HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022.04.11 SAFER Comment_MND_French Hospital EVIA EMAIL ONLY
April 11, 2022
Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner
Department of Community Development
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
rcohen@slocity.org
Re: French Hospital Expansion Project (ER No. 0742-2021)
SAFER Comment on Mitigated Negative Declaration
Dear Ms. Cohen,
I am writing on behalf of Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility
SAFER”) and its members living or working in and around the City of San Luis Obispo
City”) to comment on the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) prepared
for the French Hospital Expansion Project (ER No. 0742-2021) (“Project”).
SAFER’s review of the MND was assisted by air quality experts Matt Hagemann, P.G.,
C.Hg., and Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D., of the Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (“SWAPE”),
indoor air quality expert Francis Offermann, PE, CIH, and noise expert Deborah Jue of Wilson
Ihrig. The written comments of SWAPE, Mr. Offermann, and Ms. Jue are attached hereto as
Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and Exhibit C, respectively. Based on their review, it appears that several
of the MND’s conclusions are not supported by substantial evidence and, moreover, there is a
fair argument” that the Project may have unmitigated adverse environmental impacts. As
required by CEQA, SAFER requests that the City prepare an environmental impact report
EIR”) rather than an MND prior to further consideration of the Project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project consists of the phased expansion of French Hospital Medical
Center campus including the construction of a two-level, 234-space parking structure with 5,800
square feet of future lab and storage space and a 2,000-square-foot helistop (Phase 1), and a four-
story 89,775-square-foot patient tower, an 1,800-square-foot generator yard, and various related
site improvements (Phase 2). The proposed patient tower would include, but not be limited to, 82
patient rooms, dining and kitchen facilities, staff break rooms, waiting rooms, and medical
imaging rooms. The project includes the reconfiguration of surface parking, addition of bicycle
SAFER Comment
French Hospital Expansion Project - MND (ER No. 0742-2021)
April 11, 2022
Page 2
parking spaces, realignment of an existing bicycle path and associated open space easement, tree
removal and trimming on- and off-site, landscaping, and exterior lighting. The project also
includes the merging of Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 003-568-004 (Parcel 2), APN 003-
578-026 (Parcel 3), and a portion of APN 003-578-063 (Parcel 6) to form one 14-acre parcel.
Project construction would result in approximately 3,260 cubic yards of cut/export material and
would require 2,370 cubic yards of imported material. Project construction is anticipated to last
approximately 3 years.
The overall French Hospital Medical Center campus is approximately 18 acres in area
and consists of 6 legal parcels: APN 003-568-004, 003-568-005, 003-571-025, 003-578-026,
003-578-063, and 003-578-057 (see Figure 2). Existing development on-site consists of the one-
story French Hospital building, the three-story Copeland Health Education Building, the three-
story Pacific Medical Plaza to the south of the hospital (under separate ownership), and the Ella
Street medical condominiums located further to the south (under separate ownership). An 1,800
square-foot modular building that serves as a business office is located on the north side of the
hospital and surface parking lots surround the buildings along the perimeter of the campus. The
topography of the site is nearly flat around the existing buildings on-site, with a steep slope bank
between Johnson Avenue and the front parking lot, and another steep slope bank between the
rear parking areas and the undeveloped area on the west side of the site.
The proposed 89,775-square-foot patient tower building would consist of a four-story
building adjacent to the existing Copeland Health Education Building. In total, the patient tower
would add 82 new patient beds. The ground level floor would include, but not be limited to, a
lobby, a front desk, waiting rooms, indoor and outdoor dining areas, a gift shop, a kitchen, walk-
in coolers and freezers, dry storage rooms, medical imaging rooms, staff break room, medical
offices, restrooms, and electrical storage rooms. The second story floor would include, but not be
limited to, NICU rooms, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) rooms, waiting rooms, staff break rooms,
medical offices, restrooms, equipment storage rooms, and three corridors connecting to the
existing French Hospital Building. The third story floor would include, but not be limited to,
patient rooms, nurse stations, medical offices, a waiting room, cleaning supply rooms, equipment
storage rooms, a staff lounge, restrooms, and an outdoor garden patio. The fourth story floor
would include, but not be limited to, patient rooms, a family care suite, staff break rooms, nurse
stations, waiting room, medical offices, and restrooms. A height variance is required for the
construction of the patient tower building to be 68 feet tall above average natural grade.
The proposed parking deck would be constructed over an existing surface parking area
located on the western side of the project site, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. The ground
level area of the parking deck would include 26,000 square feet of surface level parking, an
1,800-square-foot electrical equipment storage area, a 4,000-square-foot shell space for the
future development of a hospital lab, and a pedestrian plaza. The second level of the parking
deck would include 31,000 square feet of parking area and a 2,000-square-foot helistop, which
would be located on a platform approximately 8 feet higher than the upper level of the parking
deck connected with a staircase and ramps that would provide access to the upper parking deck
level.
SAFER Comment
French Hospital Expansion Project - MND (ER No. 0742-2021)
April 11, 2022
Page 3
LEGAL STANDARD FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS
As the California Supreme Court held, “[i]f no EIR has been prepared for a nonexempt
project, but substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that the project may result
in significant adverse impacts, the proper remedy is to order preparation of an EIR.”
Communities for a Better Env’t v. South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 310,
319-20.) “Significant environmental effect” is defined very broadly as “a substantial or
potentially substantial adverse change in the environment.” (Pub. Res. Code [“PRC”] § 21068;
see also 14 CCR § 15382.) An effect on the environment need not be “momentous” to meet the
CEQA test for significance; it is enough that the impacts are “not trivial.” (No Oil, Inc. v. City of
Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68, 83.) “The ‘foremost principle’ in interpreting CEQA is that the
Legislature intended the act to be read so as to afford the fullest possible protection to the
environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory language.” (Communities for a Better
Env’t v. Cal. Res. Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98, 109.)
The EIR is the very heart of CEQA. (Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of
Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1184, 1214 (Bakersfield Citizens); Pocket Protectors v. City
of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 903, 927.) The EIR is an “environmental ‘alarm bell’
whose purpose is to alert the public and its responsible officials to environmental changes before
they have reached the ecological points of no return.” (Bakersfield Citizens, supra, 124
Cal.App.4th at 1220.) The EIR also functions as a “document of accountability,” intended to
demonstrate to an apprehensive citizenry that the agency has, in fact, analyzed and considered
the ecological implications of its action.” (Laurel Heights Improvements Assn. v. Regents of
Univ. of Cal. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 392.) The EIR process “protects not only the environment
but also informed self-government.” (Pocket Protectors, supra, 124 Cal.App.4th at 927.)
An EIR is required if “there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before
the lead agency, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment.” (PRC §
21080(d); see also Pocket Protectors, supra, 124 Cal.App.4th at 927.) In very limited
circumstances, an agency may avoid preparing an EIR by issuing a negative declaration unless
there is a “fair argument” that the project will have a significant environmental effect. (PRC, §§
21100, 21064.) Since “[t]he adoption of a negative declaration . . . has a terminal effect on the
environmental review process,” by allowing the agency “to dispense with the duty [to prepare an
EIR],” negative declarations are allowed only in cases where “the proposed project will not
affect the environment at all.” (Citizens of Lake Murray v. San Diego (1989) 129 Cal.App.3d
436, 440.) A mitigated negative declaration is proper only if the project revisions would avoid or
mitigate the potentially significant effects identified in the initial study “to a point where clearly
no significant effect on the environment would occur, and . . . there is no substantial evidence in
light of the whole record before the public agency that the project, as revised, may have a
significant effect on the environment.” (Mejia v. City of Los Angeles (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th
322, 331 [quoting PRC §§ 21064.5, 21080(c)(2)].) In that context, “may” means a reasonable
possibility of a significant effect on the environment. (PRC §§ 21082.2(a), 21100, 21151(a);
Pocket Protectors, supra, 124 Cal.App.4th at 927; League for Protection of Oakland's etc.
Historic Res. v. City of Oakland (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 896, 904-05.)
SAFER Comment
French Hospital Expansion Project - MND (ER No. 0742-2021)
April 11, 2022
Page 4
Under the “fair argument” standard, an EIR is required if any substantial evidence in the
record indicates that a project may have an adverse environmental effect—even if contrary
evidence exists to support the agency’s decision. (14 CCR § 15064(f)(1); Pocket Protectors,
supra, 124 Cal.App.4th at 931; Stanislaus Audubon Society v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33
Cal.App.4th 144, 150-51; Quail Botanical Gardens Found., Inc. v. City of Encinitas (1994) 29
Cal.App.4th 1597, 1602.) The “fair argument” standard creates a “low threshold” favoring
environmental review through an EIR rather than through issuance of negative declarations or
notices of exemption from CEQA. (Pocket Protectors, supra, 124 Cal.App.4th at 928.)
The “fair argument” standard is virtually the opposite of the typical deferential standard
accorded to agencies. As a leading CEQA treatise explains:
This ‘fair argument’ standard is very different from the standard normally
followed by public agencies in making administrative determinations.
Ordinarily, public agencies weigh the evidence in the record before them and
reach a decision based on a preponderance of the evidence. [Citations]. The fair
argument standard, by contrast, prevents the lead agency from weighing
competing evidence to determine who has a better argument concerning the
likelihood or extent of a potential environmental impact. The lead agency’s
decision is thus largely legal rather than factual; it does not resolve conflicts in
the evidence but determines only whether substantial evidence exists in the
record to support the prescribed fair argument.
Kostka & Zishcke, Practice Under CEQA, §6.29, pp. 273-74.) The Courts have explained that
it is a question of law, not fact, whether a fair argument exists, and the courts owe no deference
to the lead agency’s determination. Review is de novo, with a preference for resolving doubts in
favor of environmental review.” (Pocket Protectors, supra, 124 Cal.App.4th at 928.)
DISCUSSION
I. An EIR is Required to Disclose and Mitigate the Project’s Significant Air Quality
Impacts from Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter.
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., and Dr. Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D., of the environmental
consulting firm SWAPE reviewed the MND’s analysis of the Project’s impacts on air quality.
SWAPE’s comment letter and CVs are attached as Exhibit A. As discussed below, SWAPE
concluded that the MND failed to identify a significant impact from emissions of diesel
particulate matter. As such, an EIR is required to disclose and mitigate this impact.
A. The MND failed to analyze the Project’s operational and cumulative air
quality impacts on human health from emissions of diesel particulate matter.
The MND’s analysis of the cancer risk posed by emissions of diesel particulate matter
was inadequate. Although the MND provided a quantitative cancer risk analysis for emissions
SAFER Comment
French Hospital Expansion Project - MND (ER No. 0742-2021)
April 11, 2022
Page 5
from the Project’s generator yard (MND, p. 39), there was no quantitative analysis of the
emissions resulting from construction and operation of the Project. (Ex. A, p. 13.) The MND’s
failure to conduct a quantified health risk assessment (“HRA”) for construction and operation of
the Project emissions results in an inadequate evaluation that should not be relied upon to
determine the Project’s impacts.
As noted by SWAPE, CEQA requires that that MND “correlate the increase in emissions
generated by the Project with the potential adverse impacts on human health. (Ex. A, p. 13.)
However, such an analysis is not possible without a quantified HRA. Furthermore, the failure of
the MND to provide a quantified HRA is inconsistent with the most recent guidance of the
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”). (Id. at pp. 13-14.) OEHHA
recommends that exposure from projects lasting more than 6 months (e.g. the Project’s future
years of operation) be evaluated for the duration of the project and recommends that an exposure
duration of 30 years be used to estimate individual cancer risk for the maximally exposed
individual resident (“MEIR”). (Id. at p. 13.) OEHHA additionally recommends that agencies
evaluate the cumulative impact of construction and operation of the Project combined. (Id.)
Thus, a quantified HRA is necessary to ensure that operational and cumulative health risks are
disclosed and compared to the applicable significance thresholds set by the San Luis Obispo Air
Pollution Control District (“SLOAPCD”).
B. SWAPE’s analysis presents a fair argument that the Project will result in a
potentially significant in a potentially significant impact to human health
from emissions of diesel particulate matter.
SWAPE prepared a screening-level HRA to evaluate potential impacts to human health
from diesel particulate matter emissions (“DPM”) resulting from construction and operation of
the Project. (Ex. A, pp. 14-16.) SWAPE used AERSCREEN, the leading screening-level air
quality dispersion model. (Id. at p. 14.) SWAPE used a sensitive receptor distance of 200
meters—a conservative estimate given the single-family residence located 41 meters away
MND, p. 75)—and analyzed impacts to individuals at different stages of life based on OEHHA
guidance. (Id. at pp. 15-16.)
SWAPE found that the excess cancer risk for infants and children at the closest sensitive
receptor located approximately 200 meters away, over the course of Project construction and
operation, are approximately 45.7 and 28.1 in one million, respectively. (Ex. A, p. 17.)
Moreover, SWAPE found that the excess cancer risk over the course of a residential lifetime is
approximately 80.1 in one million. (Id.) SWAPE concludes, “The infant, child, and lifetime
cancer risks exceed the SLOAPCD threshold of 10 in one million, thus resulting in a potentially
significant impact not previously addressed or identified by the IS/MND.” (Id.)
SWAPE’s expert analysis of the Project’s significant cancer risks establishes a fair
argument that the Project may result in significant impacts. Under CEQA, SWAPE’s fair
argument requires that the City prepare an EIR to disclose and mitigate this impact.
SAFER Comment
French Hospital Expansion Project - MND (ER No. 0742-2021)
April 11, 2022
Page 6
II. An EIR is Required to Disclose and Mitigate the Project’s Significant Air Quality
Impacts from Emissions of ROGs and NOx.
A. The MND’s analysis of the Project’s air quality impacts is not supported by
substantial evidence.
SWAPE found that the MND underestimated the Project’s emissions and therefore
cannot be relied upon to determine the significant of the Project’s air quality impacts. (Ex. A, pp.
2-3.) The MND relies on emissions calculated from the California Emissions Estimator Model
Version CalEEMod.2016.3.2 (“CalEEMod”). (Id. at p. 2.) This model, which is used to generate
a project’s construction and operational emissions, relies on recommended default values based
on site specific information related to a number of factors (Id.) CEQA requires that any changes
to the default values must be justified by substantial evidence.
SWAPE reviewed the Project’s CalEEMod output files and found that the values input
into the model were inconsistent with information provided in the MND. (Ex. A, p. 3.) This
results in an underestimation of the Project’s emissions. (Id.) As a result, an EIR should be
prepared that adequately evaluates the Project’s air quality impacts. (Id.)
Specifically, SWAPE found that the following values used in the MND’s air quality
analysis were either inconsistent with information provided in the MND or otherwise unjustified:
1. Failure to Model 5,800 square feet of future lab and storage space
2. Underestimated Parking Land Use Size (Ex. A, p. 3-4.)
3. Unsubstantiated Changes to Coating/Paving Phase Lengths (Ex. A, pp. 4-6.)
4. Unsubstantiated Amount of Demolition (Ex. A, pp. 6-8.)
5. Unsubstantiated Changes to Default Intensity Factors (Ex. A, pp. 8-9.)
6. Unsubstantiated Reductions to Generator Emission Factors (Ex. A, pp. 9-10.)
7. Underestimated Operational Vehicle Trip Rates (Ex. A, pp. 10-11.)
As a result of these errors, the MND underestimates the Project’s construction and
operational emissions and cannot be relied upon to determine the significance of the Project’s air
quality impacts.
B. SWAPE’s updated analysis of the Project’s air quality impacts establishes a
fair argument that the Project will result in significant emissions of ROGs
and NOx.
In an effort to accurately determine the proposed Project’s construction and operational
emissions, SWAPE prepared an updated CalEEMod model that includes more site-specific
information and correct input parameters. (Ex. A, p. 12.) SWAPE’s updated analysis corrected
the proposed lab land use and the parking structure square footage, omitted the unsubstantiated
changes to the individual construction phase lengths, intensity factors, and stationary generator
emissions factors, and corrected the operational daily vehicle trip rates. (Id.) SWAPE’s updated
SAFER Comment
French Hospital Expansion Project - MND (ER No. 0742-2021)
April 11, 2022
Page 7
analysis found that the Project’s construction-related ROG and NOx emissions exceed the of 137
pounds per day (“lbs/day”) significance threshold set by SLOAPCD. (Id.)
SWAPE’s expert analysis of the Project’s significant cancer risks establishes a fair
argument that the Project may result in significant ROG and NOx impacts. Under CEQA,
SWAPE’s fair argument requires that the City prepare an EIR to disclose and mitigate this
impact.
III. An EIR is required to disclose and the Project’s significant indoor air quality
impacts from emissions of formaldehyde.
The MND fails to address the significant health risks posed by the Project from
formaldehyde, a toxic air contaminant (“TAC”). Certified Industrial Hygienist, Francis
Offermann, PE, CIH, has conducted a review of the Project, the MND, and relevant documents
regarding the Project’s indoor air emissions. Mr. Offermann is one of the world’s leading experts
on indoor air quality, in particular emissions of formaldehyde, and has published extensively on
the topic. As discussed below and set forth in Mr. Offermann’s comments, the Project’s
emissions of formaldehyde to air will result in very significant cancer risks to future hospital
employees. Mr. Offermann’s expert opinion and calculation present a “fair argument” that the
Project may have significant health risk impacts as a result of these indoor air pollution
emissions, which were not discussed, disclosed, or analyzed in the MND. These impacts must be
addressed in an EIR. Mr. Offermann’s comment and CV are attached as Exhibit B.
Formaldehyde is a known human carcinogen and listed by the State as a TAC.
SLOAPCD has established a significance threshold of health risks for carcinogenic TACs of 10
in a million. (Ex. B, p. 2.) The MND fails to acknowledge the significant indoor air emissions
that will result from the Project. Specifically, there is no discussion of impacts or health risks, no
analysis, and no identification of mitigation for significant emissions of formaldehyde to air from
the Project.
Mr. Offermann explains that many composite wood products typically used building
construction contain formaldehyde-based glues which off-gas formaldehyde over a very long
time period. He states, “The primary source of formaldehyde indoors is composite wood
products manufactured with urea-formaldehyde resins, such as plywood, medium density
fiberboard, and particle board. These materials are commonly used in residential, office, and
SAFER Comment
French Hospital Expansion Project - MND (ER No. 0742-2021)
April 11, 2022
Page 8
retail building construction for flooring, cabinetry, baseboards, window shades, interior doors,
and window and door trims.” (Ex. B, pp. 2-3.)
Mr. Offermann states that future employees of the hospital will be exposed to a cancer
risk from formaldehyde of approximately 17.7 per million, assuming all materials are compliant
with the California Air Resources Board’s formaldehyde airborne toxics control measure. (Ex.
A, p. 4.) This exceeds SLOAPCD’s CEQA significance thresholds for airborne cancer risk of 10
per million. (Id.) Mr. Offermann concludes that these significant environmental impacts must be
analyzed in an EIR and mitigation measures should be imposed to reduce the risk of
formaldehyde exposure. (Ex. A, pp. 4-5, 11-12.) He prescribes a methodology for estimating the
Project’s formaldehyde emissions in order to do a more project-specific health risk assessment.
Id., pp. 5-9.). Mr. Offermann also suggests several feasible mitigation measures, such as
requiring the use of no-added-formaldehyde composite wood products, which are readily
available. (Id., pp. 11-12.) Mr. Offermann also suggests requiring air ventilation systems which
would reduce formaldehyde levels. (Id.) Since the MND does not analyze this impact at all, none
of these or other mitigation measures have been considered.
When a Project exceeds a duly adopted CEQA significance threshold, as here, this alone
establishes substantial evidence that the project will have a significant adverse environmental
impact. Indeed, in many instances, such air quality thresholds are the only criteria reviewed and
treated as dispositive in evaluating the significance of a project’s air quality impacts. (See, e.g.
Schenck v. County of Sonoma (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 949, 960 [County applies Air District’s
published CEQA quantitative criteria” and “threshold level of cumulative significance”]; see
also Communities for a Better Environment v. California Resources Agency (2002) 103
Cal.App.4th 98, 110-111 [“A ‘threshold of significance’ for a given environmental effect is
simply that level at which the lead agency finds the effects of the project to be significant”].) The
California Supreme Court made clear the substantial importance that an air district significance
threshold plays in providing substantial evidence of a significant adverse impact. (Communities
for a Better Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 310,
327 [“As the District’s established significance threshold for NOx is 55 pounds per day, these
estimates [of NOx emissions of 201 to 456 pounds per day] constitute substantial evidence
supporting a fair argument for a significant adverse impact.”].) Since expert evidence
demonstrates that the Project will exceed the SLOAPCD’s CEQA significance threshold, there is
substantial evidence that an “unstudied, potentially significant environmental effect[]” exists.
See Friends of Coll. of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo Cty. Cmty. Coll. Dist. (2016) 1 Cal.5th
937, 958 [emphasis added].) As a result, the City must prepare an EIR for the Project to address
this impact and identify enforceable mitigation measures.
The failure of the MND to address the Project’s formaldehyde emissions is contrary to
the California Supreme Court’s decision in California Building Industry Ass’n v. Bay Area Air
Quality Mgmt. Dist. (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369, 386 (“CBIA”). In that case, the Supreme Court
expressly holds that potential adverse impacts to future users and residents from pollution
generated by a proposed project must be addressed under CEQA. At issue in CBIA was whether
the Air District could enact CEQA guidelines that advised lead agencies that they must analyze
SAFER Comment
French Hospital Expansion Project - MND (ER No. 0742-2021)
April 11, 2022
Page 9
the impacts of adjacent environmental conditions on a project. The Supreme Court held that
CEQA does not generally require lead agencies to consider the environment’s effects on a
project. (CBIA, 62 Cal.4th at 800-01.) However, to the extent a project may exacerbate existing
environmental conditions at or near a project site, those would still have to be considered
pursuant to CEQA. (Id. at 801.) In so holding, the Court expressly held that CEQA’s statutory
language required lead agencies to disclose and analyze “impacts on a project’s users or
residents that arise from the project’s effects on the environment.” (Id. at 800 [emphasis added].)
The carcinogenic formaldehyde emissions identified by Mr. Offermann are not an
existing environmental condition. Those emissions to the air will be from the Project. People will
be residing in and using the Project once it is built and begins emitting formaldehyde. Once built,
the Project will begin to emit formaldehyde at levels that pose significant direct and cumulative
health risks. The Supreme Court in CBIA expressly finds that this type of air emission and health
impact by the project on the environment and a “project’s users and residents” must be addressed
in the CEQA process. The existing TAC sources near the Project site would have to be
considered in evaluating the cumulative effect on future employees of the Project.
The Supreme Court’s reasoning is well-grounded in CEQA’s statutory language. CEQA
expressly includes a project’s effects on human beings as an effect on the environment that must
be addressed in an environmental review. “Section 21083(b)(3)’s express language, for example,
requires a finding of a ‘significant effect on the environment’ (§ 21083(b)) whenever the
environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly.’” (CBIA, 62 Cal.4th at 800 [emphasis in original].) Likewise, “the
Legislature has made clear—in declarations accompanying CEQA’s enactment—that public
health and safety are of great importance in the statutory scheme.” (Id.) It goes without saying
that the thousands of future residents at the Project are human beings and the health and safety of
those residents must be subjected to CEQA’s safeguards.
The City has a duty to investigate issues relating to a project’s potential environmental
impacts. (See County Sanitation Dist. No. 2 v. County of Kern, (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 1544,
1597–98. [“[U]nder CEQA, the lead agency bears a burden to investigate potential
environmental impacts.”].) The proposed Project will have significant impacts on air quality and
health risks by emitting cancer-causing levels of formaldehyde into the air that will expose future
residents to cancer risks potentially in excess of SLOAQMD’s threshold of significance for
cancer health risks of 10 in a million. Currently, outside of Mr. Offermann’s comments, the City
does not have any idea what risks will be posed by formaldehyde emissions from the Project or
the residences. As a result, the City must include an analysis and discussion in an EIR which
discloses and analyzes the health risks that the Project’s formaldehyde emissions may have on
future hospital employees and identifies appropriate mitigation measures.
IV. The MND’s Fails to Adequately Mitigate the Project’s Greenhouse Gas Impacts.
The MND concluded that, with the implementation of two mitigation measures (ENG-1
and ENG-2), the Project’s significant greenhouse gas (“GHG”) impacts would be reduced to than
SAFER Comment
French Hospital Expansion Project - MND (ER No. 0742-2021)
April 11, 2022
Page 10
significant. (MND, p. 65.) However, this conclusion is inconsistent the MND’s own “Air Quality
Greenhouse Gas Impact Assessment” (“AQ/GHG Assessment”) prepared by Ambient Air
Quality & Noise Consulting and attached as Attachment 3 to the MND. While the MND
concluded that only two mitigation measures would be required to reduce the Project’s GHG
impacts to a less-than-significant level, the MND’s Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Impact
Assessment identified three necessary mitigation measures. (MND, Attachment 3, p. 35-36.) The
first two mitigation measures identified by the AQ/GHG Assessment, GHG-1 and GHG-2, are
identical to the MND’s ENG-1 and ENG-2. However, third mitigation measure identified by the
AQ/GHG Assessment, GHG-3, is no where to be found in the MND.
The AQ/GHG Assessment first calculated the Project’s GHG emissions without any
mitigation. (MND, Attachment 3, p. 34-35.) Without mitigation, the Assessment concluded that
the Project would result in approximately 1,685.9 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents per
year (“MTCO2e/year”) in 2025 and 1,551.8 MTCO2e/year for operational year 2030. (Id.) Based
on a service population of 127 individuals, the Assessment calculated the Project’s GHG
emissions, without mitigation, would be 13.3 MTCO2e/SP/year in 2025 and 12.2
MTCO2e/SP/year in 2030. (Id.) Because these figures exceed the City’s 0.7 MTCO2e/SP/year
significance threshold, the Assessment labeled the impact as “potentially significant” before
discussing mitigation measures. (Id. at p. 35.)
After concluding that the Project’s GHG impacts were potentially significant, the
AQ/GHG Assessment listed three mitigation measures: GHG-1 (Traffic Demand Management
Plan), GHG-2 (Operational Mitigation Measures), and GHG-3 (GHG-Reduction Plan). (MND,
Attachment 3, p. 35-36.) The Assessment calculated that implementation of GHG-2 would not
reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. (Id. at p. 37.) With the implantation of all three
mitigation measures, the AQ/GHG Assessment concluded that the Project’s GHG impacts would
be less than significant. (Id.)
There is no substantial evidence in the record that GHG-1 and GHG-2 (named ENG-1
and ENG-2 in the MND) alone would reduce the Project’s GHG impacts to a less-than-
significant level. GHG-3 ensures an adequate reduction in the Project’s GHG impacts by
requiring the preparation of a GHG-Reduction Plan that includes all possible on-site GHG
reduction measures sufficient to reduce operational emissions to below the City’s threshold of
significance of 0.7 MTCO2e/SP/yr. (MND, Attachment 3, p. 36.) Importantly, GHG-3 requires
that the City approve the GHG-Reduction plan prior to issuance of building permits (id.), thereby
ensuring that the Project is held accountable to actually reduce its GHG impacts. Unless GHG-3
is required or the Project’s GHG impacts otherwise further mitigated, the MND’s AQ/GHG
Assessment is clear that the Project will potentially result in a significant GHG impact, which, in
turn, requires the preparation of an EIR under CEQA.
V.The MND inadequately analyzes and mitigates the Project’s noise impacts.
Noise expert Deborah Jue of the consulting firm Wilson Ihrig reviewed the MND’s
analysis of the Project’s noise impacts. Ms. Jue’s comment letter is attached as Exhibit
SAFER Comment
French Hospital Expansion Project - MND (ER No. 0742-2021)
April 11, 2022
Page 11
C. As discussed below, Ms. Jue concluded that the MND failed to properly analyze and mitigate
the Project’s noise impacts and, as a result, the Project may cause significant impacts.
A.The MND’s noise analysis is incomplete and fails to disclose potentially
significant noise impacts from generators, helicopters, and mechanical
operations.
Ms. Jue’s review of the MND found that the MND contained incomplete analyses of the
noise impacts from the Project’s backup generators, helipad, and mechanical equipment. (Ex. C,
pp. 2-4.) Due to these incomplete analyses, the Project’s noise impacts are not fully mitigated
and remain potentially significant. (Id. at p. 4.)
First, the MND provides an incomplete analysis of the Project’s two backup generators.
The MND claims that “operational noise levels for each generator would be approximately 76–
81 dBA at 23 feet” and that “the highest predicted noise levels at [the] nearest residence would
be 59 dBA Leq.” (MND, p. 75.) The MND then claims that, with incorporation of Mitigation
Measure N-2 (sound-attenuated container), predicted operational noise levels at the nearest
residential land use would be reduced to a less-than-significant level of approximately 50 dBA
Leq.
However, as noted by Ms. Jue, the MND’s noise level measurements appear to be based
on a 20 to 30kW portable generator rather than a larger 600kW generator more typical of a
hospital’s needs. (Ex. C, p. 2.) A 600kW generator not only produces more noise but also require
monthly testing of 45 to 60 minutes rather than the 5 to 10 minutes of testing assumed by the
MND. (Id. at pp. 2-3.) Even with the incorporation of Mitigation Measure N-2 and the proposed
sound wall, the 600kW generator would generate at least 56 dBA, in excess of the 50 dBA
daytime threshold and 45 dBA nighttime threshold. (Id. at p. 3.)
Second, the MND’s analysis of helicopter noise is based on unfounded assumptions and
incomplete information. (Ex. C, p. 3.) The MND assumes that any helicopter using the Project’s
helipad would be an Airbus H135, which is quieter than most helicopters. (Id.) However, there is
nothing in the MND that requires the Project to utilize only Airbus H135s. As such, the MND
likely underestimates the helicopter noise levels. If the City intends to allow only Airbus H135s,
it must be required as a mitigation measure in the MND. (Id. at p. 4.) Additionally, the MND
lacks any information about the helicopter flight paths and the sound exposure levels (“SEL”) for
typical operating conditions. (Id. at p. 3.) Based on a helicopter noise analysis for a project in Elk
Grove, Ms. Jue was able to estimate a 95 dBA SEL about 400 ft from the Project’s helipad,
thereby exposing nearby residents to a significant noise impact that the MND fails to disclose or
mititgate. (Id. at pp. 3-4.)
Lastly, the MND underestimates the noise impacts from the Project’s mechanical
operations. (Ex. C, pp. 3-4.) The MND assumes the Project’s air handling/cooling systems would
generate 78 dBA at 3 ft. (MND, p. 75.) While such systems might be sufficient for a commercial
office, it is more likely that the Project will require “a cooling tower, several larger HVAC units,
SAFER Comment
French Hospital Expansion Project - MND (ER No. 0742-2021)
April 11, 2022
Page 12
or several commercial packaged air conditioning units.” (Ex. C, p. 3.) Ms. Jue estimates that
cooling systems for the Project will actually generate approximately 73 dBA, resulting in a
significant impact to nearby residences. (Id. at p. 4.) The MND fails to disclose or mitigate this
potentially significant impact.
B. The MND fails to properly establish thresholds of significance for the
Project’s noise impacts.
The MND failed to establish and apply proper significance thresholds for the Project’s
noise impacts. (Ex. C, p. 2.) First, although the MND’s Noise Assessment (MND Attachment #7)
noted that an exposure level of 80 dBA can cause awakening for about 10% of exposed persons,
the MND failed to “account for sleep disturbance, in which a person may not become fully
awake, but instead changes from one deeper level of sleep to a less restful level of sleep.” (Id.)
Ms. Jue concluded that helicopter noise from the Project (at 95 dBA) would result in a
significant impact by exposing 10% of exposed nearby residents to sleep disturbance. (Id.)
Second, the MND claims that the Project’s generators would be exempt (aside from
testing/maintenance) from the City’s noise ordinances. (MND, p. 75; see SLOMC § 9.12.090
The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to: (a) the emission of sound for the purpose of
alerting persons to the existence of an emergency, or (b) the emission of sound in the
performance of emergency work.”].) However, it is unclear that operation of the generators
would qualify as “emergency work,” which is defined as “any work performed for the purpose of
preventing or alleviating the physical trauma or property damage threatened or caused by an
emergency.” (SLOMC § 9.12.090(K).) The MND should not assume that all operation of the
generators would qualify for the noise ordinance exemption. As such, the MND should be
revised.
C. The MND fails to adequately mitigate the Project’s noise impacts.
The MND’s mitigation measures for the Project’s noise impacts fail to ensure that the
impacts will actually be reduced to a less-than-significant level. (Ex. C, pp. 4-5.) The MND
claims that the noise mitigation measures, N-1 (short-term construction measures) and N-2
enclosures for generators), will mitigated the Project’s impacts. (MND, p. 78.) However, neither
mitigation measures actually requires that the measures reduce noise levels below the 50 dBA
Leq (daytime) and 45 dBA Leq (nighttime) thresholds set by the City’s noise ordinance. (Ex. C,
pp. 4-5.) To ensure that the Project’s impacts are properly mitigated, the mitigation measures
must be reformulated to specifically require that the mitigation reduces noise levels below the
applicable thresholds.
VI. The MND’s analysis of the Project’s hazards/hazardous materials impacts is not
supported by substantial evidence.
The MND concluded that, with mitigation, the Project would result in a less than
significant impact from hazards or hazardous materials. (MND, p. 67.) However, the MND
SAFER Comment
French Hospital Expansion Project - MND (ER No. 0742-2021)
April 11, 2022
Page 13
provides no documentation to support this finding other than an online review of regulatory
databases. (Ex. A, p. 1.) As SWAPE explains, “Under CEQA, the preparation of a Phase I ESA
is commonplace for identifying and disclosing conditions that may present impacts to the public,
workers, or the environment, and which may require further investigation, including
environmental sampling and cleanup.” (Id.)
