FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
for the
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
State Clearinghouse Number:
2009051126
Prepared for:
The City of Pomona
505 S. Garey Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766
Prepared by:
Applied Planning, Inc.
5817 Pine Avenue, Suite A
Chino Hills, CA 91709
August 2011
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Table of Contents
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page i
Table of Contents
Section Page
1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 Overview ............................................................................................................ 1-1
1.2 Content and Format .......................................................................................... 1-1
1.3 Revised Draft EIR Commentors ...................................................................... 1-1
1.4 Lead Agency and Point of Contact ................................................................. 1-3
1.5 Project Summary ............................................................................................... 1-3
2.0 Revisions and Errata Corrections .............................................................................. 2-1
2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Text Revisions .................................................................................................... 2-1
3.0 Comments and Responses .......................................................................................... 3-1
4.0 Mitigation Monitoring Plan ....................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ........................................................... 4-2
Appendix A: Attachments to Comments and Responses
Attachment 1: Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Health Risk Assessment -
Addendum
Attachment 2: Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Traffic Impact Analysis -
Addendum
Appendix B: Comment Letters not included in Section 3
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Table of Contents
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page ii
List of Tables
Table Page
3-1 Revised Draft EIR Commentors .................................................................................. 3-2
4.2-1 Mitigation Monitoring Plan ......................................................................................... 4-3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Introduction
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 1-1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 OVERVIEW
This document, combined with the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (Revised
DEIR), constitutes the Final EIR for the Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project (Project).
The Revised DEIR describes existing environmental conditions relevant to the proposal,
evaluates the Project’s potential environmental effects, and identifies mitigation measures
to reduce or avoid the potentially significant impacts. The Revised DEIR was circulated for
public review and comment from January 28, 2011 through March 14, 2011.
1.2 CONTENT AND FORMAT
Subsequent to this introductory Section 1.0, Section 2.0 of this Final EIR presents revisions
and errata corrections to the Revised DEIR text. Responses to comments received on the
Revised DEIR are presented at Final EIR Section 3.0. The EIR Mitigation Monitoring Plan is
presented at Final EIR Section 4.0.
1.3 REVISED DRAFT EIR COMMENTORS
1.3.1 Overview
The complete list of Revised Draft EIR commentors, along with copies of comment letters
and responses to comments, is presented at Section 3.0 of this Final EIR. The following list
provides a summary of the comment letters received in regard to the Revised Draft EIR.
• State Agencies (5 Letters)
• County Agencies (3 Letters)
• City Agencies (1 Letter)
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Introduction
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 1-2
• Local Agencies (1 Letter)
• Utilities (1 Letter)
• Local Businesses and Organizations (5 Letters)
• Individuals (24 Letters)
• Alcott Annex Elementary Students (34 Letters)
• Form Letters:1
- General Public (182 Letters)
- St. Madeleine and First Presbyterian Staff and Parishioners (136 Letters)
- Washington Park Senior Adult Services (33 Letters)
- Jaycee Park Exercise Class (16 Letters)
- Parents, teachers, and students from area schools (602 Letters)
• Opposition Petition (123 Signatures)
1.3.2 Presentation of Comments and Responses
Agency comment letters (state, county, city, and local), letters from utilities, and letters
from businesses, organizations, and individuals are included, along with corresponding
responses, in their entirety at Final EIR Section 3.0, “Comments and Responses.”
In instances where comments are provided as form letters, a representative form letter is
included and a universal response is provided at Final EIR Section 3.0. In this instance, the
form letter comments received on the Project/EIR were submitted in both English and
Spanish. Accordingly, a representative English language form letter, and a representative
Spanish language form letter are included, as are English language and Spanish language
responses. Form letters are provided at FEIR Appendix B.
A signed petition stating opposition to the Project was also submitted as part of the public
review process. Representative text from the Petition is included at Final EIR Section 3.0,
and Petition signatories are addressed universally. The petition is provided at FEIR
Appendix B.
1 Form letter totals do not reflect duplicate letters received.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Introduction
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 1-3
Additionally, where multiple commentors raise similar issues (as in comments received
from Alcott Annex Elementary Students), a representative letter is included at Final EIR
Section 3.0, the concerns identified by commentors are listed, and responses are provided
for the issues/concerns identified. Alcott Annex Elementary Students letters are included at
FEIR Appendix B.
1.4 LEAD AGENCY AND POINT OF CONTACT
The Lead Agency for the Project and EIR is the City of Pomona. Any questions or
comments regarding the preparation of this document, its assumptions, or its conclusions,
should be referred to:
Brad Johnson, Planning Manager
City of Pomona
Planning Division
505 S. Garey Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766
1.5 PROJECT SUMMARY
The following information is summarized from the Project Description in the Revised
DEIR. For additional detail in regard to Project characteristics and Project-related
improvements, along with analyses of the Project’s potential environmental impacts, please
refer to Revised DEIR Sections 3.0 and 4.0, respectively.
1.5.1 Project Location
The Project will be constructed within an approximately 10.5-acre site located in the City of
Pomona, Los Angeles County, approximately 0.4 miles west of the San Bernardino County
line. Specifically, the Project site is located at 1371 East 9th Street, and is bounded by
Mission Boulevard to the north; existing commercial and industrial buildings to the east;
East 9th Street on the south; and Southern Pacific Railroad tracks1 to the west.
1 Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) acquired Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR) in September of 1996. However,
LA County Tax Assessor’s maps show the tracks adjacent to the Project site as belonging to SPRR and
corresponding jurisdiction is referenced herein to avoid confusion.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Introduction
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 1-4
1.5.2 Project Overview
The Project proposes construction and operation of a Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)
transfer station within the City of Pomona. The primary function of the proposed transfer
station is to accept and consolidate MSW received from individual haulers for subsequent
transport by larger semi-trailer transfer trucks to area landfills for disposal.
1.5.3 Project Objectives
The Applicant has established the following Project Objectives:
• Manage municipal solid waste in an efficient and cost-effective manner consistent
with the State’s AB 939 mandates;
• Provide a minimum 20-year waste transfer capacity to the region to accommodate
future growth and increased total waste generation;
• Enhance customer service and stabilize rising solid waste collection costs;
• Minimize haul distances for collection trucks by providing locally-available solid
waste transfer and material recovery operations;
• Provide a facility that maximizes solid waste management efficiencies while
concurrently reducing potential environmental impacts, including, but not limited
to, land use, traffic, air quality, water quality, noise, visual, and odor impacts;
• Establish a waste transfer facility with proximate rail access in anticipation of
potential future regional or inter-regional rail-oriented waste hauling operations;
and
• Foster economic growth and create additional employment opportunities for City
and area residents.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Introduction
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 1-5
1.5.4 Discretionary Actions
1.5.4.1 Lead Agency Discretionary Actions and Permits
Requested decisions, or discretionary actions, necessary to realize the Project include, but
may not be limited to the following:
• CEQA Compliance/EIR Certification - The City must certify the EIR prior to or
concurrent with approval of the Project;
• Approval of a Tentative Parcel Map - The Project proposes a commercial/industrial
parcel map that would consolidate and reconfigure existing smaller lots and create a
two-parcel map. Parcel 1 will be approximately 10.49 acres and would accommodate
the Project; Parcel 2 (approximately 2.66 acres) is identified as “Not-A-Part,” and
would not be developed or otherwise employed as part of the Project;
• Approval of an Amendment to the City of Pomona Non-Disposal Facility Element
(NDFE) as required by Public Resources Code Section 50001(a) – to allow
implementation and operation of the Project;
• Approval of a Conditional Use Permit - The Project is subject to City of Pomona
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) requirements as provided for under City of Pomona
Municipal Code Chapter 62 Utilities, Article VI. Solid Waste, Sec. 62-845. Facility
requirements and conditional use permit; and City of Pomona Zoning Ordinance,
Section .421 (M-2-Uses Permitted) and Section .580 (Conditional Use Permits);
• Various City of Pomona construction, grading, and encroachment permits will be
required to allow implementation of the Project facilities; and
• Awarding of a Franchise Agreement - the Project is subject to City of Pomona
Franchise Agreement requirements as provided for under City of Pomona
Municipal Code Chapter 62 Utilities, Article VI Solid Waste, Section 62-844 Award
of a franchise; franchise required; time frame; nonassignability.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Introduction
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 1-6
1.5.4.2 Responsible and Trustee Agency Discretionary Actions, Permits, and
Consultation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15124 also states that the EIR should, to the extent known,
include a list of all the agencies expected to use the EIR in their decision-making
(Responsible Agencies) and a list of permits and other approvals required to implement the
project. Based on the current Project design concept, the anticipated permits to realize the
proposal (and associated Responsible Agencies) will likely include, but are not limited to,
the following:
• Storm Water Permit – A Notice of Intent (NOI) for a General Industrial Storm Water
Permit with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) must be filed;
• Industrial Waste Discharge Permit – The facility will require an Industrial Waste
Discharge Permit from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD);
• Solid Waste Facilities Permit – A Solid Waste Facility Permit (SWFP) issued by the
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) will be required
pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Div. 7, Art. 6, Section 17403.7;
and
• Permitting will be required by/through the South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD) for the Project waste transfer station (WTS) operations and its
associated equipment, including specific approval of an odor mitigation plan
pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 410.
2.0 REVISIONS AND ERRATA CORRECTIONS
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-1
2.0 REVISIONS AND ERRATA CORRECTIONS
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Based on the comments received on the Revised DEIR (which are provided in full in
Section 3.0 of this Final EIR), this Section presents revisions to the text of the Revised
DEIR. For text corrections, additional text is identified by bold underlined text, while
deletions are indicated by strikeout font. All text revisions affecting mitigation
measures have been incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring Plan presented in
Section 4.0 of this Final EIR. Text changes are presented under the chapter or topical
section of the Revised DEIR where they are located. It should be noted that the
revisions and corrections provided here expand and clarify analyses previously
provided, and do not constitute substantive new information. Conclusions of the
Revised DEIR are not affected by these revisions.
2.2 TEXT REVISIONS
2.2.1 Text Revisions to Revised DEIR Section 4.3, Air Quality
2.2.1.1 DPM-source Cancer Risks
One common and recurring concern expressed by commentors in their review of the
Revised DEIR is that Project-related diesel particulate matter (DPM)-source emissions
would result in certain exceedances of South Coast Air Quality Management District
cancer risk thresholds. Commentors also expressed generalized concerns regarding
effects of additional sources of DPM emissions within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-2
Summary of Responses to Concerns
Responses to the above-noted concerns are presented in the following discussions, and
include: a summary of the Revised DEIR analysis and findings regarding Project-related
DPM-source cancer risks; restatement of existing incompatible land use patterns that
contribute to those risks; clarification of Project-related DPM emissions sources and
opening year DPM reduction measures; identification of additional DPM emissions
reduction measures proposed in response to commentor concerns; modeling of
resulting DPM emissions levels/DPM-source cancer risks (See HRA Addendum, Final
EIR Appendix A); and inclusion of additional DPM mitigation measures in this Final
EIR.
Revised DEIR Analysis of Cancer Risk Exposure
As discussed in the Revised DEIR, with application of mitigation, cancer risk thresholds
would be exceeded at the two (2) residential uses located closest and adjacent to the
Project site. At the maximally impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth
Street) the mitigated cancer risk would be 45.10 per million. The residential use
experiencing the second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the
mitigated cancer risk would be 11.59 per million. At both locations, the mitigated
cancer risk would therefore exceed the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per
million.
It is again noted that modeling of potential increased cancer risks as presented in the
Revised DEIR is considered to represent a conservative estimate of real-world
conditions. That is, pursuant to the adopted SCAQMD/EPA methodologies, calculated
DPM-source cancer risks are predicated on extended 70-year/30-year exposure
scenarios. Both the 70-year and 30-year cancer risk assessments considered in the
Revised DEIR represent estimates of theoretic DPM-source cancer risks, and are based
on the assumption that a person is exposed to the emission source 24 hours a day for
365 days a year for the entire length of the assumed exposure period. Individuals are
typically not stationary at any given outdoor location, and a portion of each 24-hour
cycle is spent indoors. In addition, individuals and families at a given location for 70 or
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-3
even 30 years would be considered the exception rather than the norm. The California
OEHHA has indicated that based on EPA studies, the EPA recommends a central
tendency estimate of 9 years for residency at a given location, and a high-end estimate
of 30 years for residency time. Thus, the methodologies used to determine cancer risk
(e.g., the assumption of a 24- hour exposure for a 30 or 70 year period) represent a
maximum theoretic cancer risk, and are not intended to account for or represent DPM
exposures based on residency and occupancy tendencies.
Project-related Cancer Risks Attributable in Part to Collocation of Incompatible Land
Uses
As also discussed in the Revised DEIR, absent the two affected residences (1415 East
Ninth Street and 1295 East Ninth Street, both of which exist as non-conforming
residential uses in an industrial zone) cancer risk thresholds would not be exceeded.
The Revised DEIR notes further, that over the life of the Project and pursuant to the
adopted “M-2, General Manufacturing” zoning designation for the Project site and
surrounding areas, it is anticipated that existing non-conforming residential uses will
transition to industrial uses. In this manner, sensitive receptors would be removed from
industrial air pollutant sources, and potential adverse air quality impacts (including
DPM impacts) affecting these current uses would be alleviated.
Additional Opening Year DPM Emissions Reduction Measures Proposed
Within the context of the preceding considerations, and in response to commentor
concerns, additional DPM emission reduction measures are proposed that would act to
further reduce the Project’s opening year DPM emissions levels. More specifically,
additional mitigation is proposed that would ensure that under opening year
conditions, all Applicant-controlled commercial trash collection vehicles accessing the
Project site, and all transfer trucks accessing the Project site (all of which are also
Applicant-controlled), will be powered by compressed natural gas (CNG), or emission
equivalent technologies. Applicant use of CNG-powered vehicles, as opposed to diesel-
powered vehicles, will act to incrementally reduce DPM-source emissions and related
DPM-source health impacts.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-4
Screening level analyses indicate that these revisions to the assumed vehicle mix
composition currently reflected in the Revised DEIR would likely provide certain
reductions in DPM emissions levels and associated cancer risks when compared to
those currently identified,1 but would not reduce DPM-source cancer risks to levels that
are less-than-significant. In order to achieve more substantive reductions in DPM
emissions and associated DPM-source cancer risks, further conversion of diesel vehicles
to use of CNG (or emission equivalent technologies) is required.
Additional Year 2020 DPM Emissions Reduction Measures Proposed
As noted above, under opening year conditions, all Applicant-controlled trash
collection and trash transfer vehicles will be powered by CNG (or emission equivalent
technologies). However, as discussed in the Revised DEIR, the Project would accept
solid waste from other (non-Applicant) commercial solid waste collection vehicles, as
well as from private vehicles. These non-Applicant collection vehicles may not be CNG-
powered within the opening year timeframe.
To address DPM emissions from these non-Applicant vehicles, measures are also
proposed that will provide transitional resolution of potential Project-related DPM
emissions and DPM-source cancer risk impacts. To this end, and consistent with
mitigation refinements intended to be achieved through the CEQA and EIR review
processes, future year (2020)2 “CNG-only” (or emission equivalent technologies) access
restrictions for all other commercial trash collection vehicles are proposed as additional
mitigation within this Final EIR. Under these additional restrictions, on or before
January 2, 2020, only CNG-powered (or emission equivalent) commercial trash
collection vehicles would be permitted access to the Project site.
1 As reflected in the Revised DEIR and HRA it was initially and conservatively assumed that the
predominance of transfer trucks and commercial trash collection vehicles accessing the Project site would
be diesel-powered, thereby establishing a potential maximum DPM impact scenario.
2 The year 2020 timeframe implementation schedule proposed here is consistent with, and parallels
EPA/CARB tiered emissions reductions goals for heavy-duty trucks.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-5
In combination, opening year CNG conversion actions described above, complemented
by subsequent “CNG-only” access restrictions imposed on all commercial trash
collection vehicles, will ensure that by the year 2020, all transfer trucks and commercial
trash collection vehicles3 accessing the Project site will be powered by CNG (or emission
equivalent technologies). With incorporation of these measures, DPM emissions levels
and DPM-source cancer risks will be further reduced when compared to those
identified in the Revised DEIR, and would, by the Year 2020, reduce Project DPM-
source cancer risks to levels that are less-than-significant.
Modeling of Resulting DPM Emissions Impacts Conducted
To determine the DPM emissions levels and potential DPM-source cancer risk resulting
from the CNG-fueled vehicle mix described above, emissions dispersion modeling has
been conducted pursuant to adopted SCAQMD HRA protocols. (See HRA Addendum
provided at Final EIR Appendix A.) Results of the HRA Addendum indicate that with
the stipulated conversion of diesel-fueled vehicles to CNG vehicles described herein,
and application of DPM emissions Mitigation Measures 4.3.17 through 4.3.20
(previously proposed in the Revised DEIR), the maximum potential cancer risk
exposure at any potentially affected receptor would, by the Year 2020, be reduced to
levels that are less-than-significant.
More specifically, at the maximally impacted residential receptor location (1415 East
Ninth Street), the mitigated cancer risk would be 3.98 per million. The residential use
experiencing the second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the
mitigated cancer risk would be 0.52 per million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer
risk would therefore be less than the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per million.
The HRA Addendum results indicate further, that no schools would be significantly
affected by DPM emissions, nor would DPM emissions result in any potentially
3 Only private/individual haulers would be exempt from access requirements specifying CNG-powered
(or emission equivalent) vehicles.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-6
significant non-cancer risks at any schools. Please refer also to detailed HRA modeling
results presented at Final EIR Appendix A.
Notwithstanding these findings, this Final EIR conservatively maintains previous
conclusions regarding potential Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer
risks. That is, for the purposes of disclosure, and to maintain the conservative analysis
construct employed to date, Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risk
exposures at the residences located at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street are considered to
be significant until the Year 2020. No other locations would experience potentially
adverse elevated DPM-source cancer risk exposures (nor potentially adverse elevated
non-cancer risk exposures) resulting from Project operations or activities.
DPM Emissions Reduction Measures Incorporated as EIR Mitigation Measures
In order to ensure that DPM emissions levels generated by the Project and the resulting
cancer risk exposures are consistent with, and do not exceed the estimates reflected in
the HRA Addendum and summarized herein, the following Mitigation Measures,
4.3.21-(A)mended and 4.3.22-(A), are incorporated into the Final EIR. These measures
are presented in the Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Plan (Final EIR Section 4.0) and
replace Revised DEIR Mitigation Measures 4.3.21 and 4.3.22.
4.3.21 The commercial solid waste collection fleet (fleet) accessing the Project site
between 2011 and 2019 shall consist of a maximum of 70% diesel engines and a
minimum of 30% natural gas engines. All diesel engines, including transfer
truck diesel engines, shall operate using ultra low sulfur fuels and be fitted with a
particulate trap that is rated at a 90 % reduction rate or greater.
4.3.22 The commercial solid waste collection fleet (fleet) accessing the Project site
shall consist of a maximum of 10% diesel engines and a minimum of 90% natural
gas engines on or before January 2,2020. By year 2020, all diesel engines,
including transfer truck diesel engines, shall operate using ultra low sulfur fuels
and be fitted with a particulate trap that is rated at a 90% reduction rate or
greater.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-7
MM 4.3.21(A): At Project opening, all transfer trucks and all Applicant-
controlled commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the
Project site shall be powered by natural gas engines (or emission
equivalent technologies).
MM 4.3.22(A): On or before January 2, 2020, all transfer trucks and all
commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project site shall
be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent technologies).
As noted previously, incorporation of the above additional measures, in combination
with the DPM emissions reduction measures identified previously in the Revised DEIR,
would act to reduce year 2020 Project-related DPM-source cancer risk exposures to
levels that are less-than-significant.
2.2.1.2 Other Revisions to Section 4.3, Air Quality
In response to comments received (commentor Richard Milhorn), the following text has
been added to Mitigation Measure 4.3.14:
Mitigation Measure 4.3.14
Waste dumping, sorting/handling, and loading of waste into transfer trailers
shall be restricted to inside the transfer building. All off-road equipment used
in association with the Project shall employ South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) “Tier III” or superior diesel off-road
engine technologies, to reduce emissions generated by on-site equipment
operations.
Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-8
In response to comments received (commentor Richard Milhorn), the following text has
been added to Mitigation Measure 4.3.19:
Mitigation Measure 4.3.19
Throughout Project operations, an operational relations officer/
community liaison, appointed by the Applicant, shall be retained on-site.
In coordination and cooperation with the City and the South Coast Air
Quality Management District, the operational relations officer/
community liaison shall monitor any concerns related to diesel
particulate matter (DPM) emissions, including but not limited to
restricted access for non-CNG trucks when/as applicable, and
enforcement of on-site idling limitations. In addition, Ssign(s) with the
following language or similar shall be installed at the Project entrance, along
internal truck routes, at/within unloading areas, and at all parking areas:
“MAXIMUM FIVE (5) MINUTE ON-SITE IDLING OF TRUCK ENGINES
TO BE PERMITTED IN DESIGNATED AREAS ONLY. VIOLATORS
SUBJECT TO PENALTIES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF
CONTRACT/RESTRICTED FACILITY ACCESS.”
The sign(s) shall not be less than twenty-four (24) inches square.
Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Additionally, in response to review comments and correspondence received, the
Revised Draft EIR’s Air Quality Mitigation Measures are amended as follows. Results
and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
4.3.2 The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed unpaved roads and
disturbed areas within the Project site are watered at least three times daily
during dry weather. Watering, with complete coverage of disturbed areas, shall
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-9
occur at least three times a day, preferably in the mid-morning, mid-afternoon,
and after work is done for the day. Implementation of this measure is estimated to
reduce PM10 and PM2.5 fugitive dust emissions by approximately 61 percent.
4.3.3 The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved roads and
Project site areas are reduced to 15 miles per hour or less to reduce PM10 and
PM2.5 fugitive dust. Implementation of this measure shall reduce PM10 and
PM2.5 fugitive dust haul road emissions by approximately 44 percent.
4.3.13 The truck access gates on the Project site shall be posted with signs which
state:
• Truck drivers shall turn off engines when not in use;
• Diesel delivery trucks servicing the project shall not idle for more than 5
minutes on-site; and
• Telephone numbers of the building facilities manager and CARB shall be
posted to report violations.
4.3.15 The interior of main tipping floor, including the main transfer station
building contractor drop area, and all its equipment shall be cleaned at the end
of each day by a mechanical sweeper, hand-brooming, and wipe-down, or other
means to remove dust and dirt debris. In no case shall dust or debris result in
or cause:
(1) safety hazards due to obscured visibility;
(2) irritation of the eyes;
(3) hampered breathing; or
(4) migration of dust off-site.
Please refer also to the Project Draft Transfer/Processing Report (Revised
DEIR Appendix G), item 6.4 Dust Control.
4.3.26 The Project shall obtain approval of the proposed draft OIMP as set forth
in the EIR tTechnical Appendices (EIR Appendix G, Operational Programs), and
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-10
as also submitted to the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) and the City of
Pomona. As approved, the OIMP shall include design features that comply with
Appendix A of SCAQMD Rule 410.
4.3.27 Buildings shall exceed California Title 24 Energy Efficiency performance
standards by a minimum of 20 percent for water heating and space heating and
cooling. As deemed acceptable by the City of Pomona, any combination of the
following design features may be used to fulfill this mitigation measure provided
that the total increase in efficiency meets or exceeds 20 percent.
• To the extent that they are compatible with landscaping guidelines
established by the City of Pomona, shade-producing trees, particularly those that
shade paved surfaces such as streets and parking lots and buildings, shall be
planted at the Project site.
• Paint and surface color palette for the Project shall emphasize light and
off-white colors which will reflect heat away from the buildings.
• All buildings shall be designed to accommodate renewable energy sources,
such as photovoltaic solar electricity systems, appropriate to their architectural
design.
• To reduce energy demand associated with potable water conveyance, the
Project shall implement the following:
• Landscaping palette emphasizing drought tolerant plants;
• Use of water-efficient irrigation techniques; and
• U.S. EPA Certified WaterSense labeled or equivalent faucets, high-
efficiency toilets (HETs), and water-conserving shower heads.
• Install solar or tankless hot water heaters, and energy-efficient heating
ventilation and air conditioning.
• Create water-efficient landscapes, including the installation of water-
efficient irrigation systems and devices and the use of reclaimed water.
• Buildings shall be designed to be water-efficient, including the installation
of water-efficient fixtures and appliances.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-11
• The use of water to clean outdoor surfaces (i.e., in street sweepers) and
vehicles (i.e., truck wash facilities), as well as watering methods that apply water
to non-vegetated surfaces, shall be restricted.
• Construction and demolition waste, including, but not limited to, soil,
vegetation, concrete, lumber, metal, and cardboard, shall be reused and/or
recycled.
• Interior and exterior storage areas shall be provided for recyclables and
green waste and adequate recycling containers shall be located in public areas.
• Education and publicity shall be provided regarding reducing waste,
available recycling services, and water conservation.
2.2.2 Text Revisions to Revised DEIR Section 4.4, Noise
In response to review comments and correspondence received, the Revised Draft EIR’s
Noise Mitigation Measures are amended as follows. Results and conclusions of the
Revised DEIR are not affected.
4.4.2 Construction contractor(s) shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or
mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with
manufacturers' standards.
4.4.5 For the duration of Project demolition, site preparation, and grading
activities, a temporary noise barrier of 3/4-inch plywood, a minimum of six-feet
high, and containing no gaps greater than 1/8-inch, shall be installed along
portions of the Project's easterly, westerly and southerly boundaries.
Anticipated line-of-sight noise attenuation resulting from this or similar barrier
with a Sound Transmission Class rating of STC 30 or greater is 5 dBA.
Alternative measures (e.g., temporary sound curtains) providing equivalent noise
attenuation may be employed if approved by the City. Proposed location of this
the plywood (or alternative) barrier would be at the approximate locations of
the permanent six-foot high perimeter block walls that will be implemented by the
Project, as indicated at Figure 4.4-4. Final dimensions and location of this barrier
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-12
shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the issuance of the first
development permit.
2.2.3 Text Revisions to Revised DEIR Section 4.5, Hazards/Hazardous Materials
In response to review comments and correspondence received, the Revised Draft EIR’s
Hazards/Hazardous Materials Mitigation Measures are amended as follows. Results
and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
4.5.1 If during implementation of the Project, soil contamination is suspected,
construction in the affected area shall stop pending determination of the extent
and character of contamination (or lack thereof). Suspected soils shall be tested at
a certified laboratory approved by the Department of Health Services (DHS).
Excavation, transport, and disposal of any soils determined to be contaminated
shall be in accordance with the rules and regulations of the following agencies:
• City of Pomona;
• Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) - Los Angeles County Fire
Department;
• California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC);
• California Environmental Protection Agency (CAL-EPA);
• California Division of Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(CAL-OSHA);
• United States Department of Transportation (USDOT); and
• United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
Under the California Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Material
Management Regulatory Program, (Chapter 6.11, Division 20, Section 25404 of
the Health and Safety Code), hazards/hazardous materials management is
addressed locally through the Certified Unified Program Agency. The primary
CUPA for the City of Pomona is the Los Angeles County Fire Department.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-13
2.2.4 Text Revisions to Revised DEIR Section 4.6, Hydrology/Water Quality
In response to review comments and correspondence received, the Revised Draft EIR’s
Hydrology/Water Quality Mitigation Measures are amended as follows. Results and
conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
4.6.1 The City of Pomona requires a Notification of Intent (NOI) and
compliance with all applicable general permits. Each industrial discharger,
discharger associated with construction activity, or other discharger described in
any general stormwater permit addressing such discharges as may be adopted by
the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB), or the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control
Board, shall provide Notice of Intent, comply with, and undertake all other
activities required by any general stormwater permit applicable to such discharges
(Pomona Code of Ordinances, Subpart A, Chapter 18, Article X Stormwater
Management, Division 3. Discharge Regulations and Requirements, Section. 18-
495. Reduction of pollutants in stormwater).
2.2.5 Text Revisions to Revised DEIR Section 4.7, Public Services and Utilities
Consistent with the comments provided by the Los Angeles County Fire Department,
the text at Revised DEIR Section 4.7.2.1, Page 4.7-4 (excerpt following) is amended to
reflect the current updated information:
Station No. 183 is staffed around the clock by one captain, one fire fighter
specialist/paramedic and one fire fighter/paramedic. and two
firefighters. This station is equipped with one paramedic engine. one
engine company and one paramedic squad vehicle.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-14
Additionally, the text at Revised DEIR Section 4.7.5.2, Page 4.7-12 (excerpt following) is
amended to reflect the following current updated information.
Countywide, the LACoFD operates 160 170 fire stations that are divided
into 21 22 batallions.
Consistent with updated information provided by the County Sanitation Districts of
Los Angeles County, the text at Revised DEIR Page 4.7-20 is amended accordingly as
follows:
The Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD) would be
responsible for the treatment of wastewater generated by the Project. The
City of Pomona provides local sewer lines for conveyance to the District’s
36-inch diameter Chino Basin wastewater line, located in Grand Avenue
at Reservoir Street. The 36-inch diameter JOA-1A Chino Basin
Wastewater Line conveyed a peak flow of 5.5 million gallons per day
(mgd) when last measured in 2009.
Additionally, LACSD notes that the Pomona Water Reclamation Plant currently
processes an average flow of 8.7 million gallons per day (MGD). The following
excerpted text at Revised DEIR Page 4.7-20 et al. is amended accordingly:
The LACSD’s Pomona Water Reclamation Plant has the capacity to
provide primary, secondary, and tertiary wastewater treatment for
approximately 15 million gallons per day (MGD), and currently processes
an average flow of 8.3 8.7 MGD.
Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-15
2.2.6 Text Revisions to Revised DEIR Section 5.0, Other CEQA Considerations
Footnote No. 4 at Page 5-39 is corrected as follows:
Anticipated phased conversion of diesel vehicles to natural gas vehicles,
as required by EIR Mitigation Measures 4.3.16 and 4.3.17 , would fully
mitigate potential Project-related cancer risk exposure impacts. Future
fleet conversion in combination with other mitigation measures would
reduce the maximum residential cancer risk exposure to 16.44 per
million, which would affect only one (1) residence (1415 East Ninth
Street) within the Study Area. Nonetheless, the Project HRA
conservatively assumes no quantitative reductions for these measures,
and cancer risk exposure impacts are considered to be significant at 1295
East Ninth Street and 1415 East Ninth Street until such diesel-to-CNG
conversions are fully realized. Please refer also to EIR Section 4.3, Air
Quality, and the detailed Project Health Risk Assessment (HRA)
presented at EIR Appendix C, Air Quality Impact Analysis.
Related text at Page 5-40 is corrected as follows::
It is further noted but for the presence of non-conforming residential uses
within the industrial land use district encompassing the Project site, no
cancer risk thresholds would be exceeded. Over the long term, anticipated
conversion of diesel vehicles to CNG, as required by EIR Mitigation
Measures 4.3.16 and 4.3.17 [4.3.21 and 4.3.22], will reduce the maximum
residential cancer risk exposure to 16.44 per million, which would affect
only one (1) residence (1415 East Ninth Street) within the Study Area.
will eliminate potential increased cancer risks due to Project operations.
Even absent these measures, the transition of surrounding non-
conforming residential properties to industrial uses, pursuant to the City
General Plan buildout vision for the industrial area encompassing the
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Revisions and Errata Corrections
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 2-16
Project site and surrounding area, will alleviate any potential increased
cancer risk exposure at residential land uses.
Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
2.2.7 Text Revisions to Revised DEIR Appendix H, Environmental Justice
Considerations
The text at Page H-19 is corrected as follows:
Lastly, it is again noted that anticipated phased conversion of diesel
vehicles to natural gas vehicles per EIR Mitigation Measures 4.3.16 and
4.3.17 [4.3.21 and 4.3.22], would reduce the maximum residential cancer
risk exposure to 16.44 per million, which would affect only one (1)
residence (1415 East Ninth Street) within the Study Area. fully mitigate
potential Project-related cancer risk exposure impacts. Even absent these
measures, under General Plan Buildout conditions (approximately 2030),
the existing non-conforming residential uses within the industrial zone
encompassing the Project site are anticipated to transition to industrial
development, consistent with underlying General Plan land use
designations. In this manner, currently significant operational air quality
impacts affecting the two (2) sensitive residential receptors located
adjacent to the Project site (1295 and 1495 East Ninth Street) would be
rendered less-than-significant and in so doing, alleviate potential
environmental justice concerns.
Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
3.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-1
3.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
The following Section presents written comments received pursuant to public review of the
Revised DEIR, and provides responses to those comments. Comment letters have been
generally organized by state agencies; county, city and local agencies; utilities; local
businesses and organizations; individuals; and various groups providing consolidated or
similar comments. Comment letters have been assigned identifying designations (generally
an acronym or name abbreviation), and comments within each letter have been numbered.
Table 3-1 lists all Revised DEIR commentors and the designation assigned to each.
Commentor correspondence and correlating responses are presented subsequently.
As noted previously at Final EIR Section 1.0, ‛Introduction,‛ in instances where comments
are provided as form letters, a representative form letter is included and a universal
response is provided in this Section 3.0. In this instance, the form letter comments received
on the Project/EIR were submitted in both English and Spanish. Accordingly, a
representative English language form letter, and a representative Spanish language form
letter are included herein, as are English language and Spanish language responses. Form
letters are provided at FEIR Appendix B.
A signed petition stating opposition to the Project was also submitted. Representative text
from the petition is included in this Section 3.0, and petition signatories are also addressed
universally. The petition is provided at FEIR Appendix B.
Additionally where multiple commentors raise similar issues (as in comments received
from Alcott Annex Elementary Students), a representative letter is included in this Section
3.0, concerns identified by commentors are listed, and responses are provided for the
issues/concerns identified. All Alcott Annex Elementary Students letters are included at
FEIR Appendix B.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-2
Table 3-1
Revised DEIR Commentors
Commentor
Acronym
Assigned
Correspondence
Date
State Agencies (5 Letters)
State Clearinghouse SCH 3/15/11
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle Letter 1) CAL1 3/14/11
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle Letter 2) CAL2 4/30/10
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona POLY 3/11/11
California Department of Transportation, District 7 DOT 3/10/11
County Agencies (3 Letters)
County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County CSD 3/11/11
Los Angeles County Fire Department LAFD 4/7/11
Los Angeles County Fire Fighters Local 1014 FFL 2/25/11
City Agencies (1 Letter)
City of Montclair COM 2/1/11
Local Agencies (1 Letter)
Pomona Unified School District PUSD 3/14/11
Utilities (1 Letter)
Southern California Gas Company GAS 2/15/11
Local Businesses and Organizations (5 Letters)
Speidel & Associates, Inc. SA 3/10/11
First Presbyterian Church (Letter 1) FP1 2/26/11
First Presbyterian Church (Letter 2) FP2 3/7/11
One LA Pomona Valley Cluster ONE 3/4/11
Commercial Door Company, Inc. CD 2/3/11
Individuals (24 Letters)
Leonard Baleon (2 identical letters, sent to City and Planning Commission) LB 2/18/11
Anayansi Balmaceda (2 identical letters, sent to City and Planning
Commission)
AB 3/10/11
Joe Bauman (2 identical letters, sent to City and Planning Commission) JB 3/7/11
Elizabeth Butcher and Angela Rodriguez (2 identical letters, sent to City and
Planning Commission)
EBAR 3/8/11
Tony Cerda (2 identical letters, sent to City and Planning Commission) TC 3/7/11
Zennie Cummings and Johnnie Clark (2 identical letters, sent to City and
Planning Commission)
ZCJC 3/7/11
Lisa A. Engdahl LE 3/11/11
Adrienne Garcia AG 3/11/11
P. Scott Harmon PSH 3/12/11
Thomas Hsieh TH 3/9/11
Johnny Hwang JH 3/13/11
Karen Hwang KH 3/11/11
Maria Jimenez MJ 3/8/11
Richard Milhorn RM 3/9/11
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-3
Table 3-1
Revised DEIR Commentors
Individuals (cont’d)
Al Solis AS 2/28/11
Sara Stephens SS 3/11/11
Belinda White BW 3/14/11
John and Lynnette Whitney JLW 3/13/11
Alcott Annex Elementary Students (34 Letters; Letters are included at FEIR Appendix B)
Erick Aldrete April Llamas
Brenda Alvarez Dariela Garcia Lopez
Karla Carrillo Eduardo Mendez
Alan Casteneda Daniel Mendoza
Natalie Casteneda Devann Munoz
Jillian Cordova Bernice Pena
Angel Cortes Arianna Ramirez
Marvin Delgado Sandro Reyes, Jr.
Jordan Fitzhugh Fernando Rios
Sylvia Flores Ahluna Sanchez
Decidoro Gomez Franchesca Sanchez
Fernando Hernandez Marlene Sanchez
Kimberly Hernandez Persephany Sanchez
Jesus Herrera Enet Tovilla
Ashley Juarez Tyler Watanabe
Briana Juarez Brandon (last name not provided)
Jorge Lamas Ernesto (last name not provided)
Form Letters1
General Public (182 Letters; Letters are included at FEIR Appendix B)
Carmen Vicuna Paula Rodriguez Anthony De La Cruz Sal Sevilla
Rayvon Estes Eduardo Avila Ubaldo Escamilla Christina Caraballo
Lorna Vergara Vanessa Nguyen Virginia Ontiveros Jesse Hernandez
Diana Luna Edwin Estrada Brian Taylor Teresa Murillo
Angela Cervantes Yonson Godina Veronica McKelvey Luis Villa
Jose Ramirez Abraham Ojeda Henry Mollet Cecilia Garcia
Adrienne Taylor Jorge Lira Iran Vergara Ryan Simms
Maria Flores Jessica Velasquez Omar Marroquin Michael Baltierra
Rita Meraz Celso Jimenez Marlen Sanchez Brenda Ortiz
Alma Acosta Azquillahs Muteti Sonia Ibarra VanAnh Nguyen
Mary Sanchez Morgan Brown Benjamin Margolis Jeff Johannsen
Zuri Villalpando Angie Castanon Alejandra Jimenez Leticia Gabriel
Sandra Villarreal Tyra Weis Meg Johannsen Trina Minero
Elizabeth Curiel Angie Nash Anne Jacobs Marnee Randle
Elizabeth Olalde Rosalinda Camarillo Amanda Llorente Emma Velasco
Lina Guel Andriana Hernandez Bree Hsieh Ramona Hernandez
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-4
Table 3-1
Revised DEIR Commentors
Form Letters1
General Public (cont’d.)
Melissa Hernandez Ana Rivera Miguel Albino Laura Gonzalez
Carina Perez Tim Campbell Maria Kurtek Gustavo Rodriguez
Rosa Verduzco Joanna Rojas Carlos Aguirre Esther Gochez
Leslie Garcia Nelson Andino Juan Hurtado Jose Trujillo
Marisol Rangel Maritza Andino Cynthia Urquizo Maria Carrillo
Pilar Alanis Itzayana Martinez Ana Saucedo Catalina Carrillo
Martha Salcedo Andy Padilla Jasmin Navarrete Eric Granados
Carmen Leal Larry Miranda Jose Sanchez Jose Gonzalez
Alma Ortiz Vishra Patel Brayan Reyes Aurora Velarde
Ana Villatoro Rajendra Patel Joseluis Magallon Maria Castro
Elsa Ruiz Mansi Patel Peter Alarcio Perla Castro
Juana Marin Karen Domingues Aide Gutierrez Esmeralda Castro
Maria Solobzano Meliza Gandara Silvester Ramirez Engracia Castro
Sandra Lopez Viviana Casteneda Gissel Tostado Asaf Rodriguez
Semonal Washington Elvis Dominguez Celeste Torres John Rodriguez
Yolanda Ortega Steven Colorado Jenny Salinas Bertha Hernandez
Roberto Carrera Gustavo Michel Jose Sanchez Cecilia Avalos
Luis Lopez Andrea Acevedo Maria Ramirez Leticia Lopez-Bentacourt
Jose Pacheco Alysa Sibrian Felipe Ramirez II Cassandra Gonzalez
Ruth Saldana Manuel Dimas Jorge Ramirez Ana Franco
Alberto Garcia Joseph Morabido Josue Sanchez Mayra Cruz
Kristen Villa Luz Carrillo Veronica Ramirez Thomas McPheeters IV
Natalie Diaz Gloria Raygoza Michael Ramirez Efrain Huertas
Jason Renfro II Zenaida Leyva Carolyn Dominguez Ronald Pound
Karla Diaz Adela Sanchez German Guardado Chester Tadeja
Jose Lemus Curtis Wayne Turman Iris Guardado Manela Barju
Ana Mendez Mary Turman Rosemarie Zelaya Tom Caraballo
Lizette Monrroy Linda Peete German Zelaya Rebeca Amezcua
Juan Morales Lourdes Gonzalez Michelle Zelaya
Uriel Reza Emily Luttnill Ana Sevilla
St. Madeleine and First Presbyterian Staff and Parishioners (136 Letters; Letters are included at FEIR
Appendix B)
Carmen Martinez Virginia Hill Alejandro Pena Ninfa Arriaga
Adriana Beltran Esthela Clarke Socorro Rodriguez David Rodriquez
Yvonne Bricens Leslie Hill Victor Fuentes Jorge Angulo
Adrian Benitez Maria Gonzalez Jorge Torres Juana Martinez
Adriana Benitez Linda DeBerry Pedro Diaz Guadalupe Jacinto
Isidoro Barron Filander Franco Luz Sanchez Carmelita Angulo
Alfred Vera Maria Lopez Oscar Molina Marcario Angulo
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-5
Table 3-1
Revised DEIR Commentors
Form Letters1
St. Madeleine and First Presbyterian Staff and Parishioners (cont’d.)
Ernie Garcia Jose Martinez Irene Acosta Jorge Angulo, Jr.
Vanessa Franco Juan Aguilera Pedro Vargas Lupe Perez
Wayne Noble Elvira Aguilera Maria Vargas Diana Fletes
Manuel Valarde Rita Martinez Oscar Ramirez Nancy Thorbourn
Jennie Perez Ana Aguilera Eva Guerrero Jaime Fletes
Teresa Hernandez Daniel Salcedo Omar Montes de Oca Gloria Heredia
Jose Hernandez Celia Salcedo Anahi Monte de Oca Maria Fletes
Hillary Reyes Victoria Isidoro Pedro Vargas Blanca Guzman
Ashley Reyes Adriana Salcedo Paola Elias Manuel Guzman
Mayra Chavez Mario Guzman Rafael Almeria Manuela Romero
Hermenegildo Garcia Jose Oclaro Edna Chavez Linda Gonzales
Diana Rodriguez Maria Ortega Carlos Montes de Oca Carolyn Cianciolo
Adrian Lopez Alicia Claro Martina Montes de Oca Cecilia Munoz
Roxanne Maniquis Isabel Salcedo Miguel Moreno Heriberto Heredia
Maria Phillips Maria Rodriguez Ana Delgado Patricia Chapman
Virginia Carrasco Everardo Tovar Daisy Gonzalez Mike Suarez
Juana Diaz Adriana Garcia Haiden Esquivel Dolores Castro
Fidensia Elkins Vincentia Duffy Maria Chavez Frank Ebiner
Roger Elkins Guillermo Rocha Gustavo Contreras Robert Moran
Carlos Hernandez Maria Contreras Arturo Gomez Gliorer Guerrero
Ramona Hernandez Norma Botelho Lorena Rafael Rosie Aguirre
Jackie Flores Maria Villalobos Alma Gomez Marlene Linthicum
Martha Landeros Martha Thacker Rosa Rangel Milton Lyles
Philip LaFarge Manuel Rodriguez Tereso Peralto Carole Lyles
Lydia Lopez Margaret Velarde Reyna Franco Mario Molina
Martin Landeros Helen Uceda Jaime (last name not provided) Tumasa Qugada
Maxine LaFarge Bladimiro Gudino Irineo Rodriguez Gustavo Contresa
Washington Park Senior Adult Services (33 Letters; Letters are included at FEIR Appendix B)
Maria Rodriguez Nelly Vargas Jacinto Benitz Bonnie Johnson
Ofelia Ruano Roberto Hernandez Rachel Torres Betty Rayford
Socorro Castellanos Maria Victoria Portillo Margaret Hunter Maria Luisa Alcota
Araceli Jimenez Juana Vasquez Amelia Gonzalez Consuelo Perez
Filemon Sanchez Daniel Meza Luz Maria Cervantes Hermila Rueda
Donitila Franco Manuela Meza Maria Lara Laura Lopez
Anita Raybon Gloria Garate Antonia Garcia
Maria Bonilla Francisco Flores Maria Crazo
Mary Whitehead Delia Avedano Aurora Narvaez
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-6
Table 3-1
Revised DEIR Commentors
Form Letters1
Jaycee Park Exercise Class (16 Letters; Letters are included at FEIR Appendix B)
Elvia Cortez Maria Carrillo Maria Salcedo Lourdes Montiel
Marisela Tapia Maria Ibarra Arcelia Flores Maria Rodriquez
Alma Ortiz Virginia Marquez Teresa Loma Margarita Jacobo
Gloria Lopez Glora Lobos Maria Bustos Nancy Ceja
Parents, teachers, and students from the following schools: (602 Letters; Letters are included at FEIR
Appendix B) Alcott Elementary, Allison Elementary, Armstrong Elementary, Barfield Elementary, Cortez Elementary, Decker Elementary, Diamond Ranch High, Emerson Middle, Ganesha High, Garey High, Golden Springs Elementary, Kingsley Elementary, Lexington Elementary, Lopez Elementary, Lorbeer Middle, Madison Elementary, Mendoza Elementary, Monte Vista Elementary, Montvue Elementary, Park West High, Pomona High, Pueblo Elementary, Ramona Elementary, San Antonio Elementary, San Jose Elementary, Simons Middle, St. Joseph Elementary, St. Madeleine Catholic, Village Academy High, Washington Elementary, Western University of Health Sciences
Maria Villa Jose Rivera Amy Vine Anh Duy Ton
Jennifer Grijalva Miguel Ramos Damiana Aldana Dennis McKelvey
Maria Gomez Antonio Hurtado Leanor Gonzalez Veronica McKelvey
Veronica Hernandez Adriana Sanabria Rosa Nunez Manuel Dortha
Daniela Nevarez Lizbeth Rodriguez Shawn Nash Jesse Magana
Vitalina Vasquez Roberto Perez Na Young Song Francisco Tamayo
Grio Trejo Laura Chavez David Joyce Jessenia Carrera
Canddaria Campos Victor Sican Kevin Howard Marvelia Pacheco
Bernardino Estrada Michael Santos Andrew Lin Celia Gomez
Laura Infante Eloise Arrington Michael Lipp Jessica Escamilla
Melissa Hostetler Zaide Reyes John Royer Jose Escamilla
Rosa Perez Francisco Corona Gabe Guerrero Mario Cos
Nely Perez Berenice Limon Brian Scrivens Elizabeth Becerra
Rocio Gonzalez Max Castro Daniel Becerri Theodore Mugerian
Beatriz Tamayo Abdiel Hernandez Olga Jaimes Julio Ortega
Jose Ortuno Kiana Duran Dorothy Mann Juan Rodriguez
Lilia Escarcega Emily Perez Maria Rodriguez Dorothy Kim
Nely Franco Lazaro Cardenas Maria Bello Pedro Gonzalez
Diana Luna Andrea Enriquez Salvador Silva Susan Villa
Jesus Dimas Andres Serrato Maria Vergara Helen Estrada-Merritt
Elizabeth Alameda Nayeli Torres Estela Salazar Charles Gelsinger
Blanca Hernandez De
Lira
Wendy Rosales Maria Villanueva Rosaura Jimenez-Mireles
Laura Pizano Ana Hernandez SanJuana Porras Janice Sedig
Monica Martinez Aaron Adame Azucena Manreal Corinne McIntire
Maritza Vasquez Christian Nunez Jorge Villalpando Bob Dupaquier
Silvia Palauos Guadalupe Casteneda Guadalupe Silva Maria Dolores Zendejas
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-7
Table 3-1
Revised DEIR Commentors
Form Letters1
Parents, teachers, and students…: (cont’d.)
Tracy Jorensen Catheryn Fernandez Carlos Francisco Aragoa
Lopez
Karen Vance
Knicole Nelson Oliver Lopez Maria De La Cruz Plascenda Polly Tam Chan
Roberta Mindiola Clarissa Contreras Maria Garcia Yolanda Gonzalez
Trina Long Alec Bacon Ramona Hernandez Maria Rubalcaua
Adrianna Perez Scott Simms Maria Salcedo Ernesto Leon
Lorraine Monroy Jorge Medina Maria Saenz Noemi Guzman
Loretta Vasquez Daisy Verduzco Chris Myers Joana Gonzalez
Angel Vivor Paulo Rojas Roxana Molina Veronica Mendoza
Melisa Inzunza Julia Campos Maria Dortha Selene Munoz
Amanda Romo Jocelyn Richard Xochilt Moreno Julio Limon
Islene Leon Cesar Jimenez Ubaldo Escamilla Eduardo Rangel
Elisa Fox Abel Zarate Emila Ponce Alejandro Pena
Maryanne Villarosa Jailene Herrera Martin Ponce Magdalena Orozco
Cindy Yuen Xena Perez-Angeles Rose Ponce Jose Miguel Prado
Rosa Miranda-Zimmer Brandy Perez Mona Lisa Guzman Jesus Arambula
Jonathan Kraus Suzette David Sonia Ramirez Vanessa Correa
W. Sapson J. Avila Erica Rodriguez Victor Sanabria
Ruben Esparza Edgar Estrada Rosa Ramirez Brayan Hernandez
Gabriela Camargo Jason Orta Maria Santana Jose Alex Prado
Maria Esparza Roy Lopez Carmen Santana Yolanda Sandoval
Paz Herrera Carlos Magin Frank Guzman Gloria Ruiz
Elba Perez Jose Rodriguez Teresa Acosta Alan Martinez
Emma Ramos Laura Le Jose Guadalupe Perez Ricardo Sandoval
Lorraine Monroy Arlene Sandoval Carmen Perez Nadia Castillo
Marisol Serrano Louis Acevedo Maria De la Luz Martinez Danilo Garay
Elizeth Moreno Chinara Wilson Patricia Santellan Victor Lua
Sabina Gamino Claritza Ramirez Maria Uceda Gregory Cain
Daisy Aceves Jesus Moreno Veronica Sedano Jazmin Bravo
Maria Ledesma Jessica Contreras Thelma Jimenez Maritza Aguirre
Laura Ramirez Sandy Carrasco Martin Espinoza Myrka Salcedo
Fredy Ramos Alexandra Duarte Belinda White Marisol Ruiz
Felix Perez Joel Ramirez Susan Wentz Maria Ortega
Claudia Ortega Jennifer Argueta Teresa Turman Adolfo Quintana
Ana Cabrera Manuel Magin Bernice Walker Edith Solis
Elizabeth Martinez Magan Vergara Alba Escobar Maria Castro
Armando Mancinas Steven Raynoso Tara Tavi Maria Sanchez
Jacquelyn Callison Jonathan Medrano Alvarez Carolina Brenda Arteaga
Ivan Sanchez Eli Cordova Esmerelda Andrade Ma. Luisa Lepe
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-8
Table 3-1
Revised DEIR Commentors
Form Letters1
Parents, teachers, and students…: (cont’d.)
