Resolution No. 2013-031 (2)Appendix A:
Air Quality Analysis Worksheets
c
J.-F
�R"`a�. yoo.AoosAovo.vooveee
mmmmm ��Fp���ya�sm®raa��
SS3�
liking
RIM
gS�SS�
�iR RRRR
�a
BIs
of
..
.............
............. bhp
{
I
i
flun
Mif
9
V.- 7R-
BEEBE
88889
99888.
I
a 10,
I
N N51 - -ups-!? :?m
8�� 6n.g-.
P6. . dd�o dG
od-qw-�6
Ed
POW"
6 6 ed 6-
6:66 66 826d'd
6
Et; 91
WNd 8 H
woocda
6 VV�
9z SvRv v
I.W.N.MD.4�.G Ogg. t N t -
5M Mold" t:
I I
I I
Jill, 11 If ' 1
11 1 1.4 A I
Hill 11111ill h 111111111111
9 601
D evoe::De e'veeee6eogog'eeoo o'egg�ee eo-d Rd eooe:o�$Reg vesee$� a 6e `ed aeR$
01
g$aegR���%&bP�oeeRs=��o�o�e�AaeBo�oee�e�e�800����n"'"'°q$'ooees=�gB��Eo;�ese�s�
a
�s`�+oe�eegFeage��soe�see$o"��s`��s�"s��seq=eFoe�Fego`��gse�Bo�3e`as��`E�
eo
"eel`"re se Re= p ^s11 ss` $Ac`DeenNeEayeRseo
o
e�000Ne�,�o�aoe$ s.00$'s,es6o d..d 8e c e eSO e
c -odd Ed p=vo�nE�NRoeasaes �� �cgse,oe
evoE_
o e s -EE d- o
$eeeN�q e."a oao$§ §ee1401e�FeSRIeogo6!Ala ee _ a�eRx -esa m�Ee$s-s �e-EE
__ $x pe ® ope a'�e.oEeooOgeEeve$.==eE
'g8ee'vd.06. `ooe go o 86067r ER='"`8Oda. �8eggeeBd���ve
$e o oe
s$�osg�$ ges3 o oe o o � eaoe aEeaoe" Rpe� �ooe� �E=`sE�g a lad
$oe Nn
ace.a 8e "` oe
a
Eeege ee`e.00`6Es;=0eao-. szneecaaa ess=„„eN$evees poe gs.-;es.o$s.e e
$ Naoe'e' Ee ovoo eoso oee�ee eEe
E E__ _
�3egeoN a q�Aeee$a,oexgevooe000�` v oeo `ge"s:e q`vo Mai'�;$e'='e Bpo$l
p o q�
F eeeen�e} `avee$o eeoa, o,000goeeosg<oeoo p ege`a.�e§�="p`s.geoo'oEe�odd do q`e
A GeeeegNe-pe'eee�Sge�Es�ee e$gee�gee e$ a R'a_'oe g
E e
bbb%bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb.NMbbbbbbbbb 0bbbb
|
(
i
.
�
f
i!
|
!
!
{
!
k
k
g
:
k| 2
R
k
.
!
E
7
\
/
�
t
�
;
-
2
■
>
_
)
a
I
!
i
�
G
,
k
k&
f
i
E
!
[
.
!
CcIV\
\
kf�D
.
.
.
{
;
m
LO
§§ƒu
f»�
%
E
/
]�f)
0/
/
7
f))
/
# .
$
::E
IL
-
c
Lu
■7
.
k. �`
$
/
)
k
m !
j
'
k
«
/
k
/
\
!
\
|
CL
.k
\
—
\
—
}
—
\
§
�
{
E
E
E
E—
,
ƒ
\\\{W
§
§
|
k
§
_
�
7
.
Lo
Lo
2
;
}
ƒ
)
)
2
k.
2
7
2
k
ƒ
E
■
■
■
&
///),)
or
2
to
k
k
k
B .
0
w
8 •S '8
a
C �C':C
m 'm
O
m 'Ir9 'O
O ;C ;O
�
Q
Z
•O �O
S'S'S
;o
g ;g �o
a
=
z
................Y..
i
Z
Z
$ •
y
Z
;O'
N ;v' ;Or
IR
IR
=
•'n '$
g
Cq
of ;ri ;c
� ;m o
�� •a •�Y
� �fj ,m
Q
Q.
n 'm 'm
6
o. '� 'o
o •N
Z
;•c ;o
o o
;o
tN9 . N
IN•1 � N
v
�N-
Y•
c
a
N
w
O
m
ri
ri
o :o
N '� 11rypp
N 'O 'N
q
,
O ,C ,C,O
O
m �o �Y
'Y •� '^mi
S
A
...........
CS:6 ,e ;e
o
c ;o ,c
e
d ;c ;d
•
e
e ;o ;e
o
y ..........
N •� m
N •� 'ro
N •O W
�njl
.}
N C5
eN
V.
ui
1
o
o
g5 • a
N
w
O
V
N
v-LO
n
4..
No
y
N
M
!F7
uo
8;8�5 S
M
O
N
c
C
L
0
M
Ni
N
46
2
2
4. 1
O O O O
8'8'o e
O O �O O
S
O O O O
8 '8 S
'o 'o
o ;o ;o 0
...... a' .
o ;c ;c o
N
46
N
w
O
:L
O :O O O
8 :g :mMN
e
�
O :O iNo� F
...........
I
VMS,
'
M.
IT,
i
i;
E
t
n
T iV NtM
i S
3_t
q
n
' 1 fYy
J qa
I{t
s
f[� 3
N
w
O
M_
I
e
0
o
o :o ;d o
C5
d ;o ;o
....:...:..
o ,o ;o 0
8 :8 :8 S
0 0
....:.....
N
w
O
N
N
16
Cl)
A
Jd
0
0
c
0
to
4C
m
.9 3
g ;g ;01 P
0 o m m
. 4 r
8
o ;c e
8 O O
o.;o ;c o
o'o's s
o ;c ;o
S '8 8
e o
o :o ;o 0
S '8 '8
o ;o ;c e
.. 4 Y..
8 'o '8 0
O ;O ;O O
•Y.•.4 .. p
8 'S O
;pO� O
8 8 8 3
o
N
Z�%V
9
r
I
:`.
#
'b".
err
jyq(�
PA,
Hx
=e
�
$vis
M
r
_
l
u*�
s
1�
v
li r t+
•?. q.
�N}•�,C
lD•O• C
SIDE
m•o�c
10:o:
o,
o• y•
M�
Emg.Z.
N
O
N
r
O
co
O
kd
A
z
v
c
C
J
c
W
N
N
IE f
N
O
W
LC
iilt
rg
'
8
8
� •e
Yy
$
8 •8 •8 ;8
8 •S •C •8
r
S 8 •8 8
S
r
r r
•8 •S
o
; O ; OO
OO
r� rS
q
rp ;N
r
r
N
r
•m •W.,m
d ;m ;e
w
a
14
'W
Y
C
;O
�� �W
•t�'t
�O
O
•m �O
V
.........
� OO
i
• •. .....V
8 'O •� •O
�
8 O
$ g
O
O O
Y .V..