Without a Phase I ESA, the City has made no meaningful attempt to identify potential
hazards and, therefore, the less-than-significant determination is unfounded. SWAPE
recommends that a Phase I ESA be included in an EIR to ensure the proper analysis of the
Project’s impacts.
VII. The MND fails to consider renewable energy alternatives.
When analyzing a project's energy use to determine if it creates significant effects, CEQA
requires a discussion of whether any renewable energy features could be incorporated into the
project. (League to Save Lake Tahoe Mountain Area Preservation Foundation v. County of
Placer (2022) 75 Cal.App.5th 63, 167 (League to Save Lake Tahoe).) Compliance with state and
local regulatory programs is not sufficient to determine that a project will not result in a wasteful
or inefficient use of energy. (Id. at p. 165.)
Although the MND quantifies the Project’s expected construction and operational energy
use (MND, pp. 55-56), there is no discussion of “whether any renewable energy features could
be incorporated into the project as part of determining whether the project's impacts on energy
resources were significant.” (See League to Save Lake Tahoe, supra, 75 Cal.App.5th at p. 168.)
An updated energy analysis should be conducted and circulated in a revised MND or EIR in
order to comply with CEQA.
CONCLUSION
SAFER’s experts have established a fair argument that the Project may have significant
impacts to air quality and noise. Furthermore, the MND’s analyses of impacts to, air quality,
greenhouse gases, hazards, energy, and noise are not supported by substantial evidence.
Therefore, SAFER respectfully requests that the City prepare and circulate an EIR prior to
further consideration of the Project.
Sincerely,
Brian B. Flynn
Lozeau Drury LLP
EXHIBIT A
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
949) 887-9013
mhagemann@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
310) 795-2335
prosenfeld@swape.com
April 6, 2022
Brian Flynn
Lozeau | Drury LLP
1939 Harrison Street, Suite 150
Oakland, CA 94618
Subject: Comments on the French Hospital Expansion Project (SCH No. 2022030277)
Dear Mr. Flynn,
We have reviewed the January 2022 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND”) for the
French Hospital Expansion Project (“Project”) located in the City of San Luis Obispo (“City”). The Project
proposes to expand the existing hospital facilities by constructing an 89,775-square-foot (“SF”) patient
tower, 1,800-SF generator yard, as well as a parking structure consisting of 234 parking spaces, a 2,000-
SF helistop, and 5,800-SF of lab space on the 18-acre site.
Our review concludes that the IS/MND fails to adequately evaluate the Project’s hazards and hazardous
materials, air quality, health risk, and greenhouse gas impacts. As a result, emissions and health risk
impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project are underestimated and
inadequately addressed. An Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) should be prepared to adequately
assess and mitigate the potential hazards and hazardous materials, air quality, and health risk impacts
that the project may have on the surrounding environment.
Hazards and Hazardous MaterialsInadequateAnalysisandDisclosureofImpacts
The IS/MND failed to include a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (“ESA”) for the Project site. The
IS/MND instead relied only on an online review of regulatory databases to determine hazards and
hazardous materials impacts, which is an insufficient basis for disclosure.
Under CEQA, the preparation of a Phase I ESA is commonplace for identifying and disclosing conditions
that may present impacts to the public, workers, or the environment, and which may require further
investigation, including environmental sampling and cleanup. Phase I ESAs are conducted to identify
2
conditions that would indicate a release of hazardous substances according to ASTM International
ASTM”) standards.1 Essential components of a Phase I ESA include:
a review of regulatory agency databases to identify sites in the vicinity of the subject property
that are undergoing assessment or cleanup activities;
a site inspection;
interviews with people knowledgeable about the property; and
recommendations for further actions to address potential hazards.
The principal objective of a Phase I ESA is to identify any “recognized environmental conditions”
RECs”). A REC is the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products
on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a threat of a release
of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground,
groundwater, or surface water. If RECs are found, a Phase II ESA is usually conducted. A Phase II ESA
includes the collection of environmental samples to identify the magnitude and extent of contamination
and if cleanup is needed to reduce public exposure to contamination.
To provide an adequate basis for disclosure of hazards and hazardous materials impacts, the preparation
of a Phase I ESA is necessary. If RECs are identified in the Phase I ESA, a Phase II ESA should be prepared
to include the collection of soil samples to determine if contamination exists. Any contamination that is
found to be above regulatory screening levels, including California Department of Toxic Substances
Control Soil Screening Levels 2, should be further evaluated in coordination with regulatory agencies to
include the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the California Department of Toxic Substances
Control.
Air QualityUnsubstantiated Input Parameters Used to Estimate Project Emissions
The air quality analysis provided in the IS/MND relies on emissions calculated with CalEEMod.2020.4.0
p. 36).3 CalEEMod provides recommended default values based on site-specific information, such as
land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with
project type. If more specific project information is known, the user can change the default values and
input project-specific values, but the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requires that such
changes be justified by substantial evidence. Once all of the values are inputted into the model, the
Project's construction and operational emissions are calculated, and "output files" are generated. These
output files disclose to the reader what parameters are utilized in calculating the Project's air pollutant
emissions and make known which default values are changed as well as provide justification for the
values selected.
1 http://www.astm.org/Standards/E1527.htm
2 https://dtsc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2019/04/HHRA-Note-3-June-2020-A.pdf
3 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide.
3
When reviewing the Project’s CalEEMod output files, provided in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas
Impact Assessment (“AQ & GHG Assessment”) as Attachment 3 to the IS/MND, we found that several
model inputs were not consistent with information disclosed in the IS/MND. As a result, the Project’s
construction and operational emissions are underestimated. Therefore, an EIR should be prepared to
include an updated air quality analysis that adequately evaluates the impacts that construction and
operation of the Project will have on local and regional air quality.
Failure to Model All Proposed Land Uses
According to the IS/MND:
The proposed project consists of the phased expansion of French Hospital Medical Center
campus including the construction of a two-level, 234-space parking structure with 5,800 square
feet of future lab and storage space and a 2,000-square-foot helistop (Phase 1), and a four-story
89,775-square-foot patient tower, an 1,800-square-foot generator yard, and various related site
improvements (Phase 2) (project)” (IS/MND, p. 1).
As demonstrated above, the model should have included 5,800-SF of lab space. However, review of the
CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the “SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion” model fails to
include any lab space whatsoever (see excerpt below) (Appendix A, pp. 161, 207, 248, 291).
As you can see in the excerpt above, the model fails to include any of the proposed lab land use. This
inconsistency presents an issue, as CalEEMod includes 63 different land use types that are each assigned
a distinctive set of energy usage emission factors.4 Furthermore, each land use type includes a specific
trip rate that CalEEMod uses to calculate mobile-source emissions.5 Thus, by failing to include all
proposed land use types, the model may underestimate the Project’s construction-related and
operational emissions and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance.
Underestimated Parking Land Use Size
According to the IS/MND:
The proposed parking deck would be constructed over an existing surface parking area located
on the western side of the project site, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks (see Figure 2). The
ground level area of the parking deck would include 26,000 square feet of surface level parking,
an 1,800-square-foot electrical equipment storage area, a 4,000-square-foot shell space for the
future development of a hospital lab, and a pedestrian plaza. The second level of the parking
4 “Appendix D – Default Data Tables” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), June 2021,
available at: https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide.
5 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 29.
4
deck would include 31,000 square feet of parking area and a 2,000-square-foot helistop”
IS/MND, p. 4).
As such, the models should have included a total of 59,000-SF for the proposed parking deck.6 However,
review of the CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the “SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion”
model includes only 33,000-SF of “Unenclosed Parking Structure” (see excerpt below) (Appendix A, pp.
161, 207, 248, 291).
As you can see in the excerpt above, the proposed parking deck is underestimated by 26,000-SF.7 This
underestimation presents an issue, as the square footage of parking land uses is used for certain
calculations such as determining the area to be painted and stripped (i.e., VOC emissions from
architectural coatings), volume to be ventilated, and area to include lighting (i.e., energy impacts).8
Thus, by underestimating the proposed parking land use size, the model underestimates the Project’s
construction-related and operational emissions and should not be relied upon to determine Project
significance.
Unsubstantiated Changes to the Architectural Coating and Paving Phase Lengths
Review of the CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the “SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion”
model includes several changes to the default architectural coating and paving phase lengths (see
excerpt below) (Appendix A, pp. 163, 209, 250, 293).
As a result of these changes, the model includes the following construction schedule (see excerpt below)
Appendix A, pp. 169, 214, 255, 296):
6 Calculated: (26,000-SF of ground-level parking) + (31,000-SF upper-level parking) + (2,000-SF helistop) = 59,000-SF
total parking.
7 Calculated: 59,000-SF proposed parking structure area – 33,000-SF modeled parking structure area = 26,000-SF
underestimated.
8 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user’s-guide, p. 29.
5
As you can see from the excerpt above, the architectural coating phase was increased by 700%, from the
default value of 18 to 144 days, and the paving phase was decreased by 260%, from the default value of
18 to 5 days. As previously mentioned, the CalEEMod User’s Guide requires any changes to model
defaults be justified.9 According to the “User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data” table, the
justification provided for these changes is:
Based on anticipated const schedule provided by applicant and model defaults. Architectural
coating to begin ~5 months after building construction begins” (Appendix A, pp. 161, 207, 248,
289).
Furthermore, regarding the Project’s anticipated construction schedule, the IS/MND states:
Project construction would be completed in two phases. During Phase 1 of construction
activities, the parking deck would be constructed and is anticipated to take 12 months to
complete. Once construction of Phase 1 is completed, Phase 2 would begin and is anticipated to
take 24 months to complete. Phase 2 of construction activities would include construction of the
patient tower and associated connecting hallways to the existing French Hospital Building,
construction of the generator yard, parking area restriping, and landscape planting” (IS/MND, p.
8).
However, these justifications are insufficient. While the IS/MND indicates the total construction
duration of Phase 1 and Phase 2, the IS/MND fails to mention or justify the individual construction phase
lengths, such as the architectural and paving phase lengths. This is incorrect, as according to the
CalEEMod User’s Guide:
9 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 1, 14.
6
CalEEMod was also designed to allow the user to change the defaults to reflect site- or project-
specific information, when available, provided that the information is supported by substantial
evidence as required by CEQA.” 10
Here, as the IS/MND only justifies the total Phase 1 and Phase 2 construction duration of 12 and 24
months, the IS/MND fails to provide substantial evidence to support the revised architectural coating
and paving phase lengths. As such, we cannot verify the changes.
These unsubstantiated changes present an issue, as the construction emissions are improperly spread
out over a longer period of time for some phases, but not for others. According to the CalEEMod User’s
Guide, each construction phase is associated with different emissions activities (see excerpt below).11
Thus, by disproportionately altering and extending some of the individual construction phase lengths
without proper justification, the model assumes there are a greater number of days to complete the
construction activities required by the prolonged phases. As such, there will be less construction
activities required per day and, consequently, less pollutants emitted per day. As a result, the model
may underestimate the peak daily emissions associated with some phases of construction and should
not be relied upon to determine Project significance.
Failure to Substantiate Amount of Demolition
Review of the CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the “SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion”
model includes 84 demolition hauling trips (see excerpt below) (Appendix A, pp. 172, 217, 258, 299).
10 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 13-14.
11 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 32.
7
According to the CalEEMod User’s Guide:
Haul trips are based on the amount of material that is demolished, imported or exported
assuming a truck can handle 16 cubic yards of material.”12
Therefore, CalEEMod calculates a default number of hauling trips based upon the amount of demolition
material inputted into the model. As previously mentioned, the CalEEMod User’s Guide requires any
changes to model defaults be justified.13 According to the “User Entered Comments & Non-Default
Data” table, the justification provided for these changes is:
850 tons of demo debris” (Appendix A, pp. 161, 207, 248, 289).
However, this justification is unsubstantiated, as the IS/MND fails to disclose the specific square footage
of buildings to be demolished or the tons of demolition debris required for Project construction.
Therefore, we cannot verify that 850 tons of demolition debris, or consequently 84 demolition hauling
trips, is accurate. As such, demolition may be underestimated in the model.
This potential underestimation presents an issue, as the total amount of demolition material is used by
CalEEMod to determine emissions associated with this phase of construction; the three primary
operations that generate dust emission during the demolition phase are mechanical or explosive
dismemberment, site removal of debris, and on-site truck traffic on paved and unpaved road.14 By failing
to substantiate the amount of required demolition, the model may underestimate emissions associated
12 “Appendix A - Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA),
May 2021, available at: https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 14
13 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 1, 14.
14 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 11.
8
with fugitive dust, debris removal, as well as exhaust from hauling trucks traveling to and from the site,
and should not be relied upon to determine the significance of the Project’s air quality impacts.
Unsubstantiated Changes to the Default CH4, CO2, and N2O Intensity Factors
Review of the CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the “SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion”
model includes changes to the default CH4, CO2, and N2O intensity factors (see excerpt below) (Appendix
A, pp. 164, 210, 251, 292).
As demonstrated above, the CH4 intensity factor was reduced by approximately 18%, from a default
value of 0.033- to 0.027-pounds per megawatt hour (“lbs/MWh”); the CO2 intensity factor was reduced
by approximately 17%, from a default value of 203.98- to 168.39-lbs/MWh; and the N2O intensity factor
was reduced by approximately 25%, from a default value of 0.004- to 0.003-lbs/MWh. As previously
mentioned, the CalEEMod User’s Guide requires any changes to model defaults be justified.15 According
to the “User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data” table, the justification provided for these changes
is:
Includes RPS adjustments” (Appendix A, pp. 161, 207, 248, 289).
Furthermore, regarding California’s Renewables Portfolio Standard (“RPS”), the Energy Impact
Assessment, provided as Attachment 5 to the IS/MND, states:
In 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order (EO) S-14-08, which set the
Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) target to 33 percent by 2020. It directed state government
agencies and retail sellers of electricity to take all appropriate actions to implement this target.
EO S-14-08 was later superseded by EO S-21-09 on September 15, 2009. EO S-21-09 directed the
CARB to adopt regulations requiring 33 percent of electricity sold in the State come from
renewable energy by 2020. Statute SB X1-2 superseded this EO in 2011, which obligated all
California electricity providers, including investor-owned utilities and publicly owned utilities, to
obtain at least 33 percent of their energy from renewable electrical generation facilities by
2020” (p. 5).
However, these justifications are insufficient for two reasons.
First, simply because the State has future renewable energy goals does not ensure that these goals will
be achieved locally on the Project site or by the Project’s specific utility company. As such, the CH4, CO2,
15 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 2, 9
9
and N2O intensity factors should be based on locally achieved power mixes, rather than future estimates
accounting for statewide targets. Thus, we cannot verify the revised values.
Second, the IS/MND and associated documents fail to mention or provide a source from the Pacific Gas
and Electric Company (“PG&E”), the selected utility company for the Project, to justify the above-
mentioned changes. This is incorrect, as according to the CalEEMod User’s Guide:
CalEEMod was also designed to allow the user to change the defaults to reflect site- or project-
specific information, when available, provided that the information is supported by substantial
evidence as required by CEQA”.16
Here, until the IS/MND provides substantial evidence demonstrating PG&E has achieved these specific
intensity factors, we cannot verify the revised values.
These unsubstantiated reductions present an issue, as CalEEMod uses the CH4, CO2, and N2O intensity
factors to calculate the Project’s greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions associated with electricity use.17
Thus, by including unsubstantiated reductions to the default CH4, CO2, and N2O intensity factors, the
model may underestimate the Project’s GHG emissions and should not be relied upon to determine
Project significance.
Unsubstantiated Reductions to Stationary Generator Emission Factors
Review of the CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the “SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion”
model includes several reductions to the default stationary generator emission factors (see excerpt
below) (Appendix A, pp. 164, 210, 251, 292).
As previously mentioned, the CalEEMod User’s Guide requires any changes to model defaults be
justified.18 According to the “User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data” table, the justification
provided for these changes is:
Based on information provided by the project applicant” (Appendix A, pp. 161, 207, 248, 289).
Furthermore, regarding the proposed generators, the AQ & GHG Assessment states:
16 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 12.
17 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 17.
18 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 2, 9
10
The proposed project would include the installation of two diesel-fueled emergency
generators. The specific emergency generators to be installed have not yet been identified.
However, based on information provided for representative equipment, it is assumed that each
generator would be approximately 800 kW (1,050 horsepower)” (p. 13).
However, these changes remain unsupported, as the IS/MND and associated documents fail to justify or
provide a source for the proposed generators' exact emission factors. This is incorrect, as according to
the CalEEMod User’s Guide:
CalEEMod was also designed to allow the user to change the defaults to reflect site- or project-
specific information, when available, provided that the information is supported by substantial
evidence as required by CEQA”.19
Here, until the IS/MND provides substantial evidence to support the revised emission factors, we cannot
verify the changes.
These unsubstantiated reductions present an issue, as CalEEMod uses the emergency generator
emission factors to calculate the Project’s stationary-source emissions.20 By including unsubstantiated
reductions to the default stationary generator emission factors, the model may underestimate the
Project’s stationary-source operational emissions and should not be relied upon to determine Project
significance.
Underestimated Weekday, Saturday, and Sunday Operational Vehicle Trip Rates
According to the Focused Multimodal Transportation Analysis (“TA”), provided as Attachment 8 to
IS/MND, the proposed Project is expected to generate approximately 1,876 daily operational vehicle
trips (see excerpt below) (p. 3, Table 2):
19 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 12.
20 “Appendix A - Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA),
May 2021, available at: https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 53.
11
As such, the Project’s model should have included trip rates that reflect the estimated number of
average daily vehicle trips. However, review of the CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the “SLO
French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion” model includes only approximately 962 weekday, 693 Saturday, and
608 Sunday vehicle trips (see excerpt below) (Appendix A, pp. 197, 242, 283, 324).
As you can see in the excerpt above, the weekday, Saturday, and Sunday trips are each underestimated
by approximately 914 trips,21 1,183 trips,22 and 1,268 trips,23 respectively. As such, the trip rates
inputted into the model are underestimated and inconsistent with the information provided by the TA.
These inconsistencies present an issue, as CalEEMod uses the operational vehicle trip rates to calculate
the emissions associated with the operational on-road vehicles.24 Thus, by including underestimated
weekday, Saturday, and Sunday operational vehicle trips, the model underestimates the Project’s
mobile-source operational emissions and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance.
21 Calculated: 1,876 proposed vehicle trips – 962 modeled vehicle trips = 914 vehicle trips underestimated.
22 Calculated: 1,876 proposed vehicle trips – 693 modeled vehicle trips = 1,183 vehicle trips underestimated.
23 Calculated: 1,876 proposed vehicle trips – 607 modeled vehicle trips = 1,268 vehicle trips underestimated.
24 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide, p. 36.
12
Updated Analysis Indicates a Potentially Significant Air Quality Impact
In an effort to more accurately estimate Project’s construction-related and operational emissions, we
prepared an updated CalEEMod model, using the Project-specific information provided by the IS/MND.
In our updated model, we included the proposed lab land use and the correct parking structure square
footage; omitted the unsubstantiated changes to the individual construction phase lengths, CH4, CO2,
and N2O intensity factors, and stationary generator emissions factors; and corrected the operational
daily vehicle trip rates.
Our updated analysis estimates that the Project’s combined construction-related ROG and NOX
emissions exceed the applicable SLOAPCD threshold of 137 pounds per day (“lbs/day”) (see table
below).25
SWAPE Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
Model
Construction
ROG + NOX
lbs/day)
IS/MND 59.3
SWAPE 142.1
Increase 140%
SLOAPCD Threshold 137
Exceeds? Yes
As you can see in the excerpt above, the Project’s combined construction-related ROG and NOX
emissions, as estimated by SWAPE, increase by approximately 140% and exceed the applicable SLOAPCD
significance threshold. Thus, our model demonstrates that the Project would result in a potentially
significant air quality impact that was not previously identified or addressed in the IS/MND. As a result,
an EIR should be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate the potential air quality impacts that the
Project may have on the surrounding environment. Diesel Particulate Matter Health Risk Emissions Inadequately Evaluated
The IS/MND estimates that the maximum cancer risk posed to nearby, existing residential sensitive
receptors as a result of the proposed emergency generators would be 58.2 in one million, which would
exceed the SLOAPCD significance threshold of 10 in one million (p. 39). However, the IS/MND states:
It is important to note, however, that the proposed emergency generators would be subject to
SLOAPCD permitting requirements for stationary emission sources. The SLOAPCD requires
implementation of best available control technology for sources of TACs, sufficient to reduce
operational emissions to below applicable thresholds. An authority to construction or a permit
to operate would not be issued by the SLOAPCD unless emissions were reduced below
25 “CEQA Air Quality Handbook.” SLOCAPCD, April 2012, available at: https://www.slocleanair.org/rules-
regulations/land-use-ceqa.php, p. 2-2.
13
applicable thresholds. Therefore, through required compliance with existing regulatory
requirements, this impact would be less than significant” (p. 39).
As demonstrated above, the IS/MND addresses the toxic air contaminant (“TAC”) emissions associated
with the proposed emergency generators and concludes a less-than-significant health risk impact.
However, IS/MND fails to conduct a construction or mobile-source operational health risk analysis
HRA”) or discuss the TAC emissions associated with Project construction and operation whatsoever. As
such, the IS/MND’s evaluation of the Project’s potential health risk impacts, as well as the subsequent
less-than-significant impact conclusion, is incorrect for three reasons.
First, by failing to prepare a quantified construction and operational HRA, the Project is inconsistent with
CEQA’s requirement to correlate the increase in emissions that the Project would generate to the
adverse impacts on human health caused by those emissions.26 This is incorrect, as construction of the
proposed Project will produce emissions of DPM through the exhaust stacks of construction equipment
over a total potential construction duration of 24 months (p. 8). Furthermore, the Focused Multimodal
Transportation Analysis (“TA”), provided as Attachment 8 to IS/MND, indicates that the proposed land
uses are expected to generate approximately 1,876 average daily vehicle trips, which will generate
additional exhaust emissions and continue to expose nearby sensitive receptors to DPM emissions (p. 3,
Table 2). However, the IS/MND fails to evaluate the potential Project-generated TACs or indicate the
concentrations at which such pollutants would trigger adverse health effects. Thus, without making a
reasonable effort to connect the Project’s construction-related and operational TAC emissions to the
potential health risks posed to nearby receptors, the IS/MND is inconsistent with CEQA’s requirement to
correlate the increase in emissions generated by the Project with the potential adverse impacts on
human health.
Second, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”), the organization responsible
for providing guidance on conducting HRAs in California, released its most recent Risk Assessment
Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments in February 2015.27 This
guidance document describes the types of projects that warrant the preparation of an HRA. The OEHHA
document recommends that all short-term projects lasting at least two months be evaluated for cancer
risks to nearby sensitive receptors. As the Project’s construction duration vastly exceeds the 2-month
requirement set forth by OEHHA, it is clear that the Project meets the threshold warranting a quantified
HRA under OEHHA guidance. Furthermore, the OEHHA document recommends that exposure from
projects lasting more than 6 months be evaluated for the duration of the project and recommends that
an exposure duration of 30 years be used to estimate individual cancer risk for the maximally exposed
individual resident (“MEIR”). Even though we were not provided with the expected lifetime of the
Project, we can reasonably assume that the Project will operate for at least 30 years, if not more.
Therefore, we recommend that health risk impacts from Project operation also be evaluated, as a 30-
year exposure duration vastly exceeds the 6-month requirement set forth by OEHHA. These
26 “Sierra Club v. County of Fresno.” Supreme Court of California, December 2018, available at:
https://ceqaportal.org/decisions/1907/Sierra%20Club%20v.%20County%20of%20Fresno.pdf.
27 “Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February
2015, available at: http://oehha.ca.gov/air/hot_spots/hotspots2015.html
14
recommendations reflect the most recent state health risk policies, and as such, we recommend that an
analysis of health risk impacts posed to nearby sensitive receptors from Project-generated DPM
emissions be included in an EIR for the Project.
Third, by claiming a less than significant impact without conducting a quantified construction or
operational HRA for nearby, existing sensitive receptors, the IS/MND fails to compare the Project’s
combined excess cancer risk to the applicable SLOAPCD numeric threshold of 10 in one million.28 Thus,
pursuant to CEQA and SLOAPCD guidance, an analysis of the health risk posed to nearby, existing
receptors from Project construction and operation should have been conducted. Screening-Level Analysis Indicates a Potentially Significant Health Risk Impact
In order to conduct our screening-level risk analysis we relied upon AERSCREEN, which is a screening
level air quality dispersion model.29 The model replaced SCREEN3, and AERSCREEN is included in the
OEHHA 30 and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Associated (“CAPCOA”)31 guidance as the
appropriate air dispersion model for Level 2 health risk screening analyses (“HRSAs”). A Level 2 HRSA
utilizes a limited amount of site-specific information to generate maximum reasonable downwind
concentrations of air contaminants to which nearby sensitive receptors may be exposed. If an
unacceptable air quality hazard is determined to be possible using AERSCREEN, a more refined modeling
approach is required prior to approval of the Project.
In order to estimate the health risk impacts posed to residential sensitive receptors as a result of the
Project’s construction-related and operational TAC emissions, we prepared a preliminary HRA using the
annual PM10 exhaust estimates from the CalEEMod output files included in the IS/MND. Consistent with
recommendations set forth by OEHHA, we assumed residential exposure begins during the third
trimester stage of life. The IS/MND’s CalEEMod model indicates that construction activities will generate
approximately 369 pounds of DPM over the 731-day construction period.32 The AERSCREEN model relies
on a continuous average emission rate to simulate maximum downward concentrations from point,
area, and volume emission sources. To account for the variability in equipment usage and truck trips
over Project construction, we calculated an average DPM emission rate by the following equation:
368.9 731 453.6 124
1 3,600 Using this equation, we estimated a construction emission rate
of 0.00265 grams per second (“g/s”). Subtracting the 731-day construction period from the
total residential duration of 30 years, we assumed 28 “CEQA Air Quality Handbook.” SLOCAPCD, April
2012, available at: https://www.slocleanair.org/rules-
regulations/land-use-ceqa.php, p. 3-7. 29 U.S. EPA (April 2011)
AERSCREEN Released as the EPA Recommended Screening Model, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/
scram/guidance/clarification/20110411_AERSCREEN_Release_Memo.pdf 30 “Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual
for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: http://oehha.
ca.gov/air/hot_spots/2015/2015GuidanceManual.pdf 31 CAPCOA (July 2009) Health Risk Assessments for Proposed
Land Use Projects, http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/
CAPCOA_HRA_LU_Guidelines_8-6-
15
that after Project construction, the sensitive receptor would be exposed to the Project’s operational
DPM for an additional 28 years, approximately.33 The IS/MND’s operational CalEEMod emissions
indicate that operational activities will generate approximately 116 pounds of DPM per year throughout
operation. Applying the same equation used to estimate the construction DPM rate, we estimated the
following emission rate for Project operation:
115.6 365 453.6 1 24
1 3,600 Using this equation, we estimated an operational
emission rate of 0.00166 g/s. Construction and operational activity was simulated as
an 18-acre rectangular area source in AERSCREEN with approximate dimensions of 382- by 191-meters.
A release height of three meters was selected to represent the height of exhaust stacks on
operational equipment and other heavy-duty vehicles, and an initial vertical dimension of one and a
half meters was used to simulate instantaneous plume dispersion upon release. An urban meteorological setting
was selected with model-default inputs for wind speed and direction distribution. The population of San
Luis Obispo
was obtained from U.S. 2020 Census data.34 The AERSCREEN model
generates maximum reasonable estimates of single-hour DPM concentrations from the Project site. EPA
guidance suggests that in screening procedures, the annualized average concentration of an air pollutant be estimated
by multiplying the single-hour concentration by 10%.35 The IS/MND indicates that the nearest
sensitive receptors are residences 135 feet, or approximately 41 meters, from the Project site (p. 75).
However, review of the AERSCREEN output files demonstrates that the maximally exposed individual
resident (“MEIR”) is located approximately 200 meters from the Project site. Thus, the single-
hour concentration estimated by AERSCREEN for Project construction is approximately 1.715 µg/m3 DPM
at approximately 200 meters downwind. Multiplying this single-hour concentration by 10%, we get an annualized
average concentration of 0.1715 µg/m3 for Project construction at the MEIR. For
Project operation, the single-hour concentration estimated by AERSCREEN is 1.077 µg/m3 DPM at
approximately 200 meters downwind. Multiplying this single-hour concentration by 10%, we get an annualized average concentration of 0.
1077 µg/m3 for Project operation at the MEIR. We calculated the excess cancer risk
to the MEIR using applicable HRA methodologies prescribed by OEHHA. Consistent with the 731-day
construction schedule included in the Project’s CalEEMod output files, the annualized average concentration
for Project construction was used for the entire third trimester of pregnancy (0.25 years) and the first 1.75 years
infantile stage of life (0 – 2 years); and the annualized averaged concentration for operation was
used for the remainder of the 30-year exposure period, which makes up the remaining 0.25 years of the
infantile stage of life, the entire
the child stage 33 See Attachment B for calculations. 34 “San
Luis Obispo.” United States Census Bureau,
2020, available at: https://datacommons.org/place/geoId/0668154. 35 “Screening Procedures for Estimating the Air
Quality Impact of Stationary Sources Revised.” EPA, 1992, available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/EPA-
454R-92-019_OCR.pdf; see also “Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation
of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.
16
of life (2 – 16 years), and the entire adult stage of life (16 – 30 years).
Consistent with OEHHA guidance and recommended by SLOAPCD guidance, we used Age Sensitivity
Factors (“ASF”) to account for the heightened susceptibility of young children to the carcinogenic
toxicity of air pollution.36 According to this guidance, the quantified cancer risk should be multiplied by a
factor of 10 during the third trimester of pregnancy and during the first two years of life (infant) as well
as multiplied by a factor of 3 during the child stage of life (2 – 16 years). We also included the quantified
cancer risk without adjusting for the heightened susceptibility of young children to the carcinogenic
toxicity of air pollution in accordance with older OEHHA guidance from 2003. This guidance utilizes a less
health protective scenario than what is currently recommended by SLOAPCD, the air quality district with
jurisdiction over the City, and several other air districts in the state. Furthermore, in accordance with
guidance set forth by OEHHA, we used the 95th percentile breathing rates for infants.37 Finally, according
to OEHHA guidance, we used a Fraction of Time At Home (“FAH”) Value of 0.85 for the 3rd trimester and
infant receptors, 0.72 for the child receptors, and 0.73 for the adult receptors.38 We used a cancer
potency factor of 1.1 (mg/kg-day)-1 and an averaging time of 25,550 days. The results of our calculations
are shown below.
36 “Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February
2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf, p. 8-5, Table 8.3.
37 “Supplemental Guidelines for Preparing Risk Assessments for the Air Toxics ‘Hot Spots’ Information and
Assessment Act,” June 5, 2015, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/planning/risk-
assessment/ab2588-risk-assessment-guidelines.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 19.
Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February
2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf
38 “Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.” OEHHA, February
2015, available at: https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf, p. 8-5.
17
The Maximally Exposed Individual at an Existing Residential Receptor
Age Group Emissions
Source
Duration
years)
Concentration
ug/m3)
Breathing
Rate (L/kg-day)
Cancer Risk
without ASFs*) ASF Cancer Risk
with ASFs*)
3rd
Trimester Construction 0.25 0.1715 361 1.98E-07 10 1.98E-06
Construction 1.75 0.1715 1090 4.20E-06
Operation 0.25 0.1077 1090 3.72E-07
Infant
Age 0 – 2) Total 2 4.57E-06 10 4.57E-05
Child
Age 2 – 16) Operation 14 0.1077 572 9.36E-06 3 2.81E-05
Adult
Age 16 – 30) Operation 14 0.1077 261 4.33E-06 1 4.33E-06
Lifetime 30 1.85E-05 8.01E-05
We, along with CARB and SCAQMD, recommend using the more updated and health protective 2015 OEHHA guidance, which includes ASFs.
As demonstrated in the table above, the excess cancer risks for the 3rd trimester of pregnancy, infants,
children, and adults at the MEIR located approximately 200 meters away, over the course of Project
construction and operation, utilizing ASFs, is approximately 1.98, 45.7, 28.1, and 4.33 in one million,
respectively. The excess cancer risk over the course of a residential lifetime (30 years), utilizing ASFs, is
approximately 80.1 in one million. The infant, child, and lifetime cancer risks exceed the SLOAPCD
threshold of 10 in one million, thus resulting in a potentially significant impact not previously addressed
or identified by the IS/MND.
Utilizing ASFs is the most conservative, health-protective analysis according to the most recent guidance
by OEHHA and reflects recommendations from the air district. Results without ASFs are presented in the
table above, although we do not recommend utilizing these values for health risk analysis. Regardless,
excess cancer risks for the 3rd trimester of pregnancy, infants, children, and adults at the MEIR located
approximately 200 meters away, over the course of Project construction and operation, without ASFs,
are approximately 0.198, 4.57, 9.36, and 4.33 in one million, respectively. The excess cancer risk over
the course of a residential lifetime (30 years), without ASFs, is approximately 18.5 in one million. While
we recommend the use of ASFs, the Project’s lifetime cancer risk without ASFs, as estimated by SWAPE,
exceeds the SLOAPCD threshold of 10 in one million regardless, thus resulting in a potentially significant
impact not previously addressed or identified by the IS/MND.
An agency must include an analysis of health risks that connects the Project’s air emissions with the
health risk posed by those emissions. Our analysis represents a screening-level HRA, which is known to
be conservative and tends to err on the side of health protection. The purpose of the screening-level
construction and operational HRA shown above is to demonstrate the link between the proposed
Project’s emissions and the potential health risk. Our screening-level HRA demonstrates that
18
construction and operation of the Project could result in a potentially significant health risk impact,
when correct exposure assumptions and up-to-date, applicable guidance are used. Thus, an EIR should
be prepared, including a quantified air pollution model as well as an updated, quantified refined health
risk assessment which adequately and accurately evaluates health risk impacts associated with both
Project construction and operation.