Leticia Sanchez Adrian Avila Brianna Martinez Patricia Ortiz
Soledad Sapien Natalie Barrios Stephanie Espinoza Maria Trujillo
Iliana Molina Andrea Angulo Yolanda Sandoval Claudia Alonzo
Yeni Palacios Alan Flores Maria Salgado Elsa Martinez
Gabriela Esparza Jazmine Meza Manuel Flores Ana Lopez
Nathan Jones Yesmin Torres Rocio De Los Santos Ana Zaragoza
Andrea Bautista Manuel Diaz Ernesto Castillo Maria Baez
Dhylva Metzler Cristal Leon Maria Chavez Susie Trujillo
Carmen Hernandez Adrian Nunez Diana Demara Aurelia Aguiar
Sharon Blake Byron Gonzalez Matilde Vega Maria Torres
Hector Martinez Guadalupe Dircio Anahi Montes de Oca Xitlali Rincon
Jessica Gonzalez Yanira Lopez Rosalinda Gonzalez Juan Barruto
Jesus Mora Mariarosa Ballesteros Maria Nunez Lisa Drake
David Jimenez Steven Flores Maria Martinez David Drake
Nancy Montoya Josh Ngo Sandra Saldana William Soriano
Rosalba Camayena Valeria Segura Floridalma Reyes Irma Manzano
Ysabele Santana Thuy-Vi Mai Lucy Gutierrez Antonio Renfro
Virginia Martinez Oziel Lopez Laura Huerta Wilber Soriano
Martina Rangel Katherine Duran Gloria Peraza Jessica Urquizo
Margarita Mejia Mike Ramirez Andrea Regalado Yolimar Magana
Mercedes Santos Nick Agnoletto Marta Rivas Ernesto Aldrete
Veroni Galiz Jose Reyes Rosalia Diaz Hyleen Renteria
Ivonne Lopez Rosa Murillo Adrian Martinez Reyna Velis
Damiana Partida Josue Garcia Urbano Resendiz Janet Vargas
Ricardo Galaviz Nicholas Muro Maria Soto Lilia Rodriguez
Christina Rodriguez Stephanie Saldana Adolfo Castro Reyna Chavez
Andriana Aguilar Nanette Alarcio Herman Molina Edgar Galeana
Margarita Hernandez Brianda Arriaga Miguel Carlos Michelle Romero
Cynthia Meraz Gabriel Valasquez Alfredo Felix Cesar Flores
Marisol Galaviz Mayra Quintero Jesus Adame Luis Lemus
Abigail Vega Billy Ibarra Tiana Molina Florentina Gutierrez
Brenda Soto Ana Guzman Noemi Rivera Karla Eusquiano
Elidio Arellano Dayana Ruiz Nibia Jimenez Daniel Contreras
Martha Ramirez Rodrigo Felix Delfina Buenrostro Anthony Loza
Virginia Martinez Nicole Mladosich Dolores Reyes Luis Benitez
Maria Canare Serafin Alvarez Guadalupe Castaneda Victor Bernal
Sara Garcia Jaqueline Medina Mukta Cham Pablo Andrade
Dalia Vasquez Jesus Arredondo Silvia Paredes Cynthia Ibarra
Leticia Dircio Alicia Rivera Elvira Salazar Grisol Ramirez
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-9
Table 3-1
Revised DEIR Commentors
Form Letters1
Parents, teachers, and students…: (cont’d.)
Nancy Martinez Daniel Magana Maricela Arredondo Alan Laureano
Gladys Murillo Jesus Ochoa Alejandro Martinez Juan Gutierrez
Pilar Maldonado Teresa Alvarado Maricela Delgado Cindy Becerra
Maria Pacheco Johan Guzman Maria Armas Veronica Martinez
Jesus Villalbazo Cynthia Cazares William Brogie Justin White
Rosalbo Gonzalez Henry Loya Alberto Lopez Denise Robles
Alicia Meda Rebecca Van Guilder Victoriano Chavez Fabian Arredondo
Norma Vega Werner Casteneda Esparanzo Orozco Samira Barco
Veronica Esquivel Christian Flores Maria Paco Cindy Gonzalez
Mary Peek Alejandro Rodriguez Francis Soto Natalie Varela
Maria Infante Alejandro Mota Anthony Saucedo Ana Elizabeth Arzola
Josefina Chacon Isidore Robles Elsa Frias Jose Araiza
Irma Sabalza Ramon Arambula Ana Miller Ariana Ayers
Gabriela Priego Daisy Roman Sonia Trejo Araceli Hernandez
Iris Rojas Lizzett Ramirez Jose Garcia Cynthia Guillen
Teresa Noyola Francisco Cruz Leonides Buenrostro Steven Harper
Maria Jimenez Steven Tinajero Rosa Cazares Janet Ortiz
Adriana Serrano Jose Ruiz Gisela Delgado Shellsey Ortega
Maria Medina William Leonard Sandra Reyes Gabriela Gurrola
Genesis Escareno Andres Castro Maria Carrasco Juan Castaneda
Maria Lira Jennifer Rodriguez Silvia Lopez Kristin Burgess
Rosa Escareno Eric Peraza Veronica Villarreal Diana Avitia
Sandra Ramirez Isidro Amador Maria Donis Vincent Mora
Laurentina Infante Hannah Barreras Alejandra Ayala Estefania Aldrete
Emely Garcia Arelys Ramirez Maria Aquilar Karla Lima
Erika Rivera Alicia McMullin Elena Pasillas Jennifer Noriega
Emilia Mendoza Veronica Estrada Maria Aguirre Gloria Andino
Ulysses Mladosich Angelina Gonzalez Maria Gonzalez Michael Hernandez
Joanna Villarreal Erika Duran Jose Torres Ashley Hedrick
Laura Rivera Juana Castro Lorena Bonilla Robyn Clark
DaSean Renfra Heather Peck Alicia Rodriguez Rosie Martinez
Abram Garcia Estela Ortega Agueda Guerrero Maria Rubalcava
Jessica Serrano Judith Rose Erick Castillo Eloy Amancio
Kassandra Medina Maria Zimdars Veronica Anguiano Ricardo Amancio
Brandon Vallejo Andy Marquez Ricardo Garcia Luz Ramirez
Zaid Martinez Elias Verduzco, Jr. Maria Reynel MaElena Valdovinos
Valentino Marrufo Blanca Castro Irma Artega Diana Zarazua
Israel Ceran Dalila Delgado Elvia Lopez Minerva Vences
Jaime Rojas Maria Tamayo Ana Lopez Ruben Yepizom
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-10
Table 3-1
Revised DEIR Commentors
Form Letters1
Parents, teachers, and students…: (cont’d.)
Francisco Lua Mariza Lopez Goycoolea Maria Uribe Brooke Hayashi
Jennifer Gomez Alba Calderon Gustavo Ramirez Raquel Galicia
Yaritza Leon Patrick Adongo Maria Banderas Grisada Mayana
Selena Chavez Cynthia Macedo Rosa Villarreal Andrea Buenrrostro
German Ramos Dinorah Rivera Dalia Bibiano Illegible
Julian Bravo Ivette De Casas Miriam Vargas Carolina Morales
Sirenna Dominguez Claudia Paz Rocha Patricia Gonzalez Ivette Corness
Christian Contreras Jilma Smith Seals Maria Rizo
Cathy Garcia Sonia Chavez Maria Guadalupe Puentes
Opposition Petition (123 Signatures, Petition is included at FEIR Appendix B)
Elvia Bernal Silia Orozco Socorro Vera Maricruz Hernandez
Luisa Porras Maria Hernandez Patricia Diaz Fernando Jimenez
Javier Bernal Celia Hernandez Socorro Moreno Maria Juache
Anaycly Alonso Maria Urenda Rosabla Avila Illegible
Rafael Reyes, Jr. Margarita Ordaz Ann Cruz Jessica Juache
Maricela Cruz Armando Morales Angelica Avila Cesario Jimenez
Onelia Cruz Luis Arellano Jose Avila Beatriz Jimenez
Eneida Vasquez Steve Beas Heliodoro Avila Duarte Angeleica Hernandez
Maria Diaz Maora Baigas Maria Sanchez Martha Cortez
Malori Lared Miguel Rodriguez Luis Acuna S Blanco
Roberta Vasquez Alicia Rodriguez Teresa Acuna Art Lemus
Emilia Aquayo Arnold Rodriguez Sanila Acuna Ana Fernandez
Roberto Aquago Louisa Moya Rosio Acuna Illegible
Roberto Aquago, Jr. Mon Sanchez Guadalupe Lopez Illegible
Abigail & David Hernandez Claudia Espinoza Carolina Villagomez Virginia Illegible
Maria Perez Adriana Mercado Illegible Richard Ramos
Margarita Arellano Michela Morales Illegible Victoria Ramos
Eva Alcala Mike Morales Illegible Juan Carlos Gutierrez
Alex Horta Urbano Margarito Illegible Jacqueline Bravo
R. Horta Karina Salazar Oscar Escobedo Juana Perez
Josefina Ortega Jaime Andrade Nancy Escobedo Rangel Jesus
Felix Villalobos Lauro Morales Enriqueta Escobedo Illegible
Rita Villalobos Lourdes Cortez Salvador Escobedo Illegible
Estela Agudo Francisca Saberanie Gerardo Renteria Illegible
Rosa Diaz Mario Carillo Janet Renteria Jen Gutierrez
Carlos Castellon Maria Orendain Daniel Tzec Lourdes Espinoza
Marcelino Campos Eluira Becerra Enrique Tzec Giovani Arvizu
Patricia Gonzalez Alejandro Angel Elia Hernandez Karla Arvizu
Jose Flores Angelina Becerra Nicole Hernandez Ruben Lopez
Maria Flores Emilio Becerra Christine Ortega Jared Moreno
Martin Saldana Carmen Vivanco Luis Hernandez 1 The number of form letters does not reflect duplicate/multiple letters received from the same commentor.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-13
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
SCH No. 2009051126
Response SCH-1
State Clearinghouse receipt of the Pomona Valley Transfer Station Draft EIR is
acknowledged, as is distribution of the Draft EIR to the listed State Agencies. The State-
assigned Clearinghouse reference number (SCH No. 2009051126) and dates of the public
review period for the Draft EIR (January 28, 2011 through March 14, 2011) are also
acknowledged.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-16
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle)
801 K Street, MS 19-01
Sacramento, CA 95814
Letter #1 Dated March 14, 2011
Response CAL1-1
The commentor notes CalRecycle’s opportunity to review and comment on the January
2011 Revised Draft EIR (Revised DEIR). CalRecycle has no further comments on the
Revised DEIR beyond those presented in CalRecycle comment letter dated April 30, 2010,
(which provided comments on the March 2010 Draft EIR).
The Lead Agency appreciates CalRecycle comment and input on the Project and EIR.
Additional information provided here is acknowledged. The CalRecycle comment letter
dated April 30, 2010 and responses to that letter are attached. Additional necessary
responses to the CalRecycle comment letter dated March 14, 2011 are provided herein.
Response CAL1-2
CalRecycle staff requests that a copy of the Statement of Overriding Considerations be
provided, along with any related resolutions.
Should the EIR be certified, and the Project approved, a copy of the Statement of
Overriding Considerations, along with any related resolutions will be provided to
CalRecycle staff.
Response CAL1-3
CalRecycle requests that hard copies (paper, not electronic) of all subsequent
environmental documents be provided, to include but not limited to: the Final
Environmental Impact Report; the Transfer Processing Report, Statement of Overriding
Considerations, copies of public notices and any Notices of Determination for the Project.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-17
The Lead Agency acknowledges CalRecycle request for hard copy documents, but suggests
that limited available resources (human and other) are more effectively and efficiently
employed for purposes other than document reproduction and handling. Moreover, given
the manpower and dollar costs of reproduction; potential for loss, damage, or destruction
of information; warehousing and cataloging requirements; and information retrieval
difficulties, it is unclear how the provision of hard copy (vis-à-vis electronic copy)
documents is of benefit. Further, provision of electronic information where available is
consistent with CEQA paperwork reduction policies and guidelines; and is the preferred
method of document presentation for information submitted to the State Office of Planning
and Research. It is noted also that the use of electronic documents, rather than hard copy
printing, supports and is consistent with the City’s and (state’s) source reduction and
recycling mandates. Lastly, printing of documents in part or in total can be achieved from
the electronic copies provided. CalRecycle or other agencies have the option of printing in
house or contracting with private commercial services for document production.
Response CAL1-4
The commentor cites 14 CCR, § 15094 (d): ‚If the project requires discretionary approval
from any state agency, the local agency shall also, within five working days of this
approval, file a copy of the notice of determination with the Office of Planning and
Research.‛
Should the EIR be certified and the Project approved, the Lead Agency shall comply with
14 CCR, § 15094 (d) notice of determination requirements.
Response CAL1-5
The commentor requests that responses to CalRecycle comments and notice certification
dates (with or without public hearing) be provided a minimum of ten (10) days prior to any
such certification actions and/or hearings.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-18
The Lead Agency will provide responses to CalRecycle comments a minimum of ten (10)
days prior to any anticipated or potential EIR certification actions. CalRecycle will be
provided notice a minimum of ten (10) days prior to public hearing or other venues
allowing for potential EIR certification.
Response CAL1-6
CalRecycle point of contact information for questions and responses is provided: Martin
Perez, email to [email protected]; telephone 951.782.4194; mail to: 1001 I
Street, P.O. Box 4025, Sacramento, CA 95812-4025.
Point of contact information provided by the commentor is noted. No further response is
required.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-23
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle)
801 K Street, MS 19-01
Sacramento, CA 95814
Letter #2 Dated April 30, 2010
Response CAL2-1
The commentor notes CalRecycle’s opportunity to review and comment on the March 2010
Draft EIR (EIR). CalRecycle notes that comments on the EIR are provided for the Lead
Agency’s consideration. CalRecycle specifically notes that if the Project as described by
CalRecycle is materially different than that understood by the Lead Agency, that any
significant differences be incorporated in the Final EIR. CalRecycle cites CEQA Section
15088.5 and requirements for EIR recirculation based on inclusion of significant new
information subsequent to public review.
The Lead Agency appreciates CalRecycle’s comment and input on the Project and EIR.
Additional information provided here is acknowledged.
Response CAL2-2
CalRecycle materially and correctly summarizes substantive aspects of the Project.
However, certain elements of the EIR Project Description are incorrectly or partially
represented. Elements described by CalRecycle vis-à-vis the EIR Project Description are
compared below. Corrections and/or clarifications to the CalRecycle description of the Project
are noted.
CalRecycle Summary EIR Project Description
City of Pomona Planning Department acting as Lead
Agency is proposing the construction of a fully
enclosed Municipal Solid Waste Transfer Facility and
associated supporting facilities . . . .
The Lead Agency is not proposing construction or
operation of the Project. The Project Applicant, Grand
Central Recycling & Transfer Station, Inc. (Mr. David
Perez) proposes construction and operation of the
Project (EIR at Page 2-2, et al.).
The City of Pomona is the Lead Agency for the
purposes of CEQA because it has the principal
responsibility and authority for deciding whether or
not to approve the Project, and how it will be
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-24
implemented. As the Lead Agency, the City of
Pomona is also responsible for preparing the
environmental documentation for the Project in
compliance with CEQA (EIR, Page 3-46).
As noted by CalRecycle, the proposed transfer station
building will be fully enclosed. ‚Consistent with Rule
410 and CIWMB odor control/minimization
requirements, the proposed MSW transfer station is
fully enclosed and designed to create negative air
pressure‛ (EIR, Page 3-41).
The facility will be approximately 10. 5 acres located
at 1371 East 9th Street with access to Mission
Boulevard.
The Project site encompasses approximately 10.5 acres.
The Project site is located at 1371 East 9th Street (EIR
at Page 1-2, et al.).
Access to the transfer station will be provided via three (3)
driveways, one (1) on Mission Boulevard to the north, and
two (2) on 9th Street to the south. The northerly Mission
Boulevard driveway will be a one-way entry, and
will provide access solely to inbound transfer trucks.
The westerly driveway on 9th Street will provide
access for inbound/outbound employees and visitors,
while the easterly driveway will provide access for
inbound/outbound collection trucks, self-haul
vehicles, and some employee vehicles. Outbound
transfer trucks will also exit the site via the easterly
driveway (EIR at Page 3-23).
The facility will receive material from municipal
collection vehicles, commercial franchise haulers
operating within the City, public self-haul vehicles
and waste transported from outside the City.
Project MSW sources as summarized by CalRecycle is
materially correct.
The facility will be permitted to operate twenty-four
(24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week.
. . . Although the facility would be permitted to operate 24
hours a day, 7 days a week, pursuant to the EIR
Mitigation Measures, the transfer station hours of
operation for MSW acceptance and transfer shall not
exceed 12 hours per day, occurring between the hours of
6:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. (EIR, Page 3-33).
The Applicant proposes to further restrict Project hours for
MSW acceptance and transfer to between 7:00 a.m. to 2:00
p.m. on Saturday, and the facility will be closed for
business on Sunday. Maintenance and cleaning activities
would occur after hours. Notwithstanding, to establish a
likely maximum impact scenario, this [EIR] analysis
assumes the facility will operate 24 hours per day, 7 days
per week (EIR, Page 3-34).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-25
CalRecycle indicates Project peak tonnage at 1,500
tons per day; and Project hours of operation as 24
hours per day.
The Project Applicant has requested a Solid Waste Facility
Permit (SWFP) to allow for acceptance of up to 1,500 tons
of MSW per day (EIR, Page 3-32). Please refer also to
preceding remarks regarding Project days/hours of
operation.
Response CAL2-3
The commentor summarizes significant Project-specific and cumulative impacts identified
in the EIR. Where applicable, discrepancies and clarification of impacts listed by the
commentor, vis-à-vis those presented in the EIR are summarized below.
Traffic and Circulation: Intersection Impacts. Project-specific and cumulatively
significant traffic impacts at the intersection of Mission Boulevard at SR-71 described
by the commentor are materially correct. No revision/clarification required.
Air Quality: Construction-related PM10/PM2.5 emissions Localized Significance
Threshold (LST) Exceedances. Construction-related PM10/PM2.5 LST exceedances
noted by the commentor are both Project-specific and cumulatively significant. ‚On
this basis, temporary construction-source emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 and
operational NOx emissions in exceedance of thresholds will result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of these pollutants within a non-attainment area‛ (EIR at
Page 4.3-132). ‚At affected receptors (those closest to the Project site), the Project’s
localized PM10 and PM2.5 emissions concentrations, in combination with ambient PM
concentrations, and other PM10 and PM2.5 emissions generated by off‐site sources
would be cumulatively significant‛ (EIR at Page 5-12). PM10 and PM2.5 emissions
levels will tend to diminish as the use of heavy equipment in the early construction
stages concludes, and will dissipate entirely at the end of construction activities.
Air Quality: Diesel Particulate Matter Source (DPM-source) Cancer Risk Threshold
Exceedances. As described by the commentor, DPM-source cancer risk threshold
exceedances at two (2) residences is a Project-specific and cumulatively significant
impact.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-26
Please note further, that in response to commentor concerns, and consistent with mitigation
refinements intended to be achieved through the CEQA and EIR review processes,
additional mitigation is proposed that would act to further reduce Project-related DPM
emissions. More specifically, additional/revised mitigation is proposed [MM 4.3.21
(A)mended and MM 4.3.22(A), below+ that would ensure future year (2020) ‚CNG-only‛
access restrictions for all transfer trucks and commercial trash collection vehicles served by
the Project. 1, 2
MM 4.3.21 (A): At Project opening, all transfer trucks, and all Applicant-
controlled commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project
site shall be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent
technologies).
MM 4.3.22(A): On or before January 2, 2020, all transfer trucks and all
commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project site shall be
powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent technologies).
Health Risk Assessment (HRA) modeling of DPM-source cancer risks resulting from
application of proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) in combination with other DPM
emissions mitigation currently proposed in the Revised DEIR (See Revised DEIR Mitigation
Measures 4.3.17 through 4.3.20) has been conducted as one component of this Final EIR
(please refer to HRA Addendum included at Final EIR Appendix A). Results of the HRA
Addendum indicate that with the stipulated conversion of diesel-fueled vehicles to CNG
vehicles described herein, the Year 2020 maximum potential cancer risk exposure at any
potentially affected receptor would be reduced to levels that are less-than-significant.
1 The Year 2020 timeframe implementation schedule proposed here is consistent with and parallels
EPA/CARB tiered emissions reductions goals for heavy-duty trucks.
2 Proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) would replace/supercede MM 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 currently
reflected in the Revised DEIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-27
More specifically, at the maximally impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth
Street), the mitigated cancer risk would be 3.98 per million. The residential use
experiencing the second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the
mitigated cancer risk would be 0.52 per million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer risk
would therefore be less than the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per million.
The HRA Addendum results indicate further, that under no circumstance would area
schools be significantly affected by DPM emissions, nor would DPM emissions result in any
potentially significant non-cancer risks. Please refer also to detailed HRA modeling results
presented at Final EIR Appendix A.
Notwithstanding these findings, this Final EIR conservatively maintains previous
conclusions regarding potential Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risks.
That is, for the purposes of disclosure, and to maintain the conservative analysis construct
employed to date, Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risk exposures at the
residences located at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street are considered to be significant until
the Year 2020. No other locations would experience potentially adverse elevated DPM-
source cancer risk exposures (or non-cancer risk exposures) resulting from Project
operations or activities. Please refer also to related discussions of DPM emissions impacts
and proposed additional/revised mitigation presented at Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions
and Errata Corrections.‛ Should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a
Statement of Overriding Considerations acknowledging significant Project-specific, and
cumulative localized DPM emissions impacts.
Continuing, other significant impacts noted by the commentor and discussed in the Revised
DEIR include:
Air Quality: Regional Threshold Exceedances (NOx only). As described by the
commentor, Project operations will result in long-term exceedances of SCAQMD
regional thresholds for NOx only. This is a Project-specific and cumulatively
significant impact. No revision/clarification required.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-28
Noise: Construction Noise. As noted by the commentor, Project-related construction
noise will temporarily and intermittently exceed the City’s 65 dBA exterior
residential noise standard at proximate residential receptors. This is a Project-
specific and cumulatively significant impact. Construction-source noise levels will
tend to diminish as the use of heavy equipment in the early construction stages
concludes, and will dissipate entirely at the end of construction activities. No
revision/clarification required.
Response CAL2-4
The commentor notes that other specific comments are provided by CalRecycle, and
requests that future reference to the former California Integrated Waste Management Board
be by that agency’s new name(s), CalRecycle or the Department of Resources Recycling and
Recovery or the acronym DRRR.
Responses to other specific comments provided by CalRecycle follow. Future reference to
the commenting agency will be under the title(s) CalRecycle and/or the Department of
Resources Recycling and Recovery (DRRR).
Response CAL2-5
The commentor requests clarification of the types of Municipal Solid Wastes received.
General categories of waste accepted by the Project (as summarized at Draft Transfer
Processing Report( Draft TPR), Page 22, DEIR Appendix G), include: Mixed Residential
Waste, Commercial Waste, Wood/Green Waste, and Construction, Demolition, and Inert
(CDI) Debris. Based on similar existing operations at the Grand Central Transfer Station
(City of Industry, CA) it is anticipated that mixed refuse/green waste will comprise up to
approximately 84.7 percent (by weight) of the total daily waste stream. ‚A refuse to green
waste ratio of 9 to 1 was assumed and based upon traditional waste volumes associated
with the existing transfer facility‛ (Pomona Valley Transfer Station Odor Impact Analysis
(OIA), unnumbered page 3). The CDI debris waste stream component is estimated at
approximately 15.3 percent (by weight) of the daily waste stream (OIA; Attachment B,
Calculation Worksheets and Emissions Rates, unnumbered page 3, Waste Stream
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-29
Characterization). No hazardous materials will be accepted at the proposed transfer
station. (14 CCR § 17407.5(a).)
Response CAL2-6
The commentor summarizes operational limits imposed pursuant to the EIR mitigation
measures, and operational attributes voluntarily proposed by the Applicant. The
commentor requests these same operational limitations be reflected in the Transfer
Processing Report.
As requested by the commentor, Project operational constraints and limitations (whether
implemented through the EIR mitigation measures, required pursuant to Project
Conditions of Approval, voluntarily proposed by the Applicant, or otherwise initiated) will
be reflected in the Transfer Processing Report. Notwithstanding, for the purposes of
establishing a likely maximum impact scenario the EIR analysis assumes a twenty four
hour per day, seven days per week operational condition.
Response CAL2-7
The commentor inquires: Why are two shifts necessary when the facility will only be open from
6:00 am through 6:00 pm?
Staffing and shift duration are as proposed by the Applicant. Twelve hour shifts as
suggested by the commentor (while not uncommon) are not the norm for most business
operations. Moreover, while the facility will accept waste only between the hours of 6:00
am and 6:00 pm, certain staff will be onsite before 6:00 am and after 6:00 pm providing a
variety of services including but not limited to: facility/equipment maintenance and
cleaning, facility security, and daily opening and closing operations. Moreover, personnel
staffing preferences (whether as a single shift or as multiple shifts) would not substantively
affect the EIR analyses or conclusions.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-30
Response CAL2-8
The commentor inquires: Will any transfer vehicles be leaving the site between 6:00 pm and 6:00
am? Will any processing or loading of vehicles take place between 6:00 pm and 6:00 am?‛
As a general rule, and under normal operating conditions, no transfer vehicles will exit the
site between 6:00 pm and 6:00 am. Nor will there be any processing or loading of vehicles
between 6:00 pm and 6:00 am. Transfer vehicles that have entered the site prior to 6:00 pm
and are already on-site at the established closing time would be permitted to load and exit
the site.
Response CAL2-9
The commentor summarizes EIR Table 3-3 presentation of Project vehicle trip generation
and its translation to passenger car equivalents (PCEs). The commentor requests
clarification of gas station internal trip capture information presented at Table 3-3.
Detailed trip generation information is presented in the Project Traffic Impact Analysis
(TIA). Specific parameters and assumptions regarding Project gas station vehicle trip
generation and internal trip capture is excerpted below:
Traffic attributable to the gasoline/diesel station has been estimated based on
the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates for land
use 944 (ITE Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition), which are listed on Table
5-2.A. The proposed six (6) vehicle fueling position (VFP) gasoline/diesel
station will be publicly accessible in the northeasterly corner of the project
site. However, it is conservatively estimated that the majority of the trips
generated by the gasoline station would be serving vehicles and trucks being
generated by the transfer station. As such, a 75 percent internal capture
reduction has been assumed for the gasoline station. It is also important to
note that the pumps will be equipped with a ‚Card Lock‛ system which
takes any major credit card for payment, but does not accept cash, and there
will not be an attendant operating the gasoline station.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-31
The ‚Card Lock‛ system and lack of an attendant are anticipated to result in
a much lower than normal percentage of vehicles being drawn to the
gasoline station (i.e., not attributable to the waste transfer station). Lastly, the
internal capture percentage used for this project is consistent with that
observed at the existing Grand Central Waste Transfer Station in the City of
Industry which also utilizes a ‚Card Lock‛ system (TIA Page 70).
It is also noted that the Applicant no longer proposes gasoline fueling within the Project
site. Only diesel and CNG fueling facilities are proposed. Diesel fuel would be available to
all vehicles entering the Project site, while CNG fuel points are available for franchise
commercial haulers and transfer trucks. By eliminating gasoline from the available fuel
choices, this fueling arrangement would tend to decrease trips dedicated solely to obtaining
fuel, increase internal trip capture, and decrease overall net Project trip generation when
compared to that assumed in the EIR analysis.
Response CAL2-10
The commentor requests clarification on the proposed transfer station building design. The
commentor inquires: ‚Will the self-haul area be enclosed or open on the side where the vehicles
enter?‛
The transfer station will be fully enclosed. ‚Consistent with Rule 410 and CIWMB odor
control/minimization requirements, the proposed MSW transfer station is fully enclosed
and designed to create negative air pressure‛ (Revised DEIR, Page 3-41). Roll up doors are
provided for self-haul vehicle access. Please refer also to building elevations presented at
Revised DEIR Figure 4.3-4, ‚Transfer Station Architectural Concept.‛
Response CAL2-11
The commentor notes CalRecycle’s opportunity to review and comment on the March 2010
Revised Draft EIR.
The Lead Agency appreciates CalRecycle’s comment and input on the Project and Revised
DEIR. Additional information provided here is acknowledged.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-32
Response CAL2-12
CalRecycle staff requests that a copy of the Statement of Overriding Considerations be
provided, along with supporting findings as required under 14CCR Section 15091.
CalRecycle staff requests that any related resolution adopted by the decision-making body
also be provided.
Should the EIR be certified, and the Project approved, a copy of the Statement of
Overriding Considerations, along with supporting findings and any related resolutions will
be provided to CalRecycle staff.
Response CAL2-13
CalRecycle requests that hard copies (paper, not electronic) of all subsequent
environmental documents be provided, to include but not limited to: the Final
Environmental Impact Report; the Transfer Processing Report, Statement of Overriding
Considerations, copies of public notices and any Notices of Determination for the Project.
The Lead Agency acknowledges CalRecycle’s request for hard copy documents; however,
the provision of electronic information where available is consistent with CEQA paperwork
reduction policies and guidelines and is the preferred method of document presentation for
information submitted to the State Office of Planning and Research. It is noted also that the
use of electronic documents, rather than hard copy printing, supports and is consistent with
the City’s and (state’s) source reduction and recycling mandates.
Response CAL2-14
The commentor cites 14 CCR, § 15094 (d): ‚If the project requires discretionary approval
from any state agency, the local agency shall also, within five working days of this
approval, file a copy of the notice of determination with the Office of Planning and
Research.‛
Should the EIR be certified and the Project approved, the Lead Agency shall comply with
14 CCR, § 15094 (d) notice of determination requirements.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-33
Response CAL2-15
The commentor requests that response to CalRecycle comments, and notice certification
dates (with or without public hearing) be provided a minimum of ten (10) days prior to any
such certification actions and/or hearings.
The Lead Agency will provide responses to CalRecycle comments a minimum of ten (10)
days prior to any anticipated or potential EIR certification actions. CalRecycle will be
provided notice a minimum of ten (10) days prior to public hearing or other venues
allowing for potential EIR certification.
Response CAL2-16
CalRecycle point of contact information for questions and responses is provided: Raymond
M. Seamans, telephone 916.341.6728, email to [email protected]; or
Martin Perez, telephone 951.782.4194, email to [email protected]; mail to: 1001
I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
Point of contact information provided by the commentor is noted. No further response is
required.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-35
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona
3801 West Temple Avenue
Pomona, CA 91768
Letter Dated March 11, 2011
Response POLY-1
On behalf of the California State Polytechnic University, Pomona (Cal Poly Pomona), the
commentor requests that the Lead Agency support and approve the proposed Pomona
Valley Transfer Station Project and related EIR (Project, EIR). The commentor cites job
creation and economic stimulus as reasons for Project support.
Commentor and Cal Poly Pomona support of the Project and EIR are recognized. These
comments are forwarded to the decision-makers. Job creation and economic growth noted
by the commentor are consistent with the Project Objective to ‚*f+oster economic growth
and create additional employment opportunities for City and area residents‛ (Revised
DEIR, Page 3-45).
Response POLY-2
The commentor reiterates job opportunities created by the Project, and notes tax benefits
accruing to the City Redevelopment Agency (RDA) resulting from development within a
redevelopment area. The commentor restates support for the Project.
The commentor’s statements regarding Project job creation and location of the Project
within a City redevelopment area are materially correct. The Revised DEIR notes job
opportunities created by the Project, ‚*s+taffing estimates provided by the Applicant as of
December 2009 indicate a requirement for 45 to 50 employees‛ (Revised DEIR, Page 3-34, et
al.). Location of the Project within the City of Pomona Reservoir Industrial Redevelopment
Project Area is also discussed in the Revised DEIR:
The Project site also lies within the City of Pomona Reservoir Industrial
Redevelopment Project Area. Like the General Plan and zoning designations
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-36
applicable to the site, the Redevelopment Plan for the area within which the
Project is located encourages the establishment of industrial uses. Property
taxes resulting from any increase in assessed value of the Project site become
a source of tax increment revenue for the City of Pomona Redevelopment
Agency. Thus, the Redevelopment Agency will retain a portion of the
property tax dollars paid as a result of an increase in property values caused
by the Project. By law, the Pomona Redevelopment Agency must use the
money to alleviate blighted conditions. Blighted conditions are physical and
economic problems that are detrimental to the public health, safety and
welfare. In this respect, the Project will provide a revenue source available to
the Redevelopment Agency for alleviation of blight and
improvement/resolution of other physical or economic conditions that are
detrimental to public health, safety and welfare (Revised DEIR, Page 4.1-8).
Commentor statements supporting the Project are forwarded to the decision-makers.
Response POLY-3
The commentor notes the Lead Agency’s preparation and recirculation of the Revised
DEIR. The commentor offers an opinion that the Revised DEIR [analysis] is highly
conservative and likely overstates Project impacts. Revised DEIR disclosure of likely
environmental impacts and identification of feasible mitigation is noted by the commentor.
Lead Agency recirculation of the Revised DEIR as noted by the commentor is materially
correct. Revised DEIR text in pertinent part is excerpted below:
Based on comments received, the City of Pomona, acting as the Lead Agency,
has determined that recirculation of this Revised [emphasis added] Draft
Environmental Impact Report for the Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
(Revised Draft EIR) will be of benefit in providing on-point responses to
comments as well as correction, clarification, and amplification of
information provided previously in the March 2010 Draft EIR (Revised DEIR
Preface, Page 2).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-37
Correction, amplification, and clarification of information provided in this
Revised Draft EIR does not constitute new significant information as defined
under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15088.5,
‚Recirculation of an EIR Prior to Certification,‛ and recirculation of the
Revised Draft EIR is not a required action under CEQA. Recirculation of the
Revised Draft EIR has nonetheless been voluntarily initiated by the Lead
Agency in furtherance of disclosure and public participation mandates
established under CEQA. Noticing, content, and review of the Revised Draft
EIR is undertaken consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. In this
latter regard, the Revised Draft EIR has been distributed to the State
Clearinghouse (SCH), responsible and trustee agencies, and all parties
requesting the document (Revised DEIR Preface, Page 3).
Project impacts and proposed mitigation are discussed in the detail throughout the Revised
DEIR. A summary of impacts and mitigation is provided at Revised DEIR Table 1.10-1,
Pages 1-29 through 1-51.
Response POLY-4
The commentor offers an opinion that the City Planning Commission and City Council
should ‚enthusiastically support and approve the EIR and the Project.‛ The commentor
offers further opinion that the Project location is preferable to the site selected for the
proposed Universal facility, noting that Universal facility site required a General Plan
Amendment and a Zone Change, and was located adjacent to a mobile home park. The
commentor notes the Pomona Valley Transfer Station (PVTS) Project’s consistency with
existing zoning and location amid similar uses.
Commentor opinions regarding Planning Commission and Council actions concerning the
EIR and Project are forwarded to the decision-makers. Commentor opinions regarding
location of the proposed PVTS Project vis-à-vis the site selected for the proposed Universal
project are forwarded to the decision-makers. Project consistency with existing land use
designations, and compatibility with adjacent uses noted by the commentor are materially
correct.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-38
Land use issues are discussed in detail at Revised EIR Section 4.1, Land Use and Planning,
Revised DEIR Pages 4.1-1 through 4.1-18.
The Revised DEIR analysis states in pertinent part:
. . . [N]o established communities or other physical arrangements would be
divided or otherwise adversely physically altered by the Project’s proposed
land uses, design features, or operations. The Project proposes industrial land
uses consistent with existing General Plan (General Manufacturing) and
zoning (M-2, General Industrial) designations. The Project industrial land
uses will be compatible with adjacent land uses in that adjacent land is also
designated for industrial uses under the City’s General Plan and zoning
ordinance, and is either developed with such uses or allows for such
development (Revised DEIR, Page 4.1-18).
Response POLY-5
The commentor summarizes previous remarks and restates Cal Poly Pomona support of
the Project.
The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-40
Department of Transportation
District 7, Regional Planning
IGR/CEQA Branch
100 South Main Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Letter Dated March 10, 2011
Response DOT-1
The commentor provides introductory remarks, and indicates comments are provided on
the Revised DEIR.
Responses to DOT comments are provided here.
Response DOT-2
DOT requests clarification of information presented at Page 146 of the Traffic Impact
Analysis (TIA), dated June 12, 2009. Specifically, DOT requests clarification of how
merge/diverge improvements along I-10 and SR-60 be realized without any geometric
improvements.
An addendum to the Pomona Valley Transfer Station traffic study has been prepared which
includes the revised basic freeway segment and merge/diverge analyses for existing and
future traffic conditions. (Please refer to Final EIR Appendix A). Based on the results of the
revised analysis, there are no merge/diverge (or basic freeway segments) with improving
density/LOS values in comparison to previous analysis scenarios. The revised analysis
indicates that there are no significant impacts. As such, no merge/diverge improvements
have been recommended. These findings are consistent with the findings found in the
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Traffic TIA, dated June 12, 2009.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-41
Response DOT-3
The commentor requests that actual [traffic] volumes and speeds be reflected in the TIA in
order to determine the density (instead of employing peak hour volumes derived from
Average Daily Traffic volumes, ADT).
Caltrans-maintained Performance Measurement System (PeMS) data for April 14, 2009 has
been utilized to determine the total and truck flow on the I-10 and SR-60 Freeways within
the mixed-flow lanes. (See footnote at TIA Addendum Table 7). The mainline volumes
reflected in the Addendum analysis are based on actual peak hour volumes and have not
been derived from the ADT. Volumes from the PeMS website have been provided as an
attachment in the addendum letter. Results and conclusions of the TIA are not affected.
Response DOT-4
The commentor states that Level of Service (LOS) calculations should consider the mainline
volumes only (excluding HOV lane volumes/capacities).
The Addendum to the TIA (included at Final EIR Appendix A) considers only the traffic
volumes/capacities within the mixed-flow lanes on the applicable I-10 and SR-60 Freeway
segments. HOV lane capacities and volumes have not been considered in the Addendum
analysis.
Response DOT-5
The commentor requests incorporation of the above-noted revisions/suggestions within the
TIA, and that the revised TIA be resubmitted to Caltrans for review. Caltrans point contact
information is provided.
The TIA Addendum (included at Final EIR Appendix A) reflects all revisions/suggestions
provided by Caltrans. The TIA Addendum has been provided to Caltrans for review.
Results and conclusions of the TIA are not affected. Caltrans point of contact information is
noted.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-45
County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
1955 Workman Mill Road
Whittier, CA 90607-4998
Letter Dated March 11, 2011
Response CSD-1
The commentor provides introductory remarks indicating that CSD comments are
provided on the Revised DEIR. The commentor identifies the Project location within
LACSD District No. 21.
Responses to CSD comments are provided here. The Project location within LACSD District
No. 21 is recognized.
Response CSD-2
The commentor notes that previous CSD comments (correspondence dated June 8, 2009, as
updated by comments provided) apply to the Project and EIR.
Previous CSD comments and updated CSD information are recognized. Updated
information is incorporated where applicable as noted in these Responses. Results and
conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response CSD-3
The commentor notes that the 36-inch diameter JOA-1A Chino Basin Wastewater Line
conveyed a peak flow of 5.5 million gallons per day (mgd) when last measured in 2009.
Updated CSD information regarding the 36-inch diameter JOA-1A Chino Basin Wastewater
Line serving the City of Pomona is recognized. The information at Revised DEIR Page 4.7-
20 is amended accordingly, as follows:
The Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD) would be responsible
for the treatment of wastewater generated by the Project. The City of
Pomona provides local sewer lines for conveyance to the District’s 36-inch
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-46
diameter Chino Basin wastewater line, located in Grand Avenue at Reservoir
Street. The 36-inch diameter JOA-1A Chino Basin Wastewater Line
conveyed a peak flow of 5.5 million gallons per day (mgd) when last
measured in 2009.
It is also recognized that information based on time- and context-sensitive peak flow
monitoring conducted by LACSD will fluctuate periodically. Results and conclusions of
the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response CSD-4
The commentor notes that the Pomona Water Reclamation Plant currently processes an
average flow of 8.7 million gallons per day (MGD).
Updated CSD information regarding average flows at the Pomona Water Reclamation
Plant serving the City of Pomona is recognized. The information at Revised DEIR Page 4.7-
20 et al. is amended accordingly, as follows:
The LACSD’s Pomona Water Reclamation Plant has the capacity to provide
primary, secondary, and tertiary wastewater treatment for approximately 15
million gallons per day (MGD), and currently processes an average flow of
8.3 8.7 MGD.
It is also recognized that time- and context-sensitive information such as Water Reclamation
Plant average flow monitoring conducted by LACSD will fluctuate periodically. Results
and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response CSD-5
The commentor notes that all other information concerning the Districts’ facilities and
sewerage service presented in the Revised DEIR is correct. The commentor provides
District contact information: Adriana Raza, phone (562) 908-4288, ext. 2717.
The Lead Agency appreciates the District’s comments. District contact information is noted.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-51
Los Angeles County Fire Department
1320 North Eastern Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90063
Letter Dated April 7, 2011
Response LAFD-1
The commentor states that the Revised DEIR has been reviewed by potentially affected
departments of the Los Angeles County Fire Department.
The Lead Agency appreciates the Los Angeles County Fire Department comment and input
on the Project and Revised DEIR.
Response LAFD-2
The commentor provides current station information and corrects information presented in
the Revised DEIR.
Revised DEIR Section 4.7.2.1, Page 4.7-4 (excerpt following) is amended accordingly.
Station No. 183 is staffed around the clock by one captain, one fire fighter
specialist/paramedic and one fire fighter/paramedic. and two firefighters.
This station is equipped with one paramedic engine. one engine company
and one paramedic squad vehicle.
The text at Revised DEIR Section 4.7.5.2, Page 4.7-12 (excerpt following) is also amended to
reflect the updated information.
Countywide, the LACoFD operates 160 170 fire stations that are divided into
21 22 batallions.
These revisions are reflected in Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions and Errata Corrections.‛
Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-52
Response LAFD-3
The Land Development Unit provides guidance in regard to specific emergency response
requirements for the Project (i.e., ingress and egress points, fire hydrant spacing, and
driveway/turning clearances). As noted within these comments, the Project’s development
plans are subject to further Fire Department review as part of the City’s design review
process, which would occur subsequent to EIR Certification. The City will coordinate its
review of the Project with Fire Department staff, to ensure that the Project’s design
complies with all relevant requirements in regard to fire prevention and safety.
Response LAFD-4
The Forestry Division states that areas germane to their statutory responsibilities have been
addressed.
Forestry Division remarks are noted. No further response is necessary.
Response LAFD-5
The Health Hazardous Materials Division (HHMD) recommends that, based on the
potential for soil contamination at the Project site, the Project Applicant should enter into a
cost recovery program with HHMD or another State agency and obtain a ‚No Further
Action Letter‛ prior to grading or construction activities.
As discussed in detail at Revised DEIR Section 4.5, ‚Hazards and Hazardous Materials,‛
and the Project Phase I/II ESAs, the Project site is not subject to, or affected by, known
contamination with hazardous materials. Notwithstanding, given the historic industrial
use of the Project site, and its proximity to other industrial uses, there exists the potential
for encountering as yet unknown soil contaminants in the course of Project implementation.
Mitigation Measure 4.5.1 (excerpted below for ease of reference) ensures that any suspected
soil contaminants are properly assessed; and as necessary, remediated and/or removed
from the Project site and properly disposed.
4.5.1 If during implementation of the Project, soil contamination is suspected,
construction in the affected area shall stop pending determination of the extent and
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-53
character of contamination (or lack thereof). Suspected soils shall be tested at a
certified laboratory approved by the Department of Health Services (DHS).
Excavation, transport, and disposal of any soils determined to be contaminated shall
be in accordance with the rules and regulations of the following agencies:
City of Pomona;
Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) - Los Angeles County Fire
Department;
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC);
California Environmental Protection Agency (CAL-EPA);
California Division of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CAL-
OSHA);
United States Department of Transportation (USDOT); and
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
Under the California Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Material
Management Regulatory Program, (Chapter 6.11, Division 20, Section 25404 of the
Health and Safety Code), hazards/hazardous materials management is addressed
locally through the Certified Unified Program Agency. The primary CUPA for the
City of Pomona is the Los Angeles County Fire Department.
With the implementation of this mitigation measure, and based on the existing detailed
discussion at Revised DEIR Section 4.5, ‚Hazards and Hazardous Materials,‛ the potential
for soil contamination has been appropriately addressed and reduced to levels that are less-
than-significant. The results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-55
Los Angeles County Firefighters Local 1014
3460 Fletcher Avenue
El Monte, CA 91731
Letter Dated February 25, 2011
Response FFL-1
The commentor notes that Los Angeles County Firefighters Local 1014 (Local 1014)
represents Pomona’s firefighters and paramedics. The commentor requests that the Lead
Agency approve the EIR.
Local 1014 representation of Pomona firefighters and paramedics is noted. The
commentor’s request regarding approval of the EIR is forwarded to the decision-makers.
The commentor cites Project job creation and increased tax revenues as the basis for Local
1014 support. The commentor offers an opinion that monies generated by the Project
‚could be used to keep all eight Pomona Fire Stations operating at full capacity and restore
student programs in Pomona schools.‛
Job creation and economic growth noted by the commentor are consistent with the Project
Objective to ‚*f+oster economic growth and create additional employment opportunities for
City and area residents‛ (Revised DEIR, Page 3-45). Commentor opinions regarding use of
City revenues generated by the Project are forwarded to the decision-makers.
The Lead Agency’s voluntary re-circulation of the Revised EIR in support of full-disclosure
and public participation is noted by the commentor.
Lead Agency voluntary recirculation of the Revised DEIR as noted by the commentor is
materially correct. Revised DEIR text in pertinent part is excerpted below:
Based on comments received, the City of Pomona, acting as the Lead Agency,
has determined that recirculation of this Revised [emphasis added] Draft
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-56
Environmental Impact Report for the Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
(Revised Draft EIR) will be of benefit in providing on-point responses to
comments as well as correction, clarification, and amplification of
information provided previously in the March 2010 Draft EIR (Revised DEIR
Preface, Page 2).
Correction, amplification, and clarification of information provided in this
Revised Draft EIR does not constitute new significant information as defined
under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15088.5,
‚Recirculation of an EIR Prior to Certification,‛ and recirculation of the
Revised Draft EIR is not a required action under CEQA. Recirculation of the
Revised Draft EIR has nonetheless been voluntarily initiated by the Lead
Agency in furtherance of disclosure and public participation mandates
established under CEQA. Noticing, content, and review of the Revised Draft
EIR is undertaken consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. In this
latter regard, the Revised Draft EIR has been distributed to the State
Clearinghouse (SCH), responsible and trustee agencies, and all parties
requesting the document (Revised DEIR Preface, Page 3).
Revised DEIR disclosure of likely environmental impacts and identification of feasible
mitigation is noted by the commentor.
Project impacts and proposed mitigation are discussed in the detail throughout the Revised
DEIR. A summary of impacts and mitigation is provided at Revised DEIR Table 1.10-1,
Pages 1-29 through 1-51. Further, in response to comments received on the Revised DEIR,
additional and revised mitigation measures are proposed in this Final EIR. Mitigation
measures, together with mitigation timing and monitoring/reporting responsibilities are
comprehensively presented at Final EIR Section 4.0, Mitigation Monitoring Plan.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-57
The commentor cites a previous *unidentified+ court decision indicating that ‚the Project site
is ‘environmentally superior’ to any other in town.‛ The commentor states that ‚[t]he Project
[site] has been zoned to allow the proposed use for several decades, and it is ideally located in the
vicinity of other similar uses.‛
No supporting evidence or documentation is provided regarding previous court ruling(s)
regarding ‘environmental superiority’ of the Project site. The commentor’s statements in
this regard are forwarded to the decision-makers.
Notwithstanding, the Revised DEIR Alternatives Analysis (Revised DEIR Pages 5-28
through 5-60) indicates that no feasible alternative site exists that would allow for
attainment of the Project’s basic objectives, while demonstrably reducing the Project’s
significant environmental impacts.
The commentor summarizes requests to approve the EIR and Project.
The commentor’s summary statements requesting approval of the EIR and Project are
forwarded to the decision-makers.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-59
City of Montclair
5111 Benito Street
P.O. Box 2308
Montclair, CA 91763
Letter Dated February 1, 2011
Response COM-1
The commentor states that the City of Montclair Staff (Staff) has reviewed the Revised
DEIR, and that Staff has no comments at this time.
The Lead Agency appreciates the City of Montclair Staff’s timely review and comment on
the Revised DEIR. As the City of Montclair Staff has no comment on the Revised DEIR, no
further response is required. The City of Montclair statements are provided to the decision-
makers.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-64
Office of the Superintendent of Schools
Pomona Unified School District
800 South Garey Avenue, P.O. Box 2900
Pomona, CA 91769
Letter Dated March 14, 2011
Response PUSD-1
The commentor notes Pomona Unified School District (PUSD, District) review and
comment on the Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project (Project) Revised Draft
Environmental Impact Report dated January 2011 (Revised DEIR). The commentor also
lists and describes District schools within one-mile of the Project site, and states the
District’s obligation to ensure any potential impacts of the Project affecting school
populations, facilities, programs, faculty, and staff are evaluated and mitigated. The
commentor notes further that schools are sensitive land uses, requiring focal environmental
scrutiny.
The Lead Agency appreciates PUSD’s timely review and comment on the Revised DEIR.
Unless otherwise noted herein, information presented in the Revised DEIR is consistent
with, and is not substantively revised from, information presented in the March 2010 Draft
EIR. Pagination citations haven been amended where applicable. Please refer also to
previous responses provided to PUSD included at Revised DEIR Appendix K.
Schools listed by the commentor are specifically noted in the Revised DEIR:
. . . As indicated at [Revised DEIR] Figure 4.3-3, a total of ten (10) schools/
school facilities exist within an approximate one-mile radius of the Project
site. No schools exist or are planned within one-quarter mile of the Project
site. Schools nearest the Project site include: Washington Elementary School
(PUSD), Village Academy High School (PUSD), and Pueblo K-8 School
(PUSD). Other schools within an approximate one-mile radius include:
Kingsley Elementary School (PUSD), San Antonio Elementary School
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-65
(PUSD), St. Madeleine Catholic School, Ramona Elementary School (OMSD),
Alcott Elementary School and Annex (PUSD), Simons Middle School (PUSD)
and Emerson Middle School (PUSD) (Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-90).
The Revised DEIR also identifies school uses in total as sensitive land uses:
. . . For the purposes of this discussion, sensitive land uses are considered to
include residential land uses, schools, hospitals, daycare centers, or any other
land uses that provide long-term occupancy and/or accommodate vulnerable
populations (e.g., children, the elderly, and the infirm). Sensitive land uses
are located throughout the City of Pomona (Revised DEIR Page 4.5-4).
. . . As noted previously, land uses such as schools, hospitals, and daycare
centers would also be considered sensitive land uses that may be subject to
increased risk from any hazards associated with, or resulting from, Project
construction and operations. In this regard, the Pomona Unified School
District (PUSD), in their response to the EIR Notice of Preparation, identified
several schools within a one-mile radius of the Project, with concerns
expressed regarding potential Project-related hazards as they may affect
these schools. School locations cited by PUSD, as well as other schools within
an approximate one-mile radius of the Project site, are indicated at [Revised
DEIR] Figure 4.5-2. Of these schools, the closest are Washington Elementary
School, approximately 0.5 miles westerly of the Project site, and the Village
Academy at Indian Hill campus facility (Village Academy High School and
Pueblo K-8 School), approximately 0.7 miles northeasterly of the Project site
(Revised DEIR, Page 4.5-6).
Throughout the Revised DEIR, potential impacts of the Project that may affect schools are
discussed and analyzed. Mitigation is proposed for any impacts determined to be
potentially significant. Focal discussions related to schools as sensitive land uses are
provided under the topics of Air Quality (Revised DEIR Section 4.3), Noise (Revised DEIR
Section 4.4), and Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Revised DEIR Section 4.5). Potential
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-66
cumulative impacts under these topical issues are evaluated at Revised DEIR Section 5.0
‚Other CEQA Considerations.‛ Representative Revised DEIR topical discussions are
summarized in the responses presented here.