O O
•
.i
O
A
o ;o
;vi ;.o
W
Wo •$
•o 'g
o
o ;o
;6 ;c
o
1
j
N •O
R
� O � O
O
m
m
G
SIG �C
A
O
Oi
k
�
k
\
\
'/
E
;
2
.
§
r
J
2C
U)
§§
.
§{
),
,
&�
..
/
\u
!
E
1,
)LlIL
kk
'
a
�-00
2
2
�
.tE
;
0
|( \
$
|
f
f
« :
�
.
0
'
`
°
]
§
`/\
!
\�
2
§\k)
#
2
&
ƒ\4
.
T
a
2�>]
IL
��;.�
0)
j\)k)
§
o
6
kkk
Z
!
!a.
_
_
05
N
w
O
y
N
N
N
L
n
w
O
N
T
N
L
w
0
y
.o
E
c
T
.O
N
a
.c
.
5
ai
ai
d
m
L
E
E
E
y
.N
O
T5
�
N
O
O
O
.n
0
E
0
0
E
E
E
m
Ti
L'i
iS
0
E
°
w
c
c
c
m
a
a
a
c
o
e
e
C
M
M
M
N
M
M
M
k
O
O
NN
7
9
=
O
d
L1
d
y
N
U
d
LL
LL
LL
N
a
'^
m
0
0
J
J
J
C
W
N
N
=
E
E
E
'
a
a
o.
F
o
W
d
ITW
7
0
�o
v
'0c
v
�
iE
m
m
m
m
c
�
i
N
N
1�O
1�2
1E?
^�
{
�
y
:_
�\G
��
�
IP
Sw
�
�
\
�)2
a
d�q
t°f�
9±
\�
\
�
\z
-
^
�
RN,
I
•
ic
� )A
_
�
\
\
:
\
\�
:
,
A
C
0
d
a
O
O
N
N
C
O
C
•.•Y•••!
O
M
N
w
O
a
N
Y-
O
ii
a ;g o
O
o ;d ;C;e e
O :O :O O
C C O O
..........
;o ;o
......
,1.
hv;
_
,FR
P lI
is
P
r -
J -
k
N
46
i
N
w
O
PN
e
1 • v �r �Y� {;i��
M •m
O 'O
�
V.
;O
O
p
$
O
O ;O ;O
O
'$ 'O,
O
b
O
O ;O ;O
O
;d
o
.c
;o
e
o ;e ;o
e
O
a 'y
1
LL •
�
,
N
46
8 8 •S
8
S S O
O
8 8 •r
y
O ; O ; O
.....
O
o ;o ;o
...:...:..
e
8 ;g ;2
e
e
o
o ;d e o
d o �c o
d ,o �c o
..........
8 ;8 '8 S
o ,o :e o
o ;c c o
c e
o 'O 'O O
o �c ;o e
w �9
s '� •o 0
e ;e ;o 0
c ;e ;o e
o 'c 'o e
e ;o e ;e
o ;o ;o e
O ;O ;N MI
O ' CR ' N
O ;O ;O O
f
r
45�F=
�bF
r
r'M,1{
a,
[4)
�
dy,
''rTF 1
4 I Yi
FLU
YY)
AI t
ei
3
l}k
N
46
O
N
(
IL
ei
)
k\
�
N
!
��
�
:
-
'AAA
�
i{
�)k\\
!.
\lf::
-
� �
�\�--
��
\
� :q-
�
.� q
U.
h
Cl)
..........
N
O
N
Mil
op
a
a
e
...L 4
8'S'S S
O
O �O �O O
8 '8 'S S
O :O O O
4 �L.
OO O O
e �c ;o �o
4 L•
..........
S'S'g o
O : O � CSO
�•••�•4-4
N
r
O
to
0
A
O
b
E
E
0
w
0.
F
N
Q
a : O
d
0
O
ui
•4 !
ze E
m
q
I
r
N
O
O
N
�8
8
;O
O
b 'O
;c
N
i '8
O
o
;o
;d. ;o
eryi
;O
G
8
S
8
c
;o
..............
..............
N
:m ;$
..........
'N
Y
'O
O
;C
'10D 'O
Ip0
;O
G
S •8 `� '8
ry
e
1 .
d
; •OV ;00
O
O
OI
G
0
N
ui
W
U
0
Lo
i
W
W
U
S a
u
O
N
r
N
46
V
P ..........
;O
O ;CO !l1011l
c ;c �o 0
o ;d ;o e
•ry
VR :9 'D q
CS.0 N
O ; iO
hV .h
O ;O
E
O
M
7\
mall
-
: \
.
Mg
/
\ )`�
�\
�
\`
y
�
\\
�y�
11
�\
^
�
�
&z
yyd
M
-
�
� §�
:
.
� \�
�
\%» -
.
\
�--
.,
I
IM
0
\
� \
� �
��;..
�\l
FBI
-
�
\
ff
-
\�
�
[\\--
.\
�\ ]
�
-
!\\ -
�\�
�
\\
� »q
)
c
§
�
�
S,a
I ,
.�
r
{
4 iY
�r x
f bd
+.S
1-
f;
n
N
w
O
7]
Up
n,
[100m,
r`
ckt{YYt
,NP,
-
ok'r,+a
i 1
s
a
-
rf`
n„�,
+
j rri'i�
�1
V I
h;
N
N
46
E
8 :8 :8 8
:o ;o
o ;o ;o e
8 'O 'C
C ; G ; C O
.. y
co
n
N
O
aL
.......V
8 '8 •S S
8'o'S 8
s s s s
o ;o ;o 0
O G C O
o ;o ;d e
S •8 '8 S
c ;o ;o e
8'8'8 S
8 '8 '0 8
o �c ;o e
.eT•.q.
KK
� y
��..
�\~
\ �
ems`
� (+
: -
�-
�2<i
) a.
�
-
\�
� q-
� §�
�\m
�
r
�
�
■
2
I�
§
\
/
'
\,-
\'
/:.
y
\ ..
4
� 4
t )
� a
� .
-XI
\.�
:
� \\
}\
- -
-
�
� }�
h t
4
8 S
0 0
o
c e
o e
o ;o 0
q.
N
w
O
O
2
2
8 '8
o ; o
o � c
o ; o ; o 0
8'S'8 S
O
0'8'8 8
o ;e o 0
S •$ 'o `o
d ;d ;d o
8 •8 '8 S
. Y
OO :O O
O
O �O �O O
..........
r-
N
O
N
I
n
N
O
to
C
Ifl
a
0
e '� 'e e
0 ;0 ;0 0
8 ;8
d d 0 0
8 '8
0
8 •8 '8 0.
e ;0 ;o. o
8 •8 '8 S
8 '8 '8 8
0 0
i9
I
O
EA
L
W
C
a
p
EL
M
m'm;
n .r�
Mm
O
O
N
l lKi r
`6i
a5�
MO
MINN-
J
c� 6
..........
..........
8 's •o
o ;o ;o 0
r
N
0
N
q
N
........
r
N
w
O
N
i
ar
,
,
6T3Ii n
o ;o
,o ;o
e
a
8
e
8 8
8 8 S :8
e ;c ;c ;o
a
......
.......:...:..
a
z
8
0
8 8
� :o
:..
8 8
,o ;o
....
