14. Exhibit H - Appeal Letter from Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance

March 12, 2024
Downey City Council
City of Downey
11111 Brookshire Ave.

Downey, CA 90241
Subject: Appeal to the Downey City Council regarding a decision of the Downey Planning Commission, during the P/C Meeting of March 6, 2024. Specificly, Final Environmental Impact Report, Site Plan Review, Variance, Lot Merger (PLN-21-00025 & PLN-23-00086) SCH# 2022030738.

Project Name: Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project EIR Appellant: Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance

PURPOSE OF APPEAL
This appeal seeks to reverse the entire decision of the Downey City Planning Commission issued on March 6, 2024, approving the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project EIR.

REASONS FOR APPEAL AND DENIAL OF PROJECT
Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance ("Appellant") presented multiple arguments in our comment letter dated January 24, 2024, addressing the flaws of the EIR (see attached).

Additionally, comments sent to the Planning Commission on March 3, 2024, addressed the Commission's duty to adequately address the environmental, social, and economic justice burden placed on the City of Downey residents. The Planning Commission should have requested a Revised Environmental Impact Report be prepared for this project due to the deficiency's of the EIR and continued air quality impacts the citizenry of Downey will suffer based on the evidence we presented in our January 24, 2024 comment letter.
765 N. Main St. Suite 151 Corona, CA 92880
1265 W. Shaw Ave. Suite 100 Fresno, CA 93711

Grievances
The Planning Commission erred on March 6, 2024, in approving the project by determining the project would not result in further impacts on an already pollution -burdened and traffic congested citizenry. With the Commission's decision to approve the project, GSEJA believes the Commission did not fulfill its duty to adequately investigate nor mitigate the project. Further, under CEQA, the city must "Take all action necessary to provide the people of this state with clean air and water, enjoyment of aesthetic, natural, scenic, and historic environmental qualities, and freedom from excessive noise."
Furthermore, this appeal also addresses the inadequacy of the Planning Commissions understanding of the California Environmental Quality Act's purpose in properly applying the spirit of the law as defined below by previous California Attorney General Kamala Harris.

The importance of a healthy environment for all of California's residents is reflected in CEQA's purpose. In passing CEQA, the Legislature determined:

CEQA's Purposes
* "The maintenance of a quality environment for the people of this state now and in the future is a matter of statewide concern." (Pub. Res. Code, § 21000, subd. (a).) * We must "identify any critical thresholds for the health and safety of the people of the state and take all coordinated actions necessary to prevent such thresholds from being reached." (Id. at subd. (d).)
• "[M]ajor consideration [must be] given to preventing environmental damage, while providing a decent home and satisfying living environment for every Californian." (Id. at subd. (g).) • We must "[flake all action necessary to provide the people of this state with clean air and water, enjoyment of aesthetic, natural, scenic, and historic environmental qualities, and freedom from excessive noise." (Pub. Res. Code, § 21001, subd. (b).) 2of3
765 N. Main St. Suite 151 Corona, CA 92880
1265 W. Shaw Ave. Suite 100 Fresno, CA 93711

Cities, counties, and other local governmental entities have an important role to play in ensuring environmental justice for all of California's residents. Under state law. "[Ejnvironmental justice" means the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. (.Gov. Code, § 65040.12, subd. (e).) Fairness in this context means that the benefits of a healthy environment should be available to everyone, and the burdens of pollution should not be focused on sensitive populations or on communities that already are experiencing its adverse effects.

GSEJA provided in our comments dated March 3, 2024 the Cal Enviro Screening Information depicting the severity of the level of pollution and traffic the City of Downey and its citizens are already experiencing.
• Pollution Burden Percentile = 98
• Toxic Releases = 92
• Particulate Matter 2.5 = 88
• Diesel Particulate Matter = 86
• Traffic = 66
Conclusion
Due to the above -mentioned reasons as well as the reasons listed in the original comment letter to the EIR and subsequent letter to the Planning Commission, GSEJA believes the EIR is flawed and a revised EIR must be prepared for the proposed project and circulated for public review. GSEJA requests the City of Downey City Council reverse the decision of the Planning Commission's approval of the project and require a Revised Environmental Impact Report be completed.