Response PUSD-2
The District notes its previous comments provided in response to review of the Pomona
Valley Transfer Station March 2010 Draft EIR. The District notes further that additional
comments are provided on the Revised DEIR and requests responses to those comments be
provided in the Final EIR for the Project.
Responses to additional comments submitted by the District are provided herein.
Response PUSD-3
The commentor inquires as to the Final EIR certification process, timing, and the Lead
Agency’s acceptance of further comments.
PUSD will be provided notice of all public hearing dates for the Project including potential
certification of the EIR. Public comments will be accepted by the Lead Agency throughout
the public review/hearing process.
Response PUSD-4
The commentor summarizes potential construction-source and operational-source criteria
pollutant air quality impacts arising from the Project.
As noted by the commentor:
Even after application of mitigation, Project construction activities are projected to
temporarily and intermittently exceed applicable South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD) Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) for fugitive dust (PM10/PM2.5)
emissions. (See Revised DEIR, Pages 4.3-70, 4.3-71.)
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-67
However, as stated on Page 4.3-71 of the Revised DEIR, application of Mitigation Measures
4.3.1 through 4.3.12 will reduce all construction-source air pollution emissions, including
PM10 and PM2.5 emissions, to the extent feasible. The Project will also comply with all
applicable SCAQMD Rules and will employ Best Available Control Technology (BACT) to
reduce the impact. Additionally, and importantly, the calculated exceedances of PM10 and
PM2.5 emissions would occur temporarily and intermittently during site preparation and
grading processes, and would not affect any receptors aside from those illustrated at Figure
4.3-1 of the Revised DEIR. These uses include adjacent industrial occupancies, and limited
(fewer than 10) residential occupancies which exist as non-conforming uses within the
industrial district encompassing the Project site. No schools sites would be significantly
affected.
It is further noted that in the case of the subject site, PM10/PM2.5 LST exceedances would
likely be the case under any development scenario. This point is illustrated and
substantiated by the discussion of air quality impacts presented under the consideration of
a Light Industrial Alternative for the Project site (Revised DEIR, Pages 5-10, 5-51). Under
the Light Industrial Alternative, currently permitted or conditionally permitted light
industrial uses would be constructed at the Project site. As discussed in the Revised DEIR,
even under a Light Industrial Alternative, construction-source emissions of PM10/PM2.5
would exceed applicable SCAQMD LSTs. This is due to the fact that the subject site is
bounded on all sides by receptor land uses, including non-conforming residential uses.
Under any development scenario, grading and heavy equipment activities at the edges of
the subject site will unavoidably generate certain fugitive dust emissions (PM10/PM2.5) that
would affect adjacent off-site land uses.
It also noted, however, that because construction-source PM10 and PM2.5 emissions are
short-term and intermittent, such emissions will not result in any risk of chronic or long-
term health impacts to human beings. (See Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-71.) That is, health
consequences from PM10 and PM2.5 manifest themselves after prolonged and constant
exposure periods, as opposed to the intermittent and short-term exposures resulting from
Project construction activities.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-68
As also noted by the commentor, the Revised DEIR concludes that even after application of
mitigation, the Project’s long-term operational activities are anticipated to exceed applicable
South SCAQMD regional thresholds for NOx emissions.
However, as set forth on page 4.3-78 of the Revised DEIR, the operational NOx emissions
from the Project are the result of fuel combustion and vehicle tail pipe emissions. Tail pipe
emissions are regulated by CARB and USEPA. Regionally, NOx emissions have
incrementally declined over the past several decades and are likely to further decline
pursuant to current and proposed regulatory actions; on-going transition from older,
inefficient vehicles to contemporary vehicles; and application of alternate fuel/fuel
conserving technologies. It is further noted that in real world applications, few projects of
any scale are able to achieve SCAQMD NOx emissions regional thresholds, and such would
likely be the case for any development of the subject site. These points are supported by
the discussion of air quality impacts under the consideration of a Light Industrial
Alternative for the subject site (revised DEIR, Pages 5-10, 5-51). As indicated in the cited
discussion, even under a Light Industrial Alternative that assumes reduced trip generation,
exceedance of SCAQMD NOx emissions regional thresholds would persist. This is due to
the fact that any project that has any significant vehicle operations will typically exceed the
identified thresholds.
Should the Project be approved, the Lead Agency is required to adopt a Statement of
Overriding Considerations acknowledging the Project’s significant air quality impacts with
respect to (1) short term construction PM10 and PM2.5 emissions and (2) operational NOx
emissions as summarized above.
Response PUSD-5
The commentor summarizes the Revised DEIR analysis and findings regarding Project-
related diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions impacts. As noted by the commentor, the
Revised DEIR concludes that even with application of mitigation, DPM-source cancer risks
are projected to exceed applicable SCAQMD cancer risk thresholds at the two (2) closest
residential uses, located adjacent to the Project site (residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-69
Street).3 (See Revised DEIR, Figure 4.3-2.) The Revised DEIR and Project Health Risk
Assessment (HRA, included at Revised DEIR Appendix C) demonstrate that with
application of proposed mitigation, significant DPM-source cancer risks would not extend
beyond the two (2) noted residential uses.
The applicable significance threshold is a cancer risk incidence of greater than ten (10)
persons per one million population (10/million). At the two (2) significantly affected
residences (1295 and 1415 E. Ninth Street), mitigated cancer risks are estimated at
11.59/million and 45.10/million, respectively. At area schools, unmitigated and mitigated
cancer risk levels would not exceed the applicable threshold (10/million), and as discussed
in the Revised DEIR would not even exceed one (1)/ million (See Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-90,
et al.).
More specifically, at the three nearest discrete school receptors in the Project area
(Washington Elementary School, Village Academy High School/Pueblo K-8 School, and
Ramona Elementary School), the unmitigated risk is estimated to be 0.8, 0.8, and 0.9 in one
million, for the Washington Elementary School, Village Academy High School/Pueblo K-8
School, and Ramona Elementary School, respectively. None of these values exceed the
SCAQMD significance threshold of 10 in one million. Proposed Revised DEIR mitigation
measures would further reduce these levels to 0.4, 0.4, and 0.4 in one million, for
Washington Elementary School, Village Academy High School/Pueblo K-8 School and
Ramona Elementary School, respectively. Revised DEIR Figure 4.3-3 illustrates unmitigated
and mitigated Project-related DPM-source cancer risks at proximate area schools. Please
refer also to Revised DEIR Pages 4.3-85 through 4.3-106, ‚Health Risk Assessment of Diesel
Particulate Emissions.‛
Should the Project be approved, the Lead Agency is required to adopt a Statement of
Overriding Considerations acknowledging the Project’s significant DPM-source cancer risk
impacts at the two (2) residences located adjacent to the Project site as summarized above.
As substantiated in the Revised DEIR and summarized herein, the Project will not result in
3 At the nearest residential use located southerly of the Project site, across 9th street, the mitigated cancer risk
is estimated at 4.95/million which is less than the SCAQMD threshold of 10.0/million.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-70
or cause potentially significant DPM-source emissions impacts at area schools. Results and
conclusion of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
The commentor cites the Revised DEIR DPM emissions mitigation measures, and notes that
fleet conversion measures (proposed as one component of the Project’s DPM emissions
mitigation measures), will not be fully implemented in the estimated Project opening year
(2011) . . . ‚leaving the potential risk unmitigated for a number of years.‛ The commentor
reiterates concerns regarding the potential for the Project to result in significant DPM-
source cancer risks at area schools.
Firstly, regarding fleet conversion (from diesel to compressed natural gas, CNG) as
mitigation of DPM emissions, fleet conversion is only one of several component mitigation
measures targeting DPM emissions. Other Revised DEIR mitigation measures include:
4.3.17 The transfer station hours of operation for MSW acceptance and transfer shall
not exceed 12 hours per day, occurring between the hours of 6 am and 6 pm.
Maintenance activities may occur 24 hours per day, seven days per week except as
limited by existing ordinances, regulations, or other restrictions imposed by the City.
4.3.18 The Project transfer station building shall incorporate the unrestricted flow,
Alternative (vertical) Stack Design concept summarized herein, and as presented in
greater detail within the Mobile Source Health Risk Assessment prepared for the
Project. The Mobile Source Health Risk Assessment is presented at Revised Draft
EIR Appendix C.
4.3.19 Sign(s) with the following language or similar shall be installed at the Project
entrance, along internal truck routes, at/within unloading areas, and at all parking
areas: ‚MAXIMUM FIVE (5) MINUTE ON-SITE IDLING OF TRUCK
ENGINES TO BE PERMITTED IN DESIGNATED AREAS ONLY.
VIOLATORS SUBJECT TO PENALTIES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
LOSS OF CONTRACT/RESTRICTED FACILITY ACCESS.‛ The sign(s) shall not
be less than twenty-four (24) inches square.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-71
4.3.20 The final site plan shall provide sufficient on-site stacking length to ensure
that vehicles do not queue onto adjacent public roadways (Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-
99).
As noted by the commentor, the Revised DEIR DPM emissions mitigation measures also
include fleet conversion from diesel to CNG fuel sources. As noted at Revised DEIR
Mitigation Measures 4.3.21 and 4.3.22, following:
4.3.21 The commercial solid waste collection fleet (fleet) accessing the Project site
between 2011 and 2019 shall consist of a maximum of 70% diesel engines and a
minimum of 30% natural gas engines. All diesel engines, including transfer truck
diesel engines, shall operate using ultra low sulfur fuels and be fitted with a
particulate trap that is rated at a 90% reduction rate or greater.
4.3.22 The commercial solid waste collection fleet (fleet) accessing the Project site
shall consist of a maximum of 10% diesel engines and a minimum of 90% natural
gas engines on or before January 2, 2020. By Year 2020, all diesel engines, including
transfer truck diesel engines, shall operate using ultra low sulfur fuels and be fitted
with a particulate trap that is rated at a 90% reduction rate or greater (Revised
DEIR Page 4.3-100).
It is further noted that the Project’s proposed DPM emissions mitigation measures as
presented above incorporate applicable recommendations and input provided by the South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in their review of the Project and
March 2010 Draft EIR. The SCAQMD is a Responsible Agency in the CEQA EIR process,
whose responsibility includes but is not limited to, air quality oversight of CEQA projects.
As part of its oversight responsibilities, SCAQMD provides recommendations for
mitigation of potentially significant air quality impacts. As noted, applicable
recommendations provided by SCAQMD have been incorporated in the Revised DEIR
DPM emissions mitigation measures. The SCAQMD did not otherwise express any
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-72
significant concerns regarding the methodologies employed in the Revised DEIR to
ascertain impacts and to identify proper mitigation.
Additional reductions in DPM emissions resulting from fleet conversion are also discussed
in the Revised DEIR:
Additional emissions reductions realized through application of Mitigation
Measures 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 are reflected at Table 4.3-19. As indicated, fleet
transition from diesel to CNG in combination with other mitigation proposed
will further reduce Project-related DPM-source cancer risks. However, the
SCAQMD cancer risk incidence threshold (10 persons per million population)
will still be exceeded when considering theoretic residential lifetime (70-year)
exposure rates at one (1) residence (1415 East Ninth Street) located easterly
adjacent to the Project site. The estimated cancer risk exposure at this
residence is 16.44 in one million. But for this non-conforming residential use,
situated within the industrial land use encompassing the Project site, no
significant cancer risks would result from Project operations. At the other
potentially affected residence (1295 East Ninth Street), fleet conversion in
combination with other proposed mitigation measures would reduce [the]
Project-related DPM-source cancer risk to 4.17 in one million, below the
SCAQMD incidence threshold of 10 in one million (Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-
101).
As indicated above, with assumed fleet conversion, only one (1) residence would be
adversely affected by DPM-source cancer risk threshold exceedances. The Revised DEIR
significance conclusions, however, do not assume fleet conversion, and even under the
Revised DEIR’s conservative scenario, only two (2) residences (both of which are non-
conforming residential uses in an industrial area) are subject to DPM-source cancer risk
exposures exceeding applicable SCAQMD thresholds. Cumulatively significant DPM
emissions impacts would also be localized and limited to the above-noted two (2)
residential receptors (1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street). (See Revised DEIR, Page 5-16).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-73
In addition to the above summarized analysis of DPM-source impacts and mitigation
incorporated in the Revised DEIR, this Final EIR further responds to potential DPM-source
impacts. More specifically, in response to commentor concerns regarding DPM-source
impacts and consistent with mitigation refinements intended to be achieved through the
CEQA and EIR review processes, additional mitigation is proposed that would act to
further reduce Project-related DPM emissions. More specifically, additional/revised
mitigation is proposed [MM 4.3.21 (A)mended and MM 4.3.22(A), below] that would
ensure future year (2020) ‚CNG-only‛ access restrictions for all transfer trucks and
commercial trash collection vehicles served by the Project. 4, 5
MM 4.3.21 (A): At Project opening, all transfer trucks and all Applicant-
controlled commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project
site shall be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent
technologies).
MM 4.3.22(A): On or before January 2, 2020, all transfer trucks and all
commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project site shall
be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent technologies).
Health Risk Assessment (HRA) modeling of DPM-source cancer risks resulting from
application of proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) in combination with other DPM
emissions mitigation currently proposed in the Revised DEIR (See Revised DEIR Mitigation
Measures 4.3.17 through 4.3.20) has been conducted as one component of this Final EIR
(please refer to HRA Addendum included at Final EIR Appendix A). Results of the HRA
Addendum indicate that with the stipulated conversion of diesel-fueled vehicles to CNG
vehicles identified herein, the Year 2020 maximum potential cancer risk exposure at any
potentially affected receptor would be reduced to levels that are less-than-significant.
4 The Year 2020 timeframe implementation schedule proposed here is consistent with, and parallels
EPA/CARB tiered emissions reductions goals for heavy-duty trucks.
5 Proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) would replace/supercede MM 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 currently
reflected in the Revised DEIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-74
More specifically, at the maximally impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth
Street), the mitigated cancer risk would be 3.98 per million. The residential use
experiencing the second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the
mitigated cancer risk would be 0.52 per million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer risk
would therefore be less than the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per million.
The HRA Addendum results indicate further, that under no circumstance would area
schools be significantly affected by DPM emissions, nor would DPM emissions result in any
potentially significant non-cancer risks. Please refer also to detailed HRA modeling results
presented at Final EIR Appendix A.
Notwithstanding these findings, this Final EIR conservatively maintains previous
conclusions regarding potential Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risks.
That is, for the purposes of disclosure, and to maintain the conservative analysis construct
employed to date, Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risk exposures at the
residences located at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street are considered to be significant until
the Year 2020. No other locations would experience potentially adverse elevated DPM-
source cancer risk exposures (or non-cancer risk exposures) resulting from Project
operations or activities. Please refer also to related discussions of DPM emissions impacts
and proposed additional/revised mitigation presented at Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions
and Errata Corrections.‛
Should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations acknowledging significant Project-specific, and cumulative localized DPM
emissions impacts.
Response PUSD-6
The commentor requests clarification as to whether Washington Elementary School (the
school nearest the Project site) would be adversely affected by construction-source
emissions.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-75
Construction-source emissions will not adversely affect any area schools, including
Washington Elementary School. Please refer (for example) to the discussion at Revised
DEIR Page 4.5-35:
More specifically, the Air Quality Analysis concludes that within 60 meters
(approximately 200 feet) of the Project site, temporary construction emissions
will result in exceedances of applicable SCAQMD Local Significance
Thresholds (LSTs) for PM10 and PM2.5. However, at the closest [Washington
Elementary] school site (approximately 0.5 mile, or 2,500 feet distant) local air
quality conditions would not be noticeably affected by Project construction.
The proposed Project does not exceed the LST thresholds for long-term
Project operations.
The estimated extent/area of construction-source LST exceedances is also graphically
portrayed at Revised DEIR Figure 4.3-1. No schools exist, or are proposed within the
described area subject to LST exceedances.
The commentor states that mobile-source DPM emissions generated by transient Project
construction vehicles, and vehicles accessing the site subsequent to Project opening, could
result in adverse DPM emissions impacts. This is not the case. As discussed below, any
DPM emissions impacts resulting from transient vehicles traveling along area roads would
be substantially less than the likely maximum DPM emissions impact scenario considered
and evaluated in the Revised DEIR.
As noted at Revised DEIR Page 4.3-85, et al., a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) analysis was
prepared for the Project. The Project HRA in its entirety is presented at Revised DEIR
Appendix C. The Project HRA considers and evaluates maximum potential exposure to
DPM concentrations consistent with established SCAQMD methodologies. The
methodology considers not only the amount and sources of DPM emissions, (the highest
concentrations of which would occur on the Project site), but also considers other
exposure/risk determinants including but not limited to: relative distance to and location of
receptors, wind patterns, and topography.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-76
With specific regard to DPM emissions impacts potentially generated by Project
construction and operational traffic traveling along area roads, these impacts would not
exceed or even approach the maximum DPM emissions impact scenario evaluated in the
Revised DEIR and Project HRA. That is, the Project HRA considers potential worst case
cancer risk exposures by evaluating pollutant concentrations at the Project site, which
include pollutant emissions generated by all vehicles within a reasonable distance to, or
accessing the site, in combination with emissions generated by on-site stationary sources.
These DPM emissions concentrations are substantially higher that any that would result
from disaggregated Project traffic traveling along area roadways.
It is further noted that the cancer risk exposure scenario considered in the Revised DEIR is a
conservative assessment of potential cancer risks arising from DPM exposure. That is,
pursuant to the adopted SCAQMD/EPA methodologies, calculated DPM-source cancer
risks are predicated on extended 70-year/30-year exposure scenarios. Both the 70-year and
30-year cancer risk assessments considered in the Revised DEIR represent estimates of
theoretic DPM-source cancer risks, and are based on the assumption that a person is
exposed to the emission source 24 hours a day for 365 days a year for the entire length of
the assumed exposure period. Individuals are typically not stationary at any given outdoor
location, spending a significant portion of each 24-hour cycle indoors. In addition,
individuals and families remaining at a given location for 70 or even 30 years would be
considered the exception rather than the norm. Any individuals or populations that may
be temporarily out-of-doors along a roadway that would carry some Project traffic would
not be exposed to the maximum potential DPM concentrations for the 24 hour per day, 70-
year/30-year lifetime exposure reflected in the Project HRA.
In comparison, DPM emissions concentrations and exposures that may result from Project
vehicles traveling along area roads would be substantively reduced in that they reflect only
a portion of transient vehicle traffic/emissions and persons would be only exposed for that
limited amount of time that they may be out-of-doors and adjacent to a road carrying
Project traffic. Moreover, when compared to DPM concentrations modeled at the Project
site, transient vehicular DPM emissions are dispersed through vehicle movements and
localized winds. Lastly, as discussed on pages 4.3-12 through 4.3-13, recent analysis, i.e.,
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-77
Fine Particulate Air Pollution and Total Mortality Among Elderly Californians, 1973-2002 (Dr.
James Enstrom, UCLA) Inhalation Toxicology. 17(14):803-16, 2005 Dec 15) has cast doubt as
to whether there is a causal health risk correlation between diesel particulate emissions
from modern day diesel engines and cancer, notwithstanding the analytical protocols
required by USEPA and SCAQMD. Results and conclusion of the EIR are not affected.
The commentor suggests that the Revised DEIR include a discussion of air monitoring
activities to be implemented during project construction and operations.
Monitoring of emissions will be realized consistent with applicable AQMD rules [e.g. Rule
401 (Visible Emissions); Rule 402 (Nuisance); Rule 403 (PM10 Fugitive Dust); et al.]. See also:
www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/sc/cur.htm. Monitoring activities are also reflected in the EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan (Final EIR Section 4.0). Results and conclusion of the EIR are
not affected.
Response PUSD-7
The commentor offers an opinion that ‚*t+he sections in the EIR pertaining to noise and
traffic do not sufficiently discuss potential localized impacts.‛ The commentor speculates
that increased traffic and traffic noise from construction vehicles and/or Project operational
vehicular traffic could somehow impact area schools, particularly during school drop-off
and pick-up time frames.
Revised DEIR analyses/discussions addressing the commentor’s noise and traffic concerns
are summarized below.
NOISE
Potential Project-related noise impacts are presented at Revised DEIR Section 4.4, ‚Noise.‛
The detailed Project Noise Analysis is presented at EIR Appendix D.
Project operational source noise will not cause or result in adverse noise impacts
affecting schools. As discussed in the Revised DEIR, vehicular source noise
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-78
generated by Project operations would not adversely affect any area land uses
(including schools):
. . . Project-related vehicular source noise will increase ambient CNEL
conditions by, at most, 2.3 dBA, which would not be perceptible, and
therefore would not represent a substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise. Nor would Project-related vehicular source noise result in a
transitional exceedance in noise levels from below 60 dBA CNEL to above 60
dBA CNEL. The potential for Project vehicular source noise to result in a
substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity
above levels existing without the Project is therefore less-than-significant
(Revised DEIR, Page 4.4-41).
Vehicular noise impacts are a function of traffic types, volumes, speeds and source-receptor
proximity and presence (or lack of) intervening noise-attenuating structures or other line-of
sight-obstructions. As summarized above and presented in detail in the Revised DEIR
(Section 4.4, Noise) and supporting Noise Analysis (Revised DEIR Appendix D), potential
Project operational vehicular source noise levels received at area land uses is less-than-
significant. The types and volumes of vehicles, and resulting vehicular noise reflected in
the Revised DEIR operational vehicular source noise impact analysis establish the
maximum vehicular source noise levels that would be received at area land uses. Any
noise that may be generated by intermittent and random construction vehicles that may be
transported along, or travel along area roads would be substantially less than the noise
generated by total daily traffic volumes considered in the Revised DEIR. This conclusion is
based on noise levels generated by vehicular traffic and noise source/receptor separation,
and is not significantly or materially affected by school scheduling and/or school
pickup/drop-off times.
TRAFFIC
Potential Project-related traffic impacts are summarized at Revised DEIR Section 4.2,
‚Traffic and Circulation.‛ The detailed Project Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is presented at
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-79
Revised DEIR Appendix B. As discussed in the Revised DEIR, there are significant Level of
Service (LOS) impacts projected under Opening Year Conditions (2011) at Mission/SR-71:
. . . Pending completion of required interchange improvements, Project-
related traffic impacts at the intersection of Mission Boulevard and SR-71 are
determined to be significant. These improvements are fully funded and are
currently under construction and completion of these improvements is
anticipated in 2011. If these improvements are completed before the Project is
operational, the identified impacts at Mission Boulevard and SR-71 will be
mitigated to a less-than-significant level (Revised DEIR, Page 4.2-2).
All other potential Project-related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are less-
than-significant or are reduced to levels that are less-than-significant pursuant to the EIR
mitigation measures. As discussed in the TIA, within the City, heavy transfer trucks will
access the Project site via designated truck routes (Reservoir Street and Mission Boulevard)
both of which currently convey heavy truck traffic. Project traffic (transfer trucks)
distribution is illustrated at TIA Exhibit 5-1. Smaller collection trucks and self-haul trucks
are assumed to access the Project site via the most expedient permissible routes and will
travel along all classes of City roads, as is the current condition. Collection truck and self-
haul truck trip distribution is presented at TIA Exhibit 5-2. It is noted, however, that except
for required direct access, trucks over three (3) tons in gross weight (e.g., all commercial
trash collection vehicles) are limited under current ordinance to travel along designated
truck routes.6 The Project will not contribute additional truck traffic to streets not already
assigned this function.
With specific regard to potential traffic impacts (including potential construction traffic
impacts) during school pick-up and drop-off times, the Project does not propose uses or
activities that would adversely affect or conflict with school uses. Moreover, contrary to
the commentor’s assertion, no school uses exist proximate to the Project site. The closest
school is approximately 0.5 miles from the Project site, and is separated from the Project site
6 See: Pomona, California, Code of Ordinances; Division 2, Truck Routes; Sec. 58-291. – Designation.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-80
by intervening railroad tracks, the existing City street network, and numerous buildings. It
is unlikely that significant amounts of Project-related traffic will interact with other ambient
traffic during pick up and drop off times.
The Project does not propose nor require routing traffic such that it would conflict with
school activities, including but not limited to school pick-up and drop-off activities. As
noted above, heavy transfer trucks accessing the Project site will travel within the City
along existing designated truck routes. It is anticipated that other trucks will access the
Project site via the most expedient permissible routes. Other vehicles will likely access the
Project site via the most expedient permissible means. All vehicle operators would be
required by law to observe street weight load limits, school zone speed limits and school
crossing restrictions. Because the Project will not cause or result in any potentially
significant localized traffic impacts, potential traffic impacts along roads serving area
schools would also be less-than-significant. Traffic volumes that may be generated by
intermittent and random construction vehicles that may be transported along, or travel
along area roads would be substantially less than the total daily and peak hour traffic
volumes considered in the Revised DEIR. This conclusion is based on Project trip
generation and Project trip distribution as discussed in the Revised DEIR and Project TIA,
and is not materially affected by school scheduling and/or school pickup/drop-off times.
With regard to construction traffic, it is further noted that in accordance with City and
County policies, review and approval of Project construction traffic management plans,
complemented by ongoing coordination with the local fire and police departments
throughout planning and development of the Project, will ensure that potential interference
with school traffic patterns are minimized to the extent feasible.
It is also noted that as provided under CEQA Guidelines Section 15204 (a) . . . ‚CEQA does
not require a lead agency to conduct every test or perform all research, study, and
experiment recommended or demanded by commentors.‛ The Lead Agency considers the
EIR analysis of potential localized noise and traffic impacts to be adequate and appropriate
and substantiated by facts and evidence.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-81
Further, as provided for under CEQA Guidelines Section 15204 (c) ‚*EIR+ Reviewers should
explain the basis for their comments and should submit data or references offering facts,
reasonable assumptions based on facts, or expert opinion supported by facts in support of
the comments.‛
The commentor offers no supporting evidence, facts, or expert opinion supported by facts
that would indicate that Project construction or operational traffic could result in
potentially significant localized vehicular noise or traffic impacts at area schools.
Please refer also to extensive discussion of these same issues presented at Revised DEIR
Appendix K. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected. The
commentor’s opinions are forwarded to the decision-makers.
Response PUSD-8
The commentor summarizes alternatives considered in the Revised DEIR, and comments
are provided on the EIR Alternatives Analysis. The commentor states that, with specific
regard to the Project’s calculated DPM-source cancer risk exposures, an Alternative with
‚fewer or zero proximate sensitive land uses‛ should be considered.
As discussed in the Revised DEIR, any potential Alternative Site should, as the commentor
notes, be evaluated based on its potential to reduce or minimize potentially significant
environmental impacts of the Project. However, this is not the sole criterion employed in
evaluating a potential Alternative Site or Sites. Alternative Sites are also evaluated based on
their ability to achieve the basic Project Objectives and their overall feasibility. The State
Resources Agency, the State Agency charged with implementing CEQA’s regulatory
scheme, has defined ‚feasible,‛ for purposes of CEQA review, as ‚capable of being
accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into
account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors.‛ CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(a) provides further that ‚An EIR is not required to consider alternatives
which are infeasible.‛
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-82
As discussed in the Revised DEIR, Alternative Sites considered for analysis were distilled
from the list of sites deemed potentially feasible by the City’s Ad Hoc Solid Waste Study
Committee (formation of Committee approved by the Pomona City Council in 1999). Of the
sites listed by the Committee, most were of insufficient acreage to accommodate the Project
(less than 10 acres) and were not further considered on this basis. Six (6) of the sites,
however, conformed to basic feasibility criteria (+/- 10 acres; rectangular configuration;
compatible with existing and proposed land uses; proximate access to local roadway
systems; available or anticipated utilities infrastructure) and were preliminarily evaluated
through review of aerial photographs and site inspections. On the basis of preliminary
evaluation, five (5) of the sites were determined to be infeasible and/or would not
materially reduce the Project’s environmental impacts. One of these sites (2205 Mount
Vernon Avenue) is further evaluated in the EIR and is also ultimately determined to be
infeasible, and would not materially reduce impacts resulting from the Project at its current
location. The Revised DEIR Alternatives analysis conforms with provisions of the CEQA
Guidelines to present a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project that would potentially
lessen its environmental effects while allowing for attainment of the basic Project
Objectives.
With specific regard to calculated cancer risk exposures presented in the Revised DEIR and
noted by the commentor:
. . . this [cancer risk exposure] exceedance would affect only two (2)
residences (1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street) located respectively, westerly
and easterly adjacent to the Project site. At 1415 East Ninth Street (the 70-year
residential exposure PMI) the mitigated cancer risk is estimated at 45.10 in
one million; at 1295 East Ninth Street, the mitigated cancer risk is estimated
at 11.59 in one million. At all other study area receptor locations (whether
residential, worker, or school sites) potential Project-related DPM-source
cancer risks as mitigated would be below the SCAQMD cancer risk
threshold. Absent the above-noted non-conforming residential uses (1295
and 1415 East Ninth Street), situated within the industrial land use
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-83
encompassing the Project site, no significant DPM-source cancer risks would
result from Project operations (Revised DEIR at Page 4.3-92]
As also discussed in the Revised DEIR:
. . . The City’s General Plan recognizes that sporadic non-conforming
residential uses exist within manufacturing/industrial designations. (See
General Plan, pp. 35-37.) At the same time, the City’s General Plan contains
policies that encourage the transition of non-conforming residential uses to
industrial uses and also promote industrial development within industrially-
designated General Plan Land Uses and zoning districts. (See General Plan,
pp. 27; 28; 38.) (Revised DEIR, Page 4.1-4).
Within the range of potential exposures noted above, it can be reasonably argued that over
30-year and/or 70 year timeframes, the two (2) currently affected non-conforming single-
family residences would transition to conforming industrial uses, thereby alleviating
potential cancer risk exposure concerns.
Moreover, modeling of potential increased cancer risks as presented in the Revised DEIR is
considered to represent a conservative estimate of real-world conditions. That is, pursuant
to the adopted SCAQMD/EPA methodologies, calculated DPM-source cancer risks are
predicated on extended 70-year/30-year exposure scenarios. Both the 70-year and 30-year
cancer risk assessments considered in the Revised DEIR represent estimates of theoretic
DPM-source cancer risks, and are based on the assumption that a person is exposed to the
emission source 24 hours a day for 365 days a year for the entire length of the assumed
exposure period. Individuals are typically not stationary at any given outdoor location, and
a portion of each 24-hour cycle is spent indoors. In addition, individuals and families at a
given location for 70 or even 30 years would be considered the exception rather than the
norm. The California OEHHA has indicated that based on EPA studies, the EPA
recommends a central tendency estimate of 9 years for residency at a given location, and a
high-end estimate of 30 years for residency time. Thus, the methodologies used to
determine cancer risk (e.g., the assumption of a 24-hour exposure for a 30 or 70 year period)
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-84
represent a maximum theoretic cancer risk, and are not intended to account for or represent
DPM exposures based on real world residency and occupancy tendencies. Again, as
discussed at Revised DEIR Pages 4.3-12 through 4.3-13, recent studies have cast doubt as to
whether there is a causal health risk correlation between diesel particulate emissions from
modern day diesel engines and increased cancer risks, notwithstanding the analytical
protocols required by the USEPA and SCAQMD.
Location of the Project such that increased cancer risks would affect ‚fewer or zero
proximate sensitive land uses‛ as suggested by the commentor constitutes a location that
would affect one (1) or zero sensitive land uses. Within the context of feasibility, such a site
would also be approximately 10 acres in size and of rectangular configuration; be located in
a designated industrial area; have proximate acceptable access; be compatible with existing
and proposed land uses; be provided available or anticipated utilities infrastructure;
achieve the basic Project Objectives; and would not result in new environmental impacts,
nor increase the severity of environmental impacts otherwise occurring under the Project.
Such a site was not identified by the City’s Ad Hoc Solid Waste Study Committee and does
not exist in the City based on an independent evaluation by the City’s EIR consultant and
City Planning Staff. Nor is any such site available wherein the Project could be
accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into
account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors. On this basis, the EIR
evaluation of potential Alternative Sites is considered adequate and fulfills the
requirements established under CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, subd. (f) (2).
Please refer also to Response PUSD-5 which presents additional mitigation [MM 4.3.21 (A),
4.3.22 (A)] that will further reduce potential Project-related DPM-source cancer risk
exposures such that all DPM-source cancer risks affecting area land uses will be mitigated
to levels that are less-than-significant on or before the Year 2020.
Response PUSD-9
The commentor misrepresents the previous response to the Districts’ comments regarding
the March 2010 Draft EIR Alternatives Analysis (included at Revised DEIR Appendix K and
materially reiterated above at response PUSD-8) by stating that it . . . ‚responds to the
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-85
District’s concerns by stating that the EIR has fulfilled the requirements under the CEQA
Guidelines with respect to considering alternatives and that the City’s Ad Hoc Solid Waste
Committee did not suggest a site near one or zero sensitive receptor sites.‛
The Appendix K response previously provided to the District discussion (and materially
reiterated above at Response PUSD-8) summarizes significant cancer risk exposures of
concern to the District. Consistent with the intent and purpose of the CEQA alternatives
analysis, the discussion further establishes a reasonable range of alternatives that could
potentially and demonstrably reduce the identified significant impact. Lastly, the
discussion substantiates that there are no feasible alternative sites that would demonstrably
and substantially reduce significant cancer risk threshold exceedances resulting from the
Project.
The commentor offers an opinion that the response . . . ‚evades the question of whether
feasible Project locations should be evaluated that would locate the project away from
sensitive land uses.‛
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, the Revised DEIR describes a range of
reasonable alternatives to the Project, or to the location of the Project, which would feasibly
attain the basic Project Objectives, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the
significant environmental effects of the proposal. The CEQA Guidelines provide further that
an EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative, but rather, the discussion of
alternatives and their relative merits and impacts should be provided in a manner that
fosters informed decision-making and public participation. To this end, the CEQA
Guidelines indicate that the range of alternatives selected for examination in an EIR should
be governed by“ ‚rule of reason,‛ and requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives
necessary to permit an informed decision.
Consistent with the provisions of the CEQA Guidelines, the Revised DEIR analysis of
alternative sites presents a reasonable range of alternative locations for the Project that
would potentially lessen its environmental effects while allowing for attainment of the basic
Project Objectives. Please refer also to response PUSD-8 and the Revised DEIR discussion
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-86
of alternative sites, Pages 5-31 through 5-38. The commentor’s opinions are forwarded to
the decision-makers.
Response PUSD-10
The commentor provides concluding remarks anticipating responses to comments
provided, and requesting formal notification pursuant to PRC Section 21092.2 of any public
hearings concerning the Project and/or the EIR. The District reserves its rights to
supplement its comments and provide additional comments.
Responses to PUSD comments are provided herein. Consistent with applicable provisions
of PRC 21092.2, the District will be notified regarding any public hearings concerning the
Project and/or EIR. Public comments will be accepted by the Lead Agency throughout the
public review/hearing process.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-88
Southern California Gas Company
Orange Coast Region - Anaheim
1919 S. State College Blvd.
Anaheim, CA 92086-6114
Letter Dated February 15, 2011
Response GAS-1
The commentor notes location of the Project within an area currently provided service by
the Southern California Gas Company (SCGC). The commentor notes further that gas
service to the Project can be provided from existing proximate gas mains. Service will be
available in accordance with and based on SCGC’s policies and extension rules on file with
the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
Current availability of gas service to the Project is acknowledged. The Project Applicant
will comply with all applicable SCGC policies, extension rules, and contractual
requirements.
The commentor notes that the provided SCGC letter and comments are informational only,
and do not constitute a contractual agreement. The commentor notes further that gas
availability to the Project may be affected by regulatory actions of other agencies (e.g., the
CPUC and/or federal agencies).
The SCGC letter and comments are understood to be informational only. No contractual
arrangement is understood to exist, nor are any contractual arrangements otherwise
understood to be implied. It is further understood that regulatory actions of agencies other
than SCGC could affect gas service to the Project.
The commentor notes that statements regarding, or indication of, gas service availability to
the Project are made without consideration of non-utility laws and regulations. Effects of
these regulations can only be ascertained in the process and context of contractual
arrangements and construction activities.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-89
It is understood that SCGC statements regarding, or indication of, gas service availability to
the Project are made without consideration of non-utility laws and regulations. It is further
understood that effects of these regulations can only be ascertained in the process and
context of contractual arrangements and construction activities.
The commentor notes that estimated gas use for the Project can be obtained from SCGC
Commercial-Industrial/Residential Market Services. SCGC notes further that its assistance
is available for selection of energy efficient systems and appliances.
Gas use demand modeling services provided by SCGC are acknowledged. The Applicant
will consult with SCGC regarding selection and implementation of energy efficient systems
and appliances.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-92
Speidel & Associates, Inc.
925 North Garey Avenue
Pomona, CA 91767
Letter Dated March 10, 2011
Response SA-1
The commentor requests City support and approval of the Project and EIR. The
commentor notes his long-time City residency and business ownership. The commentor
notes and supports the Lead Agency’s preparation and recirculation of the Revised DEIR.
The commentor offers an opinion that the Revised DEIR is highly conservative and likely
overstates Project impacts; notably traffic and air quality impacts are likely overstated.
Commentor support of the Project and EIR is recognized. These comments are forwarded
to the decision-makers. Lead Agency recirculation of the Revised DEIR as noted by the
commentor is materially correct. Revised DEIR text in pertinent part is excerpted below:
Based on comments received, the City of Pomona, acting as the Lead Agency,
has determined that recirculation of this Revised [emphasis added] Draft
Environmental Impact Report for the Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
(Revised Draft EIR) will be of benefit in providing on-point responses to
comments as well as correction, clarification, and amplification of
information provided previously in the March 2010 Draft EIR (Revised DEIR
Preface, Page 2).
Correction, amplification, and clarification of information provided in this
Revised Draft EIR does not constitute new significant information as defined
under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15088.5,
‚Recirculation of an EIR Prior to Certification,‛ and recirculation of the
Revised Draft EIR is not a required action under CEQA. Recirculation of the
Revised Draft EIR has nonetheless been voluntarily initiated by the Lead
Agency in furtherance of disclosure and public participation mandates
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-93
established under CEQA. Noticing, content, and review of the Revised Draft
EIR is undertaken consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. In this
latter regard, the Revised Draft EIR has been distributed to the State
Clearinghouse (SCH), responsible and trustee agencies, and all parties
requesting the document (Revised DEIR Preface, Page 3).
Project impacts (and proposed mitigation of those impacts determined to be potentially
significant) are discussed in the detail throughout the Revised DEIR. A summary of Project
impacts and mitigation is provided at Revised DEIR Table 1.10-1, Pages 1-29 through 1-51.
Further, in response to comments received on the Revised DEIR, additional and revised
mitigation measures are proposed in this Final EIR. Mitigation measures, together with
mitigation timing and monitoring/reporting responsibilities are comprehensively presented
at Final EIR Section 4.0, Mitigation Monitoring Plan.
Response SA-2
The commentor offers an opinion that the City Planning Commission and City Council
should ‚enthusiastically support and approve the EIR and the Project.‛ The commentor
notes the PVTS Project consistency with existing zoning and location amid similar uses.
Commentor opinion regarding Planning Commission and Council actions concerning the
EIR and Project is forwarded to the decision-makers. Project consistency with existing land
use designations and compatibility with adjacent uses noted by the commentor are
materially correct. Land use issues are discussed in detail at Revised EIR Section 4.1, Land
Use and Planning, Revised DEIR Pages 4.1-1 through 4.1-18. To summarize:
. . . [N]o established communities or other physical arrangements would be
divided or otherwise adversely physically altered by the Project’s proposed
land uses, design features, or operations. The Project proposes industrial land
uses consistent with existing General Plan (General Manufacturing) and
zoning (M-2, General Industrial) designations. The Project industrial land
uses will be compatible with adjacent land uses in that adjacent land is also
designated for industrial uses under the City’s General Plan and zoning
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-94
ordinance, and is either developed with such uses or allows for such
development (Revised DEIR, Page 4.1-18).
Response SA-3
The commentor cites job opportunities created by the Project, and notes location of the
project within a City redevelopment area. The commentor summarizes observed historic
changes in the City’s development patterns, and notes his involvement in current and
planned development proposals within the City.
Commentor statements regarding Project job creation, and location of the Project within a
City redevelopment area are materially correct. The Revised DEIR notes job opportunities
created by the Project, ‚*s+taffing estimates provided by the Applicant as of December 2009
indicate a requirement for 45 to 50 employees‛ (Revised DEIR, Page 3-34, et al.).
Location of the Project within the City of Pomona Reservoir Industrial Redevelopment
Project Area is also discussed in the Revised DEIR:
The Project site also lies within the City of Pomona Reservoir Industrial
Redevelopment Project Area. Like the General Plan and zoning designations
applicable to the site, the Redevelopment Plan for the area within which the
Project is located encourages the establishment of industrial uses. Property
taxes resulting from any increase in assessed value of the Project site become
a source of tax increment revenue for the City of Pomona Redevelopment
Agency. Thus, the Redevelopment Agency will retain a portion of the
property tax dollars paid as a result of an increase in property values caused
by the Project. By law, the Pomona Redevelopment Agency must use the
money to alleviate blighted conditions. Blighted conditions are physical and
economic problems that are detrimental to the public health, safety and
welfare. In this respect, the Project will provide a revenue source available to
the Redevelopment Agency for alleviation of blight and
improvement/resolution of other physical or economic conditions that are
detrimental to public health, safety and welfare (Revised DEIR, Page 4.1-8).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-95
Commentor statements regarding historic City development patterns and commentor
involvement in current and planned development proposals are forwarded to the decision-
makers.
Response SA-4
The commentor notes that the Project will generate not only jobs, but would also generate
tax revenues available to the City.
Please refer to previous discussion of Project job creation at Response SA-2. Tax revenues
generated by the Project are also discussed in the Revised DEIR, for example:
Property taxes resulting from any increase in assessed value of the Project site
become a source of tax increment revenue for the City of Pomona
Redevelopment Agency. Thus, the Redevelopment Agency will retain a
portion of the property tax dollars paid as a result of an increase in property
values caused by the Project. By law, the Pomona Redevelopment Agency
must use the money to alleviate blighted conditions (Revised DEIR, Page 4.1-8).
Development impact fees and property tax revenues generated by the Project
will provide funding sources available for support and enhancement of fire
and police protection services (Revised DEIR Page 4.7-14)
Further, fees and taxes paid by the Project will provide funds available for
the purchase and maintenance of equipment and hiring of personnel
commensurate with Project-related demands (Revised DEIR, Page 5-56).
Response SA-5
The commentor summarizes previous remarks and restates support of the Project.
The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-97
First Presbyterian Church
401 North Gibbs Street
Pomona, CA 91767
Letter #1 Dated February 26, 2011
Response FP1-1
The commentor states general concerns regarding the Project, noting concerns for the
welfare of parishioners as well as welfare of the community (City of Pomona) at large. The
commentor summarizes general aspects of the Project, notes the Project’s proposed
location, and recognizes the City’s environmental review/public comment processes for the
Project. The commentor states that comments provided are under the official capacity as
First Presbyterian Church’s pastor.
General concerns regarding the Project are noted, as are the commentor’s concerns for the
welfare of parishioners and area residents. The commentor’s summary of the Project and
its proposed location are materially correct. Please refer also to the detailed Project
Description provided at Revised DEIR Section 3.0, ‚Project Description.‛ Commentor
statements regarding the Project Environmental Impact Report and public review/comment
process are materially correct. The commentor’s official capacity as the First Presbyterian
Church’s pastor is recognized. Responses to environmental concerns identified
subsequently by the commentor are presented herein. Please refer also to previous First
Presbyterian Church comments (dated April 22, 2010) and responses to those comments
provided at Appendix K to the Revised DEIR. Unless otherwise noted herein, information
presented in the Revised DEIR is consistent with, and is not substantively revised from,
information presented in the March 2010 Draft EIR. Pagination citations have been
amended where applicable. Please refer also to previous responses provided to First
Presbyterian Church comments included at Revised DEIR Appendix K. Results and
conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-98
Response FP1-2
The commentor notes that 51 percent of the [First Presbyterian Church] congregation live
within one mile of the Project site, and that their children attend ‚one of eight public
schools within that radius.‛ The commentor reiterates concerns regarding ‚consequences of
the operation of this transfer station on the health and life of more than one-half of my
parishioners.‛
Commentor statements regarding parish demographics are recognized and assumed
correct. With regard to the ‚consequences of the operation of this transfer station on the
health and life‛ of area residents, as required under CEQA, the Revised DEIR discloses the
Project’s significant environmental impacts. A summary of these impacts is provided at
Revised DEIR Page 1-25, as excerpted below.
Traffic and Circulation
Intersection Impacts
Pending completion of required interchange improvements, Project-related
traffic impacts at the intersection of Mission Boulevard and SR-71 are
determined to be significant.
Air Quality
Construction LST Exceedances
For localized emissions, even after implementation of all feasible mitigation
measures, construction source emissions will exceed applicable SCAQMD
localized significance thresholds (LSTs) for PM10 (24-hour concentrations) at
receptors located 60 meters or nearer and emissions of PM2.5 (24-hour
concentrations) at receptors located 30 meters or nearer from the construction
activity. This impact is significant.
Cancer Risks Threshold Exceedances
Even with the application of all feasible mitigation, Project-related DPM-
source cancer risk significance thresholds (SCAQMD threshold for lifetime
residential exposure) will be exceeded at two (2) residential receptors
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-99
adjacent to the Project site (residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street).
This is considered a significant impact of the Project. No other receptors
(whether residential, worker or schools) are subject to potential cancer risk
threshold exceedances. As the two (2) affected non-conforming residential
uses transition to industrial uses per the City General Plan, Project-related
cancer risk exceedances would be alleviated.
Regional Thresholds Exceedances
Even after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, long-term
operational source emissions will exceed the SCAQMD regional threshold for
NOx only.
Noise
Construction Noise
Noise generated by Project construction activities will temporarily and
intermittently exceed the City’s 65 dBA standard at an estimated 25 to 30
proximate residential receptors. The temporary and intermittent construction
noise impact is considered significant. These noise levels will tend to
diminish as the use of heavy equipment in the early construction stages
concludes, and will dissipate entirely at the end of construction activities.
Re: Traffic Impacts - As indicated above, pending completion of on-going and
programmed improvements at the intersection of Mission Boulevard and SR-71, Project-
related traffic impacts at this intersection only are determined to be significant. No other
significant traffic impacts are projected.
Re: Air Quality Impacts - As indicated above, persons residing within 60 meters of the
Project site could be temporarily and intermittently significantly affected by construction-
source PM10/PM2.5 (fugitive dust) exceedances. These impacts will diminish as the use of
heavy equipment and site grading activities in the early construction stages concludes, and
will dissipate entirely at the end of construction activities. No other significant localized
construction-source air quality impacts are projected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-100
As indicated above, Project-related DPM-source cancer risk significance thresholds
(SCAQMD threshold for lifetime residential exposure) will be exceeded at two (2)
residential receptors adjacent to the Project site (residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth
Street). No other significant localized DPM-source air quality impacts are projected. It is
also noted that in response to commentor concerns, and consistent with mitigation
refinements intended to be achieved through the CEQA and EIR review processes,
additional mitigation is proposed that would act to further reduce Project-related DPM
emissions. More specifically, additional/revised mitigation is proposed [MM 4.3.21
(A)mended and MM 4.3.22(A), below+ that would ensure future year (2020) ‚CNG-only‛
access restrictions for all transfer trucks and commercial trash collection vehicles served by
the Project. 7, 8
MM 4.3.21 (A): At Project opening, all transfer trucks and all Applicant-
controlled commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project
site shall be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent
technologies).
MM 4.3.22(A): On or before January 2, 2020, all transfer trucks and all
commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project site shall be
powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent technologies).
Health Risk Assessment (HRA) modeling of DPM-source cancer risks resulting from
application of proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) in combination with other DPM
emissions mitigation currently proposed in the Revised DEIR (See Revised DEIR Mitigation
Measures 4.3.17 through 4.3.20) has been conducted as one component of this Final EIR
(please refer to HRA Addendum included at Final EIR Appendix A). Results of the HRA
Addendum indicate that with the stipulated conversion of diesel-fueled vehicles to CNG
7 The Year 2020 timeframe implementation schedule proposed here is consistent with, and parallels
EPA/CARB tiered emissions reductions goals for heavy-duty trucks.
8 Proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) would replace/supercede MM 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 currently
reflected in the Revised DEIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-101
vehicles described herein, the Year 2020 maximum potential cancer risk exposure at any
potentially affected receptor would be reduced to levels that are less-than-significant.
More specifically, at the maximally impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth
Street), the mitigated cancer risk would be 3.98 per million. The residential use
experiencing the second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the
mitigated cancer risk would be 0.52 per million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer risk
would therefore be less than the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per million.
The HRA Addendum results indicate further, that under no circumstance would area
schools be significantly affected by DPM emissions, nor would DPM emissions result in any
potentially significant non-cancer risks. Please refer also to detailed HRA modeling results
presented at Final EIR Appendix A.
Notwithstanding these findings, this Final EIR conservatively maintains previous
conclusions regarding potential Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risks.
That is, for the purposes of disclosure, and to maintain the conservative analysis construct
employed to date, Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risk exposures at the
residences located at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street are considered to be significant until
the Year 2020. No other locations would experience potentially adverse elevated DPM-
source cancer risk exposures (or non-cancer risk exposures) resulting from Project
operations or activities. Please refer also to related discussions of DPM emissions impacts
and proposed additional/revised mitigation presented at Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions
and Errata Corrections.‛
Re: Noise Impacts - As indicated above, noise generated by Project construction activities
will temporarily and intermittently exceed the City’s 65 dBA standard at an estimated 25 to
30 proximate residential receptors. The temporary and intermittent construction noise
impact is considered significant. These noise levels will tend to diminish as the use of heavy
equipment in the early construction stages concludes, and will dissipate entirely at the end
of construction activities. No other significant localized construction-source noise impacts
are projected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-102
Summary: Should the Project be approved, the Lead Agency is required to adopt a
Statement of Overriding Considerations acknowledging the Project’s significant
environmental impacts as summarized above. All other potential environmental effects of
the Project are determined to be less-than-significant as substantiated within the Revised
DEIR and accompanying Initial Study, or are reduced below levels of significance with
application of mitigation measures identified in the Revised DEIR. Commentor statements
and concerns regarding Project impacts to area residents, including school children, are
forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not
affected.
The commentor states that . . . ‚the project won’t create that many new jobs.‛
Project job creation is discussed in the Revised DEIR:
The Transfer Station will be staffed by an estimated 45 to 50 employees. On-
site personnel would include facility managers, administrative/clerical
personnel, equipment operators, transfer floor laborers, transfer truck
drivers, and maintenance workers (Revised DEIR Page 1-6, et al.).
Project job creation as noted above is consistent with and supports the Project Objective to
‚create additional employment opportunities for City and area residents‛ (Revised DEIR
Page 3-45, et al.). The commentor’s statements regarding job creation are forwarded to the
decision-makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
The commentor notes that there are 9 schools within a one-mile radius of the Project site
and states that ‚[school] children will be exposed to adverse truck emission and airborne risks from
the station itself.‛
While the commentor offers no supporting evidence or expert opinion supported by
evidence that area school populations will be adversely affected by the Project, the Revised
DEIR explicitly considers and addresses potential Project impacts at area schools. Please
refer to Revised DEIR at Pages 1-12, 1-13, 1-17, 1-18, 1-23, 1-25, 1-35, 1-45, 2-11, 3-25, 4.3-2,
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-103
4.3-4, 4.3-80, 4.3-87, 4.3-90 through 4.3-93, 4.3-100, 4.3-102, 4.4-3, 4.4-7, 4.4-30, 4.5-1, 4.5-4,
4.5-6, 4.5-19, 4.5-24, 4.5-26, 4.5-34 through 4.5-36, 4.7-11, 5-65, Revised EIR Appendix K
Responses (some 300 citations to area schools), et al. As substantiated in the Revised DEIR,
with application of proposed mitigation, the Project will not result in localized or specific
impacts to area schools. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-
makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
The commentor speculates that the Project will exceed capacity limitations and
requirements stipulated under the Applicant-requested 1,500 tons per day Solid Waste
Facility Permit (SWFP).
