06. Exhibit D - Final EIR — Downey City Council, June 11, 2024 (part 1 of 3)

Exhibit D
Final Environmental Impact Report
SCH No. 2022030738
March 2024
Prepared for:
aCityc-ifDowney
Community Development Department
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, California 90241
Prepared by:

HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.
7578 El Cajon Boulevard
La Mesa, California 91942

Exhibit D
This page intentionally left blank

Exhibit D
Table of Contents
Section
Page

1.0 Introduction..................................................................................................................................1-1

2.0 Response to Comments................................................................................................................2-1

3.0 Draft EIR Clarifications and Revisions...........................................................................................3-1

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Public Comment Letters
Appendix B Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Appendix C Public Review Draft EIR
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Final Environmental Impact Report i March 2024

Exhibit D
Table of Contents
This page intentionally left blank
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project City of Downey Final Environmental Impact Report ii March 2024

Exhibit D

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared on behalf of the City of Downey (City) for the proposed Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project (Project) As required by Section 15087 of the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines), a Notice of Completion (NOC) and a Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIR for the Project were filed with the State Clearinghouse (SCH) on December 12, 2023, and the NOA of the Draft EIR was also filed with the Los Angeles County Clerk (State Clearinghouse [SCH] No. 2022030738). The Draft EIR was circulated for public review for a minimum of 45 days, from December 12, 2023 to January 25, 2024. The NOA, NOC, and the Draft EIR and supporting technical appendices were also posted on the SCH CEQANet Web Portal, and the NOA was sent to responsible agencies and other interested agencies and parties on or about December 12, 2023. Copies of the Draft EIR were also made available for public review at the City Planning Division (by appointment) and on the City's website. Eight comment letters were received by the City during the Draft EIR public review. In accordance with Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City, as the CEQA Lead Agency, has evaluated the comments received on the Draft EIR and has prepared this Final EIR with written responses to these comments. The public review comments and associated responses are contained in Section 2 of this Final EIR.

According to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15132, the Final EIR shall consist of:
(a) The draft EIR or a revision of the draft;
(b) Comments and recommendations received on the draft EIR either verbatim or in summary; (c) A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the draft EIR; (d) The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; and
(e) Any other information added by the Lead Agency.

The purpose of the Final EIR is to respond to comments received by the City regarding the environmental information and analyses contained in the Draft EIR. Additionally, any clarifications/ revisions to the Draft EIR generated from responses to comments are stated in the Final EIR, which includes the Draft EIR, as modified per the clarifications and revisions presented in Section 3 of this Final EIR.

This Final EIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and represents the independent judgment of the City as Lead Agency.

In addition to the Final EIR (including supporting technical appendices), the City will also consider the adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP), a Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations document, staff reports, and Resolutions as part of the approval process for the proposed Project.

Exhibit D 1—Introduction

1.1 CONTENT AND FORMAT OF THE FINAL EIR
Following this introductory section, Section 2 contains a table with the public comments received by the City regarding the Draft EIR, along with responses to each comment. Copies of the comment letters received are included in Appendix A, Public Comment Letters. Section 3, Draft EIR Clarifications and Revisions, contains clarifications/revisions to the Draft EIR. Appendix B contains the MMRP. Appendix C contains the Public Review Draft EIR.

1.2 POINT OF CONTACT
The City is the CEQA Lead Agency for the proposed Project. Questions or comments regarding the preparation of this document, its assumptions, or its conclusions, should be referred to:

Alfonso S. Hernandez, Principal Planner
City of Downey
Community Development Department
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, California 90241
Phone: (562) 904-7154 • e-mail: [email protected]

1.3 PROJECT SUMMARY
The following information is summarized from the Project Description contained in the Draft EIR. For additional detail regarding the Project characteristics please refer to Draft EIR Sections 1.0 and 2.0.

1.3.1 Project Location
The Project would be located on an approximately 29.16-acre site in the southeastern portion of the City in the southern portion of Los Angeles County (County). The Project site is located approximately ten miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and nine miles northwest of the County of Orange. Regional access is provided via the following freeways: the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5 [1-5]), the San Gabriel Freeway (1-605), the Century Freeway (1-105), and the Long Beach Freeway (1-710). The Project site is bounded by Hall Road on the north, Woodruff Road on the east, Stewart and Gray Road on the south, and an industrial building on the west. The site is comprised of Assessor's Parcel Numbers 6284-019-013 through 017. Primary vehicular access to the Project site is provided by Stewart and Gray Road and Hall Road.

1.3.2 Proposed Project
The proposed Project would include the demolition of the existing five buildings totaling approximately 433,000 square feet (SF) and the construction of an approximately 535,685-square-foot industrial concrete tilt -up building for warehouse/logistics uses. The Project would include 683 auto parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container parking spaces and 109 dock loading doors. The new industrial building would be used for logistics and distribution purposes, and specifically as a fulfillment center and for cold storage. Approximately 95 percent of the warehouse (508,900 SF) would be high cube fulfillment and the remaining 5 percent (26,785 SF) would be for cold storage (i.e., refrigerated warehouse space). The facility would also include 20,000 SF of office area and 25,000 SF of mezzanine area within the 535,685-SF building. On -site activities would include storage, distribution, and/or

Exhibit D
1— Introduction
consolidation of manufactured goods, and last -mile fulfillment and delivery; and general industrial/ warehouse with refrigeration and cold storage component for the purposes of receiving, storing, shipping of food and/or beverage products. The office space would be used for office uses ancillary to the warehouse operations. The proposed facility would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

1.3.3 Project Objectives
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(b), the EIR project description must include a statement of objectives sought by the proposed project. The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the Project. The fundamental purpose and goal of the Project is to accomplish the orderly development of an appropriately zoned and designated warehouse building in the City while also contributing to increased employment opportunities within the area. The Project objectives have been refined throughout the planning and design process for the proposed Project and are listed below:
• Create a professional, well -maintained, and attractive environment for the development of a warehouse building consistent with the underlying zoning adjacent to nearby transportation infrastructure.
• Expand economic development, attract new businesses, and provide employment opportunities in the City of Downey.
• Increase the industrial base in the City of Downey by providing a Class A industrial facility that meets industry standards for operational design and can accommodate a wide variety of industrial uses.
• Facilitate a project that provides goods for the regional economy. • Design the facility for energy efficiency and sustainability. • Encourage warehouse development as attractive and productive uses while minimizing conflicts to the extent possible with the surrounding existing uses. • Encourage new warehouse distribution services that take advantage of the area's close proximity to various freeways and transportation corridors to reduce traffic congestion on surface streets and to reduce concomitant air pollution emission from vehicle sources. • Encourage new development consistent with the capacity and municipal service capabilities. 1-3

Exhibit D
1— Introduction

1.3.4 Necessary Approvals
The City will be responsible for Final EIR certification, as set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15090 based on the standards of adequacy for an EIR (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15151). Final EIR certification would occur concurrent with consideration of the following discretionary actions by the City:
• Site Plan Review
• Conditional Use Permit
• Variance of Standards (for building height)
• Lot Merger
• Demolition Permit
• Grading Permit
• Building Permit
• Construction Traffic Management Plan
• Temporary Use of Land Permit (for nighttime construction) 1-4

Exhibit D

2.0 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
Eight comment letters were received by the City during the Draft EIR public review period. Responses to the comments provided are included in this section of the Final EIR. Comments that do not require a response, pursuant to Section 15088(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, include those that (1) do not address the adequacy or completeness of the Draft EIR; (2) do not raise environmental issues; or (3) do request the incorporation of additional information not relevant to environmental issues.

Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines, Evaluation of and Response to Comments, states:
a) The lead agency shall evaluate comments on environmental issues received from persons who reviewed the draft EIR and shall prepare a written response. The lead agency shall respond to comments raising significant environmental issues received during the noticed comment period and any extensions and may respond to late comments.
b) The lead agency shall provide a written proposed response, either in a printed copy or in an electronic format, to a public agency on comments made by that public agency at least 10 days prior to certifying an environmental impact report.
c) The written responses shall describe the disposition of significant environmental issues raised (e.g., revisions to the proposed project to mitigate anticipated impacts or objections). In particular, the major environmental issues raised when the lead agency's position is at variance with recommendations and objections raised in the comments must be addressed in detail, giving the reasons that specific comments and suggestions were not accepted. There must be good faith, reasoned analysis in the responses. Conclusory statements unsupported by factual information will not suffice. The level of detail contained in the response, however, may correspond to the level of detail provided in the comment (i.e., responses to general comments may be general). A general response may be appropriate when a comment does not contain or specifically refers to readily available information, or does not explain the relevance of evidence submitted with the comment.
d) The responses to comments may take the form of a revision to the draft EIR or maybe a separate section in the final EIR. Where the responses to comments make important changes in the information contained in the text of the draft EIR, the lead agency should either:

1. Revise the text in the body of the EIR; or

2. Include marginal notes showing that the information is revised in the responses to comments.

Exhibit D 2 — Response to Comments

2.1 LIST OF PERSONS, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PUBLIC AGENCIES

COMMENTING ON THE DRAFT EIR
In accordance with Section 15132 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the agencies and organizations that submitted comments regarding the Draft EIR through the end of the public review period (January 25, 2024) are listed below:

Comment
Letter
Name/Agency
Date
1 Teamsters Local 396 Union
1/3/2024
2 Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy (CARE CA) 1/3/2024
3 CARE CA
1/3/2024
4 CARE CA
1/3/2024
5 California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) 1/9/2024
6 Caltrans District 7
1/19/2024
7 Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance
1/24/2024
8 Teamsters Local 396 Union
1/25/2024

2.2 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS
Aside from courtesy statements, introductions, and closings, individual comments within the body of the comment letter have been identified and numbered. The table below includes five columns: letter number, comment number, name of the commenter, comment, and response. Responses to the comments are provided directly in the table.

Copies of the full commenter letters are included in the Final EIR as Appendix A: Public Comment Letters. This appendix shows the letters in full, along with brackets and numbers in the margin to identify the corresponding comment number in the table.

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
I
Andy Lee,
I'm emailing regarding the Prologis warehouse project at Stewart and Gray The City of Downey replied to this letter on January 3, 2024 with the Teamsters Local 396
Road, which we communicated about last year. I understand that the Draft following response: "Currently, we have not yet received any information EIR was submitted on 12/12/23 and the review period extends to 1/25/24. regarding the future tenant, lessee, or end user." As of the writing of this At this point, is there any more information about the tenant or lessee or response, no additional information is available. As this comment does end user? I didn't see anything specific in the publicly available not raise any specific environmental issues with respect to the adequacy information. Please let me know if you're aware of what company will of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), no further response is ultimately use the property, or if there are multiple companies in required.
consideration for the property. Thank you.
2 1
Alisa Pember,
We are writing on behalf of Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy The commenter's interest in the proposed Project has been noted and Adams Broadwell
("CARE CA") to request mailed notice of the availability of any they have been added to the distribution list for future notifications Joseph & Cardozo
environmental review document, prepared pursuant to the California regarding the Project. The remainder of this comment restates on behalf of
Environmental Quality Act, related to the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road information about the Project that was included in the Project Californians Allied
Warehouse Project (SCH No. 2022030738), proposed by Prologis, Inc.

Description.
for a Responsible
("Applicant"), as well as a copy of the environmental review document Economy (CARE CA)
when it is made available for public review.

The Project proposes the demolition of existing five buildings totaling approximately 433,000 square feet (SF) and the construction of an approximately 535,685-square-foot industrial concrete tilt -up building for warehouse/logistics uses. The Project would include 683 auto parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container parking spaces and 109 dock loading doors. The new industrial building would be used for logistics and distribution purposes, and specifically as a fulfillment center and for cold storage. Approximately 95 percent of the warehouse (508,900 SF) would be high cube fulfillment and the remaining 5 percent (26,785 SF) would be for cold storage (i.e., refrigerated warehouse space). The facility would also include 20,000 SF of office area and 25,000 SF of mezzanine area within the 535,685-SF building.

The Project would be located on an approximately 29.16-acre site in the southeastern portion of the City Downey, Los Angeles County, California.

The Project site is bounded by Hall Road on the north, Woodruff Road on the east, Stewart and Gray Road on the south, and an industrial building on the west. The Project site is comprised of Assessor's Parcel Numbers 6284- 019-013 through 017.

We also request mailed notice of any and all hearings and/or actions related to the Project. These requests are made pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 21092.2, 21080.4, 21083.9, 21092, 21108, 21152, and 21167(f) and Government Code Section 65092, which require local agencies to mail such notices to any person who has filed a written request for them with the clerk of the agency's governing body. 2-3

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
3 1
Sheila M. Sannadan,
We are writing on behalf of Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy The City provided the requested documents to the commenter on January Adams Broadwell
("CARE CA") to request immediate access to any and all documents 16, 2024. The remainder of this comment restates information about the Joseph & Cardozo,
referenced, incorporated by reference, and relied upon in the Draft Project that was included in the Project Description.
on behalf of
Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") prepared for the Prologis Stewart Californians Allied
and Gray Road Warehouse Project (SCH No. 2022030738), proposed by for a Responsible
Prologis, Inc. ("Applicant"). This request excludes a copy of the DEIR and its Economy (CARE CA)
appendices. This request also excludes any documents that are currently available on the City of Downey website.

The new industrial building would be used for logistics and distribution purposes, and specifically as a fulfillment center and for cold storage.

Approximately 95 percent of the warehouse (508,900 SF) would be high cube fulfillment and the remaining 5 percent (26,785 SF) would be for cold storage (i.e., refrigerated warehouse space). The facility would also include 20,000 SF of office area and 25,000 SF of mezzanine area within the 535,685-SF building. The Project would be located on an approximately

29.16-acre site in the southeastern portion of the City Downey, Los Angeles County, California. The Project site is bounded by Hall Road on the north, Woodruff Road on the east, Stewart and Gray Road on the south, and an industrial building on the west. The Project site is comprised of Assessor's Parcel Numbers 6284-019-013 through 017.

Our request for immediate access to all documents referenced in the DEIR is made pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), which requires that all documents referenced, incorporated by reference, and relied upon in an environmental review document be made available to the public for the entire comment period.
4 1
Sheila M. Sannadan,
We are writing on behalf of Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy The commenter replied to the City and withdrew this request on January Adams Broadwell
("CARE CA") to request immediate access to any and all public records in 23, 2024. Because of this withdrawal, no further action is needed by the Joseph & Cardozo,
the City of Downey's possession referring or related to the Prologis Stewart City in response to this comment.
on behalf of
and Gray Road Warehouse Project (SCH No. 2022030738), proposed by Californians Allied
Prologis, Inc. ("Applicant"). This request includes, but is not limited to, any for a Responsible
and all file materials, applications, correspondence, resolutions, memos, Economy (CARE CA)
notes, analysis, email messages, files, maps, charts, and any other documents related to the Project. This request does not include the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") or documents referenced or relied upon in the DEIR, which we have requested in a separate letter pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.

RTC-4

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
The Project proposes the demolition of existing five buildings totaling approximately 433,000 square feet (SF) and the construction of an approximately 535,685-square-foot industrial concrete tilt -up building for warehouse/logistics uses. The Project would include 683 auto parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container parking spaces and 109 dock loading doors. The new industrial building would be used for logistics and distribution purposes, and specifically as a fulfillment center and for cold storage. Approximately 95 percent of the warehouse (508,900 SF) would be high cube fulfillment and the remaining 5 percent (26,785 SF) would be for cold storage (i.e., refrigerated warehouse space). The facility would also include 20,000 SF of office area and 25,000 SF of mezzanine area within the 535,685-SF building. The Project would be located on an approximately

This request is made pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Government Code §§7920.000, et seq.). This request is also made pursuant to Article 1, section 3(b) of the California Constitution, which provides a Constitutional right of access to information concerning the conduct of government. Article 1, section 3(b) provides that any statutory right to information shall be broadly construed to provide the greatest access to government information and further requires that any statute that limits the right of access to information shall be narrowly construed.

We request immediate access to review the above documents pursuant to section 7922.525 of the Public Records Act, which requires public records to be "open to inspection at all times during the office hours of a state or local agency" and provides that "every person has a right to inspect any public record." Therefore, the 10-day response period applicable to a "request for a copy of records" under Section 7922.535(a) does not apply to this request.

We request access to the above records in their original form, as maintained by the agency. Pursuant to Government Code Section 7922.570, if the requested documents are in electronic format, please upload them to a file hosting program such as Dropbox, NextRequest or a similar program.

Alternatively, if the electronic documents are 10 MB or less (or can be easily broken into sections of 10 MB or less), they may be emailed to me as attachments.

RTC-5

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
5 1
Tamara Purvis,
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) received a DEIR for the The commenter has provided an introduction to their comments and a Department of Toxic
Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project (Project). The proposed summary of the project description. No environmental issues related to Substances Control
Project would include the demolition of the existing buildings totaling the analysis presented in the DEIR are raised, and therefore no further approximately 433,000 square feet (SF) and the construction of an response is necessary.
approximately 535,685-SF industrial concrete tilt up building for warehouse/logistics uses. The Project would include 683 automobile parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container parking spaces, and 109 dock loading doors. The new industrial building would be used for logistics and distribution purposes, and specifically as a fulfillment center and for cold storage. Approximately 95 percent of the warehouse (508,900 SF) would be high cube fulfillment and the remaining 5 percent (26,785 SF) would be for cold storage (i.e., refrigerated warehouse space).

The facility would also include 20,000 SF of office area and 25,000 SF of mezzanine area within the 535,685 SF building. On -site activities would include storage, distribution, and/or consolidation of manufactured goods, and last -mile fulfillment anddelivery; and general industrial/warehouse with refrigeration and cold storage component for the purposes of receiving, storing, shipping of food and/or beverage products. The office space would be used for office uses ancillary to the warehouse operations.

Based on our Project review, DTSC requests consideration of the following comments.
5 2
Tamara Purvis,
DTSC recommends the City of Downey enter into DTSC's Standard Voluntary The commenter has recommended that the City enter into the DTSC's Department of Toxic
Agreement (SVA) program so a proper evaluation of the Project can be Standard Voluntary Agreement program and provided information about Substances Control
reviewed by designated DTSC technical staff. The Fluxx portal link is the program. However, the City elected to not participate in the program provided and the page also has a link to the Fluxx User Guide that can help due to the voluntary nature of the program and the City's confidence that you navigate the system. You will need to create a new profile and once in Hazards and Hazardous materials have been accurately and completely the system, click "Start a Request for Lead Agency Oversight Application." evaluated in the EIR. The potential impacts related to hazards and DTSC recommends that once the SVA is signed, a Preliminary Endangerment hazardous materials have been evaluated in Section 4.7, Hazards and Assessment Report (PEA Report) be submitted for DTSC review. The PEA Hazardous Materials of this EIR. The Project is currently undergoing Report shall summarize all existing data and provide an evaluation of the regulatory oversight in compliance with the applicable requirements and possible risk to current and future users of the site. If you have any laws described in Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the questions about the application portal, please contact the DTSC Brownfield DEIR. Both a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and Phase 11 Coordinator Gregory Shaffer or contact the Application Portal Inbox.

ESA have been prepared for the Project and are included as Appendix F and Appendix G, respectively, of the DEIR.

RTC-6

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Comment
Commenter
Comment
Response
Number
Number
5 3
Tamara Purvis,
If buildings or other structures are to be demolished on any project sites Mitigation Measures HAZ-2 and HAZ-3 in Section 4.7, Hazards and Department of Toxic
included in the proposed project, surveys should be conducted for the Hazardous Materials, ensure that any materials containing asbestos and Substances Control
presence of lead -based paints or products, mercury, asbestos containing lead -based paints would be removed from the property prior to the materials, and polychlorinated biphenyl caulk. Removal, demolition, and issuance of demolition permits. Please see Section 4.7.6 of the EIR for disposal of any of the above -mentioned chemicals should be conducted in additional information. As described in Appendix H of the DEIR, sampling compliance with California environmental regulations and policies. In has been conducted at the Project site to determine the presence or addition, sampling near current and/or former buildings should be absence of asbestos, lead -based paint, and lead in the drinking water. conducted in accordance with DTSC's 2006 Interim Guidance Evaluation of Both asbestos and lead -based paint were found in some materials present School Siteswith Potential Contamination from Lead Based Paint, on the Project site; please see Section 4.7.2.5 Asbestos, Lead -Based Termiticides, and Electrical Transformers.

Paint, and Drinking Water Sampling for additional information about the types of samples taken and the locations in which these materials were found. Implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-2 and HAZ-3 would ensure that materials containing asbestos or lead -based paint would be removed from the site prior to demolition.
5 4
Tamara Purvis,
DTSC recommends that all imported soil and fill material should be tested Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 in Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Department of Toxic
to ensure any contaminants of concern are within approved screening levels Materials, describes how soil will be handled during construction in order Substances Control
for the intended land use. To minimize the possibility of introducing to minimize the potential impact of contaminated soil. This measure contaminated soil and fill material there should be documentation of the includes procedures for soil handling, fugitive dust and vapor control, soil origins of the soil or fill material and, if applicable, sampling be conducted excavation and stockpiling, air and soil monitoring, sampling, and testing. to ensure that the imported soil and fill material meets screening levels for This mitigation measure also includes specific protocols for the testing the intended land use. The soil sampling should include analysis based on and handling of imported soils, including a requirement that the soils be the source of the fill and knowledge of the prior land use. tested in general conformance with the DTSC Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material document (2001). Please see Section 4.7.6 of the EIR for additional information.
5 5
Tamara Purvis,
DTSC appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Prologis Stewart and The commenter has provided a summary statement concluding their Department of Toxic
Gray Road Warehouse Project. Thank you for your assistance in protecting comment letter. No environmental issues related to the analysis Substances Control
California's people andenvironment from the harmful effects of toxic presented in the DEIR are raised, and therefore no further response is substances. If you have any questions or would like any clarification on necessary.

DTSC's comments, please respond to this letter or via email for additional guidance.

RTC-7

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
6 1
Frances Duong,
Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation The commenter has provided an introduction to their comments and a Caltrans District 7
(Caltrans) in the review process for the above referenced project. The summary of the project description. No environmental issues related to Project proposes to demolish the existing five buildings totaling the analysis presented in the DEIR are raised, and therefore no further approximately 433,000 square feet (SF) and construction of an response is necessary.
approximately 535,685-square-foot industrial concrete tilt -up building for warehouse/logistics uses. The Project would include 683 auto parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container parking spaces and 109 dock loading doors. Regional access is provided via the following freeways: the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5 [1-5]), the San Gabriel Freeway (1-605), the Century Freeway (1-105), and the Long Beach Freeway (1-710). Primary vehicular access to the Project site is provided by Stewart and Gray Road and Hall Road. The proposed facility would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

After reviewing the DEIR, Caltrans has the following comments:
6 2
Frances Duong,
With 535,685 square feet of new warehouse use, 683 car parking spaces, The commenter has provided recommendations to reduce the VIVIT Caltrans District 7
109 loading dock doors, and stalls for 255 trailer stalls, the Prologis Stewart associated with the proposed Project. Some of the recommendations, and Gray Road Warehouse Project will induce demand for a consequential such as investment in alternative modes of freight movement including number of additional vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled (VIVIT). rail, are beyond the scope of the proposed Project. Measures the Project Caltrans recommends the following:
has taken to reduce VIVIT are described in Section 4.11, Transportation, of • Reducing the amount of parking whenever possible. Research looking the EIR. These include Project design features such as increasing job at the relationship between land -use, parking, and transportation density, as well as the Transportation Demand Management Plan indicates that the amount of car parking supplied can undermine a described in Mitigation Measure TR-1. The Transportation Demand project's ability to encourage public transit and active modes of Management Plan would include both physical measures and transportation.
programmatic measures to reduce the total VIVIT associated with the Project below a level of significance. Project Design Features are • Invest in alternative modes of freight movement, such as rail, which calculated to result in a 9.9-percent reduction in VIVIT per employee and is not only more efficient but also more easily converted to carbon Mitigation Measure TR-1 is calculated to result in an 11.9-percent neutral energy sources in the future.
reduction in VIVIT per employee, based on equations presented in the • Due to the increased volume of truck trips, a substantial contribution California Air Pollution Control Officer's Association (CAPCOA) 2021 should be made to a city fund that will build safer infrastructure for Handbook, as detailed in Appendix B of the Transportation Impact Study people walking, riding bikes, and taking transit throughout the city. (TIS; EIR Appendix Q. Because these measures would reduce the VIVIT The most effective methods to reduce pedestrian and bicyclist impact below a level of significance based on accepted methodologies, no exposure to cars and trucks is through physical design and additional measures or documentation are required.
geometrics. These methods include the construction of physically separated facilities such as Class IV bike lanes, wide sidewalks, pedestrian refuge islands, landscaping, street furniture, and reductions in crossing distances through roadway narrowing.

Following construction, a study needs to be conducted to confirm that the proposed mitigation measures are sufficiently offsetting the Project generated VIVIT. If not, new and/or additional mitigation measures need to be implemented.

RTC-8

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Comment
Commenter
Comment
Response
Number
Number
6 3
Frances Duong,
Additionally, an encroachment permit will be required for any project work The Project would occur outside of the Caltrans right-of-way and would Caltrans District 7
proposed near Caltrans Right of Way and all environmental concerns must not result in direct impacts to facilities, infrastructure, or resources be adequately addressed. Please note that any modifications to the State within the Caltrans right-of-way. No modifications to State facilities are facilities will be subject to additional review by the Office of Permits prior proposed. Therefore, an encroachment permit is not required. to issuance of the permit.
6 4
Frances Duong,
Finally, construction of the proposed project would involve deliveries of A Construction Traffic Management Plan will be prepared for the Project Caltrans District 7
materials, components, and supplies to the various sites, and will involve and submitted to City staff for review and approval prior to the issuance oversized trucks. As a result, prior to issuance of building or grading of building and grading permits for construction. A reference to the permits for the project site, the applicant shall prepare a Construction Construction Traffic Management Plan has been added to Section 2.8, Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) for review and approval by City staff to Necessary Approvals, of the EIR; please see Section 3: Clarifications and reduce any impacts to less than significant levels. The CTMP needs Revisions of the Final EIR for additional information. In addition, the tospecify the duration of construction period and provide construction project shall incorporate a condition of approval requiring the applicant analysis on significant impacts due to increase in construction truck traffic to submit such information prior to receiving building permits. on highways not designated as truck routes. It should also specify any work that would affect the freeways and its facilities,and that Caltrans has the jurisdiction for review and approval. Transportation of heavy construction equipment and/or materials, which requires the use of oversized transport vehicles on State highways, will require a transportation permit from Caltrans.
7 1
Gary Ho, Blum,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Environmental Impact The commenter has provided an introduction to their comments. The Collins & Ho LLP, on
Report (EIR) for the proposed Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse commenter's interest in the proposed Project has been noted and they behalf of Golden
Project. Please accept and consider these comments on behalf of Golden will be added to the distribution list for future notifications regarding the State Environmental
State Environmental Justice Alliance. Also, Golden State Environmental Project. No environmental issues related to the analysis presented in the Justice Alliance
Justice Alliance formally requests to be added to the public interest list DEIR are raised, and therefore no further response is necessary. regarding any subsequent environmental documents, public notices, public hearings, and notices ofcIetermination for this project. Send all communications to Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance P.O. Box 79222 Corona, CA 92877.
7 2
Gary Ho, Blum,

1.0 Summary
The commenter has provided a summary of the project description. No Collins & Ho LLP, on
The project proposes the demolition of all existing onsite buildings totaling environmental issues related to the analysis presented in the DEIR are behalf of Golden
approximately 433,000 square feet (sf) and the construction of an raised, and therefore no further response is necessary.

State Environmental
approximately 535,685 sf industrial buildingto be used as a fulfillment Justice Alliance
center warehouse on a 29.16-acre site. The proposed building includes approximately 490,685 of fulfillment center/warehouse area, 20,000 sf of ground floor office area, and 25,000 sf of mezzanine office area. The project site provides 683 passenger car parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container parking spaces, and 109 truck/trailer dock loading doors dispersed on three sides of the building. The building has a proposed height of 55 feet. While the tenant of the building is unknown, operation of the proposed project is assumed to be 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

RTC-9

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 3
Gary Ho, Blum,

2.0 Project Description
The text of the CEQA Guidelines Section cited by the commenter is only Collins & Ho LLP, on
The EIR describes the environmental setting in stating that at the date the part of the guideline. The cited text is preceded by the following behalf of Golden
Notice of Preparation was published (March 25, 2022), "the site was fully guidance:

State Environmental
occupied and operational by industrial use tenants; however, the tenants "Generally, the lead agency should describe the physical environmental Justice Alliance
have since vacated the buildings and ceased operations at the request of conditions as they exist at the time the notice of preparation is the property owner (Project applicant) in anticipation of implementing the published, or if no notice of preparation is published, at the time the proposed Project." The EIR claims that the site was occupied and actively environmental analysis is commenced, from both a local and regional used for business operations at the time the NOP was published, but has perspective."
not provided any meaningful evidence to support the claim that the existing The above portion of the CEQA guidelines states that generally, an EIR onsite buildings were occupied and operational at that time. The EIR has should consider the physical conditions as they exist at the time that the not presented any meaningful evidence to demonstrate that businesses Notice of Preparation was published to be the baseline for analysis. The were legally established and operational on March 25, 2022. Notably, environmental analysis contained in the EIR was based on a comparison Appendix L: Transportation Impact Study provided trip generation of the proposed Project with the conditions on the site on March 25, calculations for the "existing" onsite uses utilizing ITE trip generation 2022 when the environmental baseline was established.
average rates instead of conducting onsite traffic counts at the project driveways, which demonstrates that the onsite uses had ceased operating As described in Section 2.3 of the EIR, at the time the NOP was released by March 25, 2022.
the site was fully occupied and in use by industrial use tenants. These tenants have since vacated the buildings and ceased operations at the CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a)(1) states that, "Where existing request of the property owner.
conditions change or fluctuate over time, and where necessary to provide the most accurate picture practically possible of the project's impacts, a lead agency may define existing conditions by referencing historic The tenants vacated the site between December of 2022 and January of conditions, or conditions expected when the project becomes operational, 2023. The TIS for the proposed Project, included with the DEIR as or both, that are supported with substantial evidence," and CEQA Appendix L, was prepared in September 2023 after the existing tenants Guidelines Section 15125(a)(3) states that, "An existing conditions baseline had ceased operations. Calculations of trip generation from the existing shall not include hypothetical conditions, such as those that might be operations on the Project site were completed by a traffic engineer and allowed, but have never actually occurred, under existing permits or plans, documented in the TIS. Because the Project site was fully occupied with as the baseline." The EIR and its appendices model the existing site as fully industrial tenants at the time of the NOP but was no longer occupied by operational utilizing default software trip rates and emissions rates for the time the TIS was prepared, it was not possible to collect traffic counts uses that do not exist on the project site. The physical conditions and that represented the existing uses at the time of the NOP. Therefore, ITE actual emissions/vehicle traffic counts that existed at the time of analysis Land Use Code 110 (General Light Industrial) trip generation average are not described or discussed with meaningful supporting evidence in the rates were used to model the expected traffic generation for the land EIR. Utilizing emissions default rates/average rates/rates derived from uses at the time of the NOP. Analysis of mobile source emissions in the other properties instead of actual traffic counts and emissions analysis at air quality (AQ) and greenhouse gas (GHG) impact analysis used trip the project site during business operations serves to artificially reduce generation assumptions consistent with the trip generation reported in theproject's significant environmental impacts by modeling the alleged the TIS, as discussed in DEIR Section 4.2.5.3. This modeling reflected businesses onsite as more intensive than they actually were and presenting existing conditions at the time of the NOP, which were then compared to the impacts of the proposed project as "net new".
the modeled impacts of the Project. severe than concluded in the DEIR.

As such, the claim that the Project's impacts were artificially reduced is unfounded and not supported by substantial evidence. No revisions to the EIR are required.

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
At the time the analysis was performed, the use of modeling was the most accurate method available to compare the existing conditions at the time of the NOP with the forecasted conditions of the Project. This methodology for calculating trips and associated emissions for the previous on -site uses is appropriate and supported by substantial evidence as the data was derived using current, industry -accepted modeling software by technical experts. Moreover, the commenter has not provided any substantial evidence that air quality and GHG emissions impacts would be more
7 4
Gary Ho, Blum,
Additionally, nearly every area of environmental analysis credits the project Please see response to comment #3 of Letter #7.

Collins & Ho LLP, on
with various VMT, trip generation, and emissions reductions based on behalf of Golden
existing trips at the site based on emissions default rates/average State Environmental
rates/rates derived from other properties "existing uses" at the site the EIR Justice Alliance
has not proven to exist. Per Appendix L, "ITE Land Use Code 110 (General Light Industrial) trip generation average rates were used to forecast the expected traffic generation for the existing uses." It is nonsensical to utilize ITE average/default rates to calculate trip generation for "existing uses" instead of taking trip counts at the project site, particularly if the site were actually operational with tenants conducting business. This does not comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15125. The EIR overstates the existing operations at the project site to artificially inflate "existing" emissions, trip generation, and VMT, which subsequently reduces the "net new" quantity of emissions, trip generation, and VMT generated by the proposed project tand skews impacts downwards. A revised EIR must be prepared to remove any credit given forthe "existing" operations in all areas of analysis in order to accurately and adequately analyze theproject's significant impacts in accordance in order to provide an adequate and accurate environmental analysis.

T.ram

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 5
Gary Ho, Blum,

4.2 Air Quality, 4.4 Energy, and 4.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions There are currently no formal requirements, procedures, or standards of Collins & Ho LLP, on
Please refer to attachments from SWAPE for a complete technical significance to evaluate potential environmental justice impacts under behalf of Golden
commentary and analysis.

CEQA. DEIR Section 4.2.2 disclosed carcinogenic risk from exposure to State Environmental
existing air toxics in the Project area, as reported by the South Coast Air Justice Alliance
The EIR does not include for analysis relevant environmental justice issues Quality Management District's (SCAQMD's) Multiple Air Toxics Exposure in reviewing potential impacts, including cumulative impacts from the Study V (MATES V). A Health Risk Assessment has been prepared for this proposed project. This is especially significant as the surrounding Project and is included in the DEIR as part of Appendix B. The Health Risk community is highly burdened by pollution. According to CalEnviroScreen Assessment evaluated potential community health risks from exposure to

4.0, CalEPA's screening tool that ranks each census tract in the state for diesel particulate matter emitted by off -road construction equipment, pollution and socioeconomic vulnerability. The proposed project's census construction haul trucks, and trucks related to operation of the proposed tract (6037551102) and surrounding community, including residences to the warehouse. The assessment found that community cancer risk, chronic north and east, bears the impact of multiple sources of pollution and is health risk, and cancer burden would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds. more polluted than average on several pollution indicators measured by Please see DEIR Section 4.2.2 and DEIR Appendix B for additional CalEnviroScreen. For example, the project census tract ranks in the 88th information about the Health Risk Assessment performed for this Project. percentile for particulate matter (PM) 2.5 burden, 86th percentile for diesel particulate matter burden, and 66th percentile for traffic burdens. All of For information about hazardous materials, please see DEIR Section 4.7, these environmental factors are typically attributed to heavy truck activity Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
in the area. The very small particles of diesel PM can reach deep into the lung, where they can contribute to a range of health problems. These include irritation to the eyes, throat and nose, heart and lung disease, and lung cancer.

The census tract ranks in the 92nd percentile for toxic releases. People living near facilities that emit toxic releases may breathe contaminated air regularly or if contaminants are released during an accident.

The census tract also ranks in the 78th percentile for solid waste facility impacts and 89th percentile for hazardous waste facility impacts. Solid waste facilities can expose people to hazardous chemicals, release toxic gases into the air (even after these facilities are closed), and chemicals can leach into soil around the facility and pose a health risk to nearby populations. Hazardous waste generators and facilities contribute to the contamination of air, water and soil near waste generators and facilities can harm the environment as well as people.

The census tract also bears more impacts from cleanup sites than 61% of the state. Chemicals in the buildings, soil, or water at cleanup sites can move into nearby communities through the air or movement of water.

I.TS=

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
Further, the census tract is a diverse community including 81% Hispanic, 6% African -American and 6% Asian -American residents, who are especially vulnerable to the impacts of pollution. The community has a high rate of low educational attainment, meaning 70% of the census tract over age 25 has not attained a high school diploma, which is an indication that they may lack health insurance or access to medical care. The community also has a high rate of poverty, meaning 71% of the households in the census tract have a total income before taxes that is less than the poverty level. Income can affect health when people cannot afford healthy living and working conditions, nutritious food and necessary medical care. Poor communities are often located in areas with high levels of pollution. Poverty can cause stress that weakens the immune system and causes people to become ill from pollution. Living in poverty is an indication that residents may lack health insurance or access to medical care. Medical care is vital for this census tract as it ranks in the 77th percentile for incidence of low birth weights and 59th percentile for cardiovascular disease.

Additionally, the project census tract (6037551102 ) and the census tracts adjacent to the project site (6037550300 (east), 6037551101 (west), 6037551800 (northwest), and 6037551800 (south)) are identified as SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities. This indicates that cumulative impacts of development and environmental impacts in the area are disproportionately impacting these communities. The negative environmental, health, and quality of life impacts resulting from a saturation of the industrial, warehousing, and logistics industry in the City have become distinctly inequitable. The severity of significant and unavoidable impacts particularly on these Disadvantaged Communities must be included for analysis as part of a revised EIR. Each section of the revised EIR must include the specific analysis of each environmental impact on the Disadvantaged Communities, including cumulative analysis and irreversible environmental effects. 7 6
Gary Ho, Blum,
The State of California lists three approved compliance modeling softwares Quantification of building energy use is not a CEQA requirement, it is a Collins & Ho LLP, on
for non-residential buildings: CBECC-Com, EnergyPro, and IES VE. CalEEMod statutory requirement to be completed prior to issuing Project building behalf of Golden
is not listed as an approved software. The CalEEMod modeling does not permits. Title 24 analysis is required pursuant to the California Energy State Environmental
comply with the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and under- Code. A condition of approval is proposed for the project requiring Justice Alliance
reports the project's significant Energy impacts and fuel consumption to compliance with said code. As discussed in DEIR Section 4.4.4, the CEQA the public and decision makers. Since the EIR did not accurately or Guidelines Appendix G significance criteria for CEQA analysis of a land adequately model the energy impacts in compliance with Title 24, a finding use development project energy impact are:
of significance must be made. A revised EIR with modeling using one of the Would the project:
approved software types must be prepared and circulated for public review in order to adequately analyze the project's significant environmental a) Result in potentially significance environmental impact due to impacts. This is vital as the EIR utilizes CalEEMod as a source in its wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy methodology and analysis, which is clearly not an approved software. resources, during Project construction or operation; and/or b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

RTC-13

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Comment
Commenter
Comment
Response
Number
Number
Nowhere in the DEIR is CaIEEMod utilized as a source for methodology or analysis of energy impacts. A mention of CaIEEMod does not appear anywhere in the DEIR Section 4.4, Energy. CaIEEMod was appropriately used as an approved model for estimating the Project emissions of criteria pollutants, criteria pollutant precursors, and GHGs for the purpose of evaluating the Project's potential air quality and GHG emissions impacts. No revisions to the EIR are required based on this comment.
7 7
Gary Ho, Blum,
The EIR does not provide any information regarding the buildout conditions As of the writing of this Final EIR, Vision 2025 General Plan is the current Collins & Ho LLP, on
of the City's General Plan. Notably, the horizon year of the City's General general plan approved by the City of Downey. The analysis contained in behalf of Golden
Plan and its associated EIR is 2025. The project is proposed within one year this EIR considers the requirements and planned buildout described in the State Environmental
of the horizon and buildout timeline of the prior environmental analysis.

City's adopted General Plan.

Justice Alliance
The EIR must be revised to provide a cumulative analysis discussion of Potential cumulative impacts, including projects in and adjacent to the projects approved since General Plan adoption and projects "in the City of Downey that are "in the pipeline" are evaluated throughout pipeline" to determine if the project will exceed the City's General Plan Chapter 4 of the DEIR at the end of each resource section. The list of buildout scenario.
cumulative projects evaluated in the EIR can be found in Chapter 3.0, Basis for Cumulative Analysis. No revisions to the EIR are required based on this comment.
7 8
Gary Ho, Blum,
Additionally, the inadequate and inaccurate trip generation analysis also Please see response to comment #3 of Letter #7 above, which explains Collins & Ho LLP, on
impacts the project's LOS analysis and compliance with the General Plan. why modeling was used for existing trip calculations.
behalf of Golden
The EIR has not demonstrated the project's compliance or conflicts with the The proposed Project's potential impacts related to Level of Service (LOS) State Environmental
General Plan LOS requirements and other items that impact the circulation requirements are evaluated in the DEIR in Section 4.9, Land Use and Justice Alliance
system, including queuing and trip distribution. A revised EIR must be Planning, as well as Section 4.11, Transportation. Both sections conclude prepared to include impacts to the circulation system as a cumulatively that the proposed Project would be consistent with the General Plan considerable significant impact as the Project conflicts with Transportation Circulation Element's requirements for an acceptable LOS. Additional Impact Threshold A and Land Use and Planning Impact Threshold B because information about the modeling used to calculate LOS can be found in it is has not adequately or accurately demonstrated that the project is DEIR Appendix L, Transportation Impact Study. Trip generation and consistent with the following General Plan threshold:
distribution is also evaluated in Section 5.0, Non-CEQA Analysis, of Circulation Element Page 2-6: The General Plan advances programs to Appendix L Transportation Impact Study. The trips generated by the reduce congestion to provide acceptable LOS, defined as "A", "B", "C", or Project would not conflict with the requirements of the General Plan in "ID".
such a way as to create a significant impact.

RTC-14

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 9
Gary Ho, Blum,

4.11 Transportation
Please see response to comment #3 of Letter #7.

Collins & Ho LLP, on
Table 2-1: Project Trip Generation within Appendix L: Transportation Impact behalf of Golden
Study provides trip generation reduction credits for "existing uses." It is State Environmental
not appropriate to model the existing vacant site as fully operational Justice Alliance
utilizing ITE default rates/average rates and provide VIVIT and emission reduction credits based on "existing uses" that do not actually exist (and default ITE trip rates that do not accurately demonstrate what, if any traffic was generated on the site on March 25, 2022 instead of vehicle trip counts at the project site) and does not provide the most accurate picture practically possible of the project's impacts pursuant to CEQA Section 15125.

Further, CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a)(1) states that, "Where existing conditions change or fluctuate over time, and where necessary to provide the most accurate picture practically possible of the project's impacts, a lead agency may define existing conditions by referencing historic conditions, or conditions expected when the project becomes operational, or both, that are supported with substantial evidence," and CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a)(3) states that, "An existing conditions baseline shall not include hypothetical conditions, such as those that might be allowed, but have never actually occurred, under existing permits or plans, as the baseline." The EIR and its appendices model the existing site as fully operational utilizing trip rates and modeling derived from offsite locations and uses that do not exist on the project site. The physical conditions and actual emissions/vehicle traffic counts that existed on March 25, 2022are not described or discussed with meaningful supporting evidence in the EIR.

Utilizing emissions default rates/average rates/rates derived from other properties instead of actual traffic counts and emissions analysis at the project site during business operations serves to artificially reduce the project's significant environmental impacts by modeling the alleged businesses onsite as more intensive than they actually were.

RTC-15

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 10
Gary Ho, Blum,
Additionally, nearly every area of environmental analysis credits the project The Transportation Impact Study (TIS) prepared for the proposed Project, Collins & Ho LLP, on
with various VIVIT, trip generation, and emissions reductions based on included as Appendix L in the DEIR, modeled the proposed Project's behalf of Golden
existing trips at the site utilizing a prior study at a different property. As projected VIVIT impacts relative to the existing conditions at the time the State Environmental
noted above in the Environmental Setting discussion, the EIR has not NOP was released. Additional information about how VIVIT impacts were Justice Alliance
provided any meaningful evidence that the project site is occupied by any calculated can be found in Section 4.11, Transportation and Appendix L, operational tenant and all comments regarding the Environmental Setting Transportation Impact Study, of the DEIR.
above are hereby reincorporated. Per Appendix L, "ITE Land Use Code 110 As described in Section 2.3 of the EIR, at the time the NOP was released (General Light Industrial) trip generation average rates were used to the site was fully occupied and in use by industrial use tenants. These forecast the expected traffic generation for the existing uses." It is tenants have since vacated the buildings and ceased operations at the nonsensical to utilize ITE average/default rates to calculate trip generation request of the property owner. The tenants vacated the site in December for "existing uses" instead of taking trip counts at the project site, of 2022 and January of 2023. The TIS for the proposed Project, included particularly if the site were actually operational with tenants conducting with the DEIR as Appendix L, was prepared in September 2023 after the business. This does not comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15125. The existing tenants had ceased operations. Because the project site was fully EIR overstates the existing operations at the project site to artificially occupied with industrial tenants at the time of the NOP but was no longer inflate "existing" emissions, trip generation, and VIVIT, which subsequently occupied by the time the TIS was prepared, it was not possible to collect reduces the "net new" quantity of emissions, trip generation, and VIVIT traffic counts that represented the existing uses at the time of the NOP. generated by the proposed project and skews impacts downwards. A Please see response to comment #3 of Letter #7 above which explains revised EIR must be prepared to remove any credit given for the "existing" why modeling was used for existing trip calculations.
operations in all areas of analysis in order to accurately and adequately analyze the project's significant impacts in accordance in order to provide The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting an adequate and accurate environmental analysis. The inadequate and evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary inaccurate trip generation analysis also impacts the project's LOS analysis. based on this comment, and preparation of a revised EIR is not required. 7 11
Gary Ho, Blum,
The EIR has not demonstrated the project's compliance or conflicts with the Please see response to comment #8 of Letter #7 above.

Collins & Ho LLP, on
General Plan LOS requirements and other items that impact the circulation The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting behalf of Golden
system, including queuing and trip distribution. A revised EIR must be evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary State Environmental
prepared to include impacts to the circulation system as a cumulatively based on this comment, and preparation and recirculation of a revised Justice Alliance
considerable significant impact as the project conflicts with Transportation EIR is not required.