Sincerely,
/ev,X&M, 4mr,
Ramon Amaya
Treasurer
Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance
765 N. Main St. Suite 151
Corona, CA 92880
(951) 279-4697
3of3
?a,BU&r8LrL
Joe Bourgeois
Executive Director
Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance
765 N. Main St. Suite 151
Corona, CA 92880
(951) 279-4697
765 N. Main St. Suite 151 Corona, CA 92880
1265 W. Shaw Ave. Suite 100 Fresno, CA 93711

BLUM, COLLINS & HO ALP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

AON CENTER
707 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD
SUITE 4880
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017 (213) 572-
0400
January 24, 2024
Alfonso Hernandez, Principal Planner VIA EMAIL TO:

City of Downey, Planning Division [email protected] I I I I Brookshire Avenue
Downey, CA 90241
SUBJECT. COMMENTS ONPROLOGIS STE WART 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 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.Q. Box 79222 Corona, CA 92877.

1.0 Summary
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 to be used as a fulfillment 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.

Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024
Paget

2.0 Project Description
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 NQP 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.

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 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 project's 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 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

Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 3 ends

"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 VNIT 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.

4.2 Air Quality, 4.4 Energy, and 4,6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 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 4.0', 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 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 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 facilites are closed), and 'CalEnviroScreen4.0litt. i-C o t.Crfl,.cnxiroscl en-4(.

OEHHA Diesel Particulate Matter it s: NIiha.ca.<goN 'calenv iroscreen'`indicator_diesel-12artiCUlate- matter
s OEHHA Toxic Releases https: oehha.ca.�,wy`calenvjroscreen'indicatorto\ic-releaserfacilities

Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 4 ends

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 waterb.

Further, the census tract is a diverse community including 81 % Hispanic, 6% African -American and 6% Asian -American residents, wham 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 pollutions. 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 fonn 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 a OEHHA Solid Waste Facilities https:iioehha.ca.gov calenviroscreen `indicator. solid -waste -sites -and - facilities
OEHHA Hazardous Waste Generators and Facilities
Imps. "oehha.ca.LoN `calm) iroscree i iil2dicator azardous xv_astel enerators- nd-facilities 'OEHHA Cleanup Sites 1?tt 4; -oehh3 ca.<am calem iroscre,en'indicatcIclean u _sites ' OEHHA Poverty hhal . oehha.c.a w, calem iroscre_enr'indicat�ertx $ Ibid.
4 Ibid.
1° OEHHA SB 535 Census Tracts https_i )ehhaxa.g*o� calenvimsereen ,1)5 5

Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 5 ends

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.

The State of California lists three approved compliance modeling softwaresl ' 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 public and decision makers. Since the EIR did not accurately or adequatelymodel 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.

4.9 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 EIR'` is 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 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 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"
" California Energy Commission 2022 Energy Code Compliance Software litt s. -,N .ever N.ca_go d-t rc� yam_ariopicss'buildinx e17erL�effici-enc -standards_ 02' lilld3niT-�Il�r{r�`-��t1C1�11C1'-�
12 https: 1NN A, .do,,yneyc car,''horne,'shoepublisheddocument''70'63fi9179629680'0000

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 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, 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 onsite 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 a prior study at a different property. As noted above in the Environmental Setting discussion, 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 existin 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

Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 7 ends

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.

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

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 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 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 SLAG 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 "119 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 TRA, T- 7, T-8, and T-10 will reduce project generated VMT to below the significance threshold of 15.3 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 impact to less than significant is not feasible.

Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 8 ends

Further, the EIR 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 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.

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 be 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.

The EIR also states that, "The design of improvements at the Project site would 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 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

Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 9 ends

improper mitigation and does not comply with CEQA's requirement for meaningful disclosure and adequate informational documents. A revised EIR must be prepared to include the City 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 be designed 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.

5.0 Alternatives
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 - Reuse of Existing 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 decision making (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 revised EIR. As discussed above, nearly every area of environmental analysis credits the project with various VMT, trip

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,lbrecast 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 C EQA 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 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 an adequate 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 within the 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.