As discussed in the Revised DEIR: ‚The Project Applicant has requested a Solid Waste
Facility Permit (SWFP) to allow for acceptance of up to 1,500 tons of MSW per day‛
(Revised DEIR Page 1-6, et al.). Capacity expansion beyond the requested 1,500 tons per
day SWFP limitation cited in the Revised DEIR is not evaluated. The Lead Agency will
determine the type and extent of any required supporting or subsequent environmental
evaluation that may be required if such a future expansion is proposed. As with the current
Project, the Lead Agency has the authority to approve or deny any future expansion should
it be proposed. The commentor’s statements regarding potential future capacity expansion
are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not
affected.
The commentor notes that environmental justice considerations are discussed in the
Revised DEIR (Appendix H). The commentor erroneously interprets analysis and findings
of the Revised DEIR regarding environmental justice concerns.
In complete context, Revised DEIR Appendix H first notes that environmental justice
considerations are not physical impacts to the environment and are not explicitly addressed
under CEQA. Continuing, the Revised DEIR notes . . . ‚[n]otwithstanding [the fact that
environmental justice considerations are not addressed under CEQA], as a member Board
overseen by the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA), the California
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-104
Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB)9 has included the recognition of the
principles of environmental justice as an integral part of its review and permitting actions.
Moreover, the analysis presented here is intended to provide all review agencies and
decision-makers with information addressing potential environmental justice implications
of the Project‛ (Revised DEIR Appendix H, Page 1).
The commentor’s concerns about the Project’s potential disproportionate effects to minority
populations are appropriately and fully addressed within the Appendix H discussion of
environmental justice concerns. More specifically, as discussed at Page H-18:
. . . [M]inority populations comprise more than 50 percent of the total
population within all geographic areas of analysis (Project Site Census Block,
Study Area Census Tracts, City, and County), and all tiers of geographic
areas would be considered Environmental Justice Communities. Any project
with significant environmental impacts under CEQA would also have
potential environmental justice concerns if located in the Project Site Census
Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, or County. . . .
Continuing, the Appendix H discussion notes:
. . . With respect to the above potential environmental justice concerns, it is
noted that significant impacts affecting the local environmental justice
community are a product, at least in part, of the presence of non-conforming
residential uses within an area planned and designated for industrial
development. On-going transition of these non-conforming residential uses
to industrial development, as envisioned under the City General Plan, would
tend to alleviate impacts attributable to exposure of residences to proximate
industrial uses. Notwithstanding, in the course of this transition, non-
conforming residential uses located near existing or proposed industrial uses
9 The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) has been reconstituted as the California
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-105
are subject to increased environmental effects and potential environmental
justice concerns.
It is also recognized that temporary construction impacts, such as those
resulting from the Project, are typical and generally unavoidable for any
development project located adjacent to residential uses. In this sense, these
impacts are not Project-specific, and would likely occur to some degree under
all development scenarios at the Project site due to the presence of proximate
non-conforming sensitive receptors (Appendix H, Page H-19).
As noted previously, while environmental justice is not a CEQA issue, the analysis of these
concerns as presented in the Revised DEIR is intended to provide all review agencies and
decision-makers with information addressing potential environmental justice implications
of the Project. The commentor’s opinions are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results
and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response FP1-3
The commentor states that the City of Pomona ‚does have a significant trash problem.‛ The
commentor suggests the City not ‚entertain the proposal of a commercial waste removal company
whose primary objective is to maximize its profits.‛ The commentor suggests that a ‚a problem of
such enormity is best addressed through the city inviting the citizenry and the city’s business and
people-centered institutions to determine what the solution ought to be and then contract with trash
businesses on our own terms.‛
The commentor does not raise environmental issues, or otherwise comment on the Revised
DEIR. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and
conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-107
First Presbyterian Church
401 North Gibbs Street
Pomona, CA 91767
Letter #2 Dated March 7, 2011
Response FP2-1
The commentor states general concerns regarding the Project noting concerns for the [First
Presbyterian Church] church and congregation.
Environmental concerns raised by the commentor are addressed within these responses.
Other statements and concerns which are beyond the scope of the Revised DEIR are
forwarded to the decision-makers for their consideration.
The commentor summarizes general aspects of the Project, notes the Project’s proposed
location and recognizes the City’s environmental review/public comment processes for the
Project. The commentor states that comments provided are under the official capacity as the
Session (governing body) of First Presbyterian Church.
The commentor’s summary of the Project and its proposed location are materially correct.
Please refer also to the detailed Project Description provided at revised DEIR Section 3.0,
‚Project Description.‛ Commentor statements regarding the Project Environmental Impact
Report and public review/comment process are materially correct. The commentor’s official
capacity as Session (governing body) of the First Presbyterian Church is recognized.
Responses to environmental concerns identified subsequently by the commentor are
presented here. Please refer also to previous First Presbyterian Church comments (dated
April 22, 2010) and responses to those comments provided at Appendix K to the Revised
DEIR. Unless otherwise noted herein, information presented in the Revised DEIR is
consistent with, and is not substantively revised from, information presented in the March
2010 Draft EIR. Pagination citations have been amended where applicable. Please refer also
to previous responses provided to First Presbyterian Church comments included at Revised
DEIR Appendix K. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-108
Response FP2-2
The commentor notes that 51 percent of the [First Presbyterian Church] congregation live
within one mile of the Project site, and that their children attend ‚one of eight public
schools within that radius.‛ The commentor reiterates concerns regarding ‚consequences
of the operation of this transfer station on the health and life of more than one-half of our
parishioners.‛
Commentor statements regarding parish demographics are recognized and assumed
correct. With regard to the ‚consequences of the operation of this transfer station on the
health and life‛ of area residents, as required under CEQA, the Revised DEIR discloses the
Project’s significant environmental impacts. A summary of these impacts is provided at
Revised DEIR Page 1-25, as excerpted below.
Traffic and Circulation
Intersection Impacts
Pending completion of required interchange improvements, Project-related
traffic impacts at the intersection of Mission Boulevard and SR-71 are
determined to be significant.
Air Quality
Construction LST Exceedances
For localized emissions, even after implementation of all feasible mitigation
measures, construction source emissions will exceed applicable SCAQMD
localized significance thresholds (LSTs) for PM10 (24-hour concentrations) at
receptors located 60 meters or nearer and emissions of PM2.5 (24-hour
concentrations) at receptors located 30 meters or nearer from the construction
activity. This impact is significant.
Cancer Risks Threshold Exceedances
Even with the application of all feasible mitigation, Project-related DPM-
source cancer risk significance thresholds (SCAQMD threshold for lifetime
residential exposure) will be exceeded at two (2) residential receptors
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-109
adjacent to the Project site (residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street).
This is considered a significant impact of the Project. No other receptors
(whether residential, worker or schools) are subject to potential cancer risk
threshold exceedances. As the two (2) affected non-conforming residential
uses transition to industrial uses per the City General Plan, Project-related
cancer risk exceedances would be alleviated.
Regional Thresholds Exceedances
Even after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, long-term
operational source emissions will exceed the SCAQMD regional threshold for
NOx only.
Noise
Construction Noise
Noise generated by Project construction activities will temporarily and
intermittently exceed the City’s 65 dBA standard at an estimated 25 to 30
proximate residential receptors. The temporary and intermittent construction
noise impact is considered significant. These noise levels will tend to
diminish as the use of heavy equipment in the early construction stages
concludes, and will dissipate entirely at the end of construction activities.
Re: Traffic Impacts - As indicated above, pending completion of on-going and
programmed improvements at the intersection of Mission Boulevard and SR-71, Project-
related traffic impacts at this intersection only are determined to be significant. No other
significant traffic impacts are projected.
Re: Air Quality Impacts - As indicated above, persons residing within 60 meters of the
Project site could be temporarily and intermittently significantly affected by construction-
source PM10/PM2.5 (fugitive dust) exceedances. These impacts will diminish as the use of
heavy equipment and site grading activities in the early construction stages concludes, and
will dissipate entirely at the end of construction activities. No other significant localized
construction-source air quality impacts are projected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-110
As indicated above, Project-related DPM-source cancer risk significance thresholds
(SCAQMD threshold for lifetime residential exposure) will be exceeded at two (2)
residential receptors adjacent to the Project site (residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth
Street). No other significant localized DPM-source air quality impacts are projected. It is
also noted that in response to commentor concerns, and consistent with mitigation
refinements intended to be achieved through the CEQA and EIR review processes,
additional mitigation is proposed that would act to further reduce Project-related DPM
emissions. More specifically, additional/revised mitigation is proposed [MM 4.3.21
(A)mended and MM 4.3.22(A), below+ that would ensure future year (2020) ‚CNG-only‛
access restrictions for all transfer trucks and commercial trash collection vehicles served by
the Project. 10, 11
MM 4.3.21 (A): At Project opening, all transfer trucks and all Applicant-
controlled commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project
site shall be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent
technologies).
MM 4.3.22(A): On or before January 2, 2020, all transfer trucks and all
commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project site shall be
powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent technologies).
Health Risk Assessment (HRA) modeling of DPM-source cancer risks resulting from
application of proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) in combination with other DPM
emissions mitigation currently proposed in the Revised DEIR (See Revised DEIR Mitigation
Measures 4.3.17 through 4.3.20) has been conducted as one component of this Final EIR
(please refer to HRA Addendum included at Final EIR Appendix A). Results of the HRA
Addendum indicate that with the stipulated conversion of diesel-fueled vehicles to CNG
10 The Year 2020 timeframe implementation schedule proposed here is consistent with, and parallels
EPA/CARB tiered emissions reductions goals for heavy-duty trucks.
11 Proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) would replace/supercede MM 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 currently
reflected in the Revised DEIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-111
vehicles described herein, the Year 2020 maximum potential cancer risk exposure at any
potentially affected receptor would be reduced to levels that are less-than-significant.
More specifically, at the maximally impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth
Street), the mitigated cancer risk would be 3.98 per million. The residential use
experiencing the second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the
mitigated cancer risk would be 0.52 per million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer risk
would therefore be less than the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per million.
The HRA Addendum results indicate further, that under no circumstance would area
schools be significantly affected by DPM emissions, nor would DPM emissions result in any
potentially significant non-cancer risks. Please refer also to detailed HRA modeling results
presented at Final EIR Appendix A.
Notwithstanding these findings, this Final EIR conservatively maintains previous
conclusions regarding potential Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risks.
That is, for the purposes of disclosure, and to maintain the conservative analysis construct
employed to date, Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risk exposures at the
residences located at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street are considered to be significant until
the Year 2020. No other locations would experience potentially adverse elevated DPM-
source cancer risk exposures (or non-cancer risk exposures) resulting from Project
operations or activities. Please refer also to related discussions of DPM emissions impacts
and proposed additional/revised mitigation presented at Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions
and Errata Corrections.‛
Re: Noise Impacts - As indicated above, noise generated by Project construction activities
will temporarily and intermittently exceed the City’s 65 dBA standard at an estimated 25 to
30 proximate residential receptors. The temporary and intermittent construction noise
impact is considered significant. These noise levels will tend to diminish as the use of
heavy equipment in the early construction stages concludes, and will dissipate entirely at
the end of construction activities. No other significant localized construction-source noise
impacts are projected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-112
Summary: Should the Project be approved, the Lead Agency is required to adopt a
Statement of Overriding Considerations acknowledging the Project’s significant
environmental impacts as summarized above. All other potential environmental effects of
the Project are determined to be less-than-significant as substantiated within the Revised
DEIR and accompanying Initial Study, or are reduced below levels of significance with
application of mitigation measures identified in the Revised DEIR. Commentor statements
and concerns regarding Project impacts to area residents, including school children, are
forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not
affected.
The commentor states that . . . ‚the project won’t create that many new jobs.‛
Project job creation is discussed in the Revised DEIR:
The Transfer Station will be staffed by an estimated 45 to 50 employees. On-
site personnel would include facility managers, administrative/clerical
personnel, equipment operators, transfer floor laborers, transfer truck
drivers, and maintenance workers (Revised DEIR Page 1-6, et al.)
Project job creation as noted is consistent with and supports the project Objective to ‚create
additional employment opportunities for City and area residents‛ (Revised DEIR Page 3-
45, et al.). The commentor’s statements regarding job creation are forwarded to the
decision-makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
The commentor notes that there are 9 schools within a one-mile radius of the Project site12
and states that ‚[school] children will be exposed to adverse truck emission and airborne risks from
the station itself.‛
While the commentor offers no supporting evidence or expert opinion supported by
evidence that area school populations will be adversely affected by the Project, the Revised
12 In point of fact, the Revised DEIR notes and considers ten (10) schools within a one-mile radius of the
Project. Please refer to Revised DEIR Page 4.3-90, et al.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-113
DEIR explicitly considers and addresses potential Project impacts at area schools. Please
refer to Revised DEIR at Pages 1-12, 1-13, 1-17, 1-18, 1-23, 1-25, 1-35, 1-45, 2-11, 3-25, 4.3-2,
4.3-4, 4.3-80, 4.3-87, 4.3-90 through 4.3-93, 4.3-100, 4.3-102, 4.4-3, 4.4-7, 4.4-30, 4.5-1, 4.5-4,
4.5-6, 4.5-19, 4.5-24, 4.5-26, 4.5-34 through 4.5-36, 4.7-11, 5-65, Revised EIR Appendix K
Responses (some 300 citations to area schools), et al. As substantiated in the Revised DEIR,
with application of proposed mitigation the Project will not result in localized or specific
impacts to area schools. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-
makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
The commentor speculates that the Project will exceed capacity limitations and
requirements stipulated under the Applicant-requested 1,500 tons per day Solid Waste
Facility Permit (SWFP).
As discussed in the Revised DEIR: ‚The Project Applicant has requested a Solid Waste
Facility Permit (SWFP) to allow for acceptance of up to 1,500 tons of MSW per day‛
(Revised DEIR Page 1-6, et al.). Capacity expansion beyond the requested 1,500 tons per
day SWFP limitation cited in the Revised DEIR is not evaluated. The Lead Agency will
determine the type and extent of any required supporting or subsequent environmental
evaluation that may be required if such a future expansion is proposed. As with the current
Project, the Lead Agency has the authority to approve or deny any future expansion should
it be proposed. The commentor’s statements regarding potential future capacity expansion
are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not
affected.
The commentor notes that environmental justice considerations are discussed in the
Revised DEIR (Appendix H). The commentor erroneously interprets analysis and findings
of the Revised DEIR regarding environmental justice concerns.
In complete context, Revised DEIR Appendix H first notes that environmental justice
considerations are not physical impacts to the environment and are not explicitly addressed
under CEQA. Continuing, the Revised DEIR notes . . . ‚[n]otwithstanding [the fact that
environmental justice considerations are not addressed under CEQA], as a member Board
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-114
overseen by the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA), the California
Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB)13 has included the recognition of the
principles of environmental justice as an integral part of its review and permitting actions.
Moreover, the analysis presented here is intended to provide all review agencies and
decision-makers with information addressing potential environmental justice implications
of the Project‛ (Revised DEIR Appendix H, Page 1).
The commentor’s concerns about the Project’s potential disproportionate effects to minority
populations are appropriately and fully addressed within the Appendix H discussion of
environmental justice concerns. More specifically, as discussed at Page H-18:
. . . [M]inority populations comprise more than 50 percent of the total
population within all geographic areas of analysis (Project Site Census Block,
Study Area Census Tracts, City, and County), and all tiers of geographic
areas would be considered Environmental Justice Communities. Any project
with significant environmental impacts under CEQA would also have
potential environmental justice concerns if located in the Project Site Census
Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, or County. . . .
Continuing, the Appendix H discussion notes:
. . . With respect to the above potential environmental justice concerns, it is
noted that significant impacts affecting the local environmental justice
community are a product, at least in part, of the presence of non-conforming
residential uses within an area planned and designated for industrial
development. On-going transition of these non-conforming residential uses
to industrial development, as envisioned under the City General Plan, would
tend to alleviate impacts attributable to exposure of residences to proximate
industrial uses. Notwithstanding, in the course of this transition, non-
conforming residential uses located near existing or proposed industrial uses
13 The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) has been reconstituted as the California
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-115
are subject to increased environmental effects and potential environmental
justice concerns.
It is also recognized that temporary construction impacts, such as those
resulting from the Project, are typical and generally unavoidable for any
development project located adjacent to residential uses. In this sense, these
impacts are not Project-specific, and would likely occur to some degree under
all development scenarios at the Project site due to the presence of proximate
non-conforming sensitive receptors (Appendix H, Page H-19).
As noted previously, while environmental justice is not a CEQA issue, the analysis of these
concerns as presented in the Revised DEIR is intended to provide all review agencies and
decision-makers with information addressing potential environmental justice implications
of the Project. The commentor’s opinions are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results
and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response FP2-3
The commentor notes that that the City of Pomona ‚does have a trash issue.‛ The
commentor suggests the City not ‚entertain the proposal of a commercial waste removal
company whose primary objective is to maximize its profits.‛ The commentor suggests
that ‚an issue of this significance is best addressed through the city inviting the citizenry
and the city’s business and people-centered institutions to determine what the solution
ought to be, and then contract with trash businesses on the city’s (and the people’s) own
terms.‛
The commentor does not raise environmental issues, or otherwise comment on the Draft
EIR. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and
conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-121
One LA Pomona Valley Cluster
1545 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 328
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Letter Dated March 4, 2011
Response ONE-1
The commentors express disapproval of the Project. The commentors request that the City
of Pomona deny the Project.
The commentors do not raise environmental issues or otherwise provide comments on the
Draft EIR. No response is provided in this regard. The commentors’ expression of
disapproval, and request that the Project be denied are forwarded to the decision-makers.
Subsequent to introductory remarks, the commentors state objections to the Project
(‚Objections‛). Responses to the commentors’ Objections are provided herein. As set forth
below, the Objections misrepresent the Project and its potential environmental impacts.
Each of the Objections is reproduced below, along with a response to such Objection.
Response ONE-2
The commentors state concerns regarding the Project’s potential to create ‚long-term and
wide-spread regional air pollution issues,‛ citing the Project’s exceedance of SCAQMD
regional operational threshold for NOx.
As discussed in the Revised DEIR, consistent with SCAQMD methodology, certain
significant regional air quality impacts are projected to result from the Project. (See Revised
DEIR, Page 4.3-77, et al., exceedance of SCAQMD NOx regional thresholds only).
Notwithstanding, and contrary to the commentors’ statement that the Project ‚would
create long-term and wide-spread regional air pollution issues,‛ the Project would actually
tend to benefit the region by allowing waste materials to be transported more efficiently.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-122
That is, as explained in the DEIR, transfer stations such as that proposed under the Project
allow franchise trash collection vehicles and self-haulers to avoid long trips to remote
landfills. This approach can provide an efficient means to transport waste to area-wide
landfills and also can create positive benefits to area-wide traffic and air quality. In these
regards, the underlying goals of the Project are to enhance waste management services
within the City and region, stabilize rising solid waste collection costs, and reduce
environmental impacts otherwise associated with waste handling and disposal (See Revised
DEIR, Page 1-1, emphasis added).
Accordingly, ‚from a regional perspective, because the Project will result in the more
efficient management of municipal solid waste and will reduce the number of long haul
trips to landfills, it is likely that the Project will contribute to an overall reduction in VMT
[vehicle miles travelled] within the Air Basin, with correlating beneficial effects on regional
emissions of diesel particulate,‛ as well as NOx. (See Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-96.)
Further, regulatory efforts by the CARB and EPA to date have incrementally reduced NOx
emissions. As noted in the DEIR, ‚*t+he amount of NOx emissions from vehicle sources has
been reduced dramatically over the past years and is expected to further decline as clean
vehicle and fuel technologies improve.‛ (See Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-124.)
Nonetheless, as noted previously, NOx emissions from operational activities are considered
significant, because the NOx emissions related to the Project will exceed the SCAQMD
threshold of significance for NOx. (See Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-77.) However, as stated in
the Revised DEIR, ‚*w+hile operational emissions will be generated in excess of SCAQMD’s
regional threshold criteria for NOx, it is unlikely that a significant impact will occur as these
emissions are already accounted for in the AQMP [Air Quality Management Plan] since the
proposed Project is consistent with the adopted land use intensity and zoning.‛ (See
Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-56.) Moreover, the Project is in compliance with SCAQMD’s
attainment plans [and] complies with all feasible mitigation measures‛ to reduce NOx
emissions. (See Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-124.)
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-123
Accordingly, the Revised DEIR does not support the claim that the Project will ‚create
long-term and wide-spread regional air pollution issues,‛ let alone result in the health
impacts the commentors imply may result from the Project.
Response ONE-3
The commentors note that there are nine (9) schools within a one-mile radius of the Project
site, 14 and offer an opinion that the Project-related exceedance of SCAQMD regional
thresholds for NOx would result in increased health risks at area schools.
The commentors’ statements erroneously imply that the Project presents a health risk to the
schools within one mile of the Project site. While the DEIR identified the Project’s projected
operational NOx emissions as being potentially significant on a regional basis, such
emissions will not have any localized impact on schools in the general vicinity of the
Project. (Revised DEIR, Pages 1-25, 4.3-123.) As indicated in Appendix H to the Revised
DEIR, in concluding operational NOx emissions from the Project are not a potential
environmental justice concern, such emissions ‚would affect all population segments
within the encompassing regional air basin and to the approximately same degree, and
would therefore not result in disproportionate effects‛ to persons in the vicinity of the
Project. And as discussed above, the Project can be expected to result in a net benefit to
regional air quality, by facilitating more efficient management of municipal solid waste and
reducing VMT. (Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-96.)
With regard to cancer risk, the DEIR indicates that ‚under all exposure scenarios (70-year,
30-year, 9-year) potential health risks to off-site workers and schools in the area will not
exceed applicable SCAQMD threshold criteria.‛ (Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-2.)
Moreover, while the DEIR indicates the construction phase of the Project has the potential
to contribute or cause localized exceedances of air quality standards for PM10 and PM2.5, this
is true only for receptors located 60 meters or nearer from the construction activity, with
respect to PM10, and 30 meters or nearer with respect to PM2.5. (Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-70.)
14 In point of fact, the Revised DEIR considers and evaluates potential air quality impacts at ten (10)
schools/school facilities within an approximate one-mile radius of the Project site. Please refer to Revised
DEIR Page 4.3-90.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-124
Since the closest school to the Project is approximately ½ mile away, no schools will be
impacted by any localized air pollution impacts from the Project. (Revised DEIR, Pages 1-
12, 4.3-123.)
Response ONE-4
The commentors express concern for the potential health risks affecting the two residences
nearest the Project site, citing the risk of cancer and hearing loss as their main concerns.
The commentors’ statements misrepresent and incorrectly state the risk of cancer created by
the Project. While it is true that the SCAQMD cancer risk incidence threshold will be
exceeded with respect to two (and only two) residences nearest the Project site, the cancer
risk with mitigation is only 45.10 in one million at 1415 East Ninth Street and 11.59 in one
million at 1295 East Ninth Street (not 56.70/million and 45.10/million, as stated by the
commentors). Moreover, this increased risk is based on the conservative assumption that a
person living at the affected residences will be continuously exposed to the potentially
harmful emissions 24 hours a day for 365 days a year for 70 years. (See Revised DEIR,
Pages 4.3-92 to 4.3-94.)
As discussed in the Revised DEIR, real world risk exposures attributable to the Project are
far less, since ‚*i+ndividuals are typically not stationary at any given outdoor location, and
a portion of each 24-hour cycle is spent indoors. In addition, individuals and families at a
given location for 70 or even 30 years would be considered the exception rather than the
norm. . . . the EPA recommends a central tendency estimate of 9 years for residency at a
given location, and a high-end estimate of 30 years for residency time.‛ And the
assumption that anyone might live at one of the two potentially affected residences for 70
years is even more unlikely given that the City’s General Plan calls for such non-
conforming residential uses to be transitioned to industrial uses. (See Revised DEIR, Pages
4.1-4 to 4.1-5.) ‚Under a shorter, 9-year exposure scenario representative of area residency
patterns, potential DPM-source cancer risk thresholds would not be exceeded at any
location within the Study Area.‛ (See Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-2)
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-125
Furthermore, the Revised DEIR did not factor in several required mitigation measures in
calculating cancer risk attributable to the Project. Specifically, in an effort to be as
conservative as possible, the Revised DEIR did not calculate or assume an emission
reduction based on the planned future conversion of the truck fleet using the station from
diesel to CNG, or emission reductions expected from measures designed to reduce truck
idling time. (See Revised DEIR, Pages 4.3-100, 4.3-102.) Anticipated fleet conversion from
diesel fuels to CNG (or other ‚clean‛ fuel sources) pursuant to proposed Mitigation
Measures 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 will further reduce potential Project-related DPM-source cancer
risks. Future fleet conversion in combination with other mitigation measures would reduce
the maximum residential cancer risk exposure to 16.44 per million, which would affect only
one (1) residence (1415 East Ninth Street) within the Study Area. (See Revised DEIR, Page
103.) Thus, while persons living at the two residences closest to the Project may experience
an increased cancer risk exposure under the conservative assumptions used in the EIR, the
claim that they would be subject to ‚very high levels of risk for cancer‛ is simply not
accurate.
Please note further, that in response to commentor concerns, and consistent with mitigation
refinements intended to be achieved through the CEQA and EIR review processes,
additional mitigation is proposed that would act to further reduce Project-related DPM
emissions. More specifically, additional/revised mitigation is proposed [MM 4.3.21
(A)mended and MM 4.3.22(A), below+ that would ensure future year (2020) ‚CNG-only‛
access restrictions for all transfer trucks and commercial trash collection vehicles served by
the Project. 15, 16
MM 4.3.21 (A): At Project opening, all transfer trucks and all Applicant-
controlled commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project
site shall be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent
technologies).
15 The Year 2020 timeframe implementation schedule proposed here is consistent with, and parallels
EPA/CARB tiered emissions reductions goals for heavy-duty trucks.
16 Proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) would replace/supercede MM 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 currently
reflected in the Revised DEIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-126
MM 4.3.22(A): On or before January 2, 2020, all transfer trucks and all
commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project site shall be
powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent technologies).
Health Risk Assessment (HRA) modeling of DPM-source cancer risks resulting from
application of proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) in combination with other DPM
emissions mitigation currently proposed in the Revised DEIR (Revised DEIR Mitigation
Measures 4.3.17 through 4.3.20) has been conducted as one component of this Final EIR
(please refer to HRA Addendum included at Final EIR Appendix A). Results of the HRA
Addendum indicate that with the stipulated conversion of diesel-fueled vehicles to CNG
vehicles described herein, the Year 2020 maximum potential cancer risk exposure at any
potentially affected receptor would be reduced to levels that are less-than-significant.
More specifically, at the maximally impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth
Street), the mitigated cancer risk would be 3.98 per million. The residential use
experiencing the second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the
mitigated cancer risk would be 0.52 per million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer risk
would therefore be less than the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per million.
The HRA Addendum results indicate further, that under no circumstance would area
schools be significantly affected by DPM emissions, nor would DPM emissions result in any
potentially significant non-cancer risks. Please refer also to detailed HRA modeling results
presented at Final EIR Appendix A.
Notwithstanding these findings, this Final EIR conservatively maintains previous
conclusions regarding potential Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risks.
That is, for the purposes of disclosure, and to maintain the conservative analysis construct
employed to date, Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risk exposures at the
residences located at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street are considered to be significant until
the Year 2020. No other locations would experience potentially adverse elevated DPM-
source cancer risk exposures (or non-cancer risk exposures) resulting from Project
operations or activities. Please refer also to related discussions of DPM emissions impacts
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-127
and proposed additional/revised mitigation presented at Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions
and Errata Corrections.‛
The commentors’ statements regarding noise exposure and potential hearing loss similarly
misrepresent the Revised DEIR analysis and incorrectly interpret information provided.
That is the Revised DEIR does not support the claim that people living near the Project are
at a risk of hearing loss. While the Revised DEIR states that hearing loss ‚may begin to
occur at 75 dBA,‛ it indicates a risk of hearing loss at that level only where there is
prolonged exposure. (See Revised DEIR, Page 4.4-7.) Project construction noise will be
‚temporary and intermittent,‛ and, with mitigation, would exceed 75 dBA at its peak. (See
Revised DEIR, Page 4.4-35.) Thus, the commentors’ claim that the Project will expose any
residents to a ‚very high level*s+ of risk for . . . hearing loss‛ is not supportable.
Response ONE-5
The commentors express concerns about the Project’s potential disproportionate effects to
minority populations, and associated Environmental Justice (EJ) concerns.
Notwithstanding the fact that Environmental Impact Reports are not required to examine
potential environmental justice impacts, the Revised DEIR included an appendix discussing
these issues in detail. As discussed therein, ‚all feasible mitigation measures have been
implemented in order to avoid or reduce its *the Project’s+ environmental impacts and
thereby reduce potential environmental justice (EJ) concerns.‛ (See Appendix H, Page H-
18.) Recognizing EJ concerns is not a ‚warning‛ as misstated by the commentors. The
commentors further misstate and incorrectly characterize the Project impacts as a specific
burden to minorities and low-income households, and erroneously present findings of
Appendix H out of context.
In complete context, Revised DEIR Appendix H first notes that environmental justice
considerations are not physical impacts to the environment and are not explicitly addressed
under CEQA. ‚Notwithstanding, as a member Board overseen by the California
Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA), the California Integrated Waste Management
Board (CIWMB) has included the recognition of the principles of environmental justice as
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-128
an integral part of its review and permitting actions. Moreover, the analysis presented here
is intended to provide all review agencies and decision-makers with information
addressing potential environmental justice implications of the Project‛ (Revised DEIR
Appendix H, Page 1). At Page H-17, the Revised DEIR discussion of environmental justice
considerations notes that ‚there is a potential for the Project to result in disproportionate
impacts to minority populations. However, low-income populations within the affected
area comprise less than 50 percent of the total population. Based on EPA guidance, low-
income status is not a determining environmental justice parameter.‛ As further discussed
at Page H-18:
. . . [a]s indicated, minority populations comprise more than 50 percent of
the total population within all geographic areas of analysis (Project Site
Census Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, and County), and all tiers of
geographic areas would be considered Environmental Justice Communities.
Any project with significant environmental impacts under CEQA would also
have potential environmental justice concerns if located in the Project Site
Census Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, or County.
The Appendix H discussion continues:
With respect to the above potential environmental justice concerns, it is noted
that significant impacts affecting the local environmental justice community
are a product, at least in part, of the presence of non-conforming residential
uses within an area planned and designated for industrial development. On-
going transition of these non-conforming residential uses to industrial
development, as envisioned under the City General Plan, would tend to
alleviate impacts attributable to exposure of residences to proximate
industrial uses. Notwithstanding, in the course of this transition, non-
conforming residential uses located near existing or proposed industrial uses
are subject to increased environmental effects and potential environmental
justice concerns.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-129
It is also recognized that temporary construction impacts, such as those
resulting from the Project [construction equipment noise, fugitive dust (PM)
emissions] are typical and generally unavoidable for any development
project located adjacent to residential uses. In this sense, these impacts are
not Project-specific, and would likely occur to some degree under all
development scenarios at the Project site due to the presence of proximate
non-conforming sensitive receptors (Appendix H, Page H-19).
It is noted further that the Revised DEIR analysis of construction impacts conservatively
reflects a maximum potential impact scenario that could occur in the initial stages of
construction, and assumes concurrent use of heavy equipment at the Project boundaries.
Subsequent to this initial stage of construction, as the demands for heavy equipment
decrease and construction activities focus around the main structures in the central project
area, construction noise and construction emissions received at off-site locations would
typically diminish.
Operational impacts are similarly based on conservative maximum potential impact
scenarios. That is, the Revised DEIR’s finding that the inhabitants of only two (2)
residences could potentially be exposed to increased cancer risk is based on conservative
assumptions, including that individuals will remain at those locations for many decades.
(See Revised DEIR, Pages 4.1-4 to 4.1-5.) Anticipated fleet conversion from diesel fuels to
CNG (or other ‚clean‛ fuel sources) pursuant to proposed Mitigation Measures 4.3.21 (A)
and 4.3.22 (A) presented below would, by 2020, reduce all Project DPM-source cancer risks
to levels that are less-than-significant. Please refer also to the HRA Addendum included at
Final EIR Appendix A.
Moreover, ‚under General Plan Buildout conditions (approximately 2030), the existing non-
conforming residential uses within the industrial zone encompassing the Project site are
anticipated to transition to industrial development‛ thus removing potential environmental
justice concerns. (See Appendix H, Page H-19.)
Also important, in evaluating environmental justice concerns, is the fact that minority and
low-income communities, including those residing near the Project site, have been given
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-130
the opportunity for meaningful participation in the decision-making process related to the
Project. Public outreach was conducted in all communities affected by the Project,
including public meetings, notice of which was provided in both English and Spanish.
(Appendix H, Page H-20.) As noted further, ‚there has been sufficient and meaningful
involvement of all potential stakeholders, including minority and low-income communities
throughout the decision-making process.‛ (Appendix H, Page H-20.)
Additionally, the commentors are concerned with the potential for the City to be
‚burdened with extensive negative environmental impacts, so that other communities don’t
have to process their own trash.‛
Significant environmental impacts resulting from the Project are disclosed in the Revised
DEIR. The commentors’ opinions regarding, and characterization of these impacts are
forwarded to the decision-makers. It is also noted however, that effective areawide
collection and transport of MSW via transfer facilities such as that proposed by the Project
minimize haul distances and act to reduce areawide or regional impacts through reductions
in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). New MSW transfer facilities, such as proposed under the
Project, also reflect and incorporate contemporary energy efficient industrial designs and
operational programs and respond to current regulatory requirements.
Response ONE-6
The commentors express concerns regarding Project-related traffic impacts; specifically,
citing concerns regarding the ‚successful completion of the SR-71 at Mission Boulevard
Interchange Improvement project prior to the Project opening.‛ The commentors also offer
their concerned opinion regarding the Project’s impact on additional traffic, pollution,
noise, road conditions, and quality of life in the City.
The only potentially significant traffic impact, after mitigation, identified in the Revised
DEIR is the fact that the Project will add trips to an intersection (SR-71 at Mission
Boulevard) that is currently operating at an unacceptable level. As repeatedly noted in the
Revised DEIR, however, improvements that would eliminate this impact are ‚approved,
funded, and currently under construction by Caltrans.‛ (Revised DEIR, Pages 4.2-60
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-131
[emphasis added], 4.2-61, 4.2-63.) As explained in the Revised DEIR, Project-related traffic
impacts at the intersection of Mission Boulevard and SR-71 are considered significant
because ‚while it is foreseeable that the funded and planned improvements to SR-71 and
Mission Boulevard will be completed prior to the Project being fully operational . . . timely
completion of these improvements cannot be definitively assured.‛ (Revised DEIR, Page
4.2-63.) Accordingly, any significant traffic impact from the Project will be temporary and
will be alleviated by improvements already under construction.
The Revised DEIR does not support the commentors’ claim that the Project will negatively
impact traffic on Mission Boulevard. To the contrary, it indicates that all studied segments
of Mission will continue to operate at the highest level of service (LOS A) with the Project.
(Revised DEIR, Pages 4.2-46, 4.2-53 to 4.2-54.) Furthermore, the traffic analysis in the DEIR
was intentionally ‚highly conservative and likely overstates the traffic impacts of the
proposed project. In addition, even though the proposed project will reduce the number of
long hauls to area landfills by municipal trash truck, no net credit was taken for the
reduction in trips that will likely result from the Project.‛ (Revised DEIR, Page 4.2-29.)
There is no demonstrated or substantiated evidence of potential damage to area roadways
should the Project be implemented. Moreover, all roadway improvements proposed by the
Project will conform to City engineering standards, thereby reducing future maintenance
responsibilities for these improvements. The Project will also contribute fees and tax
revenues to the City that may be directed to the repair and maintenance of area roads.
The commentors’ generalized statements and opinions regarding ‚quality of life‛ do not
raise specific environmental issues, nor allow for specific response. These statements are
forwarded to the decision-makers.
Response ONE-7
The commentors offer the opinion that the 45-50 jobs created by the Project ‚is not a lot of
jobs‛ and that ‚they are not safe jobs.‛ Additionally, they state that ‚even if this site offered
a lot of jobs (which it doesn’t), the health risks outweigh the economic benefits.‛
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-132
As noted by the commentors, the Project is expected to result in the creation of 45 to 50 new
jobs. Although there is no guarantee that all of these jobs will go to Pomona residents, the
expectation is that such jobs will be filled by such residents, based on the fact that the skills
necessary for such jobs are ‚not unique or highly specialized,‛ and given the City’s high
unemployment rate. (Revised DEIR, Pages 5-61 to 5-62.) Further, the commentors’ claim
that these ‚are not safe jobs‛ is baseless, and is not supported by evidence or expert opinion
supported by fact. All Project operations will be subject to broad and encompassing
government safety regulations established under Cal/OSHA and CalRecycle (formerly the
California Integrated Waste Management Board, CIWMB). (DEIR Pages 3-46 to 3-47; Labor
Code § 6309.) Thus, there is absolutely no basis for the commentors’ claim that future
employees of the Project will not be safe.
Further, as discussed at the Responses provided herein, the commentors’ claim that these
jobs will come at the expense of the health of the community is not supported by analysis
and conclusions of the Revised DEIR.
Response ONE-8
The commentors express their concern regarding potential PM10 and PM2.5 threshold
exceedances and potential health effects on sensitive populations in the area.
While the Revised DEIR indicates the construction phase of the Project has the potential to
contribute to or cause localized exceedances of air quality standards for PM10 and PM2.5, this
is true only for receptors located 60 meters or less from the construction activity, with
respect to PM10, and 30 meters or less with respect to PM2.5. (Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-70.)
Significantly, and in contrast to what the commentors imply, the Revised DEIR explains
that because these exceedances will be intermittent and temporary, they will not result in
any health impacts.
Application of Mitigation Measures 4.3.1 through 4.3.12 will reduce all
construction-source air pollutant emissions, including PM10 and PM2.5
emissions to the extent feasible. The Project will also comply with all
applicable SCAQMD Rules and will employ Best Available Control
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-133
Technology (BACT) to lessen the impact. Additionally, and importantly, the
calculated exceedances of PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would occur temporarily
and intermittently during site preparation and grading processes, and would
not substantively affect any receptors at distances greater than 60 meters (for
PM10 emissions) or 30 meters (for PM2.5 emissions) from the emissions source.
. . . Moreover, in that construction-source PM10 and PM2.5 emissions are short-
term and intermittent they will not result in any chronic or long-term health
risks or impacts. In this latter regard, health risks analyses are based on long-
term exposure (i.e., typically many decades), and as such there are no
projected long-term health risks associated with short-term PM10 and PM2.5
emissions generated by construction activities (Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-71,
emphasis added).
Response ONE-9
The commentors express their concern regarding the accountability of the Project in
implementing and adhering to the proposed mitigation measures.
The commentors incorrectly imply that there is no mechanism for holding the Project
accountable for implementing the various mitigation measures set forth in the Revised
DEIR. In reality, the law requires that the City ensure such mitigation measures ‚are fully
enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.‛ (Pub. Resources
Code § 21081.6(b).)
Moreover, the City is required to adopt a mitigation monitoring or reporting program
‚designed to ensure compliance‛ with mitigation measures, at the time of project approval.
(Pub. Resources. Code § 21081.6(a).) Thus, mitigation measures are not empty promises but
enforceable obligations.
Notwithstanding that fact, in certain instances the Revised DEIR conservatively did not
factor in mitigation measures in calculating the Project’s potential impacts. For example, in
calculating cancer risk, the Revised DEIR conservatively did not calculate or assume an
emission reduction based on the planned future conversion of the truck fleet using the
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-134
station from diesel to CNG. (See Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-102.) Likewise, while the Revised
DEIR includes required mitigation measures designed to reduce truck idling time, such
measures were not reflected in the Revised DEIR’s emission calculations. (See Revised
DEIR, Page 4.3-102.)
Response ONE-10
The commentors speculate on potential future capacity expansion of the Project and the
related potential for additional impacts resulting from such an expansion.
The Revised DEIR clearly indicates that the operational capacity of the proposed transfer
station will be a maximum of 1,500 tons of municipal solid waste (MSW) per day and that
the Project applicant is seeking permitting to process to up to 1,500 tons per day of solid
waste. (See Revised DEIR, Pages 1, 3-32.) ‚In order to establish a likely maximum impact
scenario, the EIR analysis [thus] assumes the transfer station facility will operate at the
proposed maximum permitted capacity of 1,500 tons per day.‛ (See Revised DEIR, Page 3-
32.) There is nothing in the Revised DEIR that suggests the proposed facility will be
capable of, or requests, processing greater volumes of waste, as speculated by the
commentors. Moreover, even assuming that the Project capacity could be increased at
some future point, such expansion would be subject to discretionary governmental
approvals (See Revised DEIR, Pages 5-43 to 5-44), and thus require additional
environmental review. Accordingly, the insinuation that the Lead Agency or Project
Applicant is attempting to avoid full environmental review, or disguise or diminish true
plans for, and/or scope of the Project is baseless. To the contrary, the Lead Agency and
Applicant have, through public scoping processes, circulation of the Draft EIR, voluntary
recirculation of the Revised DEIR, and the good faith reasoned responses provided here,
demonstrated full compliance with CEQA analysis and disclosure mandates.
Response ONE-11
The commentors summarize a portion of the alternatives analysis considered in the Revised
DEIR, and state that the ‚only way the company can make money is to put our health at
risk.‛
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-135
The commentors misrepresent and misinterpret the analysis of alternatives presented in the
Revised DEIR. More specifically, the analysis of the Reduced Intensity Alternative
presented in the Revised DEIR demonstrates that there is no feasible Reduced Intensity
Alternative that would completely avoid significant air quality impacts while achieving the
basic Project Objectives rather than indicating, as stated by the commenters, that ‚the only
way the company can make money is to put our health at risk.‛ Moreover, as discussed
previously in these responses, NOx regional threshold exceedances do not equate to health
risks, as erroneously concluded by the commentors. Further, the identified potential
health risks resulting from the Project (exceedance of the SCAQMD lifetime residential
cancer risk exposure at two non-conforming residences) reflect the conservative
assumptions used in the DEIR, including that a person living at the affected residence will
be exposed to the potentially harmful emissions 24 hours a day for 365 days a year for 70
years. Under this conservative scenario, the maximum cancer risk exposure is
approximately 4 ½ times higher than the SCAQMD threshold. (Revised DEIR, Pages 4.3-92
to 4.3-94, 5-39.) As discussed, above, it is very unlikely that the assumed scenarios would
actually occur in the real world. ‚Under a shorter, 9-year exposure scenario representative
of area residency patterns, potential DPM-source cancer risk thresholds would not be
exceeded at any location within the Study Area.‛ (Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-2.)
Furthermore, the DEIR did not factor in several required mitigation measures in calculating
cancer risk attributable to the Project. Specifically, in an effort to be as conservative as
possible, the DEIR did not calculate or assume an emission reduction based on the planned
future conversion of the truck fleet using the station from diesel to CNG, or emission
reductions expected from measures designed to reduce truck idling time. (Revised DEIR,
Pages 4.3-100, 4.3-102.) Further, as noted previously in these discussions, in response to
commentor concerns, amended mitigation measures [4.3.21(A) and 4.3.22 (A)] are proposed
that would act to further reduce Project-related DPM emissions through additional and
accelerated conversion of diesel vehicles to use of CNG. This would act to further reduce
potential health risks of concern to the commentors.
To summarize, consistent with CEQA requirements, the Revised Draft EIR considers
potential alternatives to the Project that would reduce the Project’s significant impacts
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-136
while achieving the basic Project Objectives. A Reduced Intensity Alternative that would
completely avoid significant air quality impacts is not feasible. Exceedance of NOx
emissions regional thresholds does not equate to significant health risks. Modeling of
Project operational DPM emissions pursuant to conservative SCAQMD protocols indicates
that SCAQMD lifetime residential cancer exposure risks would be exceeded at the two (2)
non-conforming residential uses located closest and adjacent to the Project site. In order to
be as protective of human health as possible, the approach taken in the DEIR is extremely
conservative and consistently errs on the side of overstating potential impacts to health.
Moreover, the DEIR requires the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures to
reduce these risks, including the use of an alternative stack design and restricted
operational hours. (Revised DEIR, Pages 4.3-98 to 4.3-99.) Amended mitigation measures
incorporated in this Final EIR would act to further reduce any Project-related DPM health
risks, such that on or before the Year 2020, these risks would be reduced to levels that are
less-than-significant. Lastly, as provided for under California Public Resources Code (PRC)
Section 21080, subd. (e) (2) below, the commentor’s statements alone are not considered
substantial evidence of health risks and/or Lead Agency or Applicant intent, motivation, or
objectives:
(2) Substantial evidence is not argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion or
narrative, [or]evidence that is clearly inaccurate or erroneous . . .
The commentors’ statement that ‚the only way the company can make money is to put our
health at risk‛ is considered to fall within the context of ‚argument, speculation,
unsubstantiated opinion or narrative, *or+evidence that is clearly inaccurate or erroneous‛
and is forwarded to the decision-makers.
Response ONE-12
The commentors summarize statements and opinions provided previously.
Please refer to Responses ONE-1 through ONE-11.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-139
Commercial Door Company
1374 East Ninth Street
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter Dated February 3, 2011
Response CD-1
The commentor states points of opposition to the Project. The commentor lists reasons for
opposition to the Project.
Responses to specific comments/issues identified by the commentor are presented here.
Please refer also to similar previous Commercial Door Company comments (dated May 5,
2010) and responses to those comments provided at Appendix K to the Revised DEIR.
Unless otherwise noted herein, information presented in the Revised DEIR is consistent
with, and is not substantively revised from, information presented in the March 2010 Draft
EIR. Pagination citations haven been amended where applicable. Please refer also to
previous responses provided to Commercial Door Company included at Revised DEIR
Appendix K.
Response CD-2
The commentor states concerns that the project may adversely affect area property values.
The commentor states that he has ‚already lost value due to the recycling center being next
door.‛
The commentor’s statements and concerns regarding potential effects of the Project on area
property values are recognized, but as discussed here, are beyond the scope of the Revised
DEIR. That is, the focal concern of CEQA is potentially significant physical impacts to the
environment [emphasis added]. Economic impacts (including potential impacts to area
property values) with no associated or causal physical impacts are not within the purview
of CEQA or the Revised DEIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-140
(a) Economic or social effects of a project shall not be treated as significant
effects on the environment. An EIR may trace a chain of cause and effect from
a proposed decision on a project through anticipated economic or social
changes resulting from the project to physical changes caused in turn by the
economic or social changes. The intermediate economic or social changes
need not be analyzed in any detail greater than necessary to trace the chain of
cause and effect. The focus of the analysis shall be on the physical changes.
[CEQA Guidelines, Section 15131 subd. (a)].
Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080, subd. (e),
below, the commentor’s statements alone are not considered substantial evidence that the
Project may have a significant effect on area property values:
e) (1) For the purposes of this section and this division, substantial evidence
includes fact, a reasonable assumption predicated upon fact, or expert
opinion supported by fact.
(2) Substantial evidence is not argument, speculation, unsubstantiated
opinion or narrative, evidence that is clearly inaccurate or erroneous, or
evidence of social or economic impacts that do not contribute to, or are not
caused by, physical impacts on the environment.
There is no demonstrated or substantiated evidence of a potential decline in area property
values should the Project be implemented. Similarly, there is no demonstrated or
substantiated potential physical impact (direct or indirect) due to a potential decline in area
property values, should such a decline occur. Absent substantiation, the commentor’s
statements in these regards (as well as other opinions provided) are considered speculative
and are forwarded to the decision-makers for their consideration.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-141
The Revised DEIR analysis appropriately focuses on potential physical impacts to the area
as a whole and the welfare of all persons residing there. Please refer also to responses to
these issues provided at Revised DEIR Appendix K.
Response CD-3
The commentor states that the Project will accept up to 150 truckloads or more [of trash]
per day.
The quantity of 150 truckloads [of trash] per day noted by the commentor is not cited in the
Revised DEIR, and is imprecise in determining potential traffic impacts and related
vehicular source noise and air quality impacts. Project trip generation is discussed in detail
within the Revised DEIR Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) (Revised DEIR Appendix B) and is
summarized at Revised DEIR Section 4.2.7.2 ‚Project Trip Generation.‛ Employing
applicable passenger car equivalence (PCE) ratios, the Project would generate
approximately 2,078 total daily trips (PCE). This total includes trips from self-haul trucks,
collections trucks, transfer trucks, and employees.
The commentor states that trash will come from ‚all over.‛
With regard to populations and areas served by the Project, the commentor’s statement that
trash will come from ‚all over‛ is inaccurate. As discussed in the Revised DEIR . . . ‚*i+t is
anticipated that various commercial waste haulers and private self-haulers would use the
Project facilities. The service area for the proposed transfer station generally falls within an
approximate six-mile radius of the site. Private and public haulers within this radius will
have the opportunity to use the proposed facility‚(Revised DEIR, Page 3-5).
Contrary to the commentor’s assertions otherwise, certain potential environmental benefits
resulting from the Project stem from its service area (extending beyond the City limits), and
consolidation of areawide waste management activities. That is, as discussed in the
Revised DEIR . . . ‚it is anticipated that by centralizing and consolidating waste collection
management services, the Project could act to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) within
the region, with associated reductions in regional traffic congestion and the generation of
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-142
traffic-related air pollutants. By reducing trip lengths for trash collection/trash hauling
vehicles, the Project could also act to reduce the quantity and types of air pollutant
emissions, storm water pollutants, and/or other contaminants that might otherwise be
generated or released by trash collection vehicles as they travel along area roads‛ (Revised
DEIR, Page 3-1).
The commentor provides opinions on potential traffic, noise, air pollution and odor impacts
of the Project . . . ‚Traffic will increase tremendously . . . throughout the streets of Pomona.
The traffic, noise and diesel smoke and smell of these large trucks will impact the air
quality throughout Pomona.‛
The trip generation estimates noted previously were employed in related Revised DEIR
assessments of the Project’s potential traffic impacts (See Revised DEIR at Section 4.2,
Traffic and Circualtion and Revised DEIR Appendix B, Traffic Impact Analysis); vehicular
source air quality impacts (See Revised DEIR at Section 4.3, Air Quality; and Revised DEIR
Appendix C, Air Quality Impact Analyses); and vehicular source noise impacts (See Revised
DEIR at Section 4.4, Noise; and Revised DEIR Appendix D, Noise Impact Analysis).
Representative Revised DEIR traffic, air quality, and noise discussions are presented below.
TRAFFIC
Project-related traffic impacts are presented at Revised DEIR Section 4.2, ‚Traffic and
Circulation,‛ and the detailed Project Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is presented at Revised
DEIR Appendix B. The Revised DEIR concludes that significant Level of Service (LOS)
impacts are projected under Opening Year Conditions (2011) at Mission Boulevard/SR-71:
. . . However, although construction of the required improvements at the
intersection of Mission Boulevard at SR-71 would successfully relieve the
existing LOS ‚F‛ conditions at this intersection, and mitigate Project-related
impacts, timely and successful completion of the improvements cannot be
assured prior to Project opening and is outside the control of the City of
Pomona. As such, there are no feasible mitigation measures that will, with
certainty, reduce the Project’s potential traffic impacts during the Opening
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-143
Year and Opening Year Cumulative scenarios. Pending completion of
required interchange improvements, Project-related traffic impacts at the
intersection of Mission Boulevard and SR-71 are determined to be significant.