Impact Threshold A and Land Use and Planning Impact Threshold B because it is has not adequately or accurately demonstrated that the project is consistent with the following General Plan threshold:

1. Circulation Element Page 2-6: The General Plan advances programs to reduce congestion to provide acceptable LOS, defined as "A", "B", "C", or "D".

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 12
Gary Ho, Blum,
The EIR concludes that, "Based on the SCAG RTDM model output for TAZ The calculations used to support the conclusion that these measures Collins & Ho LLP, on
21791300, the proposed Project is forecast to generate a baseline would result in an 11.9 percent reduction in VIVIT are presented in behalf of Golden
employment VIVIT of 19.2 VIVIT per employee, which exceeds the County Appendix L, Transportation Impact Study and its attachments. These State Environmental
Guidelines threshold of 15.3 VIVIT." The EIR includes a combination of calculations are based on methodology presented in the CAPCOA Justice Alliance
Project Design Feature T-2: Increase Job Density and Mitigation Measure Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions, Assessing TR-1: Transportation Demand Management Plan, including T-7: Implement Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity. Use of the Commute Trip Reduction Marketing, T-8: Provide Riclesharing Program, and CAPCOA Handbook for VIVIT analysis complies with the City of Downey T-10: Provide End -of -Trip Bicycle Facilitiesto achieve a "11.9 percent VIVIT requirements for analyzing VIVIT, which, since the City has not adopted reduction would result in 15.2 VIVIT per employee. This is below the their own VIVIT thresholds, are the Los Angeles County Public Works significance threshold of 15.3 VIVIT." However, the EIR has not provided Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines for calculating VIVIT impacts. meaningful evidence to support the conclusion that Project Design Feature Estimates of VIVIT reduction are based on CAPCOA methodology, which is T-2, Mitigation Measure TR-1, T-7, T-8, and T-10 will reduce project consistent with City of Downey requirements and the CEQA Guidelines. generated VIVIT to below the significance threshold of 15.3 VIVIT per The Project applicant would require that tenants enact the policies and employee continuously for the life of the project. Since future building programs identified as mitigation measures in order to ensure a reduction tenants are unknown, implementation of trip reduction measures cannot be in VIVIT through preparation and implementation of a Transportation guaranteed to reduce Project generated VIVIT to a level of less than Demand Management (TDM) plan/program.
significant.

It is not possible for the City to ensure that Project Design Feature T-2, Mitigation Measure TRA-1 includes a provision that if new TDIVI measures Mitigation Measure TR-1, T-7, T-8, and T-10 will result in reduced VIVIT by are proposed by the site owner or tenant after City approval of the TDIVI project employees and be implemented continuously, at all times, plan, a new TDIVI plan shall be
throughout the life ofthe project and maintain a VIVIT reduction to less than submitted for review and approval and shall include analysis that significant levels at all times. The efficacy of the proposed mitigation demonstrates that the selected measures are expected to achieve the measures and reduction of VIVIT impacts below the applicable thresholds same or greater trip and VIVIT reductions as demonstrated by the Project - cannot be assured and the project's VIVIT impact is therefore considered specific analysis conducted in the DEIR.
significant and unavoidable. A revised EIR must be prepared to include a finding of significance because there is no possible assurance of the The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting percentage of project employees that would utilize non -automobile travel evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary associated with implementation of Project Design Feature T-2, based on this comment, and preparation and recirculation of a revised Mitigation Measure TR-1, T-7, T-8, and T-10 and mitigation of the project's EIR is not required.

VIVIT impact to less than significant is not feasible.

MOM

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 13
Gary Ho, Blum,
Further, the EIR has underreported the quantity VMT generated by the The VMT per employee for the Project, as well as the Project's total VMT, Collins & Ho LLP, on
proposed project operations. The operational nature of
was calculated using the Southern California Association of Governments behalf of Golden
industrial/warehouse uses involves high rates of truck/trailer/delivery van Regional Travel Demand Model (SCAG RTDM). The Project is located State Environmental
VMT due to traveling from large import hubs to regional distribution within Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) 21791300 and the existing land uses Justice Alliance
centers to smaller industrial parks and then to their final delivery within the TAZ include a mix of residential, commercial, and industrial destinations. Once employees arrive at work at the proposed project, they uses. The proposed Project is consistent with the land uses within the TAZ will conduct their jobs by driving delivery vans across the region as part of and thus, existing VMT per employee for the TAZ is an adequate proxy for the daily operations as a fulfillment center, which will drastically increase the VMT per employee expected to be generated by the proposed Project. project -generated VMT. The project's truck/trailer and delivery van activity The City of Downey has not formally adopted VMT guidelines, but instead is unable to utilize public transit or active transportation and it is follows the methodology set forth in the Los Angeles County Public Works misleading to the public and decision makers to exclude this activity from Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. These guidelines provide that VMT analysis. The project's total operational VMT generated is not VMT per employee is calculated based on trips between an employee's consistent with the significance threshold and legislative intent of SB 743 home and their workplace. The method of forecasting VMT used for this to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by reducing VMT. A revised EIR must Project is consistent with the County guidelines.
be prepared to reflect aquantified VMT analysis that includes all For additional discussion of how VMT was calculated for this Project, truck/trailer and delivery van activity.
please see Appendix L Transportation Impact Study and Section 4.11 Transportation Impacts of the DEIR.

The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary based on this comment, and preparation and recirculation of a revised EIR is not required.
7 14
Gary Ho, Blum,
The EIR has not adequately analyzed the project's potential to substantially Hazards due to geometric design of the Project and emergency access are Collins & Ho LLP, on
increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or both evaluated in Section 4.11.6 of the DEIR. The Project has been behalf of Golden
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses; or the project's potential to designed in such a way that would not create geometric hazards. As State Environmental
result in inadequate emergency access. There are no exhibits adequately shown on Figure 2-6, Project Site Plan, of the DEIR, four 26-foot-wide fire Justice Alliance
depicting the available maneuvering and queueing space for trucks/trailers lanes are included in the Project design in order to ensure adequate at the intersection of the project driveways and the adjacent streets. There emergency access throughout Project operations. The site plan has been are also no exhibits adequately depicting the onsite turning radius available developed to allow for adequate space for trucks to safely maneuver for trucks maneuvering throughout the site.
around the site during Project operations. Four driveways are located on Notably, passenger car parking stalls are located immediately adjacent to the site, two on Hall Road and two on Stewart and Gray Road. The the truck/trailer loading dock court on each side of the building. These location of the driveways has been designed to provide adequate spacing parking stalls may be in use at any time and further restrict truck/trailer from intersections in compliance with applicable engineering design movement on the site and present a safety hazard with potential standards. The site plans have been reviewed by City engineers and the forconflicts between passenger cars and trucks/trailers. Additionally, all Fire Department to identify and address any traffic hazard issues. For proposed driveways on the project site will be utilized for access by both additional information please see Section 4.11, Transportation, of the truck/trailers and passenger cars. The overall site design presents several DEIR.
potential conflicts in maneuvering area for both passenger cars ancltrucks/trailers that have not been analyzed.

RTC-18

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 15
Gary Ho, Blum,
The EIR also states that, "The design of improvements at the Project site The site plan for the Project was included in the DEIR as Figure 2-6, Collins & Ho LLP, on
would be required to conform with applicable City and Downey Fire Project Site
behalf of Golden
Department design criteria which contain provisions to minimize Plan, in Chapter 2, Project Description. An analysis of the Project's State Environmental
transportation hazards and provide emergency access. Based on compliance potential hazards due to geometric design is included in Section 4.11.6 of Justice Alliance
with City and Downey Fire Department design criteria, and the City's review the DEIR. Please refer to the site plan and Section 4.11 Transportation for process for approval of Project design and plans, impacts associated with additional information. The Project has undergone multiple plan checks hazards due to geometric design would be less than significant." This does as part of the entitlement process and the design has accounted for City not comply with CEQA's requirements for adequate informational review regarding potential transportation hazards. This is not deferral of documents and meaningful disclosure (CEQA § 15121 and 21003(b)). analysis of the potential for hazards, but rather part of the entitlement Deferring this environmental analysis required by CEQA to the construction and design process.
permitting phase is improper mitigation and does not comply with CEQA's The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting requirement for meaningful disclosure and adequate informational evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary documents. A revised EIR must be prepared to include the City based on this comment, and preparation and recirculation of a revised determination/review of the project and the Site Plan for review, analysis, EIR is not required.
and comment by the public and decision makers in order to provide an adequate and accurate environmental analysis.
7 16
Gary Ho, Blum,
Additionally, the EIR has not provided any analysis of the available Adequate site distances for Project operations would be provided based Collins & Ho LLP, on
horizontal and vertical sight distance at the intersection of the project on compliance with applicable City engineering standards. Sight distances behalf of Golden
driveways and adjacent streets. The EIR states that,"The Project site access have been reviewed by City engineering staff as part of the City's plan State Environmental
points from Stewart and Gray Road and Hall Road would be designed in checks associated with the discretionary approvals of the ongoing Justice Alliance
accordance with City standards to consider adequate sight distances for entitlement process.
both directions," without providing any analysis or exhibits demonstrating The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting compliance with these standards or describing what the City standards evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary require. Sight distance is the continuous length of street ahead visible to based on this comment, and preparation and recirculation of a revised the driver. At unsignalized intersections, corner sight distance must EIR is not required.
provide a substantially clear line of sight between the driver of the vehicle waiting on the minor road (driveway) and the driver of an approaching vehicle. A revised EIR must be prepared with this analysis based on the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Stopping Sight Distance requirements.

T.MW-I

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 17
Gary Ho, Blum,

5.0 Alternatives
CEQA does not require an EIR to evaluate a certain number of Collins & Ho LLP, on
The EIR is required to evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives to the alternatives, nor does it require an EIR to identify an alternative that behalf of Golden
proposed project which will avoid or substantially lessen any of the completely avoids all significant impacts and meets all project objectives.

State Environmental
significant effects of the project (CEQA § 15126.6.). The alternatives chosen Chapter 5.0, Alternatives, of the DEIR discusses the alternatives analyzed Justice Alliance
for analysis include the CEQA required "No Project" alternative and only for this Project. As stated by the commenter, this chapter identifies four three others - Reuse of Existing Buildings, Reduced Building Height, and alternatives to the proposed Project: a No Project alternative, a Reuse of Reduced Project.The EIR does not evaluate a reasonable range of Existing Buildings Alternative, a Reduced Building Height alternative, and alternatives as only three alternatives beyond the required No Project a Reduced Project alternative. These four alternatives represent a alternative are analyzed. The EIR does not include an alternative that meets reasonable range of alternatives as described by the CEQA Guidelines. the project objectives and also eliminates all of the project's significant Section 5.2 describes alternatives that were considered but not carried and unavoidable impacts. The EIR must be revised to include analysis of a forward for further analysis, including an alternative site location and reasonable range of alternatives and foster informed decision making alternatives to reduce potential VIVIT impacts. These alternatives were (CEQA § 15126.6). This could include alternatives such as development of considered because of their potential to lessen significant impacts the site with a project that reduces all of the proposed project's significant identified in the DEIR; however, they were ultimately not carried forward and unavoidable impacts to less than significant levels while meeting all for further analysis because they did not meet the Project Objectives or project objectives, and/or a mixed -use project that provides affordable were infeasible. The four alternatives carried forward for further analysis housing and local -serving commercial uses that may reduce VIVIT, GHG in Chapter 5.0 Alternatives represent a reasonable range of alternatives. emissions, and improve Air Quality.

The City was not able to identify any alternatives in which both the Project Objectives were met and all of the significant impacts were avoided, and therefore no such alternative could be evaluated. The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary based on this comment, and preparation and recirculation of a revised EIR is not required.
7 18
Gary Ho, Blum,

6.2 Significant Irreversible Environmental Effects and 6.3 Growth Inducing Please see response to comment #3 of letter #7 above which explains why Collins & Ho LLP, on
Impacts
modeling was used for existing trip calculations.
behalf of Golden
The EIR has improperly credited the project with emissions reductions for Please see response to comment #8 of letter #7 above regarding LOS State Environmental
"existing uses" that do not comply with CEQA, which has resulted in unduly analysis in the DEIR.

Justice Alliance
low impacts and this section of analysis must be updated in accordance Please see response to comment #13 of letter #7 above regarding the with revised modeling as part of a revised EIR. As discussed above, nearly VIVIT analysis in the DEIR.
every area of environmental analysis credits the project with various VIVIT, trip generation, and emissions reductions based on existing trips at the site Please see response to comment #7 of letter #7 above regarding the based on emissions default rates/average rates/rates derived from other City's current General Plan and the cumulative analysis in the DEIR. properties "existing uses" at the site the EIR has not proven to exist. For The commenter has stated that the DEIR tiers from the General Plan EIR example, Appendix L states that "ITE Land Use Code 110 (General Light are incorrect. The DEIR prepared for this Project does not tier from any Industrial) trip generation average rates were used to forecast the expected other EIR.
traffic generation for the existing uses." It is nonsensical to utilize ITE average/default rates to calculate trip generation for "existing uses" The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting instead of taking trip counts at the project site, particularly if the site were evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary actually operational with tenants conducting business. This does not based on this comment, and preparation and recirculation of a revised comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15125. The EIR overstates the existing EIR is not required.
operations at the project site to artificially inflate "existing" emissions, trip generation, and VIVIT, which subsequently reduces the "net new" quantity of emissions, trip generation, and VIVIT generated by the proposed project MRIM11

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Comment
Commenter
Comment
Response
Number
Number
and skews impacts downwards. A revised EIR must be prepared to remove any credit given for the "existing" operations in all areas of analysis in order to accurately and adequately analyze the project's significant impacts in accordance in order to provide an adequate and accurate environmental analysis.

A revised EIR must be prepared to include a cumulative analysis discussion here to demonstrate the impact of the proposed project in a cumulative setting. The EIR does not include any information regarding the buildout conditions of the City's General Plan in order to provide anadequate and accurate cumulative analysis. The revised EIR must provide the horizon year of the City's current adopted General Plan, the total developable building floor area analyzed withinthe General Manufacturing land use designation, and cumulative development since adoption of the General Plan to ensure that the proposed project is within the General Plan EIR's analysis, particularly since the EIR tiers from the General Plan EIR. 7 19
Gary Ho, Blum,
The EIR relies upon erroneous Energy modeling to determine that the As discussed in the response to comment #6 of letter #7, above, a Collins & Ho LLP, on
project will meet sustainability requirements. As noted above, the EIR did quantitative analysis of Project Title 24 building energy use is not a CEQA behalf of Golden
not model the project's energy consumption in compliance with Title 24 requirement, it is a statutory requirement to be completed prior to State Environmental
modeling software. The EIR must be revised to include a finding of issuing Project building permits.

Justice Alliance
significance as it has not adequately or accurately analyzed the project's The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting commitment of resources.
evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary based on this comment, and preparation and recirculation of a revised EIR is not required.
7 20
Gary Ho, Blum,
The EIR does not adequately discuss or and analyze the commitment of Please see response to comment #7 of letter #7 above regarding the Collins & Ho LLP, on
resources is not consistent with regional and local growth forecasts. As City's current General Plan and the cumulative analysis in the DEIR. behalf of Golden
noted throughout this comment letter, the project represents a significant The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting State Environmental
amount of growth in the City and accounts for a significant amount of the evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary Justice Alliance
City's employment growth over 29 years (SCAG) and through the City's based on this comment, and preparation and recirculation of a revised General Plan horizon year of 2025. The EIR has not provided an adequate or EIR is not required.
accurate cumulative analysis discussion here to demonstrate the impact of the proposed project in a cumulative setting. The EIR must be revised to include this information for analysis and also include acumulative development analysis of projects approved since General Plan adoption, 2016 (SCAG), and projects "in the pipeline" to determine if the proposed project exceeds the General Plan buildout scenario and/or SCAG's growth forecasts.

T.MW

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 21
Gary Ho, Blum,
Effects Found Not to be Significant: Population and Housing Estimates of Project construction jobs and permanent jobs during Project Collins & Ho LLP, on
The EIR states that "it is anticipated that the proposed Project will operations come from the Project Applicant and reflect the anticipated behalf of Golden
generate approximately 300 construction jobs and approximately 250 operations of the Project based on their similar facilities. As noted in State Environmental
permanent jobs." However, the source of this calculation is not included.

Section 2.5.1, Proposed Land Uses and Operations, of the EIR, the Justice Alliance
There are no methods for the public to verify that the project would only proposed office space would be used for office uses ancillary to the generate approximately 300 construction jobs and approximately 250 warehouse operations and would not represent a stand-alone land use. permanent jobs. The EIR utilizes uncertain and misleading language in Due to the population density in and around the City of Downey, as well stating that, "During both construction and operations, the Project is as the availability of skilled workers in the area, it is not anticipated that expected to hire from the existing population in the area," which does not additional workers will need to move to the City in order to fill either the provide any meaningful analysis or calculation of the project's population jobs available during either construction or operations of the Project. and employment (construction and operational) generation. Additionally, Please see Section 4.11, Transportation, and Appendix L, Transportation the geographic boundaries of the "area" of the project site are undefined.

Impact Study, for information about how VIVIT was calculated, as well as Relying on the entire labor force within Los Angeles County to fill the response to comment #13 of Letter #7 above.
project's construction and operational jobs will increase VIVIT and emissions The DEIR has provided meaningful disclosure of potential environmental during all phases of construction and operations and a revised EIR must be impacts with supporting evidence for these conclusions. Demographic and prepared to account for longer worker trip distances. in order to comply geographic information on the location of qualified workers to fill the with CEQA's requirements for meaningful disclosure and adequate construction and operation roles of the Project would be too speculative informational documents, a revised EIR must be prepared to provide an to provide at this time and is therefore not necessary. No revisions to the accurate estimate of employees generated by all uses of the proposed EIR are necessary based on this comment, and preparation of a revised project. It must also provide demographic and geographic information on EIR is not required.
the location of qualified workers to fill these positions.

The EIR has not accurately provided a calculation of the project's operational employees that accounts for all onsite uses, including proposed office areas. SCAG's Employment Density Study provides the following applicable average employment generation rates for Los Angeles County:

Warehouse: 1 employee per 1,518 square feet
Office: 1 employee per 319 square feet
Applying these ratios results in the following calculation:

Warehouse: 490,685 sf / 1,518 = 324 employees
Office: 45,000 sf/ 319 = 142 employees
Total: 466 employees
Mam

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 22
Gary Ho, Blum,
Utilizing SCAG's Employment Density Study ratios and accounting for all Please see response to comment #21 of Letter #7 above regarding Collins & Ho LLP, on
proposed uses, the proposed project will generate 466 employees. The EIR projected employment. A construction worker employment analysis would behalf of Golden
utilizes uncertain and misleading language which does not provide any be too speculative at this point in time and is not required. Section 15145 State Environmental
meaningful analysis of the project's population and employment of the CEQA Guidelines states that a Lead Agency is not required to Justice Alliance
generation. In order to comply with CEQA's requirements for meaningful evaluate speculative impacts.
disclosure, a revised EIR must be prepared to provide an accurate estimate Please see response to comment #7 of Letter #7 above regarding the of employees generated by all uses of the proposed project. It must also City's current General Plan and the cumulative analysis in the DEIR. provide demographic and geographic information on the location of qualified workers to fill these positions. A construction worker employment The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting analysis must also be included to analyze all potentially significant evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary environmental impacts adequately and accurately.
based on this comment, and preparation and recirculation of a revised EIR is not required.

The EIR does not provide any information regarding the buildout conditions of the City's General Plan. Table 3.3-1: Housing/Population/Employment Projections of the General Plan Downey Vision 2025 EIR notes that the City's employment population would increase by 4,900 jobs through the horizon year of 2025. The proposed project accounts for 9.5% of employees through the entire General Plan buildout/horizon year of 2025, which has not been presented for analysis. SCAG's Connect SoCal Demographics and Growth Forecast states that the City will add 2,900 jobs between 2016 - 2045. Utilizing the SCAG Employment Density Study calculation of 466 employees, the project represents 16% of the City's employment growth from 2016 - 2045. A single project accounting for this amount of growth within the City over 29 years represents a significant amount of growth. A revised EIR must be prepared toinclude this analysis, and also provide a cumulative analysis discussion of projects approved since 2016 and projects "in the pipeline" to determine if the project will exceed the City's General Plan employment projections or SCAG's employment growth forecast. 7 23
Gary Ho, Blum,
For the foregoing reasons, GSEJA believes the EIR is flawed and a revised The commenter's interest in the proposed Project has been noted and Collins & Ho LLP, on
EIR must be prepared for the proposed project and circulated for public they will be added to the distribution list for future notifications behalf of Golden
review. Golden State Environmenta I Justice Alliance requests to be added to regarding the Project.

State Environmental
the public interest list regarding any subsequent environmental documents, The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting Justice Alliance
public notices, public hearings, and notices of determination for evidence for these conclusions. Specific issues raised by the commenter thisproject. Send all communications to Golden State Environmental Justice have been addressed in responses to comments #1-22 of Letter #7 above.

Alliance P.O. Box79222 Corona, CA 92877
Specific issues raised by the commenter in the attached letter from SWAPE have been addressed below in responses to comments #24-35 of Letter #7. No revisions to the EIR are necessary based on these comments, and preparation and recirculation of a revised EIR is not required.

RTC-23

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 24
Attachment: SWAPE
We have reviewed the December 2023 Draft Environmental Impact Report The commenter presents an introduction to their comments and presents ("DEIR") for the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project a summary of the Project. Their comments related to air quality and ("Project") located in the City of Downey ("City"). The Project proposes to health risk impacts are addressed in responses to comments #25 through demolish the existing buildings and construct a 535,685-square-foot ("SF") #33 of Letter #7.
industrial building, 20,000-SF of office space, 255 trailer parking spaces, The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting and 683 auto parking spaces on the 29.16- acre site.
evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary Our review concludes that the DEIR fails to adequately evaluate the based on this comment, and preparation and recirculation of a revised Project's air quality, and health risk impacts. As a result, emissions and EIR is not required.
health risk impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project may be underestimated and inadequately addressed. A revised Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") should be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate the potential air quality, and health risk impacts that the project may have on the environment.
7 25
Attachment: SWAPE
Air Quality
The commenter is mistaken concerning the status of CaIEEMod version Failure to Provide Complete CaIEEMod Output Files
2022.1 used to evaluate Project air quality and GHG emissions impact. As shown in the CaIEEMod Downey Prologis Project Detailed Report (the Land use development projects under the California Environmental Quality CaIEEMod output report included in Appendix B to the DEIR), CaIEEMod Act ("CEQA") typically evaluate air quality impacts and calculate potential version 2022.1.1.19 was used for Project analysis and analysis of the criteria air pollutant emissions using the California Emissions Estimator existing land use on the project site. Version 2022.1.1.19, released on Model ("CaIEEMod"). CaIEEMod provides recommended default values September 6, 2023, was the most current version of CaIEEMod available based on site -specific information, such as land use type, meteorological at the time of the analysis. All CaIEEMod versions from 2022.1.13 data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with (released December 21, 2022) onward are approved models, not "soft project type. If more specific project information is known, the user can release".
change the default values and input project -specific values, but CEQA The ".JSON" files mentioned by the commenter are not "output" file, they requires that such changes be justified by substantial evidence. Once all of the values are inputted into the model, the Project's construction and are data files read by the web -based CaIEEMod program. These data files operational emissions are calculated, and "output files" are generated. are not printable files that are typically included with Project public These output files disclose to the reader what parameters are used in review DEIR files. However, the Project ".JSON" files could be requested calculating the Project's air pollutant emissions and demonstrate which from the City. The commenter made no such request for Project modelingfiles. default values are changed. Justifications are provided for the selected The CaIEEMod detailed report output files included in Appendix B to values.
the DEIR contain all parameters to enable someone knowledgeable in the use of CalEEEMod and air quality analysis to recreate the model on the According to the DEIR, CaIEEMod Version 2022 is relied upon to estimate CaIEEMod website.

Project emissions (p. 4.2-13). However, this poses a problem as the version of CaIEEMod 2022.1 currently available is described as a "soft release" The commenter has not provided any substantial evidence in this which fails to provide complete output files. Specifically, the "User Changes comment or related preceding comments that air quality emissions to Default Data" table no longer provides the quantitative counterparts to impacts would be more severe than concluded in the DEIR. No revisions the changes to the default values (see excerpt below) (Appendix B, pp. to the EIR are required.
476):
[see PDF of original comment letter]
However, previous CaIEEMod Versions, such as 2020.4.0, include the specific numeric changes to the model's default values (see example excerpt below):

RTC-24

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Comment
Commenter
Comment
Response
Number
Number
[see PDF of original comment letter]
The output files associated with CaIEEMod Version 2022.1 fail to present the exact parameters used to calculate Project emissions. To remedy this issue, the DEIR should have provided access to the model's ".JSON" output files, which allow third parties to review the model's revised input parameters. Without access to the complete output files, including the specific numeric changes to the default values, we cannot verify that the DEIR's air modeling and subsequent analysis is an accurate reflection of the proposed Project. As a result, a revised EIR should be prepared to include an updated air quality analysis that correctly provides the complete output files for CaIEEMod Version 2022.1, or includes an updated air model using an older release of CaIEEMod.
7 26
Attachment: SWAPE
Unsubstantiated Input Parameters Used to Estimate Project Emissions See the response to comment #25 of Letter #7, above, concerning the As previously discussed, the DEIR relies on CaIEEMod Version 2022.1 to model selected for air quality and GHG emissions impact analysis and the estimate the Project's air quality emissions and fails to provide the supporting evidence provided in Appendix B to the DEIR. The commenter complete output files required to adequately evaluate model's analysis (p. does not specify what "model inputs that are inconsistent with

4.2-13). Regardless, when reviewing the Project's CaIEEMod output files, information disclosed inthe DEIR" are referred to. The commenter has provided in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report not provided any substantial evidence in this comment or related ("AQ & GHG Report") as Appendix B to the DEIR, we were able to identify following comments that air quality and GHG emissions impacts would be several model inputs that are inconsistent with information disclosed inthe more severe than concluded in the DEIR. No revisions to the EIR are DEIR. As such, the Project's construction and operational emissions may be required.
underestimated. A revised EIR should be prepared to include an updated air quality analysis that adequately evaluates theimpacts that construction and operation of the Project will have on local and regional air quality. 7 27
Attachment: SWAPE
Unsubstantiated Changes to Architectural Coating Emission Factors The volatile organic compound (VOC) content for the Project building Review of the CaIEEMod output files demonstrates that the "Downey exterior and interior coatings was changed from the CaIEEMod default of Prologis Project R2" model includes changes to the default architectural 100 g/L to 50 g/L in accordance with SCAQIVID Rule 1113, as discussed in coating emission factors (see excerpt below) (Appendix B, pp. 476). the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report Section

4.1.2.1 and as noted in Section 8 of the Project CaIEEMod Detailed As previously mentioned, the CaIEEMod User's Guide requires any changes Report, included in Appendix B to the DEIR. SCAQIVID Rule 1113 specifies to model defaults be justified. As demonstrated above in the "User Changes a maximum VOC content limit for standards paints anticipated to be used to Default Data" table, the justification provided for these changes is:
for the Project building: 50 g/L for exterior surfaces ("Building Envelope "Building envelope and flat coating VOC limit 50 g/l per SCAQIVID Rule Coatings"), and 50 g/L for interior surfaces ("Flat Coatings" and/or 1113" (Appendix B, pp. 476). However, the reductions to the architectural "Nonflat Coatings"). CEQA case law establishes that Project impact coating emission factors remain unsubstantiated for three reasons. analysis is not required to evaluate speculative worst -case scenarios and First, these changes remain unsubstantiated as the AQ & GHG Report fails analysis should include reasonably foreseeable conditions (High Sierra to include the abovementioned project design feature ("PDF") as a formal Rural Alliance v County of Plumas, 2018 5th District Court of Appeal). mitigation measure. This is incorrect, as according to the Association of There is no Project -specific reasonably foreseeable condition which would Environmental Professionals' ("AEP") CEQA Portal Topic Paper on Mitigation require a specialty coating with a higher VOC content limit than 50 g/L to Measures:
be used for Project building interior or exterior surfaces painting. The commenter has not provided any substantial evidence that a coating with a higher VOC content than 50 g/L would be used during Project construction or operation in sufficient quantity to result in a significant RTC-25

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
"While not 'mitigation', a good practice is to include those project design impact. VOC limits for building coatings are regulated by the SCAQMD and feature(s) that address environmental impacts in the mitigation monitoring no Project design feature or mitigation measure would be required to and reporting program (MMRP). Often the MMRP is all that accompanies ensure compliance.
building and construction plans through the permit process. If the design features are not listed as important to addressing an environmental impact, it is easy for someone not involved in the original environmental process to approve a change to the project that could eliminate one or more of the design features without understanding the resulting environmental impact."
As demonstrated above, PDFs that are not formally included as mitigation measures may be eliminated from the Project's design altogether. Until the DEIR and associated documents incorporate a formal mitigation measure that requires the Project to use low -volatile organic compound ("VOC") coatings, we cannot verify that the above changes are accurate. 7 28
Attachment: SWAPE
Second, we cannot verify the accuracy of the revised architectural coating As discussed in the response to comment #27 of letter #7, above, CEQA emission factors based on SCAQMD Rule 1113 alone. The SCAQMD Rule case law establishes that Project impact analysis is required to evaluate 1113 Table of Standards provides the required VOC limits (grams of VOC per reasonably foreseeable conditions, not speculative worst -case scenarios. liter of coating) for 57 different coating categories. The VOC limits for each There is no Project -specific reasonably foreseeable condition which would coating varies from a minimum value of 50 g/L to a maximum value of 730 require a specialty coating with a higher VOC content limit than 50 g/L to g/L. As such, we cannot verify that SCAQMD Rule 1113 substantiates be used for project building interior or exterior surfaces painting. Citing reductions to the default coating values without more information the number of coating categories and the range of VOC content for those regarding what category of coating will be used. As the DEIR fails to categories in the SCAQMD Rule1113 does not constitute substantial explicitly require the use of a specific type of coating which would adhere evidence of reasonably foreseeable conditions that the Project building to a specific VOC limit, we are unable to verify the model's revised coating would be painted with coatings with higher VOC contents than 50 g/L. As emission factors.
discussed in the response to comment #27 of letter #7, above, the modeling input concerning architectural coating VOC content was disclosed in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report Section 4.1.2.1 and as noted in Section 8 of the Project CaIEEMod Detailed Report, included in Appendix B to the DEIR. The commenter's inability to verify Project modeling does not constitute substantial evidence of a more severe impact than concluded in the DEIR.

HIM,

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 29
Attachment: SWAPE
Third, as previously discussed, the output files for CaIEEMod 2022.1 do not As discussed in responses to comments #27 and #28 of letter #7, above, present the numeric changes to any model defaults. Upon further review of in the Project air quality impact analysis, changes made to CaIEEMod the output files, Table 5.5 contains the only mention of architectural defaults for architectural coatings VOC content are substantiated by coatings (see excerpt below) (Appendix B, pp. 464):

SCAQMD Rule 1113, as described in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas However, as demonstrated above, Table 5.5 only provides the square Emissions Technical Report Section 4.1.2.1 and as noted in Section 8 of footage of area to be coated. Since the output files fail to demonstrate the the Project CaIEEMod Detailed Report, included in Appendix B to the architectural coating emission factors that the model relies on, we cannot DEIR. The analysis correctly analyzed reasonably foreseeable conditions verify that the values included in the model are accurate. concerning the VOC content of paint to be used on the Project buildings, based on compliance with SCAQMD regulations. The resulting Project VOC These unsubstantiated reductions present an issue, as CaIEEMod uses the emissions reported on the DEIR are not underestimated. The methodology architectural coating emission factors to calculate the Project's volatile used in the Project air quality impact analysis was adequately organic compounds ("VOC") emissions. By including unsubstantiated documented and can be relied on in the assessment of potential impacts. reductions to the default architectural coating emission factors, the model may underestimate the Project's construction -related VOC emissions and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance. 7 30
Attachment: SWAPE
Unsubstantiated Changes to Fleet Mix Values
Changes were made to the CalEEMod default fleet mix to ensure the air Review of the CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the "Downey quality and GHG impact analysis was consistent with the analysis in the Prologis Project R2" model includes changes to the default operational TIS prepared for the Project, in which a traffic engineer calculated vehicle fleet mix percentages (see excerpt below) (Appendix B, pp. 476).

Project -specific truck trips. These changes are fully described in Section

4.1.2.3 of the Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical However, these changes remain unsubstantiated. As previously discussed, Report included in Appendix B to the DEIR. As described in the Air Quality the output files for CaIEEMod 2022.1 do not present the numeric changes and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report, the Project -specific to any model defaults. Upon further review of the output files, changes to changes to model defaults for mobile sources are fully substantiated by fleet mix percentages are not mentioned outside of the "User Changes to the TIS (LLG 2023), the High -Cube Warehouse Vehicle Trip Generation Default Data" table. Until the DEIR verifies the breakdown of heavy -heavy Analysis report (Institute of Transportation Engineers 2016), and the duty ("HHD"), medium -heavy duty ("MHD"), light heavy duty ("LHDI, SCAQMD Warehouse Indirect Source Rule Staff Report (SCAQMD 2021).

LDH2"), trucks used by the Project, we cannot verify that the values included in the model are accurate.

The analysis correctly evaluated reasonably foreseeable conditions of Project truck trips and passenger vehicle trips, based on the substantial These unsubstantiated changes present an issue, as CaIEEMod uses evidence described above. The resulting Project criteria pollutant and operational vehicle fleet mix percentages to calculate the Project's precursor emissions reported on the DEIR are not underestimated. The operational emissions associated with on -road vehicles. By including methodology used in the Project air quality impact analysis was several unsubstantiated changes to the default operational vehicle fleet adequately documented and can be relied on in the assessment of mix percentages, the model may underestimate the Project's mobile -source potential impacts.
operational emissions and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance.

T.MWA

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 31
Attachment: SWAPE
Updated Analysis Indicates a Potentially Significant Air Quality Impact The commenter's analysis is without merit and uses CaIEEMod version In an effort to more accurately estimate the Project's construction -related 2020.4.0 which was superseded by CaIEEMod Version 2022.1, which was and operational emissions, we used CaIEEMod Version 2020.4.0, as well as the version approved for use in Project impact analysis at the time that the Project -specific information provided by the DEIR. the DEIR was prepared. The defaults for CaIEEMod versions 2020.4.0 utilize outdated model defaults, such as EMFAC2017 (which has been Consistent with the DEIR's models, we included 488,900-SF of superseded by EIVIFAC2021) and does not include data from the Southern "Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail," 26,785-SF of "Refrigerated California Association of Governments' regional travel demand model.

Warehouse -No Rail," 20,000-SF of "General Office Building," 15.7-acres (zero SF) of "Parking Lot," and 12,360-SF of "Other Asphalt Surfaces." In addition, the commenter' s model does not include the Project -specific Additionally, we omitted the unsubstantiated changes to the architectural changes to model defaults identified in the Air Quality and Greenhouse coating emission factors and operational vehicle fleet mix.

Gas Emissions Technical Report included in Appendix B to the DEIR. The commenter's argument that the Project air quality and GHG emissions Our updated analysis estimates that the Project's construction -related VOC modeling changes to CalEEMod defaults are unsubstantiated is without emissions would exceed the applicable South Coast Air Quality Management merit, as discussed in the response to comments #27 through #30 of District ("SCAQMD") threshold of 75-pounds per day ("Ibs/clay"), as letter #7 above.
referenced by the DEIR (p. 4.2-12, Table 4.2-6) (see table below).

The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting As demonstrated in the table above, the Project's construction -related VOC evidence for these conclusions. No revisions to the EIR are necessary emissions, as estimated by SWAPE, increase by approximately 78% and based on this comment, and preparation and recirculation of a revised exceed the applicable SCAQIVID significance threshold. Our updated model EIR is not required.
demonstrates that the Project would result in a potentially significant air quality impact that was not previously identified or addressed in the DEIR.

A revised EIR should be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate the potential air quality impacts that the Project may have on the surrounding environment.
7 32
Attachment: SWAPE
Diesel Particulate Matter Emissions Inadequately Evaluated The commenter is mistaken; the model used to quantify Project The DEIR concludes that the proposed Project would result in a less -than construction- equipment diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions was significant health risk impact based on a quantified construction and CaIEEMod 2022.1.1.19, which was the most current approved and mobile -source operational health risk assessment ("HRA"). recommended model for quantifying emissions for use in CEQA impact analysis in California at the time of the analysis. The CaIEEMod Specifically, the DEIR estimates that the maximum incremental cancer risk methodology and default data sources are substantiated in the CalEEMod posed to nearby, existing residential sensitive receptors associated with Version 2022.1 User's Guide, and appendices C, D, and G to the User's exposure to diesel particulate matter ("DPM") emissions during Project Guide. All changes to CalEEMod defaults with Project specific construction and operation would be 5.3 in one million, which would not assumptions were substantiated in Section 4.1 of the Air Quality and exceed the SCAQMD significance threshold of 10 in one million (p. 4.2-29, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report included in Appendix B to the Table 4.2-13).

DEIR, and as discussed in the responses to comments #27 through #31 of As demonstrated above, the DEIR indicates that the maximum incremental letter #7, above.
cancer risk would be 5.3 chance per million over a 30-year period. However As described in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical the DEIR's evaluation of the Project's potential health risk impacts, as well Report, Section 4.1.4, Project construction and operational truck DPM as the subsequent less -than -significant impact conclusion, is incorrect for emissions were calculated using truck trips estimates from the Project TIS two reasons.
(LLG 2023) the High -Cube Warehouse Vehicle Trip Generation Analysis First, the DEIR's construction HRA is incorrect, as it relies upon emissions report (Institute of Transportation Engineers 2016), and emissions factors estimates from an unsubstantiated air model, as discussed above in section from the California Air Resources Board's (CARB's) EMFAC2021 version of this letter titled "Unsubstantiated Input Parameters Used to Estimate

1.0.2 online database.

Project Emissions." As a result, the HRA may rely on an underestimated RTC-28

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
DPM concentration to calculate the health risk associated with Project The commenter is also mistaken about age sensitivity factors and fraction construction. The DEIR's construction HRA and the resulting cancer risk of time at home. As described in Section 4.1 in the Air Quality and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report, included in Appendix B to Second, the DEIR fails to mention the exposure assumptions for the the DEIR, Project health risks were determined using CARB's Hotspots construction -related and operational HRAs, such as age sensitivity factors Analysis and Reporting Program (HARP) Air Dispersion Modeling and Risk ("ASF") or fraction of time at home ("FAH") values whatsoever. Until the Tool (ADMRT) version 22118. The ADIVIRT automatically applies age DEIR substantiates the use of correct exposure assumptions, the HRAs may sensitivity factors based on the age bins included in the model. As underestimate the cancer risk posed to nearby, existing sensitive receptors described in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical due to Project construction and operation. Furthermore, according to the Report, for residential health risks, the model assumed 30 years of Risk Assessment Guidelines provided by the Office of Environmental Health exposure, starting with infants in utero in the third trimester of Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the organization responsible for providing pregnancy. Therefore, all age sensitivity factors are accounted for in the guidance on conducting HRAs in California, the DEIR's HRA should have used Project health risk assessment. For the fraction of time at home, because the following equation:
there are no schools near the modeled receptors, fraction of time at home adjustments were applied to age bins 3-years and older using the [see full letter included in attachment]
ADIVIRT selectable option. The fraction of time at home selected options However, the DEIR fails to mention or provide a dose and risk equation to can be verified in the HRA output included in Appendix B to the DEIR: in calculate the Project's construction and operational cancer risks. As such, the Residential Cancer Risk ADIVIRT output summary sheets, the modeled we cannot verify that the DEIR's HRA is accurate, and the Project 'scarcer scenario is listed as "30YrCancerRMP — Inh — FAH3to70." This scenario risks may be underestimated.
means: 30 years total exposure, risk management policy (RMP) intake rate percentile, inhalation only, and fraction of time at home (FAH) selected for age bins 3 through 70 years old.

The equation shown in the comment would be applicable if health risks were calculated off -model. However, the health risks results shown in the DEIR Section 4.2 were calculated using the CARB's ADIVIRT which automates the risk calculation. The model and the methodology used by the ADIVIRT is publicly available on CARB's website at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/harp-air-dispersion- mode I i ng-a nd-risk-tool.

There is no requirement to "mention or provide a dose and risk equation" in the documentation of the health risk assessment methodology.

Potential cancer risks resulting from Project -related DPM emissions, as reported in the DEIR, were not underestimated. The commenter's inability to verify Project modeling does not constitute substantial evidence of a more severe impact than concluded in the DEIR.

Tirdw.,

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 33
Attachment: SWAPE
Mitigation
The commenter is mistaken; no information or analysis was provided in Feasible Mitigation Measures Available to Reduce Emissions the comment letter which demonstrates air quality or health impacts would be potentially significant and would require mitigation. As Our analysis demonstrates that the Project would result in potentially discussed in the responses to comments #27 through #32 of Letter #7, significant air quality and health impacts that should be mitigated further. above, the commenter's argument that the modeling used was In an effort to reduce emissions, the Project should consider the unsubstantiated and that Project -specific changes to model defaults were implementation of the following mitigation measures found in the unsubstantiated is without merit. As discussed in the DEIR Section 4.2, California Department of Justice Warehouse Project Best Practices the Project would not result in any potentially significant air quality document.
impacts, and no mitigation measures would be required.
• Requiring off -road construction equipment to be hybrid electric - diesel or zero emission, where available, and all diesel -fueled off - road construction equipment to be equipped with CARB Tier IV - compliant engines or better, and including this requirement in applicable bid documents, purchase orders, and contracts, with successful contractors demonstrating the ability to supply the compliant construction equipment for use prior to any ground - disturbing and construction activities.
• Prohibiting off -road diesel -powered equipment from being in the lion" position for more than 10 hours per day.
• Using electric -powered hand tools, forklifts, and pressure washers, and providing electrical hook ups to the power grid rather than use of diesel -fueled generators to supply their power.
• Designating an area in the construction site where electric -powered construction vehicles and equipment can charge. Limiting the amount of daily grading disturbance area.
• Prohibiting grading on days with an Air Quality Index forecast of greater than 100 for particulates or ozone for the project area. • Forbidding idling of heavy equipment for more than three minutes. • Keeping onsite and furnishing to the lead agency or other regulators upon request, all equipment maintenance records and data sheets, including design specifications and emission control tier classifications.
• Conducting an on -site inspection to verify compliance with construction mitigation and to identify other opportunities to further reduce construction impacts.
• Using paints, architectural coatings, and industrial maintenance coatings that have volatile organic compound levels of less than 10 g/L.
• Providing information on transit and ridesharing programs and services to construction employees.

RTC-30

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
• Providing meal options onsite or shuttles between the facility and nearby meal destinations for construction employees.
• Requiring all heavy-duty vehicles engaged in drayage to or from the project site to be zero emission beginning in 2030.
• Requiring all on -site motorized operational equipment, such as forklifts and yard trucks, to be zero -emission with the necessary charging or fueling stations provided.
• Requiring tenants to use zero -emission light- and medium -duty vehicles as part of business operations.
• Forbidding trucks from idling for more than three minutes and requiring operators to turn off engines when not in use. • Posting both interior- and exterior -facing signs, including signs directed at all dock and delivery areas, identifying idling restrictions and contact information to report violations to CARE, the local air district, and the building manager.
• Installing solar photovoltaic systems on the project site of a specified electrical generation capacity that is equal to or greater than the building's projected energy needs, including all electrical chargers.
• Designing all project building roofs to accommodate the maximum future coverage of solar panels and installing the maximum solar power generation capacity feasible.
• Constructing zero -emission truck charging/fueling stations proportional to the number of dock doors at the project. • Running conduit to designated locations for future electric truck charging stations.
• Unless the owner of the facility records a covenant on the title of the underlying property ensuring that the property cannot be used to provide refrigerated warehouse space, constructing electric plugs for electric transport refrigeration units at every dock door and requiring truck operators with transport refrigeration units to use the electric plugs when at loading docks.

RTC-31

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
• Oversizing electrical rooms by 25 percent or providing a secondary electrical room to accommodate future expansion of electric vehicle charging capability.
• Constructing and maintaining electric light -duty vehicle charging stations proportional to the number of employee parking spaces (for example, requiring at least 10% of all employee parking spaces to be equipped with electric vehicle charging stations of at least Level 2 charging performance)
• Running conduit to an additional proportion of employee parking spaces for a future increase in the number of electric light -duty charging stations.
• Installing and maintaining, at the manufacturer's recommended maintenance intervals, air filtration systems at sensitive receptors within a certain radius of facility for the life of the project. • Installing and maintaining, at the manufacturer's recommended maintenance intervals, an air monitoring station proximate to sensitive receptors and the facility for the life of the project, and making the resulting data publicly available in real time. While air monitoring does not mitigate the air quality or greenhouse gas impacts of a facility, it nonetheless benefits the affected community by providing information that can be used to improve air quality or avoid exposure to unhealthy air.
• Requiring all stand-by emergency generators to be powered by a non -diesel fuel.
• Requiring facility operators to train managers and employees on efficient scheduling and load management to eliminate unnecessary queuing and idling of trucks.
• Requiring operators to establish and promote a rideshare program that discourages single occupancy vehicle trips and provides financial incentives for alternate modes of transportation, including carpooling, public transit, and biking.
• Meeting CalGreen Tier 2 green building standards, including all provisions related to designated parking for clean air vehicles, electric vehicle charging, and bicycle parking.
• Designing to LEED green building certification standards. • Providing meal options onsite or shuttles between the facility and nearby meal destinations.
• Posting signs at every truck exit driveway providing directional information to the truck route.

RTC-32

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
• Improving and maintaining vegetation and tree canopy for residents in and around the project area.
• Requiring that every tenant train its staff in charge of keeping vehicle records in diesel technologies and compliance with CARB regulations, by attending CARB-approved courses. Also require facility operators to maintain records on -site demonstrating compliance and make records available for inspection by the local jurisdiction, air district, and state upon request.
• Requiring tenants to enroll in the United States Environmental Protection Agency's SmartWay program, and requiring tenants who own, operate, or hire trucking carriers with more than 100 trucks to use carriers that are SmartWay carriers.
• Providing tenants with information on incentive programs, such as the Carl Moyer Program and Voucher Incentive Program, to upgrade their fleets.