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 consumption in compliance with Title 24 modeling software. The EIR must be revised to include a finding 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 comment letter, the project represents a significant amount of growth in the City and accounts for a significant 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 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 a cumulative development analysis of projects approved since General Plan adoption, 2016

Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 11 ends

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

7.4 Effects Found Not to be Significant: Population and Housing The EIR 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 EIR 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 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.

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: I 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
F4d8d'sd,,J F'9F'9[:xiblXOU,',>,l)

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 EIR 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.

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 EIR14 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 buildoutJhorizon year of 2025, which has not been presented for analysis. SCAG's Connect SoCal Demographics and Growth Forecast15 states that the City will add 2,900 jobs between 2016 - 2045. Utilizing the SLAG 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 Plan employment projections or SCAG's employment growth forecast.

Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, GSEJA believes the EIR is flawed and a revised EIR must be 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 79222 Corona, CA 92877.
a 11tt I 'N� �k v� _&Nti new ea.o hone shmx publisheddocLiment' � 70 636 6296401_0000 's SCAG Connect SoCal Demographics and Growth Forecast adopted September 3, 2020 hops. 'scag.ca.gc x sites niainitz]es'lice-attaciinients,€) Ci3fconnectsocal demo raphics-and-gromh- forecast. pd1'!1606001579

Alfonso Hernandez
January 24, 2024

Page 13 ends

Sincerely,
Gary Ho
Blum, Collins & Ho LLP
Attachment: SWAPS Analysis

Technical Consultation, Data Analysis and
Litigation Support for the Environment
2656 29th 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
prosenfeld @swape.com
January 22, 2024
Gary Ho
Blum, Collins & Ho ALP
707 Wilshire Blvd, Ste. 4880
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Subject: Comments on the Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project (SCH No. 2022030738) I.Zf1'iinmm
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- 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.

Air Quality
Land use development projects under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") typically evaluate air quality impacts and calculate potential criteria air pollutant emissions using the California Emissions Estimator Model ("CalEEMod"). l CalEEMod provides recommended default values based on site -specific information, such as land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project type. If more specific project information is known, the user 1 "CaIEEMod User's Guide." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://ww v.agmd- ov ccaleemod/user"s-wide.

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 DEER, CalEEMod Version 2022.1 is relied upon to estimate Project emissions (p. 4.2-13).

However, this poses a problem as the version of CalEEMod 2022.1 currently available is described as a ,soft release" which fails to provide complete output fileS.2 Specifically, the "User Changes to Default Data" table no longer provides the quantitative counterparts to the changes to the default values (see excerpt below) (Appendix B, pp. 476):

8. User Changes to Default Data
Land U�,
BurArg and iot areas W Sde Plan and Ofect descnpaon Unroloperated warehouse SF indurfas 25 KSF of mezaa.ne Spam
Parkr,9 kol = au oroat un ., spaces (pdrkrg GoadM rrwways Kfewa dock areao, d a lk�,. 01har Asphalt Surfaces'- Off-sde sVeel rrop—roons, per proecl Street tmp�eroerfts On G-st—W. Contruclich Phases
Const-4- sdduia per p,.jW applicant.