These improvements are fully funded and are currently under construction
and completion of these improvements is anticipated in 2011. If these
improvements are completed before the Project is operational, the identified
impacts at Mission Boulevard and SR-71 will be mitigated to a less-than-
significant level . . . (Revised DEIR, Page 4.2-2).
Should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations acknowledging Project-specific and cumulatively significant LOS impacts at
Mission Boulevard at SR-71.
All other potential Project-related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are
substantiated to be less-than-significant or are reduced to levels that are less-than-
significant pursuant to the Revised DEIR mitigation measures.
Within the Revised DEIR, it is further recognized that Project-related traffic could, as a
secondary or indirect impact, result in increased air pollutants and vehicular noise along
area roadway corridors, which in turn could affect land uses adjacent to the utilized
corridors. These potential impacts are also evaluated in the Revised DEIR, and are
substantiated to be less-than-significant.
Specifically, heavy transfer trucks will access the Project site via designated truck routes
(Reservoir Street, Mission Boulevard, and east 9th Street, all of which currently convey
heavy truck traffic. Project traffic (transfer trucks) distribution is illustrated in TIA Exhibit
5-1. Smaller collection trucks and self-haul trucks are assumed to access the Project site via
the most expedient routes, and will travel along all classes of City roads, as is the current
condition. Please refer to TIA Exhibit 5-2. Based on the Project trip distribution, air quality
and noise analyses were conducted to determine whether potentially significant noise
and/or air quality impacts affecting roadway corridor land uses would result from Project
traffic.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-144
More specifically, as substantiated in the Revised DEIR, Project traffic (including heavy
truck traffic) will not result in potentially significant noise impacts affecting roadway
corridor land uses.
. . . Project-related vehicular source noise will increase ambient CNEL
conditions by, at most, 2.3 dBA, which would not be perceptible, and
therefore would not represent a substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise. Nor would Project-related vehicular source noise result in a
transitional exceedance in noise levels from below 60 dBA CNEL to above 60
dBA CNEL. The potential for Project vehicular source noise to result in a
substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity
above levels existing without the Project is therefore less-than-significant . . .
(Revised DEIR, Page 4.4-41).
With regard to air quality impacts generated by Project traffic along area roads, regionally
significant NOx emissions impacts would result as disclosed in the Revised DEIR and
discussed here. Locally significant air quality impacts would be limited to DPM-source
cancer risk threshold exceedances affecting the two (2) residences adjacent to the Project
site. At all other locations, localized air quality impacts resulting from Project operations
would be less-than-significant. In this regard, the Project Operational Localized
Significance Threshold (LST) analysis arguably considers potential worst case exposure by
evaluating pollutant concentrations at the Project site, which include pollutant emissions
generated by all vehicles within the site in combination with emissions generated by
stationary sources. As discussed in the Revised DEIR, these emissions concentrations would
not exceed applicable LST thresholds.
For operational activity, the total site area of 10.5 acres was utilized as the
emission source. In order to model worst-case conditions, the highest daily
peak emissions resulting from operational activity was utilized. Table 4.3-15
presents the results of the Project operational LST analysis, indicating
unmitigated conditions. As shown, results of the analysis indicate that long-
term operational emissions will not exceed localized emissions thresholds
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-145
established by the SCAQMD. Other operational mitigation measures
presented herein would act to further reduce already less-than-significant
potential operational LST impacts. (Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-79).
In comparison, pollutant emission concentrations generated by dispersed Project vehicles
traveling along area roads would be substantively reduced. These emissions in total would
likely be further reduced as waste collection and transfer vehicles transition from use of
diesel fuels to CNG.
AIR QUALITY
As also disclosed in the Revised DEIR (see below), Project operational source pollutant
emissions resulting from vehicular sources will exceed applicable SCAQMD regional
thresholds for NOx. With the exception of calculated NOx regional threshold exceedances,
all operational source pollutant emissions are less than-significant, or can be reduced to
levels that are less than-significant.
. . . Further, even after application of all feasible operational mitigation, the
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project will result in operational emissions of
oxides of nitrogen (NOx) that will exceed applicable SCAQMD regional
thresholds. . . (Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-2).
With specific regard to the calculated exceedance of NOx regional thresholds, NOx
emissions associated with Project operations are primarily tailpipe emissions which are
largely beyond the control of the Applicant. Over time, these emissions will be reduced
through improved engine technologies and tailpipe emissions controls. In any case, Project
operational source NOx emissions are reduced to the extent feasible through the Revised
DEIR mitigation measures and compliance with applicable SCAQMD rules:
. . . NOx is a byproduct of fuel combustion and the primary source of NOx
emissions from the Project are a result of tail pipe emissions from vehicles
accessing the site. Neither the Project Applicant nor the City has any
regulatory control over tail pipe emissions from individual sources. Rather,
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-146
vehicle tail pipe source emissions are regulated by CARB and USEPA. The
amount of NOx emissions from vehicle sources has been reduced
dramatically over the past years and is expected to further decline as clean
vehicle and fuel technologies improve . . . The Project implements all feasible
mitigation measures and complies with all applicable SCAQMD Rules
directed toward reduction of NOx emissions . . . (Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-78).
The Revised DEIR notes further that operational LSTs (including LSTs for NOx) would not
be exceeded, and that the Project’s operational emissions would not exceed the California
Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS):
. . . Under Project Buildout, operational activities will not exceed the
operational LSTs, and in so doing will not violate the CAAQS. While
operational emissions will be generated in excess of SCAQMD’s regional
threshold criteria for NOx, it is unlikely that a significant impact will occur as
these emissions are already accounted for in the AQMP since the proposed
Project is consistent with the adopted land use intensity and zoning (Revised
DEIR, Page 4.3-56).
The California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) noted above, not SCAQMD
regional emissions thresholds, represent and establish air quality safety threshold
conditions. The CAAQS recognize non-attainment conditions and account for ambient air
pollutant levels, and then establish threshold pollutant emissions concentration
levels/exposure times that provide an adequate margin of safety to protect the public health
and welfare.
With regard to Project contributions of NOx emissions as an ozone precursor, as discussed
in the Revised DEIR, the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) as a whole is a non-attainment area
for ozone. (See Revised DEIR Page 4.3-16.) Thus, all development projects within the Basin
that generate NOx emissions (essentially all development within the Basin) would to some
degree, contribute to existing ozone non-attainment conditions.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-147
Areawide ozone impacts and programs/strategies to reduce ozone levels are addressed
within the Basin’s 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (2007 AQMP). More specifically, the
purpose of the 2007 AQMP is to set forth a comprehensive program that will result in
compliance with federal and state air quality planning requirements for ozone and PM2.5.
On September 27, 2007, the CARB Board adopted the 2007 South Coast Air Quality
Management Plan as part of the State Strategy for the 2007 State Implementation Plan (SIP).
Additionally, the 2007 AQMP has been submitted to the U.S. EPA for approval; no timeline
on the approval is available at this time. The 2007 AQMP programs and strategies act to
address effects of ozone within the Basin, including effects of NOx generated as a precursor
to ozone.
The air quality conditions reflected in the 2007 AQMP are based on several assumptions.
For example, the 2007 AQMP has assumed that development associated with General Plans
will be realized in accordance with population growth projections identified by SCAG.
SCAG in turn develops population projections based on information provided by its
member governmental agencies (such as the City of Pomona). SCAG population
projections reflect buildout of the City of Pomona pursuant to the City’s adopted General
Plan, and emissions resulting from the City General Plan buildout are represented
accordingly within the 2007 AQMP.
The Project is consistent with the scope of development assumed under the City General
Plan, and is therefore reflected in SCAG growth projections, and related assumptions and
conditions presented in the 2007 AQMP. Thus, while Project operational NOx emissions
would exceed SCAQMD’s regional threshold criteria for NOx and therefore contribute to
areawide ozone levels, these emissions are already accounted for and addressed in the 2007
AQMP. The Project is also considered to be otherwise consistent with the 2007 AQMP (See
Revised DEIR, Pages 4.3-53 through 4.3-56). As noted above, the 2007 AQMP is the
adopted areawide plan addressing control and reduction of ozone emissions within the
Basin, and the Project’s consistency with the 2007 AQMP supports these ozone control and
reduction measures. Ultimately, emissions reductions achieved through the AQMP would
improve Basin air quality conditions and incrementally reduce associated Basin-wide health
concerns.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-148
It is also noted that the SCAQMD has not established localized significance thresholds
(LSTs) for ozone. However, the fact that localized NOx emissions would not exceed
applicable LSTs indicates the Project’s localized NOx contributions to ozone formation
would not be significant.
As also disclosed in the Revised DEIR (see below), Project operations will generate diesel
particulate matter (DPM) emissions that will result in localized exceedance of the SCAQMD
cancer risk threshold (10 per million population).
Additionally, even after application of all feasible mitigation, Project
operational diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions will result in
exceedance of the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold (10 per million population)
at two (2) residential receptors (1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street), located
respectively, westerly and easterly adjacent of the Project site. This
exceedance would occur under modeled 70-year and 30-year exposure
scenarios. Potential increased cancer risk incidence at all other receptors
would not exceed applicable SCAQMD threshold criteria. Under a shorter, 9-
year exposure scenario representative of area residency patterns, potential
DPM-source cancer risk thresholds would not be exceeded at any location
within the Study Area. Further, under all exposure scenarios (70-year, 30-
year, 9-year) potential health risks to off-site workers and schools in the area
will not exceed applicable SCAQMD threshold criteria (Revised DEIR, Page
4.3-2).
Cumulatively significant DPM emissions impacts would also be localized and limited to the
above-noted two (2) residential receptors at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street. (See Revised
DEIR, Page 5-16.)
It is also noted that in response to commentor concerns, and consistent with mitigation
refinements intended to be achieved through the CEQA and EIR review processes,
additional mitigation is proposed that would act to further reduce Project-related DPM
emissions. More specifically, additional/revised mitigation is proposed [MM 4.3.21
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-149
(A)mended and MM 4.3.22(A), below+ that would ensure future year (2020) ‚CNG-only‛
access restrictions for all transfer trucks and commercial trash collection vehicles served by
the Project. 17, 18
MM 4.3.21 (A): At Project opening, all transfer trucks and all Applicant-
controlled commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project
site shall be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent
technologies).
MM 4.3.22(A): On or before January 2, 2020, all transfer trucks and all
commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project site shall be
powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent technologies).
Health Risk Assessment (HRA) modeling of DPM-source cancer risks resulting from
application of proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) in combination with other DPM
emissions mitigation currently proposed in the Revised DEIR (See Revised DEIR Mitigation
Measures 4.3.17 through 4.3.20) has been conducted as one component of this Final EIR
(please refer to HRA Addendum included at Final EIR Appendix A). Results of the HRA
Addendum indicate that with the stipulated conversion of diesel-fueled vehicles to CNG
vehicles described herein, the Year 2020 maximum potential cancer risk exposure at any
potentially affected receptor would be reduced to levels that are less-than-significant.
More specifically, at the maximally impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth
Street), the mitigated cancer risk would be 3.98 per million. The residential use
experiencing the second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the
mitigated cancer risk would be 0.52 per million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer risk
would therefore be less than the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per million.
17 The Year 2020 timeframe implementation schedule proposed here is consistent with, and parallels
EPA/CARB tiered emissions reductions goals for heavy-duty trucks.
18 Proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) would replace/supercede MM 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 currently
reflected in the Revised DEIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-150
The HRA Addendum results indicate further, that under no circumstance would area
schools be significantly affected by DPM emissions, nor would DPM emissions result in any
potentially significant non-cancer risks. Please refer also to detailed HRA modeling results
presented at Final EIR Appendix A.
Notwithstanding these findings, this Final EIR conservatively maintains previous
conclusions regarding potential Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risks.
That is, for the purposes of disclosure, and to maintain the conservative analysis construct
employed to date, Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risk exposures at the
residences located at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street are considered to be significant until
the Year 2020. No other locations would experience potentially adverse elevated DPM-
source cancer risk exposures (or non-cancer risk exposures) resulting from Project
operations or activities. Please refer also to related discussions of DPM emissions impacts
and proposed additional/revised mitigation presented at Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions
and Errata Corrections.‛
Should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations acknowledging significant Project-specific, and cumulative localized DPM
emissions impacts.
Diesel odor concerns cited by the commentor may occur along roadways carrying heavy
truck traffic. However, these odors are transient and rapidly dispersed by area winds and
by the movements of the source vehicles. As a means of reducing/eliminating diesel
emissions and associated odors, the commercial solid waste collection fleet accessing the
Project will transition from diesel-powered to natural gas-powered vehicles. Please refer to
Revised DEIR Mitigation Measures 4.3.16 [4.3.21], 4.3.17 [4.3.22] listed previously.
Any residual odors generated by transient diesel vehicles may be perceptible. However,
such odors would not persist nor constitute ‚objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people,‛ and would therefore be considered less-than-significant.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-151
NOISE
As discussed in the Revised DEIR, vehicular source noise generated by Project operations
would not adversely affect any area land uses:
. . . Project-related vehicular source noise will increase ambient CNEL
conditions by, at most, 2.3 dBA, which would not be perceptible, and
therefore would not represent a substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise. Nor would Project-related vehicular source noise result in a
transitional exceedance in noise levels from below 60 dBA CNEL to above 60
dBA CNEL. The potential for Project vehicular source noise to result in a
substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity
above levels existing without the Project is therefore less-than-significant
(Revised DEIR, Page 4.4-41).
Similarly, as mitigated, noise generated by Project stationary/area sources would not
adversely affect any area land uses:
. . . Based on the potential for substantial increases in nighttime noise levels
at 1415 9th Street, an analysis was completed to determine what, if any,
operational noise reductions could be achieved by limiting the Project
operational hours during noise-sensitive nighttime hours (10:00 PM to 7:00
AM). In this regard, other operational hour limitations imposed through
Project Air Quality Mitigation Measure 4.3.12 restrict the Project operations
to the hours of 6:00 AM to 6:00 PM. Assuming these same limitations are
applied in the noise analysis, only operations occurring within the 6:00 AM to
7:00 AM hour would be governed by the City of Pomona nighttime noise
limits. [Draft EIR] Table 4.4-14 provides the results of modeling for potential
noise impacts during the 6:00 AM to 7:00 AM hour (Revised DEIR, Page 4.4-
47).
. . . [Draft EIR] Table 4.4-14 indicates that during the hour of 6:00 AM to 7:00
AM, inclusive of Project operational/area source noise, noise levels at the
nearest residential receptors will range from 58.4 to 61.4 dBA Leq; and that
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-152
Project operational/area source noise contributions will range from 0.0 to 1.4
dBA Leq. Incremental Project operational/area source noise levels during the
single affected nighttime hour (6:00 AM to 7:00 AM) will be less than 3.0 dBA,
and would therefore be less-than-significant (Revised DEIR, Page 4.4-48).
The commentor’s statements regarding the Project’s potential traffic, noise, air pollution,
and odor impacts are forwarded to the decision-makers for their consideration.
Response CD-4
The commentor speculates that . . . ‚odor, insects and rats related with this type of facility
will increase, leaving the surrounding property owners subject to dealing with them.‛
Potential odor impacts of the Project are addressed at Revised DEIR Section 4.3, Air Quality
(Revised DEIR at Pages 4.3-102 through 4.3-106), and within Appendix F to the Air Quality
Impact Analysis (included at Revised DEIR Appendix C). The concluding summary
provided at Revised DEIR Page 4.3-112 is excerpted below. Odor impact Mitigation
Measure 4.3.18 [4.3.23 as revised] has been clarified/amended pursuant to
recommendations provided by the South Coast Air Quality Management District in their
review of the March 2010 Draft EIR.
Summary
Based on air sampling and analysis conducted at the existing Grand Central
Transfer Station, as translated and applied to the Project, unmitigated odors
generated by the Project are not anticipated to exceed applicable odor
thresholds under any conditions except potential short-term emergency
conditions. Mandated compliance with SCAQMD Rule 410 and the approval
and implementation of the OIMP ensure that impacts related to odors under
all conditions (including any potential emergency conditions) are less-than-
significant.
Level of Significance: As noted, mandated compliance with SCAQMD Rule
410 and the approval and implementation of the OIMP ensure that impacts
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-153
related to odors under all conditions (including any potential emergency
conditions) are less-than-significant. The following Mitigation Measures
4.3.23 through 4.3.26 are proposed to ensure timely monitored
implementation of the odor-minimizing measures discussed above, which
will ensure compliance with OIMP/AOMP requirements and performance
standards.
Mitigation Measures:
4.3.23 The Project shall comply with SCAQMD Rule 410 and the SCAQMD-
approved Odor Impact Minimization Plan (OIMP). In support of Rule 410/OIMP
compliance, the main transfer station building shall incorporate an overhead water
misting system designed for dust suppression and odor mitigation over the entire
tipping floor area, transfer tunnel area and areas as may be specified by SCAQMD
pursuant to the approved OIMP. The misting system shall inject and mix an odor-
destroying compound (AIR8-AQUA Oil or similar compound) to eliminate odors
emanating from materials on the tipping floor. Nozzles shall be positioned around the
access doors, above the loading pits, and at other points based on manufacturer
specifications and recommendations and as provided for in the OIMP. All dust/odor
control systems shall employ Best Available Technologies (BATs). The system shall
be designed, implemented and operated so that odors are effectively neutralized
within the Project site.
4.3.24 Roof-mounted exhaust fans to be located in the main transfer station building
shall be designed to draw fresh air in through the building doors and openings, over
the transfer floor, and discharge it through the roof.
4.3.25 The primary method of odor control employed by the proposed Project will be
to restrict waste dumping, sorting, and processing to inside the building. Cleaning
the inside of the transfer building and equipment at the end of each day with a
mechanical sweeper, hand-brooming, and wipe down will also mitigate odors. Per
state regulations, waste shall not be stored on the site for more than 48 hours.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-154
4.3.26 The Project shall obtain approval of the proposed draft OIMP as set forth in
the EIR technical Appendices (Revised Draft EIR Appendix G, Operational
Programs), and as also submitted to the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) and the
City of Pomona. As approved, the OIMP shall include design features that comply
with Appendix A of SCAQMD Rule 410.
Level of Significance After Mitigation: Less-Than-Significant.
As indicated, with the application of mitigation, potential odor impacts of the Project are
less-than-significant.
Potential vector impacts (rodents, insects, birds) are addressed through mandated
compliance with Department of Resources and Recycling (CalRecycle) [formerly California
Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB)] Regulations as presented at Revised DEIR
Section 3.0, ‚Project Description,‛ and excerpted here:
Vector and Pest Control – CIWMB [CalRecycle] Regulations require
‚adequate steps to control or prevent the propagation, harborage and
attraction of flies, rodents, or other vectors, and animals, and to minimize
bird attraction.‛ (14 CCR § 17410.4.)
The Project incorporates the following design elements in a prepared Vector
Control Plan and CIWMB requirements and performance standards,
providing for pest and vector control:
The transfer station operations will be conducted within an enclosed
building, thereby minimizing the propagation or attraction of pests
(insects, rodents) and other animals or vectors;
The transfer station will be cleaned daily of loose materials and litter; and
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-155
Maximum storage time and volume of salvage material will conform with
CIWMB [CalRecycle] and City of Pomona permit requirements,
minimizing potential attraction or presence of pests or nuisances. To
minimize the potential for rodents, birds, and insects, waste will be
loaded into trailers on a first-in, first-out basis. Rodent traps will be set,
and spraying for insect control will be implemented as needed (Revised
DEIR, Page 3-37).
Please refer also to related supporting discussions presented at Revised DEIR Pages 3-39
through 3-42, and Revised DEIR Section 4.5, ‚Hazards/Hazardous Materials,‛ Page 4.5-31.
Compliance with existing CIWMB [CalRecycle] Regulations reduces potential vector
impacts to levels that are less-than-significant.
The commentor’s statements regarding potential odor/vector impacts are forwarded to the
decision-makers for their consideration.
Response CD-5
The commentor speculates on potential future capacity expansion of the Project.
Capacity expansion beyond the requested 1,500 tons per day CIWMB [CalRecycle]
permitting cited in the Revised DEIR Project Description is not evaluated in the Revised
DEIR. The Lead Agency will determine the type and extent of any required supporting or
subsequent environmental evaluation that may be required if such a future expansion is
proposed. As with the current Project, the Lead Agency will ultimately approve or deny
any future expansion should it be proposed.
Further, the proposed facility is not ‚over-sized‛ as suggested by the commentor. The
proposed facility was designed to accommodate the completion of required activities in a
closed space. Such activities include the operation of equipment to segregate trash dumped
on the tipping floor, with enough room to ensure that equipment can operate safely
alongside workers, and to ensure an efficient trash transfer capability whereby trash can be
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-156
pushed into the loading opening in the floor to awaiting trash transfer trucks. In order to
accommodate these activities, a 1,500 tons per day trash transfer operation requires the
amount of space provided for in the Project design. Enclosure of these activities realized
through the Project design acts to reduce potential environmental effects such as noise and
air pollution.
The commentor’s statements regarding potential future capacity expansion are forwarded
to the decision-makers for their consideration.
Response CD-6
The commentor provides concluding remarks stating that the City would be better served if
the Project were located elsewhere. The commentor provides opinions on traffic, aesthetic,
noise, air quality and hazards aspects of the Project.
Location of the Project is considered appropriate based on consistency/compatibility with
existing and proposed land uses, as discussed at Revised DEIR Section 4.1, Land Use:
As noted previously in this Section, industrial uses proposed by the Project
are allowed under the Project site’s current General Plan Land Use
designation, ‚General Manufacturing.‛ Further, uses proposed by the Project
are conditionally permitted under the site’s current M-2 zoning designation.
Adjacent properties are similarly designated ‚General Manufacturing‛ under
the City General Plan, are zoned M-2 and are either developed with
industrial uses or are allowed to be developed with such uses. As such, the
Project does not require nor propose a change in General Plan or zoning
designations; and properties adjacent to the Project site area are either
currently developed with uses similar to the Project, or allow for
development of similar uses (Revised DEIR, Page 4.1-18).
Further, potential alternative sites for the Project are evaluated at Revised DEIR Section 5.0,
‚Other CEQA Considerations,‛ and none of the Alternative Sites would substantively
reduce the Project’s significant environmental impacts while feasibly allowing for
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-157
implementation of the Project and attainment of the basic Project Objectives. That is, as
discussed in the Revised DEIR, any potential Alternative Site should be evaluated based on
its potential to reduce or minimize potentially significant environmental impacts of the
Project. However, this is not the sole criterion employed in evaluating a potential
Alternative Site or Sites. An Alternative Site is also evaluated based on the feasibility of
achieving basic Project Objectives at its particular location. The State Legislature has
defined ‚feasible,‛ for purposes of CEQA review, as ‚capable of being accomplished in a
successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic,
environmental, social, and technological factors.‛ CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a)
notes that ‚An EIR is not required to consider alternatives which are infeasible.‛
As further discussed in the Revised DEIR, Alternative Sites considered for analysis were
distilled from the list of sites deemed potentially feasible by the City’s Ad Hoc Solid Waste
Study Committee (formation of Committee approved by the Pomona City Council in 1999).
Of the sites listed by the Committee, most were of insufficient acreage to accommodate the
Project (less than 10 acres) and were not further considered on this basis. Six (6) of the sites,
however, conformed to basic feasibility criteria: +/- 10 acres; rectangular configuration;
compatible with existing and proposed land uses; proximate access to local roadway
systems; and, available or anticipated utilities infrastructure. These six sites were
preliminarily evaluated through review of aerial photographs and site inspections. On the
basis of preliminary evaluation, development of the Project on five (5) of the sites was
determined to be infeasible and/or not capable of materially reducing the Project’s
environmental impacts. One of these six (6) sites (2205 Mount Vernon Avenue) is further
evaluated in the Revised DEIR, and development of the Project on it is also ultimately
determined to be infeasible, and not capable of materially reducing impacts resulting from
the Project.
Within the context of feasibility, location of the Project at another site, as recommended by
the commentor, would require availability of another site that is approximately 10 acres
and rectangular; is located in a designated industrial area; has proximate acceptable access;
is compatible with existing and proposed land uses; is provided available or anticipated
utilities infrastructure; would achieve the basic Project Objectives; and would not result in
new environmental impacts, nor increase the severity of environmental impacts otherwise
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-158
occurring under the Project. Such a site was not identified by the City’s Ad Hoc Solid
Waste Study Committee. Nor is any such site available wherein the Project could be
accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into
account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors. The Revised DEIR
evaluation of potential Alternative Sites is, therefore, adequate and fulfills the requirements
established under CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, subd. (f) (2).
The commentor’s opinions regarding the Project’s potential traffic, noise and air quality
impacts are addressed in the Revised DEIR as cited previously in these responses. Please
refer to Responses CD-1 through CD-5. Additional opinions regarding generalized
aesthetic and hazards issues are also expressed by the commentor. These, too, are
addressed in the Revised DEIR (see below).
Aesthetics
No scenic or otherwise visually important or valuable resources exist within
the Project site and the Project will have no discernible effect on off-site
designated resources. However, the Project Initial Study acknowledges that
construction of the industrial uses proposed by the Project will substantially
alter visual perception of the subject site and vicinity when compared to the
site’s current, underutilized condition. The Project site currently contains
limited development consisting of a temporary building; limited areas of
ornamental landscaping; asphalt, concrete pads, walkways and gutters;
various utilities fixtures; and fencing. The majority of these would be razed
and replaced with the structures proposed by the Project (please refer to
Section 3.0, Project Description, for conceptual illustrations). Development
within the Project area is subject to the site development standards
established under the City’s existing ‚M-2‛ (General Industrial) zoning
designation, including requirements for setbacks, landscape buffers, walls
and fencing which, in combination, will serve to screen views of the Project
site as seen from adjacent properties and roadways.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-159
Moreover, the Project is subject to additional standards, including site
development requirements, such as may be identified under the Conditional
Use Permit (CUP) required for the Project. Through its development review,
building permit review, certificate of occupancy, and CUP compliance review
processes, the City assures and promotes visually acceptable and compatible
development.
Development proposed under the Project will introduce new sources of light
to the Project site including parking lot, building accent and security lighting.
Illuminated signs will also be used throughout the Project site. Compliance
with existing lighting standards and any specific lighting standards that may
be stipulated under the Project’s CUP will ensure that any potential light and
glare impacts remain at a less-than-significant level. As supported by the
preceding, the Project will have less-than-significant impacts for the
following aesthetic considerations:
• Substantial adverse effects on a scenic vista;
• Substantial damage to scenic resources, including, but not limited to,
trees, rocks, outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic
highway;
• Substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the
site and its surroundings; and
• Creation of a new source of substantial light or glare, which would
adversely affect the day or nighttime views in the area (Revised DEIR,
Pages 1-7, 1-8).
Revised DEIR Section 4.5 ‚Hazards and Hazardous Materials,‛ and extensive technical
information provided in the Revised DEIR Appendices (e.g., Appendix C, Air Quality
Impact Analyses, Health Risk Assessment; Appendix I Phase I/Phase II Environmental Site
Assessments) describe and evaluate potential hazards/hazardous materials impacts of the
Project. As discussed and disclosed in the Revised DEIR:
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-160
Even with the application of all feasible mitigation, Project-related DPM-
source cancer risk significance thresholds (SCAQMD threshold for lifetime
residential exposure) will be exceeded at two (2) residential receptors
adjacent to the Project site (residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street).
This is considered a significant and unavoidable impact of the Project. No
other receptors (whether residential, worker or schools) are subject to
potential cancer risk threshold exceedances. As the two (2) affected non-
conforming residential uses transition to industrial uses per the City General
Plan, Project-related cancer risk exceedances would be alleviated (Revised
DEIR, Page 1-25).
All other potential hazards/hazardous material impacts resulting from or caused by the
Project are less-than-significant, or are mitigated to levels that are less-than-significant.
The commentor’s statements and opinions regarding (re)location of the Project and its
traffic, aesthetic, noise, air quality and hazards aspects are forwarded to the decision-
makers for their consideration.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-162
Leonard Baleon
2106 Marquette Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter #1 Dated February 18, 2011
Response LB1-1
The commentor states support for the Project, citing an opportunity for new business and
increased jobs for the City of Pomona. The commentor’s statements will be forwarded to
decision-makers for their consideration.
Response LB1-2
The commentor cites criteria from the City’s Ad Hoc Solid Waste Study Committee which
was formed in 1999. The commentor also expresses opinions regarding the service area of
the proposed Project. The Revised DEIR notes that ‚*t+he service area for the proposed
transfer station generally falls within an approximate six-mile radius of the site. Private and
public haulers within this radius will have the opportunity to use the proposed facility.‛
(Revised DEIR, Page 3-5).
Response LB1-3
In the interest of accuracy, it is noted that the commentor’s statement that the Project ‚has
received a Gold LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Certification‛ is
premature. A preliminary evaluation and identification of the Project’s LEED certification
attributes and requirements is provided at Revised DEIR Appendix J; however, actual
LEED certification is customarily awarded upon a project’s completion. The commentor’s
opinions in support of the proposed Project are forwarded to decision-makers for their
consideration.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-164
Leonard Baleon
2106 Marquette Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter #2 Dated February 18, 2011
Response LB2-1 through LB2-3
The comments in this letter appear to duplicate those of the preceding letter (identified in
this Final EIR as ‚LB1‛), which was addressed to the City of Pomona Planning
Commission. Accordingly, please refer to the preceding responses LB1-1 through LB1-3.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-166
Anayansi Balmaceda
1675 S. Reservoir Street
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter #1 Received March 10, 2011
Response AB1-1
In general, the commentor provides support for the Project, citing its potential economic
and employment benefits. The commentor does not identify any environmental concerns
or concerns with the Revised DEIR analysis and its findings. The commentor’s statements
are forwarded to the decision-makers.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-168
Anayansi Balmaceda
1675 S. Reservoir Street
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter #2 Received March 10, 2011
Response AB2-1
Commentor statements reiterate and paraphrase statements provided in correspondence
received March 10, 2011, addressed to the City of Pomona Planning Department (See
Anayansi Balmaceda Letter #1).
Please refer to previous Response AB1-1.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-170
Joe Bauman
2190 Marquette Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter #1 Dated March 7, 2011
Response JB1-1
The commentor provides support for the Project, citing an increase in jobs and revenue for
the City of Pomona. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers.
Response JB1-2
The commentor offers an opinion that the Project is ‚well designed‛ and ‚meets independent
criteria.‛ The commentor’s opinion is forwarded to the decision-makers.
Response JB1-3
The commentor notes the Project consistency with existing zoning. The commentor offers
an opinion that the Project should ‚be given serious consideration and then approved for the
greater good.‛ The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-172
Joe Bauman
2190 Marquette Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter #2 Dated March 7, 2011
Responses JB2-1 through JB2-3
Commentor statements reiterate and paraphrase statements provided in correspondence
dated March 7, 2011, addressed to the City of Pomona Planning Department (See Joe
Bauman Letter #1).
Please refer to previous Responses JB1-1 through JB1-3.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-174
Elizabeth Butcher and Angela Rodriguez
2210 Marquette Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter #1 Dated March 8, 2011
Response EBAR1-1
The commentors state support for the Project, citing an opportunity for new business and
increased jobs for the City of Pomona. The commentors’ statements are forwarded to
decision-makers for their consideration.
Response EBAR1-2
The commentors note that the Project is ‚the type of development that many cities now have to
consider given the fact that landfills are reaching capacity,‛ and confirm the Project’s consistency
with existing zoning.
Response EBAR1-3
The commentors’ opinions regarding the City’s existing and planned industrial uses are
forwarded to decision-makers for their consideration.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-176
Elizabeth Butcher and Angela Rodriguez
2210 Marquette Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter #2 Dated March 8, 2011
Responses EBAR2-1 through EBAR2-3
Commentors statements reiterate and paraphrase statements provided in correspondence
dated March 8, 2011, addressed to the City of Pomona Planning Department (See Elizabeth
Butcher and Angela Rodriguez Letter #1).
Please refer to previous Responses EBAR1-1 through EBAR1-3.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-178
Tony Cerda
240 E. 1st Street
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter #1 Dated March 7, 2011
Response TC1-1
The commentor states support for the Project, citing an increase in jobs and revenue for the
City of Pomona. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to decision-makers for their
consideration.
Response TC1-2
The commentor states an opinion that the Project is ‚a well-designed modern facility‛ and
notes the Project’s consistency with existing zoning. The commentor also references an
independent study which suggested the Project site as an appropriate location for the
proposed Project; however, the source of this study is not substantiated by the commentor.
Response TC1-3
The commentor requests that the Lead Agency consider and approve the proposed
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to
decision-makers for their consideration.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-180
Tony Cerda
240 E. 1st Street
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter #2 Dated March 7, 2011
Responses TC2-1 through TC2-3
Commentor statements reiterate and paraphrase statements provided in correspondence
dated March 7, 2011, addressed to the City of Pomona Planning Department (See Tony
Cerda Letter #1).
Please refer to previous Responses TC1-1 through TC1-3.
ZCJC1-1
ZCJC1-2
ZCJC1-3
ZCJC1-4
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-182
Zennie Cummings and Johnnie Clark
2189 Marquette Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter #1 Dated March 7, 2011
Response ZCJC1-1
The commentors state their residency in the City of Pomona and express support for the
Project. The commentors cite Project job creation and revenues as basis for support. Job
creation and economic growth noted by the commentors are consistent with the Project
Objective to ‚*f+oster economic growth and create additional employment opportunities for
City and area residents‛ (Revised DEIR, Page 3-45). Commentor statements of support are
forwarded to the decision-makers.
Response ZCJC1-2
The commentors offer their concerned opinion regarding the roads, traffic conditions, and
streetlights in the surrounding area. The commentors suggest that the Project will
contribute fees and tax revenues to the City that may be used in the repair and maintenance
of roads.
Response ZCJC1-3
The commentors speculate on the motivation of some council candidates during the last
City election. The commentors state the opinion that, despite the council candidates
portrayal of the Project, the commentors feel that the Project is ‚an environmentally sound
project,‛ as evidenced by its LEED Gold Certification. In the interest of accuracy, it is noted
that the commentors’ statement that the Project has received a LEED [Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design] Gold Certification is premature. A preliminary evaluation and
identification of the Project’s LEED certification attributes and requirements is provided at
Revised DEIR Appendix J; however, actual LEED certification is customarily awarded upon
a project’s completion. The commentors’ opinions in support of the proposed Project are
forwarded to decision-makers for their consideration.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-183
Response ZCJC1-4
The commentors restate their support to approve the Project. The commentors’ statements
are forwarded to the decision-makers.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-185
Zennie Cummings and Johnnie Clark
2189 Marquette Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter #2 Dated March 7, 2011
Responses ZCJC2-1 through ZCJC2-4
Commentor statements reiterate and paraphrase statements provided in correspondence
dated March 7, 2011, addressed to the City of Pomona Planning Department (See Zennie
Cummings and Johnnie Clark Letter #1).
Please refer to previous Responses ZCJC1-1 through ZCJC1-3.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-187
Lisa Engdahl
770 W. 7th Street
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter Dated March 11, 2011
Response LE-1
The commentor states opposition to the Project. The commentor states concern for the
health of her daughter, and air quality impacts and traffic impacts affecting the community.
The commentor states concern for the reputation of the City of Pomona.
Commentor opposition to the Project is noted and no further response is required in this
regard. Commentor concern for the health of children, and concern for air quality and
traffic impacts affecting the community are acknowledged. The commentor does not
identify specific health, air quality or traffic concerns. It is difficult to provide on-point
responses to the generalized concerns expressed by the commentor.
As a general response, the Revised DEIR presents extensive discussion and analysis of
potential health risks resulting from the Project (Revised DEIR at Pages 4.3-85 through 4.3-
106; Revised DEIR Appendix C, Air Quality Impact Analyses). With application of
mitigation, two (2) residences (both of which are non-conforming residential uses in an
industrial area) are subject to cancer risk exposures exceeding applicable SCAQMD
thresholds. No other health risks and no potentially significant health risks to children are
projected.19 Air quality impacts are discussed at Revised DEIR Section 4.3, Air Quality;
with technical supporting studies provided at Revised DEIR Appendix C, Air Quality
Impact Analyses. Significant air quality impacts of the Project are summarized at Revised
DEIR Page 1-25. These include: temporary exceedance of PM10/PM2.5 localized significance
thresholds (LSTs) during construction; cancer risk exposures exceeding applicable
SCAQMD thresholds at two (2) residences; and exceedance of SCAQMD regional
thresholds for NOx. Pending completion of required interchange improvements,
19 Please refer also to proposed additional/revised mitigation of DPM emissions impacts discussed at Final
EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions and Errata Corrections.‛
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-188
significant Project-related traffic impacts are conservatively assumed to occur at the
intersection of Mission Boulevard and SR-71. No other significant traffic impacts are
projected. Should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a Statement of
Overriding Considerations acknowledging the Project-specific and cumulatively significant
impacts. The reputation of the City is not a physical impact to the environment, and is not
evaluated under CEQA. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Please refer also to extensive discussions/responses to these same issues presented at
Revised DEIR Appendix K.
Response LE-2
The commentor’s appreciation for the professional manner of her interactions with City
staff, specifically Ms. Judy Kollar, is both acknowledged and appreciated.
Response LE-3
The commentor states concerns regarding Project-related cancer risk threshold
exceedances, exceedance of SCAQMD regional thresholds for NOx, Project-related traffic
impacts, and Project-related noise impacts. The commentor offers an opinion that . . . ‚it is
unacceptable for the city to move forward on a project that exceeds SCAQMD’s regional threshold
by over three times, making us more susceptible to asthma and other respiratory illness.‛ The
commentor notes that there are ten (10) schools within a one-mile radius of the Project site,
and offers an opinion that the Project-related exceedance of SCAQMD regional thresholds
for NOx would result in increased health risks at area schools.
Cancer risk threshold exceedances affecting two non-conforming residential uses are
discussed in the Revised DEIR and at Response 1, above. Project-related air quality impacts
are discussed in the Revised DEIR and at Response 1, above. Significant Project-related
noise impacts are summarized at Revised DEIR Page 1-25: ‚Noise generated by Project
construction activities will temporarily and intermittently exceed the City’s 65 dBA
standard . . .‛ With application of mitigation, the Project will not result in or cause any
significant long-term noise impacts.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-189
Potential air quality impacts affecting sensitive receptors, including the ten schools cited by
the commentor, are discussed at length in the Revised DEIR (please refer to Revised DEIR
Pages 4.3-78 through 4.3-106. Area school uses would be affected by Project-related NOx
regional threshold exceedances to the same extent as would other land uses in the South
Coast Air Basin. These exceedances would not, however, constitute a health hazard under
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards or California Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS/CAAQS), and would not directly result in adverse effects at area schools. Results
and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected. Please refer also to extensive
discussions/responses to these same issues presented at Revised DEIR Appendix K.
Response LE-4
The commentor states disagreement with the Project location within the City of Pomona.
The commentor offers an opinion that ‚it is inequitable to expect us to process other cities’ trash
and suffer the environmental consequences.‛
The commentor does not identify specific concerns regarding physical environmental
impacts of the Project. It is difficult to provide on-point responses to the generalized
concerns expressed by the commentor. As a general response to location of the Project
within the City, the Project location is consistent with and supports the Project Objectives
(Revised DEIR Pages 3-44, 3-45). Potential relocation of the Project at Alternative Sites
within the City is considered and evaluated at Revised DEIR Pages 5-32 through 5-38. As
discussed in the Revised DEIR, no demonstrable reduction in environmental impacts
would be achieved through relocation of the Project. The Lead Agency has no
jurisdictional authority to suggest, propose, or evaluate location of the Project at a site
outside of the City. The commentor’s opinion regarding inequitable location of the Project
within the City is forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised
DEIR are not affected. Please refer also to extensive discussions/responses to these same
issues presented at Revised DEIR Appendix K.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-190
Response LE-5
The commentor notes that environmental justice considerations are discussed at Revised
DEIR Appendix H. The commentor erroneously presents findings of Appendix H out of
context.
In complete context, Revised DEIR Appendix H first notes that environmental justice
considerations are not physical impacts to the environment and are not explicitly addressed
under CEQA. ‚Notwithstanding, as a member Board overseen by the California
Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA), the California Integrated Waste Management
Board (CIWMB) has included the recognition of the principles of environmental justice as
an integral part of its review and permitting actions. Moreover, the analysis presented here
is intended to provide all review agencies and decision-makers with information
addressing potential environmental justice implications of the Project‛ (Revised DEIR
Appendix H, Page 1). At Page H-17, the Revised DEIR discussion of environmental justice
considerations notes that ‚there is a potential for the Project to result in disproportionate
impacts to minority populations. However, low-income populations within the affected
area comprise less than 50 percent of the total population. Based on EPA guidance, low-
income status is not a determining environmental justice parameter.‛ As further discussed
at Page H-18:
. . . [a]s indicated, minority populations comprise more than 50 percent of
the total population within all geographic areas of analysis (Project Site
Census Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, and County), and all tiers of
geographic areas would be considered Environmental Justice Communities.
Any project with significant environmental impacts under CEQA would also
have potential environmental justice concerns if located in the Project Site
Census Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, or County.
Continuing, the Appendix H discussion notes:
With respect to the above potential environmental justice concerns, it is noted
that significant impacts affecting the local environmental justice community
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-191
are a product, at least in part, of the presence of non-conforming residential
uses within an area planned and designated for industrial development. On-
going transition of these non-conforming residential uses to industrial
development, as envisioned under the City General Plan, would tend to
alleviate impacts attributable to exposure of residences to proximate
industrial uses. Notwithstanding, in the course of this transition, non-
conforming residential uses located near existing or proposed industrial uses
are subject to increased environmental effects and potential environmental
justice concerns.
It is also recognized that temporary construction impacts, such as those
resulting from the Project, are typical and generally unavoidable for any
development project located adjacent to residential uses. In this sense, these
impacts are not Project-specific, and would likely occur to some degree under
all development scenarios at the Project site due to the presence of proximate
non-conforming sensitive receptors (Appendix H, Page H-19).
As noted previously, while environmental justice is not a CEQA issue, the analysis of these
concerns presented in the Revised DEIR is intended to provide all review agencies and
decision-makers with information addressing potential environmental justice implications
of the Project. The commentor’s opinions are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results
and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response LE-6
The commentor states: ‚While it is important for this city to effectively manage its garbage
processing needs, decisions on this matter should be made at the initiative of the local government
and with widespread community participation, not in response to a profit-seeking corporation’s
proposal.‛
The commentor does not identify environmental concerns or concerns with the Revised
DEIR analysis and its findings. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-
makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-192
Response LE-7
The commentor urges ‚the planning commission to deny this bid and do what is best for
Pomona.‛ The commentor states: ‚[g]arbage processing is not the kind of ‘development’ we want,
and trash is not what we want this city to be known for.‛
The commentor does not identify environmental concerns or concerns with the Revised
DEIR analysis and its findings. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-
makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-194
Adrienne Garcia
1623 Redbud Place
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter Dated March 11, 2011
Response AG-1
The commentor provides support for the Project, citing new business opportunities for the
City of Pomona. Commentor support is noted and the commentor’s statements are
forwarded to decision-makers.
Response AG-2
The commentor cites job creation and consistency with the existing industrial zoning as
reasons for support of the Project. The commentor suggests that the Project should ‚be
given serious consideration and then approved for the greater good.‛ The commentor’s statements
are forwarded to the decision-makers.
Response AG-3
The commentor states an opinion that, despite certain City Council candidate’s portrayal of
the Project, she feels the Project is ‚well designed‛ and ‚meets independent criteria.‛ The
commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-196
P. Scott Harmon, C. P. A.
19 Cottontail Drive
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter Dated March 12, 2011
Response PSH-1
The commentor recognizes the Pomona Valley Waste Transfer Station Project (Project),
proposed on the 1300 block of [East] Ninth Street [in the City of Pomona].
Commentor recognition of the Project is noted. Please refer to Revised DEIR for detailed
description of the Project. As noted by the commentor, the Project site is located within the
1300 block of East Ninth Street within the City of Pomona. More specifically, as noted in
the Revised DEIR, the Project site is located at 1371 East 9th Street (Revised DEIR, Page 1-2,
et al.).
Response PSH-2
The commentor states disapproval of the Project. The commentor notes employment
opportunities created by the Project. The commentor states that if creation of additional
employment opportunities . . . ‚is the only consideration you may as well zone Holt Avenue for
legal prostitution.‛ The commentor misstates potential diesel risks resulting from the
Project.
Commentor disapproval of the Project is noted. Employment opportunities (approximately
45 to 50 jobs) created by the Project are identified in the Revised DEIR (Revised DEIR, Page
1-6, et al.). Job creation is not the sole Objective of the Project.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-197
Project Objectives are identified in the Revised DEIR:
3.5 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The Applicant has established the following primary Project Objectives:
• Manage municipal solid waste in an efficient and cost-effective manner
consistent with the State’s AB 939 mandates;
• Provide a minimum 20-year waste transfer capacity to the region to
accommodate future growth and increased total waste generation;
• Enhance customer service and stabilize rising solid waste collection costs;
• Minimize haul distances for collection trucks by providing locally-available
solid waste transfer and material recovery operations;
• Provide a facility that maximizes solid waste management efficiencies
while concurrently reducing potential environmental impacts, including, but
not limited to, land use, traffic, air quality, water quality, noise, visual, and
odor impacts;
• Establish a waste transfer facility with proximate rail access in anticipation
of potential future regional or inter-regional rail-oriented waste hauling
operations; and
• Foster economic growth and create additional employment opportunities
for City and area residents (Revised DEIR Pages 3-44, 3-45, et al.).
Project diesel emissions will result in calculated exceedance of SCAQMD cancer risks
thresholds at the two (2) non-conforming residential uses located adjacent to the Project
site.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-198
Cancer Risks Threshold Exceedances
Even with the application of all feasible mitigation, Project-related DPM-
source cancer risk significance thresholds (SCAQMD threshold for lifetime
residential exposure) will be exceeded at two (2) residential receptors
adjacent to the Project site (residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street).
This is considered a significant impact of the Project. No other receptors
(whether residential, worker or schools) are subject to potential cancer risk
threshold exceedances. As the two (2) affected non-conforming residential
uses transition to industrial uses per the City General Plan, Project-related
cancer risk exceedances would be alleviated (Revised DEIR, Page 1-25).20
Commentor statements are forwarded to the decision-makers. Analysis and findings of the
Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response PSH-3
The commentor offers opinions about the Project and the Project’s implications for the
reputation of the City.
The City’s reputation is not a physical impact to the environment within the scope of
CEQA. Commentor opinions regarding the City and the City’s reputation are forwarded to
the decision-makers. Analysis and findings of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response PSH-4
The commentor reiterates objection to the Project.
The commentor’s stated objection to the Project is forwarded to the decision-makers.
Analysis and findings of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
20 Please refer also to proposed additional/revised mitigation of DPM emissions impacts discussed at Final
EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions and Errata Corrections.‛
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-204
Thomas Hsieh
Pomona Resident and Business Executive
CEO of SplinterRock, Inc.
445 North Garey Avenue, Suite #2
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter Dated March 9, 2011
Response TH-1
The commentor states that, along with leaders of the One LA Pomona Cluster, he
disapproves of the Project. The commentor states that the City should deny the Project
with prejudice.
The commentor does not raise environmental concerns or comment on analysis or findings
of the Revised DEIR. Commentor statements are forwarded to the decision-makers.
Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response TH-2
The commentor lists reasons for objections to the Project. Commentor objections/concerns
are addressed in the following responses.
The commentor misstates and misinterprets significance findings of the Revised DEIR that
Project NOx emissions will exceed applicable SCAQMD Regional Thresholds. More
specifically, contrary to commentor statements, exceedance of SCAQMD regional
thresholds does not translate to ‚danger‛ and/or significant health risks. Effects of NOx
cited in the Revised DEIR and referenced by the commentor, are those that could be
expected under prolonged exposure to high concentrations such as could occur if Ambient
Air Quality Standards (AAQS) for NOx concentrations would be exceeded. These are the
standards (not the SCAQMD regional thresholds) that establish applicable health
parameters. See also Revised DEIR at Page 4.3-20:
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-205
4.3.4.3 Ambient Air Quality Standards
The [Clean Air Act] CAA established national Ambient Air Quality
Standards (AAQS) with states retaining the option to adopt more stringent
standards or to include other pollution species. These standards are the levels
of air quality considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect
the public health and welfare. They are designed to protect those ‚sensitive
receptors‛ most susceptible to further respiratory distress such as asthmatics,
the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease
or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. Healthy adults
can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations considerably
above these minimum standards before adverse effects are observed. Both
the State of California and the federal government have established health-
based AAQS for ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide,
suspended particulate matter (PM10 , PM2.5), and lead. Relevant state and
federal criteria pollutant standards, and potential health and other physical
effects attributable to exceedance of concentration standards for each
pollutant are presented at Table 4.3-3.
To evaluate potential compliance with/exceedance of applicable AAQS, localized
operational emissions concentrations are evaluated against applicable SCAQMD localized
significance thresholds, which in turn are based on the AAQS. As substantiated in the
Revised DEIR, Project operations will not generate NOx emissions that would exceed
applicable localized significance thresholds, nor violate applicable AAQS. (See Revised
DEIR at Pages 4.3-78, 4.3-79.) As summarized above, while the Revised DEIR has
concluded operational NOx emissions will exceed applicable SCAQMD regional
thresholds, this conclusion does not translate to ‚danger‛ or significant health impacts.
The commentor cites current personal health concerns and expresses concern for [the
health] of his children and other children in the City of Pomona.
As summarized above, and discussed in detail in the Revised DEIR, Project NOx emissions
will not create or result in significant health impacts. Statements regarding the commentor’s
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-206
personal health concerns and concerns regarding the health of children are forwarded to
the decision-makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response TH-3
As summarized by the commentor, and discussed in the Revised DEIR:
Even after application of mitigation, Project construction activities are
projected to temporarily and intermittently exceed applicable South Coast
Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Localized Significance
Thresholds (LSTs) for fugitive dust (PM10/PM2.5) emissions. (See Revised
DEIR at Pages 4.3-70, 4.3-71.)
However, as stated on page 4.3-71 of the Revised DEIR, application of Mitigation Measures
4.3.1 through 4.3.12 will reduce all construction-source air pollution emissions, including
PM10 and PM2.5 emissions, to the extent feasible. The Project will also comply with all
applicable SCAQMD Rules and will employ Best Available Control Technology (BACT) to
reduce the impact. Further and importantly, as discussed in the Revised DEIR, the
calculated exceedances of PM10 and PM2.5 would occur temporarily and intermittently
during site preparation and grading processes, and would not affect any receptors aside
from those illustrated at Figure 4.3-1 of the Revised DEIR. These uses include adjacent
industrial occupancies, and limited (fewer than 10) residential occupancies which exist as
non-conforming uses within an industrial district.
It is noted further that in the case of the subject site, PM10/PM2.5 LST exceedances would
likely be the case under any development scenario. This point is illustrated and
substantiated by the discussion of air quality impacts presented under the consideration of
a Light Industrial Alternative for the Project site (Revised DEIR Pages 5-10, 5-51). Under the
considered Light Industrial Alternative, currently permitted or conditionally permitted
light industrial uses would be constructed at the Project site. As discussed in the Revised
DEIR, even under this Alternative, construction-source emissions of PM10/PM2.5 would
exceed applicable SCAQMD LSTs. This is due to the fact that the subject site is bounded on
all sides by receptor land uses, including non-conforming residential uses. Under any
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-207
development scenario, grading and heavy equipment activities at the edges of the subject
site will unavoidably generate certain fugitive dust emissions (PM10/PM2.5) that would affect
adjacent off-site land uses.