These measures offer a cost-effective, feasible way to incorporate lower - emitting design features into the proposed Project, which subsequently, reduce emissions released during Project construction and operation. 7 34
Attachment: SWAPE
Furthermore, as it is policy of the State that eligible renewable energy As described in Section 2.5.4, Sustainability Features, of the DEIR, solar resources and zero -carbon resources supply 100% of retail sales of panels are included as part of the Project design. The Project would electricity to California end -use customers by December 31, 2045, we include a solar -ready roof structure, with an 80 mil Thermoplastic emphasize the applicability of incorporating solar power system into the Polyolefin Cool Roof and 5 pounds per square foot on roof structure to Project design. Until the feasibility of incorporating on -site renewable accommodate solar loads. Solar panels would be installed with a energy production is considered, the Project should not be approved. capability to generate a minimum of 3.13 watts per square foot of office A revised EIR should be prepared to include all feasible mitigation space.
measures, as well as include updated air quality and health risk analyses to The DEIR has disclosed potential environmental impacts with supporting ensure that the necessary mitigation measures are implemented to reduce evidence for these conclusions. As no significant impacts related to air emissions to below thresholds. The revised EIR should also demonstrate a quality or health risk are identified, no mitigation measures are required. commitment to the implementation of these measures prior to Project No revisions to the EIR are necessary based on this comment, and approval, to ensure that the Project's significant emissions are reduced to preparation and recirculation of a revised EIR is not required. the maximum extent possible.

RTC-33

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
7 35
Attachment: SWAPE
Disclaimer
This comment provides a disclaimer related to the above comments. No SWAPE has received limited discovery regarding this project. Additional environmental issues related to the analysis presented in the DEIR are information may become available in the future; thus, we retain the right raised, and therefore no further response is necessary. to revise or amend this report when additional information becomes available. Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and protocols, site conditions, analytical testing results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which were limited to information that was reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain informational gaps, inconsistencies, or otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of information obtained or provided by third parties.
8 1
Victor Mineros,
This letter is submitted on behalf of the members of Teamsters Local 396 The commenter has provided an introduction to their comments and a Teamsters Local 396
and their families, who live and work in Downey and throughout the Los summary of the Project Description. No environmental issues related to Angeles metropolitan area. The Teamsters represent hundreds of thousands the analysis presented in the DEIR are raised, and therefore no further of workers in the logistics industry. These members not only work in the response is necessary.
logistics industry, but very often live in communities impacted by this industry. The Teamsters membership has committed to actively improving the industry not only through improved working conditions, wages, benefits and safety, but also by mitigating and eventually eliminating its negative impacts on the quality of life of our members, their families, and their communities. Teamsters are committed to making sure their workplace is safe and healthy not only for themselves, but for their families and neighbors.

Prologis (the Applicant) is proposing demolishing five buildings, approximately 433,000 square feet of floor area, to construct a 510,110 sq. ft. industrial, concrete tilt -up logistics facility and approximately 25,000 additional square feet of ancillary uses (collectively the Project). The property, at the northwest corner of Stewart and Gray Road and Woodruff Avenue (the Site), sits approximately 700 feet from a fairly dense residential neighborhood to the west, beginning on the east side of Coldbrook Avenue. The facility would include cold -storage capacity, allowing for delivery of groceries and other fresh and frozen foodstuffs.

RTC-34

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
8 2
Victor Mineros,
Purpose of CEQA and EIR
The commenter has provided a summary of CEQA requirements as an Teamsters Local 396
CEQA is designed to inform decision makers and the public about the introduction to their comments. No environmental issues related to the potential, significant environmental effects of a project. 14 Cal. Code Regs. analysis presented in the DEIR are raised, and therefore no further ("Guidelines") § 15002(a)(1). Its purpose is to "inform the public and its response is necessary.
responsible officials" of the environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made. Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564.

CEQA also requires public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage when "feasible" by requiring implementation of "environmentally superior" alternatives and all feasible mitigation measures. Guidelines § 15002(a)(2) and (3); Citizens of Goleta Valley, 52 Cal.3d at 564. If the project will have a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the project only if it finds that it has "eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible" and that any unavoidable significant effects on the environment are "acceptable due to overriding concerns." Pub. Res. Code § 21081; Guidelines § 15092(b)(2)(A) and (B).

CEQA requires that the "rationale for government approval" be disclosed to the public. California Building Industry Assn. v. Bay Area Air Quality Management Dist. (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369, 382.
8 3
Victor Mineros,
Economic Impact/Urban Decay
Section 4.9, Land Use and Planning, of the DEIR evaluated the potential Teamsters Local 396
In our comment submitted in response to the Initial Study, we effects related to the built environment and land use patterns as required recommended conducting some degree of study to see what, if any, impacts by CEQA. Chapter 6, Other CEQA Considerations, of the DEIR evaluated would result from development of high -intensity retail delivery facilities, the Project's potential for growth inducement and found that the Project specifically with regards to existing brick -and -mortar retail (including big would not remove barriers to population growth or create growth that box stores) in Downey. This is an increasingly important area of study would overwhelm or exceed existing services. Please see Section 4.9 and because of the potential for long-term commercial vacancies as a result of Section 6.3 of the DEIR for additional information related to these topics. home delivery. Long-term vacancies can result in urban decay, and CEQA does not require analysis of economic effects pursuant to Section therefore degradation of the built environment, a change in driving and 15131 of the State CEQA Guidelines unless they can be tied to direct transit patterns, and other impacts that are properly subjects of CEQA physical changes in the market area (i.e., physical deterioration of review. The degradation of the built environment and changes in land use existing retail centers/facilities). If existing retail uses are adversely patterns must be reviewed before a final EIR is certified. affected by competition, declines in sales could directly result in and/or lead to disinvestment, business closures, abandonment, and physical deterioration indicative of urban decay. Urban decay is the physical manifestation of a project's potential to trigger a chain reaction of store closures and long-term vacancies ultimately destroying existing neighborhoods. In this context, urban decay would result only if all of the following causal chain of events occurs:

RTC-35

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
• The project results in an economic impact so severe that stores might close as a result;
• Buildings and/or properties, rather than being reused within a reasonable time, would remain vacant for an extended period of time; and
• Such vacancies would be substantial enough in scale (in terms of square footage affected and/or the loss of key "anchor" tenants) to affect the viability of existing shopping centers or districts.

It is speculative to assume that the Project would result in store closures or vacancies. Moreover, store closures and vacancies, in and of themselves, do not meet the above criteria. Any retail market is likely to have a certain amount of vacant space due to normal turnover and changes in retailing, and vacancies alone do not necessarily indicate urban decay or physical deterioration. While the closure of a business is clearly a hardship to the owner and its employees, it is only significant within the context of CEQA if it results in sustained vacancies which in turn result in deterioration of the physical condition of the vacant buildings and neighborhoods. The Project would not result in physical changes or deterioration at existing commercial retail uses in the City. 8 4
Victor Mineros,
Transportation Patterns and Local Hiring
During the NOP comment period on April 27, 2022, a representative for Teamsters Local 396
The DEIR does not seem to properly or fully address the concerns raised by the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters submitted comments the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (SRCC). The Draft EIR encouraging the City to "consider utilizing skilled and trained workforce acknowledges that adhering to the requirements of the South Coast Air policies and requirements to benefit the local area economically and Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is a necessary element of avoiding mitigate greenhouse gas, air quality, and transportation impacts". CEQA significant impacts from, especially indirect sources and vehicle emissions. does not require that hiring practices be evaluated in an EIR. Evaluations The DEIR does not seem to adequately address the SCAQMD's finding that of potential impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and "[u]se of a local state -certified apprenticeship program or a skilled and VIVIT can be found in the DEIR in Sections 4.2, 4.6, and 4.11, respectively. trained workforce with a local hire component" can significantly reduce Because air quality and greenhouse gas emissions impacts would be less vehicle miles traveled and, therefore, vehicle emissions. Given that the than significant, and VIVIT impacts would be less than significant with proposed project is designed to accommodate some variety of logistics implementation of the mitigation measures already identified, no further uses, the DEIR should address the relative impacts of the Project with local mitigation is required.
hiring mitigations versus the absence of those mitigations.

Given the SCAQMD's expertise in the area and that the issue was raised before the local agency prior to preparation of the DEIR, and the substantial likelihood that this type of mitigation would result in significant reduction of vehicle miles traveled, the DEIR should have considered these impacts.

RTC-36

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
Letter
Number
Comment
Number
Commenter
Comment
Response
8 5
Victor Mineros,
Inadequate Study of Cumulative Transport Refrigeration Units (TRUs) As shown in Figure 4 in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Teamsters Local 396
The nature of the Project as a "speculative" logistics hub raises the Technical Report (included in Appendix B to the DEIR), seven off -site potential for a significant number of Transport Refrigeration Units (TRUs) worker locations were analyzed for potential health risks from exposure not only at the site but as part of larger logistical networks in and around to localized concentrations of DPIVI, including DPIVI from Project -related Downey. The scope of an EIR does not end at a city's borders, but should TRUs.
consider the reasonable context of a project. This is particularly true of The SCAQMD has not adopted any cumulative health risk thresholds. The logistics projects, which are inherently parts of integrated logistical SCAQMD's thresholds (10 in 1 million cancer risk, non -cancer hazard systems. The use of TRUs has serious implications for the health of index of 1) are used for evaluating the impact from a single Project's residents and workers because of the significant diesel emissions. This is of incremental increase in health risks. The SCAQMD considers that, if a course of considerable concern to employees at the facility.

Project's emissions do not result in incremental health risks exceeding The DEIR's health risk assessment does not include a substantive study of the thresholds, then the Project's cumulative health risk impact would be the specific impacts of TRU emissions on workers who will be directly less than cumulatively considerable. As discussed in the DEIR, the exposed to it over given periods of time, specifically over work days, work maximally exposed individual worker would be receptor W4, located weeks, and years. This would require some study be conducted of the likely outside the commercial building on the northeast side of the Project site, w
workforce and the day-to-day exposure to intensive TRU emissions and how and would have an incremental increased cancer risk of 0.3 in 1 million, that exposure aggregates over time. Relatedly, the use of TRUs in an far below the threshold of 10 in 1 million.
integrated logistical system, and the growth of retail sales delivery in the The impact of existing DPIVI concentrations in the Project area, and in the region, requires that a health risk assessment look at cumulative exposure. greater Los Angeles regional area, on project workers would be considered an effect of the environment on the Project and, as such, is not a CEQA issue (commonly referred to as "reverse CEQA" pursuant to California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District [2015] 62 Cal.4th 369).
8 6
Victor Mineros,
Conclusion
This comment concludes the commenter's letter. Please see responses to Teamsters Local 396
We urge the City to consider the above issues and direct the agency to comments #1 through #5 of Letter #8 above.
conduct more complete study prior to certification of the DEIR.

Exhibit D
Responses to Comments
This page intentionally left blank
2-38

Exhibit D

3.0 DRAFT EIR CLARIFICATIONS AND REVISIONS
Minor clarifications and revisions to the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) recommended by the City of Downey or in response to comments received are documented in this section of the Final EIR.

The Draft EIR has not been modified and will not be re -published in its entirety as a single document to reflect these EIR modifications. The Draft EIR has been attached to this document as Appendix C.

The information included in these minor clarifications and/or revisions does not constitute substantial new information that requires recirculation of the Draft EIR. Section 15088.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines states in part:
(a) A lead agency is required to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the draft EIR for public review under Section 15087 but before certification. As used in this section, the term "information" can include changes in the project or environmental setting as well as additional data or other information.

New information added to an EIR is not "significant" unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project's proponents have declined to implement. "Significant new information" requiring recirculation includes, for example, a disclosure showing that:
(1) A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented.
(2) A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. (3) A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project, but the project's proponents decline to adopt it. (4) The draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.
(b) Recirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR.

The changes to the Draft EIR included in these modifications do not constitute "significant" new information because:
• No new significant environmental impacts would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure.
• There is no substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact that would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the identified significant impacts to a level of insignificance.
3-1

Exhibit D 3.0— Draft EIR Clarifications and Revisions
• No feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed has been proposed or identified that would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project.
• The Draft EIR is not fundamentally or basically inadequate or conclusory in nature such that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.

Therefore, recirculation of the Draft EIR is not required because the new information added to the EIR through these modifications clarifies information already provided or makes minor modifications to the already adequate Draft EIR.

The EIR modifications contained below are presented in the same order as the information that appears in the Draft EIR. Changes in text are signified by strikeouts (strikeouts) where text has been removed and by bold underline (underline) where text has been added. The applicable page numbers from the Draft EIR are also provided where necessary for easy reference.

3.1.1 Executive Summary
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.2 Chapter 1.0 - Introduction
In Section 1.4.1, Notice of Preparation, Scoping, and Opportunities for Public Input, the DER incorrectly stated that the original NOP was released on March 29, 2022 instead of March 25, 2022. The DEIR also incorrectly stated the date of the EIR scoping meeting, which was actually held April 18. 2022. The text of Section 1.4.1 has been updated, as shown below:

The City prepared and distributed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) that was available for public review between March 2-9 25, 2022 and April 27, 2022. However, due to mailing issues with NOP copies sent to public agencies, the City issued an updated NOP to those recipients on April 25, 2022 and accepted responses through May 25, 2022. Comments received on the NOP have been considered in this EIR, as described further below. The City also hosted an EIR scoping meeting on March April 18, 2022, in the Downey City Hall Council Chambers, Downey, California. The scoping meeting is for jurisdictional agencies and interested persons or groups to provide comments regarding, but not limited to, the range of actions, alternatives, mitigation measures, and environmental effects to be analyzed. The meeting was attended by City staff, Project applicant representatives, and consultants; however, no members of the public or jurisdictional agency staff attended the meeting.

3.1.3 Chapter 2.0 - Project Description
A minor revision to the list of necessary approvals for the Project has been made. The text of Section 2.8, Necessary Approvals, has been updated, as shown below:

The City of Downey will be responsible for Final EIR certification, as set forth in State CEQA Guidelines §15090 based on the standards of adequacy for an EIR (State CEQA Guidelines §15151). Final EIR certification would occur concurrent with consideration of the following discretionary actions by the City:
3-2

Exhibit D 3.0— Draft EIR Clarifications and Revisions
• Site Plan Review
• Conditional Use Permit
• Variance of Standards (for building height)
• Lot Merger
• Demolition Permit
• Grading Permit
• Building Permit
• Construction Traffic Management Plan
• Temporary Use of Land Permit (for nighttime construction)

3.1.4 Chapter 3.0 - Basis for Cumulative Analysis
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.5 Section 4.0 - Environmental Analysis
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.6 Section 4.1 - Aesthetics
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.7 Section 4.2 - Air Quality
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.8 Section 4.3 - Cultural Resources
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.9 Section 4.4 - Energy
Section 4.4.9, References, included an incorrect link for one of the references listed. The updated reference with the correct link is below:

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2021. Final Environmental Impact Report: Amendments to the Building Energy Efficiency Standards (2022 Energy Code). Available at:

Q O 0
httpsm/J www.enery.ca.ovJublications 0 environmental -impact -re ort-amendments- builin-efficiency-standardsw2022-ener y.
3-3

Exhibit D 3.0— Draft EIR Clarifications and Revisions

3.1.10 Section 4.5 - Geology and Soils
Section 4.5.9, References, did not include several references for documents cited in the text of Section 4.5. Full citations of the references which have been added appear below:

California Geological Survey. 2008. Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California. Available at:
hops:/� www.conservation,ca.gov/cgs� DocumentsJPublicationsf Special® PublicationsjSP 117a.pdf. Accessed January 25, 2022.

Southern California Earthauake Center. 1999. Recommended Procedures for Imolementation of DMG Special Publication 117 Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction in California.

Available at: http:/f scecinfo.usc.euf resources/catalogf LiquefactionproceduresJun99.pdf.

Accessed January 25, 2022.

3.1.11 Section 4.6 - Greenhouse Gas Emissions
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.12 Section 4.7 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.13 Section 4.8 - Hydrology and Water Quality
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.14 Section 4.9 - Land Use and Planning
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.15 Section 4.10 - Noise
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.16 Section 4.11 -Transportation
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.17 Section 4.12 - Tribal Cultural Resources
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.18 Chapter 5.0 - Alternatives
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR. 3-4

Exhibit D 3.0— Draft EIR Clarifications and Revisions

3.1.19 Chapter 6.0 - Other CEQA Considerations
Section 6.2.2 of the DEIR has been updated to include the significant and unavoidable impact related to Noise that was identified in Section 4.10 of the DEIR. The section has been updated as follows:

The proposed Project would include the demolition of five existing industrial buildings and the construction of one industrial building for warehouse and logistics uses. The EIR found that potential environmental effects resulting from implementation of the proposed Project are generally below the level of significance or can be mitigated to below the level of significance. Section 4.10 of the EIR identified a significant and unavoidable impact related to construction noise; however, this impact would be temporary and would not result in a lasting change to the environment. Therefore, although the Project would result in changes to the existing site conditions, the Project would not cause any significant irreversible environmental changes.

An incomplete sentence in Section 6.2.3 of the DEIR has been completed as follows:

The proposed Project consists of a warehouse and logistics center. Demolition and construction activities associated redevelopment of the proposed Project would involve some risk for environmental accidents. These activities would be monitored, however, by local, State, and federal agencies that would follow industry standards governing the use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials. Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this EIR found that potential impacts related to the creation of a significant hazard to the public or environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and the creation of a significant hazard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accidental conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would result in a less than significant impact with the incorporation of mitigation.

3.1.20 Chapter 7.0 - Effects Found Not to be Significant No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft EIR.

3.1.21 Chapter 7.0 - Preparers
No changes have been made to this Section of the Draft E. 3-5

Exhibit D 3.0— Draft EIR Clarifications and Revisions
This page intentionally left blank
3-6

Exhibit D

Exhibit D
From: Andy Lee
Sent: Wednesday, January 3, 2024 4:34 AM
To: Alfonso S. Hernandez
Subject: RE: Teamsters -Local 396 Comments Re: Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Project Dear Mr. Hernandez
I'm emailing regarding the Prologis warehouse project at Stewart and Gray Road, which we communicated about last year. I understand that the Draft EIR was submitted on 12/1/2/23 and the review period extends to 1/25/24.
1-1
At this point, is there any more information about the tenant or lessee or end user? I didn't see anything specific in the publicly available information. Please let me know if you're aware of what company will ultimately use the property, or if there are multiple companies in consideration for the property. Thank you.

Andy Lee
(213) 442-9233
DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: The proposed Project would include the demolition of the existing buildings totaling approximately 433,000 square feet (SF) and the construction of an approximately 535,685-SF industrial concrete tilt -up building for warehouse/logistics uses. The Project would include 683 automobile parking spaces, 255trailer and/or container parking spaces, and 109 dock loading doors. The new industrial building would be used for logistics and distribution purposes, and specifically as a fulfillment center and for cold storage. Approximately 95 percent of the warehouse (508,900 SF) would be high cube fulfillment and the remaining 5 percent (26,785 SF) would be for cold storage (i.e., refrigerated warehouse space). The facility would also include 20,000 SF of office area and 25,000 SF of mezzanine area within the 535,685 SF building. On -site activities would include storage, distribution, and/or consolidation of manufactured goods, and last -mile fulfillment and delivery; and general industrial/warehouse with refrigeration and cold storage component for the purposes of receiving, storing, shipping of food and/or beverage products. The office space would be used for office uses ancillary to the warehouse operations. The proposed facility would operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

A-1

Exhibit D
M

ADAMS BROADWELL JOSEPH & CARDOZO

ARANA ABEDFARD

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
NEVNT CARMiCHAEL

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CHRIST I NAM. CARO
THOMAS A: ENSLOW
601 GATEWAY BOULEVARD' SUITE 1000

DELILAH D FEDERMAN
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080-7037
RICHARD M::FRANCO
ANDREW J. GRAF

TANYA A GULESSERIAN
TEL (650) 589-1660

DARION N JOHNSTON
FAX (650) 589-5062
RAPHAEL,E. KOSS'
ssannadangadamsbr—dwells m
AIDANP. MARSHALL.

TARA C.: PIERCED
Of Lou nse7
MAR CD. JOSEPH

DANIEL L CARDOZO
January 3, 2024
VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL
Irma Huitron, Director of Community Development
City of Downey
Community Development Department
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey; CA,90241
Email: [email protected]

VIA EMAIL ONLY
Alfonso Hernandez, Principal Planner
Email: [email protected]
SACRAMENTO OFFICE.
520: CAPITOL MALL SUITE 350
SACRAMENTO,.CA 95814 4721
TEL (916) 444 6201
FAX (915f 4 4 4 - 5 2 0 9
Maria Alicia Duarte, CMC
City of Downey
City Clerk's Office
11111 Brookshire Ave
Downey, CA 90241
Email: [email protected]
Re: Requestfor Mailed Notice of Actions and Hearings— Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Proiect (SCH No. 2022030738) Dear Ms. Huitron, Ms. Duarte, and Mr. Hernandez:

We are writing on behalf of Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy ("CARE CA') to request mailed notice of the availability of ;any environmental review document, prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, related to the Prologis StewartandGray Road Warehouse Project (SCH No. 2022030738), proposed by Prologis, Inc. ("Applicant"), as well as a copy of the environmental review document when it is made available for public review.

The Project would include 683 auto parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container parking spaces and 109 dock loading doors. The new industrial building would be used for logistics and distribution purposes, and specifically as,a fulfillment center and for cold storage. Approximately 95 percent of the warehouse (508,900 SF) would be high cube fulfillment and the remaining 5 percent (26,785 SF) would be for cold storage (i.e., refrigerated warehouse space). The facility would also include 20000 SF of office area and 25,000 SF of mezzanine area within the 535,685-SF building. 6908-001acp
`>printetl on recycletl paper
A-2

Exhibit D
2-1
Cont.

January 3, 2024

Page 2 ends

The Project would be located on an approximately 29.16-acre site in the southeastern portion of the City Downey, Los Angeles County, California. The Project site is bounded by Hall Road on the north, Woodruff Road on the east, Stewart and Gray Road on the south, and an industrial building on the west. The Project site is comprised of Assessor's Parcel Numbers 6284-019-013 through 017.

Please send the above requested items by email and U.S. Mail to our San Francisco office as follows:

U.S. Mail
Sheila M. Sannadan
Adams Broadwell Joseph & Cardozo
601 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 1000
South San Francisco, CA 94080-7037
Email
ssannadanG@adamsbroadw ell. com
Please call me at (650) 589-1660 if you have any questions. Thank you for your assistance with this matter.

SMS:acp
6908-001acp
Sincerely,
Sheila M. Sannadan
Legal Assistant
«prinfatl on recycktl peper
A-3

Exhibit D
M

ADAMS BROADWELL JOSEPH & CARDOZO
AIR

AIR ABEDIFARD
A PROFESSIONAL. CORPORATION
�ANAKEV N T CARM CHAEL

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CHRIST INA'M_ CARD.

THOMAS A. ENSLOW
601 GATEWAY BOULEVARD SUITE 1000

DELILAH D FEDERMAN
SOUTH SAN FRA;NCISCO, CA 94080-7037
RICHARDM.. FRANCO
ANDREW J. GRAF

TANYAA GULESSERIAN
TEL (650) 589-1660

DARION N JOHNSTON
FAX {650) 589-.5062
RACHAELE. KOSS.
ss 1—d-gadamsbroadwe{I. com
AIDAN-P. MAR SHALL.

TARAC.:RENGIFO
OfCou nsei

MARC D JOSEPH

DAN IEL L CARDOZO
January 3, 2024
VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL
Irma Huitron, Director of Community Development
City of Downey
Community Development Department
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, CA_90241
Email: [email protected]

VIA EMAIL ONLY
Alfonso Hernandez, Principal Planner
Email: ashernandezG�downeyca.org
SACRAM ENITA OFFICE.
520CAPITOL MALL SUITE 350
SACRAMENTO, CA 35814-4721
TEL (916) 444 6207
FAX (916) 4 4 4 - 6 2 0 9
Maria Alicia Duarte, CMC
City of Downey
City Clerk's Office
11111 Brookshire Ave
Downey, CA 90241
Email: [email protected]
Re: Request for Immediate Access to Documents Referenced in the Draft Environmental Impact Report— Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project (SCH No. 2022030738)
Dear Ms. Huitron, Ms. Duarte, and Mr. Hernandez:

We are writing on behalf of Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy ("CARE CA') to request immediate access to any and all documents referenced, incorporated by reference, and relied upon in the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") prepared for the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project (SCH No. 2022030738), proposed by Prologis; Inc. ("Applicant"). This request excludes acopy of the DEIR and its appendices. This request also excludes anv documents that are currently available on the Citv of Downey website.I The Project proposes the demolition of existing, five buildings totaling approximately 433,000 square feet (SF) and the construction of an approximately 5 35,6 85 -square -foot industrial concrete tilt -up building for warehouse/logistics uses.

The Project would include 683 auto parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container I Accessed htt ps.1l www.downe y ea.or lour cit /de'artments/community -development/ Iannin /environmental -documents on: January 9, 2024.
6908-002acp
4S printetl on recycletl paper
A-4

Exhibit D
3_1
Cont.

January 3, 2024

Page 2 ends

parking spaces and 109 dock loading doors. The new industrial building would be used for logistics and distribution purposes; and specifically as a fulfillment center and for cold storage. Approximately 95 percent of the warehouse (508,900 Sl) would be high cube fulfillment and the remaining 5 percent (26,785 SF) would be for cold storage (i.e., refrigerated warehouse space). The facility would also include 20,000' SF of office area and 25,000 SF of mezzanine area within the 535,685-SF building.

Our request for immediate access to all documents referenced in the DEIR is made pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"); which requires that all documents referenced; incorporated by reference, and relied upon in an environmental review documentbemade available to the public for the entire comment period. 2
Please use the following contact information for all correspondence U.S. Mail Email
Sheila M. Sannadan [email protected]
Adams Broadwell Joseph & Cardozo
601 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 1000
South San Francisco, CA 94080-7037
2 See Public Resources Code § 21092(b)(1) (stating that "all documents referenced in the draft environmental impact report" "shall be made "available for review'); 14 Cal. Code Reg. § 15087(c)(5) (stating that all documents incorporated by reference in the'EIR ... shall be readily accessible to the public"); see also Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City olRancho Cordova (2007) 40 Cal.4th 412, 442, as- modified :(Apr. 18, 2007) (EIR:must transparently incorporate and describe the reference materials relied on in its analysis); Santiago County Water District=U. County of Orange (1981) 118 Cal.App.3rd 818, 831 ("[W]hatever is required to be considered in an EIR must be in that formal report.. "), internal citations omitted. 6908-002acp
Cjpriatea--Yly ed paper
A-5

Exhibit D
January 3; 2024

Page 3 ends

3-1
Cont If you have any questions; please call me at (650) 589-1660 or email me at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance with this matter.

SMS;acp
6908-002acp
Sincerely;
Sheila M. Sannadan
Legal Assistant
C..p p-td - recycled paper
A-6

Exhibit D
M

ADAMS BROADWELL JOSEPH & CARDOZO

ARIANA AB EDIFARD
A PROFESSIONAL. CORPORATION
KEVINT CARMiCHAEL.

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CHRISTINA-M. CARO
THOMAS A.. ENSLO W
601 GATEWAY BOULEVARD SUITE1000

KELILAH D FEDERMAN
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080-7037
RICHARD M.:FRANCO
ANDREW J.. GRAF

TANYA A GULESSERIAN
TEL..(6"50) 589-1550

DARION N JOHNSTON
FAX (:650) 58.9-.5062
PACHAELE_KOSS.
ssan dangaaamsbroadwell. com
AIDAN P. MAR SHALL.

TARA-C..RENGDO
Of Lounse/
MARC: D. JOSEPH
DANIEL L..CARDOZO
January 3, 2024
VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL
SACRAM ENTO OFFICE.
520 CAPITOL MALL SUITE 350
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814-4721
TEL (916.) 444 6201
FAX (916) 444-6209
Irma Huitron, Director of Community Development Maria Alicia Duarte, CMC City of Downey
City of Downey
Community Development Department
City Clerk's Office
11111 Brookshire Avenue
11111 Brookshire Ave
Downey, CA 90241
Downey, CA 90241
Email: [email protected]
Email: citycierk@downeyca org

VIA EMAIL ONLY
Alfonso Hernandez, Principal Planner
Email: [email protected]
Re: Request for Immediate Access to Public Records— Proloyis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Proiect (SCH No. 2022030738) Dear Ms. Huitron, Ms. Duarte, and Mr. Hernandez:

We are writing on behalf of Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy ("CARE CA') to request immediate access to any and all public records in the City of Downey's possession referring or related to the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project (SCH No. 2022030738), proposed by Prologis, Inc. ("Applicant").

This request includes, but is not limited to, any and all file materials, applications, correspondence, resolutions, memos, notes, analysis, email messages, files, maps, charts, and any other documents related to the Project. This request does not include the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR"),or documents referenced or relied upon in the DEIR, which we have requested in a separate letter pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.

The Project proposes the demolition of existing five buildings totaling approximately 433,000 square feet (SF) and the construction of an, approximately 535,685-square -foot industrial concrete tilt -up building for warehouse/logistics uses.

Exhibit D
4-1
Cont.

January 3, 2024

Page 2 ends

and for cold storage. Approximately 95 percent of the warehouse (508,900 SF) would be high cube fulfillment and the remaining 5 percent (26,785 SF) would be for cold storage (i.e., refrigerated warehouse space). The facility would also include 20,000" SF of office area and 25,000 SF of mezzanine area within the 535,685-SF building.

The Project would be located on an approximately 29.16-acre site in the southeastern portion of the City Downey, Los Angeles County, California. The Project site is bounded by Hall Road on the north, Woodruff Road on the east Stewart and Gray Road on the south, and an industrial building on the west. The Project site is comprised of Assessor's Parcel Numbers 6284-019-013 through 017.

This request is made pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Government Code §§ 7920.000, et seq.). This request is also made pursuant to Article I, section 3(b) of the California Constitution, which provides a Constitutional right of access to information concerning the conduct of government. Article 1, section 3(b) provides that any statutory right to information shall be broadly construed to provide the greatest access to government information and further requires that any statute that limits the right of access to information shall be narrowly construed.

We request immediate access to review the above documents pursuant to section 7922.525 of the Public Records Act, which requires public records to be "open to inspection at all times during the office hours of a;state or local agency" and provides that "every person has a right to inspect any public record."1 Therefore, the 10-day response period applicable to a "request for a copy of records" under Section 7922.535(a) does not apply to this request.

We request access to the above records in their original form, as maintained by the agency.2 Pursuant to Government Code Section 7922.570, if the requested documents are in electronic format, please upload them to a file hosting program such as Dropbox, NextRequest or a similar program. Alternatively, if the electronic documents are 10 MB or less (or can be easily broken into sections of 10 MB or less), they may be emailed to me as attachments.

We will pay for any direct costs of duplication associated with filling this request up to $200. However, please contact me at (650) 589-1660 with a cost estimate before copying/scanning the materials.
i Gov. Code ;.§7922.525(a).
2 Gov. Code § 7922.570; Sierra Club v. Super. Ct. (2013) 57 Cal. 4th 157, 161.62. 6908-003acp
*P-k-d 0, to yclad paper
A-8

Exhibit D
January 3; 2024

Page 3 ends

Please use the following contact information for all correspondence:

U.S. Mail Email
Sheila M. Sannadan [email protected]
4-1 Adams Broadwell Joseph & Cardozo
Cont. 601 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 1000
South San Francisco, CA 94080-7037
If you have any questions, please call me at (650) 589-1660 or email me at [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance with this matter.

SMS;acp
6908-003acp
Sincerely,
Sheila M.'Sannadan
Legal Assistant
�,I1-(ed on recycled paper
A-9

Exhibit D
M
tkk\
14� kDepartment of Toxic Substances Control
Meredith Williams, Ph.D., Director News Gavin Yana Garcia 8800 Cal Center Drive orn Secretary for Governor
Env ronmental Protection Sacramento, California 95826-3200

SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
January 9, 2024
Alfonso Hernandez
Principal Planner
City of Downey
1111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, CA 90241
[email protected]

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DEIR) FOR THE PROLOGIS STEWART AND GRAY ROAD WAREHOUSE PROJECT DATED DECEMBER 12, 2023 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE # 2022030738
Dear Alfonso Hernandez,
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) received a DEIR for the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project (Project). The proposed Project would include the demolition of the existing buildings totaling approximately 433,000 square feet (SF) and the construction of an approximately 535,685-SF industrial concrete tilt - up building for warehouse/logistics uses. The Project would include 683 automobile parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container parking spaces, and 109 dock loading doors. The new industrial building would be used for logistics and distribution purposes, and specifically as a fulfillment center and for cold storage. Approximately 95 percent of the warehouse (508,900 SF) would be high cube fulfillment and the remaining 5 percent (26,785 SF) would be for cold storage (i.e., refrigerated warehouse space). e Printed on Recycled Paper
A-10

Exhibit D
Alfonzo Hernandez
January 9, 2024
Paget
The facility would also include,20000 SF of office area and 25,000 SF of mezzanine area within the 535,685 SF building. On -site: activities would include storage, 5-1 distribution, and/or consolidation of manufactured goods, and last -mile fulfillment and Cont. delivery; and general industrial/warehouse with refrigeration and cold storage component for the purposes of receiving, storing, shipping of food and/or beverage products. The office space would be used for office uses ancillary to the warehouse operations. Based on our Project review, DTSC requests consideration of the following comments.

1. DTSC recommends the City of Downey enter into DTSC's Standard Voluntary Agreement (SVA) program so a proper evaluation of the Project can be reviewed by designated DISC technical staff. The FLUXX aortal rink is provided and the page also has a link to the F'luxx User Guide that can help you navigate the system. You will need to create a new profile and once in 5-2 the system, click "Start a Request for Lead Agency Oversight Application." DTSC recommends that once the SVA is signed,,a Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report (PEA Report) be submitted for DTSC review. The PEA Report shall summarize all existing data and provide an evaluation of the possible risk to current and future users of the site. if you have any questions about the application portal, please contact the DTSC Brownfield Coordinator Gregory Shaffer or contact the Application Portal I n box.

2. If buildings or other structures are to be demolished on any project sites included in the proposed project, surveys should be conducted for the presence of lead -based paints or products, mercury, asbestos containing 5_3 materials, and polychlorinated biphenyl caulk. Removal, demolition, and disposal of any of the above -mentioned chemicals should be conducted in compliance with California environmental regulations and policies. In addition, sampling near current and/or former buildings should be conducted in accordance with DTSC's 2006 Interim Guidance: valuation of School Sites with Potential Contamination from Lead Based Faint Termiticides, and A-11

Exhibit D
Alfonzo Hernandez
January 9, 2024

Page 3 ends

lectrical Transformers,

3. DTSC recommends that all imported soil and fill material should be tested to ensure any contaminants of concern are within approved screening levels for the intended land use. To minimize the possibility of introducing contaminated

5.4 soil and fill material there should be documentation of the origins of the soil or fill material and, if applicable, sampling be conducted to ensure that the imported soil and fill material meets screening levels for the intended land use. The soil sampling should include analysis based on the source of the fill and knowledgeofthe prior land use.

DTSC appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project. Thank you for your assistance in protecting California's people and 5-5 environment from the harmful effects of toxic substances. If you have any questions or would like any clarification on DTSC's comments, please respond to this letter or via email for additional guidance.

Sincerely,
Tamara Purvis
Associate Environmental Planner
HWMP --Permitting Division — CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
A-12

Exhibit D
Alfonzo Hernandez
January 9,'2024

Page 4 ends

cc: (via email)
Governor's Office of Planning and
Research State Clearinghouse
State. Clearing house @O r.cae gov
Dave Kereazis
Associate Environmental Planner
CEQA Unit — HWMP
Department of Toxic Substances Control
Dave: Kereazisdtsc.�
Scott Wiley
Associate Governmental Program Analyst
HWMP — Permitting Division - CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
Scott:V09ileyCcdtsc.ca:gov
A-13

Exhibit D
STATE OF CALIFORNIA--CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION '
DISTRICT 7
100 S. MAIN STREET, MS 16
LOS ANGELES,;CA 90012 Making Conservation
PHONE (213) 266 3574 a California Way of Life
FAX (213) 897-1337
TTY 711
mm.dot.ca.gov
January 19, 2024
Alfonso Hernandez, Principal Planner
City of Downey, Planning Division
1111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, CA 90241
RE: Prologis Stewart and Gray Road
Warehouse Project — Draft
Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
SCH #2022030738
GTS #07-LA-2022-04401
Vic. LA 605 PM 08.425
LA 105 PM 16.637
LA 5 PM 08.269
Dear Alfonso Hernandez,
Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the review process for the above referenced project. The Project proposes to demolish the existing five buildings totaling approximately 433,000 square feet (SF) and construction of an approximately 535,685-square-foot industrial concrete tilt -up building for warehousellogistics uses. The Project would include 683 auto parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container parking spaces and 109 dock loading doors. Regional access is provided via the following freeways: the Santa Ana Freeway (Interstate 5 [1-5]), the San Gabriel Freeway (1-605), the Century Freeway (1-105), and the Long Beach Freeway (1-710).

Primary vehicular access to the Project site is provided by Stewart and Gray Road and Hall Road. The proposed facility would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

After reviewing the DEIR, Caltrans has the following comments:

With 535,685 square feet of new warehouse use, 683 car parking spaces, 109 loading 6-2 dock doors, and stalls for 255 trailer stalls, the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project will induce demand for a consequential number of additional vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Caltrans recommends the following` "Provide a safe and reliobfe transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment" A-14

Exhibit D
Alfonso Hernandez
January 19, 2024

Page 2 ends

• Reducing the amount of parking whenever possible. Research looking at the relationship between land -use, parking, and transportation indicates that the amount of car parking supplied can undermine a project's ability to encourage public transit and active modes of transportation.
• Invest in alternative modes of freight movement, such as rail, which is not only more efficient but also more easily converted to carbon neutral energy sources in the future.
6_2 • Due to the increased volume of truck trips, a substantial contribution should be Cont. made to a city fund that will build safer infrastructure for people walking, riding bikes, and taking transit throughout the city. The most effective methods to reduce pedestrian and bicyclist exposure to cars and trucks is through physical design and geometrics. These methods include the construction of physically separated facilities such as Class IV bike lanes, wide sidewalks, pedestrian refuge islands; landscaping, street furniture, and reductions in crossing distances through roadway narrowing.

Following construction, a study needs to be conducted to confirm that the proposed mitigation measures are sufficiently offsetting the Project generated VMT. If not, new and/or additional mitigation measures need to be implemented.

Additionally, an encroachment permit will be required for any project work proposed near 6-3 Caltrans Right of Way and all environmental concerns must be adequately addressed.

Please note that any modificationsto the State facilities will be subject to additional review by the Office of Permits prior to issuance of the permit.

Finally, construction of the proposed project would involve deliveries of materials, components, and supplies to the various sites, and will involve oversized trucks. As a result, prior to issuance of building or grading permits for the project site, the applicant shall prepare a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) for review and approval 6-4 by City staff to reduce any impacts to less than significant levels. The CTMP needs to specify the duration of construction period and provide construction analysis on significant impacts due to increase in construction truck traffic on highways not designated as truck routes. It should also specify any work that would affect the freeways and its facilities, and that Caltrans has the jurisdiction for review and approval. Transportation of heavy construction equipment and/or materials, which requires the use of oversized -transport vehicles on State highways, will require a transportation permit from Caltrans. "Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment" A-15

Exhibit F1
Alfonso Hernandez
January 19.2024

Page 3 ends

If you have any questions, please contact project coordinator Anthony Higgna, at [email protected] refer h»GTS#O7'LA'2O22-O44O1 Si
FnmnceaOuong
Acting LDR/CEQA Branch Chief
Cc: State Clearinghouse
'Prowdeosafe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects themnyimnmenr

Exhibit D

BLUM, COLLINS & HO LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

AON CENTER
707 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD
SUITE4880
LOSANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017(213) 572=
0400
January 24, 2024
Alfonso Hernandez; Principal Planner VIA EMAIL TO
City of Downey, Planning Division [email protected] 1111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, CA 90241
SUBJECT: COMMENTS-ONPROLOGIS STEWART AND GRAYROAD WAREHOUSE EIR (SCH NO. 2022030738)
Dear Mr. Hernandez,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the, Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project. Please accept and consider these 7-1 comments on behalf of Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance. Also, Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance formally requests to be added to the public interest list regarding any subsequent environmental documents, public notices, public, hearings, and notices of determination for this project. Send all communications to Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance P.O. Box 79222 Corona, CA92877.

M
The project proposes the demolition of all existing onsite buildings totaling approximately 433,000 square feet (sf) and the construction of an approximately 535,685 sf industrial building 7-2 to be used as a fulfillment center warehouse on a 29.16 acre site. The proposed buildingincludes approximately 490,685 of fulfillment center/warehouse area; 20,000 sf of ground floor office area, and 25,000 sf of mezzanine office area. The project site provides 683 passenger car parking spaces, 255 trailer and/or container parking spaces, and 109 truck/trailer dock loading doors dispersed on three sides of the building. The building has -a proposed height of 55 feet.

While the tenant of the building is unknown, operation of the proposed project is assumed to be 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

A-17

Exhibit D
Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 2 ends

The EIR describes the environmental setting in stating; that at the date the Notice of Preparation was published (March 25, 2022), "the site was fully occupied and operational by industrial use tenants, however, the tenants have since vacated the buildings and ceased operations at the request of the property owner (Project applicant) in; anticipation of implementing the proposed Project." The EIR claims that the site was occupied and actively used for business operations at the time the NOP was published, but has not provided any meaningful evidence to support the claim that the existing onsite buildings were occupied and operational at that time. The EIR has not presented any meaningful evidence to demonstrate that businesses were legally established and operational on March 25, 2022. Notably, Appendix_L: Transportation Impact Study provided trip, generation calculations for the "existing" onsite uses utilizing ITE trip generation average rates instead of conducting onsite traffic counts at the project driveways; which demonstrates that the onsite uses had ceased operating by March 25, 2022. 7-3 CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a)(1) states that, "Where existing conditions change or fluctuate overtime, and where necessary to provide the most accurate picture practically possible of the project's impacts, a lead agency may define existing conditions by referencing historic conditions, or conditions expected when the project becomes operational, or both, that are supported with substantial evidence;" and CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a)(3) states that, "An existing conditions baseline shall not include hypothetical conditions, such as those that might be allowed, but have never actually occurred, under existing permits or plans, as the baseline." The EIR and its appendices model the existing site as fully operational utilizing default software trip rates and emissions rates for uses that do not exist on the project site. The physical conditions and actual emissions/vehicle traffic counts that existed at the time of analysis are not described or discussed with meaningful supporting evidence in the EIR. Utilizing emissions default rates/average rates/rates derived from other properties instead of actual traffic counts and emissions analysis at the project site during business operations serves to artificially reduce the projects -significant environmental impacts by modeling the alleged businesses onsite as more intensive than they actually were and presenting the impacts of the proposed project as "net new".

Additionally, nearly every area of environmental analysis credits the project with various VMT, trip generation, and emissions reductions based on existing trips at the site based on emissions 7-4 default rates/average rates/rates derived from other properties "existing uses" at the site the EIR has not proven to exist. Per Appendix L, "ITE Land Use Code 110 (General Light Industrial) trip generation average rates were used to forecast the expected traffic generation for the existing uses." It is nonsensical to utilize ITE average/default rates to calculate trip generation for A-18

Exhibit D
Alfonso Hernandez
January 24,,2024

Page 3 ends

° ® "existing uses" instead of taking trip counts at the projectsite, particularly if the site were actually operational with tenants conducting business. This does not comply with CEQA 7-4 Guidelines Section 15125. The EIR overstates the existing operations at the project site to Cont. artificially inflate "existing" emissions, trip generation, and VMT, which subsequently reduces the "net new" quantity of emissions, trip generation, and VMT generated by the proposed project and skews impacts downwards. A revised EIR must be prepared to remove any credit given for the "existing" operations in all areas of analysis in order to accurately and adequately analyze the project's significant impacts in accordance in order to provide an adequate and accurate environmental analysis.

Please refer to attachments from SWAPE for a complete technical commentary and analysis.

The EIR does not include for analysis relevant environmental justice issues in reviewing potential impacts, including cumulative impacts from the proposed project. This is especially significant as the surrounding community is highly burdened by pollution. According to CalEnviroScreen 4.01, CalEPA's screening tool that ranks each census tract in the state for pollution and socioeconomic vulnerability. The proposed project's census tract (6037551102) and surrounding community; including residences to the north and east; bears the impact of multiple sources of pollution and is more polluted than average on several pollution indicators 7_ , measured by CalEnviroScreen. For example, the project census tract ranks in the 88th percentile for particulate matter (PM) 2.5 burden, 86th percentile for diesel particulate matter burden; and 66th percentile for traffic burdens. All of these environmental factors are typically attributed to heavy truck activity in the area. The very small particles of diesel PM can reach deep into the lung, where they can contribute to a range of health problems. These include irritation to the eyes, throat and nose, heart and lung disease; and lung cancer2.

The census tract ranks in the 92nd percentile for toxic' releases. People living near facilities that emit toxic releases may breathe contaminated air regularly or if contaminants are released during an accident'.

The census tract also ranks in the 78th percentile for solid waste facility impacts and Mh percentile ;for hazardous waste facility impacts. Solid waste facilities can expose people to hazardous chemicals, release toxic gases into the air (even after these facilites are closed), and ' CalEnviroScreen 4.0 https://oehha.ca.gov/ealenvirosereen/report/calenviroscreen-40 z OEHHA Diesel Particulate Matter hgps://ochha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicator/diesel-particulate- matter
' OEHHA Toxic Releases https://oehha.ca.gov/calenvirosereen/indicator/toxic-releases-facilities A-19

Exhibit D
7-5
Cont.

Alfonso Hernandez
January 24,,2024

Page 4 ends

chemicals can leach into soil around the facility and pose a health risk to nearby populations4.

