acre Maintenance Yard Option no 12-acre Maintenance Yard Option no 20-acre Maintenance Yard Option no Annual SO2 Emissions (tons per year) Exceed Alternative Peak Year Threshold? SR60 LRT Alternative no Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative no 9-acre Maintenance Yard Option no 12-acre Maintenance Yard Option no 20-acre Maintenance Yard Option no Annual PM10 Emissions (tons per year) Exceed Alternative Peak Year Threshold? SR60 LRT Alternative no Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative no 9-acre Maintenance Yard Option no 12-acre Maintenance Yard Option no 20-acre Maintenance Yard Option no Annual PM2.5 Emissions (tons per year) Exceed Alternative Peak Year Threshold? SR60 LRT Alternative no Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative no 9-acre Maintenance Yard Option no 12-acre Maintenance Yard Option no 20-acre Maintenance Yard Option no Thresholds of Significance Source: USEPA, 40 CFR 51, Pollutant Emissions (tpy) VOC 10 NOx 10 CO 100 SO2 100 PM10 70 PM

107 Summary of Annual Construction Emissions by Alternative SR60 LRT Alternative Emissions of VOC (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of NOx (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of CO (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of SO2 (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of PM10 (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of PM2.5 (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total

108 Summary of Annual Construction Emissions by Alternative Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative 9-Acre Maintenance Yard Alternative Emissions of VOC (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of NOx (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of CO (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of SO2 (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of PM10 (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of PM2.5 (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total

109 Summary of Annual Construction Emissions by Alternative Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative 12-Acre Maintenance Yard Alternative Emissions of VOC (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of NOx (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of CO (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of SO2 (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of PM10 (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of PM2.5 (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total

110 Summary of Annual Construction Emissions by Alternative Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative 11-Acre Maintenance Yard Alternative Emissions of VOC (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of NOx (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of CO (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of SO2 (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of PM10 (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total Emissions of PM2.5 (tons per year) Phase Peak Year Aerial Guideway Parking Structures Maintenance Yard Subtotal (no maintenance yard) Total

111 Summary of Maximum Daily Emissions Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Alternative VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 SR60 LRT Alternative Washington Blvd LRT Alternative 9-Acre Maintenance Yard Option Acre Maintenance Yard Option Acre Maintenance Yard Option Threshold of Significance Note: If threshold exceeded, then cell highlighted red. Santa Fe Springs Yard = 9-Acre Maintenance Yard Commerce Yard = 12-Acre Maintenance Yard Mission Junction Yard = 11-Acre Maintenance Yard

112 SR60 LRT Alternative Daily Construction Emisisons ROG Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total NOx Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total CO Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total SOx Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total PM10 Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total PM2.5 Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total

113 Washington Blvd LRT Alternative Daily Construction Emissions - 9 Acre Maintenance Yard Option ROG Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total NOx Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total CO Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total SOx Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total PM10 Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total PM2.5 Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total

114 Washington Blvd LRT Alternative Daily Construction Emissions - 12 Acre Maintenance Yard Option ROG Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total NOx Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total CO Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total SOx Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total PM10 Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total PM2.5 Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total

115 Washington Blvd LRT Alternative Daily Construction Emissions - 11 Acre Maintenance Yard Option ROG Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total NOx Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total CO Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total SOx Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total PM10 Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total PM2.5 Emissions (lbs/day) Activity Construction LRT Alignment Parking Facilities Maintenance Yard Total

116 Summary of Maximum Health Risk Results Alternative SR 60 LRT Alternative Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative 9-Acre Maintenance Yard Option 12-Acre Maintenance Yard Option 11-Acre Maintenance Yard Option Threshold HIA 1.11E E E E E E+00

117 SR60 LRT Alternative Table X-X SR 60 LRT Alternative ( ) Construction TAC Emissions PSL Emissions acute PSI Toxic Air Contaminant CAS # (lb/hr) (lbs/hr) acute Particulate Matter ARSENIC CHLORINE COPPER MERCURY NICKEL ASI 0.11 Threshold 1 Pass? yes Source: "SR 60 - Emissions" worksheet Notes: Organic compounds excluded from health risk assessment because future emissions are less than baseline emissions. Although traffic increases in future years, the difference in exhaust emission factors causes the future emissions to be less than baseline conditions. The emission factors for particulate matter remain relatively constant, but traffic volumes increase; therefore, PM emissions increase in future years. Key: CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lb/hr = pounds per hour lb/yr = pounds per year ASI = application screening index PSI = pollutant screening index PSL = pollutant screening level Equations PSI cancer and/or chronic = Q yr /PSL p PSI acute = Q hr /PSL p Where: PSI = pollutant screening index PSL = pollutant screening level (see Table 1A from the SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedures, referenced below) Qhr = maximum hourly emissions (lbs/hr) Qyr = maximum annual emissions (lbs/yr)

118 Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Table X-X Washington Boulvard LRT Alternative ( ) Construction TAC Emissions PSL Emissions (lbs/hr) acute PSI (acute) Toxic Air Contaminant CAS # Alt 2a Alt 2b Alt 2c (lbs/hr) Alt 2a Alt 2b Alt 2c Particulate Matter ARSENIC CHLORINE COPPER MERCURY NICKEL ASI Threshold Pass? yes yes yes Source: "WA - Emissions" worksheet Notes: Organic compounds excluded from health risk assessment because future emissions are less than baseline emissions. Although traffic increases in future years, the difference in exhaust emission factors causes the future emissions to be less than baseline conditions The emission factors for particulate matter remain relatively constant, but traffic volumes increase; therefore, PM emissions increase in future years Key: CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lb/hr = pounds per hour lb/yr = pounds per year ASI = application screening index PSI = pollutant screening index PSL = pollutant screening level Equations PSI cancer and/or chronic = Q yr /PSL p PSI acute = Q hr /PSL p Where: PSI = pollutant screening index PSL = pollutant screening level (see Table 1A from the SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedures, referenced below) Qhr = maximum hourly emissions (lbs/hr) Qyr = maximum annual emissions (lbs/yr)

119 SR 60 LRT Alternative Table X-X SR 60 LRT ( ) Peak Hourly Emissions for Construction PM10 Daily Emissions (lbs/day) --> Fraction of PM10 Emissions Toxic Air Contaminant CAS # Exhaust Fugitive Dust (lb/hr) ARSENIC E E E-06 CHLORINE E E E-03 COPPER E E E-05 MERCURY E E E-06 NICKEL E E E-05 Source: Maintenance Yards CP.xlsx, CARB Speciation Profiles. Operating Schedule: 24 hr/day Distance to nearest receptor: 25 m Note: The minimum distance allowed in SCAQMD screening calculations is 25 meters.