Greenhouse GasFailuretoAdequately Evaluate Greenhouse Gas Impacts
The IS/MND relies upon Project consistency with the City’s Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery
CAP”) in order to conclude less-than-significant greenhouse gas (“GHG”) impact (p. 62-64, Table 9).
Specifically, the IS/MND concludes:
The project would not result in potentially significant impacts associated with greenhouse gas
emissions. The project may result in a conflict with applicable greenhouse gas emissions
reduction plans and policies. Mitigation Measures ENG-1 and ENG-2 would reduce potential
impacts associated with conflicts with GHG reduction plans and policies to less than significant.
Therefore, potential impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions would be less than
significant with mitigation” (p. 65).
As demonstrated above, the IS/MND incorporates Mitigation Measure (“MM”) ENG-1 and ENG-2 to
reduce emissions to less-than-significant levels. However, this analysis is inconsistent with the GHG
analysis included in the AQ & GHG Assessment, provided as Attachment 3 to the IS/MND.
The AQ & GHG Assessment estimates that the Project would generate 1,685.9- and 1,551.8-metric tons
of carbon dioxide equivalents per year (“MT CO2e/year”) in the year 2025 and 2030, respectively.
Furthermore, based on a service population of 127 people, the AQ & GHG Assessment estimates the
Project would result in service population efficiency values of 13.3- and 12.7-metric tons of carbon
dioxide equivalents per service population per year (“MT CO2e/SP/year”) in the year 2025 and 2030,
respectively, both of which exceed the City’s GHG efficiency threshold of 0.7 MT CO2e/SP/year (see
excerpt below) (p. 35, Table 16).
19
As such, the AQ & GHG Assessment incorporates MM GHG-3, which states:
GHG-3: A GHG-Reduction Plan shall be prepared for the proposed project. The GHG-Reduction
Plan shall include all possible on-site GHG reduction measures sufficient to reduce operational
emissions to below the City’s threshold of significance of 0.7 MTCO2e/SP/yr. The GHG-reduction
plan shall be approved by the City prior to issuance of building construction permits. GHG-
reduction measures shall include, but are not limited to, those identified in Mitigation Measure
GHG-1 and GHG-2, as well as the following:
a. To the extent possible, install electrically-powered appliances and building mechanical
equipment in place of natural-gas fueled equipment.
b. The project shall participate in Central Coast Community Energy.
c. The Project shall provide organic waste pick up and shall provide the appropriate on-site
enclosures consistent with the provisions of the City of San Luis Obispo Development
Standards for Solid Waste Services.
d. The on-site installation of trees shall be consistent with the City’s municipal code
requirements
Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4, subdivisions (c)(3) and (c)(4), respectively, a project’s
GHG emissions can be reduced by off-site measures, including offsets that are not otherwise
required and measures that sequester GHGs. In the event that feasible on-site GHG-reduction
measures are insufficient to reduce operational GHG emissions to below the City’s threshold of
significance, offsite mitigation measures may be included. Off-site mitigation measures may
20
include “Direct Reduction Activities” or the purchase of “Carbon Offset Credits” and discussed
further, as follows[...]” (p. 36).
However, the IS/MND is inconsistent with the AQ & GHG Assessment and fails to mention MM GHG-3 or
incorporate it in the Project’s Required Mitigation and Monitoring Program whatsoever (p. 93 – 100).
This is incorrect for two reasons.
First, by failing to mention the Project’s potentially significant GHG impacts, the IS/MND is inconsistent
with CEQA. According to CEQA Guidelines § 15074(d):
When adopting a mitigated negative declaration, the lead agency shall also adopt a program
for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a
condition of approval to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects.”39
As demonstrated above, a Lead Agency must mitigate a project’s significant environmental effects if
adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”). Thus, by excluding MM GHG-3, the IS/MND’s GHG
analysis fails to adequately as mitigate and avoid the Project’s significant environmental effects as
required by CEQA Guidelines § 15074(d).
Second, according to the Association of Environmental Professionals’ (“AEP”) CEQA Portal Topic Paper
on Mitigation Measures:
While not ‘mitigation’, a good practice is to include those project design feature(s) that address
environmental impacts in the mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP). Often the
MMRP is all that accompanies building and construction plans through the permit process. If the
design features are not listed as important to addressing an environmental impact, it is easy for
someone not involved in the original environmental process to approve a change to the project
that could eliminate one or more of the design features without understanding the resulting
environmental impact.”40
As demonstrated above, design features that are not formally included as mitigation measures may be
eliminated from the Project’s design altogether. While MM GHG-3 is not a design feature, rather an
intended mitigation measure, the above-mentioned guidance demonstrates the importance of formally
incorporating mitigation. As MM GHG-3 is not included in the IS/MND’s Required Mitigation and
Monitoring Program, we cannot guarantee that it would be implemented, monitored, and enforced on
the Project site. As a result, there is a large gap in the IS/MND’s GHG analysis and the IS/MND should not
be relied upon to determine Project significance until MM GHG-3 is formally implemented as a
39 “Section 15074 - Consideration and Adoption of a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration.” Cal.
Code Regs. Tit. 14 § 15074, March 2022, available at: https://casetext.com/regulation/california-code-of-
regulations/title-14-natural-resources/division-6-resources-agency/chapter-3-guidelines-for-implementation-of-
the-california-environmental-quality-act/article-6-negative-declaration-process/section-15074-consideration-and-
adoption-of-a-negative-declaration-or-mitigated-negative-declaration.
40 “CEQA Portal Topic Paper Mitigation Measures.” AEP, February 2020, available at:
https://ceqaportal.org/tp/CEQA%20Mitigation%202020.pdf, p. 6.
21
mitigation measure. Furthermore, we recommend additional feasible mitigation in the following section
of this letter that could help reduce GHG emissions to less-than-significant levels. Feasible Mitigation Measures Available to Reduce Emissions
Our analysis demonstrates that the Project would result in potentially significant air quality, health risk,
and GHG impacts that should be mitigated further. As such, in an effort to reduce the Project’s
emissions, we identified several mitigation measures that are applicable to the proposed Project.
Therefore, to reduce the Project’s emissions, we recommend consideration of SCAG’s 2020 RTP/SCS
PEIR’s Air Quality Project Level Mitigation Measures (“PMM-AQ-1”): 41
SCAG RTP/SCS 2020-2045
Air Quality Project Level Mitigation Measures – PMM-AQ-1:
In accordance with provisions of sections 15091(a)(2) and 15126.4(a)(1)(B) of the State CEQA
Guidelines, a Lead Agency for a project can and should consider mitigation measures to reduce
substantial adverse effects related to violating air quality standards. Such measures may include the
following or other comparable measures identified by the Lead Agency:
j) Require contractors to assemble a comprehensive inventory list (i.e., make, model, engine year, horsepower,
emission rates) of all heavy-duty off-road (portable and mobile) equipment (50 horsepower and greater) that
could be used an aggregate of 40 or more hours for the construction project. Prepare a plan for approval by the
applicable air district demonstrating achievement of the applicable percent reduction for a CARB-approved
fleet.
q) Require projects within 500 feet of residences, hospitals, or schools to use Tier 4 equipment for all engines
above 50 horsepower (hp) unless the individual project can demonstrate that Tier 4 engines would not be
required to mitigate emissions below significance thresholds.
bb) The following criteria related to diesel emissions shall be implemented on by individual project sponsors as
appropriate and feasible:
Diesel nonroad vehicles on site for more than 10 total days shall have either (1) engines that meet EPA
on road emissions standards or (2) emission control technology verified by EPA or CARB to reduce PM
emissions by a minimum of 85%
Diesel generators on site for more than 10 total days shall be equipped with emission control
technology verified by EPA or CARB to reduce PM emissions by a minimum of 85%.
Nonroad diesel engines on site shall be Tier 2 or higher.
Diesel nonroad construction equipment on site for more than 10 total days shall have either (1) engines
meeting EPA Tier 4 nonroad emissions standards or (2) emission control technology verified by EPA or
CARB for use with nonroad engines to reduce PM emissions by a minimum of 85% for engines for 50 hp
and greater and by a minimum of 20% for engines less than 50 hp.
Emission control technology shall be operated, maintained, and serviced as recommended by the
emission control technology manufacturer.
41 “4.0 Mitigation Measures.” Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report Addendum #1, September
2020, available at: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/fpeir_connectsocal_addendum_4_mitigationmeasures.pdf?1606004420, p. 4.0-2 – 4.0-10; 4.0-19 –
4.0-23; See also: “Certified Final Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report.” Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG), May 2020, available at: https://scag.ca.gov/peir.
22
Diesel vehicles, construction equipment, and generators on site shall be fueled with ultra-low sulfur
diesel fuel (ULSD) or a biodiesel blend approved by the original engine manufacturer with sulfur
content of 15 ppm or less.
The construction contractor shall maintain a list of all diesel vehicles, construction equipment, and
generators to be used on site. The list shall include the following:
i. Contractor and subcontractor name and address, plus contact person responsible for the
vehicles or equipment.
ii. Equipment type, equipment manufacturer, equipment serial number, engine manufacturer,
engine model year, engine certification (Tier rating), horsepower, engine serial number, and
expected fuel usage and hours of operation.
iii. For the emission control technology installed: technology type, serial number, make, model,
manufacturer, EPA/CARB verification number/level, and installation date and hour-meter
reading on installation date.
The contractor shall establish generator sites and truck-staging zones for vehicles waiting to load or
unload material on site. Such zones shall be located where diesel emissions have the least impact on
abutters, the general public, and especially sensitive receptors such as hospitals, schools, daycare
facilities, elderly housing, and convalescent facilities.
The contractor shall maintain a monthly report that, for each on road diesel vehicle, nonroad
construction equipment, or generator onsite, includes:
i. Hour-meter readings on arrival on-site, the first and last day of every month, and on off-site
date.
ii. Any problems with the equipment or emission controls.
iii. Certified copies of fuel deliveries for the time period that identify:
1. Source of supply
2. Quantity of fuel
3. Quantity of fuel, including sulfur content (percent by weight)
These measures offer a cost-effective, feasible way to incorporate lower-emitting design features into
the proposed Project, which subsequently, reduce emissions released during Project construction.
Furthermore, as it is policy of the State that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon
resources supply 100% of retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers by December 31,
2045, we emphasize the applicability of incorporating solar power system into the Project design. Until
the feasibility of incorporating on-site renewable energy production is considered to reduce the
Project’s GHG emissions, the IS/MND should not be approved.
An EIR should be prepared to include all feasible mitigation measures, as well as include updated air
quality, health risk, and GHG analyses to ensure that the necessary mitigation measures are
implemented to reduce emissions to below thresholds. The EIR should also demonstrate a commitment
to the implementation of these measures prior to Project approval, to ensure that the Project’s
significant emissions are reduced to the maximum extent possible. Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery regarding this project. Additional information may become
available in the future; thus, we retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional
information becomes available. Our professional services have been performed using that degree of
care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants
practicing in this or similar localities at the time of service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is
23
made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and protocols, site conditions, analytical testing
results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which were limited to information that was
reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain informational gaps, inconsistencies, or
otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of information obtained or provided by
third parties.
Sincerely,
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
Attachment A: CalEEMod Output Files
Attachment B: Health Risk Calculations
Attachment C: AERSCREEN Output Files
Attachment D: Matt Hagemann CV
Attachment E: Paul E. Rosenfeld CV
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion
San Luis Obispo County, Annual
Project Characteristics - See SWAPE comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to the Default CH4, CO2, and N2O Intensity Factors"
Land Use - See SWAPE comment on "Failure to Model All Proposed Land Uses" and "Underestimated Parking Land Use Size"
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to Individual Construction Phase Lengths"
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Hospital 89.78 1000sqft 2.60 89,775.00 0
Research & Development 5.80 1000sqft 0.13 5,800.00 0
Unenclosed Parking Structure 59.00 1000sqft 1.35 59,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
4
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2030OperationalYear
CO2 Intensity
lb/MWhr)
203.98 0.033CH4Intensity
lb/MWhr)
0.004N2OIntensity
lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage1of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Attachment A
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Trips and VMT - Consistent with the IS/MND's model.
Demolition - See SWAPE comment on "Failure to Substantiate Demolition and Reduction to Number of Demolition Hauling Trips"
Grading - Consistent with IS/MND's model.
Vehicle Trips - See SWAPE comment on "Underestimated Weekday, Saturday, and Sunday Operational Vehicle Trip Rates'
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.
Operational Off-Road Equipment -
Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps - Consistent with IS/MND's model.
Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps EF - See SWAPE comment on "Unsubstantiated Reductions to Stationary Generator Emission
Factors"
Energy Mitigation -
Water Mitigation -
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 8.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 6.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 12.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage2of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 21.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 8.00 14.00
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 8.00 65.00
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 7.50 8.00
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 7.50 12.00
tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 3,260.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 2,370.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 89,780.00 89,775.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 2.06 2.60
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HorsePowerValue 0.00 1,050.00
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HoursPerDay 0.00 8.00
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HoursPerYear 0.00 100.00
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse NumberOfEquipment 0.00 2.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 100.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage3of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.72 20.38
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.90 7.93
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.77 20.38
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.11 7.93
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 10.72 20.38
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.26 7.93
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage4of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2022 0.1227 1.1244 1.0750 2.0800e-
003
0.1101 0.0540 0.1641 0.0472 0.0506 0.0977 0.0000 183.4876 183.4876 0.0394 3.0100e-
003
185.3691
2023 0.2461 2.2487 2.4555 5.0000e-
003
0.2035 0.1001 0.3036 0.0665 0.0939 0.1604 0.0000 443.0558 443.0558 0.0852 0.0115 448.6071
2024 1.2499 1.1331 1.3930 2.7200e-
003
0.0505 0.0484 0.0989 0.0136 0.0456 0.0592 0.0000 239.8202 239.8202 0.0438 4.8700e-
003
242.3661
Maximum 1.2499 2.2487 2.4555 5.0000e-
003
0.2035 0.1001 0.3036 0.0665 0.0939 0.1604 0.0000 443.0558 443.0558 0.0852 0.0115 448.6071
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2022 0.0527 0.9343 1.2008 2.0800e-
003
0.1101 0.0517 0.1618 0.0472 0.0517 0.0989 0.0000 183.4874 183.4874 0.0394 3.0100e-
003
185.3690
2023 0.1194 2.1683 2.7292 5.0000e-
003
0.2035 0.1215 0.3250 0.0665 0.1214 0.1879 0.0000 443.0554 443.0554 0.0852 0.0115 448.6067
2024 1.1874 1.1946 1.5246 2.7200e-
003
0.0505 0.0711 0.1215 0.0136 0.0710 0.0847 0.0000 239.8200 239.8200 0.0438 4.8700e-
003
242.3659
Maximum 1.1874 2.1683 2.7292 5.0000e-
003
0.2035 0.1215 0.3250 0.0665 0.1214 0.1879 0.0000 443.0554 443.0554 0.0852 0.0115 448.6067
Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage5of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
16.01 4.64 -10.79 0.00 0.00 -20.61 -7.36 0.00 -28.49 -17.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
1 8-1-2022 10-31-2022 0.8117 0.6112
2 11-1-2022 1-31-2023 0.6078 0.5433
3 2-1-2023 4-30-2023 0.5529 0.5193
4 5-1-2023 7-31-2023 0.5566 0.5234
5 8-1-2023 10-31-2023 0.8081 0.7038
6 11-1-2023 1-31-2024 1.3221 1.2990
7 2-1-2024 4-30-2024 0.8365 0.8361
8 5-1-2024 7-31-2024 0.5320 0.5315
9 8-1-2024 9-30-2024 0.0058 0.0058
Highest 1.3221 1.2990
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage6of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.4893 2.0000e-
005
2.5900e-
003
0.0000 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0600e-
003
5.0600e-
003
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.3900e-
003
Energy 0.0536 0.4871 0.4092 2.9200e-
003
0.0370 0.0370 0.0370 0.0370 0.0000 705.0386 705.0386 0.0384 0.0132 709.9180
Mobile 0.8533 1.0671 7.9582 0.0165 2.0495 0.0134 2.0629 0.5472 0.0126 0.5598 0.0000 1,605.820
9
1,605.820
9
0.0938 0.0741 1,630.234
5
Stationary 0.1723 0.7706 0.4394 8.3000e-
004
0.0254 0.0254 0.0254 0.0254 0.0000 79.9674 79.9674 0.0112 0.0000 80.2477
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 196.9134 0.0000 196.9134 11.6373 0.0000 487.8447
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.4788 7.7628 12.2416 0.4613 0.0110 27.0557
Total 1.5685 2.3248 8.8093 0.0203 2.0495 0.0758 2.1253 0.5472 0.0749 0.6222 201.3922 2,398.594
7
2,599.986
9
12.2420 0.0982 2,935.305
8
Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage7of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.4893 2.0000e-
005
2.5900e-
003
0.0000 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0600e-
003
5.0600e-
003
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.3900e-
003
Energy 0.0536 0.4871 0.4092 2.9200e-
003
0.0370 0.0370 0.0370 0.0370 0.0000 704.2786 704.2786 0.0383 0.0131 709.1504
Mobile 0.8533 1.0671 7.9582 0.0165 2.0495 0.0134 2.0629 0.5472 0.0126 0.5598 0.0000 1,605.820
9
1,605.820
9
0.0938 0.0741 1,630.234
5
Stationary 0.1723 0.7706 0.4394 8.3000e-
004
0.0254 0.0254 0.0254 0.0254 0.0000 79.9674 79.9674 0.0112 0.0000 80.2477
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 196.9134 0.0000 196.9134 11.6373 0.0000 487.8447
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.5831 6.3492 9.9322 0.3690 8.8100e-
003
21.7849
Total 1.5685 2.3248 8.8093 0.0203 2.0495 0.0758 2.1253 0.5472 0.0749 0.6222 200.4965 2,396.421
1
2,596.917
6
12.1496 0.0960 2,929.267
5
Mitigated Operational
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Parking Deck Demolition 8/1/2022 8/26/2022 5 20 Demo Parking Deck
2 Site Prep Parking Deck Site Preparation 8/27/2022 9/2/2022 5 5 Site Prep Patient Tower
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.09 0.12 0.75 2.26 0.21
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage8of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3 Grading Parking Deck Grading 8/28/2022 9/7/2022 5 8 Grading Patient Tower
4 Const Parking Deck Building Construction 9/8/2022 7/26/2023 5 230 Const Parking Deck
5 Paving Parking Deck Paving 7/27/2023 8/21/2023 5 18 Paving Patient Tower
6 Demolition Tower Demolition 8/1/2023 8/28/2023 5 20 Demo Tower
7 Site Prep Tower Site Preparation 8/29/2023 9/4/2023 5 5 Site Prep Tower
8 Grading Tower Grading 9/5/2023 9/14/2023 5 8 Grading Tower
9 Const Tower Building Construction 9/15/2023 8/1/2024 5 230 Const Tower
10 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/15/2024 2/7/2024 5 18 Arch Coating
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Parking Deck Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Parking Deck Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Parking Deck Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Prep Parking Deck Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Prep Parking Deck Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Parking Deck Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Parking Deck Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Parking Deck Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Parking Deck Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Const Parking Deck Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Const Parking Deck Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Const Parking Deck Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 143,363; Non-Residential Outdoor: 47,788; Striped Parking Area: 3,540
Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 8
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 14
Acres of Paving: 1.35
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage9of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Const Parking Deck Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37
Const Parking Deck Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving Parking Deck Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Parking Deck Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Parking Deck Paving Equipment 2 6.00 132 0.36
Paving Parking Deck Rollers 2 6.00 80 0.38
Paving Parking Deck Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Demolition Tower Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Tower Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Tower Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Prep Tower Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Prep Tower Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Tower Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Tower Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Tower Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Tower Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Const Tower Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Const Tower Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Const Tower Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Const Tower Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37
Const Tower Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition Parking
Deck
6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Prep Parking
Deck
7 18.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage10of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.2 Demolition Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0264 0.2572 0.2059 3.9000e-
004
0.0124 0.0124 0.0116 0.0116 0.0000 33.9902 33.9902 9.5500e-
003
0.0000 34.2289
Total 0.0264 0.2572 0.2059 3.9000e-
004
0.0124 0.0124 0.0116 0.0116 0.0000 33.9902 33.9902 9.5500e-
003
0.0000 34.2289
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Use Cleaner Engines for Construction Equipment
Use Soil Stabilizer
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Grading Parking Deck 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Const Parking Deck 9 55.00 25.00 100.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving Parking Deck 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Demolition Tower 6 15.00 0.00 84.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Prep Tower 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading Tower 6 15.00 0.00 704.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Const Tower 9 55.00 25.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 11.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage11of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.2 Demolition Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 5.1000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
4.3000e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.4500e-
003
3.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.1502 1.1502 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
1.1613
Total 5.1000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
4.3000e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.4500e-
003
3.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.1502 1.1502 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
1.1613
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 9.2500e-
003
0.1831 0.2467 3.9000e-
004
8.6300e-
003
8.6300e-
003
8.6300e-
003
8.6300e-
003
0.0000 33.9902 33.9902 9.5500e-
003
0.0000 34.2289
Total 9.2500e-
003
0.1831 0.2467 3.9000e-
004
8.6300e-
003
8.6300e-
003
8.6300e-
003
8.6300e-
003
0.0000 33.9902 33.9902 9.5500e-
003
0.0000 34.2289
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage12of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.2 Demolition Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 5.1000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
4.3000e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.4500e-
003
3.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.1502 1.1502 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
1.1613
Total 5.1000e-
004
3.9000e-
004
4.3000e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.4500e-
003
3.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.1502 1.1502 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
1.1613
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Prep Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0494 0.0000 0.0494 0.0253 0.0000 0.0253 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 7.9300e-
003
0.0827 0.0492 1.0000e-
004
4.0300e-
003
4.0300e-
003
3.7100e-
003
3.7100e-
003
0.0000 8.3599 8.3599 2.7000e-
003
0.0000 8.4274
Total 7.9300e-
003
0.0827 0.0492 1.0000e-
004
0.0494 4.0300e-
003
0.0534 0.0253 3.7100e-
003
0.0290 0.0000 8.3599 8.3599 2.7000e-
003
0.0000 8.4274
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage13of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.3 Site Prep Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.5000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
1.2900e-
003
0.0000 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 4.4000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
0.0000 0.3451 0.3451 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.3484
Total 1.5000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
1.2900e-
003
0.0000 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 4.4000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
0.0000 0.3451 0.3451 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.3484
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0494 0.0000 0.0494 0.0253 0.0000 0.0253 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.3300e-
003
0.0477 0.0574 1.0000e-
004
2.3700e-
003
2.3700e-
003
2.3700e-
003
2.3700e-
003
0.0000 8.3598 8.3598 2.7000e-
003
0.0000 8.4274
Total 2.3300e-
003
0.0477 0.0574 1.0000e-
004
0.0494 2.3700e-
003
0.0518 0.0253 2.3700e-
003
0.0277 0.0000 8.3598 8.3598 2.7000e-
003
0.0000 8.4274
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage14of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.3 Site Prep Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.5000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
1.2900e-
003
0.0000 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 4.4000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
0.0000 0.3451 0.3451 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.3484
Total 1.5000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
1.2900e-
003
0.0000 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 4.4000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
0.0000 0.3451 0.3451 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.3484
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0315 0.0000 0.0315 0.0140 0.0000 0.0140 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 7.7900e-
003
0.0834 0.0611 1.2000e-
004
3.7600e-
003
3.7600e-
003
3.4600e-
003
3.4600e-
003
0.0000 10.4219 10.4219 3.3700e-
003
0.0000 10.5062
Total 7.7900e-
003
0.0834 0.0611 1.2000e-
004
0.0315 3.7600e-
003
0.0353 0.0140 3.4600e-
003
0.0175 0.0000 10.4219 10.4219 3.3700e-
003
0.0000 10.5062
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage15of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.4 Grading Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 2.0000e-
004
1.6000e-
004
1.7200e-
003
0.0000 5.8000e-
004
0.0000 5.8000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
0.0000 1.6000e-
004
0.0000 0.4601 0.4601 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.4645
Total 2.0000e-
004
1.6000e-
004
1.7200e-
003
0.0000 5.8000e-
004
0.0000 5.8000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
0.0000 1.6000e-
004
0.0000 0.4601 0.4601 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.4645
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0315 0.0000 0.0315 0.0140 0.0000 0.0140 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.9100e-
003
0.0594 0.0760 1.2000e-
004
3.0200e-
003
3.0200e-
003
3.0200e-
003
3.0200e-
003
0.0000 10.4219 10.4219 3.3700e-
003
0.0000 10.5062
Total 2.9100e-
003
0.0594 0.0760 1.2000e-
004
0.0315 3.0200e-
003
0.0345 0.0140 3.0200e-
003
0.0171 0.0000 10.4219 10.4219 3.3700e-
003
0.0000 10.5062
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage16of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.4 Grading Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 2.0000e-
004
1.6000e-
004
1.7200e-
003
0.0000 5.8000e-
004
0.0000 5.8000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
0.0000 1.6000e-
004
0.0000 0.4601 0.4601 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.4645
Total 2.0000e-
004
1.6000e-
004
1.7200e-
003
0.0000 5.8000e-
004
0.0000 5.8000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
0.0000 1.6000e-
004
0.0000 0.4601 0.4601 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.4645
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0700 0.6402 0.6709 1.1000e-
003
0.0332 0.0332 0.0312 0.0312 0.0000 95.0074 95.0074 0.0228 0.0000 95.5764
Total 0.0700 0.6402 0.6709 1.1000e-
003
0.0332 0.0332 0.0312 0.0312 0.0000 95.0074 95.0074 0.0228 0.0000 95.5764
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage17of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 9.0000e-
005
3.6200e-
003
6.4000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
004
3.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
1.1000e-
004
0.0000 1.1399 1.1399 4.0000e-
005
1.8000e-
004
1.1946
Vendor 1.9800e-
003
0.0507 0.0153 1.6000e-
004
4.6600e-
003
4.9000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
1.3500e-
003
4.7000e-
004
1.8200e-
003
0.0000 15.3217 15.3217 3.6000e-
004
2.2600e-
003
16.0031
Worker 7.6700e-
003
5.9100e-
003
0.0646 1.9000e-
004
0.0217 1.1000e-
004
0.0218 5.7700e-
003
1.0000e-
004
5.8700e-
003
0.0000 17.2913 17.2913 5.1000e-
004
5.2000e-
004
17.4583
Total 9.7400e-
003
0.0602 0.0805 3.6000e-
004
0.0267 6.3000e-
004
0.0273 7.2000e-
003
6.0000e-
004
7.8000e-
003
0.0000 33.7529 33.7529 9.1000e-
004
2.9600e-
003
34.6560
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0276 0.5833 0.7328 1.1000e-
003
0.0371 0.0371 0.0371 0.0371 0.0000 95.0072 95.0072 0.0228 0.0000 95.5763
Total 0.0276 0.5833 0.7328 1.1000e-
003
0.0371 0.0371 0.0371 0.0371 0.0000 95.0072 95.0072 0.0228 0.0000 95.5763
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage18of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 9.0000e-
005
3.6200e-
003
6.4000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
004
3.0000e-
005
3.4000e-
004
8.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
1.1000e-
004
0.0000 1.1399 1.1399 4.0000e-
005
1.8000e-
004
1.1946
Vendor 1.9800e-
003
0.0507 0.0153 1.6000e-
004
4.6600e-
003
4.9000e-
004
5.1500e-
003
1.3500e-
003
4.7000e-
004
1.8200e-
003
0.0000 15.3217 15.3217 3.6000e-
004
2.2600e-
003
16.0031
Worker 7.6700e-
003
5.9100e-
003
0.0646 1.9000e-
004
0.0217 1.1000e-
004
0.0218 5.7700e-
003
1.0000e-
004
5.8700e-
003
0.0000 17.2913 17.2913 5.1000e-
004
5.2000e-
004
17.4583
Total 9.7400e-
003
0.0602 0.0805 3.6000e-
004
0.0267 6.3000e-
004
0.0273 7.2000e-
003
6.0000e-
004
7.8000e-
003
0.0000 33.7529 33.7529 9.1000e-
004
2.9600e-
003
34.6560
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1164 1.0645 1.2021 1.9900e-
003
0.0518 0.0518 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 171.5355 171.5355 0.0408 0.0000 172.5557
Total 0.1164 1.0645 1.2021 1.9900e-
003
0.0518 0.0518 0.0487 0.0487 0.0000 171.5355 171.5355 0.0408 0.0000 172.5557
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage19of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 9.0000e-
005
5.4400e-
003
1.0400e-
003
2.0000e-
005
5.5000e-
004
4.0000e-
005
5.9000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
4.0000e-
005
1.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.9768 1.9768 7.0000e-
005
3.1000e-
004
2.0719
Vendor 2.1700e-
003
0.0765 0.0245 2.7000e-
004
8.4100e-
003
4.3000e-
004
8.8400e-
003
2.4300e-
003
4.1000e-
004
2.8500e-
003
0.0000 26.6908 26.6908 5.9000e-
004
3.9200e-
003
27.8742
Worker 0.0130 9.4500e-
003
0.1077 3.3000e-
004
0.0392 1.9000e-
004
0.0394 0.0104 1.8000e-
004
0.0106 0.0000 30.4453 30.4453 8.4000e-
004
8.6000e-
004
30.7236
Total 0.0152 0.0913 0.1333 6.2000e-
004
0.0481 6.6000e-
004
0.0488 0.0130 6.3000e-
004
0.0136 0.0000 59.1128 59.1128 1.5000e-
003
5.0900e-
003
60.6697
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0499 1.0527 1.3227 1.9900e-
003
0.0669 0.0669 0.0669 0.0669 0.0000 171.5353 171.5353 0.0408 0.0000 172.5555
Total 0.0499 1.0527 1.3227 1.9900e-
003
0.0669 0.0669 0.0669 0.0669 0.0000 171.5353 171.5353 0.0408 0.0000 172.5555
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage20of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 9.0000e-
005
5.4400e-
003
1.0400e-
003
2.0000e-
005
5.5000e-
004
4.0000e-
005
5.9000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
4.0000e-
005
1.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.9768 1.9768 7.0000e-
005
3.1000e-
004
2.0719
Vendor 2.1700e-
003
0.0765 0.0245 2.7000e-
004
8.4100e-
003
4.3000e-
004
8.8400e-
003
2.4300e-
003
4.1000e-
004
2.8500e-
003
0.0000 26.6908 26.6908 5.9000e-
004
3.9200e-
003
27.8742
Worker 0.0130 9.4500e-
003
0.1077 3.3000e-
004
0.0392 1.9000e-
004
0.0394 0.0104 1.8000e-
004
0.0106 0.0000 30.4453 30.4453 8.4000e-
004
8.6000e-
004
30.7236
Total 0.0152 0.0913 0.1333 6.2000e-
004
0.0481 6.6000e-
004
0.0488 0.0130 6.3000e-
004
0.0136 0.0000 59.1128 59.1128 1.5000e-
003
5.0900e-
003
60.6697
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 8.2600e-
003
0.0791 0.1097 1.7000e-
004
3.9200e-
003
3.9200e-
003
3.6200e-
003
3.6200e-
003
0.0000 14.7407 14.7407 4.6300e-
003
0.0000 14.8565
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 8.2600e-
003
0.0791 0.1097 1.7000e-
004
3.9200e-
003
3.9200e-
003
3.6200e-
003
3.6200e-
003
0.0000 14.7407 14.7407 4.6300e-
003
0.0000 14.8565
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage21of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.6 Paving Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 5.7000e-
004
4.2000e-
004
4.7600e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.7300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.7400e-
003
4.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.7000e-
004
0.0000 1.3465 1.3465 4.0000e-
005
4.0000e-
005
1.3588
Total 5.7000e-
004
4.2000e-
004
4.7600e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.7300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.7400e-
003
4.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.7000e-
004
0.0000 1.3465 1.3465 4.0000e-
005
4.0000e-
005
1.3588
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 3.9500e-
003
0.0818 0.1218 1.7000e-
004
4.7200e-
003
4.7200e-
003
4.7200e-
003
4.7200e-
003
0.0000 14.7407 14.7407 4.6300e-
003
0.0000 14.8565
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 3.9500e-
003
0.0818 0.1218 1.7000e-
004
4.7200e-
003
4.7200e-
003
4.7200e-
003
4.7200e-
003
0.0000 14.7407 14.7407 4.6300e-
003
0.0000 14.8565
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage22of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.6 Paving Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 5.7000e-
004
4.2000e-
004
4.7600e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.7300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.7400e-
003
4.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.7000e-
004
0.0000 1.3465 1.3465 4.0000e-
005
4.0000e-
005
1.3588
Total 5.7000e-
004
4.2000e-
004
4.7600e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.7300e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.7400e-
003
4.6000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
4.7000e-
004
0.0000 1.3465 1.3465 4.0000e-
005
4.0000e-
005
1.3588
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Demolition Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 9.3900e-