Hazardous waste generators and facilities contribute to the contamination of air, water and soil near waste generators and facilities can harm the environment as well aspeople 5.

Further, the census tract is a diverse community including https://ochha.ca.gov/calenvirosereen/indicator/solid-waste-sites-and- facilities
' OEHHA Hazardous Waste Generators and Facilities
https://ochha.ca . gov/calenvirosereen/indicator/hazardous-waste-generators-and-facilities e OEHHA Cleanup Sites https:Hoehha.ca.gov/calenvirosereen/indicator/cleanup sites ' OEHHA Poverty https://ochha.ca.gov/calenvirosereen/indicator/poverty Ibid.
9 Ibid.
10 OEHHA S$ 535 Census Tracts https //oehha.ca gov/calenviroscreen/sb535 A-20

Exhibit D
Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 5 ends

7_5section of the revised EIR must include the specific analysis of each environmental impact on the Cont. Disadvantaged Communities, including cumulativeanalysis and irreversible environmental effects.

The State of California lists three approved compliance modeling softwares" for non-residential buildings: CBECC-Com, EnergyPro, and IES VE. CalEEMod is not listed as an approved software. The CalEEMod modeling does not comply with the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and under -reports the project's significant Energy impacts and fuel consumption to the 7-6 public and decision makers.. Since the EIR did not accurately or adequately model the energy impacts in compliance with Title 24, a finding of significance must be made. A revised EIR with modeling using one of the approved software types must be prepared and circulated for public review in order to adequately analyze the project's significant environmental impacts. This is vital as the EIR utilizes CalEEMod as a source in its methodology and analysis, which is clearly not an approved software.
49 Land Use and Planning
The EIR does not provide any information regarding the buildout conditions of the City's General Plan. Notably, the horizon year of the City's General Plan and its associated EIR12 is 7-7 2025. The project is proposed within one year of the horizon and buildout timeline of the prior environmental analysis. The EIR must be revised to provide a cumulative analysis discussion of projects approved since General Plan adoption and projects "in the pipeline" to determine if the project will exceed the City's General Plan buildout scenario.

Additionally, the inadequate and inaccurate trip generation analysis also impacts the project's LOS analysis and compliance with the General Plan. The EIR has not demonstrated the project's compliance or conflicts with the General Plan LOS requirements and other items that impact the circulation system, including queuing and trip distribution. A revised EIR must be prepared to 7-8 include impacts to the circulation system as a cumulatively considerable significant impact as the project conflicts with Transportation Impact Threshold A -and Land Use and Planning Impact Threshold B'because it is has not adequately or accurately demonstrated that the is consistent with the following General Plan threshold:

1. Circulation Element Page 2-6: The General Plan advances programs to reduce congestion to provide acceptable LOS, defined as "A", `B' , "C", or "D". " California Energy Commission 2022 Energy Code Compliance Software https://www.energy ca. ov/programs-and-topies/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022- building-energy-efficiency-1
12htt s:// www.downe ca.org/home/showpublisheddocu ent/270/636977962968070000 A-21

Exhibit D
M
am
Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 6 ends

4.11 Transportation
Table 2-1: Project Trip Generation within Appendix L: Transportation Impact Study provides trip generation reduction credits for ""existing uses." It is not appropriate to model the existing vacant site as fully operational utilizing ITE default rates/average rates and provide VMT and emission reduction credits based on "existing uses" that do not actually exist (and default ITE trip rates that do not accurately demonstrate what, if any traffic was generated on the site on March 25, 2022 instead of vehicle trip counts at the project site) and does not provide the most accurate picture practically possible of the project's impacts pursuant to CEQA Section 15125.

Further, CEQA: Guidelines Section 15125(a)(1) states that, "Where existing conditions-changeor fluctuate overtime, and where necessary to provide the most accurate picture practically possible of the project's impacts, a lead agency may define existing conditions by referencing historic conditions, or conditions expected when the project becomes operational, or both, that are supported with substantial evidence;" and CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a)(3) states that, "An existing conditions baseline shall not include hypothetical conditions, such as those that might be allowed, but have never actually occurred, under existing permits or plans, as the baseline." The EIR and its appendices model the existing site as fully operational utilizing trip rates and modeling derived from offsite locations and uses that do not exist on the project site. The physical conditions and actual emissions/vehicle traffic counts that existed on March 25, 2022 are not described or discussed with meaningful supporting evidence in the EIR. Utilizing emissions default rates/average rates/rates derived from other properties instead of actual traffic counts and emissions analysis at the project site during business operations serves to artificially reduce the project's significant environmental impacts by modeling the alleged businesses-onfite as more intensive than they actually were.

Additionally, nearly every area of environmental analysis credits the project with various VMT, trip generation, and emissions reductions based on existing trips at the site utilizing aprior study at a different property. As noted above in the Environmental Settingdiscussion, the EIR has not provided any meaningful evidence that the project site is occupied by any operational tenant and all comments regarding the Environmental Setting above are hereby reincorporated.

Per Appendix L, "ITE Land Use Code 110 (General Light Industrial) trip generation average rates were used to forecast the expected traffic generation for the existing uses_" It is nonsensical to utilize ITE average/default rates to calculate trip generation for "existing uses" instead of taking trip counts at the project site, particularly if the site were actually operational with tenants conducting business. This does not comply with CEQA Guidelines Section 15125. The EIR overstates the existing operations ;at -the project site to artificially inflate "existing" emissions, trip generation, and VMT, which subsequently reduces the "net new" quantity of emissions, trip A-22

Exhibit D
Alfonso Hernandez
January 24,,2024

Page 7 ends

generation, and VMT generated by the proposed project and skews impacts downwards. A

7.10 revised FIR must be prepared to remove any credit given for the "existing" operations in all Cont. areas of analysis in order to accurately and adequately analyze the project's significant impacts. in accordance in order to provide an adequate and accurate environmental analysis.

The' inadequate; and inaccurate trip, generation analysis also impacts the project's LOS analysis.

The'FIR has not demonstrated the project's compliance or conflicts with the General Plan LOS requirements and other items that impact the circulation system„ including, queuing and trip distribution. A revised FIR must be prepared to include impacts to the circulation system as a 7-11 cumulatively considerable significant impact as the project conflicts with Transportation Impact Threshold A and Land Use and Planning Impact Threshold B because it is has not adequately or accurately demonstrated that the project is consistent with the following General Plan threshold:

1. Circulation Element Page 2-6: The General Plan advances programs to reduce congestion to provide acceptable LOS, defined as "A", "B", "C", or"D" .

The EIR concludes that, "Based on the SCAG RTDM model output for TAZ 21791300, the proposed Project is forecast to generate a baseline employment VMT of 19.2 VMT per employee, which exceeds the County Guidelines threshold of 15.3 VMT." The EIR includes a combination of Project Design Feature T-2: Increase Job Density and Mitigation Measure TR-1:

Transportation Demand Management Plan, including T-7: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing, T-8: Provide Ridesharing Program, and T-10: Provide End -of -Trip Bicycle Facilities to achieve a "l 1.9 percent VMT reduction would result in 15.2 VMT per employee. This is below the significance threshold of 15.3 VMT." However, the EIR has not provided meaningful evidence to support the; conclusion that Project Design Feature T-2,,Mitigation Measure TR-1, T- 7, T-8, and T-10 will reduce project generated VMT to .below the significance threshold of 15.3 7 12 VMT per employee continuously for the life of the project: Since future building tenants are unknown, implementation of trip reduction measures cannot be guaranteed to reduce Project generated VMT to a level of less than significant. It is not possible for the City to ensure that Project Design Feature T-2, Mitigation Measure TR-1, T-7, T-8, and T-10 will result in reduced VMT by project employees and be implemented continuously, at all times throughout the life of the project and maintain a VMT reduction to less than significant levels at all times. The efficacy of the proposed mitigation measures and reduction of VMT impacts below the applicable thresholds cannot be; assured and the project's VMT impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable. A revised EIR must be prepared to include a finding of significance because there is no possible assurance of the percentage of project employees that would utilize non -automobile travel associated with implementation of Project Design Feature T-2, Mitigation Measure TR-1, T-7, T-8, and T-10 and mitigation of the project's VMT impactto less than significant; is not feasible.

A-23

Exhibit D
Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 8 ends

Further; the FIR has underreported the quantity VMT generated by the proposed project operations. The operational nature of industrial/warehouse uses involves high rates of truck/trailer/delivery van VMT due to traveling from large; import hubs to regional distribution centers to smaller industrial parks and then to their final delivery destinations. Once employees arrive at work at the proposed project, they will conduct their jobs by driving delivery vans 7-13 across the region as part of the daily operations as a fulfillment center, which will drastically increase project -generated VMT. The project's truck/trailer and delivery van activity is unable to utilize public transit or active transportation and it is misleading to the public and decision makers to exclude this activity from VMT analysis. The project's total operational VMT generated is not consistent with the significance threshold and legislative intent of SB 743 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by reducing VMT. A revised EIR must be prepared to reflect a quantified VMT analysis that includes all truck/trailer and delivery van activity.

The EIR_has not adequately analyzed the project's potential to substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses; or the project's potential to result in inadequate emergency access. There are no exhibits adequately depicting the available maneuvering and queueing space for trucks/trailers at the intersection of the project driveways and the adjacent streets. There ;are also no exhibits adequately depicting the onsite turning radius available for trucks maneuvering throughout the. site.
7-14
Notably, passenger car parking stalls are located immediately_ adjacent to the truck/trailer loading dock court on the each side of the building. These parking stalls may in use at any time and further restrict truck/trailer movement on the site and present a safety hazard with potential for conflicts between passenger cars and trucks/trailers. Additionally, all proposed driveways on the project site will be utilized for access by both truck/trailers and passenger cars. The overall site design presents: several potential conflicts in maneuvering area for both passenger cars and trucks/trailers that have not been analyzed.

TheFIRalso states that,"The design of improvements at the Projectsitewould be required to conform with applicable City and Downey Fire Department design criteria which contain provisions to minimize transportation hazards and provide emergency access. Based on

7.15 compliance with City and Downey Fire Department design criteria, and the City's review process for approval of Project design and plans, impacts associated with hazards due to geometric design would be less than significant." This does not comply with CEQA's requirements for adequate informational documents and meaningful disclosure (CEQA § 15121 and 21003(b)).

Deferring this environmental analysis required by CEQA to the construction permitting phase is A-24

Exhibit D
Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 9 ends

improper mitigation and does not comply with CEQA's requirement for meaningful disclosure

7.15 and adequate informational; documents. A revised EIR must be prepared to include the City Cont. determination/review of the project and the Site Plan for review, analysis, and comment by the public and decision makers in order to provide an adequate and accurate; environmental; analysis.

Additionally, the EIR has not provided any analysis of the available horizontal and vertical sight distance at the intersection of the project driveways and adjacent streets. The EIR" states that, "The Project site access points from Stewart and Gray Road and Hall Road would bedesigned :in accordance with City standards to consider adequate sight distances for both directions," without providing any analysis or exhibits demonstrating compliance with these standards or describing what the City standards require. Sight distance is the continuous length of street ahead visible to the driver. At unsignalized intersections, corner sight distance must provide a substantially clear line of sight between the driver of the vehicle waiting on the minor road (driveway) and the driver of an approaching vehicle. A revised EIR must be prepared with this analysis based on the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Stopping Sight Distance requirements.

M11R\R3iiiTsiti
The EIR is required to evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project which will avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project(CEQA§ 15126.6.) The alternatives chosen for analysis include the CEQA required "No Project" alternative and only three others - ReuseofExisting Buildings, Reduced Building Height, and Reduced Project.

The EIR does not evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives as only three alternatives beyond the required No Project alternative are analyzed. The EIR does not include an alternative that meets the project objectives and also eliminates all of the project's significant and unavoidable impacts. The EIR must be revised to include analysis of a reasonable range of alternatives and foster informed decisionmaking (CEQA § 15126.6). This could include alternatives such as development of the site with a project that; reduces all of the proposed project's significant and unavoidable impacts to less than significant levels while meeting all project objectives, and/or a mixed -use project that provides affordable housing and local -serving commercial uses that may reduce VMT, GHG emissions, and improve Air Quality.

6.2 Significant Irreversible Environmental Effects and 6.3 Growth Inducing Impacts The EIR has improperly credited the project with emissions reductions for "existing uses" that do not comply with CEQA, which has resulted in unduly low impacts and this section of analysis must be updated in accordance with revised modeling as part of a revised EIR: As discussed above, nearly every area of environmental analysis credits the project with various VMT, trip A-25

Exhibit D
Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 10 ends

generation, and emissions reductions based on existing trips at the site based on emissions default:rates/average rates/rates derived from other properties "existing uses" at the site the EIR has not proven to exist. For example, Appendix L states that "ITE Land Use Code 110 (General Light Industrial) trip generation average rates were used to forecast the expected traffic generation for the existing uses." It is nonsensical to utilize ITE average/default rates to calculate trip generation for "existing; uses" instead of taking trip counts at the project site; particularly if the site were actually operational with tenants conducting business. This does not comply with CEQA Guidelines; Section 15125. The EIR overstates the existing operations at the project site to artificially inflate "existing" emissions, trip generation, and VMT, which subsequently reduces the "net new" quantity of emissions, trip generation, and VMT generated by the proposed project 7_18 and skews impacts downwards. A revised EIR must be prepared to remove any credit given for Cont. the "existing" operations in all areas of analysis in order to accurately and adequately analyze the project's significant impacts in accordance in order to provide an adequate and accurate environmental analysis.

The EIR relies upon erroneous Energy modeling to determine that the project will meet sustainability requirements. As noted above, the EIR did not model the project's energy 7-19 consumption in compliance with Title 24 modeling software. TheFIRmust be revised to include afinding of significance as it has not adequately or accurately analyzed the project's commitment of resources.

The EIR does not adequately discuss or and analyze the commitment of resources is not consistent with regional and local growth forecasts. As noted throughout this commentletter, the project represents a significant amount of growth in the City and accounts fora significant 7-20 amount of the City's employment growth over 29 years (SCAG) and through the City's General Plan horizon year of 2025. The EIR has not ,provided an adequate or accurate cumulative analysis discussion hereto demonstrate the impact of the proposed project in a cumulative setting. The EIR must be revised to include this information for analysis and also include a cumulative development analysis of projects approved since General Plan adoption, 2016 A-26

Exhibit D
Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 11 ends

7.20 (SCAG), and projects "in the pipeline" to determine, if the proposed project exceeds the General Cont. Plan buildout scenario and/or SCAG's growth forecasts.

7.4 Effects Found Not to be Significant: Population and Housing The FIR states that "It is anticipated that the proposed Project will generate. approximately 300 construction jobs and approximately 250 permanent jobs." However, the source of this calculation is not included. There are no methods for the public to verify that the project would only generate approximately 300 construction jobs and approximately 250 permanent jobs. The EIR utilizes uncertain and misleading language in stating that, "During both construction and operations, the Project is expected to hire from the existing population in the area, " which does not provide any meaningful analysis or calculation of the project's population and employment (construction and operational) generation. Additionally, the geographic boundaries of the "area" of the project site are undefined. Relying on the entire labor force within Los Angeles County to fill the project's construction and operational jobs will increase VMT and emissions during all phases of construction and operations and a revised FIR must be prepared to account for longer worker trip distances. In order to comply with CEQA's requirements for meaningful disclosure and adequate informational documents, a revised EIR must be prepared to provideanaccurate estimate of employees generated by all uses of the proposed project. It must also provide demographic and geographic information on the location of qualified workers to fill these positions.

The FIR has not accurately provided a calculation of the project's operational employees that accounts for all onsite uses, including proposed office areas. SCAG's Employment Density Study13 provides the following applicable average employment generation rates for Los Angeles County:

Warehouse: I employee per 1,518 square feet
Office: 1 employee per 319 square feet
Applying these ratios results in the following calculation:

Warehouse: 490,685 sf / 1,518 =324 employees
Office: 45,000 sf/ 319 = 142 employees
Total: 466 employees
13 SCAG Employment Density :Study.
http //www mwcog or /fi¢ le.aspx?A=QTTITP,24P000UIwSmPNzK8F4d8didJe4LF9Exj6lXOU%3D A-27

Exhibit D
Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 12 ends

Utilizing SCAG's Employment Density Study ratios and accounting for all proposed uses, the proposed project will generate 466 employees. The FIR utilizes uncertain and misleading language which does not provide any meaningful analysis :of the project's population and employment generation. In order to comply with CEQA's requirements for meaningful disclosure, a revised EIR must be prepared to provide an accurate estimate of employees generated by all uses of the proposed project. It must also provide demographic and geographic information on the location of qualified workers to fill these positions. A construction worker employment analysis must also be included to adequately and accurately analyze all potentially significant environmental impacts.
7-22 The FIR does not provide any information regarding the buildout conditions of the City's General Plan. Table 3.3-1: Housing/Population/Employment Projections of the General Plan Downey Vision 2025'FIR 14 notes that the City's employment; population would increaseby 4,900 jobs through the horizon year of 2025. The proposed project accounts for 9.5% of employees through the entire General Plan buildout/horizon year of 2025, which has not been presented for analysis. SCAG's Connect SoCal Demographics and Growth Forecast" states that the City will add 2,900 jobs between 2016 - 2045. Utilizing the 'SCAG"Employment Density Study calculation of 466 employees, the project represents 16% of the City's employment growth from 2016 - 2045. A single project accounting for this amount of growth within the City over 29 years represents.a significant amount of growth. A revised EIR must be prepared to include this analysis, and also provide a cumulative analysis discussion of projects approved since 2016 and projects "in the pipeline" to determine if the project will exceed the City's General Planemploymentprojections or SCAG's employment growth forecast.

Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, GSEJA believes the EIR is flawed and a revised EIR must be 7-23
prepared for the proposed project and circulated for public review. Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance requests to be added to the public interest list regarding any subsequent environmental documents, public notices, public hearings; and notices of determination for this project. Send all communications to Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance P.O. Box 79222Corona, CA,92877.
14 https://www.downe_ cy a.org/home/showpublisheddocument/270/63697796296807000O " SCAG Connect SoCal Demographics and Growth Forecast adopted September 3, 2020 https://seag.ca• gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/0903fconneetsocal demo rg aphics-and=growth- forecast.ndP 1606001579
A-28

Exhibit D
Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024
Page.13
Sincerely,
Gary Ho
Blum, Collins & Ho LLP
Attachment: SWAPE Analysis
A-29

Exhibit D
Technical Consultation, Data Analysis and
Litigation Support for the Environment
2656 291h Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica; CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G„C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
[email protected]
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
(310) 795-2335
[email protected]
January 22, 2024
Gary Ho
Blum, Collins & Ho LLP
707 Wilshire Blvd, Ste. 4880
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Subject: Comments on the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project (SCH No. 2022030738) Dear Mr. Ho,
We have reviewed the December 2023,Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") for the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project ("Project") located in the City of Downey ("City"). The Project proposes to demolish the existing buildings and construct a 535,685-square-foot ("SF") industrial building, 20,000-SF of office space, 255 trailer parking spaces, and 683 auto parking spaces on the 29.16- 7-24 acre site.

Our review concludes that the DEIR fails to adequately evaluate the Project's air quality, and health risk impacts. As a result, emissions and health risk impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project may be underestimated and inadequately addressed. A revised Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") should be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate the potential air quality, and health risk impacts that the project may have on the environment.

Failure to Provide Complete CaIEEMod Output Files
Land use development projects under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA) typically 7 25 evaluate air quality impacts and calculate potential criteria air pollutant emissions using the California Emissions Estimator Model ("CaIEEMod" ).' CaIEEMod provides recommended default values based on site -specific information, such as land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project type. If more specific project information is known, the user ' "CaIEEMod User's Guide." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
httDs:// www.aamd.Rov/caleemod/user's-guide .

A-30

Exhibit D
7-25
Cont.
can change the default values and input project -specific values, but_CEQA requires that such changes be justified by substantial evidence. Once all of the values are inputted into the model, the Project's construction and operational emissions are calculated,; and "output files" are generated. These output files disclose to the reader what parameters are used in calculating the Project's air pollutant emissions and demonstrate which default values are changed. Justifications are provided for the selected values.

According to the https://caleemod.com/ .

A-31

Exhibit D
As previously mentioned, the Cal EEMod User's Guide requires any changes to model defaults be just ified5 As demonstrated above in the "User Changes to Default Data" table, the justification provided for these changes is:
"Building envelope and flat coating VOC limit 50 g/I per SCAQMD Rule 1113" (Appendix B, pp.

A76)
However, the reductions to the architectural coating emission factors remain unsubstantiated for three reasons.

First, these changes remain unsubstantiated as the AQ & GHG Report fails to include the above mentioned project design feature ("PDF") as a formal mitigation measure. This is incorrect, as according 7-27 to the Association of Environmental Professionals' ("AEP") CEQA Portal Topic Paper on Mitigation Cont. Measures:
"While not 'mitigation', a good practice is to include those project designfeature(s) that address environmental impacts in the mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP). Often the MMRP is all that accompanies building and construction plans through the permit process. If the design features are not listed as important to addressing an environmental impact, it is easy for someone not involved in the original environmental process to approve a change to the project that could eliminate one or more of the design features without understanding the resulting environmental impact:"6
As demonstrated above, PDFs that are not formally included as mitigation measures may be eliminated from the Project's design altogether. Until the DEIR and associated documents incorporate a formal mitigation measure that requires the Project to use low -volatile -organic compound ('VOC") we cannot verify that the above changes are accurate.

Second, we cannot verify the accuracy of the revised architectural coating emission factors based on SCAQMD Rule 1113 alone. The SCAQMD Rule 1113 Table of Standards provides the required VOC limits (grams of VOC per liter of coating) for 57 different coating categories.' The VOC limits for each coating 7-28 varies from'a minimum value of 50 g/L to a maximum value of 730 g/L As such, we cannot verify that SCAQMD Rule 1113 substantiates reductions to the default coating values without more information regarding what category of coating will be used. As the DEIR fails to explicitly require the use of a specific type of coating which would adhere to a specific VOC limit, we are unable to verify the model's revised coating emission factors.
5 "CaIEEMod User's Guide." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide p.1„14.
' "CEQ4 Portal Topic Paper Mitigation Measures." AEP, February 2020„available at:
httgs:f/cegaportal.oreltpYCEQA'/e2aMitigation%202020.pdf, p. 6. ' "SCAQMD Rule 1113 Advisory Notice." SCAQMD, February 2016, available at:
htte:L www.agmd.gov/does/default-source/rule bookirea xilr1113.pdf?sfvrsn=24, p. 1113-14, Table of Standards

1. A-33

Exhibit D
light-heavyduty("LHD1, LDH2",), trucks used by the Project, we cannot verify that the values included in the model are accurate.'
7-30 These unsubstantiated changes present an issue, as CaIEEMod uses operational vehicle fleet mix Cont.percentages to calculate the Project's operational emissions associated with on -road vehicles." By including several unsubstantiated changes to the default operational vehicle fleet mix percentages, the model may underestimate the Project's mobile -source operational emissions and should not be relied upon to determine Project significance.

Updated Analysis Indicates a Potentially Significant Air Quality Impact In an effort to more accurately estimate the Project's construction -related and operational emissions, we used CaIEEMod Version 2020.4.0, as well as the Project -specific information provided by the DEIR." Consistent with the DEIR's models, we included 488,900-SF of "Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail," 7-31 26,785-SF of "Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail,"t20,000-SF of "General Office Building," 15.7-acres-(zero SF) of "Parking Lot," and 12360-SF of "Other Asphalt Surfaces." Additionally, we omitted the unsubstantiated changes to the architectural coating emission factors and operational vehicle fleet mix.1z
Our updated analysis estimates that the Project's construction -related VOC https://www.agmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide , p. 36. s"'CaIEEMod Version 2020.4.0.' California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCDA), March 2022, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/caleemod/download-model See Attachment B for updated air modeling.
"South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds." SCAQMD, March 2023, available at:
httas:// www.aamd.Eov/d ocs/d efa ul t-sou rce/cea a/hand book/south-coast-aa md-air-o ual ltv-siEni fi ca nce- thresholds,pdf?sfvrsn=25
A-35

Exhibit D
7-31
Cont.
7-32
SWAPE Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
DEIR

65.2 SWAPE 116.2
% Increase
78%
SCAQMD Threshold
75 Exceeds?
Yes
As demonstrated in the table above, the,Project's construction -related VOC emissions, as estimated by SWAPE, increase by approximately 78% and exceed the applicable SCAQMD significance threshold. Our updated model demonstrates that the Project would result in a potentially significant air quality impact that was not previously identified or addressed in the DEIR. A revised ElRshould be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate the potential air quality impacts that the Project may have on the surrounding environment.

Diesel Part:icul to Matter Emissions 1naclecluaLely Evaluate The DEIR concludes that the proposed Project would result in a less -than -significant health risk impact based on a quantified construction and mobile -source operational health risk assessment -("HRA" ).

Specifically, the DEIR estimates that the maximum incremental cancer risk posed to nearby, existing residential sensitive receptors associated with exposure to diesel particulate matter (`DPM") emissions during Project construction and operation would be 5.3 in one million, which would not :exceed "the SCAQMD significance threshold of 10 in one million (p. 4.2-29, Table 4.2-13).

A-36

Exhibit D
■
Table 4 2-13

MAXIMUM INCREMENTAL CANCER HEALTH RISK
Receptor'
Construction Risk
(chances per
million)'
Operational Risk
(chances per
million)'
Total30-Year Risk
(chances per
millions
SC;AtIMI9Threshold
(chances per
million)
Exceed
Threshold?
.

RI
2A
01 2.5
14 No
R2

3.0 0.2

3.2 10
No
R3
R4
R5

3.5 5.1
1A
0A

0.2 0.1

3.7 5.3

1.4:
10 10
10 No
Na
No
R6

2.5 01

2.6 10-
No
R7

2.7 0.1

2.8 10
No
I8

2.5 0;

2.5 10'
o
W1

0.1-

No
W2
0A
DEIR substantiates the uses of correct exposure;assumptions,the-HRAsmay underestimate the cancer risk posed to nearby, existing sensitive receptors due to Project construction and operation. Furthermore, accord ingto the Risk Assessment Guldefrnesprovided bythe 'Office of A-37

Exhibit D
P ° Environmental Health Hazard Assessment ("OEHHA",), the organization responsible for providing guidance on conducting HRAs in California, the DEIR's HRA should have used the followingequatiom" A. Equation 8.204 A: RISKinh-res = ©OSEaif x CPF x A5F x EDIAT x FAH 7, RISK inh-res = Residential inhalation cancer risk
7-32 8. DOSEair = Gaily inhalation dose (mg/kg-day)
Cont. g, CPF = Inhalation cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day-1) 1 O.ASP = Age sensitivity factor for a specified age group (unitless) 11ED = Exposure duration (in years) for a specified age group

12.AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years); 13_ FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
However, the DEIR fails to mention or provide a dose and risk equation to calculate the Project's construction and operational cancer risks. As such, we cannot verify that the DEIR's HRA is accurate, and the Project's;cancer risks may be underestimated.

Mitigation
Feasible Mitigation Measures Available to Reduce En issic.)ns Our analysis demonstrates that the Project would result in potentially significant air quality and health impacts that should be mitigated further. In an effort to reduce emissions, the Project should consider the implementation of the followingmitigation measures found in the California Department of Justice Warehouse Project Best Practices document."
• Requiring off -road construction equipment to be hybrid electric -diesel or zero emission, where 7-33 available, and all diesel -fueled off -road construction equipment to be equipped with CARB Tier IV -compliant engines or better, and including this requirement in applicable bid documents, purchase orders, and contracts, with successful contractors demonstrating the ability to supply the compliant construction equipment for use prior to any ground -disturbing and construction activities.
• Prohibiting off -road diesel -powered equipment from being in the "on" position for more than 10 hours per day.
• Using electric -powered hand tools, forklifts, and pressure washers; and providing electrical hook ups to the power grid rather than use of diesel -fueled generators to supply their power. • Designating an area in the construction site where electric -powered construction vehicles and equipment can charge.
""Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance: Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments." OEHHA, February 2015, available at: https:/Ioehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnrl20l5guidancemanua1.12df, p.8-7, Equation 8.2.4. 15"Warehouse Projects: Best Practices and Mitigation Measures to Comply with the California Environmental Quality Act." State of California Department of.ustice,rSeptember 2022, available at:
https://oa6!.ca.Rov/system/files/media/warehouse-best-gractices.pdf , p. 8— 10.

A-38

Exhibit D
• Limiting the amount of daily grading disturbance area. • Prohibiting grading on days with an Air Quality Index forecast of greater than 100 for particulates or ozone forthe project area.
• Forbidding idling of heavy equipment for more than three minutes. • Keeping onsite and furnishing to the lead agency or other regulators upon request, all equipment maintenance records and data sheets, including; design specifications and emission control tier classifications.
• Conducting an on -site inspection to verify compliance with construction mitigation and to identify other opportunities to further reduce construction impacts. • Using paints; architectural coatings, and industrial maintenance coatings that have volatile organic compound levels of less than 10 g/L.
• Providing information on transit and ridesharing programs and services to construction employees.
• Providing meal options onsite or shuttles between the facility and nearby meal destinations for construction employees.
• Requiring all heavy-duty vehicles engaged in drayage to or from the project site to be zero - emission beginning in 2030.
• Requiring all on -site motorized operational equipment, such as forklifts and yard trucks, to be zero -emission with the necessary charging or fueling stations provided. • Requiring: tenants to use zero -emission light -,and medium -duty vehicles as part of business operations.
• Forbidding trucks from idling for more than three minutes and requiring operators to turnoff engines when not in use.
• Posting both interior- and exterior -facing signs, including signs directed at all dock and delivery areas, identifying idling restrictions and contact information to report violations to CARB; the local air district, and the building manager.
• Installing solar photovoltaic systems on the project site of a specified electrical generation capacity that is equal to or greater than the building's, projectedenergy needs, including all electrical chargers.
• Designing all project building roofs to accommodate the maximum future coverage of solar panels and installing the maximum solar power generation capacity feasible. • Constructing zero -emission truck charging/fueling stations proportional to the number of dock doors at the project.
• Running conduit to designated locations for future electric truck charging stations. • Unless the owner of the facility records a covenant on the title of the underlying property ensuring that the property cannot be used toproviderefrigerated warehouse space; constructing electric plugs for electric transport refrigeration units at every dock door and requiring; truck: operators with transport refrigeration units to use the electric plugs when at loading docks.
• Oversizing electrical rooms by 25 percent or providing a secondary electrical room to accommodate future expansion of electric vehicle charging capability. 10 A-39

Exhibit D
• Constructing and maintaining electric light -duty vehicle charging stations proportional to the number of employee parking spaces (for example, requiring at least 10% of all employee parking spaces to be equipped with electric vehicle charging stations of at least Level 2 charging performance)
• Running conduit to an additional proportion of employee parking spaces fora future increase in the number of electric light -duty charging stations.
• Installing and maintaining, at the manufacturer's recommendedmaintenance intervals, air filtration systems at sensitive receptors within a certain radius of facility for the life of the project.
• Installing and maintaining, at the, manufacturer's recommended maintenance intervals, an air monitoring station proximate to sensitive; receptors and the facility for the life of the project, and making the resulting data publicly available in real time. While air monitoring does not mitigate the air quality or greenhouse gas impacts of facility, it nonetheless benefits the affected community by providing information that can be used to improve air quality or avoid exposure to unhealthy air.
• Requiring all stand-by emergency generators to be powered by non -diesel fuel. • Requiring facility operators to train managers and employees on efficient scheduling and load 7 33 management to eliminate: unnecessary queuing and idling of trucks.

Cont. • Requiring operators to establish and promote a rideshare program that discourages single - occupancy vehicle trips and provides financial incentives for alternate modes of transportation, including carpooling, public transit, and biking.
• Meeting CalGreen Tier 2 green building standards, including all provisions related to designated parking for clean air vehicles, electric vehicle charging, and bicycle parking. • Designing to LEED green building certification standards. • Providing meal options onsite or shuttles between the facility and nearby meal destinations. • Posting signs at every truck exit driveway providing directional information to the truck route. • Improving and maintaining vegetation and tree canopy for residents in and around the project area.
• Requiring that every tenant train its staff in charge of keeping vehicle records in diesel technologies and compliance with CARB regulations, by attending GARB -approved courses. Also require facility operators to maintain records on -site demonstrating compliance and make records available for inspection by the local jurisdiction, air district, and state upon request. • Requiring tenants to enroll in the United States Environmental Protection Agency's SmartWay program, and requiring' tenants who own, operate, or hire trucking carriers with more than"100 trucks to use carriers that are SmartWay carriers.
• Providing tenants with information on incentive programs, such as the Carl Moyer Program and Voucher Incentive Program, to upgrade their fleets.

Exhibit D
Furthermore, as it is policy of the State that eligible renewable energy resources and zero -carbon resources supply 100% of retail sales of electricity to California end -use customers by December 31, 2045, we emphasize the applicability of incorporating solar power system into the Project design. Until the feasibility of incorporating on -site renewable energy production is considered, the Project should not be approved.
7-34
A revised EIR should be prepared to include all feasible mitigation measures, as well as include updated air quality and health risk analyses to ensure that the necessary mitigation measures are implemented to reduce emissions to below thresholds. The revised EIR should also demonstrate a commitment to the implementation of these measures prior to Project approval, to ensure that the Project's-significant emissions are reduced to the maximum extent possible.

Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery regarding this project. Additional information may become available in the future; thus, we retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional information becomes available. Our professional "services have been performed using that degree of 35 care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of service. No other warranty,, expressed or implied, is made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and protocols, site conditions, analytical testing results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which were limited to information that was reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain informational gaps, inconsistencies, or otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of information obtained or provided by third parties.

Sincerely,
a'
MattHagemann, P.G.,C.Hg.

Paul E.'Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

Attachment A: SWAPE's CalEEMod Ouput Files
Attachment'B: Matt Hagemann'CV
Attachment C: Paul Rosenfeld CV
12 A-41

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Downey Prologis Project R2
Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
General Office Building

20.00 + 1000sgft
;

0.46 20,000.00 i
0 -------9----------------------
------------------------------
--------------------------------_------___-------_---
------------------
-------
Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail

26.79 + 1000sgft
;

0.61 26,785.00 +
0 ----- -g ---------------------
------------------------------
------------------------------=-_------_—_
___ i------------------
-------
Unrefri erated Warehouse -No Rail
488.90
+ 1000sgft
;

11.22 488,900.00 +
0 ----------------------------
------------------------------
--------------------- ---- -�_
___
___ i------------------
-------
Parking Lot
682.00
+ 1000sgft
;

15.70 0.00 +
0 ------------------------------
------------------------------
---------------------------------------------}-_----------------f-------------- Other Asphalt Surfaces

12.36 1000sgft

0.28 12,360.00
0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.3 Precipitation Freq (Days) 8 Climate Zone 7 Operational Year 2026
Utility Company Southern California Edison
CO2Intensity 390.98 CH4Intensity 0.033 N20Intensity 0.004 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr)

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Land Use - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Construction Phase - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Off -road Equipment - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Trips and VMT - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Architectural Coating - See SWAPE's comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to Architectural Coating Emission Factors".

Vehicle Trips - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Fleet Mix - See SWAPE's comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to Fleet Mix Values".

Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Grading - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
tblConstructionPhase
NumDays
s 35.00

45.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
_----------------------------1-------------------------------�-------------------------- NumDays
s 440.00
182.00
-----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
_----------------------------1-------------------------------�-------------------------- NumDays
s 30.00

75.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
_----------------------------1-------------------------------�-------------------------- NumDays
s 45.00

40.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
_----------------------------1-------------------------------�-------------------------- NumDays
s 35.00

20.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
_----------------------------1-------------------------------�-------------------------- NumDays
4i 45.00

37.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase

Y-----------------------------
PhaseEndDate
-q------------------------------ -------------------------- s 7/9/2026
3/31/2025
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
4i
s 4/2/2026
3/31/2025
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
4i
s 3/21/2024
5/23/2024
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
4i
s 5/23/2024
7/18/2024
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
4i
s 5/21/2026
3/7/2025
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
4i
s 7/25/2024
12/12/2024
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
4i
s 7/25/2024
10/18/2024
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
4i
s 5/22/2026
1/28/2025
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
4i
s 7/26/2024
7/19/2024
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
4i
s 3/22/2024
5/24/2024
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
4i
s 4/3/2026
2/9/2025
tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
4i
s 5/24/2024
10/23/2024
4 tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
7/26/2024
6/3/2024

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblGrading
AcresOfGrading
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblGrading
AcresOfGrading
-----------------------------
tblGrading
-----------------------------
Material Exported
-----------------------------
tblGrading
-----------------------------
Material Exported
-----------------------------
tblGrading
-----------------------------
Material Imported
-----------------------------
tbiLandUse
-----------------------------
Land UseSquareFeet
-----------------------------
tb]LandUse
-----------------------------
LotAcreage
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower

20.00 18.50
----------------------------- 4-------------------------- 111.00
120.00
-----------------------------

0.00 --------------------------
460.00
-----------------------------

0.00 --------------------------
75,000.00
-----------------------------

0.00 --------------------------
460.00
-----------------------------9
682,000.00
--------------------------

0.00 ------------------------------

15.66 --------------------------

15.70 ------------------------------

78.00 --------------------------

37.00 -----------------------------9

81.00 --------------------------

33.00 -----------------------------9
231.00
--------------------------
367.00
-----------------------------9
158.00
--------------------------

36.00 -----------------------------9
158.00
--------------------------

36.00 -----------------------------9

89.00 --------------------------

82.00 -----------------------------

84.00 --------------------------

14.00 -----------------------------9
402.00
--------------------------
376.00
-----------------------------9
130.00
--------------------------

81.00 ------------------------------
132.00
--------------------------

89.00 ------------------------------

80.00 --------------------------

36.00 ------------------------------
247.00
--------------------------
367.00
------------------------------
247.00
--------------------------
367.00
------------------------------
247.00
--------------------------
367.00
-----------------------------9
158.00
--------------------------

36.00 -----------------------------9

97.00 --------------------------

84.00 -----------------------------

97.00 --------------------------

84.00 -----------------------------9

97.00 --------------------------

84.00 -----------------------------9
158.00
--------------------------

36.00 -----------------------------9
187.00
--------------------------
148.00
-----------------------------9
367.00
--------------------------
423.00
----------------------------- --------------------------- 402.00
376.00

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
LoadFactor
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
LoadFactor
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tbiProjectCharacteristics
-----------------------------
PrecipitationFrequency
-----------------------------
tbiProjectCharacteristics
-----------------------------
WindSpeed
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripN umber
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripN umber
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripN umber
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripN umber

97.00 84.00
----------------------------- 4-------------------------- 402.00
376.00
-----------------------------

0.38 --------------------------

0.38 -----------------------------

0.38 --------------------------

0.38 ------------------------------T-------------------------- Off-Highway Trucks
-----------------------------9
--------------------------
Excavators
------------------------------;-------------------------- Off-Highway Trucks
------------------------------ ;-------------------------- Tractors/Load ers/Backhoes
-----------------------------9
--------------------------
Off-Highway Trucks
-----------------------------9
33 --------------------------
8 -----------------------------9

2.2 --------------------------

2.3 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

90.00 --------------------------

89.80 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

18.00 --------------------------

17.50 -----------------------------

23.00 --------------------------

22.50 ----------------------------- ---------------------------

13.00 12.50

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripN umber
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblVehideTrips
ST_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
ST_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
ST_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
SU_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
SU_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
SU_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
WD_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
WD_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
WD_TR

2.0 Emissions Summary

46.00 45.60
----------------------------- 4--------------------------

2.21 160.55
-----------------------------

2.12 --------------------------

0.93 -----------------------------

1.74 --------------------------

0.20 -----------------------------

0.70 --------------------------
160.55
-----------------------------9

2.12 --------------------------

0.93 ------------------------------

1.74 --------------------------

0.20 ------------------------------

9.74 --------------------------
160.55
-----------------------------9

2.12 --------------------------

0.93 ----------------------------- ---------------------------

1.74 0.20

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
Unmitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- Cot
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
I
I
Year
tonslyr
MT/yr
2024 •1 0.3981 1 4.0955 1 3.9134 1 0.0117 1 0.8869 1 0.1357 1 1.0226 1 0.2669 1 0.1256 0.3924 0.0000 1 1,083.850 1 1,083.850 1 0.1687 1 0.0757 1,110.629 4 1 4 1 1 I 3
1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I
2025 •1 2.5959 1 0.6720 1 0.9598 12.8100e- 1 0.1457 1 0.0228 1 0.1685 1 0.0393 1 0.0213 0.0605 0.0000 1 255.5212 1 255.5212 1 0.0327 1 0.0125 260.0495 003 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1
Maximum

2.5959

4.0955

3.9134

0.0117

0.8869

0.1357

1.0226

0.2669

0.1256

0.3924

0.0000
1,083.850
1,083.850

0.1687

0.0757
1,110.629
4 4
3 Mitigated Construction
ROG
NOx CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO e
I
I
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Year
tons/yr
MT/yr
2024 •1 0.3981 1 4.0955 1 3.9134 1 0.0117 1 0.8869 1 0.1357 1 1.0226 1 0.2669 1 0.1256 0.3924 0.0000 1 1,083.849 1 1,083.849 1 0.1687 1 0.0757 i 1,110.628 9 1 9 1 1 1 8
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1
1 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1
2025 •1 2.5959 1 0.6720 1 0.9598 1 2.8100e- 1 0.1457 1 0.0228 1 0.1685 1 0.0393 1 0.0213 0.0605 0.0000 1 255.5211 1 255.5211 1 0.0327 1 0.0125 i 260.0494 003 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1
Maximum

2.5959

4.0955

3.9134

0.0117

0.8869

0.1357

1.0226

0.2669

0.1256

0.3924

0.0000
1,083.849
1,083.849

0.1687

0.0757
1,110.628
9 9
8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Percent

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Reduction
Quarter
Start Date
End Date
Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
1 2-9-2024
5-8-2024

1.0656

1.0656
2 5-9-2024
8-8-2024

0.7782

0.7782
3 8-9-2024
11-8-2024

1.2791

1.2791
4 11-9-2024
2-8-2025

2.0912

2.0912
5 2-9-2025
5-8-2025

2.5098

2.5098
Highest

2.5098

2.5098 1

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Blo- CO2
NBio- CO21
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PMIO
I Total
PM2,5
I
PM2.5
I Total
I
I
I
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Area 2.1864 1.4000e- 0.0157 0.0000 6.0000e- 6.000Oe- 6.000Oe- 6.000Oe- 0.0000 1 0.0305 0.0305 i 8.000Oe- 0.0000 i 0.0325 i i
004 005 005 005 005 005
------------ ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- I --------------- --------------- J ------- J ------- J ------- ------- Energy .1 6.9700e- 0.0633 0.0532 3.8000e- 4.81 OOe- 4.81 OOe- 4.81 OOe- 4.81 OOe- 0.0000 1 520.4118 520.4118 0.0394 5.8800e- i523.1505 003 004 003 003 003 003 003
------------ ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J --------------- -------------- J ------- J ------- J ------- ------- Mobile 1.6264 i 1.7776 16.4623 i 0.0363 4.1460 0.0263 i 4.1723 1.1049 i 0.0244 1.1293 0.0000 3,361.938 3,361.938 i 0.2336 0.1464 i3,411.390 8 i 8 i i i 8
------- - ------- J
Waste I 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 102.1755 0.0000 102.1755 i 6.0384 0.0000 253.1355 ----------- ------- J ------- J -------A ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J -------A ---------- ------- - 1-------J-------J-------J-------
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 00000 38.9613 287.8829 326.8442 i 4.0260 0.0974 456.5295 Total

3.8198

1.8410

16.5312

0.0367

4.1460

0.0312

4.1772

1.1049

0.0293

1.1342
141.1368
4,170.263
4,311.400

10.3375

0.2497
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
1 1
1 9
8 j
14,644.238
8 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
Mitigated Operational
ROG NOx
CO
SS02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM1O
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- Ct02
NBio- CO2
Total Cat CH4
N20 CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
PM1O
Total
PM2.5
I
PM2.5
Total
I I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Area •i 2.1864 i 1.4000e- 0.0157 i 0.0000 i 6.0000e- i 6.0000e- i 6.0000e- 6.000Oe- 0.0000 1 0.0305 0.0305 i 8.0000e- 0.0000 i 0.0325 004 005 005 005 005 005
i i i i i
Energy �� 6.9700e- i 0.0633 0.0532 i 3.8000e- 4.8100e- i 4.8100e- 4.8100e- 4.8100e- 0.0000 1 520.4118 520.4118 i 0.0394 5.8800e- i 523.1505 003 004 003 003 003 003 003
Mobile •1 1.6264 i 1.7776 � 16.4623 i 0.0363 � 4.1460 � 0.0263 i 4.1723 � 1.1049 i 0.0244 1.1293 � 0.0000 i 3,361.938 � 3,361.938 i 0.2336 � 0.1464 i 3,411.390 '�
i i i i • 8 8 i 8
i
Waste �� i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 102.1755 0.0000 102,1755 i 6.0384 0.0000 253.1355 Water �� i � � � � 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 38.9613 � 287.8829 326.8442 i 4.0260 0.0974 456.5295 Total

3.8198

1.8410

16.5312

0.0367

4.1460

0.0312

4.1772

1.1049

0.0293

1.1342
141.1368
4,170.263
4,311.400

10.3375

0.2497
9 8
14,644.238
8 ROG
NOx
Co
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-CO2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
Cote ;
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Percent

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Reduction

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
1 'Demolition/Site Preparation 'Demolition =2/9/2024 15/23/2024 5: 75:
------------------------f----------------------4------------ 4 ------------ 4-------- 4--------- ---------------------- 2 'Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks 'Grading 15/24/2024 17/18/2024 5: 40:
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ..t.------------------------ 4------------------------ I------ - P-e..eve.. I- . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . 3 Grading/Undergroud Utilities :Grading 10/23/2024 12/12/2024 5' 37,