120 Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Table X-X Washington Boulevard LRT ( ) Peak Hourly Emissions for Construction Daily Emissions (lbs/day)--> PM a 9 acre b 12 acre c 11 acre Fraction of PM10 Emissions (lbs/hr) Toxic Air Contaminant CAS # Exhaust Fugitive Dust Alt 2a Alt 2b Alt 2c MAX ARSENIC E E E E E E-06 CHLORINE E E E E E E-03 COPPER E E E E E E-05 MERCURY E E E E E E-06 NICKEL E E E E E E-05 Source: Maintenance Yards CP.xlsx, CARB Speciation Profiles. Operating Schedule: 24 hr/day Distance to nearest receptor: 25 m Note: The minimum distance allowed in SCAQMD screening calculations is 25 meters.

121 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum December 5, 2011 Prepared for Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority One Gateway Plaza Los Angeles, CA State Clearinghouse Number:

122 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum This technical memorandum was prepared by: CDM 523 West Sixth Street Suite 400 Los Angeles, CA Page i

123 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Summary Operational Emissions Results CEQA Analysis NEPA Analysis CO Hot Spots Construction Emission Results Regional Construction Emissions SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) Mitigation Measures Introduction No Build Alternative Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative State Route 60 (SR 60) Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative Operating Hours and Frequency Proposed Stations Maintenance Yard Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Proposed Stations Maintenance Yard Methodology for Impact Evaluation Regulatory Framework Federal State Regional Local Thresholds of Significance NEPA Guidelines CEQA Guidelines Regional Criteria Pollutant Emission Thresholds Localized Significance Thresholds TAC Health Risk Thresholds Page ii

124 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Guidance for Air Quality Conformity Area of Potential Impact Methodology Construction Emissions CO Hot Spots Regional Operational Emissions Health Risk Assessment Affected Environment Climate and Atmospheric Conditions Existing Air Quality Conditions Monitoring Data Criteria Pollutants Intersection Analysis CO Hot Spots Sensitive Receptors Existing Operational Emissions (Criteria Pollutants) Existing Operational Emissions (Toxic Air Contaminants) Impacts No Build Alternative Construction Impacts Operational Impacts Criteria Pollutant Emissions Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions CO Hot Spots Cumulative Impacts Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative Construction Impacts Operational Impacts Criteria Pollutant Emissions Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions CO Hot Spots Cumulative Impacts State Route 60 (SR 60) Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative Construction Impacts Page iii

125 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Criteria Pollutants Regional Construction Emissions Localized Significance Thresholds Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions Operational Impacts Criteria Pollutant Emissions Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions CO Hot Spots Cumulative Impacts Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Construction Impacts Criteria Pollutants Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions Operational Impacts Criteria Pollutant Emissions Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions CO Hot Spots Cumulative Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Construction Mitigation Measures Operational Mitigation Measures Conclusions No Build Alternative NEPA Finding CEQA Determination Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative NEPA Finding CEQA Determination State Route 60 (SR 60) Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative NEPA Finding CEQA Determination Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Page iv

126 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum NEPA Finding CEQA Determination Maintenance Yard Options NEPA Finding CEQA Determination References Cited Appendix A Emission Calculations Page v

127 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Tables Table 1-1. Incremental Daily Operational Emissions Compared to Baseline Year (2010)... 3 Table 1-2. Incremental Daily Operational Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035)... 4 Table 1-3. Incremental Annual Operational Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035)... 6 Table 1-4. Incremental Annual Operational TAC Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035)... 6 Table 1-5. Summary of CO Hot Spots Analysis (Localized Concentrations of CO)... 8 Table 1-6. Summary of Unmitigated Peak Daily Construction Emissions Table 1-7. Summary of Construction TAC Emissions and Tier 1 Health Risk Assessment Table 3-1. National and California Ambient Air Quality Standards Table 3-2. Characteristics and Health Effects of Criteria Pollutants Table 3-3. Federal and State Attainment Status Table 3-4. Federal Thresholds Table 3-5. SCAQMD Mass Daily Thresholds Table 3-6. Allowable Construction Emissions for Source-Receptor Area at 25-Meter (82-Feet) Receptor Distance from Site Boundary Table 4-1. Summary of Pollutant Monitoring Data Near Project Area Table 4-2. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Baseline (2010) Table 4-3. Sensitive Receptors in Project Area Table 4-4. Existing Conditions (2010) Highway Traffic Emissions Table 4-5. Existing Conditions (2010) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Table 4-6. Existing Conditions (2010) Total Operational Emissions Table 4-7. Existing Conditions (2010) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic Table 5-1. No Build Alternative (2035) Highway Traffic Emissions Table 5-2. No Build Alternative (2035) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Table 5-3. No Build Alternative (2035) Total Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic and Buses Table 5-4. No Build Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic Table 5-5. Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the No Build Alternative (2035) Page i

128 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 5-6. TSM Alternative (2035) Highway Traffic Emissions Table 5-7. TSM Alternative (2035) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Table 5-8. TSM Alternative (2035) Total Operational Emissions Table 5-9. TSM Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic Table Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the TSM Alternative (2035) Table SR 60 LRT Alternative ( ) Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Table SR 60 LRT Alternative Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) for Construction Emissions Table SR 60 LRT Alternative ( ) Construction Health Risk Assessment Table SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Highway Traffic Emissions Table SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Parking Lot Emissions Table SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Table SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Light Rail Maintenance Yard Operational Emissions Table SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Total Operational Emissions Table SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic Table Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) Table Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) with Santa Fe Springs Maintenance Yard Option Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Table Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) with Commerce Maintenance Yard Option Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Table Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative ( ) with Mission Junction Maintenance Yard Option Maximum Daily Construction Emissions Table Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) for Construction Emissions Table Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative with the Santa Fe Springs Yard Maintenance Yard ( ) Construction Health Risk Assessment Table Washington Boulevard LRT with the Commerce Maintenance Yard ( ) Construction Health Risk Assessment Table Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative with the Mission Junction Maintenance Yard ( ) Construction Health Risk Assessment Table Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Highway Traffic Emissions Table Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Parking Lot Emissions Page ii