003
0.0000 9.3900e-
003
1.4200e-
003
0.0000 1.4200e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0227 0.2148 0.1964 3.9000e-
004
9.9800e-
003
9.9800e-
003
9.2800e-
003
9.2800e-
003
0.0000 33.9921 33.9921 9.5200e-
003
0.0000 34.2301
Total 0.0227 0.2148 0.1964 3.9000e-
004
9.3900e-
003
9.9800e-
003
0.0194 1.4200e-
003
9.2800e-
003
0.0107 0.0000 33.9921 33.9921 9.5200e-
003
0.0000 34.2301
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage23of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.7 Demolition Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.1000e-
004
7.1000e-
003
1.3500e-
003
3.0000e-
005
7.2000e-
004
6.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
2.5000e-
004
0.0000 2.5805 2.5805 9.0000e-
005
4.1000e-
004
2.7047
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.8000e-
004
3.5000e-
004
3.9700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.4500e-
003
3.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.1221 1.1221 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
1.1323
Total 5.9000e-
004
7.4500e-
003
5.3200e-
003
4.0000e-
005
2.1600e-
003
7.0000e-
005
2.2200e-
003
5.8000e-
004
6.0000e-
005
6.4000e-
004
0.0000 3.7026 3.7026 1.2000e-
004
4.4000e-
004
3.8370
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 9.3900e-
003
0.0000 9.3900e-
003
1.4200e-
003
0.0000 1.4200e-
003
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 9.2500e-
003
0.1831 0.2467 3.9000e-
004
8.6300e-
003
8.6300e-
003
8.6300e-
003
8.6300e-
003
0.0000 33.9920 33.9920 9.5200e-
003
0.0000 34.2300
Total 9.2500e-
003
0.1831 0.2467 3.9000e-
004
9.3900e-
003
8.6300e-
003
0.0180 1.4200e-
003
8.6300e-
003
0.0101 0.0000 33.9920 33.9920 9.5200e-
003
0.0000 34.2300
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage24of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.7 Demolition Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.1000e-
004
7.1000e-
003
1.3500e-
003
3.0000e-
005
7.2000e-
004
6.0000e-
005
7.7000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
5.0000e-
005
2.5000e-
004
0.0000 2.5805 2.5805 9.0000e-
005
4.1000e-
004
2.7047
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.8000e-
004
3.5000e-
004
3.9700e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.4500e-
003
3.8000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
3.9000e-
004
0.0000 1.1221 1.1221 3.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
1.1323
Total 5.9000e-
004
7.4500e-
003
5.3200e-
003
4.0000e-
005
2.1600e-
003
7.0000e-
005
2.2200e-
003
5.8000e-
004
6.0000e-
005
6.4000e-
004
0.0000 3.7026 3.7026 1.2000e-
004
4.4000e-
004
3.8370
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.8 Site Prep Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0515 0.0000 0.0515 0.0255 0.0000 0.0255 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 6.6500e-
003
0.0688 0.0456 1.0000e-
004
3.1700e-
003
3.1700e-
003
2.9100e-
003
2.9100e-
003
0.0000 8.3627 8.3627 2.7000e-
003
0.0000 8.4303
Total 6.6500e-
003
0.0688 0.0456 1.0000e-
004
0.0515 3.1700e-
003
0.0547 0.0255 2.9100e-
003
0.0284 0.0000 8.3627 8.3627 2.7000e-
003
0.0000 8.4303
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage25of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.8 Site Prep Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.4000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
1.1900e-
003
0.0000 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 4.4000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
0.0000 0.3366 0.3366 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.3397
Total 1.4000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
1.1900e-
003
0.0000 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 4.4000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
0.0000 0.3366 0.3366 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.3397
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0515 0.0000 0.0515 0.0255 0.0000 0.0255 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.3300e-
003
0.0477 0.0574 1.0000e-
004
2.3700e-
003
2.3700e-
003
2.3700e-
003
2.3700e-
003
0.0000 8.3627 8.3627 2.7000e-
003
0.0000 8.4303
Total 2.3300e-
003
0.0477 0.0574 1.0000e-
004
0.0515 2.3700e-
003
0.0539 0.0255 2.3700e-
003
0.0279 0.0000 8.3627 8.3627 2.7000e-
003
0.0000 8.4303
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage26of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.8 Site Prep Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.4000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
1.1900e-
003
0.0000 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 4.4000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
0.0000 0.3366 0.3366 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.3397
Total 1.4000e-
004
1.0000e-
004
1.1900e-
003
0.0000 4.3000e-
004
0.0000 4.4000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
0.0000 1.2000e-
004
0.0000 0.3366 0.3366 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.3397
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.9 Grading Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0591 0.0000 0.0591 0.0170 0.0000 0.0170 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 6.8400e-
003
0.0717 0.0590 1.2000e-
004
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
2.8500e-
003
2.8500e-
003
0.0000 10.4243 10.4243 3.3700e-
003
0.0000 10.5085
Total 6.8400e-
003
0.0717 0.0590 1.2000e-
004
0.0591 3.1000e-
003
0.0622 0.0170 2.8500e-
003
0.0199 0.0000 10.4243 10.4243 3.3700e-
003
0.0000 10.5085
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage27of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.9 Grading Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 9.5000e-
004
0.0595 0.0114 2.2000e-
004
6.0100e-
003
4.7000e-
004
6.4800e-
003
1.6500e-
003
4.5000e-
004
2.1000e-
003
0.0000 21.6273 21.6273 7.6000e-
004
3.4300e-
003
22.6675
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.9000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
1.5900e-
003
0.0000 5.8000e-
004
0.0000 5.8000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
0.0000 1.6000e-
004
0.0000 0.4488 0.4488 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.4529
Total 1.1400e-
003
0.0597 0.0129 2.2000e-
004
6.5900e-
003
4.7000e-
004
7.0600e-
003
1.8000e-
003
4.5000e-
004
2.2600e-
003
0.0000 22.0762 22.0762 7.7000e-
004
3.4400e-
003
23.1205
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0591 0.0000 0.0591 0.0170 0.0000 0.0170 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.9100e-
003
0.0594 0.0760 1.2000e-
004
3.0200e-
003
3.0200e-
003
3.0200e-
003
3.0200e-
003
0.0000 10.4242 10.4242 3.3700e-
003
0.0000 10.5085
Total 2.9100e-
003
0.0594 0.0760 1.2000e-
004
0.0591 3.0200e-
003
0.0621 0.0170 3.0200e-
003
0.0201 0.0000 10.4242 10.4242 3.3700e-
003
0.0000 10.5085
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage28of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.9 Grading Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 9.5000e-
004
0.0595 0.0114 2.2000e-
004
6.0100e-
003
4.7000e-
004
6.4800e-
003
1.6500e-
003
4.5000e-
004
2.1000e-
003
0.0000 21.6273 21.6273 7.6000e-
004
3.4300e-
003
22.6675
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 1.9000e-
004
1.4000e-
004
1.5900e-
003
0.0000 5.8000e-
004
0.0000 5.8000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
0.0000 1.6000e-
004
0.0000 0.4488 0.4488 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.4529
Total 1.1400e-
003
0.0597 0.0129 2.2000e-
004
6.5900e-
003
4.7000e-
004
7.0600e-
003
1.8000e-
003
4.5000e-
004
2.2600e-
003
0.0000 22.0762 22.0762 7.7000e-
004
3.4400e-
003
23.1205
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.10 Const Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0598 0.5466 0.6173 1.0200e-
003
0.0266 0.0266 0.0250 0.0250 0.0000 88.0858 88.0858 0.0210 0.0000 88.6097
Total 0.0598 0.5466 0.6173 1.0200e-
003
0.0266 0.0266 0.0250 0.0250 0.0000 88.0858 88.0858 0.0210 0.0000 88.6097
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage29of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.10 Const Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 1.1100e-
003
0.0393 0.0126 1.4000e-
004
4.3200e-
003
2.2000e-
004
4.5400e-
003
1.2500e-
003
2.1000e-
004
1.4600e-
003
0.0000 13.7061 13.7061 3.0000e-
004
2.0100e-
003
14.3138
Worker 6.6600e-
003
4.8500e-
003
0.0553 1.7000e-
004
0.0201 1.0000e-
004
0.0202 5.3500e-
003
9.0000e-
005
5.4400e-
003
0.0000 15.6341 15.6341 4.3000e-
004
4.4000e-
004
15.7770
Total 7.7700e-
003
0.0441 0.0679 3.1000e-
004
0.0244 3.2000e-
004
0.0248 6.6000e-
003
3.0000e-
004
6.9000e-
003
0.0000 29.3401 29.3401 7.3000e-
004
2.4500e-
003
30.0908
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0256 0.5406 0.6792 1.0200e-
003
0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 0.0000 88.0857 88.0857 0.0210 0.0000 88.6096
Total 0.0256 0.5406 0.6792 1.0200e-
003
0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 0.0343 0.0000 88.0857 88.0857 0.0210 0.0000 88.6096
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage30of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.10 Const Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 1.1100e-
003
0.0393 0.0126 1.4000e-
004
4.3200e-
003
2.2000e-
004
4.5400e-
003
1.2500e-
003
2.1000e-
004
1.4600e-
003
0.0000 13.7061 13.7061 3.0000e-
004
2.0100e-
003
14.3138
Worker 6.6600e-
003
4.8500e-
003
0.0553 1.7000e-
004
0.0201 1.0000e-
004
0.0202 5.3500e-
003
9.0000e-
005
5.4400e-
003
0.0000 15.6341 15.6341 4.3000e-
004
4.4000e-
004
15.7770
Total 7.7700e-
003
0.0441 0.0679 3.1000e-
004
0.0244 3.2000e-
004
0.0248 6.6000e-
003
3.0000e-
004
6.9000e-
003
0.0000 29.3401 29.3401 7.3000e-
004
2.4500e-
003
30.0908
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.10 Const Tower - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.1133 1.0352 1.2448 2.0800e-
003
0.0472 0.0472 0.0444 0.0444 0.0000 178.5238 178.5238 0.0422 0.0000 179.5792
Total 0.1133 1.0352 1.2448 2.0800e-
003
0.0472 0.0472 0.0444 0.0444 0.0000 178.5238 178.5238 0.0422 0.0000 179.5792
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage31of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.10 Const Tower - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 2.1800e-
003
0.0780 0.0250 2.8000e-
004
8.7500e-
003
4.4000e-
004
9.2000e-
003
2.5300e-
003
4.2000e-
004
2.9500e-
003
0.0000 27.3454 27.3454 6.2000e-
004
4.0200e-
003
28.5577
Worker 0.0127 8.7600e-
003
0.1044 3.3000e-
004
0.0408 1.9000e-
004
0.0410 0.0108 1.8000e-
004
0.0110 0.0000 30.9300 30.9300 8.0000e-
004
8.4000e-
004
31.1987
Total 0.0149 0.0868 0.1294 6.1000e-
004
0.0495 6.3000e-
004
0.0502 0.0134 6.0000e-
004
0.0140 0.0000 58.2754 58.2754 1.4200e-
003
4.8600e-
003
59.7564
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0519 1.0954 1.3763 2.0800e-
003
0.0696 0.0696 0.0696 0.0696 0.0000 178.5236 178.5236 0.0422 0.0000 179.5790
Total 0.0519 1.0954 1.3763 2.0800e-
003
0.0696 0.0696 0.0696 0.0696 0.0000 178.5236 178.5236 0.0422 0.0000 179.5790
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage32of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.10 Const Tower - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 2.1800e-
003
0.0780 0.0250 2.8000e-
004
8.7500e-
003
4.4000e-
004
9.2000e-
003
2.5300e-
003
4.2000e-
004
2.9500e-
003
0.0000 27.3454 27.3454 6.2000e-
004
4.0200e-
003
28.5577
Worker 0.0127 8.7600e-
003
0.1044 3.3000e-
004
0.0408 1.9000e-
004
0.0410 0.0108 1.8000e-
004
0.0110 0.0000 30.9300 30.9300 8.0000e-
004
8.4000e-
004
31.1987
Total 0.0149 0.0868 0.1294 6.1000e-
004
0.0495 6.3000e-
004
0.0502 0.0134 6.0000e-
004
0.0140 0.0000 58.2754 58.2754 1.4200e-
003
4.8600e-
003
59.7564
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.11 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 1.1198 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.6300e-
003
0.0110 0.0163 3.0000e-
005
5.5000e-
004
5.5000e-
004
5.5000e-
004
5.5000e-
004
0.0000 2.2979 2.2979 1.3000e-
004
0.0000 2.3012
Total 1.1214 0.0110 0.0163 3.0000e-
005
5.5000e-
004
5.5000e-
004
5.5000e-
004
5.5000e-
004
0.0000 2.2979 2.2979 1.3000e-
004
0.0000 2.3012
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage33of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.11 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 3.0000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
2.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
9.5000e-
004
0.0000 9.6000e-
004
2.5000e-
004
0.0000 2.6000e-
004
0.0000 0.7230 0.7230 2.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
0.7293
Total 3.0000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
2.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
9.5000e-
004
0.0000 9.6000e-
004
2.5000e-
004
0.0000 2.6000e-
004
0.0000 0.7230 0.7230 2.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
0.7293
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 1.1198 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 5.3000e-
004
0.0122 0.0165 3.0000e-
005
8.6000e-
004
8.6000e-
004
8.6000e-
004
8.6000e-
004
0.0000 2.2979 2.2979 1.3000e-
004
0.0000 2.3012
Total 1.1203 0.0122 0.0165 3.0000e-
005
8.6000e-
004
8.6000e-
004
8.6000e-
004
8.6000e-
004
0.0000 2.2979 2.2979 1.3000e-
004
0.0000 2.3012
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage34of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.11 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 3.0000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
2.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
9.5000e-
004
0.0000 9.6000e-
004
2.5000e-
004
0.0000 2.6000e-
004
0.0000 0.7230 0.7230 2.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
0.7293
Total 3.0000e-
004
2.0000e-
004
2.4400e-
003
1.0000e-
005
9.5000e-
004
0.0000 9.6000e-
004
2.5000e-
004
0.0000 2.6000e-
004
0.0000 0.7230 0.7230 2.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
0.7293
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage35of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.8533 1.0671 7.9582 0.0165 2.0495 0.0134 2.0629 0.5472 0.0126 0.5598 0.0000 1,605.820
9
1,605.820
9
0.0938 0.0741 1,630.234
5
Unmitigated 0.8533 1.0671 7.9582 0.0165 2.0495 0.0134 2.0629 0.5472 0.0126 0.5598 0.0000 1,605.820
9
1,605.820
9
0.0938 0.0741 1,630.234
5
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Hospital 1,829.72 1,829.72 1829.72 5,380,856 5,380,856
Research & Development 45.99 45.99 45.99 109,731 109,731
Unenclosed Parking Structure 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 1,875.71 1,875.71 1,875.71 5,490,587 5,490,587
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
Hospital 13.00 5.00 5.00 64.90 16.10 19.00 73 25 2
Research & Development 13.00 5.00 5.00 33.00 48.00 19.00 82 15 3
Unenclosed Parking Structure 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Hospital 0.516135 0.058853 0.199929 0.136792 0.029532 0.007795 0.008341 0.005917 0.000885 0.000346 0.029869 0.000792 0.004814
Research & Development 0.516135 0.058853 0.199929 0.136792 0.029532 0.007795 0.008341 0.005917 0.000885 0.000346 0.029869 0.000792 0.004814
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage36of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Unenclosed Parking Structure 0.516135 0.058853 0.199929 0.136792 0.029532 0.007795 0.008341 0.005917 0.000885 0.000346 0.029869 0.000792 0.004814
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 174.0333 174.0333 0.0282 3.4100e-
003
175.7542
Electricity
Unmitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 174.7933 174.7933 0.0283 3.4300e-
003
176.5217
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.0536 0.4871 0.4092 2.9200e-
003
0.0370 0.0370 0.0370 0.0370 0.0000 530.2453 530.2453 0.0102 9.7200e-
003
533.3963
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.0536 0.4871 0.4092 2.9200e-
003
0.0370 0.0370 0.0370 0.0370 0.0000 530.2453 530.2453 0.0102 9.7200e-
003
533.3963
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Install Energy Efficient Appliances
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage37of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Hospital 9.78458e
006
0.0528 0.4796 0.4029 2.8800e-
003
0.0365 0.0365 0.0365 0.0365 0.0000 522.1423 522.1423 0.0100 9.5700e-
003
525.2451
Research &
Development
151844 8.2000e-
004
7.4400e-
003
6.2500e-
003
4.0000e-
005
5.7000e-
004
5.7000e-
004
5.7000e-
004
5.7000e-
004
0.0000 8.1030 8.1030 1.6000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
8.1511
Unenclosed
Parking Structure
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0536 0.4871 0.4091 2.9200e-
003
0.0370 0.0370 0.0370 0.0370 0.0000 530.2453 530.2453 0.0102 9.7200e-
003
533.3963
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage38of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Hospital 9.78458e
006
0.0528 0.4796 0.4029 2.8800e-
003
0.0365 0.0365 0.0365 0.0365 0.0000 522.1423 522.1423 0.0100 9.5700e-
003
525.2451
Research &
Development
151844 8.2000e-
004
7.4400e-
003
6.2500e-
003
4.0000e-
005
5.7000e-
004
5.7000e-
004
5.7000e-
004
5.7000e-
004
0.0000 8.1030 8.1030 1.6000e-
004
1.5000e-
004
8.1511
Unenclosed
Parking Structure
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0536 0.4871 0.4091 2.9200e-
003
0.0370 0.0370 0.0370 0.0370 0.0000 530.2453 530.2453 0.0102 9.7200e-
003
533.3963
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage39of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Hospital 1.73894e
006
160.8935 0.0260 3.1600e-
003
162.4844
Research &
Development
46980 4.3468 7.0000e-
004
9.0000e-
005
4.3898
Unenclosed
Parking Structure
103250 9.5531 1.5500e-
003
1.9000e-
004
9.6475
Total 174.7933 0.0283 3.4400e-
003
176.5217
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage40of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Hospital 1.73073e
006
160.1334 0.0259 3.1400e-
003
161.7169
Research &
Development
46980 4.3468 7.0000e-
004
9.0000e-
005
4.3898
Unenclosed
Parking Structure
103250 9.5531 1.5500e-
003
1.9000e-
004
9.6475
Total 174.0333 0.0282 3.4200e-
003
175.7542
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage41of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.4893 2.0000e-
005
2.5900e-
003
0.0000 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0600e-
003
5.0600e-
003
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.3900e-
003
Unmitigated 0.4893 2.0000e-
005
2.5900e-
003
0.0000 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0600e-
003
5.0600e-
003
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.3900e-
003
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating
0.1120 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
0.3771 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 2.4000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
2.5900e-
003
0.0000 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0600e-
003
5.0600e-
003
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.3900e-
003
Total 0.4893 2.0000e-
005
2.5900e-
003
0.0000 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0600e-
003
5.0600e-
003
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.3900e-
003
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage42of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet
Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet
Install Low Flow Toilet
Install Low Flow Shower
Use Water Efficient Landscaping
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating
0.1120 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
0.3771 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 2.4000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
2.5900e-
003
0.0000 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0600e-
003
5.0600e-
003
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.3900e-
003
Total 0.4893 2.0000e-
005
2.5900e-
003
0.0000 1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.0600e-
003
5.0600e-
003
1.0000e-
005
0.0000 5.3900e-
003
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage43of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 9.9322 0.3690 8.8100e-
003
21.7849
Unmitigated 12.2416 0.4613 0.0110 27.0557
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Hospital 11.2656 /
2.14584
9.9091 0.3681 8.7900e-
003
21.7320
Research &
Development
2.85182 /
0
2.3325 0.0932 2.2200e-
003
5.3237
Unenclosed
Parking Structure
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 12.2416 0.4613 0.0110 27.0557
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage44of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Hospital 9.01251 /
2.14584
8.0662 0.2945 7.0400e-
003
17.5260
Research &
Development
2.28146 /
0
1.8660 0.0745 1.7800e-
003
4.2589
Unenclosed
Parking Structure
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 9.9322 0.3691 8.8200e-
003
21.7849
Mitigated
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage45of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 196.9134 11.6373 0.0000 487.8447
Unmitigated 196.9134 11.6373 0.0000 487.8447
Category/Year
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Hospital 969.62 196.8241 11.6320 0.0000 487.6234
Research &
Development
0.44 0.0893 5.2800e-
003
0.0000 0.2213
Unenclosed
Parking Structure
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 196.9134 11.6373 0.0000 487.8447
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage46of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
Hospital 969.62 196.8241 11.6320 0.0000 487.6234
Research &
Development
0.44 0.0893 5.2800e-
003
0.0000 0.2213
Unenclosed
Parking Structure
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 196.9134 11.6373 0.0000 487.8447
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
Emergency Generator 2 8 100 1050 0.73 Diesel
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage47of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
11.0 Vegetation
Equipment Type Number
10.1 Stationary Sources
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Equipment Type tons/yr MT/yr
Emergency
Generator -
Diesel (750 -
9999 HP)
0.1723 0.7706 0.4394 8.3000e-
004
0.0254 0.0254 0.0254 0.0254 0.0000 79.9674 79.9674 0.0112 0.0000 80.2477
Total 0.1723 0.7706 0.4394 8.3000e-
004
0.0254 0.0254 0.0254 0.0254 0.0000 79.9674 79.9674 0.0112 0.0000 80.2477
Unmitigated/Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:46PMPage48of48
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Annual
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion
San Luis Obispo County, Summer
Project Characteristics - See SWAPE comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to the Default CH4, CO2, and N2O Intensity Factors"
Land Use - See SWAPE comment on "Failure to Model All Proposed Land Uses" and "Underestimated Parking Land Use Size"
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to Individual Construction Phase Lengths"
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Hospital 89.78 1000sqft 2.60 89,775.00 0
Research & Development 5.80 1000sqft 0.13 5,800.00 0
Unenclosed Parking Structure 59.00 1000sqft 1.35 59,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
4
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2030OperationalYear
CO2 Intensity
lb/MWhr)
203.98 0.033CH4Intensity
lb/MWhr)
0.004N2OIntensity
lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage1of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Trips and VMT - Consistent with the IS/MND's model.
Demolition - See SWAPE comment on "Failure to Substantiate Demolition and Reduction to Number of Demolition Hauling Trips"
Grading - Consistent with IS/MND's model.
Vehicle Trips - See SWAPE comment on "Underestimated Weekday, Saturday, and Sunday Operational Vehicle Trip Rates'
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.
Operational Off-Road Equipment -
Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps - Consistent with IS/MND's model.
Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps EF - See SWAPE comment on "Unsubstantiated Reductions to Stationary Generator Emission
Factors"
Energy Mitigation -
Water Mitigation -
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 8.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 6.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 12.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage2of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 21.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 8.00 14.00
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 8.00 65.00
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 7.50 8.00
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 7.50 12.00
tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 3,260.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 2,370.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 89,780.00 89,775.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 2.06 2.60
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HorsePowerValue 0.00 1,050.00
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HoursPerDay 0.00 8.00
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HoursPerYear 0.00 100.00
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse NumberOfEquipment 0.00 2.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 100.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage3of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.72 20.38
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.90 7.93
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.77 20.38
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.11 7.93
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 10.72 20.38
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.26 7.93
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage4of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 5.2301 54.0166 35.9461 0.0705 27.9673 2.5551 30.5223 13.7111 2.3507 16.0617 0.0000 6,847.183
2
6,847.183
2
2.1289 0.0784 6,902.725
6
2023 3.3093 32.3763 32.9228 0.0856 20.7894 1.4404 22.0563 10.2527 1.3374 11.4182 0.0000 8,958.870
1
8,958.870
1
1.6342 0.9474 9,269.717
0
2024 126.2979 15.7682 19.9690 0.0389 0.7687 0.6829 1.4516 0.2065 0.6461 0.8526 0.0000 3,778.889
8
3,778.889
8
0.6421 0.0708 3,816.039
0
Maximum 126.2979 54.0166 35.9461 0.0856 27.9673 2.5551 30.5223 13.7111 2.3507 16.0617 0.0000 8,958.870
1
8,958.870
1
2.1289 0.9474 9,269.717
0
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 1.7688 33.9833 42.9263 0.0705 27.9673 1.7034 29.6706 13.7111 1.7032 15.4143 0.0000 6,847.183
2
6,847.183
2
2.1289 0.0784 6,902.725
6
2023 1.4856 29.2801 39.2951 0.0856 20.7894 1.3945 21.7364 10.2527 1.3942 11.1997 0.0000 8,958.870
1
8,958.870
1
1.6342 0.9474 9,269.717
0
2024 125.3789 16.6886 21.6982 0.0389 0.7687 1.0074 1.7760 0.2065 1.0069 1.2134 0.0000 3,778.889
8
3,778.889
8
0.6421 0.0708 3,816.039
0
Maximum 125.3789 33.9833 42.9263 0.0856 27.9673 1.7034 29.6706 13.7111 1.7032 15.4143 0.0000 8,958.870
1
8,958.870
1
2.1289 0.9474 9,269.717
0
Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage5of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
4.60 21.74 -16.98 0.00 0.00 12.25 1.57 0.00 5.30 1.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.6812 1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Energy 0.2936 2.6689 2.2419 0.0160 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 3,202.714
3
3,202.714
3
0.0614 0.0587 3,221.746
5
Mobile 4.8868 5.4994 42.5032 0.0932 11.5617 0.0737 11.6354 3.0804 0.0691 3.1495 9,999.728
8
9,999.728
8
0.5417 0.4305 10,141.54
86
Stationary 27.5699 123.2910 70.2975 0.1325 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 14,103.83
72
14,103.83
72
1.9774 14,153.27
12
Total 35.4316 131.4595 115.0583 0.2417 11.5617 4.3322 15.8939 3.0804 4.3276 7.4080 27,306.31
42
27,306.31
42
2.5805 0.4892 27,516.60
23
Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage6of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.6812 1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Energy 0.2936 2.6689 2.2419 0.0160 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 3,202.714
3
3,202.714
3
0.0614 0.0587 3,221.746
5
Mobile 4.8868 5.4994 42.5032 0.0932 11.5617 0.0737 11.6354 3.0804 0.0691 3.1495 9,999.728
8
9,999.728
8
0.5417 0.4305 10,141.54
86
Stationary 27.5699 123.2910 70.2975 0.1325 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 14,103.83
72
14,103.83
72
1.9774 14,153.27
12
Total 35.4316 131.4595 115.0583 0.2417 11.5617 4.3322 15.8939 3.0804 4.3276 7.4080 27,306.31
42
27,306.31
42
2.5805 0.4892 27,516.60
23
Mitigated Operational
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Parking Deck Demolition 8/1/2022 8/26/2022 5 20 Demo Parking Deck
2 Site Prep Parking Deck Site Preparation 8/27/2022 9/2/2022 5 5 Site Prep Patient Tower
3 Grading Parking Deck Grading 8/28/2022 9/7/2022 5 8 Grading Patient Tower
4 Const Parking Deck Building Construction 9/8/2022 7/26/2023 5 230 Const Parking Deck
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage7of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
5 Paving Parking Deck Paving 7/27/2023 8/21/2023 5 18 Paving Patient Tower
6 Demolition Tower Demolition 8/1/2023 8/28/2023 5 20 Demo Tower
7 Site Prep Tower Site Preparation 8/29/2023 9/4/2023 5 5 Site Prep Tower
8 Grading Tower Grading 9/5/2023 9/14/2023 5 8 Grading Tower
9 Const Tower Building Construction 9/15/2023 8/1/2024 5 230 Const Tower
10 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/15/2024 2/7/2024 5 18 Arch Coating
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Parking Deck Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Parking Deck Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Parking Deck Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Prep Parking Deck Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Prep Parking Deck Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Parking Deck Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Parking Deck Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Parking Deck Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Parking Deck Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Const Parking Deck Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Const Parking Deck Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Const Parking Deck Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Const Parking Deck Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37
Const Parking Deck Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 143,363; Non-Residential Outdoor: 47,788; Striped Parking Area: 3,540
Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 8
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 14
Acres of Paving: 1.35
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage8of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Paving Parking Deck Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Parking Deck Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Parking Deck Paving Equipment 2 6.00 132 0.36
Paving Parking Deck Rollers 2 6.00 80 0.38
Paving Parking Deck Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Demolition Tower Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Tower Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Tower Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Prep Tower Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Prep Tower Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Tower Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Tower Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Tower Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Tower Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Const Tower Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Const Tower Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Const Tower Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Const Tower Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37
Const Tower Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition Parking
Deck
6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Prep Parking
Deck
7 18.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading Parking Deck 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Const Parking Deck 9 55.00 25.00 100.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage9of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.2 Demolition Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.6392 25.7194 20.5941 0.0388 1.2427 1.2427 1.1553 1.1553 3,746.781
2
3,746.781
2
1.0524 3,773.092
0
Total 2.6392 25.7194 20.5941 0.0388 1.2427 1.2427 1.1553 1.1553 3,746.781
2
3,746.781
2
1.0524 3,773.092
0
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Use Cleaner Engines for Construction Equipment
Use Soil Stabilizer
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Paving Parking Deck 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Demolition Tower 6 15.00 0.00 84.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Prep Tower 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading Tower 6 15.00 0.00 704.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Const Tower 9 55.00 25.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 11.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage10of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.2 Demolition Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0506 0.0354 0.4435 1.2900e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 131.3977 131.3977 3.5900e-
003
3.5400e-
003
132.5417
Total 0.0506 0.0354 0.4435 1.2900e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 131.3977 131.3977 3.5900e-
003
3.5400e-
003
132.5417
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9246 18.3130 24.6739 0.0388 0.8627 0.8627 0.8627 0.8627 0.0000 3,746.781
2
3,746.781
2
1.0524 3,773.092
0
Total 0.9246 18.3130 24.6739 0.0388 0.8627 0.8627 0.8627 0.8627 0.0000 3,746.781
2
3,746.781
2
1.0524 3,773.092
0
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage11of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.2 Demolition Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0506 0.0354 0.4435 1.2900e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 131.3977 131.3977 3.5900e-
003
3.5400e-
003
132.5417
Total 0.0506 0.0354 0.4435 1.2900e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 131.3977 131.3977 3.5900e-
003
3.5400e-
003
132.5417
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Prep Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.7631 0.0000 19.7631 10.1139 0.0000 10.1139 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 1.6126 1.6126 1.4836 1.4836 3,686.061
9
3,686.061
9
1.1922 3,715.865
5
Total 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 19.7631 1.6126 21.3756 10.1139 1.4836 11.5975 3,686.061
9
3,686.061
9
1.1922 3,715.865
5
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage12of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.3 Site Prep Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0607 0.0425 0.5322 1.5500e-
003
0.1780 9.0000e-
004
0.1789 0.0472 8.3000e-
004
0.0480 157.6773 157.6773 4.3100e-
003
4.2400e-
003
159.0500
Total 0.0607 0.0425 0.5322 1.5500e-
003
0.1780 9.0000e-
004
0.1789 0.0472 8.3000e-
004
0.0480 157.6773 157.6773 4.3100e-
003
4.2400e-
003
159.0500
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.7631 0.0000 19.7631 10.1139 0.0000 10.1139 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.9312 19.0656 22.9600 0.0380 0.9462 0.9462 0.9462 0.9462 0.0000 3,686.061
9
3,686.061
9
1.1922 3,715.865
5
Total 0.9312 19.0656 22.9600 0.0380 19.7631 0.9462 20.7092 10.1139 0.9462 11.0601 0.0000 3,686.061
9
3,686.061
9
1.1922 3,715.865
5
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage13of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.3 Site Prep Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0607 0.0425 0.5322 1.5500e-
003
0.1780 9.0000e-
004
0.1789 0.0472 8.3000e-
004
0.0480 157.6773 157.6773 4.3100e-
003
4.2400e-
003
159.0500
Total 0.0607 0.0425 0.5322 1.5500e-
003
0.1780 9.0000e-
004
0.1789 0.0472 8.3000e-
004
0.0480 157.6773 157.6773 4.3100e-
003
4.2400e-
003
159.0500
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.8780 0.0000 7.8780 3.5106 0.0000 3.5106 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 0.9409 0.9409 0.8656 0.8656 2,872.046
4
2,872.046
4
0.9289 2,895.268
4
Total 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 7.8780 0.9409 8.8188 3.5106 0.8656 4.3762 2,872.046
4
2,872.046
4
0.9289 2,895.268
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage14of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.4 Grading Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0506 0.0354 0.4435 1.2900e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 131.3977 131.3977 3.5900e-
003
3.5400e-
003
132.5417
Total 0.0506 0.0354 0.4435 1.2900e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 131.3977 131.3977 3.5900e-
003
3.5400e-
003
132.5417
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.8780 0.0000 7.8780 3.5106 0.0000 3.5106 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.7263 14.8397 18.9906 0.0297 0.7555 0.7555 0.7555 0.7555 0.0000 2,872.046
4
2,872.046
4
0.9289 2,895.268
4
Total 0.7263 14.8397 18.9906 0.0297 7.8780 0.7555 8.6335 3.5106 0.7555 4.2662 0.0000 2,872.046
4
2,872.046
4
0.9289 2,895.268
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage15of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.4 Grading Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0506 0.0354 0.4435 1.2900e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 131.3977 131.3977 3.5900e-
003
3.5400e-
003
132.5417
Total 0.0506 0.0354 0.4435 1.2900e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 131.3977 131.3977 3.5900e-
003
3.5400e-
003
132.5417
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage16of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 2.1100e-
003
0.0856 0.0154 2.8000e-
004
7.6000e-
003
7.7000e-
004
8.3700e-
003
2.0800e-
003
7.4000e-
004
2.8200e-
003
30.6416 30.6416 1.0500e-
003
4.8500e-
003
32.1138
Vendor 0.0486 1.1992 0.3652 3.8500e-
003
0.1161 0.0120 0.1281 0.0335 0.0115 0.0449 411.8543 411.8543 9.5700e-
003
0.0606 430.1553
Worker 0.1856 0.1298 1.6261 4.7400e-
003
0.5437 2.7500e-
003
0.5465 0.1442 2.5400e-
003
0.1468 481.7916 481.7916 0.0132 0.0130 485.9862
Total 0.2363 1.4147 2.0066 8.8700e-
003
0.6675 0.0155 0.6830 0.1797 0.0147 0.1945 924.2874 924.2874 0.0238 0.0784 948.2552
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0269 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0269 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage17of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 2.1100e-
003
0.0856 0.0154 2.8000e-
004
7.6000e-
003
7.7000e-
004
8.3700e-
003
2.0800e-
003
7.4000e-
004
2.8200e-
003
30.6416 30.6416 1.0500e-
003
4.8500e-
003
32.1138
Vendor 0.0486 1.1992 0.3652 3.8500e-
003
0.1161 0.0120 0.1281 0.0335 0.0115 0.0449 411.8543 411.8543 9.5700e-
003
0.0606 430.1553
Worker 0.1856 0.1298 1.6261 4.7400e-
003
0.5437 2.7500e-
003
0.5465 0.1442 2.5400e-
003
0.1468 481.7916 481.7916 0.0132 0.0130 485.9862
Total 0.2363 1.4147 2.0066 8.8700e-
003
0.6675 0.0155 0.6830 0.1797 0.0147 0.1945 924.2874 924.2874 0.0238 0.0784 948.2552
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage18of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 1.1900e-
003
0.0712 0.0139 2.7000e-
004
7.6000e-
003
5.8000e-
004
8.1800e-
003