CaEEModVersion: Ca|EEMod.2O204.0 Page 9 of 40 . Date: 1/1S/202412:3OPK4 Exhibit
Downey PmlogkaProject H2 Los Coast County, Annual
EK8FAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle tmAccount for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied -O�SuoGo�o Uumon
.
�Tmnvxmg
.
-O��oo4 �1018�U�4 �
. . .
5�
.
1VV�
.
'-'--'»-'-----------''-'--''-'-
'----''
-'--''-'--''-'--''-'--''-
Building Construction
Construction
-----'~'-----'-'---'''---'''---
'---''-----''-'-'
-'-'''---'''---'''---'''-
Paving
'Paving
�'--'--'�------'''---'-----''----�'--'--'-''--'-''--.-'' -'-''----''----''----''--7
Architectural Coating
:Architectural Coating
:1/28/2025 :3/31/2025

5. 45,
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 18.6
Acres pfPaving: 15-98
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: g; Non -Residential Indoor: 803,528; Non -Residential Outdoor: 267'843;Striped Parking Area: 742 (Architectural Coating — sqft)
Architectural Coating
'
o
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - oumoumn/Sxepmpamuvn
- - - - - -
'
u

0.73 -----------------------------
ounmngCnnvx"ouon
-----------
-_--_
------------
7 -----
---------

0.29 -----------------------------
oumoumn/Sxepmpamuvn
-----------
-_--_
------------
u
-----
---------

0.38 -----------------------------
Off-Site Driveways &Sidewalks
-----------
-_--_
------------
u
--------------

0.38 -----------------------------
ounmngCvnvtr"ouon
-----------
-_--_
------------
u
-----
---------

0.20 -----------------------------
ounmngCnnvx"ouvn
-----------
-_--_
------------
u
-----
---------

0.74 -----------------------------
Gmu|ng8UnuergmvxUtilities
-----------
-_--_
------------
4 --------------

0.38 -----------------------------
pavng
-----------
-_--_
21 ------------
uuo
-----
---------

0.42 -----------------------------
pavng
-----------
-_--_
21 ------------
uuo
-----
---------

0.36 -----------------------------
pavng
-----------
-_--_
21 ------------
uuo
-----
---------

0.38 -----------------------------
Demolition/Site Preparation
-----------
-_--_
------------
u
--------------
040
-----------------------------
Off-Site Driveways &Sidewalks
-----------
-_--_
------------
u
--------------
040
-----------------------------
Gmu|ng8UnuargmvxUtilities
-----------
-_--_
------------
u
--------------
040
-----------------------------
n�axvS�oo u�|mm
------------------
-_--_
. o|
------------
uuo
--------------
o*'
'

0.38 -----------------------------~--------------------------~--------+-------------------------- %
'
|
-----
---------|

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks
•Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
2 8.00,
84:

0.37 - -------------------------
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
;--------------------------
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
J----------------- 4
2;
------------ ¢-------------

8.001
4--------------
84:

0.37 ---------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
----------- _-------------
-----------
Building Construction
'Welders
; 11

8.001
46,

0.45 ---------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
----------- _-------------
-----------
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
+Excavators
21 8.001
36:

0.38 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------
----------- _-------------
------------
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Graders
11 8.001
148:

0.41 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Scrapers
------------ ------------
2;
------------ _-------------

8.001
423:
------------

0.48 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------
----------- _-------------
------------
Demolition/Site Preparation
'Off -Highway Trucks
11 4.001
376:

0.38 ------------------------------------------------------- Off -Site Street Utilites
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
---------- ------------ ------------
2;
------------ _-------------

8.001
84:
-----------

0.37 -------------------------------------------------------+-----------------F----------- r-------------
-----------
Building Construction
;Off -Highway Trucks
1 ;

4.00:
376:

0.38 Trips and VMT
Demolition/Site •
7;

17.50 0.001 1,969,00; 18.50:

10.20:

20.00;LD_Mix
IHDT_Mix
IHHDT
Drnn�r�+inn
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
' �__________-_________
--------------------- I - --- - - - - i - - - - - - - - - ' ,
_____________1__________T__-
- - - - - - -
Grading/Undergroud
9;

22.50- 0.001 9,375,00: 18.50:

10.20;

20.00; LD_Mix
i HDT_Mix
i HHDT
ii+r+n�------------
-
----------------
----------- ----------i---------'
-----
----------T
--------
Off -Site Driveways &
5;

12.50- 0.001 91.00: 18.50:

10.20;

20.00; LD_Mix
i HDT_Mix
: HHDT
----------------r
----- ---------�-------
--------------- I--------i---------'
,
--------
Building Construction
10;
228.00 89.801 0.00: 18.50:

10.20;

20.00; LD_Mix
1 HDT_Mix
i HHDT
---------------
--------i---------4----------------------------------
----------T----------
Paving
6;

15.00- 0.001 0.00: 18.50:

10.20;

20.00;LD_Mix
iHDT_Mix
:HHDT
r
---------------
�
----------------- - I---------- - --------i----------4---------------------------------- ----------

T----------
Architectural Coating
1 ;

45.60- 0.001 0.00:,18.50'

10.20;

20.00; LD_Mix
1 HDT_Mix
i HHDT
' _ Y
e
Off -Site Street Utilites

4. 10.00, 0.00, 0.00, 18.50,

10.20,

20.00, LD Mix
HDT Mix
HHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Demolition/Site Preparation - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
NBio- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10 I PM10
Toiai
PM2,5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 02138 i 0.0000 02138 0.0324 i OMOO 0.0324 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0M00 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ---- -- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------------------------ ------- --------------- Off-Road 0.1099 0.9952 0.9115 i 1.4500e- i 0.0426 0.0426 i 0.0393 0.0393 0.0000 125.9858 125.9858 0.0388 0.0000 126.9561 003
Total

0.1099

0.9952

0.9115

1.4500e-

0.2138

0.0426

0.2563

0.0324

0.0393

0.0717

0.0000
125.9858
125.9858

0.0388

0.0000
126756
003
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOX
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-CO2 NBio-0O2 TotalCO21 CH4 N20 CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
I PM10
Total
PM5
PM2,5
I Total

I I I I
MT/yr
Category I
tonslyr
Hauling 2.0600e- 0.1357 0.0351 5.7000e- 0.0172 8.2000e- 0.0180 4.7100e- 7.8000e- 5.4900e- 0.0000 1 56.6101 56.6101 3.1900e- 8.9900e- 59.3698 003 004 004 003 004 003 003 003
------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ---------------- -------------- - ----- ------- ------- -- ---- Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 2.2700e- 1.7800e- 0.0253 8.000Oe- 9.1900e- 5.000Oe- 9.2400e- 2.4400e- 5.000Oe- 2.4900e- 0.0000 6.9716 6.9716 1.6000e- 1.7000e- 7.0249 i
003 003 005 003 005 003 003 005 003 004 004
Total

4.3300e-

0.1375

0.0604

6.5000e-

0.0264

8.7000e-

0.0272

7.1500e-

8.3000e-

7.9800e-

0.0000

63.5817

3.3500e-

9.1600e-

66.3947
003
004
004
003
004
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Demolition/Site Preparation - 2024
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
Plv[2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
I tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 02138 i 0.0000 02138 0.0324 i OMOO 0.0324 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0M00 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ---- -- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------------------------ ------- --------------- Off-Road 0.1099 0.9952 0.9115 i 1.4500e- i 0.0426 0.0426 i 0.0393 0.0393 0.0000 125.9856 125.9856 0.0388 0.0000 126.9559 003
Total

0.1099

0.9952

0.9115

1.4500e-

0.2138

0.0426

0.2563

0.0324

0.0393

0.0717

0.0000
125.9856
125.9856

0.0388

0.0000
1267559
003
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-CO2 NBio-0O2 TotalCO21 CH4 N20 CO2e
I
I
I
PM10 I PM10
I
Total
PM5
PM2,5
I Total

4.3300e-

0.1375

0.0604

6.5000e-

0.0264

8.7000e-

0.0272

7.1500e-

8.3000e-

7.9800e-

0.0000

63.5817

3.3500e-

9.1600e-

66.3947
003
004
004
003
004
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.3 Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust �i i 0.1303 0.0000 0.1303 0.0673 i 0.0000 0.0673 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 '� i i i i
• i
Off -Road •i 0.0306 0.2927 0.2971 i 4.2000e- i 0.0129 0.0129 i 0.0119 0.0119 0.0000 36.6078 36.6078 0.0118 0.0000 36.9038 004
Total

0.0306

0.2927

0.2971

4.2000e-

0.1303

0.0129

0.1432

0.0673

0.0119

0.0791

0.0000

36.6078

0.0118

0.0000

36.9038
004
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling -i 1.000Oe- 6.2700e- 1.6200e- 3.000Oe- 7.9000e- 4.000Oe- 8.3000e- 2.2000e- 4.000Oe-

2.5000e-

0.0000 i

2.6163 2.6163

1.5000e- 4.2000e- 2.7439
�� 004 003 003 005 004 005 004 004 005
004 .
004 004 i
i
i i i
Vendor .1 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000

0.0000 �

0.0000 � 0.0000
i
� 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000
i i i
Worker 8.6000e- 6.8000e- 9.6500e- 3.000Oe- 3.5000e- 2.000Oe- 3.5200e- 9.3000e- 2.000Oe-

9.5000e-

0.0000 i

2.6559 2.6559
i
i 6.000Oe- 6.000Oe- 2.6762
�i � � i � � i
�
004 004 003 005 003 005 003 004 005
004
005 005
Total 11 9. 004 e 16 003 e- 1 0.0113 16. 005 a 14 003 a 16 005 a 14 003 e I 1.1003 5OOe 16 005 e I 1 003 e 1

0.0000 1 5.2722 1 5.2722 12. 004 a 14 004 e- I 5.4200

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.3 Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks - 2024
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
502
Fugitive
Exhaust PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10 Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust �i i 0.1303 i 0.0000 0.1303 0.0673 i 0.0000 0.0673 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 '� i i i i
• i
Off -Road •i 0.0306 0.2927 0.2971 i 4.2000e- 0.0129 0.0129 i 0.0119 0.0119 0.0000 36.6078 36.6078 0.0118 0.0000 36.9038 004
Total

0.0306

0.2927

0.2971

4.2000e-

0.1303

0.0129

0.1432

0.0673

0.0119

0.0791

0.0000

36.6078

0.0118

0.0000

36.9038
004
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling -i 1.000Oe- 6.2700e- 1.6200e- 3.000Oe- 7.9000e- 4.000Oe- 8.3000e- 2.2000e- 4.000Oe-

2.5000e-

0.0000 i

2.6163 2.6163

1.5000e- 4.2000e- 2.7439
�� 004 003 003 005 004 005 004 004 005
004 .
004 004 i
i
i i i
Vendor .1 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 i 0.0000

0.0000 �

0.0000 � 0.0000
i
� 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000
i i i
Worker 8.6000e- 6.8000e- 9.6500e- 3.000Oe- 3.5000e- 2.000Oe- 3.5200e- 9.3000e- 2.000Oe-

9.5000e-

0.0000 i

0.0000 1 5.2722 1 5.2722 12. 004 a 14 004 e- I 5.4200

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4 Grading/Undergroud Utilities - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
I tonslyr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.1795 i 0.0000 0.1795 0.0688 i OMOO 0M88 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0M00 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ---- -- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------------------------ ------- --------------- Off-Road 0.0722 0.6913 0.6255 i 1.2500e- i 0.0294 0.0294 i 0.0271 0.0271 0.0000 109.3919 109.3919 0.0354 0.0000 110.2764 003
Total

0.0722

0.6913

0.6255

1.2500e-

0.1795

0.0294

0.2090

0.0688

0.0271

0.0959

0.0000
109.3919
109.3919

0.0354

0.0000
1107764
003
1 j
1 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOX
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
I PM10
Total
PM5
PM2,5
I Total
I I I
MT/yr
Category I
tonslyr
Hauling 9.8200e- 0.6463 0.1670 2.7000e- 0.0817 3.8900e- 0.0856 0.0224 3.7200e- 0,0261 a0000 1 269.5375 269.5375 0.0152 0.0428 282.6774 003 003 003 003
------------ ------- ------- J -------- J -------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J --------------- ------- ------- ------- Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4400e- 1.1300e- 0.0161 5.000Oe- 5.8300e- 3.000Oe- 5.8600e- 1.5500e- 3.000Oe- 1.5800e- 0.0000 1 4.4220 4.4220 1.000Oe- 1.1000e- 4.4558 i
003 003 005 003 005 003 003 005 003 004 004

0.0113
0-6474

0.1831

2.75OOe-

0.0875

3.9200e-

0.0915

0.0240

3.7500e-

0.0277

0.0000
273.9595
273.9595

0.0153

0.0429
287.1332
1771�
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4 Grading/Undergroud Utilities - 2024
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
Plv[2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
I tons/yr
MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.1795 i 0.0000 0.1795 0.0688 i OMOO 0M88 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0M00 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ---- -- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------------------------ ------- --------------- Off-Road 0.0722 0.6913 0.6255 i 1.2500e- i 0.0294 0.0294 i 0.0271 0.0271 0.0000 109.3918 109.3918 0.0354 0.0000 110.2762 003
Total

0.0722

0.6913

0.6255

1.2500e-

0.1795

0.0294

0.2090

0.0688

0.0271

0.0959

0.0000
109.3918
109.3918

0.0354

0.0000
1107762
003
1 j
1 Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
I
I
I
PM10 I PM10
I
Total
PM5
PM2,5
I Total
I I I
MT/yr
Category I
tonslyr
Hauling 9.8200e- 0.6463 0.1670 2.7000e- 0.0817 3.8900e- 0.0856 0.0224 3.7200e- 0,0261 a0000 1 269.5375 269.5375 0.0152 0.0428 282.6774 003 003 003 003
------------ ------- ------- J -------- J -------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J --------------- ------- ------- ------- Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4400e- 1.1300e- 0.0161 5.000Oe- 5.8300e- 3.000Oe- 5.8600e- 1.5500e- 3.000Oe- 1.5800e- 0.0000 1 4.4220 4.4220 1.000Oe- 1.1000e- 4.4558 i
003 003 005 003 005 003 003 005 003 004 004

0.0113
0-6474

0.1831

2.75OOe-

0.0875

3.9200e-

0.0915

0.0240

3.7500e-

0.0277

0.0000
273.9595
273.9595

0.0153

0.0429
287.1332
1771�
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.5 Off -Site Street Utilites - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio COS
NBio- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM10
I
I PM10
I Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
I Total
I
I
Category
tonslyr
MT/yr
Off -Road 0.0225 02101 0.2951 i 4.000Oe- 8.6400e- 8.6400e- i 7.9500e- 7.9500e- 0.0000 1 352195 35.2195 0.0114 0.0000 35.5043 004 003 003 003 003
Total

0.0225

0.2101

0.2951

4.000Oe-

8.6400e-

7.9500e-

0.0000

35.2195
351195

0.0114

0.0000

75.5043
004
003
003
003
003
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling :1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
------------- 1 -------
------- -------
------- -------- ------- -------
-------
-------------------------------
------
-------
-------
-------
Vendor :1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
Worker 1.7300e- 1.3600e-

0.0193

6.000Oe- 7.000Oe- 4.000Oe- 7.0400e-

1.8600e-

4.000Oe-

1.8900e-

0.0000

5.3117 5.3117

1.2000e-

1.3000e-

5.3523
i
003
003
005 003 005
003
003
005
003
004
004
Total
11 1.7300e-

1.3600e-

0.0193

6.000Oe-

7.000Oe-

4.000Oe-

7.0400e-

1.8600e-

4.000Oe-

1.8900e-

0.0000

5.3117

1.2000e-

1.3000e-

5.3523
003
003
005
003
005
003
003
005
003
004
004

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.5 Off -Site Street Utilites - 2024
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio COS
NBio- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM10
I
I PM10
I Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
I Total
I
I
Category
tonslyr
MT/yr
Off -Road 0.0225 02101 0.2951 i 4.000Oe- i 8.6400e- 8.6400e- i 7.9500e- 7.9500e- 0.0000 1 352195 35.2195 0.0114 0.0000 35.5043 004 003 003 003 003
Total

0.0225

0.2101

0.2951

4.000Oe-

8.6400e-

7.9500e-

0.0000

35.2195
351195

0.0114

0.0000

75.5043
004
003
003
003
003
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling :1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
------------- 1 -------
------- -------
------- -------- ------- -------
-------
-------------------------------
------
-------
-------
-------
Vendor :1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
Worker 1.7300e- 1.3600e-

0.0193

6.000Oe- 7.000Oe- 4.000Oe- 7.0400e-

1.8600e-

4.000Oe-

1.8900e-

0.0000

5.3117 5.3117

1.2000e-

1.3000e-

5.3523
i
003
003
005 003 005
003
003
005
003
004
004
Total
11 1.7300e-

1.3600e-

0.0193

6.000Oe-

7.000Oe-

4.000Oe-

7.0400e-

1.8600e-

4.000Oe-

1.8900e-

0.0000

5.3117

1.2000e-

1.3000e-

5.3523
003
003
005
003
005
003
003
005
003
004
004

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Building Construction - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
Plv[2.5
NBio- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10
I
I PM10
Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road 0.0913 07894 0.8989 i 1.7400e- i 0.0346 0.0346 i 0.0323 0.0323 0.0000 148,9877 148.9877 0.0445 0.0000 150.0994 003
Total

0.0913

0.7894

0.8989

1.7400e-

0.0346

0.0323

0.000;
148.9877
148.9877

0.0445

0.0000
150.3994
003
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling :1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
------------- 1 -------
Vendor :1 6.9800e-
------- -------

0.2871

0.0918
------- --------

1.4000e-
------- -------

0.0499 1.5100e-
-------

0.0514 0.0144
-------------------------------
i 1.4400e-

0.0158
■ 0.0000
------ ------- ------- -------
136.6267 136.6267 4.6500e- 0.0196 142.5912
003
003
003
003
■
003
Worker 0.0464

0.0365

0.5195

1.5600e-

0.1883 1.0700e-

0.1894 0.0500
i 9.9000e-

0.0509

0.0000
142.9061 142.9061 3.2000e- 3.4000e- 143.9980
003
003
004
■
003 003
Total

0.0534 j

0.3236

0.6113

2.9600e-

0.2382

2.5800e-

0.2408
j 0.0643
1 2.4300e-
1 0.0668

0.0000
279.5328
i
279.5328
i
j 7.8500e-

0.0230
27-58-921
003
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Building Construction - 2024
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
Plv[2.5
NBio- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10
I
I PM10
Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road 0.0913 07894 0.8989 i 1.7400e- i 0.0346 0.0346 i 0.0323 0.0323 0.0000 148,9875 148.9875 0.0445 0.0000 150.0992 003
Total

0.0913

0.7894

0.8989

1.7400e-

0.0346

0.0323

0.000;
148.9875
148.9875

0.0445

0.0000
150.3992
003
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling :1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
------------- 1 -------
Vendor :1 6.9800e-
------- -------

0.2871

0.0918
------- --------

1.4000e-
------- -------

0.0499 1.5100e-
-------

0.0514 0.0144
-------------------------------
i 1.4400e-

0.0158
■ 0.0000
------ ------- ------- -------
136.6267 136.6267 4.6500e- 0.0196 142.5912
003
003
003
003
■
003
Worker 0.0464

0.0365

0.5195

1.5600e-

0.1883 1.0700e-

0.1894 0.0500
i 9.9000e-

0.0509

0.0000
142.9061 142.9061 3.2000e- 3.4000e- 143.9980
003
003
004
■
003 003
Total

0.0534 j

0.3236

0.6113

2.9600e-

0.2382

2.5800e-

0.2408
j 0.0643
1 2.4300e-
1 0.0668

0.0000
279.5328
i
279.5328
i
j 7.8500e-

0.0230
27-58-921
003
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Building Construction - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
Plv[2.5
NBio- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
I
I PM10
Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road 0.0465 03938 0.4800 i 9.5000e- 0.0163 0.0163 i 0.0152 0.0152 0.0000 80.8120 80.8120 0M41 0.0000 81.4138 004
Total

0.0465

0.3938

0.4800

9.5000e-

0.0163

0.0152

0.0000

80.8120

0.0241

0.0000

81.4138
004
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling :1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000
------------- 1 -------
Vendor 3.6600e-
------- -------

0.1550

0.0488
------- --------

7.4000e-
------- -------

0.0271 8.2000e-
-------

0.0279 7.7900e-
-------------------------------

7.9000e-

8.5800e-

0.0000
------

72.7683 72.7683
------- -------

2.5400e- 0.0105
-------

75.9486
:1
i
: 1 003
004
004
003
004
003
003
------------ -------
------- -------
------- -------
------- -------
-------
----------------
a -------
-------
------- ---------------
Worker 0.0236

0.0178

0.2620

8.2000e-

0.1021

5.5000e-

0.1027

0.0271

5.1000e-

0.0276

0.0000

74.8746

1.5600e- 1.7200e-

75.4256
i
004
004
004
003 003
Total

0.0273

0.1727

0.3108

1.5600e-

0.1292

1.3700e-

0.1306

0.0349

1.3000e-

0.0362

0.0000
147.6428
14 .6428

4.1000e-

0.0122
151.3742
003
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Building Construction - 2025
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
Plv[2.5
NBio- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
I
I PM10
Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Off -Road 0.0465 03938 0.4800 i 9.5000e- i 0.0163 0.0163 i 0.0152 0.0152 0.0000 80.8119 80.8119 0M41 0.0000 81.4137 004
Total

0.0465

0.3938

0.4800

9.5000e-

0.0163

0.0152

0.0000

80.8119

0.0241

0.0000

81.4137
004
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling :1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000
------------- 1 -------
Vendor 3.6600e-
------- -------

0.1550

0.0488
------- --------

7.4000e-
------- -------

0.0271 8.2000e-
-------

0.0279 7.7900e-
-------------------------------

7.9000e-

8.5800e-

0.0000
------

72.7683 72.7683
------- -------

2.5400e- 0.0105
-------

75.9486
:1
i
: 1 003
004
004
003
004
003
003
------------ -------
------- -------
------- -------
------- -------
-------
----------------
a -------
-------
------- ---------------
Worker 0.0236

0.0178

0.2620

8.2000e-

0.1021

5.5000e-

0.1027

0.0271

5.1000e-

0.0276

0.0000

74.8746

1.5600e- 1.7200e-

75.4256
i
004
004
004
003 003
Total

0.0273

0.1727

0.3108

1.5600e-

0.1292

1.3700e-

0.1306

0.0349

1.3000e-

0.0362

0.0000
147.6428
14 .6428

4.1000e-

0.0122
151.3742
003
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.7 Paving - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10 ;
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio COS
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
PM10
Total :

PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tonslyr
MTlyr
Off -Road •i 9.2400e- 0.0828 0.1012 i 1.4000e- 4.4200e- 4.4200e- i 4.0700e- 4.0700e- 0.0000 12.2727 12.2727 3.9700e- 0.0000 12.3719 003 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i
i i i i
Paving �i 0.0209 � � i � i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total

0.0302

0.0828

0.1012

1.4000e-

4.4200e-

4.0700e-

0.0000

12.2727

3.9700e-

0.0000

12.3719
004
003
003
003
003
003
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling -1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 MOW

0.0000

0.0000
MOW

0.0000
MOW
i 0.0000

0.0000
MOW

0.0000
a0000
Vendor :1 0.0000 �

0.0000
� 0.0000
i
i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 �

0.0000
� 0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000
� 0.0000
� 0.0000 �

0.0000
i
� 0.0000
� 0.0000

0.0000
Worker 4.8000e- 3.7000e-

5.3900e-
i i

2.000Oe- 2.1000e- 1.000Oe- 2.1100e-

5.6000e-

1.000Oe-

5.7000e-

0.0000

1.5394 1.5394

3.000Oe-

4.000Oe-

1.5507
i
i
004
,i �
004
003
�
005 003 005
i � � �
003
004
�
005
i
004
,
`
� �
� 005
005
Total
11 4.8000e-

3.7000e-

5.3900e-

2.000Oe-

2.1000e-

1.000Oe-

2.1100e-

5.6000e-

1.000Oe-

5.7000e-

0.0000

1.5394

3.000Oe-

4.000Oe-

1.5507
004
004
003
005
003
005
003
004
005
004
005
005

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.7 Paving - 2025
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10 ;
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio COS
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
PM10
Total :

PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tonslyr
MTlyr
Off -Road •i 9.2400e- 0.0828 0.1012 i 1.4000e- i 4.4200e- 4.4200e- i 4.0700e- 4.0700e- 0.0000 12.2727 12.2727 3.9700e- 0.0000 12.3719 003 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 i
'� i i i i
• i
i i i i
Paving i 0.0209 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total

0.0302

0.0828

0.1012

1.4000e-

4.4200e-

4.0700e-

0.0000

12.2727

3.9700e-

0.0000

12.3719
004
003
003
003
003
003
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling -1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 MOW

0.0000

0.0000
MOW

0.0000
MOW
i 0.0000

0.0000
MOW

0.0000
a0000
Vendor :1 0.0000 �

0.0000
� 0.0000
i
i 0.0000 � 0.0000 � 0.0000 �

0.0000
� 0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000
� 0.0000
� 0.0000 �

0.0000
i
� 0.0000
� 0.0000

0.0000
Worker 4.8000e- 3.7000e-

5.3900e-
i i

2.000Oe- 2.1000e- 1.000Oe- 2.1100e-

5.6000e-

1.000Oe-

5.7000e-

0.0000

1.5394 1.5394

3.000Oe-

4.000Oe-

1.5507
i
i
004
,i �
004
003
�
005 003 005
i � � �
003
004
�
005
i
004
,
`
� �
� 005
005
Total
11 4.8000e-

3.7000e-

5.3900e-

2.000Oe-

2.1000e-

1.000Oe-

2.1100e-

5.6000e-

1.000Oe-

5.7000e-

0.0000

1.5394

3.000Oe-

4.000Oe-

1.5507
004
004
003
005
003
005
003
004
005
004
005
005

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.8 Architectural Coating - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10 ;
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio COS
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total :

PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tonslyr
MTlyr
Archit. Coating �i 2.4846 i i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 •
Off -Road •i 3.4800e- 0.0199 0.0256 i 4.000Oe- i 6.1000e- 6.1000e- i 6.1000e- 6.1000e- 0.0000 2.7251 2.7251 i 2.8000e- 0.0000 2.7322 003 005 004 004 004 004 . 004 i
Total

2.4881

0.0199

0.0256

4.000Oe-

6.1000e-

0.0000

2.7251

2.8000e-

0.0000

2.7322
005
004
004
004
004
004
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling -1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
MOW

0.0000

0.0000
MOW

0.0000
MOW
i 0.0000

0.0000
MOW

0.0000
a0000
Vendor :1 0.0000 �

0.0000 �

0.0000
i
i 0.0000 �

0.0000
� 0.0000 �

0.0000
� 0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000
� 0.0000
� 0.0000 �

0.0000
i
� 0.0000
� 0.0000

0.0000
Worker 3.3200e- 2.5000e-

0.0368
i 1.1000e-
i

0.0144 8.000Oe-

0.0144 3.8100e-

7.000Oe-

3.8800e-

0.0000

10.5292 10.5292

2.2000e-

2.4000e-

10.6067
i
i
003
003
004
005
003
005
003
004
004
Total
11 3.3200e-

2.5000e-

0.0368

1.1000e-

0.0144

8.000Oe-

0.0144

3.8100e-

7.000Oe-

3.8800e-

0.0000

10.5292

2.2000e-

2.4000e-

10.6067
003
003
004
005
003
005
003
004
004

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.8 Architectural Coating - 2025
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10 ;
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio COS
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total :

PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
tonslyr
MTlyr
Archit. Coating �i 2.4846 i i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 •
Off -Road •i 3.48OOe- 0.0199 0.0256 i 4.000Oe- 6.1000e- 6.1000e- i 6.1000e- 6.1000e- 0.0000 2.7251 2.7251 2.8000e- 0.0000 2.7322 003 005 004 004 004 004 . 004 i
Total

2.4881

0.0199

0.0256

4.000Oe-

6.1000e-

0.0000

2.7251

2.8000e-

0.0000

2.7322
005
004
004
004
004
004
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling -1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
MOW

0.0000

0.0000
MOW

0.0000

0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000
MOW

0.0000
a0000
Vendor :1 0.0000 �

0.0000 �

0.0000
i
i 0.0000 �

0.0000
� 0.0000 �

0.0000
� 0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000
� 0.0000
� 0.0000 �

0.0000
i
� 0.0000
� 0.0000

0.0000
Worker 3.3200e- 2.5000e-

0.0368
i 1.1000e-
i

0.0144 8.000Oe-

0.0144 3.8100e-

7.000Oe-

3.8800e-

0.0000

10.5292 10.5292

2.2000e-

2.4000e-

10.6067
i
i
003
003
004
005
003
005
003
004
004
Total
11 3.3200e-

2.5000e-

0.0368

1.1000e-

0.0144

8.000Oe-

0.0144

3.8100e-

7.000Oe-

3.8800e-

0.0000

10.5292

2.2000e-

2.4000e-

10.6067
003
003
004
005
003
005
003
004
004

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
ROG
NOx
I CO 1 802
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive!
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2;5
PM2,5
Total
Sio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2 CH4
I N20
I CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Mitigated
+i 1.6264 1.7776 1 16.4623 i 0.0363 4.1460 1 0.0263

4.1723

1.1049
i 0.0244

1.1293
+ 0.0000 3,361.938 3,361.938 i 0.2336

0.1464 3,411.390
g , 8
8 - - - - - - - - - - - -------------- --------------- F----------------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- +--------------4---------------r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -¢-------------- +--------------+--------------+--------------r - - - - - - - Unmitigated

1.6264 1.7776 16.4623 0.0363 4.1460 0.0263

4.1723

1.1049

0.0244

1.1293

0.0000 3,361.938 3,361.938 - 0.2336

0.1464 3,411.390
8 8
8 4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate
Unmitigated
Mitigated
Land Use :

Weekday
Saturday
Sunday
Annual VMT
Annual UMT
General Office Building ;
.......... ............................-
3,211.00
; 3,211.00
-;-----------t
3211.00
Y
10,344,111
- - --------------------------------
10,344,111
Other Asphalt Surfaces
...................................................

0.00 , 0.00
-_________

0.00 ----------
----------------------
------------------------
Parking Lot ;

0.00 ; 0.00

0.00 Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail ;
......................................------------

24.90 ; 24.90
----------T--------------------------------------------------------------

24.90 106,712
106,712
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail ;

97.78 97.78

97.78 419,057
419,057
Total
3,333.68
3,333.68
3,333.68
10,869,880
10,869,880

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles
Trip %
Trip Purpose %
Land Use
H-W or C-W H-S or -C
H-t3 or C-NW
H-W or C-W
', H-S or C-C
H-0 or C-NW Primary
Diverted
Pass -by
General Office Building 16.60 8.40

6.90 1 33.00 I 48.00 19.00 77
19 4
.......................�----------�---------T---------- --------- -------- �--------T-------------------- ---------- -----------------
Other Asphalt Surfaces

16.60 8.40

6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0
0 0

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Parking Lot ; 16.60 8.40 6.90 i 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
..............-------------------- ------
Refrigerated Warehouse -No ; 16.60 8.40 1 6.90 59.00 I 0.00 41.00 92 5 3 Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No 16.60 8.40 6.90 59.00 0.00 41.00 92 5 3

4.4 Fleet Mix
General Office Building

0.537891+

0.065289:

0.189998:

0.126515:

0.023567:

0.006518:

0.011114:

0.008084:

0.000933:

0.000591:

0.025474:

0.0007081 0.003318
Other Asphalt Surfaces

0.537891+

0.065289:

0.189998:

0.126515:

0.023567:

0.006518:

0.011114:

0.008084:

0.000933:

0.000591

0.025474:

0.0007081 0.003318
Parking Lot

0.537891+

0.065289:

0.189998:

0.126515:

0.023567:

0.006518:

0.011114:

0.008084:

0.000933:

0.000591

0.025474:

0.0007081 0.003318
Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail •

0.537891+

0.065289:

0.189998:

0.126515:

0.023567:

0.006518:

0.011114:

0.008084:

0.000933:

0.000591

0.025474:

0.0007081 0.003318
e
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No

0.537891-

0.065289•

0.189998-

0.126515•

0.023567-

0.006518,

0.011114-

0.008084,

0.000933-

0.000591,

0.025474,

0.000708, 0.003318
Rail

5.0 Energy Detail
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Electricity
�i 1
i

0.0000

0.0000
i 451.4561 451.4561 0.0381 i 4.6200e- 453.7851
Mitigated
.1 I I
I I
I
I I
1 .

I I I I 003 1
I 1
i I
I
I 1
i
i
II II
Electricity

0.0000

0.0000
451.4561II

0.0381

4.6200e- 453.7851
451.4561
Unmitigated
.1 I I
I I
I
I I
I
.

I I I I 003 1
I I
ry-------
I I
--

T - - - - --
NaturalGas
I 1
9 6.9700e- 1 0.0633 I
1 I

0.0532 1 3.8000e- I
1 1 4.8100e-
I 1
1 4.8100e- I
1 1 4.8100e-

4.8100e-

0.0000

I I I I
1 68.9557 I 68.9557 1 1.3200e- 1 1.2600e- 69.3654
Mitigated
: 003 1 I
i 004 1
1 003
I 003 I
i 003
003 .

I I 003 � 003
- - - - - - - - - -
� I
- --------------- }--------------}--------------}--------------}--------------}--------------}--------------4---------------4---------------* i
- - - - - - - +
- - - - - - -
I 1
'-------------- --------------- }--------------4---------------r - - - - - - NaturalGas

6.9700e- 0.0633

0.0532 - 3.8000e- -
- 4.8100e-

4.8100e- -
- 4.8100e-

4.8100e-

0.0000

68.9557 - 68.9557 1.3200e- - 1.2600e- 69.3654
Unmitigated
003
004
003
003
003
003
003 003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGa
I FLOG NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
Ct?2e
s Use
I
PM10
I
PM10
I
Total
PM2m5
I
PM2.5
Total
I
Land Use
kBTU/yr
tons/yr
MT/yr
General Office
340600 *1 1.8400e- 1 0.0167 1 0.0140 1 1.000Oe- 1 1 1.2700e- 1 1.2700e- 1 1 1.2700e- 1.2700e- 0.0000 1 18.1757 1 18,1757 1 3.5000e- 1 3.3000e- 18.2837 Building
003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 i 1 1 004 004 1 1 1
1 . I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 . 1
r--_--_�1_______I * *_______
Other Asphalt
1 1 1 I I 1 1 � 1 I 1 1
0 *1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 i 0.0000 Surfaces
1 Parking Lot
I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1
� 0 *1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 i I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1
------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- - ------- ------- ------- ------- Refrigerated
1 223119 9 1.2000e- 1 0.0109 1 9.1900e- 1 7.000Oe- 1 1 8.3000e- 1 8.3000e- 1 1 8.3000e- 1 8.3000e- r 0.0000 1 11.9065 1 11.9065 1 2.3000e- 1 2.2000e- 11.9772 Warehouse -No
003 003 005 004 004 004 004 * i 004 004
Rail
- - - - - - - - - - -
1 p1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 } I I 1 1
- - - - - -41-------------- i-------------- i-------------- i-------------- i-------------- i-------------- i-------------- i -------------- i-------------- 4-------- i - - - - - - - I -------------- i-------------- i-------------- i + - - - - - - - Unrefrigerated
e 728461 h 3.9300e- 1 0.0357 1 0.0300 1 2.1000e- 1 1 2.7100e- 1 2.71OOe- 1 1 2.71OOe- 1 2.71OOe- r 0.0000 1 38.8735 1 38.8735 1 7.5000e- 1 7.1000e- 39.1045 Warehouse -No
1 003 004 003 003 003 i 003 } 004 004
Rail
Total

6.9700e-

0.0634

0.0532

3.8000e-

4.8100e-

0.0000

68.9556

1.3300e-

1.2600e-

69.3654
003
j
j
004
j
j
003
j
003
003
003
j
j
j
003
j
003
j
j

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Mitigated
NaturalGa
I ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
Ct?2e
s Use
I
PM10
I
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
I
PM2.5
Total
I
Land Use
kBTU/yr
tons/yr
MT/yr
General Office
340600 *1 1.8400e- 1 0.0167 1 0.0140 1 1.000Oe- 1 1 1.2700e- 1 1.2700e- 1 1 1.2700e- 1.2700e- 0.0000 1 18.1757 1 18,1757 1 3.5000e- 1 3.3000e- i 18.2837 Building
003 1 1 1 004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 1 i 1 1 1 004 004 1 1 . I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 . 1
Other Asphalt
r--_--_�1_______I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 � * 1 I 1 1 *_______
0 *1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
1 Parking Lot
I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1
� 0 *1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 i I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1
------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- - ------- ------- ------- ------- Refrigerated
1 223119 9 1.2000e- 1 0.0109 1 9.1900e- 1 7.000Oe- 1 1 8.3000e- 1 8.3000e- 1 1 8.3000e- 1 8.3000e- r 0.0000 1 11.9065 1 11.9065 1 2.3000e- 1 2.2000e- 11.9772 Warehouse -No
003 003 005 004 004 004 004 * i 004 004
Rail
- - - - - - - - - - -
1 p1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 } I I 1 1
- - - - - -41-------------- i-------------- i-------------- i-------------- i-------------- i-------------- i-------------- i -------------- i-------------- 4-------- i - - - - - - - I -------------- i-------------- i-------------- i + - - - - - - - Unrefrigerated
e 728461 h 3.9300e- 1 0.0357 1 0.0300 1 2.1000e- 1 1 2.7100e- 1 2.71OOe- 1 1 2.71OOe- 1 2.71OOe- r 0.0000 1 38.8735 1 38.8735 1 7.5000e- 1 7.1000e- 39.1045 Warehouse -No
1 003 004 003 003 003 i 003 } 004 004
Rail
Total

6.9700e-

0.0634

0.0532

3.8000e-

4.8100e-

0.0000

68.9556

1.3300e-

1.2600e-

69.3654
003
j
j
004
j
j
003
j
003
003
003
j
j
j
003
j
003
j
j

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Unmitigated
Electricity Total CO2
CH4
N20
C0e
Use
I
I
Land Use
kWh✓yr MTlyr
General Office
193200 *:� � 34.2632 i 2.8900e- 3.5000e- 34.4399
Building
l 003 004 1
i
Other Asphalt
e 0 •1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Surfaces
i
Parking Lot
0 *1 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
i--------�
Refrigerated
------
e 773283 137.1383 i 0.0116 1.4000e- 137.8458
Warehouse -No
003
Rail
•i i
- - - - - - - - - - -
Unrefrigerated
- - - - - - 41-------------- i-------------- t + - - - - - - - e 1.57915e h 280.0547 1 0.0236 i 2.8700e- 281.4994
Warehouse -No
i +006 003
Rail
$� i
Total
451.4561

0.0381

4.6200e-
453.7851
11 j
003
j
j

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Mitigated
Electricity Total CO2
CH4
N20
C0e
Use
I
I
I
Land Use
kWhlyr MT/yr
General Office
193200 *:� � 34.2632 i 2.8900e- 3.5000e- 34.4399
Building
l 003 004 1
i
Other Asphalt
e 0 *1 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Surfaces
i
Parking Lot
0 •1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
i--------�
Refrigerated
------
e 773283 137.1383 i 0.0116 1.4000e- 137.8458
Warehouse -No
003
Rail
- - - - - - - - - - -
•i i
- - - - - - 41-------------- i-------------- t + - - - - - - - Unrefrigerated
e 1.57915e h 280.0547 1 0.0236 i 2.8700e- 281.4994
Warehouse -No
i +006 1: 003
Rail
$� i
Total
451.4561

0.0381

4.6200e-
453.7851
j
003
j
j

6.0 Area Detail

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 34 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG I NOx
CO
I S02
Fugitive
PMIO
Exhaust
I PM10
PMIO
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
I Total
Bia CO2
NBio- CO21
Total CO2
I CH4
I N20
1 CO2o
Category
tonslyr
MT/yr
Mitigated 2.1864 i 1.4000e-

0.0157 0.0000 6.00OOe- i 6.00OOe-

6.00OOe-

6.00OOe- 0.0000 0.0305 0.0305 i 8.00OOe- 0.0000 0.0325
004
005 005
005
005
005
--------- - -------------- 4 --------------- 4 --------------- I --------------- 4 --------------- 11 -------------- 11 -------------- 4 --------------- 4 --------------- --------------- -------------- --------------- I --------------- 4 --------------- ------- Unmitigated

2.1864 1.4000e-
- 0.0157 0.0000 - - 6.00OOe- - 6.00OOe- -
- 6.00OOe-

6.00OOe- 0.0000 0.0305 0.0305 8.00OOe- - 0.0000 0.0325
004
005 005
005
005
005

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
ROG NOx CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PMIO
Fugitive
Exhaust PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PMIO
I PMIO
Total
PM2.5
PMZ5 Total
Li
I
I
Subcategory
tonslyr
MT/yr
Architectural 0.2485 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating

J J A J J J J A J
---- -------- ---- -- -------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- --------------- --- ------- _J ------- ------ C.ns.m.,- -1 1.9365 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 - 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products

J J J J J J J J J J J
------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- Landscaping 1.4400e- 1.4000e- 0.0157 0.0000 6.00OOe- 6.00OOe- 6.00OOe- 6.00OOe- 0.0000 0.0305 0.0305 8.00OOe- 0.0000 0.0325 :•1
003 004 005 005 005 005 005
Total

2.1864

1.4000e-

0.0157

0.0000

6.00OOe-

0.0000

0.0305

8.00OOe-

0.0000

0.0325
004
005
005
005
005
005

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 35 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Mitigated
ROG
Nox
Co
S02 :

Fugitive
Exhaust
PM1O
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-Cot
NBio- Cot
Total Co2 CH4
N20 Cote
PM10
PM1O
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I I
Subcategory
tonslyr
MT/yr
Architectural 0.2485 i i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 0.0000 i 0.0000 Coating
i i i i i
Consumer •i 1.9365 i i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Products
Landscaping •i 1.4400e- i 1.4000e- 0.0157 i 0.0000 6.00OOe- i 6.00OOe- 6.00OOe- 6.00OOe- 0.0000 i 0.0305 0.0305 i 8.00OOe- 0.0000 i 0.0325 003 004 005 005 005 005 005
Total

2.1864

1.4000e-

0.0157

0.0000

6.00OOe-

0.0000

0.0305

8.00OOe-

0.0000

0.0325
004
005
005
005
005
005

7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 36 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Total CO2
CH4 I N20
I CO2ei
Category
MT/yr
Mitigated 326.8442 i 4.0260 0.0974 1 456.5295
-----------�� + +--------------*-------
Unmitigated •• 326.8442 4.0260 0.0974 456.5295

7.2 Water by Land Use
Unmitigated
Indoor/tout
Total CO2
CH4
N20 CO2e
door Use
I I
Land Use
Mgal
MT/yr
General Office
1 3.55467 / •I 13.6289 0.1169 2.8600e- 1 17.4042
Building

2.17867 003
----------
t------:i-------J----------------�
Other Asphalt
i 0/0 -I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000
Surfaces
I ------- :i------- J------- '------- -------
Parking Lot
i 0/0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000
•1 1 1
_ -
I I
------�i-------i-------i-------- -------
Refrigerated
1 6.19519 / -I 16.2715 i 0.2031 1 4.9100e- 22.8125
Warehouse -No
i 0 003
Rail
;1
---- ----I
------_------------- -
Unrefrigerated
1113.058 / v 296.9438 3.7060 0.0897 416.3129
�1
Warehouse -No
I 0 9 � �
Rail
1 ;1
Total
326.8442

4.0260

0.0974
456.5295

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 37 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

7.2 Water by Land Use
Mitigated
IndoorlOut
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
door Use
I
Land Use
Mgal
MT/yr
General Office

3.55467 / ■i 13.6289 0.1169 2.8600e- i 17.4042
Building
i 2A7867 003 i
Other Asphalt
0/0 ■1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Surfaces
Parking Lot
0 / 0 ■1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
i-------
Refrigerated

6.195191 S1 16.2715 1 0.2031 1 4.9100e- 22.8125
Warehouse -No
i 0 003
Rail
I
- - - - - - - - - - -
Unrefrigerated
- - - - - - it-------------- i------------- i + -
111058 / 11 296.9438 3.7060 0.0897 416.3129
Warehouse -No
i 0
Rail
Total
326.8442
j 4.0260
j 0.0974
j 456.5295

8.0 Waste Detail

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 38 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied CategoryNear
Mitigated -i 102.1755 6.0384 1 0.0000 253.1355
--------------- --------------- - - - - - -
Unmitigated 102.1755 6.0384 0.0000 253.1355

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Unmitigated
Waste Total CO2
e
CH4
N20
CO2e
Disposed
I
I
Land Use
tons MT/yr
General Office
1 18.6 :1 3.7756 0.2231 i 0.0000 9.3540
Building
------------
------- ------- ------- ------- -------
Other Asphalt
0 wi 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000
Surfaces
------------
------- ------- J ------- J ---------------
Parking Lot
0 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000
-----------
------- ------- -------- -------
Refrigerated

25.18 -•1 5.1113 0.3021 i 0.0000 12.6631
Warehouse -No
Rail
------------------
- I -------------- -------------- -------------- - - - - - - Unrefrigerated
459.57 93.2886 5.5132 i 0.0000 231.1185
Warehouse -No
i
Rail
Total
102.1755

6.0384

0.0000
253.1355

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 39 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Mitigated
Waste
Total CO2
CH4
N20 +
CO2e
Disposed
Land UseJ
tons`
MTlyr
General Office
i 18.6 :1 3.7756 0.2231 1 0.0000 9.3540
Building
I
!� '-------'-------
Other Asphalt
0 •1 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000
Surfaces
I
'-------'-------
Parking Lot
0 •l 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000
-----------r------�i-------i-------i-
*-------
Refrigerated

25.18 ;i 5.1113 0.3021 i 0.0000 12.6631
Warehouse -No
Rail
- +t-------------- t------------- i +
Unrefrigerated
459.57 9 93.2886 1 5.5132 1 0.0000 231,1185
Warehouse -No
0 Rail
Total
102.1755
j 6.0384
j 0.0000
j 253.1355

9.0 Operational Offroad

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Boilers

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 40 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Annual EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied User Defined Equipment

11.0 Vegetation

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Downey Prologis Project R2
Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
General Office Building

20.00 + 1000sgft
;

0.46 20,000.00 i
0 -------9----------------------
------------------------------
--------------------------------_------___-------_---
------------------
-------
Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail

26.79 + 1000sgft
;

11.22 488,900.00 +
0 ----------------------------
------------------------------
--------------------- ---- -�_
___
___ i------------------
-------
Parking Lot
682.00
+ 1000sgft
;

15.70 0.00 +
0 ------------------------------
------------------------------
---------------------------------------------}-_----------------f-------------- Other Asphalt Surfaces

12.36 1000sgft

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Land Use - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Construction Phase - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Off -road Equipment - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Trips and VMT - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Architectural Coating - See SWAPE's comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to Architectural Coating Emission Factors".