129 Figures Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Transit Bus Operations Emissions Table Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Light Rail Maintenance Yard Operational Emissions Table Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Total Operational Emissions Table Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Toxic Air Contaminant Operational Emissions: Regional Traffic Table Maximum Carbon Monoxide Concentrations at Roadway Intersections Under the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) Figure 2-1. Locations of Air Basins and Monitoring Stations Figure 2-2. No Build Alternative Figure 2-3. TSM Alternative Figure 2-4. SR 60 LRT Alternative Figure 2-5. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Figure 4-1. Location of Sensitive Receptors Page iii

130 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS LIST AQMP ASI CAA CAAQS Caltrans CARB CAS CCAA CCR CEQA CFR CO CNG DPM EMFAC FHWA FR FTA g/mi HOV HRA LAX lbs/day Air Quality Management Plan Application Screening Index Federal Clean Air Act California Ambient Air Quality Standards California Department of Transportation California Air Resources Board Chemical Abstracts Service California Clean Air Act California Code of Regulations California Environmental Quality Act Code of Federal Regulations Carbon Monoxide Compressed Natural Gas Diesel Particulate Matter Emissions Factor Model Federal Highway Administration Federal Register Federal Transit Administration grams per mile High occupancy vehicles Health Risk Assessment Los Angeles International Airport pounds per day Page iv

131 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum lbs/hr lbs/yr LOS LRT LRTP LRV LST µg/m 3 MICR MPO MRI N/A NAAQS NEPA NO 2 NOx O 3 Pb PEIR PM PM 10 PM 2.5 ppm ppmv pounds per hour pounds per year Level of service Light Rail Transit Long Range Transportation Plan Light Rail Vehicle Localized Significance Threshold micrograms per cubic meter Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk Metropolitan Planning Organization Midwest Research Institute Not Applicable National Ambient Air Quality Standards National Environmental Policy Act Nitrogen Dioxide Nitrogen Oxides Ozone Lead Program Environmental Impact Report Particulate Matter Inhalable Particulate Matter Fine Particulate Matter parts per million parts per million by volume Page v

132 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum PSI PSL ROW RTIP RTP SIP SCAG SCAQMD SO 2 SoCAB SOx Pollutant Screening Index Pollutant Screening Level Right-of-Way Regional Transportation Improvement Program Regional Transportation Plan State Implementation Plan Southern California Association of Governments South Coast Air Quality Management District Sulfur Dioxide South Coast Air Basin Sulfur Oxides SR 60 State Route 60 SRA TAC TOD TOG TSM tpy URBEMIS USEPA UTM VMT VOC Source-Receptor Area Toxic Air Contaminant Transit Oriented Development Total Organic Gases Transportation System Management tons per year Urban Emissions Model U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Universal Transverse Mercator Vehicle Miles Traveled Volatile Organic Compounds Page vi

133 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum 1.0 SUMMARY This technical memorandum was prepared to discuss the results of the proposed Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Project air quality impact analysis and health risk assessment (HRA). This analysis and assessment were completed to support project impact disclosure requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This section summarizes the potential impacts to air quality and inhalation health risk associated with the proposed construction and operation of the Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Project. This analysis includes the preparation of emissions inventories for construction and operations, HRAs for construction activities, and a carbon monoxide (CO) hot spots analysis. This analysis discusses criteria pollutants and toxic air contaminants (TACs). Criteria pollutants, which are regulated by human health-based permissible levels (hence, criteria ), include six common pollutants: particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ), ozone (O 3 ) 1 (commonly known as smog ), CO, sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), and lead (Pb). A TAC is an air pollutant that can cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness or that may pose another potential hazard to human health. Several common TACs associated with mobile sources, such as passenger vehicles and construction equipment, include: toluene, xylenes, acrolein, and diesel particulate matter (DPM). This technical memorandum discusses potential impacts from both construction activities and operations. For operations-related impacts, this analysis provides a comparison between the air quality conditions that currently exist without the proposed project (i.e., existing conditions in 2010) and air quality conditions projected to occur in the future with implementation of each alternative being considered for the proposed project (i.e., full implementation of each alternative in the future horizon year of 2035). The focus of the operations impact analysis is on the change in vehicle traffic, and associated air pollutant emissions, that would result from implementation of each alternative. While this type of direct comparison can help characterize how existing air quality conditions may be different in the future with implementation of the proposed project, it is not a true representation of the impacts directly attributable to the project. This is because background traffic conditions will change substantially between 2010 and 2035 due to regional population growth and development that is anticipated to occur irrespective of the Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Project. A more accurate and meaningful delineation of air quality impacts directly attributable to project-related changes in traffic is achieved through a comparison of a proposed future alternative (2035) and the No Build Alternative (2035). In assessing the difference in vehicle-related air pollutant emissions for future conditions with and without the project, the amount of change was compared to thresholds of significance developed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to evaluate project significance under CEQA. The increment between a proposed future alternative (2035) and the No Build Alternative (2035) was also compared against general conformity thresholds established in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 93 Subpart B. A transportation conformity analysis was also completed. 1 Ozone is a secondary pollutant, formed from precursor compounds - volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) - in the presence of sunlight. Since the formation of ozone is complex and difficult to assess on a project level, air quality impact analyses address ozone by analyzing emissions of the NOx and VOC precursors instead. Page 1