Uwspucbon Off Road Equipment
tiff -Highway took - water truck used for dust con" up to 4 nours per day, otlan off -road equipment per delautp,
Construct on Tnpn and VMT
Eshmated 1,052 krads (2 106 one-way tnp%3 of aWregatelasphaWconcrete anpsted duhN paang CSMCW ArchdecuSal C—thge
Build.,g ersefope .d ftl 50 gel per SCAOMD Ruie 1113
Operabon, Vehde Data
-T.p geoerabon per Iraffic study
Re"ercued warehouse truck% per SCACMD ftf, Cube Study
All passenger car trips wsQned to the office land use
AB truck tape asWned to the warehouae, [arid uses, 40 mles per SCAQMD Op.rcro Fleet Max
Refrigerated warehouse tuck fleet rour hurS SCAOMD Ho Cube Study UnrefrWrated war se tuck fleet rnrx from traffic satdv
Clpemt AachIeshma; Coabng,
Bui$dop enveliope and flat coating VOC Isod 50 Qn per SCAQW, Rule 1113 Const,usporr O.-RxW Fpftne Dust
0 ; miles. of each haul tap lar demobW and grafing assumed to be on unpSwed so,sdo accros orade
However, previous CalEEMod Versions, such as 2020.4.0, include the specific numeric changes to the model's default values (see example excerpt below):
its ConstrwlionPhase
NurnDays
23000
ajnWh;s_e'
-----------------------------
PhoseEndErate
-------------------------------
11 .22'2023
-------
-----------
-------------------------------
1;;6 0-n-S-1 F;qase
W,-a;,Wn-d-D-ate
9272023
. .........
---------------------------
----------------------------
liructronPhase
i zj�;
PriaseEndDate
10r252023
��;6W5K�np�a
t. --- ......................
----------------------------
e
FohaseSdartDate
1(1226r.1023
ttk i s-,, r7k," r',
-----------------------------
PhaseStartDate
------------------------------
-1,'2a2023
----------------------
............. --------
-------------------------------
IWLardUse
sand se
1601 , 000 X_
----------- �-------------
tbi andUse
....... ---------------------
Lrandk)seSquaTeFeet
-------------------------------
I MOM 00
........................
......... .................
------------------------------
WLandUse
LctAcreage
3,67
................. ... 14
trilLandUse
----------------- -----------
otALreage
-------------------------------
273
4 ---- ---------
4 -------------------------------
16 7 01 "1
--------------------------
ar2s,2023
------------
6'30'2023
__________---------------
7rdW2023
.................
7'29!2023
----------------------
7'112023
------------------
160,37 T W
------------------
41,155 01()
..........................
3,68
----------
274
I "CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model Soft Release." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), 2022, available at.* hjLpsjLcaleemod.corn- 2 The output files associated with CalEEMod 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.3 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 CalEEMod Version 2022.1, or includes an updated air model using an older release of CalEEMod.4
Used' to &..st1nutlte ll1"olw.,. t F'nn.wt;°eid; k s
As previously discussed, the DEIR relies on CalEEMod Version 2022.1 to estimate the Project's air quality emissions and fails to provide the complete output files required to adequately evaluate model's analysis (p. 4.2-13). Regardless, when reviewing the Project's CalEEMod output files, provided in the Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report ("AQ & GHG Report") as Appendix B to the DEIR, we were able to identify several model inputs that are inconsistent with information disclosed in the DEIR. As such, the Project's construction and operational emissions may be underestimated. A revised EIR should be prepared to include an updated air quality analysis that adequately evaluates the impacts that construction and operation of the Project will have on local and regional air quality. € f, .0 3i ,4 tF[ `._rP, =am??F°d,'a f .!tfcz t i F,a, 1-, ,! k"c.Ck. (it.5 Review of the CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the "Downey Prologis Project 112" model includes changes to the default architectural coating emission factors {see excerpt below} (Appendix B, pp. 476).

8. User Changes to Default Data

As previously mentioned, the CalEEMod User's Guide requires any changes to model defaults be justified.' 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/1 per SCAQMD Rule 1113" (Appendix B, pp. 476).

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 to the Association of Environmental Professionals' ("AEP") CEQA Portal Topic Paper on Mitigation Measures:
"While not 'mitigation', a good practice is to include those project design feature(s) that address environmental impacts in the mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP). Often the MMRP is all that accompanies building and construction plans through the permit process. If the design features are not listed as important to addressing an environmental impact, it is easy for someone not involved in the original environmental process to approve a change to the project that could eliminate one or more of the design features without understanding the resulting environmental impact."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") coatings, 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 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 "CalEEMod User's Guide." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https:( www.agmd.� ov/caleemodtuser`s-wide, p. 1, 14.
6 "CEQA Portal Topic Paper Mitigation Measures." AEP, February 2020, available at. https:/ cepaportai.ors/tp/CEQA�'2QMiti�ation%202020_ df, p. b. 7 "SCAQMD Rule 1113 Advisory Notice." SCAQMD, February 2016, available at. http:/f www.agmd . ov/does/default-source/rule-book/reR-xi/r1113.pdf?sfvrsn=2d, p.1113-14, Table of Standards