2.0800e-
003
5.5000e-
004
2.6300e-
003
29.4368 29.4368 1.0300e-
003
4.6600e-
003
30.8526
Vendor 0.0297 1.0017 0.3250 3.7100e-
003
0.1162 5.8400e-
003
0.1220 0.0335 5.5900e-
003
0.0391 397.3139 397.3139 8.8600e-
003
0.0583 414.9175
Worker 0.1738 0.1150 1.4996 4.5900e-
003
0.5437 2.6100e-
003
0.5463 0.1442 2.4000e-
003
0.1466 469.9583 469.9583 0.0119 0.0120 473.8323
Total 0.2047 1.1878 1.8386 8.5700e-
003
0.6675 9.0300e-
003
0.6765 0.1798 8.5400e-
003
0.1883 896.7089 896.7089 0.0218 0.0750 919.6024
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0269 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0269 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage19of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 1.1900e-
003
0.0712 0.0139 2.7000e-
004
7.6000e-
003
5.8000e-
004
8.1800e-
003
2.0800e-
003
5.5000e-
004
2.6300e-
003
29.4368 29.4368 1.0300e-
003
4.6600e-
003
30.8526
Vendor 0.0297 1.0017 0.3250 3.7100e-
003
0.1162 5.8400e-
003
0.1220 0.0335 5.5900e-
003
0.0391 397.3139 397.3139 8.8600e-
003
0.0583 414.9175
Worker 0.1738 0.1150 1.4996 4.5900e-
003
0.5437 2.6100e-
003
0.5463 0.1442 2.4000e-
003
0.1466 469.9583 469.9583 0.0119 0.0120 473.8323
Total 0.2047 1.1878 1.8386 8.5700e-
003
0.6675 9.0300e-
003
0.6765 0.1798 8.5400e-
003
0.1883 896.7089 896.7089 0.0218 0.0750 919.6024
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9181 8.7903 12.1905 0.0189 0.4357 0.4357 0.4025 0.4025 1,805.430
4
1,805.430
4
0.5673 1,819.612
2
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9181 8.7903 12.1905 0.0189 0.4357 0.4357 0.4025 0.4025 1,805.430
4
1,805.430
4
0.5673 1,819.612
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage20of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.6 Paving Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0632 0.0418 0.5453 1.6700e-
003
0.1977 9.5000e-
004
0.1987 0.0524 8.7000e-
004
0.0533 170.8939 170.8939 4.3300e-
003
4.3600e-
003
172.3027
Total 0.0632 0.0418 0.5453 1.6700e-
003
0.1977 9.5000e-
004
0.1987 0.0524 8.7000e-
004
0.0533 170.8939 170.8939 4.3300e-
003
4.3600e-
003
172.3027
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.4389 9.0888 13.5323 0.0189 0.5246 0.5246 0.5246 0.5246 0.0000 1,805.430
4
1,805.430
4
0.5673 1,819.612
2
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.4389 9.0888 13.5323 0.0189 0.5246 0.5246 0.5246 0.5246 0.0000 1,805.430
4
1,805.430
4
0.5673 1,819.612
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage21of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.6 Paving Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0632 0.0418 0.5453 1.6700e-
003
0.1977 9.5000e-
004
0.1987 0.0524 8.7000e-
004
0.0533 170.8939 170.8939 4.3300e-
003
4.3600e-
003
172.3027
Total 0.0632 0.0418 0.5453 1.6700e-
003
0.1977 9.5000e-
004
0.1987 0.0524 8.7000e-
004
0.0533 170.8939 170.8939 4.3300e-
003
4.3600e-
003
172.3027
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Demolition Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.9388 0.0000 0.9388 0.1422 0.0000 0.1422 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.2691 21.4844 19.6434 0.0388 0.9975 0.9975 0.9280 0.9280 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Total 2.2691 21.4844 19.6434 0.0388 0.9388 0.9975 1.9363 0.1422 0.9280 1.0702 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage22of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.7 Demolition Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0115 0.6877 0.1347 2.6100e-
003
0.0734 5.5600e-
003
0.0790 0.0201 5.3100e-
003
0.0254 284.3595 284.3595 9.9500e-
003
0.0451 298.0364
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0474 0.0314 0.4090 1.2500e-
003
0.1483 7.1000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.6000e-
004
0.0400 128.1704 128.1704 3.2500e-
003
3.2700e-
003
129.2270
Total 0.0589 0.7191 0.5436 3.8600e-
003
0.2217 6.2700e-
003
0.2280 0.0595 5.9700e-
003
0.0654 412.5299 412.5299 0.0132 0.0483 427.2634
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.9388 0.0000 0.9388 0.1422 0.0000 0.1422 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.9246 18.3130 24.6739 0.0388 0.8627 0.8627 0.8627 0.8627 0.0000 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Total 0.9246 18.3130 24.6739 0.0388 0.9388 0.8627 1.8015 0.1422 0.8627 1.0049 0.0000 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage23of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.7 Demolition Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0115 0.6877 0.1347 2.6100e-
003
0.0734 5.5600e-
003
0.0790 0.0201 5.3100e-
003
0.0254 284.3595 284.3595 9.9500e-
003
0.0451 298.0364
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0474 0.0314 0.4090 1.2500e-
003
0.1483 7.1000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.6000e-
004
0.0400 128.1704 128.1704 3.2500e-
003
3.2700e-
003
129.2270
Total 0.0589 0.7191 0.5436 3.8600e-
003
0.2217 6.2700e-
003
0.2280 0.0595 5.9700e-
003
0.0654 412.5299 412.5299 0.0132 0.0483 427.2634
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.8 Site Prep Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 20.6115 0.0000 20.6115 10.2055 0.0000 10.2055 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 3,687.308
1
3,687.308
1
1.1926 3,717.121
9
Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 20.6115 1.2660 21.8775 10.2055 1.1647 11.3702 3,687.308
1
3,687.308
1
1.1926 3,717.121
9
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage24of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.8 Site Prep Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0569 0.0376 0.4908 1.5000e-
003
0.1780 8.5000e-
004
0.1788 0.0472 7.9000e-
004
0.0480 153.8045 153.8045 3.9000e-
003
3.9300e-
003
155.0724
Total 0.0569 0.0376 0.4908 1.5000e-
003
0.1780 8.5000e-
004
0.1788 0.0472 7.9000e-
004
0.0480 153.8045 153.8045 3.9000e-
003
3.9300e-
003
155.0724
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 20.6115 0.0000 20.6115 10.2055 0.0000 10.2055 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.9312 19.0656 22.9600 0.0381 0.9462 0.9462 0.9462 0.9462 0.0000 3,687.308
1
3,687.308
1
1.1926 3,717.121
9
Total 0.9312 19.0656 22.9600 0.0381 20.6115 0.9462 21.5576 10.2055 0.9462 11.1517 0.0000 3,687.308
1
3,687.308
1
1.1926 3,717.121
9
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage25of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.8 Site Prep Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0569 0.0376 0.4908 1.5000e-
003
0.1780 8.5000e-
004
0.1788 0.0472 7.9000e-
004
0.0480 153.8045 153.8045 3.9000e-
003
3.9300e-
003
155.0724
Total 0.0569 0.0376 0.4908 1.5000e-
003
0.1780 8.5000e-
004
0.1788 0.0472 7.9000e-
004
0.0480 153.8045 153.8045 3.9000e-
003
3.9300e-
003
155.0724
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.9 Grading Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 14.7682 0.0000 14.7682 4.2602 0.0000 4.2602 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.7109 17.9359 14.7507 0.0297 0.7749 0.7749 0.7129 0.7129 2,872.691
0
2,872.691
0
0.9291 2,895.918
2
Total 1.7109 17.9359 14.7507 0.0297 14.7682 0.7749 15.5431 4.2602 0.7129 4.9732 2,872.691
0
2,872.691
0
0.9291 2,895.918
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage26of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.9 Grading Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.2415 14.4090 2.8214 0.0547 1.5386 0.1164 1.6550 0.4217 0.1114 0.5330 5,958.008
7
5,958.008
7
0.2085 0.9441 6,244.571
8
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0474 0.0314 0.4090 1.2500e-
003
0.1483 7.1000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.6000e-
004
0.0400 128.1704 128.1704 3.2500e-
003
3.2700e-
003
129.2270
Total 0.2889 14.4404 3.2304 0.0559 1.6869 0.1171 1.8040 0.4610 0.1120 0.5730 6,086.179
1
6,086.179
1
0.2117 0.9474 6,373.798
8
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 14.7682 0.0000 14.7682 4.2602 0.0000 4.2602 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.7263 14.8397 18.9906 0.0297 0.7555 0.7555 0.7555 0.7555 0.0000 2,872.691
0
2,872.691
0
0.9291 2,895.918
2
Total 0.7263 14.8397 18.9906 0.0297 14.7682 0.7555 15.5237 4.2602 0.7555 5.0158 0.0000 2,872.691
0
2,872.691
0
0.9291 2,895.918
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage27of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.9 Grading Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.2415 14.4090 2.8214 0.0547 1.5386 0.1164 1.6550 0.4217 0.1114 0.5330 5,958.008
7
5,958.008
7
0.2085 0.9441 6,244.571
8
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0474 0.0314 0.4090 1.2500e-
003
0.1483 7.1000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.6000e-
004
0.0400 128.1704 128.1704 3.2500e-
003
3.2700e-
003
129.2270
Total 0.2889 14.4404 3.2304 0.0559 1.6869 0.1171 1.8040 0.4610 0.1120 0.5730 6,086.179
1
6,086.179
1
0.2117 0.9474 6,373.798
8
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.10 Const Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage28of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.10 Const Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0297 1.0017 0.3250 3.7100e-
003
0.1162 5.8400e-
003
0.1220 0.0335 5.5900e-
003
0.0391 397.3139 397.3139 8.8600e-
003
0.0583 414.9175
Worker 0.1738 0.1150 1.4996 4.5900e-
003
0.5437 2.6100e-
003
0.5463 0.1442 2.4000e-
003
0.1466 469.9583 469.9583 0.0119 0.0120 473.8323
Total 0.2035 1.1167 1.8246 8.3000e-
003
0.6599 8.4500e-
003
0.6683 0.1777 7.9900e-
003
0.1857 867.2721 867.2721 0.0208 0.0703 888.7498
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0269 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0269 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage29of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.10 Const Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0297 1.0017 0.3250 3.7100e-
003
0.1162 5.8400e-
003
0.1220 0.0335 5.5900e-
003
0.0391 397.3139 397.3139 8.8600e-
003
0.0583 414.9175
Worker 0.1738 0.1150 1.4996 4.5900e-
003
0.5437 2.6100e-
003
0.5463 0.1442 2.4000e-
003
0.1466 469.9583 469.9583 0.0119 0.0120 473.8323
Total 0.2035 1.1167 1.8246 8.3000e-
003
0.6599 8.4500e-
003
0.6683 0.1777 7.9900e-
003
0.1857 867.2721 867.2721 0.0208 0.0703 888.7498
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.10 Const Tower - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698
9
2,555.698
9
0.6044 2,570.807
7
Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698
9
2,555.698
9
0.6044 2,570.807
7
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage30of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.10 Const Tower - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0287 0.9826 0.3187 3.6500e-
003
0.1162 5.7400e-
003
0.1219 0.0335 5.4900e-
003
0.0390 391.1854 391.1854 8.9600e-
003
0.0574 408.5158
Worker 0.1634 0.1025 1.3944 4.4500e-
003
0.5437 2.4800e-
003
0.5462 0.1442 2.2800e-
003
0.1465 458.7978 458.7978 0.0108 0.0112 462.3927
Total 0.1921 1.0851 1.7131 8.1000e-
003
0.6599 8.2200e-
003
0.6681 0.1777 7.7700e-
003
0.1855 849.9832 849.9832 0.0198 0.0686 870.9085
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0270 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,555.698
9
2,555.698
9
0.6044 2,570.807
7
Total 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0270 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,555.698
9
2,555.698
9
0.6044 2,570.807
7
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage31of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.10 Const Tower - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0287 0.9826 0.3187 3.6500e-
003
0.1162 5.7400e-
003
0.1219 0.0335 5.4900e-
003
0.0390 391.1854 391.1854 8.9600e-
003
0.0574 408.5158
Worker 0.1634 0.1025 1.3944 4.4500e-
003
0.5437 2.4800e-
003
0.5462 0.1442 2.2800e-
003
0.1465 458.7978 458.7978 0.0108 0.0112 462.3927
Total 0.1921 1.0851 1.7131 8.1000e-
003
0.6599 8.2200e-
003
0.6681 0.1777 7.7700e-
003
0.1855 849.9832 849.9832 0.0198 0.0686 870.9085
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.11 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 124.4208 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 124.6015 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage32of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.11 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0327 0.0205 0.2789 8.9000e-
004
0.1088 5.0000e-
004
0.1092 0.0288 4.6000e-
004
0.0293 91.7596 91.7596 2.1600e-
003
2.2300e-
003
92.4786
Total 0.0327 0.0205 0.2789 8.9000e-
004
0.1088 5.0000e-
004
0.1092 0.0288 4.6000e-
004
0.0293 91.7596 91.7596 2.1600e-
003
2.2300e-
003
92.4786
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 124.4208 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0594 1.3570 1.8324 2.9700e-
003
0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 124.4802 1.3570 1.8324 2.9700e-
003
0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage33of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.11 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0327 0.0205 0.2789 8.9000e-
004
0.1088 5.0000e-
004
0.1092 0.0288 4.6000e-
004
0.0293 91.7596 91.7596 2.1600e-
003
2.2300e-
003
92.4786
Total 0.0327 0.0205 0.2789 8.9000e-
004
0.1088 5.0000e-
004
0.1092 0.0288 4.6000e-
004
0.0293 91.7596 91.7596 2.1600e-
003
2.2300e-
003
92.4786
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage34of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 4.8868 5.4994 42.5032 0.0932 11.5617 0.0737 11.6354 3.0804 0.0691 3.1495 9,999.728
8
9,999.728
8
0.5417 0.4305 10,141.54
86
Unmitigated 4.8868 5.4994 42.5032 0.0932 11.5617 0.0737 11.6354 3.0804 0.0691 3.1495 9,999.728
8
9,999.728
8
0.5417 0.4305 10,141.54
86
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Hospital 1,829.72 1,829.72 1829.72 5,380,856 5,380,856
Research & Development 45.99 45.99 45.99 109,731 109,731
Unenclosed Parking Structure 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 1,875.71 1,875.71 1,875.71 5,490,587 5,490,587
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
Hospital 13.00 5.00 5.00 64.90 16.10 19.00 73 25 2
Research & Development 13.00 5.00 5.00 33.00 48.00 19.00 82 15 3
Unenclosed Parking Structure 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Hospital 0.516135 0.058853 0.199929 0.136792 0.029532 0.007795 0.008341 0.005917 0.000885 0.000346 0.029869 0.000792 0.004814
Research & Development 0.516135 0.058853 0.199929 0.136792 0.029532 0.007795 0.008341 0.005917 0.000885 0.000346 0.029869 0.000792 0.004814
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage35of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Unenclosed Parking Structure 0.516135 0.058853 0.199929 0.136792 0.029532 0.007795 0.008341 0.005917 0.000885 0.000346 0.029869 0.000792 0.004814
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.2936 2.6689 2.2419 0.0160 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 3,202.714
3
3,202.714
3
0.0614 0.0587 3,221.746
5
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.2936 2.6689 2.2419 0.0160 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 3,202.714
3
3,202.714
3
0.0614 0.0587 3,221.746
5
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Install Energy Efficient Appliances
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage36of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Hospital 26807.1 0.2891 2.6281 2.2076 0.0158 0.1997 0.1997 0.1997 0.1997 3,153.771
9
3,153.771
9
0.0605 0.0578 3,172.513
2
Research &
Development
416.011 4.4900e-
003
0.0408 0.0343 2.4000e-
004
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
48.9425 48.9425 9.4000e-
004
9.0000e-
004
49.2333
Unenclosed
Parking Structure
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.2936 2.6689 2.2419 0.0160 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 3,202.714
4
3,202.714
4
0.0614 0.0587 3,221.746
5
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage37of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Hospital 26.8071 0.2891 2.6281 2.2076 0.0158 0.1997 0.1997 0.1997 0.1997 3,153.771
9
3,153.771
9
0.0605 0.0578 3,172.513
2
Research &
Development
0.416011 4.4900e-
003
0.0408 0.0343 2.4000e-
004
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
48.9425 48.9425 9.4000e-
004
9.0000e-
004
49.2333
Unenclosed
Parking Structure
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.2936 2.6689 2.2419 0.0160 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 3,202.714
4
3,202.714
4
0.0614 0.0587 3,221.746
5
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage38of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 2.6812 1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Unmitigated 2.6812 1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.6136 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
2.0662 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 1.4400e-
003
1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Total 2.6812 1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage39of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet
Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet
Install Low Flow Toilet
Install Low Flow Shower
Use Water Efficient Landscaping
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.6136 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
2.0662 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 1.4400e-
003
1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Total 2.6812 1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Mitigated
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
8.0 Waste Detail
9.0 Operational Offroad
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage40of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
11.0 Vegetation
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
Emergency Generator 2 8 100 1050 0.73 Diesel
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
10.1 Stationary Sources
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Equipment Type lb/day lb/day
Emergency
Generator -
Diesel (750 -
9999 HP)
27.5699 123.2910 70.2975 0.1325 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 14,103.83
72
14,103.83
72
1.9774 14,153.27
12
Total 27.5699 123.2910 70.2975 0.1325 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 14,103.83
72
14,103.83
72
1.9774 14,153.27
12
Unmitigated/Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:48PMPage41of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Summer
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion
San Luis Obispo County, Winter
Project Characteristics - See SWAPE comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to the Default CH4, CO2, and N2O Intensity Factors"
Land Use - See SWAPE comment on "Failure to Model All Proposed Land Uses" and "Underestimated Parking Land Use Size"
Construction Phase - See SWAPE comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to Individual Construction Phase Lengths"
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Hospital 89.78 1000sqft 2.60 89,775.00 0
Research & Development 5.80 1000sqft 0.13 5,800.00 0
Unenclosed Parking Structure 59.00 1000sqft 1.35 59,000.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
4
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)3.2 44
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2030OperationalYear
CO2 Intensity
lb/MWhr)
203.98 0.033CH4Intensity
lb/MWhr)
0.004N2OIntensity
lb/MWhr)
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage1of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Off-road Equipment -
Trips and VMT - Consistent with the IS/MND's model.
Demolition - See SWAPE comment on "Failure to Substantiate Demolition and Reduction to Number of Demolition Hauling Trips"
Grading - Consistent with IS/MND's model.
Vehicle Trips - See SWAPE comment on "Underestimated Weekday, Saturday, and Sunday Operational Vehicle Trip Rates'
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - Consistent with IS/MND's model.
Operational Off-Road Equipment -
Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps - Consistent with IS/MND's model.
Stationary Sources - Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps EF - See SWAPE comment on "Unsubstantiated Reductions to Stationary Generator Emission
Factors"
Energy Mitigation -
Water Mitigation -
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 8.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 6.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 1.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 12.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage2of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 21.00
tblConstEquipMitigation NumberOfEquipmentMitigated 0.00 2.00
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblConstEquipMitigation Tier No Change Tier 3
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 8.00 14.00
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 8.00 65.00
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 7.50 8.00
tblGrading AcresOfGrading 7.50 12.00
tblGrading MaterialExported 0.00 3,260.00
tblGrading MaterialImported 0.00 2,370.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 89,780.00 89,775.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 2.06 2.60
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HorsePowerValue 0.00 1,050.00
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HoursPerDay 0.00 8.00
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse HoursPerYear 0.00 100.00
tblStationaryGeneratorsPumpsUse NumberOfEquipment 0.00 2.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 100.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage3of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 7.72 20.38
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.90 7.93
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 6.77 20.38
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.11 7.93
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 10.72 20.38
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 11.26 7.93
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage4of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 5.2413 54.0271 35.9209 0.0704 27.9673 2.5551 30.5223 13.7111 2.3507 16.0617 0.0000 6,835.041
3
6,835.041
3
2.1295 0.0797 6,890.803
5
2023 3.3202 32.7932 32.9021 0.0856 20.7894 1.4404 22.0563 10.2527 1.3374 11.4182 0.0000 8,958.275
3
8,958.275
3
1.6348 0.9485 9,269.430
5
2024 126.3182 15.8181 19.9449 0.0387 0.7687 0.6830 1.4516 0.2065 0.6461 0.8526 0.0000 3,756.566
2
3,756.566
2
0.6431 0.0721 3,794.136
7
Maximum 126.3182 54.0271 35.9209 0.0856 27.9673 2.5551 30.5223 13.7111 2.3507 16.0617 0.0000 8,958.275
3
8,958.275
3
2.1295 0.9485 9,269.430
5
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2022 1.7800 33.9938 42.9011 0.0704 27.9673 1.7034 29.6706 13.7111 1.7032 15.4143 0.0000 6,835.041
3
6,835.041
3
2.1295 0.0797 6,890.803
5
2023 1.4965 29.6971 39.2744 0.0856 20.7894 1.3946 21.7364 10.2527 1.3942 11.1997 0.0000 8,958.275
3
8,958.275
3
1.6348 0.9485 9,269.430
5
2024 125.3992 16.7386 21.6742 0.0387 0.7687 1.0074 1.7760 0.2065 1.0069 1.2134 0.0000 3,756.566
2
3,756.566
2
0.6431 0.0721 3,794.136
7
Maximum 125.3992 33.9938 42.9011 0.0856 27.9673 1.7034 29.6706 13.7111 1.7032 15.4143 0.0000 8,958.275
3
8,958.275
3
2.1295 0.9485 9,269.430
5
Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage5of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
4.60 21.64 -16.99 0.00 0.00 12.25 1.57 0.00 5.30 1.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.6812 1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Energy 0.2936 2.6689 2.2419 0.0160 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 3,202.714
3
3,202.714
3
0.0614 0.0587 3,221.746
5
Mobile 4.7567 5.9102 45.0127 0.0903 11.5617 0.0737 11.6354 3.0804 0.0691 3.1495 9,687.394
5
9,687.394
5
0.5828 0.4534 9,837.087
7
Stationary 27.5699 123.2910 70.2975 0.1325 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 14,103.83
72
14,103.83
72
1.9774 14,153.27
12
Total 35.3015 131.8702 117.5678 0.2388 11.5617 4.3322 15.8940 3.0804 4.3277 7.4080 26,993.97
99
26,993.97
99
2.6217 0.5122 27,212.14
14
Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage6of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.6812 1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Energy 0.2936 2.6689 2.2419 0.0160 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 3,202.714
3
3,202.714
3
0.0614 0.0587 3,221.746
5
Mobile 4.7567 5.9102 45.0127 0.0903 11.5617 0.0737 11.6354 3.0804 0.0691 3.1495 9,687.394
5
9,687.394
5
0.5828 0.4534 9,837.087
7
Stationary 27.5699 123.2910 70.2975 0.1325 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 14,103.83
72
14,103.83
72
1.9774 14,153.27
12
Total 35.3015 131.8702 117.5678 0.2388 11.5617 4.3322 15.8940 3.0804 4.3277 7.4080 26,993.97
99
26,993.97
99
2.6217 0.5122 27,212.14
14
Mitigated Operational
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Parking Deck Demolition 8/1/2022 8/26/2022 5 20 Demo Parking Deck
2 Site Prep Parking Deck Site Preparation 8/27/2022 9/2/2022 5 5 Site Prep Patient Tower
3 Grading Parking Deck Grading 8/28/2022 9/7/2022 5 8 Grading Patient Tower
4 Const Parking Deck Building Construction 9/8/2022 7/26/2023 5 230 Const Parking Deck
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage7of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
5 Paving Parking Deck Paving 7/27/2023 8/21/2023 5 18 Paving Patient Tower
6 Demolition Tower Demolition 8/1/2023 8/28/2023 5 20 Demo Tower
7 Site Prep Tower Site Preparation 8/29/2023 9/4/2023 5 5 Site Prep Tower
8 Grading Tower Grading 9/5/2023 9/14/2023 5 8 Grading Tower
9 Const Tower Building Construction 9/15/2023 8/1/2024 5 230 Const Tower
10 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 1/15/2024 2/7/2024 5 18 Arch Coating
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Demolition Parking Deck Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Parking Deck Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Parking Deck Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Prep Parking Deck Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Prep Parking Deck Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Parking Deck Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Parking Deck Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Parking Deck Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Parking Deck Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Const Parking Deck Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Const Parking Deck Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Const Parking Deck Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Const Parking Deck Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37
Const Parking Deck Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 143,363; Non-Residential Outdoor: 47,788; Striped Parking Area: 3,540
Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 8
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 14
Acres of Paving: 1.35
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage8of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Paving Parking Deck Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6.00 9 0.56
Paving Parking Deck Pavers 1 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Parking Deck Paving Equipment 2 6.00 132 0.36
Paving Parking Deck Rollers 2 6.00 80 0.38
Paving Parking Deck Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Demolition Tower Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Demolition Tower Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Demolition Tower Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Site Prep Tower Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Site Prep Tower Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Tower Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Tower Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Grading Tower Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Tower Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Const Tower Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Const Tower Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Const Tower Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Const Tower Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37
Const Tower Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition Parking
Deck
6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Prep Parking
Deck
7 18.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading Parking Deck 6 15.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Const Parking Deck 9 55.00 25.00 100.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage9of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.2 Demolition Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.6392 25.7194 20.5941 0.0388 1.2427 1.2427 1.1553 1.1553 3,746.781
2
3,746.781
2
1.0524 3,773.092
0
Total 2.6392 25.7194 20.5941 0.0388 1.2427 1.2427 1.1553 1.1553 3,746.781
2
3,746.781
2
1.0524 3,773.092
0
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Use Cleaner Engines for Construction Equipment
Use Soil Stabilizer
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Paving Parking Deck 8 20.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Demolition Tower 6 15.00 0.00 84.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Prep Tower 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading Tower 6 15.00 0.00 704.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Const Tower 9 55.00 25.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 11.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 5.00 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage10of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.2 Demolition Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0557 0.0402 0.4320 1.2400e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 125.8786 125.8786 3.8700e-
003
3.8500e-
003
127.1225
Total 0.0557 0.0402 0.4320 1.2400e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 125.8786 125.8786 3.8700e-
003
3.8500e-
003
127.1225
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9246 18.3130 24.6739 0.0388 0.8627 0.8627 0.8627 0.8627 0.0000 3,746.781
2
3,746.781
2
1.0524 3,773.092
0
Total 0.9246 18.3130 24.6739 0.0388 0.8627 0.8627 0.8627 0.8627 0.0000 3,746.781
2
3,746.781
2
1.0524 3,773.092
0
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage11of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.2 Demolition Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0557 0.0402 0.4320 1.2400e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 125.8786 125.8786 3.8700e-
003
3.8500e-
003
127.1225
Total 0.0557 0.0402 0.4320 1.2400e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 125.8786 125.8786 3.8700e-
003
3.8500e-
003
127.1225
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Prep Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.7631 0.0000 19.7631 10.1139 0.0000 10.1139 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 1.6126 1.6126 1.4836 1.4836 3,686.061
9
3,686.061
9
1.1922 3,715.865
5
Total 3.1701 33.0835 19.6978 0.0380 19.7631 1.6126 21.3756 10.1139 1.4836 11.5975 3,686.061
9
3,686.061
9
1.1922 3,715.865
5
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage12of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.3 Site Prep Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0668 0.0482 0.5184 1.4800e-
003
0.1780 9.0000e-
004
0.1789 0.0472 8.3000e-
004
0.0480 151.0544 151.0544 4.6400e-
003
4.6200e-
003
152.5470
Total 0.0668 0.0482 0.5184 1.4800e-
003
0.1780 9.0000e-
004
0.1789 0.0472 8.3000e-
004
0.0480 151.0544 151.0544 4.6400e-
003
4.6200e-
003
152.5470
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 19.7631 0.0000 19.7631 10.1139 0.0000 10.1139 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.9312 19.0656 22.9600 0.0380 0.9462 0.9462 0.9462 0.9462 0.0000 3,686.061
9
3,686.061
9
1.1922 3,715.865
5
Total 0.9312 19.0656 22.9600 0.0380 19.7631 0.9462 20.7092 10.1139 0.9462 11.0601 0.0000 3,686.061
9
3,686.061
9
1.1922 3,715.865
5
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage13of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.3 Site Prep Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0668 0.0482 0.5184 1.4800e-
003
0.1780 9.0000e-
004
0.1789 0.0472 8.3000e-
004
0.0480 151.0544 151.0544 4.6400e-
003
4.6200e-
003
152.5470
Total 0.0668 0.0482 0.5184 1.4800e-
003
0.1780 9.0000e-
004
0.1789 0.0472 8.3000e-
004
0.0480 151.0544 151.0544 4.6400e-
003
4.6200e-
003
152.5470
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.8780 0.0000 7.8780 3.5106 0.0000 3.5106 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 0.9409 0.9409 0.8656 0.8656 2,872.046
4
2,872.046
4
0.9289 2,895.268
4
Total 1.9486 20.8551 15.2727 0.0297 7.8780 0.9409 8.8188 3.5106 0.8656 4.3762 2,872.046
4
2,872.046
4
0.9289 2,895.268
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage14of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.4 Grading Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0557 0.0402 0.4320 1.2400e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 125.8786 125.8786 3.8700e-
003
3.8500e-
003
127.1225
Total 0.0557 0.0402 0.4320 1.2400e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 125.8786 125.8786 3.8700e-
003
3.8500e-
003
127.1225
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 7.8780 0.0000 7.8780 3.5106 0.0000 3.5106 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.7263 14.8397 18.9906 0.0297 0.7555 0.7555 0.7555 0.7555 0.0000 2,872.046
4
2,872.046
4
0.9289 2,895.268
4
Total 0.7263 14.8397 18.9906 0.0297 7.8780 0.7555 8.6335 3.5106 0.7555 4.2662 0.0000 2,872.046
4
2,872.046
4
0.9289 2,895.268
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage15of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.4 Grading Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0557 0.0402 0.4320 1.2400e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 125.8786 125.8786 3.8700e-
003
3.8500e-
003
127.1225
Total 0.0557 0.0402 0.4320 1.2400e-
003
0.1483 7.5000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.9000e-
004
0.0400 125.8786 125.8786 3.8700e-
003
3.8500e-
003
127.1225
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 1.7062 15.6156 16.3634 0.0269 0.8090 0.8090 0.7612 0.7612 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage16of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 2.0700e-
003
0.0879 0.0157 2.8000e-
004
7.6000e-
003
7.7000e-
004
8.3700e-
003
2.0800e-
003
7.4000e-
004
2.8200e-
003
30.6509 30.6509 1.0400e-
003
4.8500e-
003
32.1236
Vendor 0.0482 1.2340 0.3798 3.8500e-
003
0.1161 0.0120 0.1282 0.0335 0.0115 0.0450 412.0514 412.0514 9.5100e-
003
0.0607 430.3767
Worker 0.2042 0.1474 1.5841 4.5400e-
003
0.5437 2.7500e-
003
0.5465 0.1442 2.5400e-
003
0.1468 461.5550 461.5550 0.0142 0.0141 466.1159
Total 0.2545 1.4692 1.9796 8.6700e-
003
0.6675 0.0156 0.6830 0.1797 0.0148 0.1945 904.2573 904.2573 0.0247 0.0797 928.6162
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0269 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Total 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0269 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,554.333
6
2,554.333
6
0.6120 2,569.632
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage17of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2022
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 2.0700e-
003
0.0879 0.0157 2.8000e-
004
7.6000e-
003
7.7000e-
004
8.3700e-
003
2.0800e-
003
7.4000e-
004
2.8200e-
003
30.6509 30.6509 1.0400e-
003
4.8500e-
003
32.1236
Vendor 0.0482 1.2340 0.3798 3.8500e-
003
0.1161 0.0120 0.1282 0.0335 0.0115 0.0450 412.0514 412.0514 9.5100e-
003
0.0607 430.3767
Worker 0.2042 0.1474 1.5841 4.5400e-
003
0.5437 2.7500e-
003
0.5465 0.1442 2.5400e-
003
0.1468 461.5550 461.5550 0.0142 0.0141 466.1159
Total 0.2545 1.4692 1.9796 8.6700e-
003
0.6675 0.0156 0.6830 0.1797 0.0148 0.1945 904.2573 904.2573 0.0247 0.0797 928.6162
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage18of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 1.1400e-
003
0.0732 0.0142 2.7000e-
004
7.6000e-
003
5.8000e-
004
8.1800e-
003
2.0800e-
003
5.5000e-
004
2.6300e-
003
29.4604 29.4604 1.0300e-
003
4.6700e-
003
30.8773
Vendor 0.0290 1.0352 0.3377 3.7100e-
003
0.1162 5.8800e-
003
0.1220 0.0335 5.6200e-
003
0.0391 397.9725 397.9725 8.8000e-
003
0.0585 415.6204
Worker 0.1918 0.1305 1.4639 4.4000e-
003
0.5437 2.6100e-
003
0.5463 0.1442 2.4000e-
003
0.1466 450.2724 450.2724 0.0129 0.0131 454.4850
Total 0.2220 1.2389 1.8157 8.3800e-
003
0.6675 9.0700e-
003
0.6766 0.1798 8.5700e-
003
0.1883 877.7053 877.7053 0.0227 0.0762 900.9827
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0269 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0269 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage19of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.5 Const Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 1.1400e-
003
0.0732 0.0142 2.7000e-
004
7.6000e-
003
5.8000e-
004
8.1800e-
003
2.0800e-
003
5.5000e-
004
2.6300e-
003
29.4604 29.4604 1.0300e-
003
4.6700e-
003
30.8773
Vendor 0.0290 1.0352 0.3377 3.7100e-
003
0.1162 5.8800e-
003
0.1220 0.0335 5.6200e-
003
0.0391 397.9725 397.9725 8.8000e-
003
0.0585 415.6204
Worker 0.1918 0.1305 1.4639 4.4000e-
003
0.5437 2.6100e-
003
0.5463 0.1442 2.4000e-
003
0.1466 450.2724 450.2724 0.0129 0.0131 454.4850
Total 0.2220 1.2389 1.8157 8.3800e-
003
0.6675 9.0700e-
003
0.6766 0.1798 8.5700e-
003
0.1883 877.7053 877.7053 0.0227 0.0762 900.9827
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.9181 8.7903 12.1905 0.0189 0.4357 0.4357 0.4025 0.4025 1,805.430
4
1,805.430
4
0.5673 1,819.612
2
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.9181 8.7903 12.1905 0.0189 0.4357 0.4357 0.4025 0.4025 1,805.430
4
1,805.430
4
0.5673 1,819.612
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage20of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.6 Paving Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0698 0.0475 0.5323 1.6000e-
003
0.1977 9.5000e-
004
0.1987 0.0524 8.7000e-
004
0.0533 163.7354 163.7354 4.6800e-
003
4.7500e-
003
165.2673
Total 0.0698 0.0475 0.5323 1.6000e-
003
0.1977 9.5000e-
004
0.1987 0.0524 8.7000e-
004
0.0533 163.7354 163.7354 4.6800e-
003
4.7500e-
003
165.2673
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.4389 9.0888 13.5323 0.0189 0.5246 0.5246 0.5246 0.5246 0.0000 1,805.430
4
1,805.430
4
0.5673 1,819.612
2
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.4389 9.0888 13.5323 0.0189 0.5246 0.5246 0.5246 0.5246 0.0000 1,805.430
4
1,805.430
4
0.5673 1,819.612
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage21of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.6 Paving Parking Deck - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0698 0.0475 0.5323 1.6000e-
003
0.1977 9.5000e-
004
0.1987 0.0524 8.7000e-
004
0.0533 163.7354 163.7354 4.6800e-
003
4.7500e-
003
165.2673
Total 0.0698 0.0475 0.5323 1.6000e-
003
0.1977 9.5000e-
004
0.1987 0.0524 8.7000e-
004
0.0533 163.7354 163.7354 4.6800e-
003
4.7500e-
003
165.2673