134 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum 1.1 Operational Emissions Results Incremental daily operational emissions associated with each of the proposed alternatives above existing conditions are summarized in Table 1-1. For the reasons discussed in Section 1.0, this increment is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to be the basis for any determination of significance. Rather, incremental daily operational emissions associated with each of the proposed alternatives above the emissions for the No Build Alternative (2035) are summarized in Table 1-2 for CEQA. Incremental annual operational emissions associated with each of the proposed alternatives above the emissions for the No Build Alternative are summarized in Table 1-3 for NEPA. Emission inventories were also completed for TACs for regional traffic and transit buses. Engine exhaust, tire wear, brake wear, and paved road dust were included in the TAC emission inventories; annual incremental emissions are summarized in Table 1-4. Since the incremental TAC emissions shown in Table 1-4 are negative for all alternatives, an HRA for operational emissions was not completed. A summary of the results of the CO hot spots analysis is presented in Table 1-5. The maximum CO concentrations at each of the intersections under all alternatives were found to be less than significant CEQA Analysis A CEQA analysis typically evaluates project-related impacts measured against a baseline that is defined by the physical environmental conditions occurring at the time the Environmental Impact Report Notice of Preparation was published. In the case of the Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Project, the CEQA baseline year would be Based on the long-term regional nature of the proposed project, a horizon year of 2035 is used for characterizing the project s operational characteristics at full implementation. As such, the CEQA analysis completed for the Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Project includes a delineation of the emissions for the future project year (2035) as compared to those for existing conditions (2010); however, this increment is provided for informational purposes only. Table 1-1 delineates the incremental increase in daily emissions associated with each alternative, as measured against the 2010 baseline year. Future emission levels will be affected primarily by regional growth and associated increases in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) that are projected to occur between 2010 and 2035, as evidenced by comparing each of the build alternatives to the No Build Alternative (i.e., the increased emissions associated with the No Build Alternative, as measured from the 2010 baseline year, reflect the emissions from regional growth and associated increases in background traffic). Despite the increase in VMT, improvements in engine technology are expected to reduce emission rates of several pollutants in future years, including volatile organic compounds (VOCs), CO, and nitrogen oxides (NOx). These reductions are shown in parentheses in Table 1-1. Particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ) emissions associated with re-entrained road dust, which consists of a mixture of brake wear and tire wear emissions and the re-suspension of loose material on the road surface, are unaffected by engine technology. In addition, SO 2 emission rates are dependent on sulfur content of fuel. California already capped sulfur content of diesel fuel at 15 parts per million (ppm) and will cap the sulfur content of gasoline to 20 ppm in 2012 and is not expected to substantially reduce the cap in the future. Therefore, PM 10, PM 2.5, and SO 2 emission factors are expected to remain relatively flat from 2010 through The large increase in PM 10, PM 2.5, and SO 2 emissions reflects the Page 2

135 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum magnitude of the project area that includes emissions from a four-county region (Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties). In fact, regional population growth, which is predicted to cause an increase in VMT, and hence, an increase in engine exhaust emissions, between 2010 and 2035 would be the source of increased emissions of PM 10, PM 2.5, and SO 2. Table 1-1. Incremental Daily Operational Emissions Compared to Baseline Year (2010) Alternative Incremental Emissions 1,2 (lbs/day) VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 No Build (48,039) (1,112,223) (333,864) 4, ,023 39,727 TSM (48,034) (1,112,201) (333,767) 4, ,009 39,725 SR 60 LRT (48,030) (1,112,220) (333,789) 4, ,999 39,722 Washington Boulevard LRT (48,030) (1,112,213) (333,781) 4, ,000 39,723 Source: CDM 2011 Notes: 1 Incremental emissions are determined by subtracting the given alternative emissions from the Baseline (2010) emissions. 2 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Key: CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day LRT = light rail transit NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide TSM = Transportation System Management VOC = volatile organic compounds As noted above, the determination of significant impacts within the CEQA analysis of daily, trafficrelated operational emissions is based on a comparison to the No Build Alternative, which accounts for regional growth and increases in background traffic that would occur independent of the project. Compared to the No Build Alternative, the daily incremental operational emissions associated with each alternative would increase for NOx, CO, and VOC under all alternatives; emissions of PM 10 and PM 2.5 would decrease under all alternatives; SO 2 would either remain unchanged or would decrease (see Table 1-2). Although NOx, CO, and VOC emissions from regional traffic would decrease in each alternative, emissions from new bus routes under each of the alternatives would counteract the decrease in traffic emissions. Emissions of NOx under all alternatives would be significant and would be mitigated as required by CEQA. Overall, vehicular travel from the highway network would decrease as a result of the project. This result would be consistent with air quality goals in the region. Page 3

136 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 1-2. Incremental Daily Operational Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035) Alternative Incremental Emissions 1,2,3 (lbs/day) VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TSM <1 (14) (2) SR 60 LRT (1) (24) (4) Washington Boulevard LRT (1) (23) (4) CEQA Threshold Source: CDM 2011 Notes: 1 Incremental emissions are determined by subtracting the given alternative emissions from the No Build Alternative emissions. 2 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. 3 Emissions greater than threshold of significance are shown in bold and italics. 4 SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds (SCAQMD 2011) Key: CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day LRT = light rail transit NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide TSM = Transportation System Management VOC = volatile organic compounds As shown in Table 1-4, incremental emissions of TACs would be less than those under the No Build Alternative for all pollutants and alternatives. As a result, it was not necessary to complete an HRA for operational emissions and there would be no impacts from TACs under CEQA or NEPA. The TAC analysis was based only on regional traffic and assumed that the majority of vehicles would be gasoline fueled. Although many vehicles would also use diesel or alternative fuels, assuming all equipment would be gasoline fueled provides conservative estimate of organic emissions. Increases in DPM would not occur between each alternative and the No Build Alternative because of the reduction in VMT. Furthermore, although there would be an increase in transit bus VMT, Metro s current fleet uses only compressed natural gas (CNG) and associated TAC emissions would be minimal NEPA Analysis NEPA analysis requires comparing annual emissions for the future project year (2035) to those for the No Build Alternative (2035). Each of the alternatives would reduce highway VMT, but would increase VMT associated with new bus routes when compared to the No Build Alternative. Emissions of CO, VOC, and NOx would increase for all alternatives compared to those under the No Build Alternative, while SO 2, PM 10, and PM 2.5 emissions would either decrease or remain constant (see Table 1-3). Annual incremental operational emissions would be significant for NOx under all alternatives. Mitigation Page 4