Vehicle Trips - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Fleet Mix - See SWAPE's comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to Fleet Mix Values".

Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Grading - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
tblConstructionPhase
NumDays
s 35.00

75.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
_----------------------------1-------------------------------�-------------------------- NumDays
s 45.00

40.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
_----------------------------1-------------------------------�-------------------------- NumDays
s 35.00

20.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
_----------------------------1-------------------------------�-------------------------- NumDays
4i 45.00

37.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblGrading
AcresOfGrading
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblGrading
AcresOfGrading
-----------------------------
tblGrading
-----------------------------
Material Exported
-----------------------------
tblGrading
-----------------------------
Material Exported
-----------------------------
tblGrading
-----------------------------
Material Imported
-----------------------------
tbiLandUse
-----------------------------
Land UseSquareFeet
-----------------------------
tb]LandUse
-----------------------------
LotAcreage
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower

20.00 18.50
----------------------------- 4-------------------------- 111.00
120.00
-----------------------------

0.00 --------------------------
460.00
-----------------------------

0.00 --------------------------
75,000.00
-----------------------------

0.00 --------------------------
460.00
-----------------------------9
682,000.00
--------------------------

0.00 ------------------------------

15.66 --------------------------

15.70 ------------------------------

78.00 --------------------------

37.00 -----------------------------9

81.00 --------------------------

33.00 -----------------------------9
231.00
--------------------------
367.00
-----------------------------9
158.00
--------------------------

36.00 -----------------------------9
158.00
--------------------------

36.00 -----------------------------9

89.00 --------------------------

82.00 -----------------------------

84.00 --------------------------

14.00 -----------------------------9
402.00
--------------------------
376.00
-----------------------------9
130.00
--------------------------

81.00 ------------------------------
132.00
--------------------------

89.00 ------------------------------

80.00 --------------------------

36.00 -----------------------------9

97.00 --------------------------

84.00 -----------------------------

97.00 --------------------------

84.00 -----------------------------9

97.00 --------------------------

84.00 -----------------------------9
158.00
--------------------------

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
LoadFactor
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
LoadFactor
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tbiProjectCharacteristics
-----------------------------
PrecipitationFrequency
-----------------------------
tbiProjectCharacteristics
-----------------------------
WindSpeed
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripN umber
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripN umber
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripN umber
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripN umber

97.00 84.00
----------------------------- 4-------------------------- 402.00
376.00
-----------------------------

0.38 --------------------------

0.38 -----------------------------

0.38 --------------------------

2.2 --------------------------

2.3 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

90.00 --------------------------

89.80 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

18.00 --------------------------

17.50 -----------------------------

23.00 --------------------------

22.50 ----------------------------- ---------------------------

13.00 12.50

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripN umber
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblVehideTrips
ST_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
ST_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
ST_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
SU_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
SU_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
SU_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
WD_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
WD_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
WD_TR

2.0 Emissions Summary

46.00 45.60
----------------------------- 4--------------------------

2.21 160.55
-----------------------------

2.12 --------------------------

0.93 -----------------------------

1.74 --------------------------

0.20 -----------------------------

0.70 --------------------------
160.55
-----------------------------9

2.12 --------------------------

0.93 ------------------------------

1.74 --------------------------

0.20 ------------------------------

9.74 --------------------------
160.55
-----------------------------9

2.12 --------------------------

0.93 ----------------------------- ---------------------------

1.74 0.20

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
Unmitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10 ;
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio COS
NBio-0O2
TotalCO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
PM10
Tot l
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Year
lb/day
lb/day
2024 •i 6.9828 89.1219 69.8804 i 0.2966 18.5121 i 2.4344 20.9465 6.1131 i 2.2548 8.3679 0.0000 1 30,957.35 30,957.35 3.9969 2.9805 31,945.45 02 02 87
�i------- ---- ---- ------- -------'-------'--------------'--------------- ------+- i-------'-------�-------'-------*- i i i
2025 •i 116.1034 � 26.6942 � 38.8110 � 0.1020 � 4.9082 i 1.0272 5.9354 1.3208 0.9540 2.2748 0.0000 10,171.16 10,171.16 1.4360 0.4288 10,334.85 19 19 23
Maximum
116.1034

89.1219

69.8804

0.2966

18.5121

2.4344

20.9465

6.1131

2.2548

8.3679

0.0000
30,957.35
30,957.35

3.9969

2.9805
31,945.45
02 02
87 Mitigated Construction
ROG
NOx CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO e
I I
I
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
I
PM2.5
Total
I
Year
lb/day
lb/day
2024 •i 6.9828 89.1219 69.8804 i 0.2966 18.5121 2.4344 20.9465 6.1131 i 2.2548 8.3679 0.0000 1 30,957.35 30,957.35 3.9969 , 2.9805 i 31,945.45 02 87
02 � �
- i
�i ;
--------- J------- J------- J-------'------- J------- J------- '-------J---------------------- '------- J----------------------- 2025 •i 116.1034 26.6942 38.8110 i 0.1020 4.9082 1.0272 5.9354 1.3208 i 0.9540 2.2748 0.0000 10,171.161 10,171.16 1 1.4360 0.4288 i 10,334.85 •i 23
19 19 � �
� � i � i � � i � � i
Maximum
116.1034

89.1219

69.8804

0.2966

18.5121

2.4344

20.9465

6.1131

2.2548

8.3679

0.0000
30,957.35
30,957.35

3.9969

2.9805
31,945.45
02 02
1 87

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG
NOx
Co
SO2
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-CO2 '
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e'I
PM10
PMIO
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Percent

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Reduction

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROO NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10 i
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O CO2e
I
I
I
PM10 PM1O
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I I
Category
lb/day ;
lb/day
Area •1 11.9839 1 1.1400e- 1 0.1253 1 1.00OOe- 1 14.5000e- 14.5000e- 1 1 4.5000e- 4.5000e- 1 0.2692 1 0.2692 1 7.00OOe- 1 i 0.2867 �1 1 003 1 1 005 1 1 004 1 004 1 1 004 004 1 1 1 004 1 1 ; I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1
• 1
-
I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I I 1
Energy •1 0.0382 I 0.3471 1 0.2916 1 2.0800e- 1 I 0.0264 I 0.0264 1 1 0.0264 0.0264 416.4964 1 416.4964 1 7.9800e- 1 7.6400e- i 418.9714 q 1 1 1 003 I 1 I 1 1 . 1 1 I 003 1 003 1
'1 I I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1
• 1
I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I I 1
Mobile •1 9.2573 I 8.9322 1 91.3131 1 0.2062 1 22.8883 I 0.1446 I 23.0329 1 6.0973 1 0.1343 6.2316 21,028.28 1 21,028.28 1 1.3834 1 0.8453 i 21,314.77 07 i 07 1 1 1 89
'1 I I 1 I 1 I I 1 • 1 1 I 1 1
Total

21.2794

9.2804

91.7299

0.2083

22.8883

0.1714

23.0597

6.0973

0.1611

6.2584
21,445.04
21,445.04

1.3921

0.8530
21,734.03
63 63
70 Mitigated Operational
ROQ
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10 t
Fugitive
Exhaust PM2.5
Bio- CO
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
PM1O
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Area •1 11.9839 1 1.1400e- 1 0.1253 1 1.00OOe- 1 1 4.5000e- 1 4.5000e- 1 1 4.5000e- 4.5000e- 1 0.2692 1 0.2692 1 7.00OOe- 1 0.2867 •1 1 003 1 1 005 1 1 004 1 004 1 1 004 004 1 1 1 004 1 1 • I I 1 1
----------•1-------'-------'-------'-------'-------'-------'-------'-------'--------- -----• 1------- '------- '------- '-------* I I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 I 1
Energy •1 0.0382 1 0.3471 1 0.2916 1 2.0800e- 1 1 0.0264 1 0.0264 1 1 0.0264 � 0.0264 1 416.4964 1 416.4964 1 7.9800e- 1 7.6400e- 418.9714 •1
1 1 1 003 I 1 I I 1 . 1 1 I 003 i 003 1
,� I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 • 1 I 1 1
I I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1
Mobile •1 9.2573 1 8.9322 1 91.3131 1 0.2062 1 22.8883 1 0.1446 1 23.0329 1 6.0973 1 0.1343 6.2316 � 1 21,028.28 1 21,028.28 1 1.3834 1 0.8453 21,314.77 89 '1 07 ; 07 � �
;

21.2794

9.2804

91.7299

0.2083

22.8883

0.1714

23.0597

6.0973

0.1611

6.2584
21,445.04
21,445.04

1.3921

0.8530
21,734.03
F-777
63 63
70 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG
NOx
Co
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PMZ5
Bio-0O2
NBio•CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Percent

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Reduction

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
1 •Demolition/Site Preparation
'Demolition
12/9/2024
15/23/2024
5:
75:
a
s
s
i
2 •Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks
'Grading
15/24/2024
17/18/2024
5:
40:
+
s
s
3 •Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Grading
i 10/23/2024
: 12/12/2024
5:
37 +
s
4 •Off -Site Street Utilites
'Trenching
e6/3/2024
110/18/2024
5:
100:
+
s
5 •Building Construction
'Building Construction
17/19/2024
13/31/2025
5:
182:
+
s
6 •Paving
'Paving
e2/9/2025
13/7/2025
5:
20:
+
s
7 .Architectural Coating
:Architectural Coating
:1/28/2025
:3/31/2025

5. 45,
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 18.5
Acres of Paving: 15.98
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non -Residential Indoor: 803,528; Non -Residential Outdoor: 267,843; Striped Parking Area: 742 (Architectural Coating — sgft)
OffRoad Equipment
Architectural Coating
'Air Compressors
; 11

6.001
37,

0.48 •----------------------------
--------------------------
----------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
Demolition/Site Preparation
'Concrete/Industrial Saws
; 11

8.001
33:

0.73 s
Building Construction
'Cranes
; 11

7.001
367,

0.29 • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -'-
- - - - - - - - - - - - T--- - -
---- - - --� - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
Demolition/Site Preparation
Excavators

3. 8.00,
36,

0.38 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks
-Excavators
2 8.00,
36:

0.38 .----------------------------;--------------------------J-----------------4------------¢-------------4-------------- Building Construction
'Forklifts
3;

8.001
82:

0.20 ---------------------------------------------------- -
------------------------------
_
_ -----------
-----------
Building Construction
'Generator Sets
; 11

8.001
_-------------
14,

0.74 ------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------
-----------_-------------
-----------
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Off -Highway Trucks
11 4.001
376'

0.38 ------------------------------------------------------ Paving
'Pavers
2;
------------_-------------

8.001
81:
-----------

0.42 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------
----------- _-------------
------------
Paving
'Paving Equipment
; 21

8.001
89:

0.36 -------------------------------------------------------- ---------- ------------ ------------
-----------_-------------
-----------
Paving
'Rollers
21 8.001
36:

0.38 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ -----------
_ ----------- _-------------
------------
Demolition/Site Preparation
+Rubber Tired Dozers
21 8.001
_
367:

0.40 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ----------
----------- _-------------
-----------
Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks
+Rubber Tired Dozers
11 8.001
367:

0.40 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Grading/Undergroud Utilities
+Rubber Tired Dozers
------------ ------------
1 ;
------------ _-------------

8.001
367:
-----------

0.40 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Off -Site Street Utilites
+Excavators
------------ ------------
2;
------------ _-------------

8.001
36:
-----------

0.38 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------
----------- _-------------
------------
Building Construction
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
31 7.001
84:

0.37 ------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- ----------
_ -----------_-------------
-----------
Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
21 8.001
_
84:

0.37 ------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- ----------
_ -----------_-------------
-----------
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
21 8.001
_
84:

0.37 -------------------------------------------------------- ---------- ------------ ----------
-----------_-------------
-----------
Building Construction
'Welders
; 11

8.001
46,

0.45 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Grading/Undergroud Utilities
+Excavators
------------ ------------
2;
------------_-------------

8.001
36:
-----------

0.38 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------
----------- _-------------
------------
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Graders
11 8.001
148'

0.41 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Scrapers
------------ ------------
2;
------------ _-------------

8.001
423'
------------

0.48 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------
----------- _-------------
------------
Demolition/Site Preparation
'Off -Highway Trucks
11 4.001
376'

0.38 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Off -Site Street Utilites
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
------------ ------------
2;
------------ _-------------

8.001
84:
-----------

0.37 --------------------------------------------------------+-----------------F----------- r-------------
-----------
Building Construction
;Off -Highway Trucks
1 ;

4.00:
376;

0.38 Trips and VMT
Demolition/Site •
7; 17.50 0.001 1,969,00; 18.50: 10.20:

20.00;LD_Mix
IHDT_Mix IHHDT
Drn.,nr�+inn
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r - - - -
' �___________
- - - - - - - - - ------------------" -- I - --- - - - - i - - - - - - - - - ' ,_________ _____________1
__________T__ - - - - - - - -
Grading/Undergroud •
9; 22.50- 0.001 9,375,00: 18.50: 10.20;

20.00; LD_Mix
i HDT_Mix i HHDT
--------------------------
T---------- I- ---------- *--------- +---------------------------- -------- -------------+----------*--------
Off -Site Driveways & ;
5; 12.50, 0.00, 91.00, 18.50, 10.20,

20.00,LD_Mix
;HDT_Mix ;HHDT

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Building Construction
10' 228.00: 89.80' 0.00'

18.50'

10.20'

20.00' LD_Mix
HDT_Mix HHDT
----------------------------------------
Paving $
- I ----------i----------
6; 15.00- 0.001 0.001
-----------

18.50: 10.20:
--------- 1 - -

20.00: LD_Mix
? +----------
i HDT_Mix ; HHDT
I
,
1 Architectural Coating
1 ; 45.60 - 0.001 0.00 i

18.50:

10.20:

20.00; LD_Mix
i HDT_Mix i HHDT
I
, _
1 Off -Site Street Utilites
4' 10.00, 0.00, 0.00,

18.50,

10.20,

20.00' LD Mix
HDT Mix rHHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

3.2 Demolition/Site Preparation - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
GO
S02 :

Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10 `
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- G02
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
G02e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
Ptv12.5
Total
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 5.7003 1 0.0000 1 5.7003 1 0.8631 1 0.0000 ; 0.8631 1 1 0.0000 1 1 i 0.0000 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1
1 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1
Off -Road �1 2.9292 1 26.5386 1 24.3071 1 0.0387 1 1 1.1355 1 1.1355 1 1 1.0486 ; 1.0486 � 1 3,703.347 1 3,703.347 1 1.1409 1 i 3,731.869 55 1 5 1 1 I 7
Total

2.9292

26.5386

24.3071

0.0387

5.7003

1.1355

6.8358

0.8631

1.0486

1.9117
3,703.347
3,703.347

1.1409
3,73179
5 5
7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Demolition/Site Preparation - 2024
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
NBio-0O2
TotaICO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Totai
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0566 14346 0.9305 i 0.0151 0.4596 0.0218 0.4813 0.1260 i 0M08 0.1468 1,663304 1,663.304 0.0938 0.2642 1,744.390 7 7 8
------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -- ---- ------- ----------- --- Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- v -------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0605 0.0420 0.7207 2.1100e- 0.2461 1.4000e- 0.2475 0.0653 i 1.2900e- 0.0666 213.1685 213.1685 4.5700e- 4.4800e- 214.6190 003 003 003 003 003
777-

3.4766

1.6512

0.0172

0.7057

0.0232

0.7289

0.1913

0.0221

0.2134
1,876.473
1,76.473

0.0984

0.2687
1,957
F0.1170
2 2
8 Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
ToIaICO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 5.7003 0.0000 5.7003 0.8631 0.0000 0,8631 0.0000 i0.0000 ---Off-Road -2- ------------------------ ------- ------- ------- --------------- .9292 26.5386 24.3071 0.0387 1.1355 1.1355 1.0486 1.0486 0.0000 3,703.347 3,703.347 1.1409 13,731.869 5 5 7
Total

2.9292

26.5386

24.3071

0.0387

5.7003

1.1355

6.8358

0.8631

1.0486

1.9117

0.0000
3,703.347
3,703.347

1.1409
3,731.869
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
1 1
5 5
7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Demolition/Site Preparation - 2024
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROO
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i 0.0566 3.4346 0.9305 i 0.0151 0.4596 i 0.0218 0.4813 0.1260 i 0.0208 0.1468 1,663.304 1,663.304 0.0938 0.2642 1,744.390 i i i i i
Vendor �i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � � 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 i i i i
Worker •i 0.0605 � 0.0420 � 0.7207 i 2.1100e- � 0.2461 i 1.4000e- 0.2475 0.0653 i 1.2900e- 0.0666 213.1685 213.1685 4.5700e- 4.4800e- 214.6190 003 003 003 . 003 003 i
Total

0.1170

3.4766

1.6512

0.0172

0.7057

0.0232

0.7289

0.1913

0.0221

0.2134
1,876.473
1,876.473

0.0984

0.2687
1,959.009
2 2
8 3.3 Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
Fugitive Dust •i

6.5126 0.0000

6.5126 3.3632 0.0000

3.3632
i 0.0000
i 0.0000
Off -Road •i 1.5287

14.6365 14.8530 i 0.0208 0.6448

0.6448 i 0.5933

0.5933
2,017.660 2,017.660 0.6526
2,033.974
Total

1.5287

14.6365

14.8530

0.0208

6.5126

0.6448

7.1574

3.3632

0.5933

3.9564
2,017.660
2,017.660

0.6526
2,033.974
2 2
0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.3 Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks - 2024
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TotaICO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
I PM10
I Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
I Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 4.90OOe- 02976 0.0806 1.3100e- M398 1.8900e- M417 0.0109 1.8100e- M127 144.1348 1441348 8.1300e- 0.0229 1511613 003 s s s 003 s s 003 s s s 003 003
------------ ------- ---------------•-------------- ------- ------- --------------- Vendor :1 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ----------------------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0432 0.0300 0.5148 1.5100e- 0.1758 1.000Oe- 0.1768 0.0466 9.2000e- 0.0475 152.2632 152.2632 3.2600e- 3.2000e- 153.2993 003 s 003 s s s 004 003 s 003
Total7

0.0481

0.3277

0.5954

2.8200e-

0.2156

2.8900e-

0.2185

0.0575

2.7300e-

0.0603
296.3980
23980

0.0114

0.0261
304.4606
003
003
003
1 Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TotaICO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 6.5126 0.0000 s 6.5126 s 3.3632 s 0.0000 3.3632 s s 0.0000 s s i0.0000 ---Off-Road _ ----- ------------------------ ------- ------- ------- --------------- .5287 14.6365 14.8530 0.0208 0.6448 0.6448 0.5933 0.5933 0.0000 2,017.660 2,017.660 0.6526 12,033.974 2 s 2 s s s 0
Total

1.5287

14.6365

14.8530

0.0208

6.5126

0.6448

7.1574

3.3632

0.5933

3.9564

0.0000
2,017.660
2,717.660

0.6526
2,033.974
2 2
0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.3 Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks - 2024
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TotaICO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
I PM10
I Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
I Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 4.9000e- 02976 0.0806 i 1.3100e- 0.0398 i 1.8900e- 0.0417 0.0109 i 1.8100e- 0.0127 144.1348 1441348 8.1300e- 0.0229 1511613 003 003 003 003 003
------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ---------------•-------------- ------- ------- --------------- Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----------------------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0432 0.0300 0.5148 1.5100e- 0.1758 1.000Oe- 0.1768 0.0466 i 9.2000e- 0.0475 152.2632 152.2632 3.2600e- 3.2000e- 153.2993 003 003 004 003 003
Total7

0.0481

0.3277

0.5954

2.8200e-

0.2156

2.8900e-

0.2185

0.0575

2.7300e-

0.0603
296.3980
23980

0.0114

0.0261
304.4606
003
003
003
1 3.4 Grading/Undergroud Utilities - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TotaICO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.7044 0.0000 9.7044 3.7184 0.0000 3.7184 0.0000 i0.0000 ---Off-Road -3- ------------------------ ------- ------- ------- --------------- .9038 37.3675 33.8090 0.0673 1.5915 1.5915 1.4642 1.4642 6,518.048 6,518.048 2.1081 16,570.750 7 7 i i 5
Total

3.9038

37.3675

33.8090

0.0673

9.7044

1.5915

11.2959

3.7184

1.4642

5.1826
6,518.048

2.1081
6,570.750
1 1
16,518.048
7 7
5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4 Grading/Undergroud Utilities - 2024
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TotaICO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.5459 331483 8.9808 i 01459 4.4353 i 0.2102 4.6455 1.2161 i 02011 1.4172 16,053.02 16,05102 MOM 2.5502 16,835.61 62 62 08
------------ ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J --------------- -------------- J -- ---- J ------- ----------- --- Vendor .1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J --------------- -------- ------- J ------- J ------- J --------------- Worker 0.0778 0.0540 0.9266 2.7100e- 0.3165 1.8000e- 0.3183 0.0839 i 1.6500e- 0.0856 274.0737 274.0737 5.8700e- 5.7700e- 275.9387 003 003 003 003 003
Total

0.6237

33.2023

9.9074

0.1486

4.7518

0.2120

4.9638

1.3000

0.2028

1.5028
16,327.09
16,327.09

0.9115

2.5559
17,111.54
99 1 99
1 95
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
ToIaICO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.7044 0.0000 9.7044 3.7184 0.0000 3.7184 0.0000 i0.0000 ---Off-Road -3- ------------------------ ------- ------- ------- --------------- .9038 37.3675 33.8090 0.0673 1.5915 1.5915 1.4642 1.4642 0.0000 6,518.048 6,518.048 2.1081 16,570.750 7 7 i i 5
Total

3.9038

37.3675

33.8090

0.0673

9.7044

1.5915

11.2959

3.7184

1.4642

5.1826

0.0000
6,518.048
6,518.048

2.1081
6,570.750
7 7
5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4 Grading/Undergroud Utilities - 2024
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.5459 331483 8.9808 i 01459 4.4353 i 0.2102 4.6455 1.2161 i 02011 1.4172 16,053.02 16,05102 MOM 2.5502 16,835.61 62 62 08
------------ ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J ------- J --------------- -------------- J -- ---- J ------- J ----------- --- Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0778 0.0540 0.9266 2.7100e- 0.3165 1.8000e- 0.3183 0.0839 i 1.6500e- 0.0856 274.0737 274.0737 5.8700e- 5.7700e- 275.9387 003 003 003 003 003
Total

0.6237

33.2023

9.9074

0.1486

4.7518

0.2120

4.9638

1.3000

0.2028

1.5028
16,327.09
16,327.09

0.9115

2.5559
17,111.54
1�
99 1 99
1 95

3.5 Off -Site Street Utilites - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I I
PM10 I PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
I lb/day j
lb/day
Off -Road 0.4502 4.2012 5.9012 8.0200e- 0.1728 0.1728 0.1590 0.1590 776.4576 776.4576 0.2511 i782.7356 003
Total

0.4502

4.2012

5.9012

8.0200e-

0.1728

0.1590

0.1590
776.4576
776.4576

0.2511
782.7356
j
j
003
1 I
j
j
j
j
1 1
1 j
j
j

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.5 Off -Site Street Utilites - 2024
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBio-0O2
TotalCO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0()00 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 0.0()00 0.00()0 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ---------------•------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----------------------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0346 0.0240 0.4118 1.2100e- 0.1407 8.000Oe- 0.1414 0.0373 i 7.4000e- 0.0380 121.8105 121.8105 2.6100e- 2.5600e- 122.6394 003 004 004 003 003
Total

0.0346

0.0240

0.4118

1.2100e-

0.1407

8.000Oe-

0.1414

0.0373

7.4000e-

0.0380
121.8105
171.8105

2.6100e-

2.5600e-
12271
003
004
004
003
003
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM10 I PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 0.4502 4.2012 5.9012 8.0200e- 0.1728 0.1728 0.1590 0.1590 0.0000 776.4576 776.4576 0.2511 i782.7356 003
Total

0.4502

4.2012

5.9012

8.0200e-

0.1728

0.1590

0.0000
776.4576
776.4576

0.2511
782.7356
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.5 Off -Site Street Utilites - 2024
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBio-0O2
TotalCO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0()00 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 0.0()00 0.00()0 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ---------------•------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----------------------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0346 0.0240 0.4118 1.2100e- 0.1407 8.000Oe- 0.1414 0.0373 i 7.4000e- 0.0380 121.8105 121.8105 2.6100e- 2.5600e- 122.6394 003 004 004 003 003
Total

0.0346

0.0240

0.4118

1.2100e-

0.1407

8.000Oe-

0.1414

0.0373

7.4000e-

0.0380
121.8105
171.8105

2.6100e-

2.5600e-
12271
003
004
004
003
003

3.6 Building Construction - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 1.5474 13.3795 15.2360 0.0296 0.5872 0.5872 0.5466 0,5466 2,783.573 2,783.573 0.8308 i2,804.343 2 2 i 3
Total

1.5474

13.3795

15.2360

0.0296

0.5872

0.5466

0.5466
2,783.573
2,783.573

0.8308
2,804.343
1�
2 2
3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Building Construction - 2024
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0()00 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 s 0.0()00 s 0.00()0 s 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- -- ---- ------- --- ---
Vendor 0.1201 4.6250 1.5386 0.0237 0.8492 0.0255 s 0.8747 s 0.2444 s 0.0244 0.2688 2,551.347 s 2,551.347 s 0.0870 s 0.3662 2,662.636 9 s g s s s 4
------------ ------- --------------- v -------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.7879 0.5475 9.3895 0.0275 3.2067 0.0182 s 3.2249 s 0.8504 s 0.0168 0.8671 2,777.280 s 2,777.280 s 0.0595 s 0.0584 2,796.179 4 s 4 s s s 1
Total

0.9079

5.1725

10.9281

0.0512

4.0559

0.0437

4.0996

1.0948

0.0412

1.1359
5,328.628
5,728.628

0.1465

0.4246
5,45;78]15
4 4
5 Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 1.5474 13.3795 15.2360 0.0296 0.5872 s 0.5872 s s 0.5466 0,5466 0.0000 2,783.573 s 2,783.573 s 0.8308 s i2,804.343 2 s 2 s s s 3
Total

1.5474

13.3795

15.2360

0.0296

0.5872

0.5466

0.0000
2,783.573
2,783.573

0.8308
2,804.343
1�
2 2
3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Building Construction - 2024
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0()00 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 s 0.0()00 s 0.00()0 s 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- --------------- -------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Vendor :•1 0.1201 4.6250 1.5386 0.0237 0.8492 0.0255 0.8747 0.2444 0.0244 0.2688 2,551.347 2,551.347 0.0870 0.3662 2,662.636 9 s g s s s 4
------------ ------- ------------------------ ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.7879 s 0.5475 s 9.3895 s 0.0275 s 3.2067 0.0182 s 3.2249 s 0.8504 s 0.0168 0.8671 2,777.280 s 2,777.280 s 0.0595 s 0.0584 2,796.179 4 s 4 s s s 1
Total

0.9079

5.1725

10.9281

0.0512

4.0559

0.0437

4.0996

1.0948

0.0412

1.1359
5,328.628
5,328.628

0.1465

0.4246
5,45;78]15
4 4
5 3.6 Building Construction - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 1.4544 12M48 15.0006 0.0296 0.5100 s 0.5100 s s 0.4751 0,4751 2,783.750 s 2,783.750 s 0.8292 s i2,804.480 1 s 1 s s s 5
Total

1.4544

12.3048

15.0006

0.0296

0.5100

0.4751

0.4751
2,783.750
2,783.750

0.8292
2,804.480
1�
1 1
5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Building Construction - 2025
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ---------------•-------------- -- ---- ------- ----------- --- Vendor :•1 0.1163 4.6029 1.5075 0.0232 0.8492 0.0256 0.8748 0.2444 0.0245 0.2689 2,505.383 2,505.383 0.0876 0.3598 2,614.799 2 s 2 s s s 4
------------ ------- J J J J J J ------------------------ ------- J ------- J ------- J --------------- Worker 0.7370 s 0.4910 s 8.7259 s 0.0265 s 3.2067 0.0173 s 3.2241 s 0.8504 s 0.0160 0.8663 2,682.667 s 2,682.667 s 0.0536 s 0.0545 2,700.252 3 s 3 s s s 4
Total

0.8532

5.0939

10.2334

0.0498

4.0559

0.0429

4.0989

1.0948

0.0405

1.1352
5,188.050
5,78.050

0.1412

0.4143
5,315.�051
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
5 5
j
8 Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 1.4544 12M48 15.0006 0.0296 0.5100 s 0.5100 s s 0.4751 0,4751 0.0000 2,783.750 s 2,783.750 s 0.8292 s i2,804.480 1 s 1 s s s 5
Total

1.4544

12.3048

15.0006

0.0296

0.5100

0.4751

0.0000
2,783.750
2,783.750

0.8292
2,804.480
1�
1 1
5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Building Construction - 2025
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ---------------•-------------- -- ---- ------- --- --- Vendor :•1 0.1163 4.6029 1.5075 0.0232 0.8492 0.0256 0.8748 0.2444 0.0245 0.2689 2,505.383 2,505.383 0.0876 0.3598 2,614.799 2 s 2 s s s 4
------------ ------- J J J J J J ------------------------ ------- J ------- J ------- J --------------- Worker 0.7370 s 0.4910 s 8.7259 s 0.0265 s 3.2067 0.0173 s 3.2241 s 0.8504 s 0.0160 0.8663 2,682.667 s 2,682.667 s 0.0536 s 0.0545 2,700.252 3 s 3 s s s 4
Total

0.8532

5.0939

10.2334

0.0498

4.0559

0.0429

4.0989

1.0948

0.0405

1.1352
5,188.050
5,78.050

0.1412

0.4143
5,315.�051
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
5 5
j
8 3.7 Paving - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 0.9241 8.2829 10.1181 0.0140 0.4424 0.4424 0.4070 0,4070 1,352.829 1,352.829 0.4375 s s s s s s i1,363.767
2 s 2 s s s 5
------------ ---- -- --------------- ------- -------
Paving 2.0934 0.0000 s 0.0000 s s 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total

3.0174

8.2829

10.1181

0.0140

0.4424

0.4070

0.4070
1,352.829
1,72.829

0.4375
1,363.767
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
1 1
2 1
2 5

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.7 Paving - 2025
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBio-0O2
TotalCO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0()00 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 0.0()00 0.00()0 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ---------------•-------------- -- ---- ------- ------- --- --- Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- v -------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0485 0.0323 0.5741 1.7500e- 0.2110 1.1400e- 0.2121 0.0559 i 1.0500e- 0.0570 176.4913 176.4913 3.5200e- 3.5900e- 177.6482 003 003 003 003 003
Total

0.0485

0.0323

0.5741

1.7500e-

0.2110

1.1400e-

0.2121

0.0559

1.0500e-

0.0570
176.4913
174913

3.5200e-

3.5900e-
17771
003
003
003
003
003
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
I lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 0.9241 8.2829 10.1181 0.0140 0.4424 0.4424 0.4070 0,4070 0.0000 1 1,352.829 1,352.829 0.4375 i1,363.767 2 2 i 5
----------- ------- ---- -- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- Paving 2.0934 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total

3.0174

8.2829

10.1181

0.0140

0.4424

0.4070
000
1,352.829
1,72.829

0.4375
1,363.767
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
1 77
1 2
1 2
1 5

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.7 Paving - 2025
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBio-0O2
TotalCO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0()00 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 0.0()00 0.00()0 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ---------------•------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----------------------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0485 0.0323 0.5741 i 1.7500e- 0.2110 1.1400e- 0.2121 0.0559 i 1.0500e- 0.0570 176.4913 176.4913 3.5200e- 3.5900e- 177.6482 003 003 003 003 003
Total

0.0485

0.0323

0.5741

1.7500e-

0.2110

1.1400e-

0.2121

0.0559

1.0500e-

0.0570
176.4913
176.4913

3.5200e-

3.5900e-
17771
003
003
003
003
003

3.8 Architectural Coating - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Archit. Coating 110.4276 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0,0000 0.0000 i0.0000 ------------ ------- ---- -- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Off-Road 0.1548 0.8821 1.1396 i 1.6400e- 0.0273 0.0273 i 0.0273 0.0273 133.5074 133.5074 0.0139 133.8539 003
Total
110.5825

0.8821

1.1396

1.6400e-

0.0273

0.0273
133.5074
133.5074

0.0139
133.879
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.8 Architectural Coating - 2025
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBio-0O2
TotalCO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0()00 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 0.0()00 0.00()0 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ---------------•-------------- -- ---- ------- ------- --- --- Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- v -------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.1474 0.0982 1.7452 5.3100e- 0.6413 3.4700e- 0.6448 0.1701 i 3.1900e- 0.1733 536.5335 536.5335 0.0107 0.0109 540.0505 003 003 003
Total

0.1474

0.0982

1.7452

5.3100e-

0.6413

3.4700e-

0.6448

0.1701

3.1900e-

0.1733
536.5335
575335

0.0107

0.0109
540.31
003
003
003
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Archit. Coating 110.4276 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0,0000 0.0000 i0.0000 ------------ ------- ---- -- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Off-Road 0.1548 0.8821 1.1396 1.6400e- 0.0273 0.0273 0.0273 0.0273 0.0000 133.5074 133.5074 0.0139 133.8539 i i
003
Total
110.5825

0.8821

1.1396

1.6400e-

0.0273

0.000;
133.5074
133.5074

0.0139
133.879
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.8 Architectural Coating - 2025
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10 ;
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio COS
NBio-0O2
TotalCO2
CH4
N20':

CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
PM10
Total :

PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling �i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • i i
i i i i
Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � � 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 '� i i i i
• i
i i i i
Worker •i 0.1474 � 0.0982 � 1.7452 i 5.3100e- � 0.6413 i 3.4700e- 0.6448 0.1701 i 3.1900e- 0.1733 536.5335 536.5335 0.0107 0.0109 540.0505 003 003 003
Total

0.1474

0.0982

1.7452

5.3100e-

0.6413

3.4700e-

0.6448

0.1701

3.1900e-

0.1733
536.5335
536.5335

0.0107

0.0109
540.3
003
003
003

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG
I NOx
I GO
I S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10 PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive;
PM2.5+
Exhaust
PM2;5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
I N20
I CO2e
Category
Iblday
Iblday
Mitigated •, 9.2573 8.9322 91.3131 i 0.2062 22.8883 0.1446

23.0329

6.0973
i 0.1343

6.2316 , 21,028.28 21,028.28 i 1.3834

0.8453 21,314.77
•�
. 07 07
89 � � i � � � � i �
-------------,
Unmitigated

9.2573 - 8.9322 91.3131 - 0.2062 - 22.8883 - 0.1446
• 23.0329

6.0973
- 0.1343

6.2316
21,028.28 21,028.28 - 1.3834

0.8453 21,314.77
07 07
89 4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate
Unmitigated
Mitigated
Land Use
Weekday
Saturday
Sunday
Annual VMT
Annual VMT
General Office Building ••••••---3.211.00- , 3,211.00--T-- 321100__Y--------10,344,111---- e---------10,344,111--- .............................. ------------ ---- ------ +
Other Asphalt Surfaces , 0.00 0.00 0.00
................................................. . .----------'T - - - - - - - - - - - •! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - f -------------------------- Parking Lot + 0.00 ; 0.00 0.00
.. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . • .. . . . . .. . . . .----------T .. . . . . .. . . . .� . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . r
Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail ; 24.90 ; 24.90 24.90 106,712 106,712 .....................................+--------- -------------------------------------------------- ;-----------t-----------
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail 97.78 , 97.78 97.78 419,057 419,057 Total 3,333.68
3,333.68
3,333.68
10,869,880
10,869,880

4.3 Trip Type Information
General Office Building 16.60 1 8.40

6.90 i 33.00 '
'

48.00 19.00
77 19
4 • • .i - - - - - - - - - - -t - - - - - - - -
Asphalt S. rfa ; 16.60 8.40

6.90 0.00 l
.T

0.00 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ r _ _

0.00 ;
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ! -
; 0 ;
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
0 • • .Other .es
.......... r---------- 1-____--
-------J
--------- T-----------
.
. .

Parking Lot 16.60 8.40

6.90 v 0.00

0.00 0.00
0 0
0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Wareho ; 16.60 8.40
-

6.90 •

59.00 e
-

0.00 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ r _ _

41.00 ;
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
92 _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - ! -
; 5 ;
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _
3 .Refrigerated :se.No
• .t__________y _________T
..........

Y......... ------- 1---------------------
...........
.......... ...............
.

Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No 16.60 8.40

6.90 59.00

0.00 41.00
92 5
3 4.4 Fleet Mix

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied General Office Building

0.537891+

0.065289:

0.189998:
0,126515:

0.023567:

0.006518:

0.011114:

0.008084;

0.000933:

0.000591:

0.025474:

0.0007081 0.003318
Other Asphalt Surfaces

0.537891+

0.065289:

0.189998:
0,126515:

0.023567:

0.006518:

0.011114:

0.008084;

0.000933:

0.000591

0.025474:

0.0007081 0.003318
Parking Lot

0.537891+

0.065289:

0.189998:
0,126515:

0.023567:

0.006518:

0.011114:

0.008084;

0.000933:

0.000591

0.025474:

0.0007081 0.003318
Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail •

0.537891+

0.065289:

0.189998:
0,126515:

0.023567:

0.006518:

0.011114:

0.008084;

0.000933:

0.000591

0.025474:

0.0007081 0.003318
+
i
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No

0.537891•

0.065289,

0.189998,
0,126515,

0.023567,

0.006518,

0.011114,

0.008084,

0.000933,

0.000591,

0.025474,

0.000708, 0.003318
Rail

5.0 Energy Detail
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
ROG
I NOX
I CO
I S02
I Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
'Total
Bia- CO2
NBio- 002
Total CO2
CH4
I N20
I CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
NaturalGas 0.0382
1 0.3471 1 0.2916 2.0800e-
i 0.0264

0.0264

0.0264
i i 416.4964 416.4964 7.9800e- i 7.6400e- 418.9714
Mitigated
003
. i 003 003
• i i i i • i
NaturalGas 0.0382

0.3471 0.2916 2.0800e-
- 0.0264

0.0264

0.0264
416.4964 416.4964 7.9800e- - 7.6400e- 418.9714
Unmitigated
003
003 003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGa
FLOG NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2 CH4
N20
CO2e
s Use
I
PM10
I
PM10
I
Total
PM2m5
I
PM2.5
Total
I
Land Use
kBTU/yr
Ib/day
lb/day
General Office
933.151 *1 0.0101 1 0.0915 1 0.0769 1 5.5000e- 1 1 6.9500e- 1 6.9500e- 1 1 6.9500e- 6.9500e- 1 109.7824 1 109.7824 1 2.1000e- 1 2.0100e- i 110.4348 Building
004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 1 i 1 1 1 1 003 1 003 1
1 .

Other Asphalt
I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1
� 0 *1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 0.0000 � 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 i 0.0000 Surfaces
I ; I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1
Parking Lot
I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1
� 0 *1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 0.0000 � 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 i 0.0000 I ; I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1
r------�1 i------- i------- i------- i------- i------- i------- i------- i-------- ------- T------- 1 i-------i-------i-------t------- Refrigerated
611.285 9 6.5900e- 1 0.0599 1 0.0503 1 3.6000e- 1 1 4.5500e- 1 4.5500e- 1 1 4.5500e- 1 4.5500e- r 1 71.9159 1 71.9159 1 1.3800e- 1 1.3200e- 72.3433 Warehouse -No
003 004 003 003 003 003 * i 003 003
Rail
-----------
1 S1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 1
-----
Unrefrigerated
e 1995,78 h 0.0215 1 0.1957 1 0.1644 1 1.1700e- 1 1 0.0149 1 0.0149 1 1 0.0149 1 0.0149 r 1 234.7981 1 234.7981 1 4.5000e- 1 4.3000e- 236.1934 Warehouse -No
1 I I 1 1 r I I 1 1
1 003 1 003 003
9 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 T I I 1 1
Rail
1 pi I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 r I 1 1 1
Total

0.0382

0.3471

0.2916

2.0800e-

0.0264

0.0264
416.4964
416.4964

7.9800e-

7.6300e-
418.9714
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Mitigated
NaturalGa
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2 CH4
N20
CO2e
s Use
I
PM10
I
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
I
PM2.5
Total
I
Land Use
kBTU/yr
Ib/day
lb/day
General Office
1 0.933151 *1 0.0101 1 0.0915 1 0.0769 1 5.5000e- 1 1 6.9500e- 1 6.9500e- 1 1 6.9500e- 6.9500e- 1 109.7824 1 109.7824 1 2.1000e- 1 2.0100e- i 110.4348 Building
004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 1 i 1 1 1 1 003 1 003 1
1 .

0.611285 9 6.5900e- 1 0.0599 1 0.0503 1 3.6000e- 1 1 4.5500e- 1 4.5500e- 1 1 4.5500e- 1 4.5500e- r 1 71.9159 1 71.9159 1 1.3800e- 1 1.3200e- 72.3433 Warehouse -No
003 004 003 003 003 003 * i 003 003
Rail
-----------
1 S1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 1
-----
Unrefrigerated
e 1.99578 h 0.0215 1 0.1957 1 0.1644 1 1.1700e- 1 1 0.0149 1 0.0149 1 1 0.0149 1 0.0149 r 1 234.7981 1 234.7981 1 4.5000e- 1 4.3000e- 236.1934 Warehouse -No
1 I I 1 1 r I I 1 1
1 003 1 003 003
9 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 T I I 1 1
Rail
1 p1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 r I 1 1 1
Total

0.0382

0.3471

0.2916

2.0800e-

0.0264

0.0264
416.4964
416.4964

7.9800e-

7.6300e-
418.9714
11 003
003
003

6.0 Area Detail

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG I NOx
CO
I S02
I Fugitive
PMIO
I Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
I Total
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
I
CH4
I
N20
CO2o
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Mitigated 11.9839 i 1.1400e-

0.1253 1.000Oe-

4.5000e- i 4.5000e-

4.5000e-

4.5000e- 0.2692 0.2692 i 7.000Oe- 0.2867
003
005
004 004
004
004
004
--------- - -------------- 4 --------------- i --------------- 4 --------------- 4 --------------- I --------------- 4 --------------- i --------------- 4 --------------- --------------- -------------- i --------------- 4 --------------- I --------------- ------- Unmitigated

11.9839 1.1400e-

0.1253 - 1.000Oe-
- 4.5000e- - 4.5000e-

4.5000e-

4.5000e- 0.2692 0.2692 - 7.000Oe- 0.2867
003
005
004 004
004
004
004

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
ROG NOx CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PMIO
Fugitive
Exhaust PM2.5
Bio-00
NBio-0O2
TotaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PMZ5 Total
Li
I
I
Subcategory
lb/day
lb/day
Architectural 1.3614 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Coating

J J J J J J J J I J
---- -------- ---- -- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- -------------- ---------------- ------- ------- Consumer -1 10.6109 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products

J J J J J J J J J J J
----------- -------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- ------ ----- ------- ------- ------- ------- Landscaping 0.0115 1.1400e- 0.1253 1.000Oe- 4.5000e- 4.5000e- 4.5000e- 4.5000e- T-0.2692 0.2692 7.000Oe- 0.2867 :-1
003 005 004 004 004 004 004
Total

11.9839

1.1400e-

0.1253

1.000Oe-

4.5000e-

0.2692

7.000Oe-

0.2867
11 003
005
004
004
004
004
004

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Mitigated
ROG
Nox
Co
Sot :

Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-Cot
NBio- Cot
Total Cot
CH4
N20 Cote
PM10
PM1O
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I I
Subcategory
lb/day
lb/day
Architectural 1.3614 i i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Coating
i i i i i
Consumer .1 10.6109 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 � � � 0.0000 0.0000 Products i
i
Landscaping •i 0.0115 i 1.1400e- 0.1253 i 1.00OOe- 4.5000e- i 4.5000e- i 4.5000e- 4.5000e- i 0.2692 0.2692 i 7.00OOe- i 0.2867 003 005 004 004 004 004 004
Total

11.9839

1.1400e-

0.1253

1.00OOe-

4.5000e-

0.2692

7.00OOe-

0.2867
003
005
004
004
004
004
004

7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 34 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

8.0 Waste Detail

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

9.0 Operational Offroad

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Boilers
User Defined Equipment

11.0 Vegetation

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Downey Prologis Project R2
Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
General Office Building

20.00 + 1000sgft
;

0.46 20,000.00 i
0 -------9----------------------
------------------------------
--------------------------------_------___-------_---
------------------
-------
Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail

26.79 + 1000sgft
;

11.22 488,900.00 +
0 ----------------------------
------------------------------
--------------------- ---- -�_
___
___ i------------------
-------
Parking Lot
682.00
+ 1000sgft
;

15.70 0.00 +
0 ------------------------------
------------------------------
---------------------------------------------}-_----------------f-------------- Other Asphalt Surfaces

12.36 1000sgft

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non -Default Data
Project Characteristics - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Land Use - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Construction Phase - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Off -road Equipment - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Off -road Equipment - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Trips and VMT - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Architectural Coating - See SWAPE's comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to Architectural Coating Emission Factors".

Vehicle Trips - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Fleet Mix - See SWAPE's comment on "Unsubstantiated Changes to Fleet Mix Values".

Demolition - Consistent with the DEIR's model.