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Demolition Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.9388 0.0000 0.9388 0.1422 0.0000 0.1422 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.2691 21.4844 19.6434 0.0388 0.9975 0.9975 0.9280 0.9280 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Total 2.2691 21.4844 19.6434 0.0388 0.9388 0.9975 1.9363 0.1422 0.9280 1.0702 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage22of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.7 Demolition Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0110 0.7074 0.1367 2.6100e-
003
0.0734 5.5700e-
003
0.0790 0.0201 5.3200e-
003
0.0255 284.5874 284.5874 9.9200e-
003
0.0451 298.2746
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0523 0.0356 0.3993 1.2000e-
003
0.1483 7.1000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.6000e-
004
0.0400 122.8016 122.8016 3.5100e-
003
3.5600e-
003
123.9505
Total 0.0633 0.7430 0.5359 3.8100e-
003
0.2217 6.2800e-
003
0.2280 0.0595 5.9800e-
003
0.0654 407.3889 407.3889 0.0134 0.0487 422.2250
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.9388 0.0000 0.9388 0.1422 0.0000 0.1422 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.9246 18.3130 24.6739 0.0388 0.8627 0.8627 0.8627 0.8627 0.0000 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Total 0.9246 18.3130 24.6739 0.0388 0.9388 0.8627 1.8015 0.1422 0.8627 1.0049 0.0000 3,746.984
0
3,746.984
0
1.0494 3,773.218
3
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage23of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.7 Demolition Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0110 0.7074 0.1367 2.6100e-
003
0.0734 5.5700e-
003
0.0790 0.0201 5.3200e-
003
0.0255 284.5874 284.5874 9.9200e-
003
0.0451 298.2746
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0523 0.0356 0.3993 1.2000e-
003
0.1483 7.1000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.6000e-
004
0.0400 122.8016 122.8016 3.5100e-
003
3.5600e-
003
123.9505
Total 0.0633 0.7430 0.5359 3.8100e-
003
0.2217 6.2800e-
003
0.2280 0.0595 5.9800e-
003
0.0654 407.3889 407.3889 0.0134 0.0487 422.2250
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.8 Site Prep Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 20.6115 0.0000 20.6115 10.2055 0.0000 10.2055 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 1.2660 1.2660 1.1647 1.1647 3,687.308
1
3,687.308
1
1.1926 3,717.121
9
Total 2.6595 27.5242 18.2443 0.0381 20.6115 1.2660 21.8775 10.2055 1.1647 11.3702 3,687.308
1
3,687.308
1
1.1926 3,717.121
9
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage24of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.8 Site Prep Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0628 0.0427 0.4791 1.4400e-
003
0.1780 8.5000e-
004
0.1788 0.0472 7.9000e-
004
0.0480 147.3619 147.3619 4.2100e-
003
4.2700e-
003
148.7406
Total 0.0628 0.0427 0.4791 1.4400e-
003
0.1780 8.5000e-
004
0.1788 0.0472 7.9000e-
004
0.0480 147.3619 147.3619 4.2100e-
003
4.2700e-
003
148.7406
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 20.6115 0.0000 20.6115 10.2055 0.0000 10.2055 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.9312 19.0656 22.9600 0.0381 0.9462 0.9462 0.9462 0.9462 0.0000 3,687.308
1
3,687.308
1
1.1926 3,717.121
9
Total 0.9312 19.0656 22.9600 0.0381 20.6115 0.9462 21.5576 10.2055 0.9462 11.1517 0.0000 3,687.308
1
3,687.308
1
1.1926 3,717.121
9
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage25of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.8 Site Prep Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0628 0.0427 0.4791 1.4400e-
003
0.1780 8.5000e-
004
0.1788 0.0472 7.9000e-
004
0.0480 147.3619 147.3619 4.2100e-
003
4.2700e-
003
148.7406
Total 0.0628 0.0427 0.4791 1.4400e-
003
0.1780 8.5000e-
004
0.1788 0.0472 7.9000e-
004
0.0480 147.3619 147.3619 4.2100e-
003
4.2700e-
003
148.7406
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.9 Grading Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 14.7682 0.0000 14.7682 4.2602 0.0000 4.2602 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.7109 17.9359 14.7507 0.0297 0.7749 0.7749 0.7129 0.7129 2,872.691
0
2,872.691
0
0.9291 2,895.918
2
Total 1.7109 17.9359 14.7507 0.0297 14.7682 0.7749 15.5431 4.2602 0.7129 4.9732 2,872.691
0
2,872.691
0
0.9291 2,895.918
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage26of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.9 Grading Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.2303 14.8217 2.8636 0.0547 1.5386 0.1166 1.6552 0.4217 0.1116 0.5332 5,962.782
8
5,962.782
8
0.2079 0.9449 6,249.561
9
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0523 0.0356 0.3993 1.2000e-
003
0.1483 7.1000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.6000e-
004
0.0400 122.8016 122.8016 3.5100e-
003
3.5600e-
003
123.9505
Total 0.2827 14.8573 3.2628 0.0559 1.6869 0.1173 1.8042 0.4610 0.1122 0.5732 6,085.584
3
6,085.584
3
0.2114 0.9485 6,373.512
4
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 14.7682 0.0000 14.7682 4.2602 0.0000 4.2602 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.7263 14.8397 18.9906 0.0297 0.7555 0.7555 0.7555 0.7555 0.0000 2,872.691
0
2,872.691
0
0.9291 2,895.918
2
Total 0.7263 14.8397 18.9906 0.0297 14.7682 0.7555 15.5237 4.2602 0.7555 5.0158 0.0000 2,872.691
0
2,872.691
0
0.9291 2,895.918
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage27of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.9 Grading Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.2303 14.8217 2.8636 0.0547 1.5386 0.1166 1.6552 0.4217 0.1116 0.5332 5,962.782
8
5,962.782
8
0.2079 0.9449 6,249.561
9
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0523 0.0356 0.3993 1.2000e-
003
0.1483 7.1000e-
004
0.1490 0.0393 6.6000e-
004
0.0400 122.8016 122.8016 3.5100e-
003
3.5600e-
003
123.9505
Total 0.2827 14.8573 3.2628 0.0559 1.6869 0.1173 1.8042 0.4610 0.1122 0.5732 6,085.584
3
6,085.584
3
0.2114 0.9485 6,373.512
4
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.10 Const Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 1.5728 14.3849 16.2440 0.0269 0.6997 0.6997 0.6584 0.6584 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage28of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.10 Const Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0290 1.0352 0.3377 3.7100e-
003
0.1162 5.8800e-
003
0.1220 0.0335 5.6200e-
003
0.0391 397.9725 397.9725 8.8000e-
003
0.0585 415.6204
Worker 0.1918 0.1305 1.4639 4.4000e-
003
0.5437 2.6100e-
003
0.5463 0.1442 2.4000e-
003
0.1466 450.2724 450.2724 0.0129 0.0131 454.4850
Total 0.2209 1.1657 1.8016 8.1100e-
003
0.6599 8.4900e-
003
0.6684 0.1777 8.0200e-
003
0.1857 848.2449 848.2449 0.0217 0.0715 870.1054
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0269 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Total 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0269 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,555.209
9
2,555.209
9
0.6079 2,570.406
1
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage29of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.10 Const Tower - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0290 1.0352 0.3377 3.7100e-
003
0.1162 5.8800e-
003
0.1220 0.0335 5.6200e-
003
0.0391 397.9725 397.9725 8.8000e-
003
0.0585 415.6204
Worker 0.1918 0.1305 1.4639 4.4000e-
003
0.5437 2.6100e-
003
0.5463 0.1442 2.4000e-
003
0.1466 450.2724 450.2724 0.0129 0.0131 454.4850
Total 0.2209 1.1657 1.8016 8.1100e-
003
0.6599 8.4900e-
003
0.6684 0.1777 8.0200e-
003
0.1857 848.2449 848.2449 0.0217 0.0715 870.1054
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.10 Const Tower - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698
9
2,555.698
9
0.6044 2,570.807
7
Total 1.4716 13.4438 16.1668 0.0270 0.6133 0.6133 0.5769 0.5769 2,555.698
9
2,555.698
9
0.6044 2,570.807
7
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage30of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.10 Const Tower - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0280 1.0159 0.3313 3.6500e-
003
0.1162 5.7800e-
003
0.1220 0.0335 5.5300e-
003
0.0390 391.8678 391.8678 8.9000e-
003
0.0576 409.2421
Worker 0.1809 0.1164 1.3639 4.2600e-
003
0.5437 2.4800e-
003
0.5462 0.1442 2.2800e-
003
0.1465 439.6262 439.6262 0.0117 0.0121 443.5355
Total 0.2089 1.1323 1.6952 7.9100e-
003
0.6599 8.2600e-
003
0.6682 0.1777 7.8100e-
003
0.1855 831.4940 831.4940 0.0206 0.0697 852.7777
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0270 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,555.698
9
2,555.698
9
0.6044 2,570.807
7
Total 0.6739 14.2261 17.8738 0.0270 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.9036 0.0000 2,555.698
9
2,555.698
9
0.6044 2,570.807
7
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage31of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.10 Const Tower - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0280 1.0159 0.3313 3.6500e-
003
0.1162 5.7800e-
003
0.1220 0.0335 5.5300e-
003
0.0390 391.8678 391.8678 8.9000e-
003
0.0576 409.2421
Worker 0.1809 0.1164 1.3639 4.2600e-
003
0.5437 2.4800e-
003
0.5462 0.1442 2.2800e-
003
0.1465 439.6262 439.6262 0.0117 0.0121 443.5355
Total 0.2089 1.1323 1.6952 7.9100e-
003
0.6599 8.2600e-
003
0.6682 0.1777 7.8100e-
003
0.1855 831.4940 831.4940 0.0206 0.0697 852.7777
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.11 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 124.4208 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 124.6015 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-
003
0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage32of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.11 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0362 0.0233 0.2728 8.5000e-
004
0.1088 5.0000e-
004
0.1092 0.0288 4.6000e-
004
0.0293 87.9252 87.9252 2.3400e-
003
2.4300e-
003
88.7071
Total 0.0362 0.0233 0.2728 8.5000e-
004
0.1088 5.0000e-
004
0.1092 0.0288 4.6000e-
004
0.0293 87.9252 87.9252 2.3400e-
003
2.4300e-
003
88.7071
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 124.4208 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.0594 1.3570 1.8324 2.9700e-
003
0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Total 124.4802 1.3570 1.8324 2.9700e-
003
0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0951 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage33of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
3.11 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0362 0.0233 0.2728 8.5000e-
004
0.1088 5.0000e-
004
0.1092 0.0288 4.6000e-
004
0.0293 87.9252 87.9252 2.3400e-
003
2.4300e-
003
88.7071
Total 0.0362 0.0233 0.2728 8.5000e-
004
0.1088 5.0000e-
004
0.1092 0.0288 4.6000e-
004
0.0293 87.9252 87.9252 2.3400e-
003
2.4300e-
003
88.7071
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage34of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 4.7567 5.9102 45.0127 0.0903 11.5617 0.0737 11.6354 3.0804 0.0691 3.1495 9,687.394
5
9,687.394
5
0.5828 0.4534 9,837.087
7
Unmitigated 4.7567 5.9102 45.0127 0.0903 11.5617 0.0737 11.6354 3.0804 0.0691 3.1495 9,687.394
5
9,687.394
5
0.5828 0.4534 9,837.087
7
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Hospital 1,829.72 1,829.72 1829.72 5,380,856 5,380,856
Research & Development 45.99 45.99 45.99 109,731 109,731
Unenclosed Parking Structure 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 1,875.71 1,875.71 1,875.71 5,490,587 5,490,587
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
Hospital 13.00 5.00 5.00 64.90 16.10 19.00 73 25 2
Research & Development 13.00 5.00 5.00 33.00 48.00 19.00 82 15 3
Unenclosed Parking Structure 13.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
Hospital 0.516135 0.058853 0.199929 0.136792 0.029532 0.007795 0.008341 0.005917 0.000885 0.000346 0.029869 0.000792 0.004814
Research & Development 0.516135 0.058853 0.199929 0.136792 0.029532 0.007795 0.008341 0.005917 0.000885 0.000346 0.029869 0.000792 0.004814
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage35of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Unenclosed Parking Structure 0.516135 0.058853 0.199929 0.136792 0.029532 0.007795 0.008341 0.005917 0.000885 0.000346 0.029869 0.000792 0.004814
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.2936 2.6689 2.2419 0.0160 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 3,202.714
3
3,202.714
3
0.0614 0.0587 3,221.746
5
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.2936 2.6689 2.2419 0.0160 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 3,202.714
3
3,202.714
3
0.0614 0.0587 3,221.746
5
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Install Energy Efficient Appliances
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage36of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Hospital 26807.1 0.2891 2.6281 2.2076 0.0158 0.1997 0.1997 0.1997 0.1997 3,153.771
9
3,153.771
9
0.0605 0.0578 3,172.513
2
Research &
Development
416.011 4.4900e-
003
0.0408 0.0343 2.4000e-
004
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
48.9425 48.9425 9.4000e-
004
9.0000e-
004
49.2333
Unenclosed
Parking Structure
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.2936 2.6689 2.2419 0.0160 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 3,202.714
4
3,202.714
4
0.0614 0.0587 3,221.746
5
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage37of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Hospital 26.8071 0.2891 2.6281 2.2076 0.0158 0.1997 0.1997 0.1997 0.1997 3,153.771
9
3,153.771
9
0.0605 0.0578 3,172.513
2
Research &
Development
0.416011 4.4900e-
003
0.0408 0.0343 2.4000e-
004
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
3.1000e-
003
48.9425 48.9425 9.4000e-
004
9.0000e-
004
49.2333
Unenclosed
Parking Structure
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.2936 2.6689 2.2419 0.0160 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 0.2028 3,202.714
4
3,202.714
4
0.0614 0.0587 3,221.746
5
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage38of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 2.6812 1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Unmitigated 2.6812 1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.6136 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
2.0662 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 1.4400e-
003
1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Total 2.6812 1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage39of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet
Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet
Install Low Flow Toilet
Install Low Flow Shower
Use Water Efficient Landscaping
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.6136 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
2.0662 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 1.4400e-
003
1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Total 2.6812 1.4000e-
004
0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
6.0000e-
005
0.0338 0.0338 9.0000e-
005
0.0360
Mitigated
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
8.0 Waste Detail
9.0 Operational Offroad
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage40of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
11.0 Vegetation
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
Emergency Generator 2 8 100 1050 0.73 Diesel
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
10.1 Stationary Sources
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Equipment Type lb/day lb/day
Emergency
Generator -
Diesel (750 -
9999 HP)
27.5699 123.2910 70.2975 0.1325 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 14,103.83
72
14,103.83
72
1.9774 14,153.27
12
Total 27.5699 123.2910 70.2975 0.1325 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 4.0556 14,103.83
72
14,103.83
72
1.9774 14,153.27
12
Unmitigated/Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Date: 3/31/2022 3:50PMPage41of41
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion - San Luis Obispo County, Winter
EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
Annual Emissions (tons/year)0.0516 Total DPM (lbs)368.9276712 Annual Emissions (tons/year)0.0578
Daily Emissions (lbs/day)0.282739726 Total DPM (g)167345.5917 Daily Emissions (lbs/day)0.316712329
Construction Duration (days)153 Emission Rate (g/s)0.002649617 Total DPM (lbs)115.6
Total DPM (lbs)43.25917808 Release Height (meters)3 Emission Rate (g/s)0.00166274
Total DPM (g)19622.36318 Total Acreage 18 Release Height (meters)3
Start Date 8/1/2022 Max Horizontal (meters)381.69 Total Acreage 18
End Date 1/1/2023 Min Horizontal (meters)190.84 Max Horizontal (meters)381.69
Construction Days 153 Initial Vertical Dimension (meters)1.5 Min Horizontal (meters)190.84
Setting Urban Initial Vertical Dimension (meters)1.5
Annual Emissions (tons/year)0.1179 Population 47,063 Setting Urban
Daily Emissions (lbs/day)0.646027397 Start Date 8/1/2022 Population 47,063
Construction Duration (days)365 End Date 8/1/2024
Total DPM (lbs)235.8 Total Construction Days 731
Total DPM (g)106958.88 Total Years of Construction 2.00
Start Date 1/1/2023 Total Years of Operation 28.00
End Date 1/1/2024
Construction Days 365
Annual Emissions (tons/year)0.077
Daily Emissions (lbs/day)0.421917808
Construction Duration (days)213
Total DPM (lbs)89.86849315
Total DPM (g)40764.34849
Start Date 1/1/2024
End Date 8/1/2024
Construction Days 213
2024
Construction Operation
2022 Total Emission Rate
2023
Attachment B
Start date and time 03/30/22 15:31:00
AERSCREEN 21112
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion Construction
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion Construction
DATA ENTRY VALIDATION
METRIC ENGLISH
AREADATA
Emission Rate:0.265E 02 g/s 0.210E 01 lb/hr
Area Height:3.00 meters 9.84 feet
Area Source Length:381.69 meters 1252.26 feet
Area Source Width:190.84 meters 626.12 feet
Vertical Dimension:1.50 meters 4.92 feet
Model Mode:URBAN
Population:47063
Dist to Ambient Air:1.0 meters 3. feet
BUILDING DATA
Attachment C
No Building Downwash Parameters
TERRAIN DATA
No Terrain Elevations
Source Base Elevation:0.0 meters 0.0 feet
Probe distance:5000.meters 16404.feet
No flagpole receptors
No discrete receptors used
FUMIGATION DATA
No fumigation requested
METEOROLOGY DATA
Min/Max Temperature:250.0 310.0 K 9.7 98.3 Deg F
Minimum Wind Speed:0.5 m/s
Anemometer Height:10.000 meters
Dominant Surface Profile:Urban
Dominant Climate Type:Average Moisture
Surface friction velocity u*):not adjusted
DEBUG OPTION ON
AERSCREEN output file:
2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Construction.out
AERSCREEN Run is Ready to Begin
No terrain used,AERMAP will not be run
SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS MAKEMET
Obtaining surface characteristics...
Using AERMET seasonal surface characteristics for Urban with Average Moisture
Season Albedo Bo zo
Winter 0.35 1.50 1.000
Spring 0.14 1.00 1.000
Summer 0.16 2.00 1.000
Autumn 0.18 2.00 1.000
Creating met files aerscreen_01_01.sfc aerscreen_01_01.pfl
Creating met files aerscreen_02_01.sfc aerscreen_02_01.pfl
Creating met files aerscreen_03_01.sfc aerscreen_03_01.pfl
Creating met files aerscreen_04_01.sfc aerscreen_04_01.pfl
Buildings and/or terrain present or rectangular area source,skipping probe
FLOWSECTOR started 03/30/22 15:33:16
Running AERMOD
Processing Winter
Processing surface roughness sector 1
Processing wind flow sector 1
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 0
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 2
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 5
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 3
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 10
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 4
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 15
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 5
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 20
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 6
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 25
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 7
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 30
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Running AERMOD
Processing Spring
Processing surface roughness sector 1
Processing wind flow sector 1
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 0
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 2
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 5
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 3
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 10
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 4
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 15
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 5
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 20
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 6
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 25
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 7
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 30
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Running AERMOD
Processing Summer
Processing surface roughness sector 1
Processing wind flow sector 1
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 0
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 2
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 5
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 3
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 10
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 4
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 15
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 5
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 20
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 6
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 25
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 7
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 30
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Running AERMOD
Processing Autumn
Processing surface roughness sector 1
Processing wind flow sector 1
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 0
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 2
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 5
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 3
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 10
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 4
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 15
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 5
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 20
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 6
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 25
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 7
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 30
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
FLOWSECTOR ended 03/30/22 15:33:43
REFINE started 03/30/22 15:33:43
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for REFINE stage 3 Winter sector 0
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
REFINE ended 03/30/22 15:33:46
AERSCREEN Finished Successfully
With no errors or warnings
Check log file for details
Ending date and time 03/30/22 15:33:49
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Construction_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:32 PM]
Concentration Distance Elevation Diag Season/Month Zo sector Date H0 U* W* DT/DZ ZICNV
ZIMCH M-O LEN Z0 BOWEN ALBEDO REF WS HT REF TA HT
0.13116E+01 1.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.13801E+01 25.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.14451E+01 50.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.15043E+01 75.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.15587E+01 100.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16086E+01 125.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16548E+01 150.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16979E+01 175.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17154E+01 200.00 0.00 20.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17200E+01 203.00 0.00 20.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.14355E+01 225.00 0.00 25.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.11317E+01 250.00 0.00 20.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.98128E+00 275.01 0.00 20.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.87633E+00 300.00 0.00 20.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.79670E+00 325.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.73526E+00 350.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.68158E+00 375.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.63436E+00 400.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.59234E+00 425.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.55508E+00 450.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.52156E+00 475.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.49103E+00 500.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.46366E+00 525.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.43881E+00 550.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.41591E+00 575.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.39511E+00 600.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Construction_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:32 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.37604E+00 625.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.35847E+00 650.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.34228E+00 675.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.32713E+00 700.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.31317E+00 725.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.30033E+00 750.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.28831E+00 775.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.27697E+00 800.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.26640E+00 825.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.25658E+00 850.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.24736E+00 875.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.23860E+00 900.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.23041E+00 925.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.22274E+00 950.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.21553E+00 975.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.20867E+00 1000.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.20210E+00 1025.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.19588E+00 1050.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.19000E+00 1075.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.18443E+00 1100.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17917E+00 1125.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17417E+00 1150.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16943E+00 1175.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16490E+00 1200.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16053E+00 1225.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.15635E+00 1250.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.15233E+00 1275.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Construction_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:32 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.14849E+00 1300.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.14483E+00 1325.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.14133E+00 1350.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.13798E+00 1375.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.13477E+00 1400.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.13170E+00 1425.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.12875E+00 1450.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.12589E+00 1475.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.12312E+00 1500.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.12046E+00 1525.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.11791E+00 1550.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.11545E+00 1575.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.11307E+00 1600.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.11079E+00 1625.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10858E+00 1650.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10644E+00 1675.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10437E+00 1700.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10237E+00 1725.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10043E+00 1750.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.98567E-01 1775.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.96760E-01 1800.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.95013E-01 1825.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.93321E-01 1850.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.91671E-01 1875.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.90062E-01 1900.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.88503E-01 1925.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.86991E-01 1950.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Construction_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:32 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.85524E-01 1975.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.84101E-01 2000.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.82720E-01 2025.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.81378E-01 2050.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.80075E-01 2075.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.78808E-01 2100.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.77577E-01 2125.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.76379E-01 2150.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.75214E-01 2175.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.74080E-01 2200.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.72977E-01 2225.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.71902E-01 2250.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.70855E-01 2275.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.69835E-01 2300.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.68831E-01 2325.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.67853E-01 2350.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.66899E-01 2375.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.65968E-01 2400.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.65060E-01 2425.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.64174E-01 2450.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.63309E-01 2475.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.62465E-01 2500.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.61638E-01 2525.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.60823E-01 2550.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.60026E-01 2575.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.59248E-01 2600.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.58487E-01 2625.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Construction_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:32 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.57744E-01 2650.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.57016E-01 2675.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.56305E-01 2700.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.55609E-01 2725.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.54928E-01 2750.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.54262E-01 2775.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.53610E-01 2800.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.52973E-01 2825.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.52352E-01 2850.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.51739E-01 2875.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.51139E-01 2900.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.50552E-01 2925.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.49975E-01 2950.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.49411E-01 2975.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.48856E-01 3000.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.48312E-01 3025.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.47779E-01 3050.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.47255E-01 3075.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.46742E-01 3100.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.46240E-01 3125.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.45747E-01 3150.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.45263E-01 3175.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.44788E-01 3200.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.44322E-01 3225.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.43864E-01 3250.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.43415E-01 3275.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.42974E-01 3300.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Construction_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:32 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.42540E-01 3325.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.42114E-01 3350.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.41696E-01 3375.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.41285E-01 3400.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.40881E-01 3425.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.40483E-01 3450.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.40093E-01 3475.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.39709E-01 3500.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.39331E-01 3525.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.39517E-01 3550.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.39140E-01 3575.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.38768E-01 3600.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.38403E-01 3625.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.38043E-01 3650.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.37690E-01 3675.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.37342E-01 3700.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.36999E-01 3725.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.36662E-01 3750.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.36330E-01 3775.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.36004E-01 3800.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.35682E-01 3825.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.35366E-01 3850.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.35054E-01 3875.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.34747E-01 3900.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.34444E-01 3925.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.34147E-01 3950.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.33853E-01 3975.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Construction_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:32 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.33564E-01 4000.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.33279E-01 4025.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.32998E-01 4050.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.32722E-01 4075.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.32449E-01 4100.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.32181E-01 4125.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.31916E-01 4150.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.31655E-01 4175.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.31397E-01 4200.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.31143E-01 4225.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.30893E-01 4250.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.30646E-01 4275.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.30403E-01 4300.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.30163E-01 4325.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.29926E-01 4350.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.29692E-01 4375.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.29461E-01 4400.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.29234E-01 4425.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.29010E-01 4450.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.28788E-01 4475.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.28570E-01 4500.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.28354E-01 4525.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.28141E-01 4550.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.27931E-01 4575.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.27724E-01 4600.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.27519E-01 4625.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.27317E-01 4650.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Construction_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:32 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.27117E-01 4675.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.26920E-01 4700.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.26725E-01 4725.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.26533E-01 4750.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.26343E-01 4775.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.26156E-01 4800.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.25971E-01 4825.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.25788E-01 4850.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.25607E-01 4875.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.25429E-01 4900.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.25252E-01 4925.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.25078E-01 4950.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.24906E-01 4975.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.24736E-01 5000.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
Start date and time 03/30/22 15:34:28
AERSCREEN 21112
SLO French Hospital Med Ctr Expansion Operation
DATA ENTRY VALIDATION
METRIC ENGLISH
AREADATA
Emission Rate:0.166E 02 g/s 0.132E 01 lb/hr
Area Height:3.00 meters 9.84 feet
Area Source Length:381.69 meters 1252.26 feet
Area Source Width:190.84 meters 626.12 feet
Vertical Dimension:1.50 meters 4.92 feet
Model Mode:URBAN
Population:47063
Dist to Ambient Air:1.0 meters 3.feet
BUILDING DATA
No Building Downwash Parameters
TERRAIN DATA
No Terrain Elevations
Source Base Elevation:0.0 meters 0.0 feet
Probe distance:5000.meters 16404.feet
No flagpole receptors
No discrete receptors used
FUMIGATION DATA
No fumigation requested
METEOROLOGY DATA
Min/Max Temperature:250.0 310.0 K 9.7 98.3 Deg F
Minimum Wind Speed:0.5 m/s
Anemometer Height:10.000 meters
Dominant Surface Profile:Urban
Dominant Climate Type:Average Moisture
Surface friction velocity u*):not adjusted
DEBUG OPTION ON
AERSCREEN output file:
2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Operations.out
AERSCREEN Run is Ready to Begin
No terrain used,AERMAP will not be run
SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS MAKEMET
Obtaining surface characteristics...