1. 4

Third, as previously discussed, the output files for CalEEMod 2022.1 do not present the numeric changes to any model defaults. Upon further review of the output files, Table 5.5 contains the only mention of architectural coatings (see excerpt below) (Appendix B, pp. 464):

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Archdeckmal C.-oN coo d CAt W3 528 267,843 40,4326
However, as demonstrated above, Table 5.5 only provides the square footage of area to be coated.

Since the output files fail to demonstrate the architectural coating emission factors that the model relies on, we cannot verify that the values included in the model are accurate.

These unsubstantiated reductions present an issue, as CalEEMod uses the architectural coating emission factors to calculate the Project's volatile organic compounds ("VOC") emissions.$ By including unsubstantiated 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.
=kite v to 11 ect 'VI : c,"'ue
Review of the CalEEMod output files demonstrates that the "Downey Prologis Project 132" model includes changes to the default operational vehicle fleet mix percentages (see excerpt below) (Appendix B, pp. 476).
8, User Changes to Default Data
Land Use
Building and M areas per Site Plan and project description Unnefrigerated warehouse SF includes 25 KSF of mezcanme space
Fadung lot = afl other ,mperinous spaces kFarkxg. Boadmg dock areas, driveways., sidewalks; Other Asphalt Surfaces, .r CCCW-srte street ,mpno ements per pm7ect Street Imprrwernents plan i::. rr^rtnxYaon Coostnn-Uon Phases
Conscheduic per protect appMcant
C.,onstruccoo Off -Read £qu,p€+ l
Off -Highway touch = water truck used for dust contrd up to 4 hours per day: other oil -road equipment per defaul8:.

Construction Trips and VMT
Estimated 1,053 bads (2, 10C one-way trips) of aggngateJasphaticonenoe imported dunrg paving C,00sco,trin Archriectural Coalogs
Bulldog envelope and flat coating VOC t,n d 50 gA per SCACMD Rule 1113 OpeiaiN,' n behisle Data
Trip generabon per traffic sh#y
Re ed ware per SCAGMD High Tube Study
AN passenger car taps as to the office sand use
AN truck tnps as5gried to the warehouse land uses. 46 miles per SCAOM7 �(}peratrons Fleet M,x
Re traarehouse truck iteek mrx ham SCAC)MCt Hgh Cube ShMy t,tnrekgerated warehouse tnxic fleet from traffic study y,
Operatrcx,s Amfolsi to al Lk: abngs.

B; dwq envelope and flat coating VOC ho* 50 gil per SCAOMC, Ruk=, 1113 C„o 1—tron 0, Road Fugdcse Duns
0 2 moles of each haul trip ks de arM gradrrg assumed to be on u d —de access reads
However, these changes remain unsubstantiated. As previously discussed, the output files for CalEEMod 2022.1 do not present the numeric changes to any model defaults. Upon further review of the output files, changes to fleet mix percentages are not mentioned outside of the "User Changes to Default Data" table. Until the DEIR verifies the breakdown of heavy -heavy duty ("HHD"), medium -heavy duty ("MHD"), 8 "CalEEMod User's Guide." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://ww, , iim . ovfcaieernad/user's-guide, p. 35, 40.