The commentor, as with statements regarding NOx emissions above, notes potential health
effects of exposure to PM10/PM2.5 at high concentrations and for prolonged constant periods.
In the case of the Project, because construction-source PM10 and PM2.5 emissions are short-
term and intermittent, such emissions will not result in any chronic or long-term health
risks of impacts to human beings. (See Revised DEIR at Page 4.3-71) Thus, while the
Revised DEIR has concluded that short term impacts related to PM10 and PM2.5 as a result of
construction activities will result in significant and unavoidable impacts, this conclusion
does not translate to health impacts. That is, health consequences from PM10 and PM 2.5
manifest themselves after prolonged and constant exposure periods, as opposed to the
intermittent and short-term exposures resulting from Project construction activities.
Response TH-4
The commentor misstates and misinterprets analysis and conclusions of the Revised DEIR
regarding DPM-source emissions impacts and construction-source noise impacts.
Regarding increased DPM-source cancer risk exposure, even with application of mitigation
DPM-source cancer risks are projected to exceed applicable SCAQMD cancer risk
thresholds at the two (2) closest residential uses, located adjacent to the Project site
(residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street).21 (See Revised DEIR, Figure 4.3-2) These
conclusions are based on the Project Health Risk Assessment (HRA, Revised DEIR
Appendix C), and associated dispersion modeling of DPM emissions which were prepared
consistent with applicable SCAQMD methodologies and protocols. As discussed in the
Revised DEIR, the Project HRA demonstrates that with application of proposed mitigation,
significant DPM-source cancer risks would not extend beyond the noted two (2) residential
uses. The applicable significance threshold is a cancer risk incidence of greater than ten (10)
21 At the nearest residential use located southerly of the Project site, across 9th Street, the cancer risk is
estimated at 8.47/million which is less than the SCAQMD threshold of 10.0/million.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-208
persons per one million population (10/million). At the two (2) significantly affected
residences (1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street), mitigated cancer risks are estimated at
11.59/million and 45.10/million respectively22 [not 56.70/million and 45.10/million as stated
by the commentor]. At area schools, unmitigated and mitigated cancer risks levels would
not exceed the applicable threshold (10/million) and as discussed in the Revised DEIR
would not even exceed one (1)/ million.
It is further noted that the Project’s proposed DPM emissions mitigation measures
incorporate applicable recommendations and input provided by the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in their review of the Project and March 2010
Draft EIR. The SCAQMD is a Responsible Agency in the CEQA EIR process whose
responsibilities include, but are not limited to, air quality oversight of CEQA projects. As
part of its oversight responsibilities, SCAQMD provides recommendations for mitigation of
potentially significant air quality impacts. As noted, applicable recommendations provided
by SCAQMD have been incorporated in the Revised DEIR DPM emissions mitigation
measures.
As summarized above and discussed in detail in the Revised DEIR and supporting
technical analyses, the potential risks from DPM emissions are mitigated to the extent
feasible at Project opening. Notwithstanding, the two (2) residences located closest and
adjacent to the Project site (both of which are non-conforming uses in an industrially-
designated land use) would experience DPM-source cancer risks exceeding applicable
SCAQMD thresholds. Future transition of vehicles from use of diesel to CNG (as proposed
under Revised DEIR Mitigation Measures 4.3.21, 4.3.22) would reduce cancer risks such
that only one (1) residence located closest to the Project site would experience DPM-source
cancer risks exceeding applicable SCAQMD thresholds. Ultimately, as vicinity non-
conforming residential uses transition to industrial uses (such transition should reasonably
occur with the 30-year General Plan Buildout scenario, and well before conclusion of the
assumed 70-year DPM exposure period), all potential DPM-source cancer risks resulting
from the Project would be reduced to levels that are less-than-significant. It is also explicitly
noted that in all instances and under all circumstances, Project-related DPM-source risks at
22 See Revised DEIR at Page 4.3-92, et al.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-209
area schools are less-than-significant. Lastly, and significantly, it should again be
emphasized that the DEIR and Revised DEIR analyses in total are constructed to be
conservative, thereby establishing potential maximum impact scenarios.
It is also noted that in response to commentor concerns, and consistent with mitigation
refinements intended to be achieved through the CEQA and EIR review processes,
additional mitigation is proposed that would act to further reduce Project-related DPM
emissions. More specifically, additional/revised mitigation is proposed [MM 4.3.21
(A)mended and MM 4.3.22(A), below+ that would ensure future year (2020) ‚CNG-only‛
access restrictions for all transfer trucks and commercial trash collection vehicles served by
the Project. 23, 24
MM 4.3.21 (A): At Project opening, all transfer trucks and all Applicant-
controlled commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project
site shall be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent
technologies).
MM 4.3.22(A): On or before January 2, 2020, all transfer trucks and all
commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project site shall be
powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent technologies).
Health Risk Assessment (HRA) modeling of DPM-source cancer risks resulting from
application of proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) in combination with other DPM
emissions mitigation currently proposed in the Revised DEIR (See Revised DEIR Mitigation
Measures 4.3.17 through 4.3.20) has been conducted as one component of this Final EIR
(please refer to HRA Addendum included at Final EIR Appendix A). Results of the HRA
Addendum indicate that with the stipulated conversion of diesel-fueled vehicles to CNG
vehicles described herein, the maximum potential cancer risk exposure at any potentially
affected receptor would be reduced to levels that are less-than-significant.
23 The Year 2020 timeframe implementation schedule proposed here is consistent with, and parallels EPA/CARB tiered emissions reductions goals for heavy-duty trucks. 24 Proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) would replace/supercede MM 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 currently reflected in the Revised DEIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-210
More specifically, at the maximally impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth
Street), the mitigated cancer risk would be 3.98 per million. The residential use
experiencing the second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the
mitigated cancer risk would be 0.52 per million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer risk
would therefore be less than the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per million.
The HRA Addendum results indicate further, that under no circumstance would area
schools be significantly affected by DPM emissions, nor would DPM emissions result in any
potentially significant non-cancer risks. Please refer also to detailed HRA modeling results
presented at Final EIR Appendix A.
Notwithstanding these findings, this Final EIR conservatively maintains previous
conclusions regarding potential Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risks.
That is, for the purposes of disclosure, and to maintain the conservative analysis construct
employed to date, Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risk exposures at the
residences located at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street are considered to be significant until
the Year 2020. No other locations would experience potentially adverse elevated DPM-
source cancer risk exposures (or non-cancer risk exposures) resulting from Project
operations or activities. Please refer also to related discussions of DPM emissions impacts
and proposed additional/revised mitigation presented at Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions
and Errata Corrections.‛
Should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations acknowledging significant Project-specific, and cumulative localized DPM
emissions impacts.
With regard to noise impacts, the Revised DEIR’s conservative analysis of temporary and
intermittent noise resulting from Project construction activities indicates that residential
exterior noise ordinance standards (65 dBA) could be exceeded. In this regard, the analysis
takes into account non-conforming residential uses that exist with the industrial zone
encompassing the Project site. The commentor misstates that Project construction-source
noise would exceed standards for the industrial zone. That is, within codified permissible
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-211
hours, noise from construction activities is exempt from ordinance provisions, except as
received at residential properties. Please refer to Noise Ordinance Sec. 18-305. –
Exemptions, as excerpted below:
Sec. 18-305. – Exemptions
The following activities shall be exempted from this article:
(3) Noise sources associated with or vibration created by construction, repair,
remodeling or grading of any real property or during authorized seismic
surveys, provided such activities do not take place between the hours of 8:00
p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on
Sunday or a federal holiday, and provided the noise level created by such
activities do not exceed the noise standard of 65 dB(A) plus the limits
specified in section 18-311(b) as measured on residential property [emphasis
added] and any vibration created does not endanger the public health,
welfare and safety.
Project construction activities are limited by code to the hours noted above, and the Project
will comply with all code requirements regarding limitations on construction activities. As
such, Project construction-source noise received at industrial properties is not subject to
code limitations.
The commentor, as with statements regarding air pollutant emissions above, notes potential
health effects of exposure to noise at high levels and for prolonged constant periods. In the
case of the Project, because construction-source noise is short-term and intermittent, such
noise will not result in any chronic or long-term health risks of impacts to human beings.
Thus, while the Revised DEIR has concluded that short term impacts related to noise as a
result of construction activities will result in significant and unavoidable impacts, this
conclusion does not translate to chronic or long-term health impacts. That is, health
consequences from noise manifest themselves after prolonged and constant exposure
periods, as opposed to the intermittent and short-term exposures resulting from Project
construction activities. Moreover, the conservatively modeled maximum noise exposure
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-212
assumes heavy equipment operating under maximum power at the Project perimeter
boundaries. Representative of the majority of noise generated by construction activities are
the modeled results (Revised DEIR Tables 4.4-6 through 4.4-8) wherein the received noise
levels would more typically range from 62.9 dBA to 67.4 dBA.
The Revised DEIR incorporates mitigation that would reduce construction-source noise
levels and its effects to the extent feasible. (See Revised DEIR Mitigation Measures 4.4.1
through 4.4.6.)
Lastly, it is noted that irrespective of the development scenario proposed at the subject site,
construction-source noise would likely be considered significant based on the proximity of
sensitive receptors. (See Revised DEIR Section 5.2, Alternatives Analysis, Subsection 5.2.2.4,
Comparative Noise Impacts, Pages 5-52, 5-53.)
The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and conclusions
of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response TH-5
The commentor misstates and misrepresents the Revised DEIR discussion of Environmental
Justice considerations.
In complete context, Revised DEIR Appendix H first notes that environmental justice
considerations are not physical impacts to the environment and are not explicitly addressed
under CEQA. ‚Notwithstanding, as a member Board overseen by the California
Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA), the California Integrated Waste Management
Board (CIWMB)25 has included the recognition of the principles of environmental justice as
an integral part of its review and permitting actions. Moreover, the analysis presented here
is intended to provide all review agencies and decision-makers with information
addressing potential environmental justice implications of the Project‛ (Revised DEIR
Appendix H, Page 1).
25 The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) has been reconstituted as the California
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-213
The commentor’s concerns about the Project’s potential disproportionate effects to minority
populations are also appropriately and fully addressed within the Appendix H discussion
of environmental justice concerns. More specifically, as discussed at Page H-18:
. . . [M]inority populations comprise more than 50 percent of the total
population within all geographic areas of analysis (Project Site Census Block,
Study Area Census Tracts, City, and County), and all tiers of geographic
areas would be considered Environmental Justice Communities. Any project
with significant environmental impacts under CEQA would also have
potential environmental justice concerns if located in the Project Site Census
Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, or County. . . .
Continuing, the Appendix H discussion notes:
. . . With respect to the above potential environmental justice concerns, it is
noted that significant impacts affecting the local environmental justice
community are a product, at least in part, of the presence of non-conforming
residential uses within an area planned and designated for industrial
development. On-going transition of these non-conforming residential uses
to industrial development, as envisioned under the City General Plan, would
tend to alleviate impacts attributable to exposure of residences to proximate
industrial uses. Notwithstanding, in the course of this transition, non-
conforming residential uses located near existing or proposed industrial uses
are subject to increased environmental effects and potential environmental
justice concerns.
It is also recognized that temporary construction impacts, such as those
resulting from the Project, are typical and generally unavoidable for any
development project located adjacent to residential uses. In this sense, these
impacts are not Project-specific, and would likely occur to some degree under
all development scenarios at the Project site due to the presence of proximate
non-conforming sensitive receptors (Appendix H, Page H-19).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-214
As noted previously, while environmental justice is not a CEQA issue, the analysis of these
concerns as presented in the Revised DEIR is intended to provide all review agencies and
decision-makers with information addressing potential environmental justice implications
of the Project.
The commentor’s opinions are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and conclusions
of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response TH-6
The commentor expresses concerns regarding Project-related traffic impacts. The Revised
DEIR discusses potential Project traffic impacts, as summarized below.
Project-related traffic impacts are presented at Revised DEIR Section 4.2, ‚Traffic and
Circulation,‛ and the detailed Project Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is presented at Revised
DEIR Appendix B. The Revised DEIR concludes that significant Level of Service (LOS)
impacts are projected under Opening Year Conditions (2011) at Mission Boulevard/SR-71:
. . . However, although construction of the required improvements at the
intersection of Mission Boulevard at SR-71 would successfully relieve the
existing LOS ‚F‛ conditions at this intersection, and mitigate Project-related
impacts, timely and successful completion of the improvements cannot be
assured prior to Project opening and is outside the control of the City of
Pomona. As such, there are no feasible mitigation measures that will, with
certainty, reduce the Project’s potential traffic impacts during the Opening
Year and Opening Year Cumulative scenarios. Pending completion of
required interchange improvements, Project-related traffic impacts at the
intersection of Mission Boulevard and SR-71 are determined to be significant.
These improvements are fully funded and are currently under construction
and completion of these improvements is anticipated in 2011. If these
improvements are completed before the Project is operational, the identified
impacts at Mission Boulevard and SR-71 will be mitigated to a less-than-
significant level . . . (Revised DEIR, Page 4.2-2).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-215
Should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations acknowledging Project-specific and cumulatively significant LOS impacts at
Mission Boulevard at SR-71.
All other potential Project-related and cumulative traffic and circulation impacts are
substantiated to be less-than-significant or are reduced to levels that are less-than-
significant pursuant to the Revised DEIR mitigation measures.
The commentor’s opinions and statements regarding traffic and its potential effects on the
quality of life are forwarded to the decision-makers.
Response TH-7
The commentor expresses concerns regarding Project job creation.
Project job creation is discussed in the Revised DEIR:
The Transfer Station will be staffed by an estimated 45 to 50 employees. On-
site personnel would include facility managers, administrative/clerical
personnel, equipment operators, transfer floor laborers, transfer truck
drivers, and maintenance workers (Revised DEIR Page 1-6, et al.)
Project job creation as noted is consistent with and supports the Project
Objective to ‚create additional employment opportunities for City and area
residents‛ (Revised DEIR Page 3-45, et al.).
The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and conclusions
of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-216
Response TH-8
The commentor notes that there are 9 schools within a one-mile radius of the Project site
and expresses concern that children will be exposed to Project NOx emissions, resulting in
significant health risks.
The commentor offers no supporting evidence or expert opinion supported by evidence
that area school populations or children will be adversely affected by the Project. To the
contrary, the Revised DEIR explicitly considers and addresses potential Project impacts at
area schools. Please refer to Revised DEIR at Pages 1-12, 1-13, 1-17, 1-18, 1-23, 1-25, 1-35, 1-
45, 2-11, 3-25, 4.3-2, 4.3-4, 4.3-80, 4.3-87, 4.3-90 through 4.3-93, 4.3-100, 4.3-102, 4.4-3, 4.4-7,
4.4-30, 4.5-1, 4.5-4, 4.5-6, 4.5-19, 4.5-24, 4.5-26, 4.5-34 through 4.5-36, 4.7-11, 5-65, Revised
EIR Appendix K Responses (some 300 citations to area schools), et al. As substantiated in
the Revised DEIR, with application of proposed mitigation the Project will not result in
localized or specific impacts to area schools.
The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and conclusions
of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response TH-9
The commentor speculates that mitigation proposed in the Revised DEIR (and reproduced
within the Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring Program, FEIR Section 4.0) will not be
implemented/enforced, resulting in unmitigated Project impacts.
The commentor offers no substantial evidence or expert opinion supported by evidence
that would indicate that the EIR mitigation measures will not be implemented/enforced.
Public Resources Code Section 21082.2 provides that substantial evidence shall include
‚facts, reasonable assumptions predicated upon facts, and expert opinion supported by
facts.‛ The statute further provides that ‚argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion
or narrative . . . is not substantial evidence.‛
To facilitate implementation, enforce, and monitor EIR mitigation measures, the Final EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP, Final EIR Section 4.0) has been prepared consistent
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-217
with CEQA Guidelines Section 15097. Mitigation monitoring and responsibilities are
specifically discussed in the Project MMP:
Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibilities
As the Lead Agency, the City of Pomona is responsible for ensuring full
compliance with the mitigation measures adopted for the proposed Project.
The City will monitor and report on all mitigation activities. Mitigation
measures will be implemented at different stages of development
throughout the Project area. In this regard, the responsibilities for
implementation have been assigned to the Applicant, Contractor, or a
combination thereof.
If during the course of Project implementation, any of the mitigation
measures identified herein cannot be successfully implemented, the City
shall be immediately informed, and the City will then inform any affected
responsible agencies. The City, in conjunction with any affected responsible
agencies, will then determine if modification to the Project is required
and/or whether alternative mitigation is appropriate (Final EIR Section 4.0,
Page 4-2).
The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and conclusions
of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response TH-10
The commentor speculates that the Project will exceed capacity limitations and
requirements stipulated under the Applicant-requested 1,500 tons per day Solid Waste
Facility Permit (SWFP).
As discussed in the Revised DEIR: ‚The Project Applicant has requested a Solid Waste
Facility Permit (SWFP) to allow for acceptance of up to 1,500 tons of MSW per day‛
(Revised DEIR Page 1-6, et al.). Capacity expansion beyond the requested 1,500 tons per
day SWFP limitation cited in the Revised DEIR is not evaluated. The Lead Agency will
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-218
determine the type and extent of any required supporting or subsequent environmental
evaluation that may be required if such a future expansion is proposed. As with the current
Project, the Lead Agency will ultimately approve or deny a future expansion should it be
proposed.
The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and
conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response TH-11
The commentor excerpts and misinterprets selected text from the EIR Alternatives Analysis
(Reduced Operational Capacity Alternative). As noted in the Revised DEIR, the Reduced
Operational Capacity Alternative is considered infeasible and is therefore not further
evaluated.
Infeasibility of the Reduced Operational Capacity Alternative is based on the substantial
reduction in scope and operating capacity that would be required in order to achieve
applicable SCAQMD operational emissions thresholds. This does not mean however (as the
commentor asserts) that ‚the only way the company can make money is to put our health at risk,‛
but rather, that the Alternative is determined to be infeasible and need not be further
evaluated.
More specifically, as discussed in the Revised DEIR, the reduction in scope considered
under the Reduced Operational Capacity Alternative is not economically feasible, and
would represent something materially different than the Project proposed by the Applicant
and considered in the Revised DEIR. (See Revised DEIR pages 5-39, 5-40). To clarify
further, the State Resources Agency, the State Agency charged with implementing CEQA’s
regulatory scheme, has defined ‚feasible,‛ for purposes of CEQA review, as ‚capable of
being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into
account economic, [emphasis added] environmental, social, and technological factors.‛
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a) provides further that ‚An EIR is not required to
consider alternatives which are infeasible.‛ Moreover, the resultant reduction in scope
under the Reduced Operational Capacity Alternative is materially a ‚no build‛ condition,
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-219
and effectively precludes attainment of the basic Project Objectives. CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6 states that an EIR must describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the
Project, or to the location of the Project, which would feasibly attain the basic Project
Objectives, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant environmental
effects of the proposal. The Reduced Operational Capacity Alternative would not achieve
the basic Project Objectives, another indicator of its infeasibility.
The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and
conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response TH-12
The commentor summarizes previous remarks and provides opinions and personal
perspectives regarding business and employment profiles. The commentor requests that
the city of Pomona ‚permanently deny this land use permit.‛
Regarding commentor summary statements, please refer to Responses TH-1 through TH-
11. No additional environmental issues are identified.
The commentors statements are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and conclusions
of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-221
Johnny Hwang
950 West 12th Street, Unit A
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter Dated March 13, 2011
Response JH-1
The commentor expresses generalized concern regarding the Project. The commentor
states: ‚I believe that soliciting for the business of trash is absolutely the wrong direction that our
city should take.‛
The commentor raises no environmental issues, nor provides comments on the Revised
DEIR. Commentor general concerns and statements regarding the Project are forwarded to
the decision-makers. Analysis and findings of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response JH-2
The commentor expresses concerns regarding project-related traffic and ‚ground level‛
pollution. Potential project traffic impacts are extensively discussed at Revised DEIR
Section 4.2, Traffic and Circulation and within the detailed Traffic Impact Analysis
provided at Revised DEIR Appendix B. The Revised DEIR concludes that significant Level
of Service (LOS) impacts are projected under Opening Year Conditions (2011) at Mission
Boulevard/SR-71:
. . . However, although construction of the required improvements at the
intersection of Mission Boulevard at SR-71 would successfully relieve the
existing LOS ‘F’ conditions at this intersection, and mitigate Project-related
impacts, timely and successful completion of the improvements cannot be
assured prior to Project opening and is outside the control of the City of
Pomona. As such, there are no feasible mitigation measures that will, with
certainty, reduce the Project’s potential traffic impacts during the Opening
Year and Opening Year Cumulative scenarios. Pending completion of
required interchange improvements, Project-related traffic impacts at the
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-222
intersection of Mission Boulevard and SR-71 are determined to be significant.
These improvements are fully funded and are currently under construction
and completion of these improvements is anticipated in 2011. If these
improvements are completed before the Project is operational, the identified
impacts at Mission Boulevard and SR- 71 will be mitigated to a less-than-
significant level . . . (Revised DEIR Page 4.2-2).
All other potential traffic and circulation impacts are substantiated to be less-than-
significant or are reduced to levels that are less-than-significant pursuant to the Revised
DEIR mitigation measures.
Should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations acknowledging the Project’s significant traffic impacts.
‚Ground-level‛ pollution concerns expressed by the commentor are interpreted to mean
potential air pollution impacts of the Project. These too are addressed in detail in the
Revised DEIR. Please refer to Revised DEIR Section 4.2, Air Quality, and the detailed air
quality analyses (Air Quality Study, Global Climate Change Analysis, and Health Risk
Assessment) presented at Revised DEIR Appendix C. As disclosed in the Revised DEIR,
the Project is anticipated to result in certain significant air quality impacts, which are
summarized at Revised DEIR Page 1-25:
Air Quality
Construction LST Exceedances
For localized emissions, even after implementation of all feasible mitigation
measures, construction source emissions will exceed applicable SCAQMD
localized significance thresholds (LSTs) for PM10 (24-hour concentrations) at
receptors located 60 meters or nearer and emissions of PM2.5 (24-hour
concentrations) at receptors located 30 meters or nearer from the construction
activity. This impact is significant.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-223
Cancer Risks Threshold Exceedances
Even with the application of all feasible mitigation, Project-related DPM-
source cancer risk significance thresholds (SCAQMD threshold for lifetime
residential exposure) will be exceeded at two (2) residential receptors
adjacent to the Project site (residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street).
This is considered a significant impact of the Project. No other receptors
(whether residential, worker or schools) are subject to potential cancer risk
threshold exceedances. As the two (2) affected non-conforming residential
uses transition to industrial uses per the City General Plan, Project-related
cancer risk exceedances would be alleviated.26
Regional Thresholds Exceedances
Even after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, long-term
operational source emissions will exceed the SCAQMD regional threshold for
NOx only.
All other potential air quality impacts are substantiated to be less-than-significant or are
reduced to levels that are less-than-significant pursuant to the Revised DEIR mitigation
measures.
Should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations acknowledging the Project’s significant traffic impacts.
It is further noted that environmental concerns identified above (and subsequently) by the
commentor are addressed in the previous responses to comments provided at Revised
DEIR Appendix K. Unless otherwise noted herein, information presented in the Revised
DEIR is consistent with, and is not substantively revised from, information presented in the
March 2010 Draft EIR. Pagination citations have been amended where applicable. Analysis
and findings of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
26 Please refer also to proposed additional/revised mitigation of DPM emissions impacts discussed at Final
EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions and Errata Corrections.‛
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-224
The commentor states concern regarding *the Project’s potential effects on+ the City’s
reputation. The commentor states: ‚. . . by having this transfer station [the Project] we will be
known as the garbage city.‛
The City’s reputation is not a physical impact to the environment within the scope of
CEQA. Commentor concerns and statements regarding the City’s reputation and its
characterization are forwarded to the decision-makers. Analysis and findings of the
Revised DEIR are not affected.
The commentor speculates on potential future increase in size of the transfer station.
The Project as defined in the Revised DEIR (please refer to Revised DEIR Section 3.0,
Project Description) is the topic of the environmental analysis, and is the project under
consideration by the Lead Agency. The Revised DEIR does not consider, nor evaluate an
expansion of the Project (either physical or operational). Should such future expansion be
proposed, the Lead Agency will determine the scope and content of any subsequent
environmental evaluation (a 300 percent expansion such as is speculated by the commentor
would likely trigger additional EIR context analyses). The commentor’s statements are
forwarded to the decision-makers. Analysis and findings of the Revised DEIR are not
affected.
Response JH-3
The commentor indicates that his assessed property value has declined since 2007, and
speculates on potential future declining assessed property valuations in the City, if the City
‚developed the reputation as the area’s garbage city.‛
The commentor raises no environmental issues, nor provides comments on the Revised
DEIR. The commentor’s statements and concerns regarding potential effects of the Project
on area property values are recognized, but as discussed here, are beyond the scope of the
Revised DEIR. That is, the focal concern of CEQA is potentially significant physical impacts
to the environment [emphasis added]. Economic impacts (including potential impacts to
area property values) with no associated or causal physical impacts are not within the
purview of CEQA or the EIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-225
(a) Economic or social effects of a project shall not be treated as significant
effects on the environment. An EIR may trace a chain of cause and effect
from a proposed decision on a project through anticipated economic or social
changes resulting from the project to physical changes caused in turn by the
economic or social changes. The intermediate economic or social changes
need not be analyzed in any detail greater than necessary to trace the chain of
cause and effect. The focus of the analysis shall be on the physical changes.
[CEQA Guidelines, Section 15131 subd. (a)].
Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080, subd. (e),
below, the commentor’s statements alone are not considered substantial evidence that
the Project may have a significant effect on area property values:
(e) (1) For the purposes of this section and this division, substantial evidence
includes fact, a reasonable assumption predicated upon fact, or expert
opinion supported by fact.
(2) Substantial evidence is not argument, speculation, unsubstantiated
opinion or narrative, evidence that is clearly inaccurate or erroneous, or
evidence of social or economic impacts that do not contribute to, or are not
caused by, physical impacts on the environment.
There is no demonstrated or substantiated evidence of a potential decline in area property
values should the Project be implemented. Similarly, there is no demonstrated or
substantiated potential physical impact (direct or indirect) due to a potential decline in area
property values, should such a decline occur. Absent substantiation, the commentor’s
statements in these regards (as well as other opinions provided) are considered speculative
and are forwarded to the decision-makers for their consideration.
Lastly, even if there were a potential for some real or perceived impact on area property
values, the City’s determination through the adopted General Plan and zoning ordinance
that the Project uses are permitted or conditionally permitted at the proposed site is
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-226
tantamount to recognizing this phenomenon. The Revised DEIR analysis appropriately
focuses on potential physical impacts to the area as a whole and the welfare of all persons
residing there. Analysis and findings of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response JH-4
The commentor suggests continuing development of medical educational and medical
services facilities in the City. The commentor states: ‚. . . why should we pursue something that
will only further ruin the reputation of the City.‛
The commentor raises no environmental issues, nor provides comments on the Revised
DEIR. Commentor suggestions for continuing development of medical educational and
medical services facilities in the City, and statements regarding the City’s reputation are
forwarded to the decision-makers. Analysis and findings of the Revised DEIR are not
affected.
Response JH-5
The commentor requests reconsideration of . . . ‚this action approving the installation of this
waste transfer station.‛
To clarify, no approval actions are realized or implied through the preparation of the
Revised DEIR. As noted at revised DEIR Page 2-1:
An EIR is an informational document intended to inform decision-makers
and the general public of potentially significant environmental impacts of a
Project. An EIR also identifies possible ways to preclude or minimize these
potentially significant impacts (referred to as mitigation) and describes
reasonable alternatives to the Project that may also reduce or avoid
significant impacts. Having the authority to take action on the Project, the
City of Pomona will consider the information in this EIR in their evaluations
of the proposal. The findings and conclusions of the EIR regarding
environmental impacts do not control the City’s discretion to approve, deny,
or modify the Project, but instead are presented as information to aid the
decision-making process.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-227
Commentor statements regarding approval/denial of the Project are forwarded to the
decision-makers. Analysis and findings of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-229
Karen Hwang
950 West 12th Street, Unit A
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter Dated March 11, 2011
Response KH-1
The commentor restates opposition to the Project and reiterates concerns and statements
provided previously (please refer to Revised DEIR Appendix K, correspondence from
Karen Hwang dated May 2, 2010) regarding Project environmental impacts under the
topics of traffic, air quality, and potential impacts to area schools.
Detailed responses to previous comments and concerns are provided at Revised EIR
Appendix K. Results and conclusions regarding the Project’s significant environmental
impacts are not substantively amended or altered based on information and clarification
presented in the Revised DEIR. Responses to comments and statements provided
previously by the commentor are not substantively amended or altered based on
information and clarification provided in the Revised DEIR. For ease of reference,
significant traffic, air quality, and noise impacts resulting from the Project are summarized
below:
Traffic and Circulation
Intersection Impacts
Pending completion of required interchange improvements, Project-related
traffic impacts at the intersection of Mission Boulevard and SR-71 are
determined to be significant.
Air Quality
Construction LST Exceedances
For localized emissions, even after implementation of all feasible mitigation
measures, construction source emissions will exceed applicable SCAQMD
localized significance thresholds (LSTs) for PM10 (24-hour concentrations) at
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-230
receptors located 60 meters or nearer and emissions of PM2.5 (24-hour
concentrations) at receptors located 30 meters or nearer from the construction
activity. This impact is significant.
Cancer Risks Threshold Exceedances
Even with the application of all feasible mitigation, Project-related DPM-
source cancer risk significance thresholds (SCAQMD threshold for lifetime
residential exposure) will be exceeded at two (2) residential receptors
adjacent to the Project site (residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street).
This is considered a significant impact of the Project. No other receptors
(whether residential, worker or schools) are subject to potential cancer risk
threshold exceedances. As the two (2) affected non-conforming residential
uses transition to industrial uses per the City General Plan, Project-related
cancer risk exceedances would be alleviated.
Regional Thresholds Exceedances
Even after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, long-term
operational source emissions will exceed the SCAQMD regional threshold for
NOx only.
Noise
Construction Noise
Noise generated by Project construction activities will temporarily and
intermittently exceed the City’s 65 dBA standard at an estimated 25 to 30
proximate residential receptors. The temporary and intermittent
construction noise impact is considered significant. These noise levels will
tend to diminish as the use of heavy equipment in the early construction
stages concludes, and will dissipate entirely at the end of construction
activities. (Revised DEIR, Page 1-25.)
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-231
The commentor notes that there are 9 schools within a one-mile radius of the Project site27
and states that ‚all of these children are put at risk not only by the pollution, but 610 more trucks
traveling down the streets every day.‛
The commentor offers no supporting evidence or expert opinion supported by evidence
that area school populations will be adversely affected by the Project. In contrast, the
Revised DEIR explicitly considers and addresses potential Project impacts at area schools.
Please refer to Revised DEIR at Pages 1-12, 1-13, 1-17, 1-18, 1-23, 1-25, 1-35, 1-45, 2-11, 3-25,
4.3-2, 4.3-4, 4.3-80, 4.3-87, 4.3-90 through 4.3-93, 4.3-100, 4.3-102, 4.4-3, 4.4-7, 4.4-30, 4.5-1,
4.5-4, 4.5-6, 4.5-19, 4.5-24, 4.5-26, 4.5-34 through 4.5-36, 4.7-11, 5-65, Revised EIR Appendix
K Responses (some 300 citations to area schools), et al. As substantiated in the Revised
DEIR, with application of proposed mitigation, the Project will not result in localized or
specific impacts to area schools. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the
decision-makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response KH-2
The commentor states: ‚Simply put, these mitigation measures they propose in their revised EIR
are simply not good enough.‛ The commentor misinterprets the purposes of significance
thresholds and meaning of significant impacts. The commentor incorrectly states that
health and safety are not of concern to the Lead Agency and Applicant. The commentor
misinterprets and provides out of context remarks regarding environmental justice
considerations.
Mitigation is applied in instances where impacts are determined to be potentially
significant. To this end, the Revised DEIR incorporates additional and expanded mitigation
suggested by the Lead Agency and commenting Responsible Agencies. Please refer for
example, to additional information and new or revised air quality mitigation measures
incorporated in the Revised DEIR as suggested by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District:
27 In point of fact, the Revised DEIR notes and considers ten (10) schools within a one-mile radius of the
Project. Please refer to Revised DEIR Page 4.3-90, et al.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-232
4.3 Air Quality
Pursuant to comments received from SCAQMD, the following revisions have
been incorporated at Revised Draft EIR Section 4.3, Air Quality. Correlating
revisions appear in the Project Air Quality Impact Analysis presented at
Revised Draft EIR Appendix C.
Previous EIR Mitigation Measures 4.3.16 and 4.3.17 [4.3.21 and 4.3.22 as
revised] are amended to reflect full and accelerated implementation of high-
efficiency diesel particulate traps.
Previous EIR Mitigation Measure 4.3.14 [4.3.19] is amended to limit on-site
truck idling.
Discussion of the vertical stack design to be implemented pursuant to
previous Mitigation Measure 4.3.13 [4.3.18] has been clarified and expanded.
Clarification of methodology and information employed in the Project odor
impact analysis is provided.
Previous EIR Mitigation Measure 4.3.18 [4.3.23] is expanded paralleling
requirements of the Project odor impact analysis.
Calculation/notation errors noted by SCAQMD have been corrected.
Additional description and clarification of vehicle trip lengths employed in
the air quality modeling have been provided.
Construction-source emissions mitigation measures are revised consistent
with SCAQMD direction. Other feasible and applicable construction-source
emissions mitigation measures suggested by SCAQMD have been
incorporated.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-233
The EIR text is amended to note that demolition/construction within the
Project site will be accomplished pursuant to applicable provisions of AQMD
Rule 1166 Volatile Organic Compound Emission from Decontamination of Soil
(Revised DEIR Preface, Pages 8-9).
In addition to the above revisions/amendments identified in the Revised DEIR, this Final
EIR proposes further refinement/expansion of mitigation measures. More specifically, in
response to commentor concerns, and consistent with mitigation refinements intended to be
achieved through the CEQA and EIR review processes, additional mitigation is proposed
that would act to further reduce Project-related DPM emissions. More specifically,
additional/revised mitigation is proposed [MM 4.3.21 (A)mended and MM 4.3.22(A),
below+ that would ensure future year (2020) ‚CNG-only‛ access restrictions for all transfer
trucks and commercial trash collection vehicles served by the Project. 28, 29
MM 4.3.21 (A): At Project opening, all transfer trucks and all Applicant-
controlled commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project
site shall be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent
technologies).
MM 4.3.22(A): On or before January 2, 2020, all transfer trucks and all
commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project site shall be
powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent technologies).
Health Risk Assessment (HRA) modeling of DPM-source cancer risks resulting from
application of proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) in combination with other DPM
emissions mitigation currently proposed in the Revised DEIR (See Revised DEIR Mitigation
Measures 4.3.17 through 4.3.20) has been conducted as one component of this Final EIR
(please refer to HRA Addendum included at Final EIR Appendix A). Results of the HRA
28 The Year 2020 timeframe implementation schedule proposed here is consistent with, and parallels
EPA/CARB tiered emissions reductions goals for heavy-duty trucks.
29 Proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) would replace/supercede MM 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 currently
reflected in the Revised DEIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-234
Addendum indicate that with the stipulated conversion of diesel-fueled vehicles to CNG
vehicles described herein, the maximum potential cancer risk exposure at any potentially
affected receptor would be reduced to levels that are less-than-significant.
That is, at the maximally impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth Street), the
mitigated cancer risk would be 3.98 per million. The residential use experiencing the
second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the mitigated cancer
risk would be 0.52 per million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer risk would therefore
be less than the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per million.
The HRA Addendum results indicate further, that under no circumstance would area
schools be significantly affected by DPM emissions, nor would DPM emissions result in any
potentially significant non-cancer risks. Please refer also to detailed HRA modeling results
presented at Final EIR Appendix A.
Notwithstanding these findings, this Final EIR conservatively maintains previous
conclusions regarding potential Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risks.
That is, for the purposes of disclosure, and to maintain the conservative analysis construct
employed to date, Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risk exposures at the
residences located at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street are considered to be significant until
the Year 2020. No other locations would experience potentially adverse elevated DPM-
source cancer risk exposures (or non-cancer risk exposures) resulting from Project
operations or activities. Please refer also to related discussions of DPM emissions impacts
and proposed additional/revised mitigation presented at Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions
and Errata Corrections.‛
Should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations acknowledging significant Project-specific, and cumulative localized DPM
emissions impacts.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-235
With regard to significance thresholds and significant impacts, please refer to the discussion
at Revised DEIR Page 2-4:
CEQA requires that the EIR only address significant adverse impacts. The
CEQA Guidelines suggest thresholds or standards which define the
significance of various types of impacts. The CEQA Guidelines also state that
the significance of impacts should be considered in relation to their severity
and probability of occurrence. However, ultimately, the determination of the
significance of impacts is at the discretion of the lead agency. The
identification of significant impacts in the EIR does not prevent an agency
from approving a project. A project may be approved if the lead agency
determines that impacts cannot be feasibly mitigated below a level of
significance and if the agency determines that there are important overriding
considerations, such as social and economic benefits, which are sufficient to
justify approval of the considered project.
Identification of a potentially significant impact does not necessarily mean or lead to the
conclusion that health or safety impacts will result, but rather indicates that mitigation
should be applied. If after application of mitigation, residual significant impacts persist,
preparation of an EIR is required. In instances where the Pomona Valley Transfer Station
Project’s significant impacts are health and/or safety related (i.e., increased cancer risk
exposure at the two (2) non-conforming residential occupancies located adjacent to the
Project site), these impacts have been identified.
With regard to environmental justice considerations, in complete context, Revised DEIR
Appendix H first notes that environmental justice considerations are not physical impacts
to the environment and are not explicitly addressed under CEQA. ‚Notwithstanding, as a
member Board overseen by the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA), the
California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB)30 has included the recognition of
the principles of environmental justice as an integral part of its review and permitting
30 The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) has been reconstituted as the California
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-236
actions. Moreover, the analysis presented here is intended to provide all review agencies
and decision-makers with information addressing potential environmental justice
implications of the Project‛ (Revised DEIR Appendix H, Page 1).
The commentor’s concerns about the Project’s potential disproportionate effects to minority
populations are appropriately and fully addressed within the Appendix H discussion of
environmental justice concerns. More specifically, as discussed at Page H-18:
. . . [M]inority populations comprise more than 50 percent of the total
population within all geographic areas of analysis (Project Site Census Block,
Study Area Census Tracts, City, and County), and all tiers of geographic
areas would be considered Environmental Justice Communities. Any project
with significant environmental impacts under CEQA would also have
potential environmental justice concerns if located in the Project Site Census
Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, or County. . . .
Continuing, the Appendix H discussion notes:
. . . With respect to the above potential environmental justice concerns, it is
noted that significant impacts affecting the local environmental justice
community are a product, at least in part, of the presence of non-conforming
residential uses within an area planned and designated for industrial
development. On-going transition of these non-conforming residential uses
to industrial development, as envisioned under the City General Plan, would
tend to alleviate impacts attributable to exposure of residences to proximate
industrial uses. Notwithstanding, in the course of this transition, non-
conforming residential uses located near existing or proposed industrial uses
are subject to increased environmental effects and potential environmental
justice concerns.
It is also recognized that temporary construction impacts, such as those
resulting from the Project, are typical and generally unavoidable for any
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-237
development project located adjacent to residential uses. In this sense, these
impacts are not Project-specific, and would likely occur to some degree under
all development scenarios at the Project site due to the presence of proximate
non-conforming sensitive receptors (Appendix H, Page H-19).
As noted previously, while environmental justice is not a CEQA issue, the analysis of these
concerns as presented in the Revised DEIR is intended to provide all review agencies and
decision-makers with information addressing potential environmental justice implications
of the Project. The commentor’s opinions are forwarded to the decision-makers.
Response KH-3
The commentor states concern regarding [the Project’s potential effects on+ the City’s
reputation and potential characterization as a ‚dumping ground.‛
The City’s reputation is not a physical impact to the environment within the scope of
CEQA. Commentor concerns and statements regarding the City’s reputation and its
characterization are forwarded to the decision-makers. Analysis and findings of the
Revised DEIR are not affected.
The commentor speculates on potential future increase in size of the transfer station.
The Project as defined in the Revised DEIR (please refer to Revised DEIR Section 3.0,
Project Description) is the topic of the environmental analysis, and is the project under
consideration by the Lead Agency. The Revised DEIR does not consider, nor evaluate an
expansion of the Project (either physical or operational). Should such future expansion be
proposed, the Lead Agency will determine the scope and content of any subsequent
environmental evaluation (a 300 percent expansion such as is speculated by the commentor
would likely trigger additional EIR context analyses). The commentor’s statements are
forwarded to the decision-makers. Analysis and findings of the Revised DEIR are not
affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-238
Response KH-4
The commentor restates opposition to the Project, and urges its denial.
Commentor statements of objection to, and requested denial of, the Project are forwarded
to the decision-makers. Analysis and findings of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-240
Maria Jimenez
2436 Marquette Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter Dated March 8, 2011
Response MJ-1
The commentor states opposition to the Project. The commentor states concern for the
health of children, and air quality impacts and traffic impacts affecting the community. The
commentor states concern for the reputation of the City of Pomona.
Commentor opposition to the Project is noted, no further response is required in this
regard. Commentor concern for the health of children, and concern for air quality and
traffic impacts affecting the community are acknowledged. The commentor does not
identify specific health, air quality or traffic concerns. It is difficult to provide on-point
responses to the generalized concerns expressed by the commentor.
As a general response, the Revised DEIR presents extensive discussion and analysis of
potential health risks resulting from the Project (Revised DEIR at Pages 4.3-85 through 4.3-
106; Revised DEIR Appendix C, Air Quality Impact Analyses). With application of
mitigation, two (2) residences (both of which are non-conforming residential uses in an
industrial area) are subject to cancer risk exposures exceeding applicable South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds.31 No other health risks; and no
potentially significant health risks to children are projected. Air quality impacts are
discussed at Revised DEIR Section 4.3, Air Quality; with technical supporting studies
provided at Revised DEIR Appendix C, Air Quality Impact Analyses. Significant air
quality impacts of the Project area summarized at Revised DEIR Page 1-25. These include:
temporary exceedance of PM10/PM2.5 localized significance thresholds (LSTs) during
construction; cancer risk exposures exceeding applicable SCAQMD thresholds at two (2)
residences; and exceedance of SCAQMD regional thresholds for NOx. Pending completion
31 Please refer also to proposed additional/revised mitigation of DPM emissions impacts discussed at Final
EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions and Errata Corrections.‛
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-241
of required interchange improvements, significant Project-related traffic impacts are
conservatively assumed to occur at the intersection of Mission Boulevard and SR-71. No
other significant traffic impacts are projected. Should the Project be approved, the City is
required to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations acknowledging the Project-
specific and cumulatively significant impacts. The reputation of the City is not a physical
impact to the environment, and is not evaluated under CEQA. Results and conclusions of
the Draft EIR are not affected. Please refer also to extensive discussions/responses to these
same issues presented at Revised DEIR Appendix K.
Response MJ-2
The commentor states concerns regarding Project-related cancer risk threshold
exceedances, exceedance of SCAQMD regional thresholds for NOx, Project-related traffic
impacts, and Project-related noise impacts. The commentor offers an opinion that . . . ‚it is
unacceptable for the city to move forward on a project that exceeds SCAQMD’s regional threshold
by over three times, making us more susceptible to asthma and other respiratory illness.‛ The
commentor notes that there are nine (9) schools within a one-mile radius of the Project site,
and offers an opinion that the Project-related exceedance of SCAQMD regional thresholds
for NOx would result in increased health risks at area schools.
The Revised DEIR acknowledges and discloses Project-related exceedances of SCAQMD
regional thresholds for operational NOx emissions. However, contrary to the commentor’s
opinion, this conclusion does not translate to significant health impacts. In this regard, the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the more stringent California
Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), not SCAQMD regional emissions thresholds,
represent and establish air quality safety threshold conditions. The CAAQS recognize non-
attainment conditions and account for ambient air pollutant levels, and then establish
threshold pollutant emissions concentration levels/exposure times that provide an adequate
margin of safety to protect the public health and welfare.
Moreover, neither the Lead Agency, nor the SCAQMD has established a ‚health‛ threshold
for regional NOx emissions. As such, there is no established determinant allowing for a
conclusion that a given project’s regional emissions would be considered a significant
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-242
health impact under CEQA. Further, the SCAQMD, the Responsible Agency for air quality
issues and air quality concerns has not otherwise indicated or commented that the Project
regional NOx emissions constitute a health concern.
As discussed in the Revised DEIR, the Project’s operational emissions (including NOx
emissions) would not exceed the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS):
‚*u+nder Project Buildout, operational activities *emissions+ will not exceed
the operational LSTs, and in so doing will not violate the CAAQS‛ (Revised
Draft EIR, Page 4.3-56).
Thus, although the Project’s operational NOx emissions would exceed SCAQMD regional
thresholds, operational NOx emissions would not exceed standards established under the
CAAQS, and would not constitute a potential health hazard/health risk.
Similarly, cumulatively significant impacts associated with NOx regional threshold
exceedances are not considered a health hazard/health risk. In this regard, the LST analysis
considers background NOx pollutant levels to which the Project NOx emissions are added,
thus establishing the cumulative condition. The Project LST analysis indicates that
cumulatively, Project NOx emissions in addition to background pollutant levels would not
exceed applicable CAAQS, and therefore would not constitute a potential NOx health
hazard/health risk.
Moreover, the Project is consistent with the scope of development assumed under the City
General Plan, and is therefore reflected in Southern California Association of Governments
(SCAG) growth projections, and related assumptions and air quality conditions presented
in the 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Thus, while Project operational NOx
emissions would exceed of SCAQMD’s regional threshold criteria for NOx, these emissions
are already accounted for and addressed in the 2007 AQMP. The Project is also considered
to be otherwise consistent with the 2007 AQMP (See Revised DEIR, Pages 4.3-53 through
4.3-56). Ultimately, emissions reductions achieved through the AQMP would improve
Basin air quality conditions and incrementally reduce associated basin-wide health
concerns.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-243
Lastly, as discussed in the Revised EIR, NOx is a byproduct of fuel combustion and the
primary source of NOx emissions from the Project are a result of tail pipe emissions from
vehicles accessing the site. (See Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-78, et al.). Neither the Project
Applicant nor the City has any regulatory control over tail pipe emissions from individual
sources. Rather, vehicle tail pipe source emissions are regulated by CARB and USEPA. The
amount of NOx emissions from vehicle sources has been reduced dramatically over the
past years and is expected to further decline as clean vehicle and fuel technologies improve.
In addition, the Project implements all feasible mitigation measures and complies with all
applicable SCAQMD Rules directed toward reduction of NOx emissions.
Cancer risk threshold affecting two non-conforming residential uses are discussed in the
Revised DEIR and at Response 1, above. Project-related air quality impacts are discussed in
the Revised DEIR and at Response 1, above. Significant Project-related noise impacts are
summarized at Revised DEIR Page 1-25: ‚Noise generated by Project construction activities
will temporarily and intermittently exceed the City’s 65 dBA standard . . .‛ With
application of mitigation, the Project will not result in or cause any significant long-term
noise impacts.
Potential air quality impacts affecting sensitive receptors, including the nine (9) schools
cited by the commentor32 are discussed at length in the Revised DEIR (please refer to
Revised DEIR Pages 4.3-78 through 4.3-106). Area school uses would be affected by Project-
related NOx regional threshold exceedances to the same extent as would other land uses in
the South Coast Air Basin. These exceedances would not, however, constitute a health
hazard under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards or California Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS/CAAQS), and would not directly result in adverse effects at
area schools. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected. Please refer also
to extensive discussions/responses to these same issues presented at Revised DEIR
Appendix K.
32 In point of fact, the Revised DEIR considers and evaluates potential air quality impacts at ten (10)
schools/school facilities within an approximate one-mile radius of the Project site. Please refer to Revised
DEIR Page 4.3-90.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-244
Response MJ-3
The commentor states disagreement with the Project location within the City of Pomona.
The commentor offers an opinion that ‚it is inequitable to expect us to process their [neighboring
cities without transfer stations] trash and suffer the environmental consequences.‛
The commentor does not identify specific concerns regarding physical environmental
impacts of the Project. As a general response to location of the Project within the City, the
Project location is consistent with and supports the Project Objectives (Revised DEIR Pages
3-44, 3-45). Potential relocation of the Project at Alternative Sites within the City is
considered and evaluated at Revised DEIR Pages 5-32 through 5-38. As discussed in the
Revised DEIR, no demonstrable reduction in environmental impacts would be achieved
through relocation of the Project. The Lead Agency has no jurisdictional authority to
suggest, propose, or evaluate location of the Project at a site outside of the City. The
commentor’s opinion regarding inequitable location of the Project within the City is
forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and conclusions of the Draft EIR are not affected.
Please refer also to extensive discussions/responses to these same issues presented at
Revised DEIR Appendix K.
Response MJ-4
The commentor notes that environmental justice considerations are discussed at Revised
DEIR Appendix H. The commentor erroneously presents findings of Appendix H out of
context.
In complete context, Revised DEIR Appendix H first notes that environmental justice
considerations are not physical impacts to the environment and are not explicitly addressed
under CEQA. ‚Notwithstanding, as a member Board overseen by the California
Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA), the California Integrated Waste Management
Board (CIWMB) has included the recognition of the principles of environmental justice as
an integral part of its review and permitting actions. Moreover, the analysis presented here
is intended to provide all review agencies and decision-makers with information
addressing potential environmental justice implications of the Project‛ (Revised DEIR
Appendix H, Page 1). At Page H-17, the Revised DEIR discussion of environmental justice
considerations notes that ‚there is a potential for the Project to result in disproportionate
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-245
impacts to minority populations. However, low-income populations within the affected
area comprise less than 50 percent of the total population. Based on EPA guidance, low-
income status is not a determining environmental justice parameter.‛ As further discussed
at Page H-18:
. . . [a]s indicated, minority populations comprise more than 50 percent of
the total population within all geographic areas of analysis (Project Site
Census Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, and County), and all tiers of
geographic areas would be considered Environmental Justice Communities.
Any project with significant environmental impacts under CEQA would also
have potential environmental justice concerns if located in the Project Site
Census Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, or County.
Continuing, the Appendix H discussion notes:
With respect to the above potential environmental justice concerns, it is noted
that significant impacts affecting the local environmental justice community
are a product, at least in part, of the presence of non-conforming residential
uses within an area planned and designated for industrial development. On-
going transition of these non-conforming residential uses to industrial
development, as envisioned under the City General Plan, would tend to
alleviate impacts attributable to exposure of residences to proximate
industrial uses. Notwithstanding, in the course of this transition, non-
conforming residential uses located near existing or proposed industrial uses
are subject to increased environmental effects and potential environmental
justice concerns.