Grading - Consistent with the DEIR's model.
tblConstructionPhase
NumDays
s 35.00

75.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
_----------------------------1-------------------------------�-------------------------- NumDays
s 45.00

40.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
_----------------------------1-------------------------------�-------------------------- NumDays
s 35.00

20.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
_----------------------------1-------------------------------�-------------------------- NumDays
4i 45.00

37.00 -----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblGrading
AcresOfGrading
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblGrading
AcresOfGrading
-----------------------------
tblGrading
-----------------------------
Material Exported
-----------------------------
tblGrading
-----------------------------
Material Exported
-----------------------------
tblGrading
-----------------------------
Material Imported
-----------------------------
tbiLandUse
-----------------------------
Land UseSquareFeet
-----------------------------
tb]LandUse
-----------------------------
LotAcreage
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower

20.00 18.50
----------------------------- 4-------------------------- 111.00
120.00
-----------------------------

0.00 --------------------------
460.00
-----------------------------

0.00 --------------------------
75,000.00
-----------------------------

0.00 --------------------------
460.00
-----------------------------9
682,000.00
--------------------------

0.00 ------------------------------

15.66 --------------------------

15.70 ------------------------------

78.00 --------------------------

37.00 -----------------------------9

81.00 --------------------------

33.00 -----------------------------9
231.00
--------------------------
367.00
-----------------------------9
158.00
--------------------------

36.00 -----------------------------9
158.00
--------------------------

36.00 -----------------------------9

89.00 --------------------------

82.00 -----------------------------

84.00 --------------------------

14.00 -----------------------------9
402.00
--------------------------
376.00
-----------------------------9
130.00
--------------------------

81.00 ------------------------------
132.00
--------------------------

89.00 ------------------------------

80.00 --------------------------

36.00 -----------------------------9

97.00 --------------------------

84.00 -----------------------------

97.00 --------------------------

84.00 -----------------------------9

97.00 --------------------------

84.00 -----------------------------9
158.00
--------------------------

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
LoadFactor
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
LoadFactor
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------
tbiProjectCharacteristics
-----------------------------
PrecipitationFrequency
-----------------------------
tbiProjectCharacteristics
-----------------------------
WindSpeed
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripN umber
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripN umber
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripN umber
-----------------------------
tbJTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripN umber

97.00 84.00
----------------------------- 4-------------------------- 402.00
376.00
-----------------------------

0.38 --------------------------

0.38 -----------------------------

0.38 --------------------------

2.2 --------------------------

2.3 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------

6.90 --------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------9

90.00 --------------------------

89.80 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

14.70 --------------------------

18.50 ------------------------------

18.00 --------------------------

17.50 -----------------------------

23.00 --------------------------

22.50 ----------------------------- ---------------------------

13.00 12.50

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripN umber
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblVehideTrips
ST_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
ST_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
ST_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
SU_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
SU_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
SU_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
WD_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
WD_TR
-----------------------------
tblVehideTrips
-----------------------------
WD_TR

2.0 Emissions Summary

46.00 45.60
----------------------------- 4--------------------------

2.21 160.55
-----------------------------

2.12 --------------------------

0.93 -----------------------------

1.74 --------------------------

0.20 -----------------------------

0.70 --------------------------
160.55
-----------------------------9

2.12 --------------------------

0.93 ------------------------------

1.74 --------------------------

0.20 ------------------------------

9.74 --------------------------
160.55
-----------------------------9

2.12 --------------------------

0.93 ----------------------------- ---------------------------

1.74 0.20

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
Unmitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bia COS
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
PM10
Tot l
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Year
Ib/day,
lb/day
2024 •i 7.0221 90.8570 69.1400 i 0.2952 18.5121 i 2.4351 20.9471 6.1131 i 2.2554 8.3685 0.0000 30,816.45 30,816,45 3.9949 2.9884 31,806.86 29 29 i 20
'� i i i
• i
i i i i
2025 •i 116.1878 � 26.9673 � 37.8925 � 0.1003 � 4.9082 i 1.0273 5.9355 1.3208 0.9541 2.2749 0.0000 9,995.328 i 9,995.328 i 1.4360 0.4342 10,160.62 6 6 i i 13
Maximum
116.1878

90.8570

69.1400

0.2952

18.5121

2.4351

20.9471

6.1131

2.2554

8.3685

0.0000
30,816.45
30,816.45

3.9949

2.9884
31,806.86
29 29
20 Mitigated Construction
ROG
NOx CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2 NBiu- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO e
I I
I
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Year
lb/day
lb/day
2024 •i 7.0221 90.8570 69.1400 i 0.2952 18.5121 2.4351 20.9471 6.1131 i 2.2554 8.3685 0.0000 : 30,816.45 30,816.45 3.9949 , 2.9884 i 31,806.86 20 29 � 29 � �
; i
--- ------- ------- -------'------- --------------�-------�---------------+- '-------�--------------- •�-------� *------- ( ( t-------� (
2025 116A878 26.9673 37.8925 i 0.1003 4.9082 1.0273 5.9355 1.3208 i 0.9541 2.2749 0.0000 9,995.328 9,995.328 1.4360 0.4342 i 10,160.62 6 i 6 i i 13
Maximum
116.1878

90.8570

69.1400

0.2952

18.5121

2.4351

20.9471

6.1131

2.2554

8.3685

0.0000
30,816.45
30,816.45

3.9949

2.9884
31,806.86
29 29
1 20

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG
NOx
co
SO2
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM10
PMIO
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Percent

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Reduction

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROO NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive Exhaust
PM1O
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O CO2e
I
I
I
PM10 PM1O
I
Total
PM2.5
I
PM2.5
Total
I I
Category
lb/day ;
lb/day
Area •1 11.9839 1 1.1400e- 1 0.1253 1 1.00OOe- 1 14.5000e- 14.5000e- 1 1 4.5000e- 4.5000e- 1 0.2692 1 0.2692 1 7.00OOe- 1 i 0.2867 �1 1 003 1 1 005 1 1 004 1 004 1 1 004 004 1 1 1 004 1 1 ; I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1
• 1
-
I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I I 1
Energy •1 0.0382 I 0.3471 1 0.2916 1 2.0800e- 1 I 0.0264 I 0.0264 1 1 0.0264 0.0264 416.4964 1 416.4964 1 7.9800e- 1 7.6400e- i 418.9714 q 1 1 1 003 I 1 I 1 1 . 1 1 I 003 1 003 1
'1 I I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1
• 1
I I 1 1 1 I I 1 I I 1
Mobile •1 9.0854 I 9.6371 1 89.7542 1 0.1975 1 22.8883 I 0.1446 I 23.0330 1 6.0973 1 0.1343 6.2316 20,151.45 1 20,151.45 1 1.4217 1 0.8814 i 20,449.66 75 1 75 1 1 1 32
'1 I I 1 I 1 I I 1 • 1 1 I 1 1
Total

21.1074

9.9853

90.1711

0.1996

22.8883

0.1715

23.0598

6.0973

0.1612

6.2584
20,568.22
20,568.22

1.4304

0.8891
20,868.92
31 31
13 Mitigated Operational
ROQ
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10 t
Fugitive
Exhaust PM2.5
Bio- CO
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
PM1O
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Area •1 11.9839 1 1.1400e- 1 0.1253 1 1.00OOe- 1 1 4.5000e- 1 4.5000e- 1 1 4.5000e- 4.5000e- 1 0.2692 1 0.2692 1 7.00OOe- 1 0.2867 •1 1 003 1 1 005 1 1 004 1 004 1 1 004 004 1 1 1 004 1 1 • I I 1 1
----------•1-------'-------'-------'-------'-------'-------'-------'-------'--------- -----• 1------- '------- '------- '-------* I I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 I 1
Energy •1 0.0382 1 0.3471 1 0.2916 1 2.0800e- 1 1 0.0264 1 0.0264 1 1 0.0264 � 0.0264 1 416.4964 1 416.4964 1 7.9800e- 1 7.6400e- 418.9714 •1
1 1 1 003 I 1 I I 1 . 1 1 I 003 i 003 1
,� I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 • � 1 I 1 1
I I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1
Mobile •1 9.0854 1 9.6371 1 89.7542 1 0.1975 1 22.8883 1 0.1446 1 23.0330 1 6.0973 1 0.1343 6.2316 1 20,151.45 1 20,151.45 1 1.4217 1 0.8814 20,449.66 32 '1 75 � 75 � �
�

21.1074

9.9853

90.1711

0.1996

22.8883

0.1715

23.0598

6.0973

0.1612

6.2584
20,568.22
20,568.22

1.4304

0.8891
20,868.92
F-777
31 31
13 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG
NOx
Co
Sot
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio•CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Percent

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
Reduction

6.001
37,

0.48 •----------------------------
--------------------------
----------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
Demolition/Site Preparation
'Concrete/Industrial Saws
; 11

8.001
33:

0.73 s
Building Construction
'Cranes
; 11

7.001
367,

3. 8.00,
36,

0.38 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks
-Excavators
2 8.00,
36:

0.38 .----------------------------;--------------------------J-----------------4------------¢-------------4-------------- Building Construction
'Forklifts
3;

8.001
82:

0.20 ---------------------------------------------------- -
------------------------------
_
_ -----------
-----------
Building Construction
'Generator Sets
; 11

8.001
_-------------
14,

0.74 ------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------
-----------_-------------
-----------
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Off -Highway Trucks
11 4.001
376'

0.38 ------------------------------------------------------ Paving
'Pavers
2;
------------_-------------

8.001
81:
-----------

0.42 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------
----------- _-------------
------------
Paving
'Paving Equipment
; 21

8.001
89:

0.36 -------------------------------------------------------- ---------- ------------ ------------
-----------_-------------
-----------
Paving
'Rollers
21 8.001
36:

0.40 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ----------
----------- _-------------
-----------
Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks
+Rubber Tired Dozers
11 8.001
367:

0.40 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Grading/Undergroud Utilities
+Rubber Tired Dozers
------------ ------------
1 ;
------------ _-------------

8.001
367:
-----------

0.40 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Off -Site Street Utilites
+Excavators
------------ ------------
2;
------------ _-------------

8.001
36:
-----------

0.38 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------
----------- _-------------
------------
Building Construction
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
31 7.001
84:

0.37 -------------------------------------------------------- ---------- ------------ ----------
-----------_-------------
-----------
Building Construction
'Welders
; 11

8.001
46,

0.45 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Grading/Undergroud Utilities
+Excavators
------------ ------------
2;
------------_-------------

8.001
36:
-----------

0.38 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------
----------- _-------------
------------
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Graders
11 8.001
148'

0.41 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Scrapers
------------ ------------
2;
------------ _-------------

8.001
423'
------------

0.48 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ------------
----------- _-------------
------------
Demolition/Site Preparation
'Off -Highway Trucks
11 4.001
376'

0.38 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Off -Site Street Utilites
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
------------ ------------
2;
------------ _-------------

8.001
84:
-----------

0.37 --------------------------------------------------------+-----------------F----------- r-------------
-----------
Building Construction
;Off -Highway Trucks
1 ;

4.00:
376;

0.38 Trips and VMT
Demolition/Site •
7; 17.50 0.001 1,969,00; 18.50: 10.20:

20.00,LD_Mix
;HDT_Mix ;HHDT

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Building Construction
10' 228.00: 89.80' 0.00'

18.50'

10.20'

20.00' LD_Mix
HDT_Mix HHDT
----------------------------------------
Paving $
- I ----------i----------
6; 15.00- 0.001 0.001
-----------

18.50: 10.20:
--------- 1 - -

20.00: LD_Mix
? +----------
i HDT_Mix ; HHDT
I
,
1 Architectural Coating
1 ; 45.60 - 0.001 0.00 i

18.50:

10.20:

20.00; LD_Mix
i HDT_Mix i HHDT
I
, _
1 Off -Site Street Utilites
4' 10.00, 0.00, 0.00,

18.50,

10.20,

20.00' LD Mix
HDT Mix rHHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

3.2 Demolition/Site Preparation - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
GO
S02 :

2.9292

26.5386

24.3071

0.0387

5.7003

1.1355

6.8358

0.8631

1.0486

1.9117
3,703.347
3,703.347

1.1409
3,73179
5 5
7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Demolition/Site Preparation - 2024
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
NBlo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Totai
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0529 15862 0.9430 i 0.0151 0.4596 0.0218 0.4814 0.1260 i 0M09 0.1469 1,665.082 1,665.082 0.0936 0.2645 i1,746.249 2 2 i i 4
------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -- ---- ------- ----------- --- Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- v -------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0659 0.0464 0.6578 2.000Oe- 0.2461 1.4000e- 0.2475 0.0653 i 1.2900e- 0.0666 201.9140 201.9140 4.5800e- 4.7900e- 203.4555 003 003 003 003 003
777-

3.6326

1.6008

0.0171

0.7057

0.0232

0.7289

0.1913

0.0222

0.2135
1,866.996
1,866.996

0.0982

0.2693
1,947
F0.1188
2 2
0 Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 5.7003 0.0000 5.7003 0.8631 0.0000 0,8631 0.0000 i0.0000 ---Off-Road -2- ------------------------ ------- ------- ------- --------------- .9292 26.5386 24.3071 0.0387 1.1355 1.1355 1.0486 1.0486 0.0000 3,703.347 3,703.347 1.1409 13,731.869 5 5 7
Total

2.9292

26.5386

24.3071

0.0387

5.7003

1.1355

6.8358

0.8631

1.0486

1.9117

0.0000
3,703.347
3,703.347

1.1409
3,731.869
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
1 1
5 5
7 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.2 Demolition/Site Preparation - 2024
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10 ;
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling •i 0.0529 3.5862 0.9430 i 0.0151 0.4596 i 0.0218 0.4814 0.1260 i 0.0209 0.1469 1,665.082 1,665.082 0.0936 0.2645 1,746.249 2 2 i i 4
i i i i
Vendor �i 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 � � 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 � 0.0000 0.0000 i i i i
Worker •i 0.0659 � 0.0464 � 0.6578 i 2.000Oe- � 0.2461 i 1.4000e- 0.2475 0.0653 i 1.2900e- 0.0666 201.9140 201.9140 4.5800e- 4.7900e- 203.4555 003 003 003 . 003 003 i
Total

0.1188

3.6326

1.6008

0.0171

0.7057

0.0232

0.7289

0.1913

0.0222

0.2135
1,866.996
1,866.996

0.0982

0.2693
1,949.705
2 2
0 3.3 Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
Fugitive Dust •i

6.5126 0.0000

6.5126 3.3632 0.0000

3.3632
i 0.0000
i 0.0000
Off -Road •i 1.5287

14.6365 14.8530 i 0.0208 0.6448

0.6448 i 0.5933

0.5933
2,017.660 2,017.660 0.6526
2,033.974
Total

1.5287

14.6365

14.8530

0.0208

6.5126

0.6448

7.1574

3.3632

0.5933

3.9564
2,017.660
2,017.660

0.6526
2,033.974
2 2
0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.3 Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks - 2024
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
I lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 4.58OOe- 03108 0.0817 1.3100e- M398 1.8900e- M417 0.0109 1.8100e- M127 144.2888 1442888 8.1100e- 0.0229 1513224 003 s s s 003 s s 003 s s s 003 003
------------ ------- ---------------•-------------- ------- ------- --------------- Vendor :1 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ----------------------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0471 0.0332 0.4699 1.4300e- 0.1758 1.000Oe- 0.1768 0.0466 9.2000e- 0.0475 144.2243 144.2243 3.2700e- 3.4200e- 145.3254 003 s 003 s s s 004 003 s 003
Total

0.0516

0.3439

0.5516

2.7400e-

0.2156

2.8900e-

0.2185

0.0575

2.7300e-

0.0603
288.5131
278.5131

0.0114

0.0263
296.6478
003
003
003
1 Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TotaICO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 6.5126 0.0000 s 6.5126 s 3.3632 s 0.0000 3.3632 s s 0.0000 s s i0.0000 ---Off-Road _ ----- ------------------------ ------- ------- ------- --------------- .5287 14.6365 14.8530 0.0208 0.6448 0.6448 0.5933 0.5933 0.0000 2,017.660 2,017.660 0.6526 12,033.974 2 s 2 s s s 0
Total

1.5287

14.6365

14.8530

0.0208

6.5126

0.6448

7.1574

3.3632

0.5933

3.9564

0.0000
2,017.660
2,717.660

0.6526
2,033.974
2 2
0 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.3 Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks - 2024
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I
I PM10
Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
I lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 4.5800e- 03108 0.0817 i 1.3100e- 0.0398 i 1.8900e- 0.0417 0.0109 i 1.8100e- 0.0127 144.2888 1442888 8.1100e- 0.0229 1513224 003 003 003 003 003
------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ---------------•-------------- ------- ------- --------------- Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----------------------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0471 0.0332 0.4699 1.4300e- 0.1758 1.000Oe- 0.1768 0.0466 i 9.2000e- 0.0475 144.2243 144.2243 3.2700e- 3.4200e- 145.3254 003 003 004 003 003
Total

0.0516

0.3439

0.5516

2.7400e-

0.2156

2.8900e-

0.2185

0.0575

2.7300e-

0.0603
288.5131
278.5131

0.0114

0.0263
296.6478
003
003
003
1 3.4 Grading/Undergroud Utilities - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
TotaICO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.7044 0.0000 9.7044 3.7184 0.0000 3.7184 0.0000 i0.0000 ---Off-Road -3- ------------------------ ------- ------- ------- --------------- .9038 37.3675 33.8090 0.0673 1.5915 1.5915 1.4642 1.4642 6,518.048 6,518.048 2.1081 16,570.750 7 7 i i 5
Total

3.9038

37.3675

33.8090

0.0673

9.7044

1.5915

11.2959

3.7184

1.4642

5.1826
6,518.048

2.1081
6,570.750
1 1
16,518.048
7 7
5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4 Grading/Undergroud Utilities - 2024
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
I lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.5105 34.6113 9.1010 i 01461 4.4353 i 0.2108 4.6461 1.2161 i 02016 1.4177 16,070.18 16,07018 0.9037 2.5529 16,853.54 10 10 93
------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- -------------- -- ---- ------- ----------- --- Vendor .1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- -------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0847 0.0597 0.8458 2.5700e- 0.3165 1.8000e- 0.3183 0.0839 i 1.6500e- 0.0856 259.6037 259.6037 5.8900e- 6.1600e- 261.5857 003 003 003 003 003
Total

0.5952

34.6710

9.9467

0.1486

4.7518

0.2126

4.9643

1.3000

0.2033

1.5033
16,329.78
16,329.78

0.9096

2.5591
17,115.13
47 47
50 Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBio-0O2
ToIaICO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Fugitive Dust 9.7044 0.0000 9.7044 3.7184 0.0000 3.7184 0.0000 i0.0000 ---Off-Road -3- ------------------------ ------- ------- ------- --------------- .9038 37.3675 33.8090 0.0673 1.5915 1.5915 1.4642 1.4642 0.0000 6,518.048 6,518.048 2.1081 16,570.750 7 7 i i 5
Total

3.9038

37.3675

33.8090

0.0673

9.7044

1.5915

11.2959

3.7184

1.4642

5.1826

0.0000
6,518.048
6,518.048

2.1081
6,570.750
7 7
5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.4 Grading/Undergroud Utilities - 2024
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-0O2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
I lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.5105 34.6113 9.1010 i 01461 4.4353 i 0.2108 4.6461 1.2161 i 02016 1.4177 16,070.18 16,07018 0.9037 2.5529 16,853.54 10 10 93
------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- -------------- -- ---- ------- ----------- --- Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0847 0.0597 0.8458 2.5700e- 0.3165 1.8000e- 0.3183 0.0839 i 1.6500e- 0.0856 259.6037 259.6037 5.8900e- 6.1600e- 261.5857 003 003 003 003 003
Total

0.5952

34.6710

9.9467

0.1486

4.7518

0.2126

4.9643

1.3000

0.2033

1.5033
16,329.78
16,329.78

0.9096

2.5591
17,115.13
1�
47 47
50 3.5 Off -Site Street Utilites - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I I
PM10 I PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
I lb/day j
lb/day
Off -Road 0.4502 4.2012 5.9012 8.0200e- 0.1728 0.1728 0.1590 0.1590 776.4576 776.4576 0.2511 i782.7356 003
Total

0.4502

4.2012

5.9012

8.0200e-

0.1728

0.1590

0.1590
776.4576
776.4576

0.2511
782.7356
j
j
003
1 I
j
j
j
j
1 1
1 j
j
j

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.5 Off -Site Street Utilites - 2024
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0()00 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 0.0()00 0.00()0 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- -------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----------------------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0377 0.0265 0.3759 1.1400e- 0.1407 8.000Oe- 0.1414 0.0373 i 7.4000e- 0.0380 115.3794 115.3794 2.6200e- 2.7400e- 116.2603 003 004 004 003 003
Total

0.0377

0.0265

0.3759

1.1400e-

0.1407

8.000Oe-

0.1414

0.0373

7.4000e-

0.0380
115.3794
175.3794

2.6200e-

2.7400e-
11671
003
004
004
003
003
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM10 I PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 0.4502 4.2012 5.9012 8.0200e- 0.1728 0.1728 0.1590 0.1590 0.0000 776.4576 776.4576 0.2511 i782.7356 003
Total

0.4502

4.2012

5.9012

8.0200e-

0.1728

0.1590

0.0000
776.4576
776.4576

0.2511
782.7356
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.5 Off -Site Street Utilites - 2024
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0()00 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 0.0()00 0.00()0 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- -------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----------------------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0377 0.0265 0.3759 1.1400e- 0.1407 8.000Oe- 0.1414 0.0373 i 7.4000e- 0.0380 115.3794 115.3794 2.6200e- 2.7400e- 116.2603 003 004 004 003 003
Total

0.0377

0.0265

0.3759

1.1400e-

0.1407

8.000Oe-

0.1414

0.0373

7.4000e-

0.0380
115.3794
175.3794

2.6200e-

2.7400e-
11671
003
004
004
003
003

1.5474

13.3795

15.2360

0.0296

0.5872

0.5466

0.5466
2,783.573
2,783.573

0.8308
2,804.343
1�
2 2
3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Building Construction - 2024
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0()00 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 s 0.0()00 s 0.00()0 s 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- -- ---- ------- --- ---
Vendor 0.1173 4.8342 1.5782 0.0237 0.8492 0.0256 s 0.8748 s 0.2444 s 0.0245 0.2689 2,554.395 s 2,554.395 s 0.0867 s 0.3669 2,665.898 5 s 5 s s s 2
------------ ------- --------------- v -------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.8584 0.6048 8.5702 0.0260 3.2067 0.0182 s 3.2249 s 0.8504 s 0.0168 0.8671 2,630.650 s 2,630.650 s 0.0597 s 0.0624 2,650.735 8 s 8 s s s 0
Total

0.9757

5.4390

10.1484

0.0498

4.0559

0.0438

4.0997

1.0948

0.0413

1.1360
5,185.046
5,75.046

0.1464

0.4293
5,316.�633
3 3
2 Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 1.5474 13.3795 15.2360 0.0296 0.5872 s 0.5872 s s 0.5466 0,5466 0.0000 2,783.573 s 2,783.573 s 0.8308 s i2,804.343 2 s 2 s s s 3
Total

1.5474

13.3795

15.2360

0.0296

0.5872

0.5466

0.0000
2,783.573
2,783.573

0.8308
2,804.343
1�
2 2
3 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Building Construction - 2024
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0()00 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 s 0.0()00 s 0.00()0 s 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ---------------•-------------- -- ---- ------- ----------- --- Vendor :•1 0.1173 4.8342 1.5782 0.0237 0.8492 0.0256 0.8748 0.2444 0.0245 0.2689 2,554.395 2,554.395 0.0867 0.3669 2,665.898 5 s 5 s s s 2
------------ ------- ------------------------ ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.8584 s 0.6048 s 8.5702 s 0.0260 s 3.2067 0.0182 s 3.2249 s 0.8504 s 0.0168 0.8671 2,630.650 s 2,630.650 s 0.0597 s 0.0624 2,650.735 8 s 8 s s s 0
Total

0.9757

5.4390

10.1484

0.0498

4.0559

0.0438

4.0997

1.0948

0.0413

1.1360
5,185.046
5,75.046

0.1464

0.4293
5,316,633
3 3
2 3.6 Building Construction - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 1.4544 12M48 15.0006 0.0296 0.5100 s 0.5100 s s 0.4751 0,4751 2,783.750 s 2,783.750 s 0.8292 s i2,804.480 1 s 1 s s s 5
Total

1.4544

12.3048

15.0006

0.0296

0.5100

0.4751

0.4751
2,783.750
2,783.750

0.8292
2,804.480
1�
1 1
5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Building Construction - 2025
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0()00 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 s 0.0()00 s 0.00()0 s 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ---------------•-------------- -- ---- ------- ----------- --- Vendor :•1 0.1133 4.8112 1.5470 0.0233 0.8492 0.0257 0.8749 0.2444 0.0246 0.2690 2,508.430 2,508.430 0.0874 0.3605 2,618.053 0 ------------ ------- ------------------------ ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.8059 s 0.5422 s 7.9690 s 0.0251 s 3.2067 0.0173 s 3.2241 s 0.8504 s 0.0160 0.8663 2,541.348 s 2,541.348 s 0.0538 s 0.0582 2,560.035 2 s 2 s s s 8
Total

0.9193

5.3534

9.5161

0.0484

4.0559

0.0430

4.0990

1.0948

0.0405

1.1353
5,049.778
5,749.778

0.1411

0.4187
5,1787088
3 3
8 Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 1.4544 12M48 15.0006 0.0296 0.5100 s 0.5100 s s 0.4751 0,4751 0.0000 2,783.750 s 2,783.750 s 0.8292 s i2,804.480 1 s 1 s s s 5
Total

1.4544

12.3048

15.0006

0.0296

0.5100

0.4751

0.0000
2,783.750
2,783.750

0.8292
2,804.480
1�
1 1
5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.6 Building Construction - 2025
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0()00 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 s 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 s 0.0()00 s 0.00()0 s 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ---------------•-------------- -- ---- ------- --- --- Vendor :•1 0.1133 4.8112 1.5470 0.0233 0.8492 0.0257 0.8749 0.2444 0.0246 0.2690 2,508.430 2,508.430 0.0874 0.3605 2,618.053 0 ------------ ------- ------------------------ ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.8059 s 0.5422 s 7.9690 s 0.0251 s 3.2067 0.0173 s 3.2241 s 0.8504 s 0.0160 0.8663 2,541.348 s 2,541.348 s 0.0538 s 0.0582 2,560.035 2 s 2 s s s 8
Total

0.9193

5.3534

9.5161

0.0484

4.0559

0.0430

4.0990

1.0948

0.0405

1.1353
5,049.778
5,749.778

0.1411

0.4187
5,1787088
3 3
8 3.7 Paving - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 0.9241 8.2829 10.1181 0.0140 0.4424 s 0.4424 s s 0.4070 0,4070 1,352.829 s 1,352.829 s 0.4375 s i1,363.767 2 s 2 s s s 5
------------ ---- -- --------------- ------- -------
Paving 2.0934 0.0000 s 0.0000 s s 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total

3.0174

8.2829

10.1181

0.0140

0.4424

0.4070

0.4070
1,352.829
1,72.829

0.4375
1,363.767
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
1 1
2 1
2 5

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.7 Paving - 2025
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0()00 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 0.0()00 0.00()0 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -- ---- ------- ------- --- --- Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- v -------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0530 0.0357 0.5243 1.6500e- 0.2110 1.1400e- 0.2121 0.0559 i 1.0500e- 0.0570 167.1940 167.1940 3.5400e- 3.8300e- 168.4234 003 003 003 003 003
Total

0.0530

0.0357

0.5243

1.6500e-

0.2110

1.1400e-

0.2121

0.0559

1.0500e-

0.0570
167.1940
167.1940

3.5400e-

3.8300e-
16871
003
003
003
003
003
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Off -Road 0.9241 8.2829 10.1181 0.0140 0.4424 0.4424 0.4070 0,4070 0.0000 1 1,352.829 1,352.829 0.4375 i1,363.767 2 2 i 5
------------ ------- ---- -- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- Paving 2.0934 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total

3.0174

8.2829

10.1181

0.0140

0.4424

0.4070
000
1,352.829
1,72.829

0.4375
1,363.767
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
1 77
1 2
1 2
1 5

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.7 Paving - 2025
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0()00 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 0.0()00 0.00()0 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- -------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----------------------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.0530 0.0357 0.5243 i 1.6500e- 0.2110 1.1400e- 0.2121 0.0559 i 1.0500e- 0.0570 167.1940 167.1940 3.5400e- 3.8300e- 168.4234 003 003 003 003 003
Total

0.0530

0.0357

0.5243

1.6500e-

0.2110

1.1400e-

0.2121

0.0559

1.0500e-

0.0570
167.1940
171940

3.5400e-

3.8300e-
16871
003
003
003
003
003

0.8821

1.1396

1.6400e-

0.0273

0.0273
133.5074
133.5074

0.0139
133.879
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.8 Architectural Coating - 2025
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio CO2
NBIo- CO21
Total CO21
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0()00 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 0.0()00 0.00()0 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -- ---- ------- ------- --- --- Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- v -------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.1612 0.1084 1.5938 5.0300e- 0.6413 3.4700e- 0.6448 0.1701 i 3.1900e- 0.1733 508.2696 508.2696 0.0108 0.0116 512.0072 003 003 003
Total

0.1612

0.1084

1.5938

5.0300e-

0.6413

3.4700e-

0.6448

0.1701

3.1900e-

0.1733
508.2696
5072696

0.0108

0.0116
512.31
003
003
003
Mitigated Construction On -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PM10 I PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Archit. Coating 110.4276 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0,0000 0.0000 i0.0000 ------------ ------- ---- -- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Off-Road 0.1548 0.8821 1.1396 1.6400e- 0.0273 0.0273 0.0273 0.0273 0.0000 133.5074 133.5074 0.0139 133.8539 i i
003
Total
110.5825

0.8821

1.1396

1.6400e-

0.0273

0.000;
133.5074
133.5074

0.0139
133.879
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

3.8 Architectural Coating - 2025
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2'Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio COS
NBIo- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
I
I
PM10
I PM10
Total
PM2,5
PM2.5
Total
I
I
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0()00 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 OMOO 0.0000 0.0()00 0.00()0 0.0000 0.00()0 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- -------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Vendor :1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ------------ ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ----------------------- ------- ------- ------- --------------- Worker 0.1612 0.1084 1.5938 5.0300e- 0.6413 3.4700e- 0.6448 0.1701 i 3.1900e- 0.1733 508.2696 508.2696 0.0108 0.0116 512.0072 003 003 003
Total

0.1612

0.1084

1.5938

5.0300e-

0.6413

3.4700e-

0.6448

0.1701

3.1900e-

0.1733
508.2696
508.2696

0.0108

0.0116
512.31
1 003
003
003
1 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG
I NOx
I GO
I S02
Fugitive Exhaust
PM10 PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2'.5
P 2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
I N20
I CO2e
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Mitigated •, 9.0854 9.6371 89.7542 i 0.1975 22.8883 0.1446

23.0330

6.0973
i 0.1343

6.2316 , 20,151.45 120,151.45 i 1.4217

0.8814 20,449.66
•�
. 75 75
32 � � i � � � � i �
-------------,
Unmitigated

9.0854 - 9.6371 - 89.7542 0.1975 - 22.8883 0.1446
• 23.0330

6.0973

0.1343

6.2316
20,151.45 20,151.45 - 1.4217
- 0.8814 20,449.66
75 75
32 4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate
Unmitigated
Mitigated
Land Use
Weekday
Saturday
Sunday
Annual VMT
Annual VMT
General Office Building ••••••---3.211.00- , 3,211.00--T-- 321100__Y--------10,344,111---- e---------10,344,111--- .............................. ------------ ---- ------ +
Other Asphalt Surfaces + 0.00 0.00 0.00
................................................. . .----------'T - - - - - - - - - - - •! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - f -------------------------- Parking Lot + 0.00 ; 0.00 0.00
.. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . • .. . . . . .. . . . .----------T .. . . . . .. . . . .� . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . r
Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail ; 24.90 ; 24.90 24.90 106,712 106,712 .....................................+--------- -------------------------------------------------- ;-----------t-----------
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail 97.78 , 97.78 97.78 419,057 419,057 Total 3,333.68
3,333.68
3,333.68
10,869,880
10,869,880

4.3 Trip Type Information
General Office Building 16.60 1 8.40

6.90 i 33.00 '
'

48.00 19.00
77 19
4 • • .i - - - - - - - - - - -t - - - - - - - -
Asphalt S. rfa ; 16.60 8.40

6.90 0.00 I
.T

0.00 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ r _ _

0.00 ;
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ! -
; 0 ;
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
0 • • .Other .es
.......... r---------- 1-____--
-------J
--------- T-----------
.
. .

Parking Lot 16.60 8.40

6.90 v 0.00

0.00 0.00
0 0
0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .i - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Wareho ; 16.60 8.40
-

6.90 •

59.00 e
-

0.00 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ r _ _

41.00 ;
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
92 _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - ! -
; 5 ;
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _
3 .Refrigerated :se.No
• .t__________y _________T
..........

Y......... ------- 1---------------------
...........
.......... ...............
.

Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No 16.60 8.40

6.90 59.00

0.00 41.00
92 5
3 4.4 Fleet Mix

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied General Office Building

0.537891+

0.065289:

0.189998:
0,126515:

0.023567:

0.006518:

0.011114:

0.008084;

0.000933:

0.000591:

0.025474:

0.0007081 0.003318
Other Asphalt Surfaces

0.537891+

0.065289:

0.189998:
0,126515:

0.023567:

0.006518:

0.011114:

0.008084;

0.000933:

0.000591

0.025474:

0.0007081 0.003318
Parking Lot

0.537891+

0.065289:

0.189998:
0,126515:

0.023567:

0.006518:

0.011114:

0.008084;

0.000933:

0.000591

0.025474:

0.0007081 0.003318
Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail •

0.537891+

0.065289:

0.189998:
0,126515:

0.023567:

0.006518:

0.011114:

0.008084;

0.000933:

0.000591

0.025474:

0.0007081 0.003318
+
i
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No

0.537891•

0.065289,

0.189998,
0,126515,

0.023567,

0.006518,

0.011114,

0.008084,

0.000933,

0.000591,

0.025474,

0.000708, 0.003318
Rail

5.0 Energy Detail
Historical Energy Use: N

0.0264

0.0264
i i 416.4964 416.4964 7.9800e- i 7.6400e- 418.9714
Mitigated
003
. i 003 003
• i i i i • i
NaturalGas 0.0382

0.3471 0.2916 2.0800e-
- 0.0264

0.0264

0.0264
416.4964 416.4964 7.9800e- - 7.6400e- 418.9714
Unmitigated
003
003 003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGa
FLOG NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2 CH4
N20
Ct?2e
s Use
I
PM10
I
PM10
I
Total
PM2m5
I
PM2.5
Total
I
Land Use
kBTU/yr
Ib/day
lb/day
General Office
1 933.151 *1 0.0101 1 0.0915 1 0.0769 1 5.5000e- 1 1 6.9500e- 1 6.9500e- 1 1 6.9500e- 6.9500e- 1 109.7824 1 109.7824 1 2.1000e- 1 2.0100e- i 110.4348 Building
004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 1 i 1 1 1 1 003 1 003 1
1 .

Other Asphalt
I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1
� 0 *1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 0.0000 � 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 i 0.0000 Surfaces
I ; I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1
Parking Lot
I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I 1 1
� 0 *1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 1 0.0000 0.0000 � 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 i 0.0000 I ; I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1
r------�1 i------- i------- i------- i------- i------- i------- i------- i-------- ------- T------- 1 i-------i-------i-------t------- Refrigerated
611.285 9 6.5900e- 1 0.0599 1 0.0503 1 3.6000e- 1 1 4.5500e- 1 4.5500e- 1 1 4.5500e- 1 4.5500e- r 1 71.9159 1 71.9159 1 1.3800e- 1 1.3200e- 72.3433 Warehouse -No
003 004 003 003 003 003 * i 003 003
Rail
-----------
1 S1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 1
-----
Unrefrigerated
e 1995,78 h 0.0215 1 0.1957 1 0.1644 1 1.1700e- 1 1 0.0149 1 0.0149 1 1 0.0149 1 0.0149 r 1 234.7981 1 234.7981 1 4.5000e- 1 4.3000e- 236.1934 Warehouse -No
}
003 I I 1 1
1 1 003 003
9 I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 T I I 1 1
Rail
Total

0.0382

0.3471

0.2916

2.0800e-

0.0264

0.0264
416.4964
416.4964

7.9800e-

7.6300e-
418.9714
003
003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Mitigated
NaturalGa
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2 CH4
N20
Ct?2e
s Use
I
PM10
I
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
I
PM2.5
Total
I
Land Use
kBTU/yr
Ib/day
lb/day
General Office
1 0.933151 *1 0.0101 1 0.0915 1 0.0769 1 5.5000e- 1 1 6.9500e- 1 6.9500e- 1 1 6.9500e- 6.9500e- 1 109.7824 1 109.7824 1 2.1000e- 1 2.0100e- i 110.4348 Building
004 1 1 003 1 003 1 1 003 003 1 i 1 1 1 1 003 1 003 1
1 .

0.0382

0.3471

0.2916

2.0800e-

0.0264

0.0264
416.4964
416.4964

7.9800e-

7.6300e-
418.9714
11 003
003
003

6.0 Area Detail

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ROG I NOx
CO
I S02
I Fugitive
PMIO
Exhaust
I PM10
PMIO
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
I Total
Bia CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
I
CH4
I
N20
CO2o
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Mitigated 11.9839 i 1.1400e-

0.1253 1.000Oe-

4.5000e- i 4.5000e-

4.5000e-

4.5000e- i 0.2692 0.2692 i 7.000Oe- 0.2867
003
005
004 004
004
004
004
--------- - -------------- 4 --------------- i --------------- 4 --------------- 4 --------------- I --------------- 4 --------------- i --------------- 4 --------------- --------------- -------------- i --------------- 4 --------------- I --------------- ------- Unmitigated

11.9839 1.1400e-

0.1253 - 1.000Oe-
- 4.5000e- - 4.5000e-

4.5000e-

4.5000e- 0.2692 0.2692 - 7.000Oe- 0.2867
003
005
004 004
004
004
004

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
ROG NOx CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PMIO
Fugitive
Exhaust PM2.5
Bio-00
NBio-0O2
TotaICO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
I
PMIO
I PMIO
Total
PM2.5
PMZ5 Total
Li
I
I
Subcategory
lb/day
lb/day
Architectural 1.3614 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000 Coating

11.9839

1.1400e-

0.1253

1.000Oe-

4.5000e-

0.2692

7.000Oe-

0.2867
11 003
005
004
004
004
004
004

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Mitigated
ROG
Nox
Co
Sot
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM1O
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio-Cot
NBio- Cot
Total Cot
CH4
N20 Cote
PM10
PM1O
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I I
Subcategory
lb/day
lb/day
Architectural 1.3614 i i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i i 0.0000 Coating
i i i i i
Consumer .1 10.6109 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 � � � 0.0000 0.0000 Products i
i
Landscaping •i 0.0115 i 1.1400e- 0.1253 i 1.00OOe- 4.5000e- i 4.5000e- i 4.5000e- 4.5000e- i 0.2692 0.2692 i 7.00OOe- i 0.2867 003 005 004 004 004 004 004
Total

11.9839

1.1400e-

0.1253

1.000Oe-

4.5000e-

0.2692

7.00OOe-

0.2867
003
005
004
004
004
004
004

7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 34 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM Exhibit D
Downey Prologis Project R2 - Los Angeles -South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off -Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied

8.0 Waste Detail

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

9.0 Operational Offroad

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Boilers
User Defined Equipment

11.0 Vegetation

Exhibit D
Attachment B
Litigation Support for the Environment
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
2656 29t" Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
[email protected]
Geologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization
Investigation and Remediation Strategies
Litigation Support and Testifying Expert
Industrial Stormwater Compliance
CEQA Review
Education:

M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 1984, B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA,1982.

Professional Certifications:

California Professional Geologist
California Certified Hydrogeologist
Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner
Professional Experience:

Matt has 30 years of experience in environmental policy, contaminant assessment and remediation, stormwater compliance, and CEQA review. He spent nine years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and Superfund programs and served as EPA's Senior Science Policy Advisor in the Western Regional Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from perchlorate and MTBE. While with EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of the assessment of seven major military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement actions under provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and directed efforts to improve hydrogeologic characterization and water quality monitoring. For the past 15 years, as a founding partner with SWAPE, Matt has developed extensive client relationships and has managed complex projects that include consultation as an expert witness and a regulatory specialist, and a manager of projects ranging from industrial stormwater compliance to CEQA review of impacts from hazardous waste, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions.

Positions Matt has held include:
• Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 — present); • Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 — 2104, 2017; • Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 -- 2003);

Exhibit D
• Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001— 2004);
• Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989- 1998);
• Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 — 2000); • Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 — 1998);
• Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990—1995); • Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986—1998); and
• Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984—1986).

Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst:

With SWAPE, Matt's responsibilities have included:
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 300 environmental impact reports and negative declarations since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard to hazardous waste, water resources, water quality, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and geologic hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead agencies at the local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks and implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from toxins and Valley Fever.
• Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at more than 100 industrial facilities.
• Expert witness on numerous cases including, for example, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) contamination of groundwater, MTBE litigation, air toxins at hazards at a school, CERCLA compliance in assessment and remediation, and industrial stormwater contamination. • Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns. • Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission. • Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S. • Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of Perchlorate contamination in Southern California drinking water wells.
• Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas stations throughout California.

With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt's duties included the following:
• Senior author of a report on the extent of Perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel. • Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology of MTBE use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology of perchlorate use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies. • Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by MTBE in California and New York.

Exhibit D
• Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production -related contamination in Mississippi. • Lead author for a multi -volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines. • Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with clients and regulators.

Executive Director:

As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business institutions including the Orange County Business Council.

Hydrogeology:

As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows:
• Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and groundwater.
• Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory analysis at military bases.
• Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum.

At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and County of Maui.

As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included the following:
• Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for the protection of drinking water.
• Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports, conducted 3 Exhibit D
public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very concerned about the impact of designation.

Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments, including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water transfer.

Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows:
• Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance with Subtitle C requirements.
• Reviewed and wrote "part B" permits for the disposal of hazardous waste. • Conducted RCRA Corrective Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S.

EPA legal counsel.
• Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor's investigations of waste sites.

With the National Park Service, Matt directed service -wide investigations of contaminant sources to prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks:
• Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants. • Conducted watershed -scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and Olympic National Park.
• Identified high -levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA. • Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a national workgroup.
• Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while serving on a national workgroup.
• Co-authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation- wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks. • Contributed to the Federal Multi -Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water Action Plan.

Policy:

Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9.

Activities included the following:
• Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking water supplies.
• Shaped EPA's national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in Water: Critical Information and Research Needs.
• Improved the technical training of EPA's scientific and engineering staff. • Earned an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the region's 300 scientists and engineers in negotiations with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific 4 Exhibit D
principles into the policy -making process.
• Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents.

Geology:

With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:

Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical models to determine slope stability.

Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource protection.

Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the city of Medford, Oregon.

As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern Oregon. Duties included the following:

Supervised year -long effort for soil and groundwater sampling.

Conducted aquifer tests.

Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.

Teaching:

From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university levels:
• At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater contamination.
• Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students. • Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.

Matt is currently a part time geology instructor at Golden West College in Huntington Beach, California where he taught from 2010 to 2014 and in 2017.

Invited Testimony, Reports, Pavers and Presentations:

Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.

Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.

EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.

Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).
5 Exhibit D
Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at schools in Southern California, Los Angeles.

Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells.

Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee).

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy of Sciences, Irvine, CA.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter -Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant.

Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002, A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental Journalists.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater (and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and State Underground Storage Tank Program managers.

Exhibit D
Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished report.

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water.

Unpublished report.

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage Tanks. Unpublished report.

Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. Potential W a t e r Quality Concerns Related to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.

VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.

Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina.

Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada.

Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City.

Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L., 1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui, October 1996.

Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu, Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air and Waste Management Association Publication VIP-61.

Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Characterization and Cleanup at Closing Military Bases in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.

Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of Groundwater.

Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL- contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting. 7 Exhibit D
Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35.

Other Experience:

Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examinations, 2009-2011.

Exhibit D
Attachment C
Technical Consultation, Data Analysis and
Litigation Support for the Environment
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

Principal Environmental Chemist
Education

SOII, WATER AIR PROTECTION ENTERPRISE
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, California 90405
Attn: Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

Mobil: (310) 795-2335
Office: (310) 452-5555
Fax: (310) 452-5550
Email: prosenfeld(aswape.com
Chemical Fate and Transport & Air Dispersion Modeling
Risk Assessment & Remediation Specialist
Ph.D. Soil Chemistry, University of Washington, 1999. Dissertation on volatile organic compound filtration.

M.S. Environmental Science, U.C. Berkeley, 1995. Thesis on organic waste economics.

B.A. Environmental Studies, U.C. Santa Barbara, 1991. Focus on wastewater treatment.

Professional Experience
Dr. Rosenfeld has over 25 years of experience conducting environmental investigations and risk assessments for evaluating impacts to human health, property, and ecological receptors. His expertise focuses on the fate and transport of environmental contaminants, human health risk, exposure assessment, and ecological restoration. Dr.

Rosenfeld has evaluated and modeled emissions from oil spills, landfills, boilers and incinerators, process stacks, storage tanks, confined animal feeding operations, industrial, military and agricultural sources, unconventional oil drilling operations, and locomotive and construction engines. His project experience ranges from monitoring and modeling of pollution sources to evaluating impacts of pollution on workers at industrial facilities and residents in surrounding communities. Dr. Rosenfeld has also successfully modeled exposure to contaminants distributed by water systems and via vapor intrusion.

Dr. Rosenfeld has investigated and designed remediation programs and risk assessments for contaminated sites containing lead, heavy metals, mold, bacteria, particulate matter, petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents, pesticides, radioactive waste, dioxins and furans, semi- and volatile organic compounds, PCBs, PAHs, creosote, perchlorate, asbestos, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFOA/PFOS), unusual polymers, fuel oxygenates (MTBE), among other pollutants. Dr. Rosenfeld also has experience evaluating greenhouse gas emissions from various projects and is an expert on the assessment of odors from industrial and agricultural sites, as well as the evaluation of odor nuisance impacts and technologies for abatement of odorous emissions. As a principal scientist at SWAPE, Dr. Rosenfeld directs air dispersion modeling and exposure assessments. He has served as an expert witness and testified about pollution sources causing nuisance and/or personal injury at sites and has testified as an expert witness on numerous cases involving exposure to soil, water and air contaminants from industrial, railroad, agricultural, and military sources.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 1 of 12 October 2022

Exhibit D
Professional History:

Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher) UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer
San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager Bechtel, San Diego, California, 1999 — 2000; Risk Assessor King County, Seattle, 1996 —1999; Scientist
James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist
Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1.993; Scientist Publications:

Rosenfeld P. E., Spaeth K., Hallman R., Bressler R., Smith, G., (2022) Cancer Risk and Diesel Exhaust Exposure Among Railroad Workers. Water Air Soil Pollution. 233, 171.