Using AERMET seasonal surface characteristics for Urban with Average Moisture
Season Albedo Bo zo
Winter 0.35 1.50 1.000
Spring 0.14 1.00 1.000
Summer 0.16 2.00 1.000
Autumn 0.18 2.00 1.000
Creating met files aerscreen_01_01.sfc aerscreen_01_01.pfl
Creating met files aerscreen_02_01.sfc aerscreen_02_01.pfl
Creating met files aerscreen_03_01.sfc aerscreen_03_01.pfl
Creating met files aerscreen_04_01.sfc aerscreen_04_01.pfl
Buildings and/or terrain present or rectangular area source,skipping probe
FLOWSECTOR started 03/30/22 15:35:22
Running AERMOD
Processing Winter
Processing surface roughness sector 1
Processing wind flow sector 1
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 0
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 2
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 5
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 3
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 10
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 4
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 15
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 5
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 20
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 6
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 25
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 7
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Winter sector 30
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Running AERMOD
Processing Spring
Processing surface roughness sector 1
Processing wind flow sector 1
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 0
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 2
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 5
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 3
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 10
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 4
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 15
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 5
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 20
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 6
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 25
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 7
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Spring sector 30
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Running AERMOD
Processing Summer
Processing surface roughness sector 1
Processing wind flow sector 1
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 0
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 2
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 5
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 3
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 10
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 4
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 15
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 5
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 20
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 6
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 25
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 7
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Summer sector 30
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Running AERMOD
Processing Autumn
Processing surface roughness sector 1
Processing wind flow sector 1
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 0
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 2
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 5
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 3
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 10
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 4
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 15
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 5
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 20
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 6
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 25
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
Processing wind flow sector 7
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for FLOWSECTOR stage 2 Autumn sector 30
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
FLOWSECTOR ended 03/30/22 15:35:50
REFINE started 03/30/22 15:35:50
AERMOD Finishes Successfully for REFINE stage 3 Winter sector 0
WARNING MESSAGES
NONE
REFINE ended 03/30/22 15:35:53
AERSCREEN Finished Successfully
With no errors or warnings
Check log file for details
Ending date and time 03/30/22 15:35:57
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Operations_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:52 PM]
Concentration Distance Elevation Diag Season/Month Zo sector Date H0 U* W* DT/DZ ZICNV
ZIMCH M-O LEN Z0 BOWEN ALBEDO REF WS HT REF TA HT
0.82328E+00 1.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.86633E+00 25.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.90712E+00 50.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.94431E+00 75.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.97843E+00 100.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10098E+01 125.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10388E+01 150.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10658E+01 175.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10768E+01 200.00 0.00 20.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10797E+01 203.00 0.00 20.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.90112E+00 225.00 0.00 25.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.71036E+00 250.00 0.00 20.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.61596E+00 275.01 0.00 20.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.55009E+00 300.00 0.00 20.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.50010E+00 325.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.46153E+00 350.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.42784E+00 375.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.39820E+00 400.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.37182E+00 425.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.34843E+00 450.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.32739E+00 475.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.30823E+00 500.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.29105E+00 525.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.27545E+00 550.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.26107E+00 575.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.24802E+00 600.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Operations_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:52 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.23605E+00 625.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.22502E+00 650.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.21486E+00 675.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.20534E+00 700.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.19658E+00 725.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.18852E+00 750.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.18098E+00 775.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17386E+00 800.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16723E+00 825.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16106E+00 850.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.15527E+00 875.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.14977E+00 900.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.14463E+00 925.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.13982E+00 950.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.13529E+00 975.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.13099E+00 1000.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.12686E+00 1025.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.12296E+00 1050.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.11926E+00 1075.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.11577E+00 1100.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.11247E+00 1125.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10933E+00 1150.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10635E+00 1175.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10351E+00 1200.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.10077E+00 1225.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.98141E-01 1250.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.95619E-01 1275.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Operations_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:52 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.93212E-01 1300.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.90913E-01 1325.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.88716E-01 1350.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.86613E-01 1375.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.84600E-01 1400.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.82670E-01 1425.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.80818E-01 1450.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.79023E-01 1475.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.77286E-01 1500.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.75617E-01 1525.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.74011E-01 1550.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.72466E-01 1575.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.70979E-01 1600.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.69545E-01 1625.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.68158E-01 1650.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.66812E-01 1675.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.65512E-01 1700.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.64257E-01 1725.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.63044E-01 1750.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.61872E-01 1775.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.60738E-01 1800.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.59641E-01 1825.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.58579E-01 1850.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.57543E-01 1875.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.56533E-01 1900.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.55555E-01 1925.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.54606E-01 1950.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Operations_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:52 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.53685E-01 1975.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.52792E-01 2000.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.51925E-01 2025.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.51082E-01 2050.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.50264E-01 2075.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.49469E-01 2100.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.48696E-01 2125.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.47944E-01 2150.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.47213E-01 2175.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.46501E-01 2200.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.45809E-01 2225.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.45134E-01 2250.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.44477E-01 2275.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.43837E-01 2300.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.43207E-01 2325.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.42592E-01 2350.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.41993E-01 2375.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.41409E-01 2400.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.40839E-01 2425.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.40283E-01 2450.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.39740E-01 2475.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.39210E-01 2500.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.38691E-01 2525.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.38179E-01 2550.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.37680E-01 2575.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.37191E-01 2600.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.36713E-01 2625.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Operations_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:52 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.36247E-01 2650.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.35790E-01 2675.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.35344E-01 2700.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.34907E-01 2725.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.34479E-01 2750.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.34061E-01 2775.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.33652E-01 2800.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.33252E-01 2825.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.32862E-01 2850.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.32478E-01 2875.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.32101E-01 2900.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.31732E-01 2925.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.31370E-01 2950.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.31016E-01 2975.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.30668E-01 3000.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.30326E-01 3025.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.29991E-01 3050.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.29663E-01 3075.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.29341E-01 3100.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.29025E-01 3125.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.28716E-01 3150.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.28412E-01 3175.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.28114E-01 3200.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.27822E-01 3225.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.27534E-01 3250.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.27252E-01 3275.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.26975E-01 3300.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Operations_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:52 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.26703E-01 3325.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.26436E-01 3350.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.26173E-01 3375.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.25915E-01 3400.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.25661E-01 3425.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.25412E-01 3450.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.25167E-01 3475.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.24926E-01 3500.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.24689E-01 3525.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.24805E-01 3550.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.24568E-01 3575.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.24335E-01 3600.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.24106E-01 3625.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.23880E-01 3650.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.23658E-01 3675.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.23440E-01 3700.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.23225E-01 3725.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.23014E-01 3750.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.22805E-01 3775.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.22600E-01 3800.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.22398E-01 3825.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.22200E-01 3850.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.22004E-01 3875.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.21811E-01 3900.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.21621E-01 3925.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.21434E-01 3950.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.21250E-01 3975.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Operations_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:52 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.21069E-01 4000.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.20890E-01 4025.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.20714E-01 4050.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.20540E-01 4075.00 0.00 5.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.20369E-01 4100.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.20200E-01 4125.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.20034E-01 4150.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.19870E-01 4175.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.19708E-01 4200.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.19549E-01 4225.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.19392E-01 4250.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.19237E-01 4275.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.19084E-01 4300.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.18933E-01 4325.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.18785E-01 4350.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.18638E-01 4375.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.18493E-01 4400.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.18351E-01 4425.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.18210E-01 4450.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.18071E-01 4475.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17934E-01 4500.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17798E-01 4525.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17665E-01 4550.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17533E-01 4575.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17402E-01 4600.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17274E-01 4625.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17147E-01 4650.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
file:///C/Users/swinn/Downloads/2022.03.30_FrenchHospital_AERSCREEN_Operations_max_conc_distance.txt[4/5/2022 1:45:52 PM]
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.17022E-01 4675.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16898E-01 4700.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16776E-01 4725.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16655E-01 4750.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16536E-01 4775.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16418E-01 4800.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16302E-01 4825.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16187E-01 4850.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.16074E-01 4875.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.15962E-01 4900.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.15851E-01 4925.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.15742E-01 4950.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.15634E-01 4975.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
0.15527E-01 5000.00 0.00 0.0 Winter 0-360 10011001 -1.30 0.043 -9.000 0.020 -999. 21. 6.0
1.000 1.50 0.35 0.50 10.0 310.0 2.0
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
949) 887-9013
mhagemann@swape.com
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
Geologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization
Investigation and Remediation Strategies
Litigation Support and Testifying Expert
Industrial Stormwater Compliance
CEQA Review
Education:
M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 1984.
B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, 1982.
Professional Certifications:
California Professional Geologist
California Certified Hydrogeologist
Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner
Professional Experience:
Matt has 30 years of experience in environmental policy, contaminant assessment and remediation,
stormwater compliance, and CEQA review. He spent nine years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and
Superfund programs and served as EPA’s Senior Science Policy Advisor in the Western Regional
Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from perchlorate and MTBE. While with
EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of the assessment of seven major
military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement actions under provisions of
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and directed efforts to improve hydrogeologic
characterization and water quality monitoring. For the past 15 years, as a founding partner with SWAPE,
Matt has developed extensive client relationships and has managed complex projects that include
consultation as an expert witness and a regulatory specialist, and a manager of projects ranging from
industrial stormwater compliance to CEQA review of impacts from hazardous waste, air quality and
greenhouse gas emissions.
Positions Matt has held include:
Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 – present);
Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 – 2104, 2017;
Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 2003);
Attachment D
2
Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001 – 2004);
Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989–
1998);
Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 – 2000);
Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 –
1998);
Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990 – 1995);
Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986 – 1998); and
Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984 – 1986).
Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst:
With SWAPE, Matt’s responsibilities have included:
Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 300 environmental impact reports
and negative declarations since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard
to hazardous waste, water resources, water quality, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions,
and geologic hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead
agencies at the local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks
and implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from
toxins and Valley Fever.
Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at more than 100 industrial
facilities.
Expert witness on numerous cases including, for example, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)
contamination of groundwater, MTBE litigation, air toxins at hazards at a school, CERCLA
compliance in assessment and remediation, and industrial stormwater contamination.
Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns.
Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications
for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission.
Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S.
Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of perchlorate contamination in
Southern California drinking water wells.
Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the
review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas
stations throughout California.
With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt’s duties included the following:
Senior author of a report on the extent of perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony
by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel.
Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of MTBE use, research, and regulation.
Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology
of perchlorate use, research, and regulation.
Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking
water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony
against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies.
Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by
MTBE in California and New York.
3
Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production related contamination in Mississippi.
Lead author for a multi volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los
Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines.
Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with
clients and regulators.
Executive Director:
As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange
County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of
wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange
County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection
of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the
development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the
discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including
Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business
institutions including the Orange County Business Council.
Hydrogeology:
As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to
characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point
Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army
Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows:
Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of
monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and
groundwater.
Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory
analysis at military bases.
Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation
development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum.
At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of
groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to
show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and
County of Maui.
As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the
Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included
the following:
Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for
the protection of drinking water.
Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities
through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports, conducted
4
public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very concerned
about the impact of designation.
Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments,
including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water
transfer.
Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows:
Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance
with Subtitle C requirements.
Reviewed and wrote part B permits for the disposal of hazardous waste.
Conducted RCRA Corrective Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed
the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S.
EPA legal counsel.
Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor’s investigations of waste sites.
With the National Park Service, Matt directed service wide investigations of contaminant sources to
prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks:
Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the
Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants.
Conducted watershed scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and
Olympic National Park.
Identified high levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico
and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA.
Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a
national workgroup.
Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while
serving on a national workgroup.
Co authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal
watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation
wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks.
Contributed to the Federal Multi Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water
Action Plan.
Policy:
Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 9.
Activities included the following:
Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the
potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking
water supplies.
Shaped EPA’s national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing
to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in
Water: Critical Information and Research Needs.
Improved the technical training of EPAs scientific and engineering staff. Earned
an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the region’s 300 scientists and engineers in negotiations
with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific
5
principles into the policy making process.
Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents.
Geology:
With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for
timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:
Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical
models to determine slope stability.
Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource
protection.
Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the
city of Medford, Oregon.
As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later
listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern
Oregon. Duties included the following:
Supervised year long effort for soil and groundwater sampling.
Conducted aquifer tests.
Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.
Teaching:
From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university
levels:
At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in
environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater
contamination.
Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students.
Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.
Matt is currently a part time geology instructor at Golden West College in Huntington Beach, California
where he taught from 2010 to 2014 and in 2017.
Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations:
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public
Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.
Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.
EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.
Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and
Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las
Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).
6
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at
schools in Southern California, Los Angeles.
Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE
Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells.
Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater
Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust,
Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee).
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water
in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy
of Sciences, Irvine, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a
meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water
Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant.
Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited
presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee.
Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of
the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a
meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address
Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental
Journalists.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater
and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.
Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage
Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and
State Underground Storage Tank Program managers.
7
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished
report.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water.
Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks. Unpublished report.
Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. Potential W a t e r Quality Concerns Related
to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft
Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.
Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright
Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina.
Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund
Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air
Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City.
Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L., 1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic
Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui,
October 1996.
Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu,
Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air
and Waste Management Association Publication VIP 61.
Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Ch ar ac te r i z a t i o n and Cl ean up a t Closing Military Bases
in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater
Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of
Groundwater.
Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL
contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.
8
Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of
Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35.
Other Experience:
Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examinations,
2009 2011.
SOIL WATER AIR PROTECTION ENTERPRISE
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, California 90405
Attn: Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
Mobil: (310) 795-2335
Office: (310) 452-5555
Fax: (310) 452-5550
Email: prosenfeld@swape.com
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 1 of 10 October 2021
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.Chemical Fate and Transport & Air Dispersion Modeling
Principal Environmental Chemist Risk Assessment & Remediation Specialist
Education
Ph.D. Soil Chemistry, University of Washington, 1999. Dissertation on volatile organic compound filtration.
M.S. Environmental Science, U.C. Berkeley, 1995. Thesis on organic waste economics.
B.A. Environmental Studies, U.C. Santa Barbara, 1991. Thesis on wastewater treatment.
Professional Experience
Dr. Rosenfeld has over 25 years’ experience conducting environmental investigations and risk assessments for
evaluating impacts to human health, property, and ecological receptors. His expertise focuses on the fate and
transport of environmental contaminants, human health risk, exposure assessment, and ecological restoration. Dr.
Rosenfeld has evaluated and modeled emissions from oil spills, landfills, boilers and incinerators, process stacks,
storage tanks, confined animal feeding operations, industrial, military and agricultural sources, unconventional oil
drilling operations, and locomotive and construction engines. His project experience ranges from monitoring and
modeling of pollution sources to evaluating impacts of pollution on workers at industrial facilities and residents in
surrounding communities. Dr. Rosenfeld has also successfully modeled exposure to contaminants distributed by
water systems and via vapor intrusion.
Dr. Rosenfeld has investigated and designed remediation programs and risk assessments for contaminated sites
containing lead, heavy metals, mold, bacteria, particulate matter, petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents,
pesticides, radioactive waste, dioxins and furans, semi- and volatile organic compounds, PCBs, PAHs, creosote,
perchlorate, asbestos, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFOA/PFOS), unusual polymers, fuel oxygenates
MTBE), among other pollutants. Dr. Rosenfeld also has experience evaluating greenhouse gas emissions from
various projects and is an expert on the assessment of odors from industrial and agricultural sites, as well as the
evaluation of odor nuisance impacts and technologies for abatement of odorous emissions. As a principal scientist
at SWAPE, Dr. Rosenfeld directs air dispersion modeling and exposure assessments. He has served as an expert
witness and testified about pollution sources causing nuisance and/or personal injury at sites and has testified as an
expert witness on numerous cases involving exposure to soil, water and air contaminants from industrial, railroad,
agricultural, and military sources.
Attachment E
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 2 of 10 October 2021
Professional History:
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner
UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher)
UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor
UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator
UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate
Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist
National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer
San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor
Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager
Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager
Bechtel, San Diego, California, 1999 – 2000; Risk Assessor
King County, Seattle, 1996 – 1999; Scientist
James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist
Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist
Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist
Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1993; Scientist
Publications:
Remy, L.L., Clay T., Byers, V., Rosenfeld P. E. (2019) Hospital, Health, and Community Burden After Oil
Refinery Fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012. Environmental Health. 18:48
Simons, R.A., Seo, Y. Rosenfeld, P., (2015) Modeling the Effect of Refinery Emission On Residential Property
Value. Journal of Real Estate Research. 27(3):321-342
Chen, J. A, Zapata A. R., Sutherland A. J., Molmen, D.R., Chow, B. S., Wu, L. E., Rosenfeld, P. E., Hesse, R. C.,
2012) Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compound Exposure To A Community In Texas City Texas Evaluated
Using Aermod and Empirical Data. American Journal of Environmental Science, 8(6), 622-632.
Rosenfeld, P.E. & Feng, L. (2011). The Risks of Hazardous Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2011). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Agrochemical Industry, Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Gonzalez, J., Feng, L., Sutherland, A., Waller, C., Sok, H., Hesse, R., Rosenfeld, P. (2010). PCBs and
Dioxins/Furans in Attic Dust Collected Near Former PCB Production and Secondary Copper Facilities in Sauget, IL.
Procedia Environmental Sciences. 113–125.
Feng, L., Wu, C., Tam, L., Sutherland, A.J., Clark, J.J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Dioxin and Furan Blood Lipid and
Attic Dust Concentrations in Populations Living Near Four Wood Treatment Facilities in the United States. Journal
of Environmental Health. 73(6), 34-46.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Wood and Paper Industries. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2009). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best
Practices in the Petroleum Industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living
near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Air
Pollution, 123 (17), 319-327.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 3 of 10 October 2021
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid
Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equivalency Quotients (TEQ) In Two
Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 002252-002255.
Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins
And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 000527-
000530.
Hensley, A.R. A. Scott, J. J. J. Clark, Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Attic Dust and Human Blood Samples Collected near
a Former Wood Treatment Facility. Environmental Research. 105, 194-197.
Rosenfeld, P.E., J. J. J. Clark, A. R. Hensley, M. Suffet. (2007). The Use of an Odor Wheel Classification for
Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria for Compost Facilities. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 345-357.
Rosenfeld, P. E., M. Suffet. (2007). The Anatomy Of Odour Wheels For Odours Of Drinking Water, Wastewater,
Compost And The Urban Environment. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 335-344.
Sullivan, P. J. Clark, J.J.J., Agardy, F. J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Toxic Legacy, Synthetic Toxins in the Food,
Water, and Air in American Cities. Boston Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash. Water Science
and Technology. 49(9),171-178.
Rosenfeld P. E., J.J. Clark, I.H. (Mel) Suffet (2004). The Value of An Odor-Quality-Wheel Classification Scheme
For The Urban Environment. Water Environment Federation’s Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC)
2004. New Orleans, October 2-6, 2004.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet, I.H. (2004). Understanding Odorants Associated With Compost, Biomass Facilities,
and the Land Application of Biosolids. Water Science and Technology. 49(9), 193-199.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash, Water Science
and Technology, 49( 9), 171-178.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M. A., Sellew, P. (2004). Measurement of Biosolids Odor and Odorant Emissions from
Windrows, Static Pile and Biofilter. Water Environment Research. 76(4), 310-315.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Grey, M and Suffet, M. (2002). Compost Demonstration Project, Sacramento California Using
High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Integrated Waste Management
Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS–6), Sacramento, CA Publication #442-02-008.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Characterization of odor emissions from three different biosolids. Water
Soil and Air Pollution. 127(1-4), 173-191.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2000). Wood ash control of odor emissions from biosolids application. Journal
of Environmental Quality. 29, 1662-1668.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry and D. Bennett. (2001). Wastewater dewatering polymer affect on biosolids odor
emissions and microbial activity. Water Environment Research. 73(4), 363-367.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Activated Carbon and Wood Ash Sorption of Wastewater, Compost, and
Biosolids Odorants. Water Environment Research, 73, 388-393.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2001). High carbon wood ash effect on biosolids microbial activity and odor.
Water Environment Research. 131(1-4), 247-262.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 10 October 2021
Chollack, T. and P. Rosenfeld. (1998). Compost Amendment Handbook For Landscaping. Prepared for and
distributed by the City of Redmond, Washington State.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1992). The Mount Liamuiga Crater Trail. Heritage Magazine of St. Kitts, 3(2).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1993). High School Biogas Project to Prevent Deforestation On St. Kitts. Biomass Users
Network, 7(1).
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions From Biosolids
Application To Forest Soil. Doctoral Thesis. University of Washington College of Forest Resources.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1994). Potential Utilization of Small Diameter Trees on Sierra County Public Land. Masters
thesis reprinted by the Sierra County Economic Council. Sierra County, California.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (1991). How to Build a Small Rural Anaerobic Digester & Uses Of Biogas In The First And Third
World. Bachelors Thesis. University of California.
Presentations:
Rosenfeld, P.E., "The science for Perfluorinated Chemicals (PFAS): What makes remediation so hard?" Law
Seminars International, (May 9-10, 2018) 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 101 Seattle, WA.
Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile
organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 44th Western Regional Meeting, American
Chemical Society. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara, CA.
Sok, H.L.; Waller, C.C.; Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sutherland, A.J.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; Hesse, R.C.;
Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Atrazine: A Persistent Pesticide in Urban Drinking Water.
Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sok, H.L.; Sutherland, A.J.; Waller, C.C.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; La, M.; Hesse,
R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Bringing Environmental Justice to East St. Louis,
Illinois. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluoroactane Sulfonate (PFOS)
Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United
States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting , Lecture conducted
from Tuscon, AZ.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Cost to Filter Atrazine Contamination from Drinking Water in the United
States” Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the
United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting. Lecture
conducted from Tuscon, AZ.
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (20-22 July, 2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in
populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. Brebbia, C.A. and Popov, V., eds., Air
Pollution XVII: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and
Management of Air Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing
Facility. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from
University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). The Repeated Trespass of Tritium-Contaminated Water Into A
Surrounding Community Form Repeated Waste Spills From A Nuclear Power Plant. The 23rd Annual International
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 5 of 10 October 2021
Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst
MA.
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment
Facility Emissions. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Lecture conducted
from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Production, Chemical Properties, Toxicology, & Treatment Case Studies of 1,2,3-
Trichloropropane (TCP). The Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) Annual Meeting. Lecture
conducted from San Diego, CA.
Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Blood and Attic Sampling for Dioxin/Furan, PAH, and Metal Exposure in Florala,
Alabama. The AEHS Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (August 21 – 25, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. The 26th International Symposium on
Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants – DIOXIN2006. Lecture conducted from Radisson SAS Scandinavia
Hotel in Oslo Norway.
Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (November 4-8, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And
Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility . APHA 134 Annual Meeting &
Exposition. Lecture conducted from Boston Massachusetts.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (October 24-25, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
Mealey’s C8/PFOA. Science, Risk & Litigation Conference. Lecture conducted from The Rittenhouse Hotel,
Philadelphia, PA.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton
Hotel, Irvine California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Fate, Transport, Toxicity, And Persistence of 1,2,3-TCP. PEMA
Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel in Irvine, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 26-27, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PDBEs. Mealey’s Groundwater
Conference. Lecture conducted from Ritz Carlton Hotel, Marina Del Ray, California.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (June 7-8, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.
International Society of Environmental Forensics: Focus On Emerging Contaminants. Lecture conducted from
Sheraton Oceanfront Hotel, Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Fate Transport, Persistence and Toxicology of PFOA and Related
Perfluorochemicals. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water And Environmental Law Conference.
Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human
Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water and
Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. and Rob Hesse R.G. (May 5-6, 2004). Tert-butyl Alcohol Liability
and Toxicology, A National Problem and Unquantified Liability. National Groundwater Association. Environmental
Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Congress Plaza Hotel, Chicago Illinois.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (March 2004). Perchlorate Toxicology. Meeting of the American Groundwater Trust.
Lecture conducted from Phoenix Arizona.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 10 October 2021
Hagemann, M.F., Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and Rob Hesse (2004). Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River.
Meeting of tribal representatives. Lecture conducted from Parker, AZ.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (April 7, 2004). A National Damage Assessment Model For PCE and Dry Cleaners.
Drycleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento,
California.
Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh
International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical
Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southwest Focus
Conference. Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California
CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California.
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA
Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wastewater and
Industrial Processes. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water
Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor.
Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association . Lecture
conducted from Barcelona Spain.
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Biocycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington..
Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November 11-14, 2002). Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a
Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Society Annual Conference. Lecture conducted from
Indianapolis, Maryland.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (September 16, 2000). Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Water
Environment Federation. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.
Rosenfeld. P.E. (October 16, 2000). Wood ash and biofilter control of compost odor. Biofest. Lecture conducted
from Ocean Shores, California.
Rosenfeld, P.E. (2000). Bioremediation Using Organic Soil Amendments. California Resource Recovery
Association. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (1999). An evaluation of ash incorporation with biosolids for odor reduction. Soil
Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Comparison of Microbial Activity and Odor Emissions from
Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Brown and Caldwell. Lecture conducted from Seattle Washington.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 7 of 10 October 2021
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions from
Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Lake Chelan, Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E, C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur
Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th
Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue
Washington.
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. B. Harrison, and R. Dills. (1997). Comparison of Odor Emissions From Three
Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Anaheim
California.
Teaching Experience:
UCLA Department of Environmental Health (Summer 2003 through 20010) Taught Environmental Health Science
100 to students, including undergrad, medical doctors, public health professionals and nurses. Course focused on
the health effects of environmental contaminants.
National Ground Water Association, Successful Remediation Technologies. Custom Course in Sante Fe, New
Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage
tanks.
National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1,
2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites.
California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San
Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design.
UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation
Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation.
University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry,
Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability.
U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10.
Academic Grants Awarded:
California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment.
Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001.
Synagro Technologies, Corona California: $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University.
Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000.
King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of
Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on
VOC emissions. 1998.
Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of
polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997.
James River Corporation, Oregon: $10,000 grant was awarded to investigate the success of genetically engineered
Poplar trees with resistance to round-up. 1996.
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 10 October 2021
United State Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest: $15,000 grant was awarded to investigating fire ecology of the
Tahoe National Forest. 1995.
Kellogg Foundation, Washington D.C. $500 grant was awarded to construct a large anaerobic digester on St. Kitts
in West Indies. 1993
Deposition and/or Trial Testimony:
In the Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois
Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition, 5-14-2021
Trial, October 8-4-2021
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Joseph Rafferty, Plaintiff vs. Consolidated Rail Corporation and National Railroad Passenger Corporation
d/b/a AMTRAK,
Case No.: No. 18-L-6845
Rosenfeld Deposition, 6-28-2021
In the United States District Court For the Northern District of Illinois
Theresa Romcoe, Plaintiff vs. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation d/b/a METRA
Rail, Defendants
Case No.: No. 17-cv-8517
Rosenfeld Deposition, 5-25-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of Arizona In and For the Cunty of Maricopa
Mary Tryon et al., Plaintiff vs. The City of Pheonix v. Cox Cactus Farm, L.L.C., Utah Shelter Systems, Inc.
Case Number CV20127-094749
Rosenfeld Deposition: 5-7-2021
In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Beaumont Division
Robinson, Jeremy et al Plaintiffs, vs. CNA Insurance Company et al.
Case Number 1:17-cv-000508
Rosenfeld Deposition: 3-25-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino
Gary Garner, Personal Representative for the Estate of Melvin Garner vs. BNSF Railway Company.
Case No. 1720288
Rosenfeld Deposition 2-23-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, Spring Street Courthouse
Benny M Rodriguez vs. Union Pacific Railroad, A Corporation, et al.
Case No. 18STCV01162
Rosenfeld Deposition 12-23-2020
In the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri
Karen Cornwell, Plaintiff, vs. Marathon Petroleum, LP, Defendant.
Case No.: 1716-CV10006
Rosenfeld Deposition. 8-30-2019
In the United States District Court For The District of New Jersey
Duarte et al, Plaintiffs, vs. United States Metals Refining Company et. al. Defendant.
Case No.: 2:17-cv-01624-ES-SCM
Rosenfeld Deposition. 6-7-2019
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 9 of 10 October 2021
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division
M/T Carla Maersk, Plaintiffs, vs. Conti 168., Schiffahrts-GMBH & Co. Bulker KG MS “Conti Perdido”
Defendant.
Case No.: 3:15-CV-00106 consolidated with 3:15-CV-00237
Rosenfeld Deposition. 5-9-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
Carole-Taddeo-Bates et al., vs. Ifran Khan et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC615636
Rosenfeld Deposition, 1-26-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica
The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments et al. vs El Adobe Apts. Inc. et al., Defendants
Case No.: No. BC646857
Rosenfeld Deposition, 10-6-2018; Trial 3-7-19
In United States District Court For The District of Colorado
Bells et al. Plaintiff vs. The 3M Company et al., Defendants
Case No.: 1:16-cv-02531-RBJ
Rosenfeld Deposition, 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018
In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 112th Judicial District
Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants
Cause No.: 1923
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-17-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Contra Costa
Simons et al., Plaintiffs vs. Chevron Corporation, et al., Defendants
Cause No C12-01481
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-20-2017
In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois
Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-23-2017
In United States District Court For The Southern District of Mississippi
Guy Manuel vs. The BP Exploration et al., Defendants
Case: No 1:19-cv-00315-RHW
Rosenfeld Deposition, 4-22-2020
In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles
Warrn Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC
Case No.: LC102019 (c/w BC582154)
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-16-2017, Trail 8-28-2018
In the Northern District Court of Mississippi, Greenville Division
Brenda J. Cooper, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Meritor Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JVM
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2017
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 10 October 2021
In The Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Snohomish
Michael Davis and Julie Davis et al., Plaintiff vs. Cedar Grove Composting Inc., Defendants
Case No.: No. 13-2-03987-5
Rosenfeld Deposition, February 2017
Trial, March 2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda
Charles Spain., Plaintiff vs. Thermo Fisher Scientific, et al., Defendants
Case No.: RG14711115
Rosenfeld Deposition, September 2015
In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County
Russell D. Winburn, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Doug Hoksbergen, et al., Defendants
Case No.: LALA002187
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015
In The Circuit Court of Ohio County, West Virginia
Robert Andrews, et al. v. Antero, et al.
Civil Action N0. 14-C-30000
Rosenfeld Deposition, June 2015
In The Iowa District Court For Muscatine County
Laurie Freeman et. al. Plaintiffs vs. Grain Processing Corporation, Defendant
Case No 4980
Rosenfeld Deposition: May 2015
In the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit, in and For Broward County, Florida
Walter Hinton, et. al. Plaintiff, vs. City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a Municipality, Defendant.
Case Number CACE07030358 (26)
Rosenfeld Deposition: December 2014
In the County Court of Dallas County Texas
Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant.
Case Number cc-11-01650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants
Case Number: 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987)
Rosenfeld Deposition: October 2012
In the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, Northern Division
James K. Benefield, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. International Paper Company, Defendant.
Civil Action Number 2:09-cv-232-WHA-TFM
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2010, June 2011
In the Circuit Court of Jefferson County Alabama
Jaeanette Moss Anthony, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Drummond Company Inc., et al., Defendants
Civil Action No. CV 2008-2076
Rosenfeld Deposition: September 2010
In the United States District Court, Western District Lafayette Division
Ackle et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Citgo Petroleum Corporation, et al., Defendants.
Case Number 2:07CV1052
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2009
EXHIBIT B
INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
1448 Pine Street, Suite 103 San Francisco, California 94109
Telephone: (415) 567-7700
E-mail: offermann@IEE-SF.com
http://www.iee-sf.com
Date: April 5, 2022
To: Brian Flynn
Lozeau | Drury LLP
1939 Harrison Street, Suite 150
Oakland, California 94612
From: Francis J. Offermann PE CIH
Subject: Indoor Air Quality: French Hospital Expansion Project, San Luis Obispo, CA.
IEE File Reference: P-4561)
Pages: 18
Indoor Air Quality Impacts
Indoor air quality (IAQ) directly impacts the comfort and health of building occupants,
and the achievement of acceptable IAQ in newly constructed and renovated buildings is a
well-recognized design objective. For example, IAQ is addressed by major high-
performance building rating systems and building codes (California Building Standards
Commission, 2014; USGBC, 2014). Indoor air quality in homes is particularly important
because occupants, on average, spend approximately ninety percent of their time indoors
with the majority of this time spent at home (EPA, 2011). Some segments of the
population that are most susceptible to the effects of poor IAQ, such as the very young
and the elderly, occupy their homes almost continuously. Additionally, an increasing
number of adults are working from home at least some of the time during the workweek.
Indoor air quality also is a serious concern for workers in hotels, offices and other
business establishments.
The concentrations of many air pollutants often are elevated in homes and other buildings
relative to outdoor air because many of the materials and products used indoors contain
2 of 18
and release a variety of pollutants to air (Hodgson et al., 2002; Offermann and Hodgson,
2011). With respect to indoor air contaminants for which inhalation is the primary route
of exposure, the critical design and construction parameters are the provision of adequate
ventilation and the reduction of indoor sources of the contaminants.
Indoor Formaldehyde Concentrations Impact. In the California New Home Study
CNHS) of 108 new homes in California (Offermann, 2009), 25 air contaminants were
measured, and formaldehyde was identified as the indoor air contaminant with the highest
cancer risk as determined by the California Proposition 65 Safe Harbor Levels (OEHHA,
2017a), No Significant Risk Levels (NSRL) for carcinogens. The NSRL is the daily intake
level calculated to result in one excess case of cancer in an exposed population of 100,000
i.e., ten in one million cancer risk) and for formaldehyde is 40 µg/day. The NSRL
concentration of formaldehyde that represents a daily dose of 40 µg is 2 µg/m3, assuming
a continuous 24-hour exposure, a total daily inhaled air volume of 20 m3, and 100%
absorption by the respiratory system. All of the CNHS homes exceeded this NSRL
concentration of 2 µg/m3. The median indoor formaldehyde concentration was 36 µg/m3,
and ranged from 4.8 to 136 µg/m3, which corresponds to a median exceedance of the 2
µg/m3 NSRL concentration of 18 and a range of 2.3 to 68.
Therefore, the cancer risk of a resident living in a California home with the median indoor
formaldehyde concentration of 36 µg/m3, is 180 per million as a result of formaldehyde
alone. The CEQA significance threshold for airborne cancer risk is 10 per million, as
established by the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control.
Besides being a human carcinogen, formaldehyde is also a potent eye and respiratory
irritant. In the CNHS, many homes exceeded the non-cancer reference exposure levels
RELs) prescribed by California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
OEHHA, 2017b). The percentage of homes exceeding the RELs ranged from 98% for the
Chronic REL of 9 µg/m3 to 28% for the Acute REL of 55 µg/m3.
The primary source of formaldehyde indoors is composite wood products manufactured
with urea-formaldehyde resins, such as plywood, medium density fiberboard, and
3 of 18
particleboard. These materials are commonly used in building construction for flooring,
cabinetry, baseboards, window shades, interior doors, and window and door trims.
In January 2009, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted an airborne toxics
control measure (ATCM) to reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood
products, including hardwood plywood, particleboard, medium density fiberboard, and
also furniture and other finished products made with these wood products (California Air
Resources Board 2009). While this formaldehyde ATCM has resulted in reduced
emissions from composite wood products sold in California, they do not preclude that
homes built with composite wood products meeting the CARB ATCM will have indoor
formaldehyde concentrations below cancer and non-cancer exposure guidelines.
A follow up study to the California New Home Study (CNHS) was conducted in 2016-
2018 (Singer et. al., 2019), and found that the median indoor formaldehyde in new homes
built after 2009 with CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials had lower indoor
formaldehyde concentrations, with a median indoor concentration of 22.4 µg/m3 (18.2
ppb) as compared to a median of 36 µg/m3 found in the 2007 CNHS. Unlike in the CNHS
study where formaldehyde concentrations were measured with pumped DNPH samplers,
the formaldehyde concentrations in the HENGH study were measured with passive
samplers, which were estimated to under-measure the true indoor formaldehyde
concentrations by approximately 7.5%. Applying this correction to the HENGH indoor
formaldehyde concentrations results in a median indoor concentration of 24.1 µg/m3,
which is 33% lower than the 36 µg/m3 found in the 2007 CNHS.
Thus, while new homes built after the 2009 CARB formaldehyde ATCM have a 33%
lower median indoor formaldehyde concentration and cancer risk, the median lifetime
cancer risk is still 120 per million for homes built with CARB compliant composite wood
products. This median lifetime cancer risk is more than 12 times the OEHHA 10 in a
million cancer risk threshold (OEHHA, 2017a).
With respect to the French Hospital Medical Center Project, San Luis Obispo, CA, the
buildings consist of hospital spaces.
4 of 18
The employees of the spaces are expected to experience significant indoor exposures
e.g., 40 hours per week, 50 weeks per year). These exposures for employees are
anticipated to result in significant cancer risks resulting from exposures to formaldehyde
released by the building materials and furnishing commonly found in offices,
warehouses, residences and hotels.
Because the hospital spaces will be constructed with CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde
ATCM materials, and be ventilated with the minimum code required amount of outdoor
air, the indoor formaldehyde concentrations are likely similar to those concentrations
observed in residences built with CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials, which
is a median of 24.1 µg/m3 (Singer et. al., 2020)
Assuming that the hospital spaces employees work 8 hours per day and inhale 20 m3 of
air per day, the formaldehyde dose per work-day is 161 µg/day.
Assuming that these employees work 5 days per week and 50 weeks per year for 45 years
start at age 20 and retire at age 65) the average 70-year lifetime formaldehyde daily dose
is 70.9 µg/day.