It is also recognized that temporary construction impacts, such as those
resulting from the Project, are typical and generally unavoidable for any
development project located adjacent to residential uses. In this sense, these
impacts are not Project-specific, and would likely occur to some degree under
all development scenarios at the Project site due to the presence of proximate
non-conforming sensitive receptors (Appendix H, Page H-19).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-246
As noted previously, while environmental justice is not a CEQA issue, the analysis of these
concerns presented in the Revised DEIR is intended to provide all review agencies and
decision-makers with information addressing potential environmental justice implications
of the Project. The commentor’s opinions are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results
and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response MJ-5
The commentor states: ‚While it is important for this region to effectively manage its garbage
processing needs, decisions on this matter should be made at the initiative of the local government
and with widespread community participation, not in response to a profit-seeking corporation’s
proposal.‛
The commentor does not identify environmental concerns or concerns with the Revised
DEIR analysis and its findings. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-
makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response MJ-6
The commentor urges ‚the planning commission to deny this bid and do what is best for
Pomona.‛ The commentor states: ‚[g]arbage processing is not the kind of ‘development’ we want,
and trash is not what we want this city to be known for. Our health and quality of life are not up for
sale to the highest bidder.‛
The commentor does not identify environmental concerns or concerns with the Revised
DEIR analysis and its findings. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-
makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-249
Richard L. Milhorn
Email address: [email protected]
Telephone (559) 251-3128
Letter Dated March 9, 2011
Response RM-1
The commentor’s description of his experience and qualifications are noted. No further
response is required.
Response RM-2
The commentor’s generally positive assessment of the Revised DEIR is noted. Responses to
the commentor’s specific concerns are provided in the following paragraphs.
Response RM-3
The commentor’s concerns in regard to the use of alternative fuels in Project equipment are
acknowledged. In response, it should be noted that the use of ‚Tier IV‛ diesel off-road
engine standards in onsite front end loaders during Project operations is supported by the
South Coast Air Quality Management District staff in their letter dated May 7, 2009
(Revised Draft EIR Appendix K, page 32). The use of the most efficient technologies
available to reduce emissions from onsite equipment is addressed in the Revised DEIR’s
Project Description, which states ‚All off-road equipment will employ South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) ‚Tier III‛ or superior diesel off-road engine
technologies, acting to reduce emissions generated by on-site equipment operations.‛
(Revised DEIR, page 3-17). However, in order to ensure adequate monitoring and
enforcement of this requirement, the following text has been added to Mitigation Measure
4.3.14:
Mitigation Measure 4.3.14
Waste dumping, sorting/handling, and loading of waste into transfer trailers shall be
restricted to inside the transfer building. All off-road equipment used in
association with the Project shall employ South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) “Tier III” or superior diesel off-road
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-250
engine technologies, to reduce emissions generated by on-site equipment
operations.
This revision to Mitigation Measure 4.3.14 is reflected in the Project Mitigation Monitoring
Plan (Final EIR Section 4.0), and in Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions and Errata
Corrections.‛
Response RM-4
The commentor correctly notes that Mitigation Measures 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 address the
conversion of transfer trucks from diesel fuel to compressed natural gas (CNG) fuel. The
commercial fleet referenced in Mitigation Measures 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 would be comprised
of public and private haulers utilizing the proposed transfer station. On page 4.3-96, the
Revised DEIR states, ‚it is noted that Applicant-controlled trash collection vehicles
accessing the Project site are fueled by natural gas, which do not emit diesel particulate, and
are less carbon intensive as compared to regular diesel fuel.‛ 33
Response RM-5
In order to ensure adequate monitoring and enforcement of operational activities that
would result in the emissions of diesel particulates, the following text has been added to
Mitigation Measure 4.3.19:
Mitigation Measure 4.3.19
Throughout Project operations, an operational relations officer/ community
liaison, appointed by the Applicant, shall be retained on-site. In
coordination and cooperation with the City and the South Coast Air
Quality Management District, the operational relations officer/ community
liaison shall monitor any concerns related to diesel particulate matter
(DPM) emissions, including but not limited to restricted access for non-CNG
trucks, and enforcement of on-site idling limitations. In addition, Ssign(s)
with the following language or similar shall be installed at the Project entrance,
along internal truck routes, at/within unloading areas, and at all parking areas:
33 Please refer also to proposed additional/revised mitigation of DPM emissions impacts discussed at Final
EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions and Errata Corrections.‛
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-251
‚MAXIMUM FIVE (5) MINUTE ON-SITE IDLING OF TRUCK
ENGINES TO BE PERMITTED IN DESIGNATED AREAS ONLY.
VIOLATORS SUBJECT TO PENALTIES INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO LOSS OF CONTRACT/RESTRICTED FACILITY
ACCESS.‛
The sign(s) shall not be less than twenty-four (24) inches square.
This revision to Mitigation Measure 4.3.19 is reflected in the Project Mitigation Monitoring
Plan (Final EIR Section 4.0), and in Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions and Errata
Corrections.‛
Response RM-6
The commentor’s concerns in regard to the Project’s potential health risks are
acknowledged. In regard to the two (2) existing residences that are forecast to be within the
Project’s area of significant impact, it may be noted that these properties are not owned by
or under the control of the Project Applicant. Further, the City’s General Plan recognizes
that sporadic non-conforming residential uses exist within manufacturing/ industrial
designations. (Pomona General Plan, pp. 35-37.) At the same time, the City’s General Plan
contains policies that encourage the transition of non-conforming residential uses to
industrial uses and also promote industrial development within industrially-designated
General Plan Land Use and zoning districts. (Pomona General Plan, pp. 27; 28; 38.) In
regard to the potential health risks identified by the Project’s Revised DEIR, it can be
reasonably argued that over the 30-year and/or 70 year timeframes used to assess potential
impacts, the two (2) currently affected non-conforming single-family residences would
transition to conforming industrial uses, thereby alleviating potential cancer risk exposure
concerns.
Moreover, modeling of potential increased cancer risks as presented in the Revised DEIR is
considered to represent a conservative estimate of real-world conditions. That is, pursuant
to the adopted SCAQMD methodologies, calculated DPM-source cancer risks are
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-252
predicated on extended 70-year/30-year exposure scenarios. Both the 70-year and 30-year
cancer risk assessments considered in the Revised DEIR represent estimates of theoretic
DPM-source cancer risks, and are based on the assumption that a person is exposed to the
emission source 24 hours a day for 365 days a year for the entire length of the assumed
exposure period. Individuals are typically not stationary at any given outdoor location, and
a portion of each 24-hour cycle is spent indoors. In addition, individuals and families
residing at a given location for 70 or even 30 years would be considered the exception,
rather than the norm. The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
(OEHHA) has indicated that based on studies prepared by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), the EPA recommends a central tendency estimate of nine (9)
years for residency at a given location, and a high-end estimate of 30 years for residency
time. Thus, the methodologies used to determine cancer risk (e.g., the assumption of a 24-
hour exposure for a 30 or 70 year period) represent a maximum theoretic cancer risk, and
are not intended to account for or represent DPM exposures based on residency and
occupancy tendencies. For these reasons, and considering that the Project Applicant does
not own or control the existing residences located adjacent to the Project site, vacation of
these residences is not proposed as part of the Project’s implementation.
As noted in the Revised DEIR’s discussion of alternatives that were considered and
rejected, ‚Project operations would need to be reduced by approximately 74 percent (a ratio
of 55/207.83) to achieve the SCAQMD operational threshold for NOx, and by
approximately 78 percent (a ratio of 10/45.1) to achieve the SCAQMD’s cancer risk
exposure threshold.’’ (Revised DEIR, page 5-40.) A redesign of the Project at such a
significant reduction in scope would be infeasible. Further, reduction of the Project’s scope
to this degree would not permit the fulfillment of community and Project objectives,
primarily, to manage municipal solid waste in an efficient and cost-effective manner
consistent with the State’s AB 939 mandates; and to provide a minimum 20-year waste
transfer capacity to the region to accommodate future growth and correlating increases in
City-wide waste generation.
As stated in the CEQA Guidelines (Section 15002 (a)), one of the basic purposes of CEQA is
to ‚inform governmental decision makers and the public about the potential significant
environmental effects of proposed activities.‛ The Revised DEIR has identified the
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-253
potentially significant effects of the Project on the environment. The commentor’s opinions
regarding the Project’s identified significant health risk exposures will be forwarded to
decision-makers for their consideration.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-255
Al Solis
Mission Recycling
Letter Dated February 28, 2011
Response AS-1
The commentor identifies himself as a stakeholder and business owner in the City of
Pomona. The commentor requests that the City support and approve the Project and
related EIR, citing the Project’s potential employment and tax revenue benefits.
Commentor support of the Project is noted and no further response is required in this
regard.
Response AS-2
The commentor states that the Revised Draft EIR is ‚highly conservative and likely overstates
project impacts.‛ Additionally, ‚the DEIR is also comprehensive and fully discloses to the public
all of the reasonably foreseeable impacts of the project and imposes reasonable mitigation.‛
Commentor approval of the Revised DEIR is noted and no further response is required in
this regard.
Response AS-3
The commentor feels the proposed location of the Project is ‚preferred‛ and notes the
industrial zoning of the site. The commentor further states that denying the Project would
‚be to ignore its [the City’s] fundamental obligation of stimulating the economy of the City.‛ The
commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-makers.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-258
Sara Stephens
1147 W. 11th Street
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter Dated March 11, 2011
Response SS-1
The commentor states opposition to the Project, citing threshold exceedances for ‚regional
NOx emissions, cancer risk, noise, and particulate emissions during construction, and traffic
impacts‛ as the basis for her objections. Commentor opposition to the Project is noted and
commentor statements regarding the Project are forwarded to the decision-makers.
Response SS-2
The commentor misstates and misinterprets significance findings of the Revised DEIR that
Project NOx emissions will exceed applicable SCAQMD Regional Thresholds. Effects of
NOx cited in the Revised DEIR and referenced by the commentor, are those that could be
expected under prolonged exposure to high concentrations such as could occur if Ambient
Air Quality Standards (AAQS) for NOx concentrations would be exceeded. These are the
standards (not the SCAQMD regional thresholds) that establish applicable health
parameters. See also Revised DEIR at Page 4.3-20:
4.3.4.3 Ambient Air Quality Standards
The [Clean Air Act] CAA established national Ambient Air Quality
Standards (AAQS) with states retaining the option to adopt more stringent
standards or to include other pollution species. These standards are the levels
of air quality considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect
the public health and welfare. They are designed to protect those ‚sensitive
receptors‛ most susceptible to further respiratory distress such as asthmatics,
the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease
or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. Healthy adults
can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations considerably
above these minimum standards before adverse effects are observed. Both
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-259
the State of California and the federal government have established health-
based AAQS for ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide,
suspended particulate matter (PM10 , PM2.5), and lead. Relevant state and
federal criteria pollutant standards, and potential health and other physical
effects attributable to exceedance of concentration standards for each
pollutant are presented at Table 4.3-3.
To evaluate potential compliance with/exceedance of applicable AAQS, localized
operational emissions concentrations are evaluated against applicable SCAQMD localized
significance thresholds, which in turn are based on the AAQS. As substantiated in the
Revised DEIR, Project operations will not generate NOx emissions that would exceed
applicable localized significance thresholds, nor violate applicable AAQS. (See Revised
DEIR at Pages 4.3-78, 4.3-79.) As summarized above, while the Revised DEIR has
concluded operational NOx emissions will exceed applicable SCAQMD regional thresholds,
this conclusion does not translate to significant health impacts.
Regarding increased DPM-source cancer risk exposure, DPM-source cancer risks are
projected to exceed applicable SCAQMD cancer risk thresholds at the two (2) closest
residential uses located adjacent to the Project site (residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth
Street).34 (See Revised DEIR, Figure 4.3-2.) These conclusions are based on the Project
Health Risk Assessment (HRA, Revised DEIR Appendix C) and associated dispersion
modeling of DPM emissions which were prepared consistent with applicable SCAQMD
methodologies and protocols. As discussed in the Revised DEIR, the Project HRA
demonstrates that with application of proposed mitigation, significant DPM-source cancer
risks would not extend beyond the noted two (2) residential uses. The applicable
significance threshold is a cancer risk incidence of greater than ten (10) persons per one
million population (10/million). At the two (2) significantly affected residences (1295 and
1415 East Ninth Street), mitigated cancer risks are estimated at 11.59/million and
45.10/million respectively.35 At area schools, unmitigated and mitigated cancer risks levels
34 At the nearest residential use located southerly of the Project site, across 9th Street, the cancer risk is
estimated at 8.47/million which is less than the SCAQMD threshold of 10.0/million.
35 See Revised DEIR at Page 4.3-92, et al.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-260
would not exceed the applicable threshold (10/million) and as discussed in the Revised
DEIR would not even exceed one (1)/million.
As summarized above and discussed in detail in the Revised DEIR and supporting technical
analyses, the potential risks from DPM emissions are mitigated to the extent feasible at
Project opening. Notwithstanding, the two (2) residences located closest and adjacent to the
Project site (both of which are non-conforming uses in an industrially-designated land use
district) would experience DPM-source cancer risks exceeding applicable SCAQMD
thresholds. Future transition of vehicles from use of diesel to CNG (as proposed under
Revised DEIR Mitigation Measures 4.3.21, 4.3.22) would reduce cancer risks such that only
one (1) residence located closest to the Project site would experience DPM-source cancer
risks exceeding applicable SCAQMD thresholds. Ultimately, as vicinity non-conforming
residential uses transition to industrial uses (such transition should reasonably occur with
the 30-year General Plan Buildout scenario, and well before conclusion of the assumed 70-
year DPM exposure period), all potential DPM-source cancer risks resulting from the
Project would be reduced to levels that are less-than-significant. It is also explicitly noted
that in all instances and under all circumstances, Project-related DPM-source risks at area
schools are less-than-significant. Lastly, and significantly, it should again be emphasized
that the DEIR and Revised DEIR analyses in total are constructed to be conservative,
thereby establishing potential maximum impact scenarios.
Should the Project be approved, the Lead Agency is required to adopt a Statement of
Overriding Considerations acknowledging the Project’s significant DPM-source cancer risk
impacts at the two (2) residences located adjacent to the Project site as summarized above.
As substantiated in the Revised DEIR and summarized herein, the Project will not result in
or cause potentially significant DPM-source emissions impacts at area schools. Results and
conclusion of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response SS-3
The commentor is correct in stating that environmental justice considerations are discussed
at Revised DEIR Appendix H. The commentor erroneously presents findings of Appendix
H out of context.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-261
In complete context, Revised DEIR Appendix H first notes that environmental justice
considerations are not physical impacts to the environment and are not explicitly addressed
under CEQA. ‚Notwithstanding, as a member Board overseen by the California
Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA), the California Integrated Waste Management
Board (CIWMB) has included the recognition of the principles of environmental justice as
an integral part of its review and permitting actions. Moreover, the analysis presented here
is intended to provide all review agencies and decision-makers with information addressing
potential environmental justice implications of the Project‛ (Revised DEIR Appendix H,
Page 1). At Page H-17, the Revised DEIR discussion of environmental justice considerations
notes that ‚there is a potential for the Project to result in disproportionate impacts to
minority populations. However, low-income populations within the affected area comprise
less than 50 percent of the total population. Based on EPA guidance, low-income status is
not a determining environmental justice parameter.‛ As further discussed at Page H-18:
. . . [a]s indicated, minority populations comprise more than 50 percent of the
total population within all geographic areas of analysis (Project Site Census
Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, and County), and all tiers of
geographic areas would be considered Environmental Justice Communities.
Any project with significant environmental impacts under CEQA would also
have potential environmental justice concerns if located in the Project Site
Census Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, or County.
Continuing, the Appendix H discussion notes:
With respect to the above potential environmental justice concerns, it is noted
that significant impacts affecting the local environmental justice community
are a product, at least in part, of the presence of non-conforming residential
uses within an area planned and designated for industrial development. On-
going transition of these non-conforming residential uses to industrial
development, as envisioned under the City General Plan, would tend to
alleviate impacts attributable to exposure of residences to proximate
industrial uses. Notwithstanding, in the course of this transition, non-
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-262
conforming residential uses located near existing or proposed industrial uses
are subject to increased environmental effects and potential environmental
justice concerns.
It is also recognized that temporary construction impacts, such as those
resulting from the Project, are typical and generally unavoidable for any
development project located adjacent to residential uses. In this sense, these
impacts are not Project-specific, and would likely occur to some degree under
all development scenarios at the Project site due to the presence of proximate
non-conforming sensitive receptors (Appendix H, Page H-19).
As noted previously, while environmental justice is not a CEQA issue, the analysis of these
concerns presented in the Revised DEIR is intended to provide all review agencies and
decision-makers with information addressing potential environmental justice implications
of the Project. The commentor’s opinions are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results
and conclusions of the Revised Draft EIR are not affected.
Response SS-4
The commentor expresses concern for a family living in the Project area, citing general
health concerns, vectors, and pollution as the basis for her concern. The commentor asks
the City to ‚keep families like these in mind‛ when making their decision regarding the Project.
The commentor does not identify specific health concerns. It is difficult to provide on-point
responses to the generalized concerns expressed by the commentor. Notwithstanding,
commentor concern for potential impacts affecting the health of the area residents are
acknowledged and are forwarded to the decision-makers.
Response SS-5
The commentor expresses concern regarding the proposed facility size. In particular, the
commentor offers opinions on the appropriate scope of waste transfer facilities within the
City of Pomona. The Project and waste transfer activity scope evaluated in the Revised
DEIR is consistent with that proposed by the Project Applicant. More specifically, the 1500
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-263
tons per day operating limitation of the Project is based on the waste acceptance capacity as
defined and considered in the Revised DEIR, and as stipulated under the Solid Waste
Facility Permit (SWFP) requested by the Applicant.
The commentor restates their concerns for the health of the area residents. Please refer to
preceding Response SS-4. Additionally, the commentor is concerned with the potential for
the City’s reputation as a ‚garbage processing hub, while the cities around us save money and
avoid these risks by sending their trash to us.‛ The City’s reputation is not a physical impact to
the environment within the scope of CEQA. Commentor concerns and statements
regarding the City’s reputation and its characterization are forwarded to the decision-
makers. Results and findings of the Revised Draft EIR are not affected.
Response SS-6
The commentor speculates on potential future capacity expansion of the Project.
Capacity expansion beyond the requested 1,500 tons per day CIWMB [CalRecycle]
permitting cited in the Revised DEIR Project Description is not evaluated in the Revised
DEIR. The Lead Agency will determine the type and extent of any required supporting or
subsequent environmental evaluation that may be required if such a future expansion is
proposed. As with the current Project, the Lead Agency will ultimately approve or deny
any future expansion should it be proposed.
The commentor’s statements regarding potential future capacity expansion are forwarded
to the decision-makers for their consideration.
Response SS-7
The commentor does not identify environmental concerns or concerns with the Revised
DEIR analysis and its findings. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-
makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-265
Belinda White
1539 Evans Avenue
Pomona, CA 91766
Letter Dated March 14, 2011
Response BW-1
The commentor states her status as a voting citizen of Pomona and her opposition to the
Project. The commentor does not identify specific reasons for her opposition. Nor does the
commentor cite CEQA or environmental concerns. Commentor opposition to the Project is
noted and commentor statements are forwarded to the decision-makers.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-268
John and Lynette Whitney
Letter Dated March 13, 2011
Response JLW-1
The commentors state disapproval of the Project. The commentors state residency in the
City of Pomona. The commentors state they have two young boys. The commentors offer
an opinion that the Project is not in the best interest of the City. The commentors express
concerns with the Draft EIR and Revised DEIR.
The commentors do not identify environmental concerns. Commentor statements and
opinions are forwarded to the decision-makers
Response JLW-2
The commentors express general concerns regarding significant residual impacts resulting
from the Project. The commentors restate concerns that Project operational NOx emissions
will exceed applicable SCAQMD regional thresholds. (See Lynnette Whitney Comments
and Responses, and John Whitney Comments and Responses, Revised DEIR Appendix K).
The commentor notes that should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a
Statement of Overriding Considerations acknowledging Project-specific and [cumulatively]
significant operational source NOx emissions impacts.
As discussed and disclosed in the Revised DEIR . . .‛ [e]ven after implementation of all
feasible mitigation measures, long-term operational source emissions will exceed the
SCAQMD regional threshold for NOx only‛ (Revised DEIR Page 1-25, et al.). As noted by
the commentor, should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a Statement of
Overriding Considerations acknowledging Project-specific and [cumulatively] significant
operational source NOx emissions impacts.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-269
Response JLW-3
The commentors state concerns regarding Project diesel particulate matter (DPM)
emissions, and DPM-source exceedance of SCAQMD cancer risk thresholds at two (2)
residential uses.
DPM-source exceedance of SCAQMD cancer risk thresholds are adequately and
appropriately discussed and disclosed in the Revised DEIR, as excerpted below:
. . . [e]ven with the application of all feasible mitigation, Project-related
DPM-source cancer risk significance thresholds (SCAQMD threshold for
lifetime residential exposure) will be exceeded at two (2) residential receptors
adjacent to the Project site (residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street).
This is considered a significant impact of the Project. No other receptors
(whether residential, worker or schools) are subject to potential cancer risk
threshold exceedances. As the two (2) affected non-conforming residential
uses transition to industrial uses per the City General Plan, Project-related
cancer risk exceedances would be alleviated (Revised DEIR Page 1-25, et al.).
As indicated above, Project-related DPM-source cancer risk significance thresholds
(SCAQMD threshold for lifetime residential exposure) will be exceeded at two (2)
residential receptors adjacent to the Project site (residences at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth
Street). No other significant localized DPM-source air quality impacts are projected. As
noted by the commentor, should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a
Statement of Overriding Considerations acknowledging significant Project-specific, and
cumulative localized DPM emissions impacts.
It is further noted that in response to commentor concerns, and consistent with mitigation
refinements intended to be achieved through the CEQA and EIR review processes,
additional mitigation is proposed that would act to further reduce Project-related DPM
emissions. More specifically, additional/revised mitigation is proposed [MM 4.3.21
(A)mended and MM 4.3.22(A), below] that would ensure future year (2020) ‚CNG-only‛
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-270
access restrictions for all transfer trucks and commercial trash collection vehicles served by
the Project. 36, 37
MM 4.3.21 (A): At Project opening, all transfer trucks and all Applicant-
controlled commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project
site shall be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent
technologies).
MM 4.3.22(A): On or before January 2, 2020, all transfer trucks and all
commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project site shall be
powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent technologies).
Health Risk Assessment (HRA) modeling of DPM-source cancer risks resulting from
application of proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A), in combination with other DPM
emissions mitigation currently proposed in the Revised DEIR (See Revised DEIR Mitigation
Measures 4.3.17 through 4.3.20) has been conducted as one component of this Final EIR.
Detailed modeling results are presented within the HRA Addendum included at Final EIR
Appendix A. Results of the HRA Addendum indicate that with the stipulated conversion of
diesel-fueled vehicles to CNG vehicles required pursuant to MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM
4.3.22(A), by the Year 2020 the maximum potential cancer risk exposure at any potentially
affected receptor would be reduced to levels that are less-than-significant.
More specifically, at the maximally impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth
Street), the mitigated cancer risk would be 3.98 per million. The residential use
experiencing the second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the
mitigated cancer risk would be 0.52 per million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer risk
would therefore be less than the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per million.
36 The Year 2020 timeframe implementation schedule proposed here is consistent with, and parallels
EPA/CARB tiered emissions reductions goals for heavy-duty trucks.
37 Proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) would replace/supercede MM 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 currently
reflected in the Revised DEIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-271
The HRA Addendum results indicate further, that under no circumstance would area
schools be significantly affected by DPM emissions, nor would DPM emissions result in any
potentially significant non-cancer risks. Please refer also to detailed HRA modeling results
presented at Final EIR Appendix A.
Notwithstanding these findings, this Final EIR conservatively maintains previous
conclusions regarding potential Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risks.
That is, for the purposes of disclosure, and to maintain the conservative analysis construct
employed to date, Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risk exposures at the
residences located at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street are considered to be significant during
the approximate ten year period following the opening of the Project. No other locations
would experience potentially adverse elevated DPM-source cancer risk exposures (or non-
cancer risk exposures) resulting from Project operations or activities. Please refer also to
related discussions of DPM emissions impacts and proposed additional/revised mitigation
presented at Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions and Errata Corrections.‛
Response JLW-4
The commentors incorrectly state: ‚there [are] at least three significant areas of risk for public
health and the environment‛ [inferred from the commentors’ statements as]: (1) Project operational
NOx emissions regional threshold exceedance; (2) Project-generated NOx as an ozone precursor, and
(3) Project-generated DPM-source emissions] which will require a Statement of Overriding
Considerations in order for the project to pass. The commentors incorrectly equate significant
environmental impacts as defined under CEQA with significant risks and/or significant
health concerns. Significant environmental impacts resulting from the Project are
summarized at Revised DEIR Page 1-25. These impacts are defined as ‚significant‛ under
CEQA in that even after application of mitigation, impacts would exceed applicable
thresholds. This does not mean, however, that these impacts translate to significant risk or
health concerns.
Of the concerns noted by the commentor, increased DPM-source cancer risks at two (2)
residential uses resulting from the Project would be considered an identifiable health
concern, and is discussed and disclosed as such in the Revised DEIR (See Revised DEIR
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-272
Section 4.3, Air Quality, Pages 4.3-86 through 4.3-106; Appendix C, HRA Analysis). Please
refer also to Response JLW-2.
This is not the case however for Project-related exceedances of SCAQMD regional
thresholds for operational NOx emissions. In this regard, the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) and the more stringent California Ambient Air Quality Standards
(CAAQS), not SCAQMD regional emissions thresholds, represent and establish air quality
safety threshold conditions. The CAAQS recognize non-attainment conditions and account
for ambient air pollutant levels, and then establish threshold pollutant emissions
concentration levels/exposure times that provide an adequate margin of safety to protect
the public health and welfare.
Moreover, neither the Lead Agency, nor the SCAQMD has established a ‚health‛ threshold
for regional NOx emissions. As such, there is no established determinant allowing for a
conclusion that a given project’s regional emissions would be considered a significant health
impact under CEQA. The fact that the commentor believes there is an identifiable causal
health impact from Project NOx emissions does not make it so. Further, the SCAQMD, the
Responsible Agency for air quality issues and air quality concerns has not indicated or
commented that the Project regional NOx emissions constitute a health concern.
As discussed in the Revised DEIR, the Project’s operational emissions (including NOx
emissions) would not exceed the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS):
‚*u+nder Project Buildout, operational activities [emissions] will not exceed
the operational LSTs, and in so doing will not violate the CAAQS‛ (Revised
Draft EIR, Page 4.3-56).
Thus, although the Project’s operational NOx emissions would exceed SCAQMD regional
thresholds, operational NOx emissions would not exceed standards established under the
CAAQS, and would not constitute a potential health hazard/health risk.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-273
Similarly, cumulatively significant impacts associated with NOx regional threshold
exceedances are not considered a health hazard/health risk. In this regard, the LST analysis
considers background NOx pollutant levels to which the Project NOx emissions are added,
thus establishing the cumulative condition. The Project LST analysis indicates that
cumulatively, Project NOx emissions in addition to background pollutant levels would not
exceed applicable CAAQS, and therefore would not constitute a potential NOx health
hazard/health risk.
With regard to Project contributions of NOx emissions as an ozone precursor, as discussed
in the Revised DEIR, the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) as a whole is a non-attainment area
for ozone. (See Revised DEIR Page 4.3-16). Thus, all development projects within the Basin
that generate NOx emissions (essentially all development within the Basin) would to some
degree, contribute to existing ozone non-attainment conditions.
Areawide ozone impacts and programs/strategies to reduce ozone levels are addressed
within the Basin’s 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (2007 AQMP). More specifically, the
purpose of the 2007 AQMP is to set forth a comprehensive program that will result in
compliance with federal and state air quality planning requirements for ozone and PM2.5.
On September 27, 2007, the CARB Board adopted the 2007 South Coast Air Quality
Management Plan as part of the State Strategy for the 2007 State Implementation Plan (SIP).
Additionally, the 2007 AQMP has been submitted to the U.S. EPA for approval; no timeline
on the approval is available at this time. The 2007 AQMP programs and strategies act to
address effects of ozone within the Basin, including effects of NOx generated as a precursor
to ozone.
The air quality conditions reflected in the 2007 AQMP are based on several assumptions.
For example, the 2007 AQMP has assumed that development associated with general plans
will be realized in accordance with population growth projections identified by SCAG.
SCAG in turn develops population projections based on information provided by its
member governmental agencies (such as the City of Pomona). SCAG population
projections reflect buildout of the City of Pomona pursuant to the City’s adopted General
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-274
Plan, and emissions resulting from the City General Plan buildout are represented
accordingly within the 2007 AQMP.
The Project is consistent with the scope of development assumed under the City General
Plan, and is therefore reflected in SCAG growth projections, and related assumptions and
conditions presented in the 2007 AQMP. Thus, while Project operational NOx emissions
would exceed SCAQMD’s regional threshold criteria for NOx and therefore contribute to
areawide ozone levels, these emissions are already accounted for and addressed in the 2007
AQMP. The Project is also considered to be otherwise consistent with the 2007 AQMP (See
Revised DEIR, Pages 4.3-53 through 4.3-56). As noted above, the 2007 AQMP is the
adopted areawide plan addressing control and reduction of ozone emissions within the
Basin, and the Project’s consistency with the 2007 AQMP supports these ozone control and
reduction measures. Ultimately, emissions reductions achieved through the AQMP would
improve Basin air quality conditions and incrementally reduce associated basin-wide health
concerns.
It is also noted that the SCAQMD has not established localized significance thresholds
(LSTs) for ozone. However, the fact that localized NOx emissions would not exceed
applicable LSTs, indicates the Project’s localized NOx contributions to ozone formation
would not be significant.
Lastly, as discussed in the Revised DEIR, NOx is a byproduct of fuel combustion and the
primary source of NOx emissions from the Project are a result of tail pipe emissions from
vehicles accessing the site. (See Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-78, et al.). Neither the Project
Applicant nor the City has any regulatory control over tail pipe emissions from individual
sources. Rather, vehicle tail pipe source emissions are regulated by CARB and USEPA. The
amount of NOx emissions from vehicle sources has been reduced dramatically over the past
years and is expected to further decline as clean vehicle and fuel technologies improve. In
addition, the Project implements all feasible mitigation measures and complies with all
applicable SCAQMD Rules directed toward reduction of NOx emissions.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-275
Response JLW-5
The commentors speculate that Project-related traffic will cause road damage. The
commentors ask: ‚Will the City be required to pay for the damage caused by this project?‛
The commentor offers no evidence or expert opinion supported by evidence that Project
traffic will cause road damage. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section
21080, subd. (e), below, the commentor’s statements alone are not considered substantial
evidence that the Project may have a significant effect on the physical condition of area
roadways:
e) (1) For the purposes of this section and this division, substantial evidence
includes fact, a reasonable assumption predicated upon fact, or expert
opinion supported by fact.
(2) Substantial evidence is not argument, speculation, unsubstantiated
opinion or narrative, evidence that is clearly inaccurate or erroneous, or
evidence of social or economic impacts that do not contribute to, or are not
caused by, physical impacts on the environment.
There is no demonstrated or substantiated evidence of potential damage to area roadways
should the Project be implemented. Moreover, all roadway improvements proposed by the
Project will conform to City engineering standards, thereby reducing potential future
maintenance responsibilities for these improvements. Maintenance and repair of area roads
are funded by federal, state, and local tax revenues. The Project will also contribute fees and
tax revenues to the City that may be directed to the repair and maintenance of area roads.
Response JLW-6
The commentors recognize mitigation measures included in the Revised DEIR and request
additional information regarding mitigation implementation and enforcement.
Section 4.0 of this Final EIR incorporates all proposed mitigation measures within the EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) identifies measures
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-276
incorporated in the Project which reduce its potential environmental effects; the entities
responsible for implementation and monitoring of mitigation measures; and the
appropriate timing for implementation of mitigation measures. As described at CEQA
Guidelines § 15097, this MMP employs both reporting on, and monitoring of, Project
mitigation measures.
The objectives of the MMP are to:
Assign responsibility for, and ensure proper implementation of mitigation measures;
Assign responsibility for, and provide for monitoring and reporting of compliance
with mitigation measures;
Provide the mechanism to identify areas of noncompliance and need for
enforcement action before irreversible environmental damage occurs.
As the Lead Agency, the City of Pomona is responsible for ensuring full compliance with
the mitigation measures adopted for the proposed Project. The City will monitor and
report on all mitigation activities. Mitigation measures will be implemented at different
stages of development throughout the Project area. In this regard, the responsibilities for
implementation have been assigned to the Applicant, Contractor, or a combination thereof.
If during the course of Project implementation, any of the mitigation measures identified
herein cannot be successfully implemented, the City shall be immediately informed, and the
City will then inform any affected responsible agencies. The City, in conjunction with any
affected responsible agencies, will then determine if modification to the Project is required
and/or whether alternative mitigation is appropriate. Mitigation monitoring and reporting
procedures incorporated in the Project are presented at Final EIR Section 4.2. Specific
mitigation measures incorporated in the Project, mitigation timing, and implementation and
reporting/monitoring responsibilities are presented at Final EIR Section 4.0, Table 4.2-1.
In addition, to the extent the Project is proposed with various design features, the Project
Conditions of Approval will require the implementation of all such design features.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-277
Conditions of Approval are tied to various permitting/development actions and are
enforced by the City.
Response JLW-7
The commentors speculate on potential future expansion of the Project and related potential
for additional or different impacts resulting from such an expansion.
Please refer to Response JLW-5 for CEQA direction addressing response to speculation.
Capacity expansion beyond the requested 1,500 tons per day CIWMB [CalRecycle]
permitting cited in the EIR Project Description is not evaluated in the Revised DEIR. The
Lead Agency will determine the type and extent of any required supporting or subsequent
environmental evaluation that may be required if such a future expansion is proposed. As
with the current Project, the Lead Agency will ultimately approve or deny a future
expansion should it be proposed.
Further, the proposed facility is not ‚over-sized‛ as suggested by the commentors. The
proposed facility was designed to accommodate the completion of required activities in a
closed space. Such activities include the operation of equipment to segregate trash dumped
on the tipping floor with enough room to ensure that equipment can operate safely
alongside workers, and to ensure an efficient trash transfer capability whereby trash can be
pushed into the loading opening in the floor to awaiting trash transfer trucks. In order to
accommodate these activities, a 1,500 tons per day trash transfer operation requires the
amount of space provided for in the Project design. Enclosure of these activities realized
through the Project design acts to reduce potential environmental effects such as noise and
air pollution.
The commentor’s statements regarding potential future capacity expansion are forwarded
to the decision-makers.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-278
Response JLW-8
The commentors state an opinion that the Project will not be an asset to the City and
express concern regarding the Project’s potential to hurt the City’s image. The commentors
restate general health concerns.
The commentor’s opinion(s) regarding the Project are forwarded to the decision-makers.
Absent potential blight impacts, the City’s image is not a physical environmental
consideration and is not addressed under CEQA. There is no evidence or indication the
Project would cause or result in physical blight. Rather, the Project would develop
underutilized vacant property that in its current state could be considered blighted and is
targeted for redevelopment by the City’s Redevelopment Plan for industrial uses such as
those proposed by the Project. Thus, according to the City’s Redevelopment Plan, the
Project will eliminate blight.
Potential health risks resulting from the Project (exceedance of SCAQMD cancer risk
thresholds at two residential uses) are summarized at Responses JLW-2 and JLW-3, and
discussed in detail in the Revised DEIR (See Revised DEIR at Pages 4.3-85 through 4.3-106,
et al.) Please refer also to the Project HRA included at Revised DEIR Appendix C; and the
HRA Addendum included at Appendix A to this Final EIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-279
ALCOTT ANNEX ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENT LETTERS
Thirty-four (34) students of Alcott Annex Elementary School wrote letters in opposition to
the Project. The comments contain general concerns about the Project and do not refer to
specific information presented within the Revised DEIR. Nevertheless, responses to these
general concerns are provided following the list of student commentors. The letters
themselves are included at FEIR Appendix B.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-280
ALCOTT ANNEX ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Letters Dated March 10, 2011
The following table summarizes the primary concerns expressed by the student
commentors.
Student Commentor Environmental Concern(s)
Erick Aldrete Odors
Brenda Alvarez Proximity of Project to School
Odors
Vectors
Community Reputation
Karla Carrillo Air Quality
Traffic
Community Reputation
Health Effects
Financial Considerations
Vectors
Alan Casteneda Odors
Natalie Castaneda Health Effects
Jillian Cordova Proximity of Project to School
Odors
Traffic
Noise
Health Effects
Vectors
Angel Cortes Health Effects
Community Quality and Reputation
Odors
Noise
Marvin Delgado Air Quality
Health Effects
Jordan Fitzhugh Health Effects
Financial Considerations
Odors
Vectors
Noise
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-281
Student Commentor Environmental Concern(s)
Sylvia Flores Health Effects
Financial Considerations
Odors
Decidoro Gomez Proximity of Project to School
Odors
Vectors
Health Effects
Financial Considerations
Fernando Hernandez Health Effects
Proximity of Project to School
Odors
Kimberly Hernandez Health Effects
Odors
Proximity of Project to School
Jesus Herrera Proximity of Project to School
Health Effects
General Environmental/Pollution Concern
Odors
Vectors
Ashley Juarez Air Quality
Health Effects
Odors
Financial Considerations
Vectors
Briana Juarez Proximity of Project to School
Health Effects
Financial Considerations
Odors
Jorge Lamas Proximity of Project to School
Health Effects
April Llamas Health Effects
Financial Considerations
Odors
Vectors
Dariela Garcia Lopez General Environmental/Pollution Concern
Health Effects
Financial Considerations
Odors
Vectors
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-282
Student Commentor Environmental Concern(s)
Eduardo Mendez Community Reputation
Odors
Daniel Mendoza Proximity of Project to School
Odors
Health Effects
Devanh Munoz Health Effects
Air Quality
Water Quality
Odors
Financial Considerations
Community Reputation
Bernice Pena Health Effects
Community Quality
Arianna Ramirez Community Quality
Vectors
Odors
Health Effects
Sandro Reyes, Jr. Health Effects
Odors
Financial Considerations
Noise
Vectors
Fernando Rios Health Effects
Vectors
Odors
Ahluna Zoe Sanchez Health Effects
Financial Considerations
Proximity of Project to School
Vectors
Odors
Franchesca Sanchez Odors
Health Effects
Financial Considerations
Marlene Sanchez Health Effects
Financial Considerations
Vectors
Community Quality
Proximity of Project to School
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-283
Student Commentor Environmental Concern(s)
Persephany Sanchez Financial Considerations
Vectors
Proximity of Project to School/Home
Health Effects
Odors
Enet Tovilla Proximity of Project to School
Odors
Health Effects
Financial Considerations
Community Reputation
Tyler Watanabe Proximity of Project to School
Health Effects
Vectors
Brandon (last name not provided) Financial Considerations
Ernesto (last name not provided) Proximity of Project to School
Health Effects
Since the majority of the student letters focus on similar issues, responses to each topical
concern are presented in the following discussions. A few students voiced concern
regarding general environmental/pollution impacts; however, absent specific identification
of physical environmental concerns, further response has not been undertaken.
In addition to the concerns identified above, each student also provided opinions regarding
potential Project impacts, and many urged the City to deny the Project. While response to
these comments is outside the scope of CEQA, the commentor’s statements are provided to
the decision-makers.
Air Quality Impacts
Overview
The majority of the commenting students expressed concern about the air quality impacts
of the Project and the potential health effects that could result. The Revised DEIR uses a
number of different analyses to judge whether the Project would result in significant air
quality effects. These techniques include measuring the Project’s contribution to pollutant
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-284
levels addressed by regional air quality standards and conducting a Localized Significance
Threshold (LST) Analysis. The Revised DEIR also evaluates and addresses the potential for
Project diesel emissions to contribute significantly to increased cancer risks within the
Study Area.
The methodology and thresholds used to determine whether a significant effect occurs are
provided by the SCAQMD. Neither the modeling techniques or thresholds are absolutes;
they only provide a ‚yardstick‛ to measure the impacts of the Project, and suggest what
measures should be taken to reduce these impacts.
In summary, the analysis within the Revised DEIR shows that the Project operational-
source air pollutant emissions would exceed regional air quality standards for oxides of
nitrogen (NOx), and that Project construction-source emission would exceed applicable LST
standards for particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). Additionally, dispersion modeling of
Project-related diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions indicates that SCAQMD lifetime
exposure residential cancer risk thresholds would be exceeded at the two (2) residences
located closest to, and adjacent to the Project site. More specifically, at the maximally
impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth Street) the mitigated cancer risk
would be 45.10 per million. The residential use experiencing the second highest exposure
is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the mitigated cancer risk would be 11.59 per
million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer risk would therefore exceed the SCAQMD
cancer risk threshold of 10 per million. The Revised DEIR indicates further, that under no
circumstance, would any other land uses (including area schools) be significantly affected
by DPM emissions, nor would DPM emissions result in any potentially significant non-
cancer risks.
It also noted that solid waste collection and consolidation activities of the proposed transfer
station would, on a regional basis, act to reduce the total vehicle miles travelled (VMT) for
the purposes of collecting and disposing of solid waste. In this regard, the VMT reductions
and associated vehicle emissions reductions attributable to the Project would likely provide
a net benefit to regional air quality.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-285
Construction-Source Emissions Impacts
Temporary, intermittent and localized PM10/PM2.5 emissions impacts (see below) are
identified as significant impacts within the Revised DEIR. All other Project construction-
source emissions impacts are less-than-significant, or are reduced to levels that are less-
than-significant through application of the Revised DEIR mitigation measures.
The Revised DEIR analysis does however indicate that construction-source emissions could
result in LST exceedances for PM10 emissions (at distances of up to 60 meters from the
Project perimeter), and for PM2.5 emissions (at distances of up to 30 meters from the Project
perimeter). Beyond the 30 and 60 meter distances, there are no potentially significant
PM10/PM2.5 emissions impacts. The closest school is located approximately 800 meters from
the Project, and therefore will not be adversely affected by PM10/PM2.5 emissions impacts
during Project construction.
Operational-Source Emissions Impacts
NOx Emissions-Regional Threshold Exceedances Only
Exceedance of NOx emissions thresholds (regional threshold exceedances only), and
exceedance of SCAQMD cancer risk thresholds at two (2) residences are identified as
significant impacts resulting from Project operations within the Revised DEIR. All other
Project operational-source emissions impacts are less-than-significant, or are reduced to
levels that are less-than-significant through application of the Revised DEIR mitigation
measures.
With specific regard to the Project’s operational NOx regional threshold exceedance, it is
again noted that NOx is a byproduct of fuel combustion in engines, and is released through
vehicle tailpipes. (See Revised DEIR, Page 4.3-78, et al.). Neither the Project Applicant nor
the City of Pomona has regulatory control over tailpipe emissions from vehicle exhaust.
Rather, these source emissions are regulated by the California Air Resources Board and the
United States Environmental Protection Agency. As noted in the Revised DEIR, due to
regulatory requirements and improved vehicle emissions technologies, NOx emissions
from vehicles have diminished over the past years, and are expected to further decline as
clean vehicle and fuel technologies improve. The Project has implemented all feasible
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-286
mitigation measures that are available to reduce NOx emissions. As previously noted, the
NOx emission threshold exceedances indicate that mitigation measures should be applied
to the Project; not that specific health (e.g., an increased incidence of asthma) or other
environmental damage will occur.
SCAQMD Cancer Risk Threshold Exceedances
As also discussed in the Revised DEIR, with application of mitigation, cancer risk
thresholds would be exceeded at the two (2) residential uses located closest, and adjacent to
the Project site. At the maximum impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth
Street) the mitigated cancer risk would be 45.10 per million. The residential use
experiencing the second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the
mitigated cancer risk would be 11.59 per million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer
risk would therefore exceed the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per million.
In response to commentor concerns, and consistent with mitigation refinements intended to
be achieved through the CEQA and EIR review processes, additional mitigation is
proposed that would act to further reduce Project-related DPM emissions.
More specifically, additional/revised mitigation is proposed [MM 4.3.21 (A)mended and
MM 4.3.22(A), below+ that would ensure future year (2020) ‚CNG-only‛ access restrictions
for all transfer trucks and commercial trash collection vehicles served by the Project. 38, 39
MM 4.3.21 (A): At Project opening, all transfer trucks and all Applicant-
controlled commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project
site shall be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent
technologies).
38 The Year 2020 timeframe implementation schedule proposed here is consistent with, and parallels
EPA/CARB tiered emissions reductions goals for heavy-duty trucks.
39 Proposed MM 4.3.21(A) and MM 4.3.22(A) would replace/supercede MM 4.3.21 and 4.3.22 currently
reflected in the Revised DEIR.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-287
MM 4.3.22(A): On or before January 2, 2020, all transfer trucks and all
commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project site shall be
powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent technologies).
Health Risk Assessment (HRA) modeling of DPM-source cancer risks resulting from
application of proposed MM 4.3.21 (A) and MM 4.3.22(A) in combination with other DPM
emissions mitigation currently proposed in the Revised DEIR (See Revised DEIR Mitigation
Measures 4.3.17 through 4.3.20) has been conducted as one component of this Final EIR
(please refer to HRA Addendum included at Final EIR Appendix A). Results of the HRA
Addendum indicate that with the stipulated conversion of diesel-fueled vehicles to CNG
vehicles described herein, the maximum potential cancer risk exposure at any potentially
affected receptor would be reduced to levels that are less-than-significant.
More specifically, at the maximally impacted residential receptor location (1415 East Ninth
Street), the mitigated cancer risk would be 3.98 per million. The residential use
experiencing the second highest exposure is located at 1295 East Ninth Street, where the
mitigated cancer risk would be 0.52 per million. At both locations, the mitigated cancer risk
would therefore be less than the SCAQMD cancer risk threshold of 10 per million. The
HRA Addendum results indicate further, that under no circumstance would area schools
be significantly affected by DPM emissions, nor would DPM emissions result in any
potentially significant non-cancer risks. Please refer also to detailed HRA modeling results
presented at Final EIR Appendix A.
Notwithstanding these findings, this Final EIR conservatively maintains previous
conclusions regarding potential Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risks.
That is, for the purposes of disclosure, and to maintain the conservative analysis construct
employed to date, Project-related and cumulative DPM-source cancer risk exposures at the
residences located at 1295 and 1415 East Ninth Street are considered to be significant until
the Year 2020. No other locations would experience potentially adverse elevated DPM-
source cancer risk exposures (or non-cancer risk exposures) resulting from Project
operations or activities. Please refer also to related discussions of DPM emissions impacts
and proposed additional/revised mitigation presented at Final EIR Section 2.0, ‚Revisions
and Errata Corrections.‛
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-288
Noise
Temporary, intermittent, and localized construction-source noise impacts (see below) are
identified as significant impacts within the Revised DEIR. All other Project noise impacts
(construction and operational) are less-than-significant, or are reduced to levels that are
less-than-significant through application of the Revised DEIR mitigation measures.
In order to illustrate the extent of potential construction source noise impacts, Figure 4.4-4
is presented in the Revised DEIR. Figure 4.4-4 graphically portrays a 65 dBA contour line,
beyond which received noise levels would not exceed applicable noise standards
established by the City. A potential maximum construction-source noise scenario was
considered in establishing this line, and assumes heavy equipment operating at the
Project’s boundaries, and unobstructed line-of-sight between noise source and receptors.
Within a real world context, noise levels at receptors would be attenuated (lessened) due to
intervening structures and physical separation from the Project site. No school uses exist or
are proposed within the area subject to temporary intermittent construction source noise
levels of 65 dBA or greater.
Odors
Many of the commenting students expressed concerns regarding potential odors which
they feel will be generated on-site. As presented within Section 4.3, ‚Air Quality‛ of the
Revised DEIR (page 4.3-107), an Odor Impact Assessment was conducted. Based on the air
sampling and analysis conducted at a similar facility, odors generated by the Project are not
anticipated to exceed applicable odor thresholds.
As detailed in Section 3.0, ‚Project Description‚ of the Revised DEIR, the Project includes
the development and implementation of a comprehensive Odor Impact Minimization Plan
(OIMP) pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 410 and the Alternative Odor Management Plan
(AOMP) program established by the California Integrated Waste Management Board
(CIWMB, which has been reconstituted as CalRecycle).
The Project is designed to be fully enclosed and contains an overhead misting system. The
misting system will consist of a network of water pipes and nozzles, suspended from the
ceiling covering more than two-thirds of the transfer station/tipping floor area, with
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-289
additional nozzles at the transfer station building’s entrance/exit doors. In its basic
application, the misting system will emit a fine mist that will entrap airborne dust and settle
it to the transfer station floor where it can be mechanically removed by
sweeping/vacuuming. As an enhancement, an odor-destroying chemical will be injected
into the misting system to eliminate odor-producing bacteria. Roof-mounted exhaust fans
will further reduce and control dust and odor by drawing in clean air from building
openings, while filtering and discharging air from the tipping floor. With the incorporation
of these features (required by Mitigation Measures 4.3.23 through 4.3.26), the Project will
not create a significant impact with respect to odors.
Proximity of Project to School/Home
The students’ concerns regarding the location of the Project within the context of other area
land uses are addressed within the responses to air quality, health risk, noise, odors, traffic
and vector concerns provided within this response.
Quality and Reputation of Community
While clearly of concern to City residents and leaders, the Project’s potential to affect the
quality and/or reputation of the City is not evaluated within the Revised DEIR since this
issue does not involve a physical impact to the environment. The students’ concerns in this
regard are provided to the decision-makers.
Traffic
With specific regard to potential traffic impacts during school pick-up and drop-off times,
the Project does not propose uses or activities that would adversely affect school uses. The
closest school (Washington Elementary) is approximately 0.5 miles from the Project site,
and is separated from the Project site by intervening railroad tracks, the existing City street
network, and numerous buildings. The Project does not propose or require the routing of
traffic in a way that would lead to conflicts with school activities, including but not limited
to student pick-up and drop-off.
Heavy trucks accessing the Project site will travel along existing designated truck routes.
Other vehicles will likely access the Project site via the most expedient means. All vehicle
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-290
operators would be required by law to observe school zone speed limits and school
crossing restrictions. Because the Project will not cause or result in any potentially
significant localized traffic impacts, potential traffic impacts along roads serving area
schools would also be less-than-significant.
Vectors (Pests)
Many of the students expressed concern regarding nuisance pests, specifically rats, mice,
cockroaches, and flies. As presented in Section 4.5, ‚Hazards and Hazardous Materials‛
(page 4.5-31) of the Revised DEIR:
A traditional source of concern with MSW [municipal solid waste] transfer
facilities is the attraction the waste may have for insects, rodents, and other
potential scavengers that could be a source of nuisance and/or disease
transmission (collectively called vectors). Insects and rodents (most
commonly rats or mice) are pests that are routinely attracted to or associated
with MSW. Insects, such as domestic flies common to Southern California,
are potential vectors primarily through indirect transmission of disease to
objects, which are then contacted or used by humans. Rats are generally
known as intermediate carriers of vectors, particularly fleas that carry a
variety of infectious diseases afflicting man. However, rats can also directly
infect humans through contaminated saliva injected by a bite. Infectious
agents may be also be transmitted mechanically through contact with rat
excrement. Similar concerns arise with mice.
Hazards and nuisance associated with vectors are addressed consistent with
California Code of Regulations Title 14 requirements as summarized within
the (Draft) Transfer Processing Report included at Revised Draft EIR
Appendix G. More specifically, potential health hazards associated with
vectors and pests will be minimized through compliance with State
Minimum Standards relating to transfer stations, Title 14, Section 17406.1 et
seq. To these ends, vectors will [be] minimized by moving MSW out on a
first-in/first-out basis in a timely manner, and through limiting the holding
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-291
time for waste at the facility (not to exceed 48-hours). If loaded trucks need to
be staged overnight, these parking areas will be inspected and cleaned daily
with a power wet/dry sweeping system. A pest control company will
regularly inspect the site, setting rodent traps and spraying for insect control
as needed.