137 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum measures required under CEQA would also reduce annual emissions for NEPA. Table 1-4 summarizes incremental annual operational emissions compared to the No Build Alternative CO Hot Spots This technical memorandum evaluates the significance of localized concentrations of CO under the proposed project. This analysis used the methodology in the Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (CO Protocol) that was developed by the University of California Davis for the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). A screening analysis was completed using Appendix A of the CO Protocol. The screening analysis estimates worst-case CO concentrations by evaluating the traffic speed, lane configurations, and traffic volumes. It evaluated which street intersections under the project alternatives would contribute the most to adverse impacts to localized air quality. The five intersections with the most potential for adverse impacts, based on the screening analysis, were selected for further analysis using localized dispersion modeling. The State Route 60 (SR 60) LRT and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives cover different geographic areas; therefore, all five intersections were not modeled for each alternative. For example, if an intersection would only be affected by the SR 60 LRT Alternative, then it was not modeled for the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative. This technical memorandum analyzes the five intersections with the most potential for adverse impacts using the CAL3QHC model. This is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency s (USEPA) preferred model for CO hot spots modeling. Concentrations of CO at the intersections would not exceed the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) or National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Thus, the CO hot spots would not be significant. The results of the analysis are provided in Table 1-5. Intersections that were not modeled for an alternative, as described above, are shown as not applicable ( N/A ) on the table. 1.2 Construction Emission Results This technical memorandum estimates potential construction emissions and compares them to thresholds of significance published by the SCAQMD. The SCAQMD also recommends that localized impacts be evaluated for significance. Thus, this section summarizes construction air quality impacts locally and regionally. An emissions inventory was completed for TACs that would occur from construction-related activities. The TAC inventories from engine exhaust and fugitive dust were limited to compounds with acute health impacts because of the temporary nature of construction. Since construction activities would result in an increase in TAC emissions as compared to the No Build Alternative, an HRA was also completed. Page 5

138 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 1-3. Incremental Annual Operational Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035) Alternative Incremental Emissions (tpy) 1,2 VOC CO NOx SO2 PM10 PM2.5 TSM <1 (2) (<1) SR 60 LRT (<1) (4) (1) Washington Boulevard LRT (<1) (4) (1) NEPA Threshold Source: CDM 2011 Notes: 1 Incremental emissions are determined by subtracting the given alternative emissions from the No Build Alternative emissions. 2 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. 3 Emissions greater than threshold of significance are shown in bold and italics. 4 NEPA thresholds from 40 CFR Key: CO = carbon monoxide LRT = light rail transit NEPA = National Environmental Policy Act NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide tpy = tons per year TSM = Transportation System Management VOC = volatile organic compounds Table 1-4. Incremental Annual Operational TAC Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035) Pollutant Organic Compounds Incremental Emissions 1 (lbs/year) CAS # TSM SR 60 LRT Washington Boulevard LRT Butadiene, (9) (14) (14) Acetaldehyde (4) (6) (6) Acrolein (2) (4) (4) Benzene (44) (68) (68) Page 6

139 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 1-4. Incremental Annual Operational TAC Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035) (continued) Pollutant Incremental Emissions 1 (lbs/year) CAS # TSM SR 60 LRT Washington Boulevard LRT Ethylbenzene (18) (28) (28) Formaldehyde (28) (44) (44) Methyl alcohol (7) (11) (11) Methyl ethyl ketone (<1) (<1) (<1) Methyl t-butyl ether (32) (50) (50) Xylene, m (61) (95) (95) Naphthalene (1) (1) (1) Hexane, n (26) (41) (41) Xylene, o (21) (33) (33) Propylene (52) (81) (81) Styrene (2) (3) (3) Toluene (98) (153) (153) Inorganic Compounds Arsenic (<1) (<1) (<1) Cadmium (<1) (<1) (<1) Chlorine (64) (99) (99) Copper (5) (8) (8) Lead (1) (2) (2) Manganese (7) (11) (11) Mercury (<1) (<1) (<1) Page 7

140 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 1-4. Incremental Annual Operational TAC Emissions Compared to the No Build Alternative (2035) (continued) Pollutant Incremental Emissions 1 (lbs/year) CAS # TSM SR 60 LRT Washington Boulevard LRT Nickel (1) (1) (1) Selenium (<1) (<1) (<1) Source: CDM 2011 Note: 1 Emission reductions (beneficial impacts) are shown in parentheses. Key: CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/year = pounds per year LRT = light rail transit TAC = toxic air contaminant Table 1-5. Summary of CO Hot Spots Analysis (Localized Concentrations of CO) ID Intersection Max. CO Conc. (ppm) 1 Significance 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 2 8-Hour 3 Existing Conditions (2010) 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue no no 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard no no 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard no no 62 SR 60 WB Ramps & Peck Road no no 63 Durfee Avenue & Peck Road no no No Build Alternative (2035) 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue no no 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard no no 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard no no 62 SR 60 WB Ramps & Peck Road no no 63 Durfee Avenue & Peck Road no no Page 8

141 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 1-5. Summary of CO Hot Spots Analysis (Localized Concentrations of CO) (continued) ID TSM Alternative (2035) Intersection Max. CO Conc. (ppm) 1 Significance 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 2 8-Hour 3 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue no no 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard no no 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard no no 62 SR 60 WB Ramps & Peck Road no no 63 Durfee Avenue & Peck Road no no SR 60 LRT Alternative (2035) 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue no no 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 62 SR 60 WB Ramps & Peck Road no no 63 Durfee Avenue & Peck Road no no Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (2035) 11 Via Campo & Garfield Avenue no no 33 Washington Boulevard & Paramount Boulevard no no 37 Washington Boulevard & Pioneer Boulevard no no 62 SR 60 WB Ramps & Peck Road 5 N/A N/A N/A N/A 63 Durfee Avenue & Peck Road 5 N/A N/A N/A N/A Source: CDM 2011 Notes: 1 Maximum concentrations for a given year include the ambient background CO concentrations (1-hour and 8-hour) for that year. 2 1-Hour CAAQS = 9.0 ppm; 1-Hour NAAQS = 9 ppm 3 8-Hour CAAQS = 20 ppm; 8-Hour NAAQS = 35 ppm 4 Intersections 33 and 37 would not be affected by the proposed SR 60 LRT Alternative and were not modeled. 5 Intersections 62 and 63 would not be affected by the proposed Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative and were not modeled. Key: CO = carbon monoxide ppm = parts per million Page 9