:o :c
s:s
o
r s s
r
Z
s
d
Z
q
Q �
O
O 'N 'N •O
J.'9
E
;"
N D
10
r
r
N
46
N
N
n
R
S
•$
'$ '8
S
c
;c
00
'$
'o '$
e
o
;o
;o ;o
0
d
;o
;o ;d
o
d
;o
;d ;d
o
S ;$
d ,d
;d ;c
o
,o ;o
e
ryry
O ;O
;O ;O
O
C , E'
'
n
N
0
O
N
N
s
�
�\q
S c(
�
\�\
,y.\
\
...�...�..�
k �
»f 9
:�y---�
A\
)
%
�2»
� }\
T �]
.%
I
I
rr
N
46
W
N
�O
� �O ci i0 N
8 g O
O !O j0 O
q) S g n YY
V
p Y...Y.p•
O
Oi
r
N
46
n
N
Appendix B:
Health Risk Assessment
PCR
October 15, 2012
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
Senior Vice President
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
630 N. Rosemead Boulevard, Suite 150
Pasadena, California 91107
Re: FOCUSED REFINED HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL HOUSING
SITES IN VERNON, CALIFORNIA
Dear Ms. Stetson:
PCR Services Corporation (PCR), under contract to Hogle-Ireland, submits this health risk
assessment (HRA) to evaluate the potential impacts from proposed updates to the Housing Element
for the City of Vernon.
A health risk assessment (HRA) was performed to determine the suitability of developing housing at
three identified locations. It is important to note that people living in urbanized areas of the South
Coast Air Basin, such as Vernon, are subject to toxic air contaminants (TACs) exposure from a
variety of sources, originating both near to and at some distance from residential land uses.
Examples include industrial processes (manufacturing, refining, electricity generation, etc.), fugitive
sources (solvent use, paint and coating application, etc.), and transportation (off -shore shipping
lanes, on -road trucks and personal vehicles, rail, off -highway construction equipment, etc.).
Specifically, this report evaluates the difference in potential negative health effects from exposure to
localized sources of airborne TACs of the three sites.
The HRA-identified sources of toxic air contaminants (TACs) within '/a mile of each housing site
using the SCAQMD Facility Information Detail (FIND) database, aerial photo search, and field
surveys performed by PCR. Large sources of TACs outside of the '/a mile radius were also included
such as the BNSF/UP rail yard, the Alameda Corridor and the I-710 freeway. Results of the analysis
indicate that residents at the proposed housing sites will be exposed to cancer risk levels below the
SCAQMD cancer burden threshold of 0.5 persons likely to develop cancer. However, due to the
proximity to the I-710 Freeway, Alameda Corridor and the BNSF/UP rail yards, it is recommended
that residential uses install enhanced filtration systems and transitional housing. or homeless shelters
include inoperable windows in addition to filtration systems into building design to reduce exposure.
The attached exhibit provides additional technical details regarding toxics air emissions inventory
and cancer risk calculations for the three proposed residential sites.
Ms, Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
October 15, 2012 - Page 2
Should you have any questions please feel free to contact me at (626) 204-6170 or
h.rous&crnet.com.
Sincerely,.
PPCCjR SERVICES CORPORATION
lra h.6tua
Heidi Rous, CPP
Principal/Director of Air Quality,
Climate & Acoustic Services
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC. 0
October 15, 2012 - Page 1
INTRODUCTION
The City of Vernon (City) is interested in identifying areas within Vernon suitable for future
residential land use development. The City is in the process of updating its General Plan to allow
for an increase in residential development, and Hogle-Ireland will prepare the appropriate analysis
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Thus, potential impacts related to health
risks of allowing future residential uses to be developed in the environmental setting of Vernon need
to be assessed. PCR proposed a two -phased approach to these siting studies: (1) a constraints
analysis and (2) a focused refined HRA. This submittal is the second phase of the siting studies.
PROJECT SETTING
The City of Vernon is an industrial city of 5.2 square miles located southeast of Downtown Los
Angeles in Southern California. Founded in 1905 as the first exclusively industrial city in the
Southwestern United States, Vernon currently houses more than 1,800 businesses that employ
approximately 50,000 people. Vernon is the home to industries including food and agriculture,
apparel, steel, plastics, logistics and home furnishings.' According to the 2010 census, Vernon has a
residential population of approximately 112 people?
CANDIDATE SITES
The City has identified two locations within Vernon as candidate site for single- or multi -family
residential development, and one site for potential California Senate Bill 2 (SB2) zoning (allowing
homeless shelters or transitional housing to be developed). These candidate sites are listed in
Table 1, Candidate Sites, and shown in Figure 1, City of Vernon Housing Element — Potential
Housing Sites, attached. As shown, the sites vary in size from approximately 0.5 acre to slightly
over three acres. Out of the three locations, one is privately owned, two are publically owned.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Management of air quality in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) is the responsibility of the South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). As part of the SCAQMD's environmental
justice initiatives adopted in late 1997, the SCAQMD has assessed background cancer risks in the
Basin. The SCAQMD conducted the Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study (MATES) III between
April 2004 and March 2006, with a Final Report issued in September 2008. MATES III was a
follow-up to the previous MATES I and II air toxics studies. The MATES III study was based on
actual monitored data throughout the Basin and consisted of several elements. These included a
monitoring program, an updated emissions inventory of TACs, and a modeling effort to characterize
carcinogenic risk across the Basin from exposure to TACs. The MATES III study applied a
2-kilometer (1.24-mile) grid over the Basin and reported carcinogenic risk within each grid space
' bttp://www.cityofvemon.org/about—vemon/; Accessed March 22, 2012
s http://www.cubitplanning.com/city/16800-vemon-city-census-2010-population, Accessed March 22, 2012
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
October 15, 2012 - Page 2
No.(See
Figure 1)
Address
1
4459 E. 52-d Drive
Vernon, CA 90040
2
4675 E. 52nd Drive
Vernon, CA 90040
3
25th Street
Vernon, CA 90058
Source: Hogle-Ireland Inc, 2012
Table 1
Candidate Sites
Size Possible
acres Ownership Future Use
0.52
Publically owned
Residential
2.06
Privately owned
Residential
1.61
Publically owned
SB2 Zoning
(each covering an area of 4 square kilometers or 1.54 square miles). The study concluded that the
average of the modeled air toxics concentrations measured at each of the 10 monitoring stations in
the Basin equates to a background cancer risk of approximately 1,200 in a million primarily due to
diesel exhaust particulate matter (DPM)' The area south of Central Los Angeles, which includes a
major transportation corridor as well as the City of Vernon, has background risks ranging from about
1,400 to 1,900 per million. More specifically, according to the MATES III grid, Candidate Sites I
and 2 have background risks ranging between 1,565 and 1,840 in one million and Candidate Site 3
has background risks ranging between 1,647 and 1,868 in one million.
According to MATES III, about 94 percent of the Basin -wide cancer risk from air pollution is
attributed to emissions associated with mobile sources, and about 6 percent of the risk is attributed to
toxics emitted from stationary sources, which include industries, and businesses such as dry cleaners
and chrome plating operations! The MATES III study found lower ambient concentrations of most
of the measured air toxics, as compared to the levels measured in the previous MATES II study
conducted dtwing 1998 and 1999. Specifically, benzene and 1,3-butadiene, pollutants generated
mainly from vehicles, were down 50 percent and 73 percent, respectively.' The reductions were
attributed to air quality control regulations and improved emission control technologies.