Based on the Project’s planned controls and compliance with existing regulations, no
potentially significant impacts would occur with regard to vectors.
Water Quality
Project drainage controls/storm water management provisions are summarized at Revised
DEIR Section 3.0, Project Description:
Drainage Controls/Storm Water Management – The Project is required to
obtain an Industrial Storm Water General Permit. The Industrial Storm Water
General Permit is an NPDES permit that regulates discharges associated with
a range of industrial activities, including waste handling facilities such as the
Project. The General Industrial Permit requires the implementation of
management measures that will achieve the performance standard of best
available technology (BAT) economically achievable and best conventional
pollutant control technology (BCT). The General Industrial Permit also
requires the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) and an associated water quality monitoring plan. Through the
SWPPP, sources of pollutants are to be identified and the means to manage
the sources to reduce storm water pollution are described. ‚The SWPPP has
two major objectives: (1) to help identify the sources of pollution that affect
the quality of industrial storm water discharges and authorized non-storm
water discharges; and (2) to describe and ensure the implementation of BMPs
to reduce or prevent pollutants in storm water discharges and authorized
non-storm water discharges.‛ (Fact Sheet for Order 97-03-DWQ, p. IX.) The
SWPPP must ‚contain a compliance activity schedule, a description of
industrial activities and pollutant sources, descriptions of BMPs, drawings,
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-292
maps, and relevant copies or references of parts of other plans.‛ (Order 97-
03-DWQ, p. 12.) ‚The SWPPP shall be revised whenever appropriate and
shall be readily available for review by facility employees or Regional Water
Board inspectors.‛ (Id.) The General Industrial Permit requires that an annual
report be submitted each July 1. (Order 97-03-DWQ, p. 35.) Incidental
wastewater resulting from floor cleanup activities will be vacuumed up and
discharged to a three-stage industrial wastewater clarifier(s), then, under
permit, into the Los Angeles County Sanitation District’s sewer system. (See
also 14 CCR § 14407.3 [requiring drainage controls].) (Revised DEIR at Pages
3-36, 3-37.)
In combination, the above measures act to reduce Project-related water quality impacts to
levels that are less-than-significant. Please refer also to related discussions presented at
Revised DEIR Section 4.6, ‚Hydrology/Water Quality.‛
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-294
Form Letter
Letters Dated March 10, 2011
Form letters in opposition to the Project were received from local residents, church
parishioners, parents and students of vicinity schools, resident senior citizens, and a local
exercise group. These letters are presented at Final EIR Appendix B, and responses are
provided below. Some of the letters were written in Spanish, therefore a Spanish
translation of these following responses is provided as well.
Response FL-1
The commentor states opposition to the Project. The commentor states concern for the
health of children, and notes concern for air quality impacts and traffic impacts affecting the
community. The commentor states concern for the reputation of the City of Pomona.
Commentor opposition to the Project is noted, and is forwarded to the decision-makers.
Commentor concern for the health of children, and concern for air quality and traffic
impacts affecting the community are acknowledged. The commentor does not identify
specific health, air quality, or traffic concerns. Although on-point responses to these
generalized concerns expressed by the commentor cannot be provided, a more general
response based on the content of the January 2011 Revised DEIR is presented below.
As a general response, the Revised DEIR presents extensive discussion and analysis of
potential health risks resulting from the Project (Revised DEIR at Pages 4.3-85 through 4.3-
106; Revised DEIR Appendix C, Air Quality Impact Analyses). With application of
mitigation, two (2) residences (both of which are non-conforming residential uses in an
industrial area) are subject to cancer risk exposures exceeding applicable SCAQMD
thresholds. No other health risks are projected.
Air quality impacts are discussed at Revised DEIR Section 4.3, Air Quality. Supporting
technical air quality studies are provided at Revised DEIR Appendix C, Air Quality Impact
Analyses. Significant air quality impacts of the Project are summarized at Revised DEIR
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-295
Page 1-25. These include: temporary exceedance of PM10/PM2.5 localized significance
thresholds (LSTs) during construction; cancer risk exposures exceeding applicable
SCAQMD thresholds at two (2) residences; and exceedance of SCAQMD regional
thresholds for NOx.
Pending completion of required interchange improvements, significant Project-related
traffic impacts are conservatively assumed to occur at the intersection of Mission Boulevard
and SR-71. No other significant traffic impacts are projected.
Should the Project be approved, the City is required to adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations acknowledging Project-specific and cumulatively significant impacts.
The reputation of the City is not a physical impact to the environment, and is not evaluated
under CEQA.
Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected. Please refer also to extensive
discussions/responses to these same issues presented at Revised DEIR Appendix K.
Response FL-2
The commentor states concerns regarding Project-related cancer risk threshold
exceedances; exceedance of SCAQMD regional thresholds for NOx; Project-related traffic
impacts; and Project-related noise impacts. The commentor offers an opinion that . . . ‚it is
unacceptable for the city to move forward on a project that exceeds SCAQMD’s regional threshold
by over three times, making us more susceptible to asthma and other respiratory illness.‛ The
commentor notes that there are nine (9) schools within a one-mile radius of the Project site,
and offers an opinion that the Project-related exceedance of SCAQMD regional thresholds
for NOx would result in increased health risks at area schools.
Exceedance of SCAQMD cancer risk thresholds affecting two (2) non-conforming
residential uses are discussed in the Revised DEIR and at Response FL-1, above. Project-
related air quality and traffic impacts are discussed in the Revised DEIR and at Response
FL-1, above.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-296
Significant Project-related noise impacts are summarized at Revised DEIR Page 1-25:
‚Noise generated by Project construction activities will temporarily and intermittently
exceed the City’s 65 dBA standard . . .‛ With application of mitigation, the Project will not
result in or cause any significant long-term noise impacts.
Potential air quality impacts affecting sensitive receptors, including the nine (9) schools
cited by the commentor40 are discussed at length in the Revised DEIR (please refer to
Revised DEIR Pages 4.3-78 through 4.3-106). Area school uses would be affected by Project-
related NOx regional threshold exceedances to the same extent as would other land uses in
the South Coast Air Basin. These exceedances would not, however, constitute a health
hazard under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards or California Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS/CAAQS), and would not directly result in adverse effects at
area schools.
Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected. Please refer also to extensive
discussions/responses to these same issues presented at Revised DEIR Appendix K.
Response FL-3
The commentor states disagreement with the Project location within the City of Pomona.
The commentor offers an opinion that ‚it is inequitable to expect us to process their trash and
suffer the environmental consequences.‛
The commentor does not identify specific concerns regarding physical environmental
impacts of the Project. Although it is difficult to provide on-point responses to the
generalized concerns expressed by the commentor, the general response provided below
addresses issues related to Project location.
The Project location is consistent with and supports the Project Objectives (Revised DEIR
Pages 3-44, 3-45). Potential relocation of the Project at Alternative Sites within the City is
considered and evaluated at Revised DEIR Pages 5-32 through 5-38. As discussed in the
40 In point of fact, the Revised DEIR considers and evaluates potential air quality impacts at ten (10)
schools/school facilities within an approximate one-mile radius of the Project site. Please refer to Revised
DEIR Page 4.3-90.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-297
Revised DEIR, no demonstrable reduction in environmental impacts would be achieved
through relocation of the Project.
The Lead Agency has no jurisdictional authority to suggest, propose, or evaluate location of
the Project at a site outside of the City. The commentor’s opinion regarding inequitable
location of the Project within the City is forwarded to the decision-makers. Results and
conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected. Please refer also to extensive
discussions/responses to these same issues presented at Revised DEIR Appendix K.
Response FL-4
The commentor notes that environmental justice considerations are discussed at Revised
DEIR Appendix H. The commentor [citing poverty (low-income) and minority statistics
and relevant EPA guidance out of context] erroneously interprets analysis and findings of
Appendix H.
In complete context, Revised DEIR Appendix H first notes that environmental justice
considerations are not physical impacts to the environment and are not explicitly addressed
under CEQA. ‚Notwithstanding, as a member Board overseen by the California
Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA), the California Integrated Waste Management
Board (CIWMB)41 has included the recognition of the principles of environmental justice as
an integral part of its review and permitting actions. Moreover, the analysis presented here
is intended to provide all review agencies and decision-makers with information
addressing potential environmental justice implications of the Project‛ (Revised DEIR
Appendix H, Page 1).
With regard to the commentor’s concerns about the Project’s potential disproportionate
effects to low-income populations, at Page H-17, the Revised DEIR discussion of
environmental justice considerations notes that ‚there is a potential for the Project to result
in disproportionate impacts to minority populations. However, low-income populations within
the affected area comprise less than 50 percent of the total population. Based on EPA guidance, low-
income status is not a determining environmental justice parameter‛ (emphasis added).
41 The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) has been reconstituted as the California
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-298
The commentor’s concerns about the Project’s potential disproportionate effects to minority
populations are also appropriately and fully addressed within the Appendix H discussion
of environmental justice concerns. More specifically, as discussed at Page H-18:
. . . [M]inority populations comprise more than 50 percent of the total
population within all geographic areas of analysis (Project Site Census Block,
Study Area Census Tracts, City, and County), and all tiers of geographic
areas would be considered Environmental Justice Communities. Any project
with significant environmental impacts under CEQA would also have
potential environmental justice concerns if located in the Project Site Census
Block, Study Area Census Tracts, City, or County. . . .
Continuing, the Appendix H discussion notes:
. . . With respect to the above potential environmental justice concerns, it is
noted that significant impacts affecting the local environmental justice
community are a product, at least in part, of the presence of non-conforming
residential uses within an area planned and designated for industrial
development. On-going transition of these non-conforming residential uses
to industrial development, as envisioned under the City General Plan, would
tend to alleviate impacts attributable to exposure of residences to proximate
industrial uses. Notwithstanding, in the course of this transition, non-
conforming residential uses located near existing or proposed industrial uses
are subject to increased environmental effects and potential environmental
justice concerns.
It is also recognized that temporary construction impacts, such as those
resulting from the Project, are typical and generally unavoidable for any
development project located adjacent to residential uses. In this sense, these
impacts are not Project-specific, and would likely occur to some degree under
all development scenarios at the Project site due to the presence of proximate
non-conforming sensitive receptors (Appendix H, Page H-19).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-299
As noted previously, while environmental justice is not a CEQA issue, the analysis of these
concerns as presented in the Revised DEIR is intended to provide all review agencies and
decision-makers with information addressing potential environmental justice implications
of the Project. The commentor’s opinions are forwarded to the decision-makers. Results
and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response FL-5
The commentor states: ‚While it is important for this region to effectively manage its garbage
processing needs, decisions on this matter should be made at the initiative of the local government
and with widespread community participation, not in response to a profit-seeking corporation’s
proposal.‛
The commentor does not identify environmental concerns or concerns with the Revised
DEIR analysis and its findings. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-
makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
Response FL-6
The commentor urges ‚the planning commission to deny this bid and do what is best for
Pomona.‛ The commentor states: ‚[g]arbage processing is not the kind of ‘development’ we want,
and trash is not what we want this city to be known for. Our health and quality of life are not up for
sale to the highest bidder.‛
The commentor does not identify environmental concerns or concerns with the Revised
DEIR analysis and its findings. The commentor’s statements are forwarded to the decision-
makers. Results and conclusions of the Revised DEIR are not affected.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-301
Form Letter (Spanish Translation)
Letters Dated March 10, 2011
Carta modelo respuesta-1
El comentador expresa su oposición al Proyecto. El comentador expresa su preocupación
por la salud de los niños, y manifiesta su inquietud acerca de los impactos en la calidad del
aire y en el tráfico que afectarán a la comunidad. El comentador expresa su preocupación
por la reputación de la Ciudad de Pomona.
Se toma nota de la oposición del comentador, y la misma será remitida a los encargados de
tomar las decisiones. Es reconocida la preocupación del comentador sobre la salud de los
niños, y su inquietud por los impactos en la calidad del aire y en el tráfico que afectarán a la
comunidad. El comentador no identifica en forma específica dichas preocupaciones sobre
la salud, los impactos en la calidad del aire o del tráfico. Si bien no se puede ofrecer una
respuesta puntual a las inquietudes que expresa el comentador, a continuación se ofrece
una respuesta más general en base al contenido del Informe de Impacto Ambiental
Preliminar Revisado (DEIR Revisado) en enero de 2011.
Como respuesta general, el informe DEIR Revisado presenta un debate y análisis extenso
de los posibles riesgos para la salud que pueden surgir del Proyecto (DEIR Revisado,
página 4.3-85 hasta 4.3-106; DEIR Revisado, Anexo C, Análisis del Impacto en la Calidad
del Aire). Con la aplicación de las medidas atenuantes (mitigaciones), dos (2) viviendas
(que no cumplen con el uso residencial en una zona industrial) están sujetas a la exposición
de riesgo de cáncer, excediendo los umbrales aplicables de SCAQMD. No se proyectan
otros riesgos de salud.
Los impactos en la calidad del aire se debaten en el DEIR Revisado, Sección 4.3, Calidad del
Aire. El informe DEIR Revisado, Anexo C, Análisis de Impacto en la Calidad del Aire se
proporcionan estudios técnicos de apoyo sobre la calidad del aire. Los impactos
significativos en la calidad del aire del Proyecto están resumidos en el informe DEIR
Revisado, páginas 1-25. Los mismos incluyen: excedencia temporal en los umbrales
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-302
significantes localizados en PM10/PM2.5 (LSTs) durante la construcción; exposición al riesgo
de cáncer que excede los umbrales aplicables (2) viviendas; y excedencia en los umbrales
regionales de SCAQMD para el NOx.
Mientras se terminan las mejoras de intercambio solicitadas, se prevén impactos
significantes en el tráfico relacionados con el Proyecto en la intersección de Mission
Boulevard y SR-71. No se proyectan otros impactos significantes en el tráfico.
Si se aprueba el Proyecto, la Ciudad deberá adoptar una Declaración de Consideraciones
Predominantes, reconociendo los impactos significantes específicos y acumulativos del
Proyecto.
La reputación de la Ciudad no es un impacto físico en el medio ambiente, y no es evaluado
por CEQA.
Los resultados y conclusiones del DEIR Revisado no se ven afectados. También, sírvase
consultar los debates y respuestas extensas a estos mismos temas, presentados en el Anexo
K del DEIR Revisado.
Carta modelo respuesta-2
El comentador expresa su preocupación respecto a la excedencia del umbral de riesgo de
cáncer relacionado con el Proyecto; excedencia de los umbrales regionales de SCAQMD
para el NOx; impactos en el tráfico relacionados con el Proyecto e impactos de ruido
relacionados con el Proyecto. El comentador ofrece la siguiente opinión: . . ‚es inaceptable
que la ciudad continúe con un proyecto que excede y triplica el umbral regional de SCAQMD,
haciéndonos m{s susceptibles al asma y a otras enfermedades respiratorias‛ El comentador
menciona que hay nueve (9) escuelas dentro de un radio de una milla del lugar del
Proyecto, y manifiesta su opinión acerca de que la excedencia del umbral regional de
SCAQMD para el NOx, relacionada con el proyecto, resultaría en un mayor riesgo para la
salud en la zona escolar.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-303
La excedencia en los umbrales de riesgo de cáncer de SCAQMD, que afectan a dos (2)
viviendas que no cumplen con el uso residencial, se menciona en el DEIR Revisado y en la
Respuesta 1 de arriba. Los impactos en la calidad del aire, relacionados con el Proyecto, se
mencionan en el DEIR Revisado y en la Respuesta 1 de arriba. Los impactos en el tráfico,
relacionados con el Proyecto, se mencionan en el DEIR Revisado y en la Respuesta 1 de
arriba.
Los impactos de ruido significantes, relacionados con el Proyecto, se resumen en el DEIR
Revisado en las páginas 1-25: ‚El ruido generado por las actividades de construcción del
Proyecto, exceder{n de forma temporal e intermitente la norma de 65 dBA de la Ciudad. . .‛
Con la aplicación de las medidas atenuantes, el Proyecto no resultará en o causará impactos
de ruido significantes y de largo plazo.
Los posibles impactos en la calidad del aire que afectan a receptores sensibles, incluyendo
las nueve escuelas citadas por el comentador42, son tratados extensivamente en el DEIR
Revisado (sírvase consultar las páginas 4.3-78 a 4.3-106 del DEIR Revisado). Las áreas
escolares serían afectadas por la excedencia del umbral regional del NOx, relacionada con
el Proyecto, de la misma manera en que otros usos del suelo en la Cuenca de Aire de la
Costa Sur. Sin embargo, dichas excedencias no constituirían un peligro para la salud, en
conformidad con las Normas Nacionales de Calidad del Aire Ambiental o las Normas de
Calidad del Aire Ambiental de California (NAAQS/CAAQS), y no resultaría directamente
en efectos adversos en la zona escolar.
Los resultados y conclusiones del DEIR Revisado no se ven afectados. También, sírvase
consultar los debates/respuestas extensas a estos mismos temas, presentados en el Anexo K
del DEIR Revisado.
42 De hecho, el DEIR Revisado considera y evalúa los posibles impactos sobre la calidad del aire en diez (10)
escuelas/instalaciones escolares dentro de un radio de aproximadamente una milla del sitio del Proyecto.
Sírvase consultar la página 4.3-90 del DEIR Revisado.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-304
Carta modelo respuesta-3
El comentador manifiesta su desacuerdo con la ubicación del Proyecto dentro de la Ciudad
de Pomona. El comentador ofrece su opinión: ‚es injusto esperar que nosotros procesemos
la basura y suframos las consecuencias ambientales.‛
El comentador no identifica en forma específica las preocupaciones sobre los impactos
físicos ambientales del Proyecto. Si bien es difícil ofrecer respuestas puntuales a las
preocupaciones generales manifestadas por el comentador, la respuesta general que se
ofrece a continuación, aborda los temas relacionados con la ubicación del Proyecto.
La ubicación del proyecto se ajusta a y avala los Objetivos del Proyecto (DEIR Revisado,
páginas 3-44, 3-45). La posible reubicación del Proyecto en sitios alternativos dentro de la
Ciudad, se considera y evalúa en el DEIR Revisado, páginas 5-32 a 5-38. Como se debatió
en el DEIR Revisado, no se lograría una reducción demostrable en los impactos ambientales
mediante la reubicación del Proyecto.
La Agencia Líder no tiene jurisdicción para sugerir, proponer o evaluar una ubicación del
Proyecto en un sitio fuera de la Ciudad. La opinión del comentador con respecto a la
ubicación injusta del Proyecto dentro de la Ciudad será enviada a los encargados de tomar
las decisiones. Los resultados y conclusiones del DEIR Revisado no se ven afectados.
También, sírvase consultar los debates/respuestas extensas a estos mismos temas,
presentados en el Anexo K del DEIR Revisado.
Carta modelo respuesta-4
El comentador tiene en cuenta que las consideraciones de la justicia ambiental se abordan
en el Anexo H del DEIR Revisado. El comentador [citando la pobreza (bajos ingresos) y las
estadísticas de las minorías y las instrucciones relevantes de EPA fuera de contexto],
interpreta de forma errónea los análisis y hallazgos del Anexo H.
En el contexto completo, el Anexo H del DEIR Revisado, primero hace referencia a que las
consideraciones de la justicia ambiental no son impactos físicos para el medio ambiente y
no son abordadas explícitamente bajo CEQA. No obstante, como miembro de la Junta que
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-305
supervisa la Agencia de Protección Ambiental de California (Cal EPA), la Junta de Manejo
Integral de Residuos de California (CIWMB)43, ha incluido el reconocimiento de los
principios de justicia ambiental como parte integral de su revisión y acciones permitidas.
Además, el análisis que se presenta aquí, tiene como objeto ofrecer información a todas las
agencias de revisión y a los encargados de tomar las decisiones sobre las posibles
implicaciones de la justicia ambiental del Proyecto‛ (DEIR Revisado, Anexo H, p{gina 1).
Con respecto a las preocupaciones del comentador sobre los posibles efectos
desproporcionados del Proyecto sobre las poblaciones de bajos recursos, en la página H-17,
el debate sobre las consideraciones de justicia ambiental en el DEIR Revisado indica que
‚existe la posibilidad de que el Proyecto resulte en impactos desproporcionados en las
poblaciones minoritarias. Sin embargo, las poblaciones de bajos ingresos dentro de las áreas
afectadas abarcan menos del 50 por ciento de la población total. En base a las instrucciones EPA, la
condición de bajos ingresos no es un parámetro determinante de justicia ambiental (énfasis
añadido).
Las inquietudes del comentador sobre los posibles efectos desproporcionados del Proyecto
sobre las poblaciones minoritarias, también se abordan adecuada y completamente dentro
del debate sobre justicia ambiental en el Anexo H. Más específicamente, en la página H-18:
. . . La población minoritaria abarca más del 50 por ciento de la población
total dentro de todas las áreas geográficas del análisis (Bloque Censal de la
Ubicación del Proyecto, Distritos Censales del Área de Estudio, la Ciudad y
el Condado), y todos los niveles de las áreas geográficas serían consideradas
Comunidades de Justicia Ambiental. Cualquier proyecto con impactos
ambientales significativos bajo CEQA, también tendrían posibles inquietudes
sobre la justicia ambiental si están ubicados en el Bloque Censal de la
Ubicación del Proyecto, Distritos Censales del Área de Estudio, la Ciudad y
el Condado, . . .
43 La Junta de Manejo Integral de Residuos de California (CIWMB) ha sido reconstituida como el
Departamento de Reciclaje y Recuperación de Recursos de California (CalRecycle).
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-306
Asimismo, el Anexo H menciona que:
. . . Con respecto a las posibles inquietudes de justicia ambiental arriba
mencionadas, se manifiesta que los impactos significantes que afectan a la
comunidad de justicia ambiental local son producto, al menos en parte, de la
presencia de usos que no cumplen con el uso residencial dentro de un área
planificada y designada para el desarrollo industrial. La transición continua
de dichos usos que no cumplen con los usos residenciales al desarrollo
industrial, como se visualiza en el Plan General de la Ciudad, aliviaría los
impactos que se atribuyen a la exposición de las viviendas a los usos
industriales aproximados. No obstante, en el curso de dicha transición, los
usos que no cumplen con el uso residencial ubicados cerca de usos
industriales existentes o propuestos están sujetos a mayores efectos
ambientales e inquietudes sobre posible justicia ambiental.
También se reconoce que los impactos temporales debido a la construcción,
tales como los que resultan del Proyecto, son típicos y generalmente nos se
pueden evitar en ningún proyecto de desarrollo ubicado en adyacencia de
usos residenciales. En tal sentido, dichos impactos no son específicos al
Proyecto, y probablemente ocurrirían hasta cierto grado en todos los casos de
desarrollo en el sitio del Proyecto debido a la presencia de receptores
sensibles, próximos y que no se ajustan (Anexo H, página H-19).
Como se ha indicado anteriormente, si bien la justicia ambiental no es un tema del CEQA,
el análisis de dichas preocupaciones se presenta en el DEIR Revisado con el objeto de
ofrecer información a todas las agencias de revisión y a los encargados de tomar las
decisiones sobre las posibles implicaciones de la justicia ambiental del Proyecto. Las
opiniones del comentador son enviadas a los encargados de tomar las decisiones. Los
resultados y conclusiones del DEIR Revisado no se ven afectados.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-307
Carta modelo respuesta-5
El comentador manifiesta: ‚Si bien es importante para la región administrar eficazmente el
procesamiento de la basura, las decisiones sobre este tema deben ser realizadas por el gobierno local y
con la amplia participación de la comunidad, no en respuesta a una propuesta corporativa con fines
de lucro.
El comentador no identifica inquietudes ambientales o inquietudes relacionadas con el
análisis y los hallazgos del DEIR Revisado. Las opiniones del comentador son enviadas a
los encargados de tomar las decisiones. Los resultados y conclusiones del DEIR Revisado
no se ven afectados.
Carta modelo respuesta-6
El comentador insta a ‚la comisión de planeamiento a denegar la licitación y hacer lo que es mejor
para Pomona‛. El comentador manifiesta: ‚El procesamiento de basura no es la clase de
‘desarrollo’ que queremos, y no queremos que esta ciudad sea conocida por la basura. Nuestra salud y
calidad de vida no est{n a la venta al mejor postor‛.
El comentador no identifica inquietudes ambientales o inquietudes relacionadas con el
análisis y los hallazgos del DEIR Revisado. Las opiniones del comentador son enviadas a
los encargados de tomar las decisiones. Los resultados y conclusiones del DEIR Revisado
no se ven afectados.
© 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Comments and Responses
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 3-309
Opposition Petition
Petition Received March 14, 2011
Response OP-1
Petition signatories express opposition to the Project. The petition states: ‚Hundreds of
trucks carrying trash from many cities will bring additional pollution that can only have a negative
impact on the health of our families.‛
Petition signers’ expressed opposition to the Project is forwarded to the decision-makers.
The petition language states general concerns regarding health issues but does not identify
specific Revised DEIR or CEQA issues. These general statements of concern are also
forwarded to the decision-makers. Please refer also to comprehensive analysis of potential
Project-related environmental impacts presented in the Revised Draft EIR, and responses to
comments on the Draft EIR presented herein.
4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-1
4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN
4.1 INTRODUCTION
To ensure that the mitigation measures contained in this EIR are properly implemented,
a monitoring program has been developed pursuant to State law. This Mitigation
Monitoring Plan (MMP) identifies measures incorporated in the Project which reduce
its potential environmental effects; the entities responsible for implementation and
monitoring of mitigation measures; and the appropriate timing for implementation of
mitigation measures. As described at CEQA Guidelines §15097, this MMP employs both
reporting on, and monitoring of, Project mitigation measures.
The objectives of the MMP are to:
Assign responsibility for, and ensure proper implementation of mitigation
measures;
Assign responsibility for, and provide for monitoring and reporting of
compliance with mitigation measures;
Provide the mechanism to identify areas of noncompliance and need for
enforcement action before irreversible environmental damage occurs.
Mitigation monitoring and reporting procedures incorporated in the Project are
presented in the following Section 4.2. Specific mitigation measures incorporated in the
Project, mitigation timing, and implementation and reporting/monitoring
responsibilities are presented within this Section at Table 4.2-1.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-2
4.2 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
Mitigation Monitoring and Responsibilities
As the Lead Agency, the City of Pomona is responsible for ensuring full compliance
with the mitigation measures adopted for the proposed Project. The City will monitor
and report on all mitigation activities. Mitigation measures will be implemented at
different stages of development throughout the Project area. In this regard, the
responsibilities for implementation have been assigned to the Applicant, Contractor, or
a combination thereof.
If during the course of Project implementation, any of the mitigation measures
identified herein cannot be successfully implemented, the City shall be immediately
informed, and the City will then inform any affected responsible agencies. The City, in
conjunction with any affected responsible agencies, will then determine if modification
to the Project is required and/or whether alternative mitigation is appropriate.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-3
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Traffic and Circulation
4.2.1 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit within the
Project site, the Project Applicant shall contribute fees, as defined
by Project Conditions of Approval, toward a signal modification for
northbound right-turn overlap phasing at the intersection of
Reservoir Street at Holt Avenue. The City shall ensure that such
improvements are completed prior to that time at which the LOS is
projected to otherwise fail.
Prior to issuance of first
building permit
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Engineering Division -
Traffic
City shall verify receipt of
fees before issuance of first
building permit
4.2.2 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit within the
Project site, the Project Applicant shall contribute fees, as defined
by Project Conditions of Approval, toward the addition of a
westbound right-turn lane at the intersection of Indian Hill
Boulevard at Holt Avenue. The City shall ensure that such
improvements are completed prior to that time at which the LOS is
projected to otherwise fail.
Prior to issuance of first
building permit
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Engineering Division -
Traffic
City shall verify receipt of
fees before issuance of first
building permit
Air Quality
4.3.1 Per SCAQMD guidelines, in order to limit fugitive dust
emissions, all clearing, grading, earth-moving, or excavation
activities shall cease when winds, as instantaneous gusts, exceed 25
mph.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division, SCAQMD
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going
monitoring by Applicant
construction liaison officer;
and City/SCAQMD
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-4
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.2 The contractor shall ensure that all disturbed unpaved roads
and disturbed areas within the Project site are watered at least three
times daily during dry weather. Watering, with complete coverage of
disturbed areas, shall occur at least three times a day, preferably in
the mid-morning, mid-afternoon, and after work is done for the day.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division, SCAQMD
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going
monitoring by Applicant
construction liaison officer;
and City/SCAQMD
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
4.3.3 The contractor shall ensure that traffic speeds on unpaved
roads and Project site areas are reduced to 15 miles per hour or less
to reduce PM10 and PM2.5 fugitive dust.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contactor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division, SCAQMD
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going
monitoring by Applicant
construction liaison officer;
and City/SCAQMD
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-5
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.4 In order to reduce localized Project impacts to sensitive
receptors in the Project vicinity during construction, construction
equipment staging areas shall be located at least 300-feet away from
sensitive receptors.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division, SCAQMD
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going
monitoring by Applicant
construction liaison officer;
and City/SCAQMD
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
4.3.5 Contractors shall utilize existing power sources (e.g.,
power poles) or clean-fuel generators until permanent power is
established.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division, SCAQMD
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going
monitoring by Applicant
construction liaison officer;
and City/SCAQMD
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-6
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.6 Project heavy-duty construction equipment shall use
alternative clean fuels, such as low sulfur diesel or compressed
natural gas with oxidation catalysts or particulate traps.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division, SCAQMD
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going
monitoring by Applicant
construction liaison officer;
and City/SCAQMD
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
4.3.7 The Applicant shall use “Zero-Volatile Organic
Compounds” paints, coatings, and solvents with a VOC content
lower than required under Rule 1113 (not to exceed 150
grams/liter; 1.25 pounds/gallon). Assuming a maximum VOC
content of 1.1 pounds per gallon, application of VOC-containing
paints, coatings, and solvents shall not exceed 65 gallons per day.
High Pressure Low Volume (HPLV) applications of paints,
coatings, and solvents shall be consistent with South Coast Air
Quality Management District Rule 1113. Alternatively, the
Applicant shall use materials that do not require painting or are
pre-painted.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going
monitoring by Applicant
construction liaison officer;
and City response to any
community concerns
regarding Project
construction activities.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-7
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.8 Wheel washers shall be installed where vehicles exit the construction site onto paved roads. Alternatively, any trucks or equipment leaving the site shall be washed before each trip.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going
monitoring by Applicant
construction liaison officer;
and City response to any
community concerns
regarding Project
construction activities.
4.3.9 All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials shall be covered.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division, SCAQMD
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going
monitoring by Applicant
construction liaison officer;
and City/SCAQMD
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-8
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.10 Adjacent public paved roads shall be swept at the end of each day if soil is evident. Use of water sweepers employing reclaimed water is recommended if such sweepers are available.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division, SCAQMD
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going
monitoring by Applicant
construction liaison officer;
and City/SCAQMD
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
4.3.11 Non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied (according to manufacturers' specifications) to any inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more).
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division, SCAQMD
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going
monitoring by Applicant
construction liaison officer;
and City/SCAQMD
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-9
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.12 Throughout Project construction, a construction relations officer/community liaison, appointed by the Applicant, shall be retained on-site. In coordination and cooperation with the City, the construction relations officer/community liaison shall respond to any concerns related to PMlO (fugitive dust) generation or other construction-related air quality issues.
Applicant to appoint
construction relations
officer/community liaison
prior to issuance of first
development permit, and
provide City with
construction relations
officer/community liaison
contact information.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division
City to verify
officer/community liaison
appointment, and obtain
relevant contact information
prior to issuance of first
development permit.
4.3.13 The truck access gates on the Project site shall be posted with signs which state:
Truck drivers shall turn off engines when not in use; Diesel delivery trucks servicing the project shall not idle
for more than 5 minutes on-site; and Telephone numbers of the building facilities manager and
CARB shall be posted to report violations.
Prior to issuance of first
Certificate of Occupancy
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division
City shall verify required
signage installation before
issuance of first Certificate
of Occupancy.
4.3.14 Waste dumping, sorting/handling, and loading of waste into transfer trailers shall be restricted to inside the transfer building. All off-road equipment used in association with the Project shall employ South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) “Tier III” or superior diesel off-road engine technologies, to reduce emissions generated by on-site equipment operations.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
building permit.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
SCAQMD,
CalRecycle
City to verify required notations before issuance of
first building permit. SCAQMD to verify prior to OIMP approval. CalRecycle to verify prior to issuance of SWFP. Thereafter, on-going
City response to any community concerns
regarding Project operations.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-10
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.15 The main tipping floor, including the contractor drop area,
and all its equipment shall be cleaned at the end of each day by a
mechanical sweeper, hand-brooming, wipe-down, or other means to
remove dust and dirt debris. In no case shall dust or debris result in
or cause:
(1) safety hazards due to obscured visibility;
(2) irritation of the eyes;
(3) hampered breathing; or
(4) migration of dust off-site.
Please refer also to the Project Draft Transfer/Processing Report
(Revised DEIR Appendix G), item 6.4 Dust Control.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
building permit.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
SCAQMD,
CalRecycle
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first building permit.
SCAQMD to verify prior to
OIMP approval. CalRecycle
to verify prior to issuance of
SWFP. Thereafter, on-going
City response to any
community concerns
regarding Project
operations.
4.3.16 On-site emissions of fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) due
to traffic on paved surfaces will be reduced by daily vacuum
sweeping by an SCAQMD-certified vacuum sweeper. Leaf-blowers
or equivalent equipment shall not be used to remove dust from
roadways and asphalt at the facility.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
building permit.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
SCAQMD,
CalRecycle
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first building permit.
SCAQMD to verify prior to
OIMP approval. CalRecycle
to verify prior to issuance of
SWFP. Thereafter, on-going
City response to any
community concerns
regarding Project
operations.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-11
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.17 The transfer station hours of operation for MSW
acceptance and transfer shall not exceed 12 hours per day,
occurring between the hours of 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. Maintenance
activities may occur 24 hours per day, seven days per week except
as limited by existing ordinances, regulations, or other restrictions
imposed by the City.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
building permit.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
SCAQMD,
CalRecycle
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first building permit.
SCAQMD to verify prior to
OIMP approval. CalRecycle
to verify prior to issuance of
SWFP. Thereafter, on-going
City response to any
community concerns
regarding Project
operations.
4.3.18 The Project transfer station building shall incorporate the
unrestricted flow, alternative vertical stack design concept
summarized herein, and as presented in greater detail within the
Mobile Source Health Risk Assessment prepared for the Project.
The Mobile Source Health Risk Assessment is presented at EIR
Appendix C.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
building permit.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division, SCAQMD,
CalRecycle
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first building permit.
SCAQMD to verify prior to
OIMP approval. CalRecycle
to verify prior to issuance of
SWFP. Thereafter, on-going
City response to any
community concerns
regarding Project
operations.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-12
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.19 Throughout Project operations, an operational relations
officer/community liaison, appointed by the Applicant, shall be
retained on-site. In coordination and cooperation with the City and
the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the operational
relations officer/community liaison shall monitor any concerns
related to diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions, including but
not limited to restricted access for non-CNG trucks when/as
applicable, and enforcement of on-site idling limitations. In
addition, sign(s) with the following language or similar shall be
installed at the Project entrance, along internal truck routes,
at/within unloading areas, and at all parking areas:
“MAXIMUM FIVE (5) MINUTE ON-SITE IDLING OF TRUCK
ENGINES TO BE PERMITTED IN DESIGNATED AREAS
ONLY. VIOLATORS SUBJECT TO PENALTIES INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF CONTRACT/RESTRICTED
FACILITY ACCESS.”
The sign(s) shall not be less than twenty-four (24) inches square.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
building permit.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
SCAQMD,
CalRecycle
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first building permit.
SCAQMD to verify prior to
OIMP approval. CalRecycle
to verify prior to issuance of
SWFP. Thereafter, on-going
City response to any
community concerns
regarding Project
operations.
4.3.20 The final site plan shall provide sufficient on-site stacking
length to ensure that vehicles do not queue onto adjacent public
roadways.
Correlating design shall
be reflected in the Project
site plan prior to Final
Site Plan Approval
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division
City to verify stacking
length adequacy prior to
Final Site Plan Approval
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-13
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.21(A): At Project opening, all transfer trucks, and all
Applicant-controlled commercial solid waste collection vehicles
accessing the Project site shall be powered by natural gas engines
(or emission equivalent technologies).
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
building permit.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first building permit.
Thereafter, Applicant
operational liaison required
to ensure appropriate
controlled access to the
Project. On-going City
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
operations.
4.3.22(A): On or before January 2, 2020, all transfer trucks and all
commercial solid waste collection vehicles accessing the Project site
shall be powered by natural gas engines (or emission equivalent
technologies).
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
building permit.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first building permit.
Thereafter, Applicant
operational liaison required
to ensure appropriate
controlled access to the
Project. On-going City
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
operations.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-14
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.23 The Project shall comply with SCAQMD Rule 410 and
the SCAQMD-approved Odor Impact Minimization Plan (OIMP).
In support of Rule 410/OIMP compliance, the main transfer station
building shall incorporate an overhead water misting system
designed for dust suppression and odor mitigation over the entire
tipping floor area, transfer tunnel area and areas as may be specified
by SCAQMD pursuant to the approved OIMP. The misting
system shall inject and mix an odor-destroying compound (AIR8-
AQUA Oil or similar compound) to eliminate odors emanating
from materials on the tipping floor. Nozzles shall be positioned
around the access doors, above the loading pits, and at other points
based on manufacturer specifications and recommendations and as
provided for in the OIMP. All dust/odor control systems shall
employ Best Available Technologies (BATs). The system shall be
designed, implemented and operated so that odors are effectively
neutralized within the Project site.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
building permit.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
SCAQMD, CalRecycle
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first building permit.
SCAQMD to verify prior to
OIMP approval. CalRecycle
to verify prior to issuance of
SWFP. Thereafter, on-going
City response to any
community concerns
regarding Project
operations.
4.3.24 Roof-mounted exhaust fans to be located in the main
transfer station building shall be designed to draw fresh air in
through the building doors and openings, over the transfer floor,
and discharge it through the roof.
Correlating design
specifications and
features shall be
incorporated in
Project building plans,
prior to issuance of first
building permit.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
SCAQMD, CalRecycle
City to verify required
design specifications and
features before issuance of
first building permit.
SCAQMD to verify prior to
OIMP approval. CalRecycle
to verify prior to issuance of
SWFP.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-15
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.25 The primary method of odor control employed by the
proposed Project will be to restrict waste dumping, sorting, and
processing to inside the building. Cleaning the inside of the
transfer building and equipment at the end of each day with a
mechanical sweeper, hand-brooming, and wipe down will also
mitigate odors. Per state regulations, waste shall not be stored on
the site for more than 48 hours.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
building permit.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
SCAQMD, CalRecycle
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first building permit.
SCAQMD to verify prior to
OIMP approval. CalRecycle
to verify prior to issuance of
SWFP. Thereafter, on-going
City response to any
community concerns
regarding Project
operations.
4.3.26 The Project shall obtain approval of the proposed draft
OIMP as set forth in the EIR Technical Appendices (EIR Appendix
G, Operational Programs), and as also submitted to the Local
Enforcement Agency (LEA) and the City of Pomona. As approved,
the OIMP shall include design features that comply with Appendix
A of SCAQMD Rule 410.
Prior to issuance of first
building permit
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
SCAQMD, LEA
City to verify OIMP
approval before issuance of
first building permit
4.3.27 Buildings shall exceed California Title 24 Energy
Efficiency performance standards by a minimum of 20 percent for
water heating and space heating and cooling. As deemed acceptable
by the City of Pomona, any combination of the following design
features may be used to fulfill this mitigation measure provided that
the total increase in efficiency meets or exceeds 20 percent.
Prior to issuance of first
building permit
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division
City to verify Title 24
enhanced compliance
(minimum 20 percent
increased energy efficiency
beyond incumbent Title 24
requirements) before
issuance of first building
permit.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-16
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.27 (cont’d)
To the extent that they are compatible with landscaping
guidelines established by the City of Pomona, shade-
producing trees, particularly those that shade paved
surfaces such as streets and parking lots and buildings,
shall be planted at the Project site.
Paint and surface color palette for the Project shall
emphasize light and off-white colors which will reflect heat
away from the buildings.
All buildings shall be designed to accommodate renewable
energy sources, such as photovoltaic solar electricity
systems, appropriate to their architectural design.
To reduce energy demand associated with potable water
conveyance, the Project shall implement the following:
Landscaping palette emphasizing drought tolerant
plants;
Use of water-efficient irrigation techniques; and
U.S. EPA Certified WaterSense labeled or equivalent
faucets, high-efficiency toilets (HETs), and water-
conserving shower heads.
Install solar or tankless hot water heaters, and energy-
efficient heating ventilation and air conditioning.
Create water-efficient landscapes, including the
installation of water-efficient irrigation systems and
devices and the use of reclaimed water.
Buildings shall be designed to be water-efficient, including
the installation of water-efficient fixtures and appliances.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-17
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Air Quality
4.3.27 (cont’d)
• Construction and demolition waste, including, but not
limited to, soil, vegetation, concrete, lumber, metal, and
cardboard, shall be reused and/or recycled.
Education and publicity shall be provided regarding
reducing waste, available recycling services, and water
conservation.
Noise
4.4.1 Notice of proposed construction activities shall be mailed to
owners and occupants of all developed land uses abutting or
adjacent to the Project site. Notice shall include a preliminary
Project construction activities schedule, thereby allowing for
scheduling or rescheduling of off-site activities that may be affected
by Project construction noise.
Notice content, mailing
list, and verified delivery
of notice required prior
to issuance of first
development permit
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division
City to review and approve
notice content and mailing
list, and verify delivery of
notice prior to issuance of
first development permit.
4.4.2 Construction contractor(s) shall equip all construction
equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained
mufflers, consistent with manufacturers' standards.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going City
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-18
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Noise
4.4.3 The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging
areas and fixed/stationary construction activities in areas that will
create the greatest distance between construction-related noise
sources and noise sensitive receptors nearest the Project site during
all project construction. The construction contractor shall place all
stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed
away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the Project site.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going City
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
4.4.4 The construction contractor shall limit haul truck
deliveries, including but not limited to transport of heavy
equipment to the Project site, soil import/export, and building
materials deliveries, to the same hours specified for construction
activities. Proposed haul routes shall be delineated by the Project
Applicant, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to
issuance of the first development permit.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division, City of
Pomona Engineering
Division - Traffic
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going City
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-19
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Noise
4.4.5 For the duration of Project demolition, site preparation, and
grading activities, a temporary noise barrier of 3/4-inch plywood, a
minimum of six-feet high, and containing no gaps greater than 1/8-
inch, shall be installed along portions of the Project's easterly,
westerly and southerly boundaries. Anticipated line-of-sight noise
attenuation resulting from this or similar barrier with a Sound
Transmission Class rating of STC 30 or greater is 5 dBA. Alternative
measures (e.g., temporary sound curtains) providing equivalent noise
attenuation may be employed if approved by the City. Proposed
location of the plywood (or alternative) barrier would be at the
approximate locations of the permanent six-foot high perimeter block
walls that will be implemented by the Project, as indicated at Figure
4.4-4. Final dimensions and location of this barrier shall be reviewed
and approved by the City prior to the issuance of the first development
permit.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going City
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
4.4.6 In order to minimize the effects of building/facilities
construction noise received at nearby residential uses, the Project's
exterior and interior screen walls as portrayed on the Project Site
Plan Concept and indicated at Figure 4.4-4 shall be constructed in
the first increment of development, or at the earliest feasible date.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-20
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Noise
4.4.7 The transfer station hours of operation for MSW
acceptance and transfer shall not exceed 12 hours per day,
occurring between the hours of 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. Maintenance
activities may occur 24 hours per day, seven days per week except
as limited by existing ordinances, regulations, or other restrictions
imposed by the City.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
CalRecycle, LEA
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going City
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
operational activities.
4.4.8 Heavy construction equipment operations (equipment and
activities capable of producing groundborne vibration levels of 87
VdB or greater) are prohibited within 38 feet of the Project's
easterly property line. This requirement may be waived if the
developer provides, and the City accepts, substantiating analysis
demonstrating that vibration levels received at the closest occupied
land use will not exceed 82 VdB.
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
Building & Safety
Division
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Thereafter, on-going City
response to any community
concerns regarding Project
construction activities.
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
4.5.1 If during implementation of the Project, soil
contamination is suspected, construction in the affected area shall
stop pending determination of the extent and character of
contamination (or lack thereof). Suspected soils shall be tested at a
certified laboratory approved by the Department of Health Services
(DHS). Excavation, transport, and disposal of any soils determined
to be contaminated shall be in accordance with the rules and
regulations of the following agencies:
City of Pomona;
Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) - Los Angeles
County Fire Department;
Correlating notations
shall be incorporated in
all Project plans,
specifications and
contract documents prior
to issuance of first
development permit.
Applicant and
contractor(s)
City of Pomona
Planning Division,
CUPA
City to verify required
notations before issuance of
first development permit.
Verification of compliance
with CUPA requirements
if/as applicable throughout
Project construction.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-21
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
4.5.1 (cont’d) California Department of Toxic Substances Control
(DTSC); California Environmental Protection Agency (CAL-EPA); California Division of Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (CAL-OSHA); United States Department of Transportation (USDOT); and United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
Under the California Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Material Management Regulatory Program, (Chapter 6.11, Division 20, Section 25404 of the Health and Safety Code), hazards/hazardous materials management is addressed locally through the Certified Unified Program Agency. The primary CUPA for the City of Pomona is the Los Angeles County Fire Department.
Hydrology/Water Quality
4.6.1 The City of Pomona requires a Notification of Intent (NOI) and compliance with all applicable general permits. Each industrial discharger, discharger associated with construction activity, or other discharger described in any general stormwater permit addressing such discharges as may be adopted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), or the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, shall provide Notice of Intent, comply with, and undertake all other activities required by any general stormwater permit applicable to such discharges (Pomona Code of Ordinances, Subpart A, Chapter 18, Article X Stormwater Management, Division 3 Discharge Regulations and Requirements, Section 18-495 Reduction of pollutants in stormwater).
Prior to issuance of first
development permit
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Engineering Division -
Environmental
City to verify NOI and
compliance with all general
permits before issuance of
first development permit.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-22
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Hydrology/Water Quality
4.6.2 The Project Applicant shall obtain environmental
clearance from the City of Pomona prior to receiving any grading or
building permits. The County of Los Angeles Municipal
Stormwater (MS4) Permit does not allow the City of Pomona to
issue permits until such time as the Project has obtained
environmental clearance.
Prior to issuance of first
development permit
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Engineering Division -
Environmental
City to verify environmental
clearance before issuance of
first development permit.
4.6.3 As required by the SWRCB and in compliance with the
City of Pomona requirements for environmental clearance, the
Project developer shall file a NOI with the State of California to
comply with the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System General Construction Permit. Before issuance
of a grading permit, the Project Applicant shall prepare a
Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), in
compliance with the applicable ordinances and regulations of the
City of Pomona, the Los Angeles County Flood Control District,
and the SWRCB. The Construction SWPPP shall incorporate Best
Management Practices (BMPs) for control of pollutants in
stormwater runoff during construction-related activities, which
will be designed to address the following: water erosion control,
sediment control, offsite tracking control, wind erosion control,
non-stormwater management control, and waste management and
materials pollution control.
Prior to issuance of first
development permit
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Building & Safety
Division, City of
Pomona Engineering
Division -
Environmental
City to verify approved
SWPPP before issuance of
first development permit.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-23
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Hydrology/Water Quality
4.6.4 The Project Applicant shall develop a Project-specific
SUSMP in compliance with the City-required SUSMP and
Municipal Stormwater Permit.
Prior to issuance of first
development permit
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Engineering Division -
Environmental
City to verify approved
SUSMP before issuance of
first development permit.
SUSMP incorporates
compliance actions to be
verified by City periodically
over the life of the Project.
4.6.5 The Project Applicant shall obtain an Industrial Waste
Discharge Permit from LACSD, and comply with its requirement.
Prior to issuance of first
development permit
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division,
City of Pomona
Engineering Division
– Environmental,
LACSD
City to verify approved
Industrial Waste Discharge
(IWDP) Permit before
issuance of first
development permit. IWDP
incorporates periodic
compliance actions to be
verified by LACSD and City
periodically over the life of
the Project.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-24
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Public Services
4.7.1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project
Applicant shall submit a hydraulic analysis that demonstrates
adequate fire flow and domestic water supply, pursuant to the
requirements of the City of Pomona Water & Wastewater
Operations Division. Improvements that may be necessary to
ensure adequate water supply to the Project site, as identified by the
hydraulic study, shall be incorporated into the Project design and
constructed by the Project Applicant, to the satisfaction of the City
of Pomona.
Prior to issuance of first
building permit
Applicant City of Pomona Water
& Wastewater
Operations Division
Before issuance of first
building permit, hydraulic
analysis to be reviewed and
approved by the City of
Pomona Water &
Wastewater Operations
Division. Before issuance of
first building permit,
improvements that may be
necessary to ensure
adequate water supply to
the Project site, as identified
by the hydraulic study, shall
be incorporated into the
Project design and
constructed by the Project
Applicant, to the
satisfaction of the City of
Pomona.
Cultural Resources
4.8.1 A qualified professional archaeological monitor (Project
Archaeological Monitor) shall conduct full-time monitoring of site
excavation and grading activities. A qualified archaeological
monitor is defined as meeting the Secretary of the Interior
Professional Qualification Standards for Archaeology. The Project
Archaeological Monitor shall be equipped to salvage and record the
location of archaeological and/or other cultural resources as they
The Applicant shall hire
and field a City-approved
Archaeological Monitor
prior to issuance of first
development permit
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division
On-going monitoring,
protection and preservation
activities as required under
MM 4.8.1 throughout
Project excavation and
grading activities.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-25
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Cultural Resources
4.8.1 (cont’d)
may be unearthed to avoid construction delays. The Project
Archaeological Monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or
divert equipment to allow removal of abundant or large specimens
or finds and to allow the preparation of recovered resources to a
point of identification. With the exception of significant Native
American resources that would be returned to a Tribe, all recovered
resources shall then be curated in an established, accredited
museum repository with permanent retrievable archaeological/
historic resource storage. A report of findings shall also be prepared
by the Project Archaeological Monitor, and shall include an
itemized inventory of any specimens recovered. The report and
confirmation of curation of any recovered resources from an
accredited museum repository shall signify completion of the
program to mitigate impacts to historic or prehistoric resources. If
disturbed resources are required to be collected and preserved, the
Applicant shall be required to participate financially up to the
limits imposed by Public Resources Code Section 21083.2.
4.8.2 Should as-yet-unidentified paleontological resources be
encountered in the course of Project development, construction
activities will be halted, allowing for identification, cataloguing,
and as applicable, protection and preservation of resources by a
qualified paleontologist. A qualified paleontologist is defined as an
individual with an M.S. or a Ph. D. in paleontology or geology who
is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques.
The Applicant shall hire
and field a City-approved
Archaeological Monitor
prior to issuance of first
development permit
Applicant City of Pomona
Planning Division
On-going monitoring,
protection and preservation
activities as required under
MM 4.8.2 throughout
Project excavation and
grading activities.
8 2011 Applied Planning, Inc.
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Final EIR - SCH No. 2009051126 Page 4-26
Table 4.2-1
Pomona Valley Transfer Station Project
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Timing
Implementation
Entity
Monitoring/
Reporting Entity
Monitoring/Reporting
Frequency
Cultural Resources
A paleontological monitor may be retained to perform the on-site
monitoring in place of the qualified paleontologist. A
paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has
experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials and who
is working under the supervision of a qualified paleontologist.