142 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Regional Construction Emissions Emissions from construction of the project were analyzed under CEQA. Thresholds of significance developed for CEQA were also used for the NEPA analysis, since CEQA requirements are at least as stringent as NEPA requirements. Construction emissions would not occur if not for the project; therefore, baseline emissions (No Build Alternative) were assumed to be zero. Although the TSM Alternative would have minimal construction activities, emissions were not quantified because they are expected to be negligible. Short-term, peak, daily emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, SO 2, PM 10, and PM 2.5 would not exceed thresholds of significance for CEQA under all build alternatives. Emissions are summarized in Table 1-6. Construction activities would result in an increase in TAC emissions as compared to the No Build Alternative; therefore, an HRA was completed for acute health effects from construction. Since the TSM Alternative would only involve minimal construction activities that were not quantified, only emissions from the SR 60 and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives are provided. Table 1-7 summarizes TAC emissions from the project and the results of the SCAQMD s Tier 1 HRA. The Tier 1 evaluation essentially compares TAC emissions to a series of look-up tables published by the SCAQMD. If the application screening index (ASI) is less than 1, then impacts would be less than significant (SCAQMD 2005). Since the ASI is less than 1 for both the SR 60 and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives, then health risk-related impacts would be less than significant SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) In June 2003, the SCAQMD developed a methodology (revised July 2008) to evaluate localized construction impacts on air quality that would account for air dispersion. The SCAQMD developed localized significance thresholds (LSTs) for projects based on the project location, size (acreage), and distance to the nearest receptor. Look-up tables were published for NOx, CO, PM 10, and PM 2.5 for both construction and operational impacts. Operational LSTs were not analyzed because operational emissions would be dispersed throughout the project area and would not be concentrated in a single location that would warrant an LST analysis. Maximum daily emissions for each project construction activity, considering their locations, were compared to relevant LSTs. The construction phases included in the LST analysis included street widening and construction of the elevated guideways, parking facilities, and the maintenance yard. The comparison assumes a one-acre site for each construction activity and a distance of 25 meters (82 feet) to the nearest sensitive receptor. This approach provides conservative results for the LST analysis. Construction of the Mission Junction maintenance yard for the SR 60 LRT and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives would result in significant emissions of PM 10 ; however, construction of the Commerce or Santa Fe Springs maintenance yards would not result in significant impacts for any pollutant. After mitigation measures, emissions of all pollutants would be less than LST thresholds. Thus, construction-related pollutant concentrations would not be significant. Page 10

143 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 1-6. Summary of Unmitigated Peak Daily Construction Emissions Alternative SR 60 LRT Alternative with Mission Junction Yard Option Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative with Santa Fe Springs Yard Option Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative with Commerce Yard Option Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative with Mission Junction Yard Option Unmitigated Peak Daily Construction Emissions (lbs/day) 1 VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM < < < < Threshold of Significance Source: CDM 2011 Notes: 1 Emissions shown are for all phases of construction, including street widening and construction of the guideways, stations, parking facilities, and maintenance yard. 2 SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds (SCAQMD 2011) Key: CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day LRT = light rail transit NOx = nitrogen oxides PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter PM 10 = inhalable particulate matter SO 2 = sulfur dioxide VOC = volatile organic compounds Table 1-7. Summary of Construction TAC Emissions and Tier 1 Health Risk Assessment Pollutant CAS Emissions (lbs/hr) Acute PSL (lbs/hr) Acute PSI SR 60 LRT Alternative Arsenic Chlorine Copper Mercury Nickel Page 11

144 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Table 1-7. Summary of Construction TAC Emissions and Tier 1 Health Risk Assessment (continued) Pollutant CAS Emissions (lbs/hr) Acute PSL (lbs/hr) Acute PSI ASI 0.15 Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative 1 Arsenic Chlorine Copper Mercury Nickel ASI 0.15 Source: CDM 2011 Note: 1 Maximum emissions from the three Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives (with Mission Junction, Commerce, and Santa Fe Springs maintenance yard options) summarized in table. Key: TAC = toxic air contaminants CAS = Chemical Abstracts Service lbs/hr = pounds per hour PSL = pollutant screening level PSI = pollutant screening index 1.3 Mitigation Measures Daily emissions of NOx from operations for all alternatives would exceed the significance threshold for operational emissions under CEQA because the increase in bus VMT counteracts the reduction in regional traffic VMT. It was therefore necessary to apply mitigation measures to reduce emissions of NOx associated with the TSM, SR 60 LRT, and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives. If three percent of the estimated daily bus miles in 2035 are traveled by zero-emission buses, then the daily NOx operational emissions would be less than significant. A hydrogen-fuel cell bus, an electric trolley bus, and a battery electric bus are examples of zeroemission buses. A zero-emission bus does not emit smog-forming pollutants and is estimated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 46 percent compared to a diesel-fueled bus (California Air Resources Board [CARB], 2010e). The Transit Fleet Rule (13 California Code of Regulations [CCR] Section 2023) requires transit agencies with a fleet size of 200 or more urban buses to acquire 15 percent of all new annual urban bus purchases as zero-emission buses between 2011 or 2012 and 2026, depending on the agency s fuel path. CARB approved Resolution #09-49 on July 23, 2009 which postpones the purchase requirement for zero-emission buses under the Transit Fleet Rule. CARB is required to develop new purchasing requirements and complete the public hearing process for the Transit Fleet Rule no later than July 2012 (CARB, 2010d). If the Transit Fleet Rule remains in place, then it is expected that the mitigated three percent of emissions would be met and there would be no Page 12

145 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum impacts; however, if the Transit Fleet Rule does not remain, then Metro would still be required to purchase sufficient zero-emission vehicles to offset the emissions increases. Unmitigated regional construction emissions for the SR 60 and Washington Boulevard LRT Alternatives would exceed the PM 10 LST for the Mission Junction maintenance yard option. Mitigation measures, including additional fugitive dust control measures, are expected to reduce construction emissions to less than significant. Page 13