' South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Report: Multiple Air Toxics Fxposure Study in the South Coast
Air Basin,.(2008) ES-2.
° South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Report: Multiple Air Toxics Fxposure Study in the South Coast
Air Basin, (2008) ES-2.
' South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Report: Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast
Air Basin, (2008) 2-7.
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
October 15, 2012 - Page 3
ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
The assessment and dispersion modeling methodologies used in the preparation of this HRA were
composed of relevant and appropriate procedures presented by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA), California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA), and the SCAQMD. The
methodologies and assumptions offered under this regulatory guidance were used to ensure that the
assessment effectively quantified health risk impacts associated with the generation of toxic air
contaminant (TAC) emissions from nearby stationary and mobile sources. This report summarizes
the protocol used to evaluate the health risks and presents the results of the health risk assessment.
Threshold
This HRA evaluates cancer and non -cancer chronic and acute impacts from emissions of TACs.
TACs are those substances which have been shown or suspected to result in cancer and non -cancer
human health impacts from acute or chronic exposure. The SCAQMD Air Quality Analysis
Guidance Handbook ("SCAQMD Handbook")' provides thresholds for assessing air quality impacts
from land use development projects in the Basin. The SCAQMD Handbook recommends (1) a
lifetime probability of contracting cancer greater than 10 in one million (10 x 10'6) as a significance
threshold for evaluating incremental cancer impacts from a facility, and (2) a health hazard index of
1.0 as a significance threshold for evaluating non -carcinogenic impacts from a facility? The
SCAQMD also recommends a cancer burden threshold of greater than 0.5 excess cancer cases. The
cancer burden is the estimated increase in the occurrence of cancer cases in a given population as a
result of exposures to TAC emissions. These thresholds are normally applied to new facilities that
emit TACs into the surrounding environment and potentially impact off -site sensitive receptors
within a '/a mile of the facility.
In this case, the Candidate Sites would locate new sensitive receptors into an existing developed area
rather than a new source of TACs. This situation presents inherent difficulties when applying the
SCAQMD threshold of significance. When locating sensitive receptors, it is common practice to
access the risk from sources of TACs, such as facilities, freeways, and rail yards, located within a
'/< mile from the site. The risk from these sources is typically considered to represent an incremental
increase over the background risk for the area. However, this potentially results in a double
counting of impacts as TAC emissions from sources within a % mile of a proposed sensitive receptor
site contribute to both the background risk in the area and the site -specific risk at the sensitive
receptor site. For example, the risks from the BNSF.Hobart (BNSF) and Union Pacific (UP) rail
yards in the City of Commerce and City of Vernon contribute to the background risk in the area as
well as site -specific risks at each of the three Candidate Sites. Additionally, with respect to the
Candidate Sites, an incremental increase in risk of 10 in one million would represent a relatively
small 0.5 to 0.6 percent increase in risk from the MATES III background risk levels. A somewhat
South Coast Air Quality Management District, "Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook,"
http://www.agmd.gov/cega/hdbk.httnl, 2011.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, (2011).
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC. "
October 15, 2012 Page 4
more meaningful representation of the actual risk that could be expected at the Candidate Sites
would be the estimated cancer burden. Although the cancer burden is calculated from the
incremental increase in risk, and thus would still potentially result in a double counting of impacts, it
would provide an indication as to whether an increase in the incidence of cancer would be expected
in a given population due to lifetime exposure to TAC emissions from nearby sources. Thus, this
analysis considers a cancer burden greater than 0.5 as an appropriate threshold to evaluate whether
the Candidate Sites could result in an incidence of cancer in the expected population.
Modeling
The primary pathway of exposure to TACs from routine industrial operations is inhalation of
airborne emissions emitted lawfully through vents, stacks, or fugitive (non -point) sources. The
SCAQMD maintains the Facility Information Detail (FIND) database, a web -based portal which
tabulates information about permitted industrial sources by location (address, zip code, municipal
jurisdiction, etc.). PCR identified SCAQMD permitted sources of TACs within'/4 mile of each of
the candidate sites using the FIND database and from field surveys conducted on February 29, 2012
(no additional permitted sources of TACs were found during the field surveys). A few unpermitted
sources such as auto repair shops and small scale auto body paint shops were identified. In addition
to permitted and non -permitted stationary sources, mobile sources which have the potential to emit
diesel particulate matter (DPW such as rail lines, heavy duty truck warehousing, and freeways were
identified through aerial search, field survey, and the SCAQMD MATES III.
Health risk impacts are assessed using the California Air Resources Board (CARE) Hotspots
Analysis Reporting Program (HARP) version 1.4. The health risk calculation methodology
contained in HARP is consistent with the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
(OEHHA) Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk
Assessments (OEHHA, 2003). The HARP software is currently unable to import line sources
(freeways, rail lines) for health risk calculations. Therefore, health risk impacts due to line source
emissions were calculated using spreadsheet methodology.
OEHHA does not promulgate environmental regulations directly; however, it is responsible for
developing and providing toxicological and medical information relevant to decisions involving
public health to agencies such as Cal/EPA. The OEHHA Guidance recommends that a 70-year
exposure duration be used for determining lifetime residential cancer risks (exposure for 7 days per
week, 50 weeks per year). This ensures that a person residing in the vicinity of a facility for a
lifetime will be included in the evaluation of risk posed by that facility.
The SCAQMD has established a method for calculating cancer burden. The cancer burden is the
estimated increase in the occurrence of cancer cases in a given population as a result of exposures to
TAC emissions. For the purposes of this BRA, the cancer burden will be calculated for the
Candidate Sites. ---- -
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
October 15, 2012 - Page 5
SOURCE IDENTIFICATION
P+C R
The SCAQMD recommends that sources of TAC emissions within a'/ mile radius (1,320 feet) of a
sensitive receptor be included in a local health risk analyses. Therefore, sources of TAC emissions
within a'/4 mile radius (1,320 feet) of each of the candidate sites were included in this HRA.
A preliminary search was performed using the SCAQMD FIND to identify permitted sources within
'/4 mile of each potential housing site. However, the FIND database only contains sources which
require permits such as stationary combustion equipment (emergency generators, boilers, spray paint
booths, charbroilers, etc.). Other sources that may emit TACs such as body shops, small industrial
uses or other uses which may generate a large amount of heavy duty truck trips (warehousing) are
not required to obtain an SCAQMD permit (unpermitted source) and are therefore not contained in
the FIND database. In addition, mobile sources such as freeways, rail lines and facilities with heavy
diesel truck traffic are also not contained within the FIND database. An additional search for
unpermitted and mobile source TACs was performed using aerial photo and internet search for
sources within'/4 mile of each housing site.