Remy, L.L., Clay T., Byers, V., Rosenfeld P. E. (2019) Hospital, Health, and Community Burden After Oil Refinery Fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012. Environmental Health. 18:48 Simons, R.A., Seo, Y. Rosenfeld, P., (2015) Modeling the Effect of Refinery Emission On Residential Property Value. Journal of Real Estate Research. 27(3):321-342
Chen, J. A, Zapata A. R., Sutherland A. J., Molmen, D.R., Chow, B. S., Wu, L. E., Rosenfeld, P. E., Hesse, R. C., (2012) Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compound Exposure To A Community In Texas City Texas Evaluated Using Aermod and Empirical Data. American Journal of Environmental Science, 8(6), 622-632.

Rosenfeld, P.E. & Feng, L. (2011). The Risks of Hazardous Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2011). Handbook of'Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Agrochemical Industry, Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Gonzalez, J., Feng, L., Sutherland, A., Waller, C., Sok, H., Hesse, R., Rosenfeld, P. (2010). PCBs and Dioxins/Furans in Attic Dust Collected Near Former PCB Production and Secondary Copper Facilities in Sauget, IL.

Procedia Environmental Sciences. 113-125.

Feng, L., Wu, C., Tam, L., Sutherland, A.J., Clark, J.J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Dioxin and Furan Blood Lipid and Attic Dust Concentrations in Populations Living Near Four Wood Treatment Facilities in the United States. Journal of Environmental Health. 73(6), 34-46.

Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Handbook of'Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Wood and Paper Industries. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2009). Handbook of'Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Petroleum Industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 2 of 12 October 2022

Exhibit D
Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Air Pollution, 123 (17), 319-327.

Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equivalency Quotients (TEQ) In Two Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 002252-002255.

Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 000527- 000530.

Hensley, A.R. A. Scott, J. J. J. Clark, Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Attic Dust and Human Blood Samples Collected near a Former Wood Treatment Facility. Environmental Research. 105, 194-197.

Rosenfeld, P.E., J. J. J. Clark, A. R. Hensley, M. Suffet. (2007). The Use of an Odor Wheel Classification for Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria for Compost Facilities. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 345-357.

Rosenfeld, P. E., M. Suffet. (2007). The Anatomy Of Odour Wheels For Odours Of Drinking Water, Wastewater, Compost And The Urban Environment. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 335-344.

Sullivan, P. J. Clark, J.J.J., Agardy, F. J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Toxic Legacy, Synthetic Toxins in the Food, Water, and Air in American Cities. Boston Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash. Water Science and Technology. 49(9),171-178.

Rosenfeld P. E., J.J. Clark, I.H. (Mel) Suffet (2004). The Value of An Odor -Quality -Wheel Classification Scheme For The Urban Environment. Water Environment Federation's Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC) 2004. New Orleans, October 2-6, 2004.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet, I.H. (2004). Understanding Odorants Associated With Compost, Biomass Facilities, and the Land Application of Biosolids. Water Science and Technology. 49(9), 193-199.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash, Water Science and Technology, 49( 9), 171-178.

Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M. A., Sellew, P. (2004). Measurement of Biosolids Odor and Odorant Emissions from Windrows, Static Pile and Biofilter. Water Environment Research. 76(4), 310-315.

Rosenfeld, P.E., Grey, M and Suffet, M. (2002). Compost Demonstration Project, Sacramento California Using High -Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Integrated Waste Management Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS-6), Sacramento, CA Publication #442-02-008.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Characterization of odor emissions from three different biosolids. Water Soil and Air Pollution. 127(1-4), 173-191.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2000). Wood ash control of odor emissions from biosolids application. Journal of Environmental Quality. 29, 1662-1668.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry and D. Bennett. (2001). Wastewater dewatering polymer affect on biosolids odor emissions and microbial activity. Water Environment Research, 73(4), 363-367.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Activated Carbon and Wood Ash Sorption of Wastewater, Compost, and Biosolids Odorants. Water Environment Research, 73, 388-393.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 3 of 12 October 2022

Exhibit D
Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2001). High carbon wood ash effect on biosolids microbial activity and odor.

Water Environment Research. 131(1-4), 247-262.

Chollack, T. and P. Rosenfeld. (1998). Compost Amendment Handbook For Landscaping. Prepared for and distributed by the City of Redmond, Washington State.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1992). The Mount Liamuiga Crater Trail. Heritage Magazine of St. Kitts, 3(2).

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1993). High School Biogas Project to Prevent Deforestation On St. Kitts. Biomass Users Network, 7(1).

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions From Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Doctoral Thesis. University of Washington College of Forest Resources.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1994). Potential Utilization of Small Diameter Trees on Sierra County Public Land. Masters thesis reprinted by the Sierra County Economic Council. Sierra County, California.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1991). How to Build a Small Rural Anaerobic Digester & Uses Of Biogas In The First And Third World. Bachelors Thesis. University of California.

Presentations:

Rosenfeld, P.E., "The science for Perfluorinated Chemicals (PEAS): What makes remediation so hard?" Law Seminars International, (May 9-10, 2018) 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 101 Seattle, WA.

Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 44th Western Regional Meeting, American Chemical Society. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara, CA.

Sok, H.L.; Waller, C.C.; Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sutherland, A.J.; Wisdom -Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; Hesse, R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Atrazine: A Persistent Pesticide in Urban Drinking Water.

Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.

Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sok, H.L.; Sutherland, A.J.; Waller, C.C.; Wisdom -Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; La, M.; Hesse, R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Bringing Environmental Justice to East St. Louis, Illinois. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.

Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluoroactane Sulfonate (PFOS) Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting, Lecture conducted from Tuscon, AZ.

Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Cost to Filter Atrazine Contamination from Drinking Water in the United States" Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting. Lecture conducted from Tuscon, AZ.

Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (20-22 July, 2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. Brebbia, C.A. and Popov, V., eds., Air Pollution XVII: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and Management ofAir Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing Facility. The 23' Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 12 October 2022

Exhibit D
Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). The Repeated Trespass of Tritium -Contaminated Water Into A Surrounding Community Form Repeated Waste Spills From A Nuclear Power Plant. The 23' Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment Facility Emissions. The 23'd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.

Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Production, Chemical Properties, Toxicology, & Treatment Case Studies of 1,2,3- Triehloropropane (TCP). The Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.

Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Blood and Attic Sampling for Dioxin/Furan, PAIL and Metal Exposure in Florala, Alabama. The AEHS Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.

Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (August 21 — 25, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. The 26th International Symposium on Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants — DIOXIN2006. Lecture conducted from Radisson SAS Scandinavia Hotel in Oslo Norway.

Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (November 4-8, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. APHA 134 Annual Meeting & Exposition. Lecture conducted from Boston Massachusetts.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (October 24-25, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.

Mealey's C8/PFOA. Science, Risk & Litigation Conference. Lecture conducted from The Rittenhouse Hotel, Philadelphia, PA.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel, Irvine California.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Fate, Transport, Toxicity, And Persistence of 1,2,3-TCP. PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel in Irvine, California.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 26-27, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PDBEs. Mealey's Groundwater Conference. Lecture conducted from Ritz Carlton Hotel, Marina Del Ray, California.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (June 7-8, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.

International Society of Environmental Forensics: Focus On Emerging Contaminants. Lecture conducted from Sheraton Oceanfront Hotel, Virginia Beach, Virginia.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Fate Transport, Persistence and Toxicology of PFOA and Related Perfluorochemieals. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water And Environmental Law Conference.

Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. and Rob Hesse R.G. (May 5-6, 2004). Tert-butyl Alcohol Liability and Toxicology, A National Problem and Unquantified Liability. National Groundwater Association. Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Congress Plaza Hotel, Chicago Illinois.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 5 of 12 October 2022

Exhibit D
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (March 2004). Perchlorate Toxicology. Meeting of the American Groundwater Trust.

Lecture conducted from Phoenix Arizona.

Hagemann, M.F., Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and Rob Hesse (2004). Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River.

Meeting of tribal representatives. Lecture conducted from Parker, AZ.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (April 7, 2004). A National Damage Assessment Model For PCE and Dry Cleaners.

Drycleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento, California.

Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southwest Focus Conference. Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 1.0, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wastewater and Industrial Processes. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor.

Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Bioeycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration.

Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington..

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November 1.1-14, 2002). Using High -Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Society Annual Conference. Lecture conducted from Indianapolis, Maryland.

Rosenfeld. P.E. (September 16, 2000). Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Water Environment Federation. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.

Rosenfeld. P.E. (October 16, 2000). Wood ash and biofilter control of compost odor. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Ocean Shores, California.

Rosenfeld, P.E. (2000). Bioremediation Using Organic Soil Amendments. California Resource Recovery Association. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High -Carbon Wood -Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (1999). An evaluation of ash incorporation with biosolids for odor reduction. Soil Science Society of'America. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 12 October 2022

Exhibit D
Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Comparison of Microbial Activity and Odor Emissions from Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Brown and Caldwell. Lecture conducted from Seattle Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions from Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Lake Chelan, Washington, Rosenfeld, P.E, C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High -Carbon Wood -Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. B. Harrison, and R. Dills. (1997). Comparison of Odor Emissions From Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.

Teaching Experience:

UCLA Department of Environmental Health (Summer 2003 through 20010) Taught Environmental Health Science 100 to students, including undergrad, medical doctors, public health professionals and nurses. Course focused on the health effects of environmental contaminants.

National Ground Water Association, Successful Remediation Technologies. Custom Course in Same Fe, New Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage tanks.

National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites.

California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design.

UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation.

University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry, Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability.

U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10.

Academic Grants Awarded:

California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment.

Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001.

Synagro Technologies, Corona California: $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University.

Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000.

King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on VOC emissions. 1998.

Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 7 of 12 October 2022

Exhibit D
James River Corporation, Oregon: $10,000 grant was awarded to investigate the success of genetically engineered Poplar trees with resistance to round -up. 1996.

United State Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest: $15,000 grant was awarded to investigating fire ecology of the Tahoe National Forest. 1995.

Kellogg Foundation, Washington D.C. $500 grant was awarded to construct a large anaerobic digester on St. Kitts in West Indies. 1993
Deposition and/or Trial Testimony:

In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino Billy Wildrick, Plaintiff vs. BNSF Railway Company
Case No. CIVDS1711810
Rosenfeld Deposition 10-17-2022
In the State Court of Bibb County, State of Georgia
Richard Hutcherson, Plaintiff vs Norfolk Southern Railway Company Case No. 10-SCCV-092007
Rosenfeld Deposition 10-6-2022
In the Civil District Court of the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana Millard Clark, Plaintiff vs. Dixie Carriers, Inc. et al.

Case No. 2020-03891
Rosenfeld Deposition 9-15-2022
In The Circuit Court of Livingston County, State of Missouri, Circuit Civil Division Shirley Ralls, Plaintiff vs. Canadian Pacific Railway and Soo Line Railroad Case No. 18-LV-CC0020
Rosenfeld Deposition 9-7-2022
In The Circuit Court of the 13th Judicial Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, Florida Civil Division Jonny C. Daniels, Plaintiff vs. CSX Transportation Inc.

Case No. 20-CA-5502
Rosenfeld Deposition 9-1-2022
In The Circuit Court of St. Louis County, State of Missouri Kieth Luke et. al. Plaintiff vs. Monsanto Company et. al.

Case No. 19SL-CC03191
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-25-2022
In The Circuit Court of the 13th Judicial Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, Florida Civil Division Jeffery S. Lamotte, Plaintiff vs. CSX Transportation Inc.

Case No. NO. 20-CA-0049
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-22-2022
In State of Minnesota District Court, County of St. Louis Sixth Judicial District Greg Bean, Plaintiff vs. Soo Line Railroad Company
Case No. 69-DU-CV-21-760
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-17-2022
In United States District Court Western District of Washington at Tacoma, Washington John D. Fitzgerald Plaintiff vs. BNSF
Case No. 3:2 1 -cv-05288-RJB
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-11-2022
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 12 October 2022

Exhibit D
In Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, Macon Illinois Rocky Bennyhoff Plaintiff vs. Norfolk Southern
Case No. 20-L-56
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-3-2022
In Court of Common Pleas, Hamilton County Ohio
Joe Briggins Plaintiff vs. CSX
Case No. A2004464
Rosenfeld Deposition 6-17-2022
In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Kern George LaFazia vs. BNSF Railway Company.

Case No. BCV-19-103087
Rosenfeld Deposition 5-17-2022
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Bobby Earles vs. Penn Central ct. al.

Case No. 2020-L-000550
Rosenfeld Deposition 4-16-2022
In United States District Court Easter District of Florida Albert Hartman Plaintiff vs. Illinois Central
Case No. 2:20-ev-1633
Rosenfeld Deposition 4-4-2022
In the Circuit Court of the 4`}' Judicial Circuit, in and For Duval County, Florida Barbara Steele vs. CSX Transportation
Case No.16-219-Ca-008796
Rosenfeld Deposition 3-15-2022
In United States District Court Easter District of New York Romano et al. vs. Northrup Grumman Corporation
Case No. 16-ev-5760
Rosenfeld Deposition 3-10-2022
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Linda Benjamin vs. Illinois Central
Case No. No. 2019 L 007599
Rosenfeld Deposition 1-26-2022
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Donald Smith vs. Illinois Central
Case No. No. 2019 L 003426
Rosenfeld Deposition 1-24-2022
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Jan Holeman vs. BNSF
Case No. 2019 L 000675
Rosenfeld Deposition 1-18-2022
In the State Court of Bibb County State of Georgia
Dwayne B. Garrett vs. Norfolk Southern
Case No. 20-SCCV-091232
Rosenfeld Deposition 11-10-2021
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 9 of 12 October 2022

Exhibit D
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Joseph Ruepke vs. BNSF
Case No. 2019 L 007730
Rosenfeld Deposition 11-5-2021
In the United States District Court For the District of Nebraska Steven Gillett vs. BNSF
Case No. 4:20-cv-03120
Rosenfeld Deposition 10-28-2021
In the Montana Thirteenth District Court of Yellowstone County James Eadus vs. Soo Line Railroad and BNSF
Case No. DV 19-1056
Rosenfeld Deposition 10-21-2021
In the Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois Martha Custer et al.cvs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc.

Case No. Oi9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition 5-14-2021
Trial October 8-4-2021
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Joseph Rafferty vs. Consolidated Rail Corporation and National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a

AMTRAK,
Case No. 18-L-6845
Rosenfeld Deposition 6-28-2021
In the United States District Court For the Northern District of Illinois Theresa Romcoe vs. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation d/b/a METRA Rail Case No. 17-cv-8517
Rosenfeld Deposition 5-25-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of Arizona In and For the Cunty of Maricopa Mary Tryon et al. vs. The City of Pheonix v. Cox Cactus Farm, L.L.C., Utah Shelter Systems, Inc.

Case No. CV20127-094749
Rosenfeld Deposition 5-7-2021
In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Beaumont Division Robinson, Jeremy et al vs. CNA Insurance Company et al.

Case No. 1:17-cv-000508
Rosenfeld Deposition 3-25-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino Gary Garner, Personal Representative for the Estate of Melvin Garner vs. BNSF Railway Company.

Case No. 1720288
Rosenfeld Deposition 2-23-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, Spring Street Courthouse Benny M Rodriguez vs. Union Pacific Railroad, A Corporation, et al.

Case No. 18STCV01162
Rosenfeld Deposition 12-23-2020
In the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri
Karen Cornwell, Plaintiff, vs. Marathon Petroleum, LP, Defendant.

Case No. 1716-CV 10006
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-30-2019
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 12 October 2022

Exhibit D
In the United States District Court For The District of New Jersey Duarte et al, Plaintiffs, vs. United States Metals Refining Company et. al. Defendant.

Case No. 2:17-cv-01624-ES-SCM
Rosenfeld Deposition 6-7-2019
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division M/T Carla Maersk vs. Conti 168., Schiffahrts-GMBH & Co. Bulker KG MS "Conti Perdido' Defendant.

Case No. 3:15-CV-00106 consolidated with 3:15-CV-00237
Rosenfeld Deposition 5-9-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles — Santa Monica Carole-Taddeo-Bates et al., vs. Ifran Khan et al., Defendants Case No. BC615636
Rosenfeld Deposition 1-26-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles — Santa Monica The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments et al. vs El Adobe Apts. Inc. et al., Defendants Case No. BC646857
Rosenfeld Deposition 10-6-2018; Trial 3-7-19
In United States District Court For The District of Colorado Bells et al. Plaintiffs vs. The 3M Company et al., Defendants Case No. 1:16-ev-02531-RBJ
Rosenfeld Deposition 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018
In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 112" Judicial District Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants Cause No. 1923
Rosenfeld Deposition 11-17-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Contra Costa Simons et al., Plaintifs vs. Chevron Corporation, et al., Defendants Cause No. C12-01481
Rosenfeld Deposition I1-20-2017
In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants Case No.: No. Oi9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-23-2017
In United States District Court For The Southern District of Mississippi Guy Manuel vs. The BP Exploration et al., Defendants
Case No. 1:19-ev-00315-RHW
Rosenfeld Deposition 4-22-2020
In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles Warm Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC Case No. LC102019 (c/w BC582154)
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-16-2017, Trail 8-28-2018
In the Northern District Court of Mississippi, Greenville Division Brenda J. Cooper, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Meritor Inc., et al., Defendants Case No. 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JVM
Rosenfeld Deposition July 2017
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 11 of 12 October 2022

Exhibit D
In The Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Snohomish Michael Davis and Julie Davis et al., Plaintiff vs. Cedar Grove Composting Inc., Defendants Case No. 13-2-03987-5
Rosenfeld Deposition, February 2017
Trial March 2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda Charles Spain., Plaintiff vs. Thermo Fisher Scientific, et al., Defendants Case No. RG14711115
Rosenfeld Deposition September 2015
In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County
Russell D. Winburn, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Doug Hoksbergen, et al., Defendants Case No. LALA002187
Rosenfeld Deposition August 2015
In The Circuit Court of Ohio County, West Virginia
Robert Andrews, et al. v. Antero, et al.

Civil Action No. 14-C-30000
Rosenfeld Deposition June 2015
In The Iowa District Court for Muscatine County
Laurie Freeman et. al. Plaintiffs vs. Grain Processing Corporation, Defendant Case No. 4980
Rosenfeld Deposition May 2015
In the Circuit Court of the 17" Judicial Circuit, in and For Broward County, Florida Walter Hinton, et. al. Plaintiff, vs. City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a Municipality, Defendant.

Case No. CACE07030358 (26)
Rosenfeld Deposition December 2014
In the County Court of Dallas County Texas
Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant.

Case No. ee-11-01.650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial April 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants Case No. 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987)
Rosenfeld Deposition October 2012
In the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, Northern Division James K. Benefield, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. International Paper Company, Defendant.

Civil Action No. 2:09-cv-232-WHA-TFM
Rosenfeld Deposition July 2010, June 2011
In the Circuit Court of Jefferson County Alabama
Jacanette Moss Anthony, ct al., Plaintiffs, vs. Drummond Company Inc., et al., Defendants Civil Action No. CV 2008-2076
Rosenfeld Deposition September 2010
In the United States District Court, Western District Lafayette Division Ackie et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Citgo Petroleum Corporation, ct al., Defendants.

Case No. 2:07CV 1052
Rosenfeld Deposition July 2009
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 12 of 12 October 2022

Exhibit D
8-3
Packnd General t1fility )Ti er
,r1l,ftliewed with 1h
January 25, 2024
Alfonso Hernandez, Senior Planner
City of Downey
Planning Division
1st Floor Downey City Hall
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, CA 90241
Email: [email protected]
RE: Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Protect Draft EIR This letter issubmittedon behalf of the members of Teamsters Local 396 and their families, who live and work in Downey and throughout the Los Angeles metropolitan area. The Teamsters represent hundreds of thousands of workers in the logistics industry. These members notoniywork _in the logistics industry, butveryoften live ;in communities impacted by this industry. The Teamsters membership has committed to actively improving the industry not only through improved working conditions, wages, benefits and safety, but also by mitigating and eventually eliminating its negative impacts on the quality of life of our members, their families, and their communities. Teamsters are committed to making sure their workplace is safe and healthy not only for themselves, but for their families and neighbors.

Prologis (theApplicant)is proposing demolishing five buildings, approximately 433,000 square feet of floor area, to constructs 510,110 sq. ft. industrial, concrete tilt -up logistics facility and approximately 25,000 additional square feet of ancillary uses (collectively Project). The property, at the northwest corner of Stewart and Gray Road and Woodruff' Avenue (the Site), sits approximately700 feet from a fairly dense, residential neighborhood to the west, beginning on the east side of Coldbrook Avenue. The facility would include cold -storage capacity, allowing for delivery of groceries and other fresh and frozen foodstuffs.

Purpose of CEQA and EIR
CEQA is designed to inform decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project. 14 Cal. Code Regs. ("Guidelines") § 15002(a)(1). Its purpose is to "inform the public and its responsible officials" of the; environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made. Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564.

CEQA also requires public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage when "feasible" by requiring implementation of"environmentally superior" alternatives and all feasible mitigation measures. Guidelines§ 15002(a)(2) and'(3); Citizens of Goleta Valley. 52 Cal.3d at-564. If the project will have a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the project only if it finds that it has "eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible' and that any unavoidable significant effects on the environment are "acceptable due to overriding concerns." Pub. Res. Code §`21081; Guidelines § 15092(b)(2)(A) and (B).

CEQA requires thatthe "rationale for government approval" be disclosed to the public. California Building Industry Assn. v. Bay Area Air Quality Management Dist. (2015)'62 Cal.4th 369, 382.

Economic Impact/Urban Decay
In our comment submitted in response to the Initial Study, we recommended conducting some degree of study to see what, if any, impacts would result from development of high -intensity retail delivery facilities, specifically with A-43

Exhibit D

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

INTRODUCTION
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs (MMRPs) are required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 21081.6 to be adopted by CEQA Lead Agencies for projects having the potential to cause significant environmental impacts. The MMRP describes changes to the project or conditions of project approval that mitigate or avoid the project's potential significant effects on the environment. This MMRP addresses the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project. A brief description of the proposed project is provided below. The proposed project is located within the City of Downey (City); the City is the Lead Agency under CEQA and has discretionary authority over the proposed project.

MMRP FORMAT AND IMPLEMENTATION
Mitigation measures that would reduce or eliminate potential environmental impacts of the proposed project are identified in the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project EIR. These mitigation measures will become conditions of project approval if the project is approved. The City is required to verify that all adopted mitigation measures are implemented properly and to ensure compliance, this MMRP (including the checklist) has been formulated. The MMRP shall be adopted, along with CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, by the City (Lead Agency) and must be administered by City personnel from the Community Development Department. Specific responsibilities are delineated for each measure in the attached checklist table and these responsibilities may be delegated to qualified City staff or consultants.

The checklist, which follows as Table B-1, is intended to be used by the applicant, grading/construction contractors, and City personnel, as the appointed mitigation implementation and monitoring entities.

Information contained within the checklist clearly identifies each mitigation measure, defines the conditions required to verify compliance, and delineates the monitoring schedule. Following is an explanation of the three columns that constitute each MMRP checklist.

Column 1 Mitigation Measure: An inventory of each mitigation measure is provided.

Column 2 Monitoring Responsibility: Identifies what entities are responsible for determining compliance with each mitigation measure (e.g., City of Downey Community Development Department, construction contractor, project applicant).

Column 3 Implementation Schedule: As scheduling is dependent upon the progression of the overall project, specific dates are not used within the "Schedule" column. Instead, scheduling describes a logical succession of events (e.g., prior to ground -disturbing activities, etc.) and, if necessary, delineates a follow-up program.

Column 4 Monitoring Compliance Record Name/Date: Column is left blank and is to be signed and dated when compliance with the mitigation measure has been met. 01 Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Monitoring
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Implementation
Compliance
Responsibility
Schedule
Record
Name/Date
Cultural Resources
CUL-1: Cultural Monitoring Program. The construction contractor shall Construction
During grading and
implement an archaeological and Native American monitoring program Contractor; Qualified
other soil -disturbing
during grading and other ground -disturbing activities (i.e., trenching for Archaeologist; Native
activities
utilities) which are to occur below the current layer of fill. The monitoring American Monitor;
program shall include the retention of a qualified archaeologist and a City
Native American monitor. The archaeological and Native American monitors shall attend a pre -construction meeting with the construction manager and be in attendance during initial ground -disturbing activities at the Project site. The monitors shall determine the extent of their presence during soil disturbing activities.

The archaeological and Native American monitors shall have the authority to temporarily halt or redirect grading and other ground -disturbing activity if cultural resources are encountered. If an artifact is encountered, all operations within 50 feet of where the artifact was found shall be suspended immediately, the City shall be notified, and the qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the Native American monitor, shall evaluate the significance of the find. If cultural material is determined to be significant, the qualified archaeologist shall coordinate with the consulting tribes and City staff to develop and implement appropriate treatment measures. Pursuant to California PRC §21083.2(b), avoidance is the preferred method of preservation. The archaeologist and the tribal representative shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that will be implemented to protect the newly discovered cultural resource(s), including but not limited to, avoidance in place, excavation, relocation, and further evaluation of the discoveries in accordance with CEQA.

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
No further ground disturbance shall occur in the area of the discovery until the City approves the measures to protect the significant cultural resource(s).

CUL-2: Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. If the discovery of Project Applicant/
Upon discovery of
human remains occurs on the Project site, the specific procedures Authorized
human remains
outlined by the NAHC, in accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Representative/
Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code, Construction
must be followed:

Contractor

1. All excavation activities within 60 feet of the remains will immediately stop, and the area will be protected with flagging or by posting a monitor or construction worker to ensure that no additional disturbance occurs.

2. The Project owner or their authorized representative will contact the Los Angeles County Coroner.

3. The coroner will have two working days to examine the remains after being notified in accordance with HSC 7050.5. If the coroner determines that the remains are Native American and are not subject to the coroner's authority, the coroner will notify NAHC of the discovery within 24 hours.

4. NAHC will immediately notify the Most Likely Descendant (MILD), who will have 48 hours after being granted access to the location of the remains to inspect them and make recommendations for their treatment. Work will be suspended in the area of the find until the County approves the proposed treatment of human remains.

B-3

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
If human remains of Native American origin are discovered or unearthed, the applicant shall contact the consulting Tribe, as detailed in Mitigation Measures TCR-1, TCR-2, and TCR-3 regarding any finds and provide information after the archaeologist makes an initial assessment of the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input concerning significance and treatment. Once the find has been appropriately mitigated, as determined and documented by a qualified archaeologist, work in the area may resume.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZ-1: VOC-Contaminated Soil. The following shall be implemented Construction
During Project
during Project construction to address VOC-contaminated soil:

Contractor;
construction
• Soil Handling: If impacted soil is encountered, the area shall be Environmental Field
delineated as necessary with cones, caution tape, stakes, chalk, or Coordinator
flagging and the area shall not be disturbed further until an environmental professional is on -site for observation and determination of whether testing and/or excavation work is required.

Stockpile staging areas shall be delineated prior to the start of excavation. The specific equipment, means, and methods to be utilized for soil removal, handling, and disposition shall be selected based on the nature of the work to be conducted and its location on the site.

Areas from which contaminated or potentially contaminated soil is being excavated, disturbed, or handled shall be secured by temporary fencing and/or caution tape, as appropriate. Exclusion and support zones, if any, staging areas, and decontamination pads shall also be delineated.

B-4

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
An environmental field coordinator shall be present full-time during soil removal and handling activities in areas in which contaminated soil has been encountered or has the potential to be encountered.

This individual shall be responsible for observations of soil conditions, air monitoring, maintaining communications, ensuring compliance with the MMP, and any oversight of sampling.

If testing of suspect materials confirm that contaminated soils are present, notification and permitting with the SCAQMD shall be required along with implementation of necessary mitigation controls and monitoring pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 1166.

If excavation is conducted during the rainy season (November through April), provisions shall be made to prevent off -site migration of sediment in runoff. Best management practices shall be implemented for runoff control in accordance with the construction permit, regulatory requirements, and the SWPPP. Measures may include placement of sandbags, straw rolls, and/or hay bales to control runoff and to act as filters. If precipitation accumulates within any excavation, it shall be pumped out and disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations.
• Fugitive Dust and Vapor Control: Appropriate procedures shall be implemented to control the generation of airborne dust by soil removal activities, including, but not limited to, some or all of the following:

B-5

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
o Generation of dust and emission of VOCs (if any) during construction activities shall be minimized, as necessary, by the use of water as a dust suppressant. The water shall be available from on -site water service, via a water truck, or through a metered discharge from a fire hydrant located on or proximate to the Project site. When necessary, the grading contractor shall control dust generation by spraying water prior to daily work activities, during excavation/loading activities (as necessary to maintain concentrations below action levels) and at truck staging locations.

During construction activities, water equipment shall be continuously available to provide proper control measures. o Activities that have the potential to generate fugitive dust shall cease in the event wind conditions change creating an
uncontrollable condition. If required, the environmental field coordinator shall monitor on -site meteorological instrumentation and/or coordinate with off -site meteorological professionals to identify conditions that require cessation of work.
• Soil excavation and Stockpiling: Impacted soil that is excavated and not immediately removed from the site shall be stockpiled on and covered with plastic sheeting to control dust and minimize exposure to precipitation. The edges of the plastic sheeting shall have an overlap of at least 24 inches. Plastic sheeting shall be secured at the base of the stockpile and along seams of overlapping plastic sheeting, if any, with sandbags or by equivalent means. If a stockpile remains on site during the rainy season, a perimeter sediment barrier, constructed of material such as straw bales or fiber roll, shall also be installed. The stockpiles shall remain covered until the soil is ready for final disposition.

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
A bi-weekly inspection of stockpiles shall be conducted, as appropriate, to verify cover integrity. Any gaps, tears, or other deficiencies shall be documented by the environmental field coordinator and corrected immediately. Records shall be kept of stockpile inspections and any repairs made. During stockpile removal, only the working face of the stockpile shall be uncovered.

If the stockpiled impacted soil is to be transported off site for disposal or recycling, the soil shall be profiled for waste characteristics. Waste profiling shall consist of collecting soil samples for laboratory analysis at the frequency required by the disposal/recycling facility to which the soil is to be transported. A minimum of four samples shall be collected from a stockpile of up to 1,000 cubic yards. For each approximately 500 cubic yards of stockpile material, an additional sample shall be collected and analyzed. Soil samples shall be analyzed for parameters required by the disposal/recycling facility. If no specific analytical program is required by the disposal/recycling facility, analysis shall include VOCs, metals, and TPH.
• Air and Soil Monitoring, Sampling, and Testing: monitoring and sampling activities to be performed shall include:
o Air Monitoring: Air monitoring shall be conducted by an air monitoring/health and safety professional under the guidance of the environmental field coordinator in areas where potential VOC- contaminated soil is to be disturbed. Areas of the site requiring such monitoring shall include those areas where ongoing remediation is occurring. An air monitoring/health and safety professional shall be present during ground -disturbing activities and shall record monitoring data on field sheets, which will be B-7

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
kept as part of Project documentation. Air monitoring shall include the following:
■ Real-time aerosol monitors and industrial hygiene air sampling equipment and media shall be deployed to measure dust
levels and/or concentration of chemicals of potential concern in dust.
■ Vapor concentrations shall be monitored using an organic vapor analyzer fitted with a photo ionization detector. If readings using the photo ionization detector reach or exceed 50 parts per million, the provisions of SCAQMD Rule 1166 shall be implemented, as outlined in Section (c) of Rule 1166. o Soil Monitoring: During pre -demolition, demolition, grading, and construction activities, visual observation of the exposed soil beneath building foundations, floors, pavement, and subsurface features shall be conducted by a monitoring/health and safety professional under the guidance of the environmental field coordinator. A field form shall be completed daily to document the areas of soil suspected of being contaminated, if any. Any observed discoloration, odor, or other evidence of potential hazardous materials shall be documented and serve as the basis for further evaluation.
o Soil Sampling and Testing: Based on field indications, soil samples may be collected to evaluate the presence of suspected chemicals or compounds in exposed soil. Selected soil samples shall be analyzed by an appropriately certified, off -site laboratory, with the analytical methods selected based on the following criteria:

B-8

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
■ Visual and Olfactory Observation: Soil that is odorous or appears dark or oil stained shall be analyzed for TPH by EPA Method 8015M modified and for VOCs by EPA Method 8260B.

Soil that appears discolored in a manner typical of metals impacts (e.g., red, yellow, green, gray, silvery) shall be analyzed for California Code of Regulations Title 22 metals using EPA Method 601013/7000.
■ Elevated VOC Levels: A soil sample (or samples) shall be collected for laboratory testing if the headspace VOC
measurement exceeds 100 ppm, as measured with a photo
ionization detector calibrated to hexane during the on -site screening. Samples may be analyzed for VOCs using EPA
Method 8260 (VOCs) and/or TPH by EPA Method 8015M
modified.

Soil samples for laboratory analysis shall be collected using hand tools (for instance hand auger or hand trowel) and placed in glass jars, brass tubes, or other appropriate containers. Samples to be analyzed for VOCs (if deemed
necessary) shall be field preserved using EPA Method 5035.

After collection, samples shall be sealed, uniquely labeled, and placed in a chilled cooler pending delivery to the analytical laboratory. All soil samples shall be tracked from point of collection through the laboratory using chain -of -custody documentation. Reuseable soil sampling equipment (hand
auger, trowel, shovel, etc.) shall be decontaminated prior to re -use to reduce the potential for cross -contamination.

B-9

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
Laboratory analytical data shall also be used to characterize excavated soil to determine the appropriate location for off -site disposal. Soil with no visual or olfactory evidence of impacts and not containing chemicals of potential concern may be re -used on the Project site. Soil export manifest records documenting the destination of all excavated and exported soil shall be maintained. • Import Fill Soils: Off -site soils brought to the Project site for use as backfill (import fill), if necessary, shall be tested in general conformance with the IDTSC Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material document (2001). Import fill shall be tested for target compounds based on knowledge of the fill source area; however, as a minimum, the fill should be tested for the following constituents (or have been tested and documented at the source):
o TPH-cc using EPA Method 8015
o VOCs using EPA Method 8260B
o Title 22 metals using EPA Methods 601013/7471
o Pesticides using EPA Method 8081A
Other analyses may be required contingent on the source of the import fill or recommendations by the supervising professional. A minimum of one sample for laboratory analysis is suggested per 1,000 tons of import fill per borrow site (single source). For quantities above 5,000 tons of import fill per borrow site (single source), one sample for laboratory analysis is suggested per 5,000 tons of import fill.

B-10

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
HAZ-2: Asbestos -Containing Material Removal. Prior to issuance of Project Applicant;
Prior to demolition
demolition permits, removal of asbestos -containing materials shall be Construction
and construction
conducted in the buildings at 9301 Stewart and Gray, 9400 Hall Road, Contractor
9399 Stewart and Gray Road, and 9333/9363 Stewart and Gray Road. A Licensed State of California asbestos abatement contractor must remove all known asbestos -containing materials, consistent with applicable Division of Occupational Safety (Title 8, Industrial Relations, Division 1.

Department of Industrial Relations, Chapter 4. Division of Industrial Safety, Subchapter 4. Construction Safety Orders, Article 4. Dust Fumes, Mists, Vapors, and Gases, Section 1529. Asbestos) and SCAQMD (Rule 1403 — Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/ Renovation Activities) guidelines.

The Licensed State of California asbestos abatement contractor shall provide documentation of removal activities to the City.

HAZ-3: Lead -Based Paint Removal. Prior to issuance of demolition Project Applicant;
Prior to demolition
permits, removal of lead -based paint shall be conducted in the building at Construction
and construction
9400 Hall Road. The removal of lead -containing materials shall comply Contractor
with applicable regulations for demolition methods and dust suppression.

Lead containing materials shall be managed in accordance with applicable regulations including, at a minimum, the hazardous waste disposal requirements (CCR Title 22, Division 4.5); and the State Lead Accreditation, Certification and Work Practice Requirements (CCR Title 17, Division 1, Chapter 8). Verification that the specified procedures were followed shall be provided to the City.

B-11

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Monitoring
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Implementation
Compliance
Responsibility
Schedule
Record
Name/Date
Noise
NOI-1: Construction Activity Limits. The Project applicant or designated Project Applicant;
Prior to and during
contractor shall obtain permits for Project construction activities from the Construction
construction
City. The City shall ensure all permits contain restrictions to construction Contractor; City of
activities
hours, and nighttime work requirements described below.

Downey Community
All construction activity with the exception of concrete pouring as Development
specified below shall be prohibited between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and Department
7:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday, and at any time on Sundays or on any City recognized public holiday. Delivery of materials or equipment to the site and construction truck traffic coming to and from the site shall be prohibited during the same hours specified above.

If, due to weather condition (e.g., high temperatures), pouring of concrete at night or on Sundays or on any City recognized public holiday is required, the Project applicant or designated contractor shall provide written notification of nighttime/weekend concrete work to all residences located within 300 feet of the Project site. The notification shall:
• Be delivered a minimum of 48 hours prior to commencement of nighttime work;
• Include the days and hours of upcoming concrete poring nighttime work; and
• Include noise complaint contact information, including phone numbers and email addresses to register noise complaints with both the construction contractor and the City.

B-12

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Monitoring
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Implementation
Compliance
Responsibility
Schedule
Record
Name/Date
The City and the construction contractor shall log all received noise complaints. The construction contractor shall submit to the City a daily log of all noise complaints received, including the date and time of the complaint and address of the complainant (if provided). The City shall work with the construction contractor to respond to noise complaints and limit nighttime work and locations of noise generating equipment to the extent feasible.

Transportation
TR-1: Transportation Demand Management Plan. The Project Applicant Project Applicant; City
Prior to construction
shall prepare a formal Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan of Downey
for review and approval by the City prior to the issuance of grading or Community
building permits. The TDM Plan shall identify the TDM measures that will Development
be implemented for the Project and shall include documentation of how Department
both physical measures (e.g., bike lockers, designated carpool parking spaces, etc.) and programmatic measures (e.g., guaranteed ride home program, employee transportation coordinator, etc.) will be provided. The TDM Plan shall be implemented for the life of the Project and shall include, at a minimum, the TDM strategies listed below (TDM Strategies T-7, T-S, and T-10) to reduce significant VMT impacts. If new TDM measures are proposed by the site owner or tenant after City approval of the TDM Plan, a new TDM plan shall be submitted for review and approval and shall include an analysis that demonstrates that the selected measures are expected to achieve the same or greater trip and VMT reductions as demonstrated by this Project -specific analysis.

B-13

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
• T-7. Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing. The Project Applicant shall implement a marketing strategy to promote the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR). Information sharing and marketing educates employees about their travel choices to and from the location and promotes alternatives to driving such as carpooling, taking transit, walking, and biking, thereby reducing VMT. Effective marketing strategies incorporate the following features or similar alternatives:
o On -site or online commuter information services.
o Employee transportation coordinators.
o On -site or online transit pass sales.
o Guaranteed ride home service.

The Project Applicant shall provide information on available travel options to and from the Project site in a clear and easily accessible location (e.g., a bulletin board in a common employee area), including information on where transit passes may be purchased online or in person. The Project Applicant shall also designate an employee transportation coordinator who will be able to provide information and/or administer a guaranteed ride home service. Such services may consist of providing free or subsidized rides upon request via taxis or other transportation network companies (TNQ such as Uber or Lyft.

B-14

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
• T-8: Provide Ridesharing Program. The Project Applicant shall implement a riclesharing program. Ridesharing encourages carpooled vehicle trips in place of single -occupancy vehicle trips, thereby reducing the number of trips and VMT. Ridesharing may be promoted through a multifaceted approach, such as designating parking spaces for ridesharing/carpooling vehicles, dedicating loading and waiting zones, and coordinating rides. The Project Applicant shall provide designated parking spaces for carpool vehicles in a
convenient/preferential location, and a designated waiting area for employees participating in riclesharing which is comfortable and convenient. The Project Applicant should facilitate the process of arranging ridesharing or carpooling matches, either through a website/app or via the employee transportation coordinator (refer to TDM measure T-7 above).
• T-10. Provide End -of -Trip Bicycle Facilities. The Project Applicant shall provide end -of -trip bicycle facilities such as secure bike parking, showers, and personal lockers. Providing and maintaining secure bike parking and related facilities encourages commuting by bicycle, thereby reducing VMT. The Project Applicant shall provide secure bicycle parking (e.g., bicycle lockers) in an easily accessible, well -lit location. Additionally, the Project Applicant shall provide showers and changing rooms.

B-15

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Monitoring
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Implementation
Compliance
Responsibility
Schedule
Record
Name/Date
Tribal Cultural Resources
TCR-1: Retain a Native American Monitor Prior to Commencement of Project Applicant;
Prior to
Ground -Disturbing Activities.

Construction
commencement of
a. The Project applicant/lead agency shall retain a Native American Contractor; Native
any ground -
Monitor from or approved by the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians American Monitor
disturbing activities
— Kizh Nation. The monitor shall be retained prior to the and during
commencement of any ground -disturbing activity for the subject construction
Project at all Project locations(i.e., both on -site and any off -site locations that are included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the Project, such as public improvement work). Ground -disturbing activity shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching. b. A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the commencement of any ground -disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground -disturbing activity.

B-16

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
c. The monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the relevant ground -disturbing activities, the type of construction activities performed, locations of ground -disturbing activities, soil types, cultural -related materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance to the Tribe.

Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered TCRs, including but not limited to, Native American cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places of significance, etc., (collectively, tribal cultural resources, or TCR), as well as any discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of monitor logs will be provided to the Project applicant/lead agency upon written request to the Tribe.
d. On -site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following (1) written confirmation to the Kizh from a designated point of contact for the Project applicant/lead agency that all ground - disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground -disturbing activities on the Project site or in connection with the Project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the Kizh to the Project applicant/lead agency that no future, planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the Project site possesses the potential to impact Kizh TCRs. e. Upon discovery of any TCRs, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) and shall not resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the Kizh monitor and/or Kizh archaeologist. The Kizh will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, in the Tribe's sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe deems appropriate, including for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes.

B-17

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
TCR-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Project Applicant;
During construction
Funerary Objects.

Construction
a. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as Contractor; Native
an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or American Monitor
skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.
b. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods discovered or recognized on the Project site, then all construction activities shall immediately cease. Health and Safety Code Section7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and all ground -disturbing activities shall immediately halt and shall remain halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe they are Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 shall be followed. c. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California PRC Section5097.98(d)(1) and (2).
d. Construction activities may resume in other parts of the Project site at a minimum of 200 feet away from discovered human remains and/or burial goods, if the Kizh determines in its sole discretion that resuming construction activities at that distance is acceptable and provides the project manager express consent of that determination (along with any other mitigation measures the Kizh monitor and/or archaeologist deems necessary). (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f).) B-18

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
e. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin (non-TCR) shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, it shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes. f. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.

TCR-3: Procedures for Burials and Funerary Remains.

Project Applicant;
During construction
a. As the Most Likely Descendant (MLD), the Koo-nas-gna Burial Policy Construction
shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term "human remains" Contractor; Kizh Tribe;
encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic Qualified
times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the Archaeologist
preparation of the soil for burial, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains. b. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the discovery location shall be treated as a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created.

B-19

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
c. The prepared soil and cremation soils are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure complete recovery of all sacred materials.
d. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to recommend diverting the Project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the Project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed.
e. In the event preservation in place is not possible despite good faith efforts by the Project applicant/developer and/or landowner, before ground -disturbing activities may resume on the Project site, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the Project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects.

B-20

Exhibit D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure
Monitoring
Responsibility
Implementation
Schedule
Monitoring
Compliance
Record
Name/Date
f. Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the Project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered.
g. The Tribe will work closely with the Project's qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically, and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be prepared and shall include (at a minimum) detailed descriptive notes and sketches. All data recovery data recovery - related forms of documentation shall be approved in advance by the Tribe. If any data recovery is performed, once complete, a final report shall be submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive and/or destructive diagnostics on human remains.

B-21

Exhibit D
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
This page intentionally left blank
B-22

Exhibit D
0*30*��

Exhibit D
Draft Environmental Impact Report
SCH No. 2022030738
December 2023
Prepared for:
[a CityufDovine
y
Community Development Department
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, California 90241
Prepared by:

HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.
7578 El Cajon Boulevard
La Mesa, California 91942

Exhibit D
This page intentionally left blank

Exhibit D
Table of Contents
Section
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................

ES-1
ES.1
Project Overview............................................................................................................

ES-1
ES.1.1 Project Location................................................................................................

ES-1
ES.1.2 Project Description Summary...........................................................................

ES-1
ES.1.3 Project Objectives.............................................................................................

ES-2
ES.2
Areas of Controversy and Issues To Be Resolved..........................................................

ES-2
ES.3
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts.............................................................................

ES-3
ES.4
Summary of Alternatives Evaluated..............................................................................

ES-3
ES.S
Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures........................................................

ES-4

1.0 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................1-1

1.1 Purpose of This EIR..........................................................................................................1-1

1.2 Type of EIR.......................................................................................................................1-2

1.3 Standards of Adequacy Under CEQA...............................................................................1-2

1.4 Responsibilities of The Lead Agency................................................................................1-2

1.4.1 Notice of Preparation, Scoping, and Opportunities for Public Input..................1-2

1.4.2 Scope of Environmental Analysis........................................................................1-5

1.4.3 Report Organization............................................................................................1-5

1.5 Incorporation By Reference.............................................................................................1-6

1.6 Availability of The Draft EIR.............................................................................................1-7

Downey City CouncilJune 11, 2024

Downey City Council
June 11, 2024