146 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum 2.0 INTRODUCTION Air basins are defined as areas that share similar geographical and meteorological conditions. The South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) consists of Orange County and the urban, non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. The SoCAB is confined by the Pacific Ocean and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, San Jacinto, and Santa Ana Mountains. Normally, atmospheric temperature decreases with altitude. However, the SoCAB is marked by frequent temperature inversions, where the temperature at higher elevations is higher than at lower elevations. Figure 2-1 illustrates the locations of the air basins. Furthermore, the region has very low average traffic speeds. The combination of low traffic speeds, temperature inversions, and surrounding mountains, creates a situation where pollutants are readily trapped in the basin. Pollutants cannot easily disperse horizontally or vertically. These factors, along with high population and high reliance on the automobile, make air quality in the SoCAB among the worst in the nation. The Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Project would ultimately decrease air pollution in the region by removing vehicles from the roads and increasing regional transportation from clean emission sources. Although the addition of electric vehicles would be expected to cause an increase in emissions at the source of fossil fuel-fired electricity generation (power plant), the emission reduction from the motor vehicles being taken off the road due to persons mode switching to transit outweighs the effect of increased emissions from fossil fuel-fired electricity generation; therefore, a net benefit remains for air quality. However, construction of the project could cause a temporary increase in air pollution and negatively impact air quality temporarily. Therefore, this technical memorandum evaluates the potential for adverse impacts from construction and operation of the proposed Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Project. 2.1 No Build Alternative The No Build Alternative is used for comparison purposes to assess the relative benefits and impacts of constructing a new transit project in the project area versus implementing only currently planned and funded projects. The No Build Alternative is also a required alternative for comparison as part of the NEPA/CEQA environmental analysis. The No Build Alternative includes all of the projects that are identified for construction and implementation in the Constrained Plan of Metro s 2009 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) (through the year 2035). This plan includes the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension currently in operation, but does not include any project resulting from this Phase 2 study effort. It also includes the construction of the Metro Crenshaw Line and the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) People Mover, as well as the extension of the Metro Purple Line to Westwood, and the extensions of the Metro Green Line to LAX and to the South Bay. The plan also includes construction of the Regional Connector that will connect existing lines through downtown Los Angeles. After construction of the Regional Connector, east-west trains will operate between Santa Monica and East Los Angeles without the need for riders to transfer, and north-south trains will operate between Montclair and Long Beach, also without the need for riders to transfer. Bus services will be reorganized and expanded to provide connections with these new rail lines. Figure 2-2 displays the No Build Alternative. Page 14

147 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum The No Build Alternative also includes all of the projects that are identified for construction and implementation in the financially constrained project list of the 2008 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP): Making the Connections, developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to present the transportation vision for the region through year The RTP outlines future highway projects, including providing one high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction on I-5 from SR 19 (Rosemead Boulevard) to I-710. There are no other major roadway improvements in the project area included in the financially constrained RTP. Figure 2-1. Locations of Air Basins and Monitoring Stations Page 15

148 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Source: Metro; CDM, 2011 Figure 2-2. No Build Alternative 2.2 Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative The TSM Alternative is intended to address the same mobility needs as the two LRT build alternatives, but does not include the construction of a fixed guideway facility. The TSM Alternative includes all of the transit and roadway provisions of the No Build Alternative, plus proposed enhancements to existing bus service. Under the TSM Alternative, the basic approach is to enhance the east-west bus service in the same corridor as the build alternatives to develop the TSM network. In order to leverage the investment in an east-west transit spine, the TSM Alternative also includes enhancements to north-south bus services that would feed and integrate with the improved east-west spine. The TSM Alternative is presented in Figure 2-3. The key elements of the TSM Alternative are the creation of an east-west transit spine along with new north-south feeder service. The transit spine would include new Pomona Freeway Flyer express service from the Eastside Extension Phase 1 terminus at Atlantic Station to Crossroads Parkway near SR 60, supported by enhanced bus service provided by Montebello Bus Lines. The enhanced service would include new Rapid bus service on Route 40 on Beverly Boulevard and additional service on Route 10 on Whittier Boulevard and Route 50 on Washington Boulevard. The north-south feeder service would include new Rapid bus service on Montebello Bus Lines Route 30 on Garfield Avenue, new Limited Stop service on Montebello Bus Lines Route 20 on Montebello Boulevard, and additional service on Metro Route 265 on Paramount Boulevard, Metro Route 266 on Page 16

149 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Rosemead Boulevard, and Foothill Transit Route 274 on Workman Mill Road. It would also include new Route 370 Limited Stop service in addition to existing Metro Route 270 service on Peck Road and Workman Mill Road. Source: Metro; CDM, 2011 Figure 2-3. TSM Alternative 2.3 State Route 60 (SR 60) Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative The SR 60 LRT Alternative would extend the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension, a dedicated, dual track LRT system with overhead catenary wiring, approximately 6.9 miles east to Peck Road. More than 94 percent of this alternative would operate in an aerial configuration, primarily within the southern portion of the SR 60 Freeway right-of-way (ROW). Figure 2-4 illustrates the SR 60 LRT Alternative. The proposed alignment runs at-grade east from the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension Atlantic Station in the median of Pomona Boulevard, where the alignment transitions to an independent aerial structure within the south side of the SR 60 Freeway ROW to Garfield Avenue. The SR 60 LRT Alternative continues east beyond Garfield Avenue in the freeway ROW, terminating in the vicinity of the SR 60/Peck Road interchange in the city of South El Monte, with tail tracks for storage extending farther east. The proposed LRT alignment is located on the south side of the freeway between the edge of the eastbound traffic lanes and the SR 60 Freeway ROW line. Traction power substations, track crossovers, emergency generators, and other ancillary facilities that provide power and help to operate the LRT would also be constructed along the route. The SR 60 LRT Alternative also includes all No Build Alternative transit and roadway improvements and TSM Alternative bus services, with the exception of the Pomona Freeway Flyer. Page 17