Based on the above survey and records review, stationary sources were identified as shown in
Figure 2. The following sources were identified near the three potential housing sites:
Sites 1& 2:
1. I-710 Freeway
2. Unipolo Fabrics Corporation (5000 District Blvd.)
3. Allied Veneer Company (4901 Fruitland Ave.)
4. Pacific Coast Chemical (5100 District Blvd.)
5. Frey Environmental (5122 S. Atlantic Blvd.)
6. Douglas Drive- In (5208 S. Atlantic Blvd.)
7. Las Trancas, Inc. (5351 Atlantic Blvd.)
8. Ramirez Auto Repair (5504 South Atlantic Blvd.)
9. El Lempira (5516 S. Atlantic Blvd.)
10. Kop-Coat (5431 District Blvd.)
11. Matheson Tri-Gas (5555 District Blvd.)
12. Castrol Industrial North America Inc. (5511 District Blvd.)
13. International Paper (3030 S. Atlantic Blvd.)
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
October 15, 2012 - Page 6
Site 3:
1. Alameda Corridor
2. Prudential Lighting Corporation (1774 E. 21st St.)
3. Continental Fleet Paint and Body (2021 E. 25th St.)
4. Roy Hanson Manufacturing (1960 S. Alameda St.)
5. California Portland Cement Company (2026 E. 27th St.)
6. Forever 21 (2001 S. Alameda St.)
SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION
Stationary Sources
PCR .
Contaminant release information and associated chemical species were identified through a review
of available documentation for each source referenced above. To the degree practical, all TAC
emissions generated from each source location were considered in the analysis. The limiting factor
for the inclusion of a compound was the availability of published exposure factors and other toxicity
data enabling risks to be quantified and, where appropriate, target organs identified. A list of
emitted compounds for each source is outlined in Table 2, Chemical Compounds Emitted From
Each Facility.
Emissions of TACs from each facility were estimated through interviewing the facility operator or if
detailed information is not available; estimates were made using industry -wide averages. A detailed
list of sites, activities and pollutants are provided in Appendix A.
As discussed previously, Candidate Site 3 is proposed for SB2 zoning (allowing homeless shelters or
transitional housing to be developed). Nonetheless, health risk impacts to the site are evaluated for
lifetime (i.e., 70 year) exposures.
The BNSF Hobart (BNSF) Railyard and the Union Pacific (UP) Railyard are located to the north of
all three candidate sites in the City of Commerce and City of Vernon. Although the rail yard is
located well beyond the '/4 mile buffer distance, health risks from the rail yard have the potential to
impact all three housing sites due to the large amount of diesel particulate emissions. The CARD
has conducted an analysis of diesel particulate emissions from the rail yard in the document Health
Risk Assessment For the Four Commerce Railyards which estimates. health risk impacts to receptors
located within several miles from the rail yard which includes the three potential housing sites
(CARB, 2007). Health risk impacts contained in the CARB study will be incorporated into this
analysis.
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC. c
October 15, 2012 - Page 7
Table 2
Chemical Compounds Emitted From Each Facility
Facility Name Contaminant
Sites 1 & 2
Castro] Industrial North America Inc. benzene, formaldehyde, n-hexane, toluene
Allied Veneer benzene, formaldehyde, n-hexane, toluene
Continental Fleet Paint and Body 2-butoxyethanol, ethylbenzene, xylene
Douglas Burgers (Drive -In) acetaldehyde
El Lempira acetaldehyde .
Frey Environmental benzene, ethylbenzene, hexane, MTBE
International Paper
Las Trancas, Inc.
Matheson Tri-Gas.
Kop-Coat
Ramirez Auto Repair
Unipolo Fabrics Corporation
Site 3
California Portland Cement Company
Continental Fleet Paint and Body
Forever 21
Prudential Lighting Corporation
Roy Hanson Manufacturing
Source: - PCR Services Corporation, 2012.
Mobile Sources
benzene, formaldehyde, n-hexane, styrene, toluene
acetaldehyde
diesel particulate
ethyl benzene, xylene
toluene, methanol
formaldehyde, benzene, toluene, n-hexane
diesel particulate
2-butoxyethanol, ethylbenzene, xylene
diesel particulate
2-butoxyethanol, ethylbenzene, xylene
2-butoxyethanol, ethylbenzene, xylene
In urban communities, vehicle emissions contribute significantly to localized concentrations of air
contaminants. Typically, emissions generated from these sources are characterized by vehicle mix,
the rate pollutants are generated during the course of travel and the number of vehicles traversing the
roadway network. As Site 2 is located approximately '/a mile from the 1-710 freeway, an analysis of
freeway emissions was performed.
To produce a representative vehicle fleet distribution, the assessment utilized the fleet mix contained
in the EMFAC2011 emissions model. The EMFAC2011 model is based on actual California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) vehicle registration data for each county. Outputs from
EMFAC2011 were formatted to calculate emission factors from diesel and non -diesel sources based
on an average Los Angeles County fleet mix.
Emission factors are generated from a series of computer based programs to produce a composite
emission rate for vehicles traveling within a defined geographical area or along a discrete roadway
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
IiOGLE-IRELAND, INC. N"M
October 15, 2012 - Page 8
segment. EWAC2011 was utilized to identify pollutant emission rates for total organic gases
(TOG) and diesel exhaust particulates. To quantify the generation of hazardous emissions, the TOG
emission rate was multiplied by available exhaust fractions for identified compounds promulgated
by the USEPA Motor Vehicle -Related Air Toxics Study (USEPA, 1993). A list of emitted
compounds for the on -road mobile source category is presented in Table 3, Compounds Emitted
From Mobile Source Activity. To determine hourly traffic volumes, the assessment employed
available average daily traffic counts published by the California Department. of Transportation
(Caltrans), Traffic and Vehicle Data Systems Unit, and reported on the Caltrans Website.
Table 3
Compounds Emitted From Mobile Source Activity
Source Contaminant
Interstate — 710 1,3-butadiene, acetaldehyde, benzene, diesel particulates, formaldehyde
Alameda Corridor diesel particulates
Source: PCR Service Corporation, 2012.
Site 3 is not located within a V4 mile of a freeway; however, it is located adjacent to the Alameda
Corridor. Emissions from the I-710 freeway (DPM, gasoline exhaust) and the Alameda corridor
(DPM) were included in this HRA. The USEPA has adopted emission standards for locomotives,
which are codified in 40 CFR Part 1033. Emissions from locomotives traveling on the BNSFIUP
railroads were estimated based on the USEPA emission standards. Appendix B presents the
emission rate calculations for each source considered in the assessment.
Onsite Contamination
Soil sampling has been performed for Site 2 at the request of the City. Sampling performed in
October 2011 indicates that the subsurface soils may be contaminated with perchloroethylene,
trichlorethylene and a variety of heavy metals (arsenic, nickel, etc.).' Currently, contamination was
detected below the surface and will not likely be released to the atmosphere unless disturbed
(excavated). The soil sampling report recommended that additional soil sampling be performed to
determine the true extent.of the contamination. It is assumed that eventually the site will be
remediated through excavation or in -situ treatment prior to development for residential uses.
Therefore, soil contamination of Site 2 is not considered in the analysis:
s Memo to City of Vernon: Data Presentation — 5119 District Boulevard, Vernon, California. Hazard. Management
Consulting, October 2011.
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
October 15, 2012 - Page 9
EXPOSURE QUANTIFICATION
In order to assess the impact of emitted compounds on individuals who may reside at the candidate
sites, air quality modeling utilizing the AMS/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD) model, version
12060, was performed. The model is a steady state Gaussian plume model and is utilized by the
USEPA and Cal/EPA for estimating ground level impacts from point and fugitive sources in simple
and complex terrain.