This is 1.77 times the NSRL (OEHHA, 2017a) of 40 µg/day and represents a cancer risk
of 17.7 per million, which exceeds the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million. This impact
should be analyzed in an environmental impact report (“EIR”), and the agency should
impose all feasible mitigation measures to reduce this impact. Several feasible mitigation
measures are discussed below and these and other measures should be analyzed in an
EIR.
Appendix A, Indoor Formaldehyde Concentrations and the CARB Formaldehyde ATCM,
provides analyses that show utilization of CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials
will not ensure acceptable cancer risks with respect to formaldehyde emissions from
composite wood products.
5 of 18
Even composite wood products manufactured with CARB certified ultra low emitting
formaldehyde (ULEF) resins do not ensure that the indoor air will have concentrations of
formaldehyde that substantially exceed 10 per million. The permissible emission rates for
ULEF composite wood products are only 11-15% lower than the CARB Phase 2 emission
rates. Only use of composite wood products made with no-added formaldehyde resins
NAF), such as resins made from soy, polyvinyl acetate, or methylene diisocyanate can
ensure that the OEHHA cancer risk of 10 per million is met.
The following describes a method that should be used, prior to construction in the
environmental review under CEQA, for determining whether the indoor concentrations
resulting from the formaldehyde emissions of specific building materials/furnishings
selected exceed cancer and non-cancer guidelines. Such a design analyses can be used to
identify those materials/furnishings prior to the completion of the City’s CEQA review
and project approval, that have formaldehyde emission rates that contribute to indoor
concentrations that exceed cancer and non-cancer guidelines, so that alternative lower
emitting materials/furnishings may be selected and/or higher minimum outdoor air
ventilation rates can be increased to achieve acceptable indoor concentrations and
incorporated as mitigation measures for this project.
Pre-Construction Building Material/Furnishing Formaldehyde Emissions Assessment
This formaldehyde emissions assessment should be used in the environmental review
under CEQA to assess the indoor formaldehyde concentrations from the proposed
loading of building materials/furnishings, the area-specific formaldehyde emission rate
data for building materials/furnishings, and the design minimum outdoor air ventilation
rates. This assessment allows the applicant (and the City) to determine, before the
conclusion of the environmental review process and the building materials/furnishings
are specified, purchased, and installed, if the total chemical emissions will exceed cancer
and non-cancer guidelines, and if so, allow for changes in the selection of specific
material/furnishings and/or the design minimum outdoor air ventilations rates such that
cancer and non-cancer guidelines are not exceeded.
6 of 18
1.) Define Indoor Air Quality Zones. Divide the building into separate indoor air quality
zones, (IAQ Zones). IAQ Zones are defined as areas of well-mixed air. Thus, each
ventilation system with recirculating air is considered a single zone, and each room or
group of rooms where air is not recirculated (e.g. 100% outdoor air) is considered a
separate zone. For IAQ Zones with the same construction material/furnishings and design
minimum outdoor air ventilation rates. (e.g. hotel rooms, apartments, condominiums,
etc.) the formaldehyde emission rates need only be assessed for a single IAQ Zone of that
type.
2.) Calculate Material/Furnishing Loading. For each IAQ Zone, determine the building
material and furnishing loadings (e.g., m2 of material/m2 floor area, units of
furnishings/m2 floor area) from an inventory of all potential indoor formaldehyde
sources, including flooring, ceiling tiles, furnishings, finishes, insulation, sealants,
adhesives, and any products constructed with composite wood products containing urea-
formaldehyde resins (e.g., plywood, medium density fiberboard, particleboard).
3.) Calculate the Formaldehyde Emission Rate. For each building material, calculate the
formaldehyde emission rate (µg/h) from the product of the area-specific formaldehyde
emission rate (µg/m2-h) and the area (m2) of material in the IAQ Zone, and from each
furnishing (e.g. chairs, desks, etc.) from the unit-specific formaldehyde emission rate
µg/unit-h) and the number of units in the IAQ Zone.
NOTE: As a result of the high-performance building rating systems and building codes
California Building Standards Commission, 2014; USGBC, 2014), most manufacturers
of building materials furnishings sold in the United States conduct chemical emission rate
tests using the California Department of Health “Standard Method for the Testing and
Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using
Environmental Chambers,” (CDPH, 2017), or other equivalent chemical emission rate
testing methods. Most manufacturers of building furnishings sold in the United States
conduct chemical emission rate tests using ANSI/BIFMA M7.1 Standard Test Method for
Determining VOC Emissions (BIFMA, 2018), or other equivalent chemical emission rate
testing methods.
7 of 18
CDPH, BIFMA, and other chemical emission rate testing programs, typically certify that
a material or furnishing does not create indoor chemical concentrations in excess of the
maximum concentrations permitted by their certification. For instance, the CDPH
emission rate testing requires that the measured emission rates when input into an office,
school, or residential model do not exceed one-half of the OEHHA Chronic Exposure
Guidelines (OEHHA, 2017b) for the 35 specific VOCs, including formaldehyde, listed in
Table 4-1 of the CDPH test method (CDPH, 2017). These certifications themselves do
not provide the actual area-specific formaldehyde emission rate (i.e., µg/m2-h) of the
product, but rather provide data that the formaldehyde emission rates do not exceed the
maximum rate allowed for the certification. Thus, for example, the data for a certification
of a specific type of flooring may be used to calculate that the area-specific emission rate
of formaldehyde is less than 31 µg/m2-h, but not the actual measured specific emission
rate, which may be 3, 18, or 30 µg/m2-h. These area-specific emission rates determined
from the product certifications of CDPH, BIFA, and other certification programs can be
used as an initial estimate of the formaldehyde emission rate.
If the actual area-specific emission rates of a building material or furnishing is needed
i.e. the initial emission rates estimates from the product certifications are higher than
desired), then that data can be acquired by requesting from the manufacturer the complete
chemical emission rate test report. For instance if the complete CDPH emission test
report is requested for a CDHP certified product, that report will provide the actual area-
specific emission rates for not only the 35 specific VOCs, including formaldehyde, listed
in Table 4-1 of the CDPH test method (CDPH, 2017), but also all of the cancer and
reproductive/developmental chemicals listed in the California Proposition 65 Safe Harbor
Levels (OEHHA, 2017a), all of the toxic air contaminants (TACs) in the California Air
Resources Board Toxic Air Contamination List (CARB, 2011), and the 10 chemicals
with the greatest emission rates.
Alternatively, a sample of the building material or furnishing can be submitted to a
chemical emission rate testing laboratory, such as Berkeley Analytical Laboratory
https://berkeleyanalytical.com), to measure the formaldehyde emission rate.
8 of 18
4.) Calculate the Total Formaldehyde Emission Rate. For each IAQ Zone, calculate the
total formaldehyde emission rate (i.e. µg/h) from the individual formaldehyde emission
rates from each of the building material/furnishings as determined in Step 3.
5.) Calculate the Indoor Formaldehyde Concentration. For each IAQ Zone, calculate the
indoor formaldehyde concentration (µg/m3) from Equation 1 by dividing the total
formaldehyde emission rates (i.e. µg/h) as determined in Step 4, by the design minimum
outdoor air ventilation rate (m3/h) for the IAQ Zone.
Equation
1)
where: Cin = indoor formaldehyde concentration (µg/
m3) Etotal = total formaldehyde emission rate (µg/h) into the IAQ
Zone. Qoa = design minimum outdoor air ventilation rate to the IAQ Zone (m3/
h) The above Equation 1 is based upon mass balance theory, and is referenced in
Section 3.10.2 “Calculation of Estimated Building Concentrations” of the California
Department of Health “Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic
Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers”, (CDPH,
2017). 6.) Calculate the Indoor Exposure Cancer and Non-Cancer Health Risks. For each
IAQ Zone, calculate the cancer and non-cancer health risks from the indoor
formaldehyde concentrations determined in Step 5 and as described in the OEHHA Air Toxics Hot
Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines; Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health
Risk Assessments (OEHHA,
2015). 7.) Mitigate Indoor Formaldehyde Exposures of exceeding the CEQA Cancer and/
or Non-Cancer Health Risks. In each IAQ Zone, provide mitigation for any
formaldehyde exposure risk as determined in Step 6, that exceeds the CEQA cancer risk of 10
per million or the CEQA non-cancer Hazard Quotient of 1.
0. Provide the source and/or ventilation mitigation required in all IAQ Zones to reduce
9 of 18
health risks of the chemical exposures below the CEQA cancer and non-cancer health
risks.
Source mitigation for formaldehyde may include:
1.) reducing the amount materials and/or furnishings that emit formaldehyde
2.) substituting a different material with a lower area-specific emission rate of
formaldehyde
Ventilation mitigation for formaldehyde emitted from building materials and/or
furnishings may include:
1.) increasing the design minimum outdoor air ventilation rate to the IAQ Zone.
NOTE: Mitigating the formaldehyde emissions through use of less material/furnishings,
or use of lower emitting materials/furnishings, is the preferred mitigation option, as
mitigation with increased outdoor air ventilation increases initial and operating costs
associated with the heating/cooling systems.
Further, we are not asking that the builder “speculate” on what and how much composite
materials be used, but rather at the design stage to select composite wood materials based
on the formaldehyde emission rates that manufacturers routinely conduct using the
California Department of Health “Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of
Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental
Chambers,” (CDPH, 2017), and use the procedure described earlier above (i.e. Pre-
Construction Building Material/Furnishing Formaldehyde Emissions Assessment) to
ensure that the materials selected achieve acceptable cancer risks from material off
gassing of formaldehyde.
Outdoor Air Ventilation Impact. Another important finding of the CNHS, was that the
outdoor air ventilation rates in new homes without mechanical outdoor air ventilation
were very low. Outdoor air ventilation is a very important factor influencing the indoor
concentrations of air contaminants, as it is the primary removal mechanism of all indoor
air generated contaminants. Lower outdoor air exchange rates cause indoor generated air
10 of 18
contaminants to accumulate to higher indoor air concentrations. Many homeowners rarely
open their windows or doors for ventilation as a result of their concerns for security/safety,
noise, dust, and odor concerns (Price, 2007). In the CNHS field study, 32% of the homes
did not use their windows during the 24 hour Test Day, and 15% of the homes did not use
their windows during the entire preceding week. Most of the homes with no window usage
were homes in the winter field session. Thus, a substantial percentage of homeowners
never open their windows, especially in the winter season. The median 24 hour
measurement was 0.26 air changes per hour (ach), with a range of 0.09 ach to 5.3 ach. A
total of 67% of the homes had outdoor air exchange rates below the minimum California
Building Code (2001) requirement of 0.35 ach. Thus, the relatively tight envelope
construction, combined with the fact that many people never open their windows for
ventilation, results in homes with low outdoor air exchange rates and higher indoor air
contaminant concentrations.
The French Hospital Expansion Project, is close to roads with moderate to high traffic
e.g., Johnson Avenue, Ella Street, Breck Street, etc.) as well as Amtrak rail traffic.
According to the Project noise assessment (Ambient Air Quality and Noise Consulting.
2021a), the future noise levels at the Project range from 64.7 to 65.5 dBA CNEL.
As a result of the high outdoor noise levels, the current project will require a mechanical
supply of outdoor air ventilation to allow for a habitable interior environment with closed
windows and doors. Such a ventilation system would allow windows and doors to be kept
closed at the occupant’s discretion to control exterior noise within building interiors.
PM10 Outdoor Concentrations Impact.. According to the Project Air Quality
Assessment (Ambient Air Quality and Noise Consulting. 2021b), the Project is located in
the South Central Coast Air Basin, which is a State and non-attainment area for PM10.
An air quality analyses should to be conducted to determine the concentrations of PM10 in
the outdoor and indoor air that people inhale each day. This air quality analyses needs to
consider the cumulative impacts of the project related emissions, existing and projected
11 of 18
future emissions from local sources upon the outdoor air concentrations at the Project site.
If the outdoor concentrations are determined to exceed the California annual average PM10
exceedence concentration of 20 µg/m3, or the California 24-hour average exceedence
concentration of 50 µg/m3, then the buildings need to have a mechanical supply of outdoor
air that has air filtration with sufficient removal efficiency, such that the indoor
concentrations of outdoor PM10 particles is less than the California PM10 annual and 24-
hour standards.
The Project will require installation of high efficiency air filters (i.e. MERV 13 or higher)
in all mechanically supplied outdoor air ventilation systems.
Indoor Air Quality Impact Mitigation Measures
The following are recommended mitigation measures to minimize the impacts upon
indoor quality:
Indoor Formaldehyde Concentrations Mitigation. Use only composite wood materials (e.g.
hardwood plywood, medium density fiberboard, particleboard) for all interior finish
systems that are made with CARB approved no-added formaldehyde (NAF) resins
CARB, 2009). CARB Phase 2 certified composite wood products, or ultra-low emitting
formaldehyde (ULEF) resins, do not insure indoor formaldehyde concentrations that are
below the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million. Only composite wood products
manufactured with CARB approved no-added formaldehyde (NAF) resins, such as resins
made from soy, polyvinyl acetate, or methylene diisocyanate can insure that the OEHHA
cancer risk of 10 per million is met.
Alternatively, conduct the previously described Pre-Construction Building
Material/Furnishing Chemical Emissions Assessment, to determine that the combination
of formaldehyde emissions from building materials and furnishings do not create indoor
formaldehyde concentrations that exceed the CEQA cancer and non-cancer health risks.
It is important to note that we are not asking that the builder “speculate” on what and how
12 of 18
much composite materials be used, but rather at the design stage to select composite
wood materials based on the formaldehyde emission rates that manufacturers routinely
conduct using the California Department of Health “Standard Method for the Testing and
Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using
Environmental Chambers”, (CDPH, 2017), and use the procedure described above (i.e.
Pre-Construction Building Material/Furnishing Formaldehyde Emissions Assessment) to
insure that the materials selected achieve acceptable cancer risks from material off
gassing of formaldehyde.
Outdoor Air Ventilation Mitigation. Provide each habitable room with a continuous
mechanical supply of outdoor air that meets or exceeds the California 2016 Building
Energy Efficiency Standards (California Energy Commission, 2015) requirements of the
greater of 15 cfm/occupant or 0.15 cfm/ft2 of floor area. Following installation of the
system conduct testing and balancing to insure that required amount of outdoor air is
entering each habitable room and provide a written report documenting the outdoor
airflow rates. Do not use exhaust only mechanical outdoor air systems, use only balanced
outdoor air supply and exhaust systems or outdoor air supply only systems. Provide a
manual for the occupants or maintenance personnel, that describes the purpose of the
mechanical outdoor air system and the operation and maintenance requirements of the
system.
References
Ambient Air Quality and Noise Consulting. 2021a. Noise Impact Assessment – French
Hospital Medical Expansion Project, San Luis Obispo, CA.
Ambient Air Quality and Noise Consulting. 2021b. Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas
Impact Assessment – French Hospital Medical Expansion Project, San Luis Obispo, CA.
BIFA. 2018. BIFMA Product Safety and Performance Standards and Guidelines.
www.bifma.org/page/standardsoverview
13 of 18
California Air Resources Board. 2009. Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Reduce
Formaldehyde Emissions from Composite Wood Products. California Environmental
Protection Agency, Sacramento, CA.
https://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/compwood07/fro-final.pdf
California Air Resources Board. 2011. Toxic Air Contaminant Identification List.
California Environmental Protection Agency, Sacramento, CA.
https://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/id/taclist.htm
California Building Code. 2001. California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2 Volume
1, Appendix Chapter 12, Interior Environment, Division 1, Ventilation, Section 1207:
2001 California Building Code, California Building Standards Commission. Sacramento,
CA.
California Building Standards Commission (2014). 2013 California Green Building
Standards Code. California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11. California Building
Standards Commission, Sacramento, CA http://www.bsc.ca.gov/Home/CALGreen.aspx.
California Energy Commission, PIER Program. CEC-500-2007-033. Final Report, ARB
Contract 03-326. Available at: www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/03-326.pdf.
California Energy Commission, 2015. 2016 Building Energy Efficiency Standards for
Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2015publications/CEC-400-2015-037/CEC-400-2015-037-
CMF.pdf
CDPH. 2017. Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic
Chemical Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers, Version 1.1.
California Department of Public Health, Richmond, CA.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/ DEODC/EHLB/IAQ/Pages/VOC.aspx.
14 of 18
EPA. 2011. Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition, Chapter 16 – Activity Factors.
Report EPA/600/R-09/052F, September 2011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C.
Hodgson, A. T., D. Beal, J.E.R. McIlvaine. 2002. Sources of formaldehyde, other
aldehydes and terpenes in a new manufactured house. Indoor Air 12: 235–242.
OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2015. Air Toxics Hot
Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines; Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health
Risk Assessments.
OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2017a. Proposition 65
Safe Harbor Levels. No Significant Risk Levels for Carcinogens and Maximum Allowable
Dose Levels for Chemicals Causing Reproductive Toxicity. Available at:
http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/pdf/safeharbor081513.pdf
OEHHA - Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2017b. All OEHHA
Acute, 8-hour and Chronic Reference Exposure Levels. Available at:
http://oehha.ca.gov/air/allrels.html
Offermann, F. J. 2009. Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality in New Homes. California Air
Resources Board and California Energy Commission, PIER Energy-Related
Environmental Research Program. Collaborative Report. CEC-500-2009-085.
https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/04-310.pdf
Offermann, F. J. and A. T. Hodgson. 2011. Emission Rates of Volatile Organic
Compounds in New Homes. Proceedings Indoor Air 2011 (12th International Conference
on Indoor Air Quality and Climate 2011), June 5-10, 2011, Austin, TX.
Singer, B.C, Chan, W.R, Kim, Y., Offermann, F.J., and Walker I.S. 2020. Indoor Air
Quality in California Homes with Code-Required Mechanical Ventilation. Indoor Air, Vol
30, Issue 5, 885-899.
15 of 18
USGBC. 2014. LEED BD+C Homes v4. U.S. Green Building Council, Washington, D.C.
http://www.usgbc.org/credits/homes/v4
16 of 18
APPENDIX A
INDOOR FORMALDEHYDE CONCENTRATIONS
AND THE
CARB FORMALDEHYDE ATCM
With respect to formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, the CARB
ATCM regulations of formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, do not
assure healthful indoor air quality. The following is the stated purpose of the CARB
ATCM regulation - The purpose of this airborne toxic control measure is to “reduce
formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, and finished goods that contain
composite wood products, that are sold, offered for sale, supplied, used, or manufactured for
sale in California”. In other words, the CARB ATCM regulations do not “assure healthful
indoor air quality”, but rather “reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood
products”.
Just how much protection do the CARB ATCM regulations provide building occupants
from the formaldehyde emissions generated by composite wood products? Definitely
some, but certainly the regulations do not “assure healthful indoor air quality” when
CARB Phase 2 products are utilized. As shown in the Chan 2019 study of new California
homes, the median indoor formaldehyde concentration was of 22.4 µg/m3 (18.2 ppb),
which corresponds to a cancer risk of 112 per million for occupants with continuous
exposure, which is more than 11 times the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million.
Another way of looking at how much protection the CARB ATCM regulations provide
building occupants from the formaldehyde emissions generated by composite wood
products is to calculate the maximum number of square feet of composite wood product
that can be in a residence without exceeding the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million for
occupants with continuous occupancy.
For this calculation I utilized the floor area (2,272 ft2), the ceiling height (8.5 ft), and the
number of bedrooms (4) as defined in Appendix B (New Single-Family Residence
Scenario) of the Standard Method for the Testing and Evaluation of Volatile Organic Chemical
Emissions for Indoor Sources Using Environmental Chambers, Version 1.1, 2017, California
17 of 18
Department of Public Health, Richmond, CA. https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/
DEODC/EHLB/IAQ/Pages/VOC.aspx.
For the outdoor air ventilation rate I used the 2019 Title 24 code required mechanical
ventilation rate (ASHRAE 62.2) of 106 cfm (180 m3/h) calculated for this model residence.
For the composite wood formaldehyde emission rates I used the CARB ATCM Phase 2
rates.
The calculated maximum number of square feet of composite wood product that can be in
a residence, without exceeding the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million for occupants with
continuous occupancy are as follows for the different types of regulated composite wood
products.
Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF) – 15 ft2 (0.7% of the floor area), or
Particle Board – 30 ft2 (1.3% of the floor area), or
Hardwood Plywood – 54 ft2 (2.4% of the floor area), or
Thin MDF – 46 ft2 (2.0 % of the floor area).
For offices and hotels the calculated maximum amount of composite wood product (% of
floor area) that can be used without exceeding the CEQA cancer risk of 10 per million for
occupants, assuming 8 hours/day occupancy, and the California Mechanical Code
minimum outdoor air ventilation rates are as follows for the different types of regulated
composite wood products.
Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF) – 3.6 % (offices) and 4.6% (hotel rooms), or
Particle Board – 7.2 % (offices) and 9.4% (hotel rooms), or
Hardwood Plywood – 13 % (offices) and 17% (hotel rooms), or
Thin MDF – 11 % (offices) and 14 % (hotel rooms)
Clearly the CARB ATCM does not regulate the formaldehyde emissions from composite
wood products such that the potentially large areas of these products, such as for flooring,
baseboards, interior doors, window and door trims, and kitchen and bathroom cabinetry,
18 of 18
could be used without causing indoor formaldehyde concentrations that result in CEQA
cancer risks that substantially exceed 10 per million for occupants with continuous
occupancy.
Even composite wood products manufactured with CARB certified ultra low emitting
formaldehyde (ULEF) resins do not insure that the indoor air will have concentrations of
formaldehyde the meet the OEHHA cancer risks that substantially exceed 10 per million.
The permissible emission rates for ULEF composite wood products are only 11-15%
lower than the CARB Phase 2 emission rates. Only use of composite wood products made
with no-added formaldehyde resins (NAF), such as resins made from soy, polyvinyl
acetate, or methylene diisocyanate can insure that the OEHHA cancer risk of 10 per
million is met.
If CARB Phase 2 compliant or ULEF composite wood products are utilized in
construction, then the resulting indoor formaldehyde concentrations should be determined
in the design phase using the specific amounts of each type of composite wood product,
the specific formaldehyde emission rates, and the volume and outdoor air ventilation
rates of the indoor spaces, and all feasible mitigation measures employed to reduce this
impact (e.g. use less formaldehyde containing composite wood products and/or
incorporate mechanical systems capable of higher outdoor air ventilation rates). See the
procedure described earlier (i.e., Pre-Construction Building Material/Furnishing
Formaldehyde Emissions Assessment) to insure that the materials selected achieve
acceptable cancer risks from material off gassing of formaldehyde.
Alternatively, and perhaps a simpler approach, is to use only composite wood products
e.g. hardwood plywood, medium density fiberboard, particleboard) for all interior finish
systems that are made with CARB approved no-added formaldehyde (NAF) resins.
EXHIBIT C
Letter EMY
WI #22-004.08
April 9, 2022
Mr. Brian Flynn
Lozeau | Drury LLP
1939 Harrison Street, Suite 150
Oakland, California 94612
SUBJECT: French Hospital Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Comments on the
Noise Analysis
Dear Mr. Flynn,
Per your request, I have reviewed the subject matter document for the French Hospital Expansion
Project Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND) in San Luis Obispo (SLO), California.
The proposed Project would include a new 4-story patient tower, a 2-story parking deck with a
helistop on the upper deck, a generator yard to support the proposed new tower and other proposed
facilities in the event of power interruption, and some changes to the parking to improve circulation.
Errors and Omissions in the ISMND
A note under Table 13 of the ISMND indicates that the source is Reference 38 – this seems unlikely,
as Reference 38 is listed as a FEMA document on flood hazards (p. 91).
The Noise Attachment to the ISMND references a report prepared by 45dB Acoustics in 2020, that is
not included with the Attachment or elsewhere in the ISMND. Information regarding the proposed
helicopter paths is thus not available to review.
The noise measurement results presented in Figure 4 of the Noise Attachment appear to be incorrect.
The figure plots the actual measured data and also shows the weighted noise levels for the Evening
period at location Pic02, but lacks that correction for the other locations. Furthermore, the legend
suggest that there was some confusion as to whether CNEL or Ldn is being calculated. The noise
results in Table 2 show CNEL. Furthermore, the “Average-Hourly” data in Table 2 do not seem to
represent correctly the nightime noise levels which reach 40 dBA. Finally, the column lable “Average-
Daily” for the CNEL values is misleading, since only one 24 hour period was measured, which does
not represent a daily average.
Thresholds of Significance are Not Properly Developed
Several significance thresholds are listed in the Noise Attachment (p. 12), but these are missing from
the discussion of criteria and thresholds in the ISMND (p. 73).
WILSON IHRIG
French Hospital, San Luis Obispo ISMND
Page 2
Per CEQA1, the ISMND must clearly show that the mitigation would eliminate potentially significant
effects:
Figure 1 CEQA Section 15070(b)
Thus, thresholds for some potentially significant noise impacts are missing or incorrect:
Sleep disturbance
The ISMND lacks any assessment of potentially significant sleep disturbance caused by nighttime
activities, such as helicopter activities. The Noise Attachment (p. 6) identifies that an indoor sound
exposure level of SEL 80 dBA can cause awakening for about 10% of exposed persons. This does not
account for sleep disturbance, in which a person may not become fully awake, but instead changes
from one deeper level of sleep to a less restful level of sleep.
The General Plan appears to assume that a residential building will provide 15 dBA noise reduction,
implied from its noise standard for exterior transportation noise of 60 CNEL/Ldn and interior to be
45 CNEL/Ldn (ISMND Table 10). From this we conclude that an exterior SEL 95 dBA from helicopters
would cause sleep disturbance to at least 10% of exposed persons, and this would be potentially
significant.
Noise Ordinance Compliance
Section 9.12.020(K) of the SLO code2 defines "emergency work" as "any work performed for the
purpose of preventing or alleviating the physical trauma or property damage threatened or caused
by an emergency." The ISMND states that the backup generators are exempt from the SLO noise
ordinance (p. 75), but it is not clear that a power outage at hospital qualifies as such an emergency,
which usually applies to public “work” such as repairing a water main or to stabilize a falling cliff.
Thus, on-going backup generator noise would not qualify for the “emergency exemption” in clause
9.12.090(A) and if it would exceed the nighttime standard of 45 dBA Leq (Table 11), the generator
noise would be potentially significant.
Impact Analyses are Incomplete
Backup Generator
The generator noise analysis provided in the ISMND (p. 75) and the Noise Attachment do not clearly
indicate the size or power rating of the generators. The Air Quality analysis indicates that it will use
a 1,050 hp engine, but the manufacturer’s data and noise levels are usually related to the power rating
in watts. The noise level for a single generator (Noise Attachment, p. 15), indicates an expected noise
level of 76 to 81 dBA at 23 ft. This sound level seems comparable to a 20 to 30kW portable generator.3
A 600kW generator, perhaps more suitable for the needs of the hospital, ranges in noise level from
1 https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/IA1DEFD80D48811DEBC02831C6D6C108E?
2 https://sanluisobispo.municipal.codes/Code/9.12.020
3 For example, a Generac MLG20 provides 20kW with a 32.1 hp engine and emits a sound level of 70 dBA at 23 ft
with an acoustic enclosure.
WILSON IHRIG
French Hospital, San Luis Obispo ISMND
Page 3
over 90 dBA without an enclosure to 76 dBA at 23 ft distance with a Level 3 sound attenuating
enclosure4. Furthermore, it is our understanding that these kinds of standby generators require
monthly testing of about 45 to 60 minutes, not the 5 to 10 minutes indicated in the ISMND (p. 15).
The ISMND states that the generators would be 135 ft to the nearest residential dwelling, and with
two generators operating a 600kW generator with a Level 3 enclosure similar to the BlueStar would
generate 64 dBA without a sound wall. An additional 14 dBA reduction would be required to meet
daytime noise limits, and 19 dBA reduction to meet the nighttime noise limits.
The ISMND indicates that the generators would be surrounded by a CMU soundwall reducing noise
by approximately 8 dBA. Note that the generators are shown with the exhaust mufflers positioned
above the CMU wall (Figure 6). It is not apparent that this CMU wall would be sufficient control the
noise. This would be a potentially significant impact. Once the generator enclosure has been
determined, the height of the wall must be evaluated to ensure that the generator noise would be
properly controlled to meet 50 dBA during the daytime and 45 dBA at nighttime.
Helicopter noise
The helicopter noise analysis apparently relies on noise from the Airbus H135, which the
manufacturer states quieter than most5. Unless the project can ensure that only Airbus H135 craft
will be used the analysis should include a compensating factor for other helicopters.
Since the helicopter noise analysis is not available, a helicopter noise study for a similar scope project
was identified on the internet6. This “Supplemental Helicopter Noise Study” for a medical center in
Elk Grove, CA provides information that is not provided in the ISMND: proposed flight path and the
SEL for the typical operating conditions: “normal” with 4 trips per month, and “busy” with 6 trips per
month.
Scaling the SEL contour from this Elk Grove study, the 95 dBA SEL contour is about 400 ft from the
helipad. If the helistop for the French Hospital is similar then during the nighttime period, several
neighboring residents would be exposed to helicopter noise that would awaken about 10% and
disturb the sleep of many more. See Figure 2 (next page). Patients in the new tower and a portion of
the existing hospital would also be affected during the daytime and nighttime, since many hospital
patients require sleep during the daytime hours. This is a potentially significant impact.
Mechanical equipment
The ISMND states that commercial-use air handling cooling systems generate 78 dBA at 3 ft. A
hospital can have substantial cooling needs compared to a typical office, and perhaps a more realistic
selection for the project would be a cooling tower, several larger HVAC units, or several commercial
packaged air conditioning unit such as a Carrier N series which generates 76 dBA at 25 ft distance, or
about 94 dBA at 3 ft. With two of these units in operation the resulting noise level at the nearest
residence (50 ft away as noted in the ISMND p. 75) would be 73 dBA. Once the mechanical equipment
has been located on the rooftop or within the building, the effect of the mechanical acoustical screen
must be evaluated to ensure that the combined mechanical equipment noise would be properly
4 BlueStar VD600-03
5 https://www.airbus.com/en/products-services/helicopters/civil-helicopters/h135/h135-technical-information
6 https://p1cdn4static.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_109585/File/Departments/Planning/Projects/
california_northstate_university_hospital/5-final-environmental-impact-report/Appendix-A.pdf
WILSON IHRIG
French Hospital, San Luis Obispo ISMND
Page 4
controlled to meet 50 dBA during the daytime and 45 dBA at nighttime. This would be a potentially
significant impact.
Figure 2 95 SEL dBA contour for “normal” helistop with about 4 trips per month (adapted from Elk
Grove)
Total project noise results
Based on the lacking elements of the noise analysis discussed above, the total noise impacts of the
project should be provided in a table or results shown in Figure 19 of the ISMND. It is not at all clear
whether the results in Table 13 and Figure 19 of the ISMND are reflective of the total project noise,
or only the helicopter. If the latter, than the ISMND lacks any presentation of the total changes to the
environment which would be generated by the project. Based on the comments above, without
mitigation there would be significant noise impacts for operations.
Noise Mitigations are Lacking
As noted above, the noise analysis assumes that a quiet helicopter will be used. If the project relies
upon this fact to avoid a significance determination, then the use of Airbus H135 craft must be
included as a mitigation measure.
Furthermore, there is a potentially significant impact caused by the helistop operations to people
located within 400 ft of the helistop. In particular, sleep disturbance would affect at least 10% of
exposed persons. It is not patently obvious how such an impact would be mitigated, and thus this
issue requires further study and community engagement as part of an EIR process.
As noted above, the height of the CMU wall surrounding the generator yard must be evaluated to
ensure that the generator noise is being properly mitigated. Thus, mitigation measure N-2 should
WILSON IHRIG
French Hospital, San Luis Obispo ISMND
Page 5
be modified to clarify that proper selection of the generator and enclosure is required, in
combination with the final design of the CMU wall to ensure that the noise standards of 50 dBA
Leq (daytime) and 45 dBA Leq (nighttime) are met at any nearby dwelling or other noise
sensitive use.
As noted above, the building mechanical noise could generate a potentially significant impact,
depending on where it is located within or on top of the building, and other factors including
equipment selection and the acoustical performance of the mechanical screen could also determine
significance. Thus, a mitigation measure is required which would ensure that the mechanical
equipment siting, selection and the final design of the mechanical screening would be
reviewed to ensure that the noise standards of 50 dBA Leq (daytime) and 45 dBA Leq
nighttime) are met at any nearby dwelling or other noise sensitive use.
The ISMND provides no evidence that Mitigation Measure N-1 would reduce the construction noise
below the threshold of significance. Other than the time limits to restrict construction to daytime
hours, there is no evidence that these items will reduce the noise levels by 10 dBA and comply with
the maximum noise limit of 75 dBA Lmax:
2. Properly maintained equipment should be a minimum standard, which would not reduce
the noise,
3. “Furthest distance possible” places no hard requirement to identify a buffer distance. In
many cases, such a buffer distance will not be possible. More specific distance
requirements that are feasible must be identified. A temporary sound barrier/blanket
of suitable size and construction can augment the buffer distances.
4. Likewise, a buffer distance must be defined for stationary equipment. A temporary
sound barrier/enclosure/blanket of suitable size and construction can augment the
buffer distances.
5. Notification is useful community outreach, but has no bearing on reducing noise.
Conclusions
The ISMND lacks evaluation of potentially significant sleep disturbance from helistop operations,
which could be an unavoidable significant impact. The mechanical noise, generator noise and
construction noise analyses in the ISMND also are not complete, and based on the analysis discussed
above, additional mitigations or clarifications to the proposed mitigations are required.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions on this information.
Very truly yours,
WILSON IHRIG
Deborah A. Jue, INCE-USA
Principal
french hospital ismnd_noise review_wilson ihrig_4-9-22.docx