150 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum An SR 60 North Side Design Variation is being analyzed to address concerns raised by the USEPA about potential impacts to the former Operating Industries, Inc. landfill site south of SR 60 in the city of Monterey Park. With this variation, instead of running along the edge of the landfill site on the south side of SR 60, the LRT alignment would transition from the south side to the north side of SR 60 just west of Greenwood Avenue and return to the south side of SR 60 approximately one-quarter mile west of Paramount Boulevard (see Figure 2-4). This design variation would include approximately 3,500 feet of at-grade and aerial alignment on the north side of SR 60, and two new bridges to carry the LRT guideway over SR Operating Hours and Frequency The operating hours and schedules for the SR 60 LRT Alternative would be comparable to the weekday, Saturday and Sunday, and holiday schedules for the existing Metro Gold Line. Trains would operate every day from 4:00 AM to 1:30 AM. On weekdays, trains would operate every five minutes during peak hours, every 10 minutes mid-day and until 8:00 PM, and every 15 minutes in the early morning and after 8:00 PM. On weekends, trains would operate every 10 minutes from 9:00 AM to 6:30 PM, every 15 minutes from 6:30 7:30 PM and from 7:00-9:00 AM, and every 20 minutes in the early morning and after 7:30 PM Proposed Stations The SR 60 LRT Alternative has four aerial, center platform stations designed with bus and parking facilities to intercept vehicular and bus travel operating within the east-west freeway corridor and circulating in a north-south direction crossing the freeway. All of the station areas would require property acquisition to accommodate stations and related facilities, including park and ride structures, and all have the potential for Transit Oriented Development (TOD). The proposed station locations and estimated parking spaces provided at each station would be as follows: Garfield Avenue East of Garfield Avenue along Via Campo in the city of Montebello, approximately 344 parking spaces. Shops at Montebello On the west side of the Shops at Montebello, approximately 417 parking spaces. Santa Anita Avenue East of Santa Anita Avenue in the city of South El Monte, approximately 692 parking spaces. Peck Road East of Peck Road in the city of South El Monte, approximately 1,983 parking spaces. Page 18

151 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Source: Metro; CDM, 2011 Figure 2-4. SR 60 LRT Alternative Please see Figure 2-2 for TSM enhancements that are also included as part of the SR 60 LRT Alternative (with the exception of the Pomona Freeway Flyer) Maintenance Yard Under the SR 60 LRT Alternative, one potential site (referred to as the Mission Junction Yard Option to distinguish it from the additional options identified for the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative) has been preliminarily identified for the location of a new maintenance yard. The site is approximately 11 acres in size and is adjacent to the existing Mission Junction rail facility, generally bounded by I-5 to the east, I-10 to the south, the Los Angeles River to the west, and the Union Pacific rail line to the north. This industrial area is zoned for railroads and maintenance yard facilities. The proposed maintenance yard, located on the north side of Mission Road, would be operated in conjunction with the existing Division 10 bus maintenance yard located on the south side of Mission Road, adjacent to the proposed maintenance yard site. The proposed maintenance yard would accommodate daily maintenance, inspection and repairs, and storage of the light rail vehicles (LRVs). In addition to the proposed maintenance yard and the existing Division 10 bus maintenance yard, Metro may also consider modifying existing facilities to accommodate the additional capacity required to maintain the project s vehicles or using a proposed maintenance yard in Monrovia that is currently being studied as part of the extension of the Metro Gold Line to Montclair. Page 19 Source: Metro; CDM, 2011.

152 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum 2.4 Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative The Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative would extend the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension, a dedicated, dual track LRT system with overhead catenary wiring, approximately 9.5 miles east to the city of Whittier at Lambert Road. This alternative is proposed to operate in an aerial configuration with columns located in the roadway median or sidewalks, as well as in an at-grade configuration where the street widths are sufficient to accommodate the alignment and potential stations. Figure 2-5 displays the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative. The proposed alignment runs at-grade east from the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension Atlantic Station in the median of Pomona Boulevard, where it then transitions to aerial operations running in the south side of the SR 60 Freeway ROW until Garfield Avenue. This segment is the same as that described for the SR 60 LRT Alternative. At Garfield Avenue, the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative turns south in an aerial configuration to operate above Garfield Avenue. The aerial structure continues south on Garfield Avenue and then turns southeast along Washington Boulevard. The aerial structure is supported at various locations either by columns straddling both sides of the street or by single columns. At Montebello Boulevard along Washington Boulevard, the alignment transitions to a street running configuration within the center of Washington Boulevard to a terminus station located south of Washington Boulevard just west of Lambert Road, with tail tracks for storage extending south and adjacent to Lambert Road. The street running segment is a dedicated trackway located in the center of Washington Boulevard with only signalized intersections allowing for cross traffic. Partial signal priority would be provided to the LRT at signalized intersections. In addition, traction power substations, track crossovers, emergency generators, and other ancillary facilities would be located along the alignment. The Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative also includes all No Build Alternative transit and roadway improvements and TSM Alternative bus services, with the following exceptions: The Pomona Freeway Flyer would operate from the Garfield Avenue station (instead of the Atlantic Station) to Crossroads Parkway near SR 60. Metro Rapid Route 720 would be extended to the Garfield Avenue station, to provide connectivity. Montebello Bus Lines Route 50 Rapid service would operate between downtown Los Angeles and the Greenwood Avenue station only, as it would duplicate LRT service on Washington Boulevard east of Greenwood Avenue. Two design variations are being considered for the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative. The first design variation, the Rosemead Boulevard aerial crossing, would include a grade separation at Rosemead Boulevard. In this variation, the LRT would operate in an aerial configuration in the vicinity of Rosemead Boulevard. The second design variation, the San Gabriel River/I-605 aerial crossing, would include an aerial crossing of the San Gabriel River and I-605 and a grade separation at Pioneer Boulevard. In this variation, the LRT would operate on an aerial structure just south of Washington Boulevard across the San Gabriel River and then return to the median of Washington Boulevard, still in an aerial configuration, over I-605 and Pioneer Boulevard. Page 20

153 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Air Quality Impacts and Health Risk Assessment Technical Memorandum Source: Metro; CDM, 2011 Figure 2-5. Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative Please see Figure 2-2 for TSM enhancements that are also included as part of the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative (see text for exceptions). The operating hours and service frequency for the Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative would be the same as described for the SR 60 LRT Alternative Proposed Stations The Washington Boulevard LRT Alternative has six stations located to serve the communities through which this alternative runs. Property acquisition at all stations is necessary to accommodate stations, access, and related facilities, including park and ride structures. All of the proposed stations, with the exception of the Whittier Boulevard station, include a park and ride facility. The proposed station locations and estimated parking spaces provided at each would be as follows: Garfield Avenue Aerial, center platform station located on the southeast corner of Garfield Avenue and Via Campo in the city of Montebello, approximately 523 parking spaces. Whittier Boulevard Aerial, side platform station located in the median of Garfield Avenue just north of Whittier Boulevard in unincorporated East Los Angeles, no parking facility. Page 21