The model offers additional flexibility by allowing the user to assign initial vertical and lateral
dispersion parameters for sources representative of a localized mobile fleet. For this assessment, the
line source module was used for the mobile source dispersion estimates. The line source is
presented by combining a series of separated volume sources to model the emissions generated from
on -road mobile source activity. The model requires additional input parameters including chemicals
emission rates and local meteorology data. Inputs for each. emitting source were based on the
characterizations referenced above. Meteorological data from the SCAQMD's Downtown LA
monitoring station within Source Receptor Area I was used to represent local weather conditions
and prevailing winds data.
The modeling analysis also considered the spatial distribution of each emitting source in relation to
each of the proposed sites. To accommodate the model's Cartesian grid format, direction dependent
calculations were obtained by identifying the universal transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates for
each source location.
CARCINOGENIC RISK CHARACTERIZATION
As mentioned previously, health risk impacts were calculated using the HARP software for
stationary sources. HARP is currently unable to directly import line sources, so health risk impacts
from line sources (freeways, rail lines) were calculat'pd using the same methodology contained in the
HARP software but with the use of spreadsheets.
Carcinogenic compounds are not considered to have threshold levels (i.e., dose levels below which
there are no risks). Any exposure, therefore, will have some associated risk. Incremental health
risks associated with exposure to carcinogenic compounds at the candidate sites can be defined in
terms of the probability of developing cancer as a result of exposure to a chemical at a given
concentration. Under a deterministic approach (i.e., point estimate methodology), the cancer risk
probability is determined by multiplying the chemical's annual concentration by its unit risk factor.
(URF); The URF is a measure of the carcinogenic potential of a chemical when a dose is received
through the inhalation pathway. It represents an upper bound estimate of the probability of
contracting cancer as a result of continuous exposure to an ambient concentration of one microgram
per cubic meter (µg/ni) over a 70 year lifetime.
In accordance with OEHHA policy, a breathing rate equal to the 80'h percentile should be used in
single -point risk management decisions, such as those subject to a threshold or standard, for which
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
October 15, 2012 - Page 10
the cancer risk is entirely associated with inhalation and residential cancer risk are being evaluated
(OEHHA, 2003). These two criteria are met for this assessment. Thus, a breathing rate of 302 liters
per kilogram of body weight per day was used for the residential cancer risk calculations.
For the inhalation pathway, the procedure requires the incorporation of several discrete variables to
effectively quantify dose. Once determined, contaminant dose is multiplied by the cancer potency
factor (CPF) in units of inverse dose expressed in milligrams per kilogram per day (mg/kg/day)-1 to
derive the cancer risk estimate. Therefore, to accommodate the unique exposures associated with
the proposed population, the following dose algorithm was utilized.
Where;
CDI = (CB;, x EF x ED x IR) / (B W x AT)
CDI =
chronic daily intake (mg/kg/day)
Cair =
concentration of contaminant in air (mg/m3)
EF =
exposure frequency (days/year)
ED =
exposure duration (years)
IR =
inhalation rate (m3/day)
BW =
body weight (kg)
AT =
averaging time (days)
The URFs utilized in the assessment and corresponding cancer potency factors were obtained
principally from OEHHA guidance. For gasoline vapors, the toxicity value presented in the former
CAPCOA Air Toxic Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. was utilized (CAPCOA, 1993).
This was done to ensure a conservative (i.e., health protective) assessment by accounting for the
mass generation of product vapors rather than reducing the risk estimate by limiting source strength
based upon the fraction of benzene in the vapor phase. For compounds not listed in the OEHHA
database, toxicity values from the USEPA, Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) were utilized,
The estimated cancer burden was calculated for each candidate site based on an estimated residential
population 100 residents, the cancer risk impacts calculated from the AERMOD dispersion model
output, and the methodology provided in the SCAQMD Risk Assessment Procedures for Rules 1401
and 212, Version 7.0 (SCAQMD, 2005).
CHRONIC AND ACUTE IMPACT CHARACTERIZATION
An evaluation of the potential non -cancer effects of chronic chemical exposures was also conducted.
Under the point estimate approach, adverse health effects are evaluated by comparing the annual
ground level concentration of each chemical compound with the appropriate Reference Exposure
Level (REL). Available RELs promulgated by OEHHA were considered in the assessment. For
compounds not listed in the OEHHA database, RELs from the Consolidated Table of OEHHA/ARB
Approved Risk Assessment Health Values were utilized. When identified, USEPA Reference
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP pl 14i
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC. ! `
October 15, 2012 -Page 11
Concentrations (RfCs) reported in this table were substituted with updated values from the IRIS
database.
In the absence of published inhalation REL/RfC values, a compound's available oral reference dose
was employed by assuming equal absorption by the inhalation and oral routes. When inhalation
and/or oral toxicity values were not available, informal inhalation concentrations were developed by
converting occupational exposure levels (Le., Threshold Limit Values) derived by the American
Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists to a lifetime exposure, as follows:
(TLV in mg/m3) x (20 m3/day) / [(420) x (70 kg)] = mg/kg/day
The exposure level expressed in mg/kg/day may additionally be converted to ❑g/m3 by the
following:
(mg/kg/day) x (70 kg) x (1,000 µg/mg) / (20 m3/day) = µg/m3
To quantify non -carcinogenic impacts, the hazard index approach was used. The approach assumes
that chronic sub -threshold exposures adversely affect a specific organ or organ system (toxicological
endpoint). For each discrete .chemical exposure, target organs presented in regulatory guidance were
utilized. When informal concentrations were developed, endpoints identified in the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Pocket Guide
to Chemical Hazards were employed.
To calculate the hazard index, each chemical's concentration or dose is divided by the appropriate
toxicity value. For compounds affecting the same toxicological endpoint, this ratio is summed.
Where the total is equal to or exceeds one, a health hazard is presumed to exist. In a manner
consistent with the assessment of carcinogenic exposures, REL/RfC values were converted to units
expressed in mg/kg/day to accommodate the above referenced intake algorithm.
HEALTH RisK ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Carcinogenic Risks
For carcinogenic exposures, the summation of risk and cancer burden is provided for each Candidate
Site in Table 4, Results of Health Risk Assessment. Cancer risk is calculated in terms of the number
of people who are expected to develop cancer per million people exposed. Cancer burden values
apply cancer risk values to actual population values and represent the number of people who may
develop cancer as a result of exposure to pollutants. As mentioned previously, the SCAQMD has
developed thresholds for residential uses based on cancer risk and cancer burden. SCAQMD cancer
risk thresholds are incremental thresholds which apply to new stationary sources. The cancer burden
threshold is more appropriate as it takes into account ambient cancer risk due to existing facilities in
the area and the anticipated risk for a given population.
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
October 15, 2012 - Page 12
Candidate Site 1
Candidate Site 2
Candidate Site 3
Candidate Site 1
Candidate Site 2
Candidate Site 3
Table 4
Results of Health Risk Assessment
Incremental Cancer Risk
(increase in chance of contracting
10 in one million
26 in one million
690 in one millior
210 in one million
226 in one million
715 in one million
" Assumes direct exposure (no air filtration systems in place)
Based on a population of 100 people at each site.
Source: PCR Service Corporation, 2012,
0.001
0,003
0.02
0.02
0.07
As mentioned previously, the candidate housing sites are located near the BNSF/UP rail yard which
emits high levels of diesel particulate emissions. Cancer risk calculated by the CARB for the rail
yard indicates that residents at Sites 1 and 2 will be exposed to cancer risk values of approximately
200 in a million while residents at Site 3 will be exposed to 25 in a million cancer risk due to the rail
yard.
According to the results of the analysis, the cancer burden indicates that TAC exposures from
sources within a '/a mile radius are not anticipated to pose an actual or potential endangerment to
persons who reside at the candidate sites since the cancer burden is less than 0.5. As shown in
Table 4, the cancer burden would be lower at Candidate Site 1 when compared to Site 2. Therefore,
based on a qualitative ranking, Candidate Sites 1 would have a lower potential for routine exposure
compared to Site 2.
Candidate Site 3 has a higher TAC exposure than Sites 1 and 2 due to the proximity to the Alameda
corridor. It should be noted however, transitional housing tends to be temporary in nature, whereas
carcinogenic properties of TACs are based on a hypothetical lifetime (70-year) continuous exposure.
Because SB2 housing is more likely to be equipped with non -operational windows and a central
ventilation system with minimum efficient reporting value (MERV) filtration (allowing for cost-
effective filtering of incoming air) as compared to individual residential units, the site could be
Health Risk Assessment for the Four Commerce Railyards. CARB Stationary Source Division, 2007.
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
October 15, 2012 - Page 13
compatible with temporary or transitional housing. Detailed health risk calculations are provided in
Appendix C. AERMOD dispersion modeling files are available electronically as Appendix D.
Non -Carcinogenic Impacts
For non -carcinogenic effects, the hazard index identified for the maximum impacted toxicological
endpoint is provided for each Candidate Site in Table 5, Results of Non -Cancer Impacts. The
hazard index identified for each toxicological endpoint totaled less than one for receptors at all
Candidate Sites. Therefore, chronic and acute non -carcinogenic hazards were predicted to be within
acceptable limits.
Table 5
Results of Non -Cancer Impacts
Hazard Indices 1H11
Receptor
Candidate Site 1
Candidate Site 2
Candidate Site 3
Source: PCR Service Corporation, 2011.
ACUTE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Chronic
Acute (1-Hour)
0.003
0.03
0.003
0.03
0.001
0.02
PCR conducted a constraints analysis as part of the first phase of the siting studies. The constraints
analysis included an assessment of acutely hazardous materials (AHM), such as ammonia for
refrigeration purposes, among others, which could be accidentally released through an upset
condition (man-made or act of nature). . These AHMs are regulated through the California
Accidental Release Prevention Program (CALARP) and requires that facilities that store or use a
regulated substance (RS) in amounts above a compound -specific threshold quantity (TQ) identify
likely and worst -case accidental release scenarios and prepare an offshe consequence analysis
(OCA) for each.
The suitability of future residential uses at each of the candidate sites was assessed by evaluating
whether the site is located beyond the distance to the toxic endpoint (TE) identified in the OCA for
each regulated substance at nearby facilities with regulated substances. As indicated in the
constraints analysis, Candidate Sites 1-3 are not expected to be impacted by AHMs.
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
October 15, 2012 - Page 14
OTHER RISKS
Active Rail Lines
Candidate Site 1 is not located in close proximity to active rail lines. Site 2 is transected by an
existing rail lines; however, it is seldom used and terminates at East Slauson Avenue. Since the rail
line near Site 2 terminates at East Slauson, it is unlikely that significant rail traffic would be passing
through the area. Site 3 is located near the BNSF/UP rail lines, which currently serve the BNSF and
UP Railyards. Based on data from the Federal Railroad Administration (IRA), five highway -rail
accidents occurred between 2008 and 2012.10 However, there have been no instances of train
derailment or accidents associated with pedestrian and street crossings for the portion of the rail
lines in the vicinity of Site 3. In addition, the Alameda corridor running near Site 3 is below grade
protected by security fencing. It is recommended that homeless shelters or transitional housing
developed on Site 3 include appropriate on -site warning signs and physical barriers to prevent
unauthorized pedestrian and vehicular access to the rail lines. It is expected that with the appropriate
measures in place, the potential hazards from active rail lines would be minimized.
Overhead Power Lines
Overhead power lines typically seen in established communities and residential neighborhoods are
located along streets in the vicinity of each of the three Candidate Sites, including along streets
directly adjacent to the Sites. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP)
transmission corridor abutting the east side of the Los 'Angeles River is located approximately 900
feet (275 meters) to the northeast of Site 1 and 500 feet (150 meters) to the northeast of Site 2.
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) requested that scientists from the California
Department of Health Services (DHS) analyze the possible health problems from electric and
magnetic fields (EMFs) from power lines, wiring in buildings, some jobs, and appliances (cell
phones and radio towers were not included in the review). The analysis is described in the
California EMF Program report, An Evaluation of the Possible Risks From Electric and Magnetic
Fields (EMFs) From Power Lines, Internal Wiring, Electrical Occupations, and Appliances (DHS,
June 2002). The analysis is based on a literature review of the results of published research studies,
including the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) Working Group Report
(Assessment of Health Effects from Exposure to Power -Line Frequency Electric and Magnetic
Fields, 1998), and the results of the California EMF Program Studies. After reviewing the available
evidence, the DHS scientists concluded that, to one degree or another, the DHS scientists were
inclined to believe that EMFs can cause some degree of increased risk of childhood leukemia, adult
brain cancer; Lou Gehrig's Disease, and miscarriage. The degree of certainty amongst the scientists
that exposure to EMFs can increase these health risks to some degree was over 50 on a scale of 1 to
100. However, there was no consensus if the increase in risks should be considered close to the
dividing line between believing or not believing (40 to 60), prone to believe (60 to 90), or strongly
10 Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety Analysis Crossing Accident Data. Accessed October 1, 2012
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
October 15, 2012 - Page 15
believe (90 to 99.5). None of the risks were considered virtually certain (>99.5) by any of the DHS
scientists that reviewed the research. The analysis also noted that "[wjith the exception of
miscarriage, which is common, the other diseases for which EMFs may be a contributing cause
(childhood leukemia, adult brain cancer, Lou Gehrig's Disease) have low incidence, with rates
between 1/100,000 and 1/10,000 a year. Even doubling such rates and accumulating them over a
childhood or a lifetime leaves accumulated lifetime risks between 1/1,000 and 1%. Thus the vast
majority (990/-99.9%) of highly exposed people would still not contract these diseases."
According to NEIHS, Electric and Magnetic Fields Associated with the Use of Electric Power:
Questions & Answers, "[ajt a distance of 300 feet and at times of average electricity demand, the
magnetic fields from many lines can be similar to typical background levels found in most homes"
(NEIHS, June 200). As noted above, the LADWP transmission corridor is located in excess of 300
feet (91 meters) from the Candidate Sites. In addition, while overhead power lines are located along
streets directly adjacent to the Candidate Sites, they are not substantially different or more clustered
than overhead power lines in other nearby neighborhoods. Therefore, the potential risks from IMF
exposure are not expected to be substantially different at the Candidate Sites compared to other
locations in the area.
Underground Utilities/High Pressure Pipelines
A diagram of the gas system pipelines in the City of Vernon is provided in Figure 3, City of Vernon
Gas System Index. As shown in the figure, the Candidate Sites are located adjacent to gas pipelines.
The pipelines are operated.by the City's Light and Power Department and regulated by the CPUC.
A diagram of the potentially hazardous pipelines in the City of Vernon is provided in Figure 4, City
of Vernon Hazardous Pipeline Model.
The City of Vernon has a number of pipelines that service industrial facilities. According to the City
of Vernon Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan, "the City of .Vernon is particularly vulnerable to
pipeline ruptures because of the abundance of pipelines serving the industrial facilities" (City of
Vernon, October 2004). According to the Mitigation Plan, "[t]he pipeline posing the greatest threat
is a 26" diameter pipeline located on Downey Road. It runs north and south, the entire length of
Downey Road, continuing into the City of Los Angeles to the north; to the south to Malburg Way,
and into the City of Huntington Park." The Mitigation Plan also notes that there are several small
gasoline pipelines in the City. "The one of greatest concern is a 12" diameter pipeline owned by
Mobil Oil, naming from the western boundary of the City at Alameda Street; east on Slauson
Avenue to Santa Fe Avenue; north to 38th Street; and east into the Mobil Oil Treatment Plant."
The Candidate Sites are all located in excess of 1 mile from the 26" diameter natural gas pipeline
located on Downey Road. Candidate Sites 1 and 2 are not located in the vicinity of the 12" diameter
gasoline pipeline owned by Mobil Oil, while Candidate Site 3 is located approximately 0.5 miles
from the pipeline. As shown in Figure 4, Candidate Site 3 is adjacent to the Southern Pacific Pipe
Lines. While some risk is associated with the presence of natural gas and gasoline pipelines, the
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC. i r
October 15, 2012 - Page 16
potential risks from underground utilities/high pressure pipelines are not expected to be substantially
greater at the Candidate Sites compared to other locations in the area.
SUMMARY AND UNCERTAINTIES
The following qualitative ranking of residential land use suitability has been developed based on a
review of facilities within close proximity to the three candidate sites which routinely emit TACs.
Most Compatible. Site 1 is the most compatible, resulting in the lowest exposure to TACs
and the lowest cancer burden. Nonetheless, controls to reduce risks and exposures are
recommended.
• Hiehly Compatible. Site 2 is highly compatible but the proximity to the 710 freeway will
result in elevated risk. It is recommended that enhanced filtration be installed to reduce risks
and exposures
Least Compatible. Site 3 is the least compatible due to the proximity to the Alameda
Corridor. It is highly recommended that enhanced filtration be installed to reduce risks and
exposures.
The major contributor of cancer risk at each of the three sites is attributed to diesel particulates from
the Alameda corridor, BNSFXP rail yards and the I-710 freeway. Although the project site is
located in an area with elevated cancer risk, it is recommended that each potential housing site be
developed with enhanced filtration and inoperable windows, as detailed below.
In orderto reduce impacts resulting from diesel particulates, the following project features are
recommended:
Project Feature 1: All housing sites shall include air filtration systems designed to have a
MERV of 13 as indicated by the American Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air
Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 52.2. The air handling systems shall be
maintained on a regular basis per manufacturer's recommendations by a qualified technician
employed or contracted by the project proponent or successor. Operation and maintenance
of the system shall ensure that it performs at or above the minimum reporting value.
Project Feature 2: Site 43 (SB2 zoning) shall be designed with sealed inoperable windows
combined with HVAC systems specified in Project Feature I.
The BNSF/UP rail yards health risk assessment cancer risk values includes other sources
surrounding the rail yard such as rail lines and other diesel particulate emissions. Therefore, the
incorporation of the BNSF/UP rail yard HRA may overestimate actual impacts. Nonetheless, health
Ms. Laura Stetson, AICP
HOGLE-IRELAND, INC.
October 15, 2012 - Page 17
/ .PC.R
risk impacts from the rail yards alone will result in elevated cancer and health risk impacts to future
residents.
LIST OT ATTACHMENTS
Figure 1 - City of Vernon Housing Element — Potential Housing Sites
Figure 2 — City of Vernon Housing Element— Stationary TAC Sources
Figure 3 — City of Vernon Gas System Index
Figure 4 — City of Vernon Hazardous Pipeline Model
Appendix A —Air Pollutant Emitting Sources
Appendix B - Emission Rate Calculations
Appendix C — Incremental Cancer Risk and Cancer Burden Calculations (HARP Output Files)
Appendix D — AERMOD Model Output File
V'. 5,,
nY'i i..
' 'P.
�'�\r
h' � eii x i i�i'�
i i ` .
�.. ?i
k r, j i�
F s
�
��,���g
� � 0 ��
�Y �
�''+
�� �
�� F{!�
4i ��
i °
'
;
� e
At
e,
�� l
�
A
��
t
'
C
�
t .
i
;t�
�1
�
1 Y G
yj 1
(
�,���. �fs
__ i i
.. .. 1A�.
�
Legend
Potential
Housing Site
J :L
3
is
ne- i'i1Gri
l � �`�• °�"� Fv7Y n ' �kx'r( I II�i .. �5i4`�
t�"`� i li i n - ,I VVatili yl�n Hir (1 -
lyv 1v-. "a: it
11 t I If k 1
J" C.ACv
Ir \� �'��^i��til V`Ff I �i x'-, b\�•. , _:.sS s' aJ1W��,llyk, t '�
i
��
�v§ 3\ > f i IS;v P
-1�'YiA'1 y"Y'4' yl r��yfR$j�j 41 y��vit ,F.,, i k 1 ����EFn �i�j
iPviS 1
I F I li tY$ri��f$ b r ,fit„ s I �_ sr J \�fr�Fiv
�t� u. * 'ry I� rifi{aA'A�3nvvv f`Tg Pt
F
g ['I"��'t
NO
Jr •`� I r � I I � I
OEM,
� 11T
e
Io e r fi
as i'w t`l
v ti RN a •.`i �y, d1 V Y SrvS+� � .ire F * � fi SVc°^ �'c+ F� r yy� #•, � v '.' i C 7 / I h . l x ! I
Ni v1a r kquy3 rq" xi{I r %'v`�lid!f`43t4 m }K i at r ak el •• r�
( Y s urx� (jAk� a wi�w a, �i aGzy,ar �„ k �+x
r�) Ni 1�� wi'
h K'f3 »cl np1d�' r n 33'
III s E4 3� 1 r a h 5 rIi' 1 ! r v ew s t •�
i'Snv4�5��} `
! i iyfryG SI +� yti{�,
�i 1! urn tlx x5
` r
r x Y.��4Y aY itfA Y �zl1 i�4{ � ry',� F � m
C ? t t �f' t�xf<E�` � � 1
1 � Y �?x `� � 1�
i
II
� � �
414 rr �i , a r
{ V e r n In :In' �, r
r
Legend
�
li M rbn I ulhm'Nmg JI HW� d' 1' � < �cr�l .,,,• �� l �x� <i v�;
Y
666666 <
r 'rl':r011t I IG r x I I I
r "}
1. rrr ��:���"t� �q. �.r.
Potential She
pp __ 4 _ •I i lir
Housing
1 P1� 0 Toxic Air Contaminant Sourc
M f
r ! �; � r I-y� i �I�hcvly Y (���. VI did'.
9 kkk
t , � .av ,. '. Pry �� �. � �, r I �RRIv�
�,