light -heavy duty ("i-HD1, LDH2"), trucks used by the Project, we cannot verify that the values included in the model are accurate.'
These unsubstantiated changes present an issue, as CalEEMod uses operational vehicle fleet mix percentages to calculate the Project's operational emissions associated with on -road vehicles.1) 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.
�4
tt .��t �- �. t3��.,t�:. ;�. pi„c_,.�?. �x;y ,. �>.r`•�. ,.��;� ( s.,�SLN"et,1.0 �:,�t?�'i;. m.'l,,,r�i. i}xl c�z.�rt'l. i s t 3 _
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.11 Consistent with the DEIR's models, we included 488,900-SF of "U n refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail," 26,785-SF of "Refrigerated 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." Additionally, we omitted the unsubstantiated changes to the architectural coating emission factors and operational vehicle fleet miX.l2
Our updated analysis estimates that the Project's construction -related VOC emissions would exceed the applicable South Coast Air Quality Management District ("SCAQMD") threshold of 75-pounds per day ("Ibs/day"), as referenced by the DEIR (p. 4.2-12, Table 4.2-6) (see table below).i3 9 "CaIEEMod User's Guide." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.agmd.gov/caleemod{ user"s-guide, p. 38.
10 "CalEEMod User's Guide." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), May 2021, available at:
https://www.agmd.EovJcaleemod/user"s-uide , p. 36.
11 "CalEEMod Version 2020.4.0." California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), March 2022, available at: http://www,agmd.� ov/caleemodJdownload-model. 12 See Attachment B for updated air modeling.
13 "South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds." SCAQMD, March 2023, available at. https:/Z www.agmd.gov/docsldefault source/cega/handbook/south coast agmd air quality -significance thresho1ds.pdf?sfvrsn=25.

SWAPE Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
VOC
Construction
ribs`;
DEIR

65.2 SWAPE
116.2
I 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 EIR should be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate the potential air quality impacts that the Project may have on the surrounding environment.

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). 7 Table 4.2-13

MAXIMUM INCREMENTAL CANCER HEALTH RISK
R1

2.4 0.1

2.5 10
No
R2

3.0 0.2

3.2 10
No
R3
R4
R5

3.5 5.1

1.4 0.1

0.2 0.1

3.7 5.3

1.4 10
10 10
No
No
No
R6

2.5 0.1

2.6 10
No
R7

2.7 0.1

2.8 10
No
R8

2.5 0A

2.5 10
0 W I

0.1 <0A
0A
10 No
W2

0.1 <0.1

0.1 10
No
W3
01 <0.1

0.2 10
No
W4
O.2
<0.1

0.3 10
No
W5
0A
<0.1

0.1 10
No
6 0.1

0.1 0.2
10 No
W7
0A
<0.1
0A
10 No
Source: HELIX .�I.►
exposure23.
2 Construction
3 Operation exposure duration 29.
4 Totals may not due to rounding.

As demonstrated above, the DEIR indicates that the maximum incremental cancer risk would be 5.3 chancer per million over a 30-year period. However, the DEIR's evaluation of the Project's potential health risk impacts, as well as the subsequent less -than -significant impact conclusion, is incorrect for two reasons.

First, the DEIR's construction HRA is incorrect, as it relies upon emissions estimates from an unsubstantiated air model, as discussed above in section of this letter titled "Unsubstantiated Input Parameters Used to Estimate Project Emissions." As a result, the HRA may rely on an underestimated DPM concentration to calculate the health risk associated with Project construction. The DEIR's construction HRA and the resulting cancer risk should not be relied upon to determine Project significance.

Second, the DEIR fails to mention the exposure assumptions for the construction -related and operational HRAs, such as age sensitivity factors ("ASF") or fraction of time at home ("FAH") values whatsoever. Until the DEIR substantiates the use of correct exposure assumptions, the HRAs may underestimate the cancer risk posed to nearby, existing sensitive receptors due to Project construction and operation. Furthermore, according to the Risk Assessment Guidelines provided by the Office of 8 Environmental Health Hazard Assessment ("OEHHA"), the organization responsible for providing guidance on conducting HRAs in California, the DEIR's HRA should have used the following equation:" A. Equation 8.2.4 A, I RISKinh-res = DOSEair x CPF x ASF x ED1AT x FAH

7. RISK inh-res =
Residential inhalation cancer risk

8. DOSEair =
Daily inhalation dose (mg/kg-day)

9. CPF =
Inhalation cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day-1)

10.ASF =
Age sensitivity factor for a specified age group (unitless)

11. ED =
Exposure duration (in years) for a specified age group

12.AT =
Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)

1. FAN =
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
1 e,isilia' i.ti https://oehha.ca.gov/medialdownloads/crnr/2015guidanceMAngal ddf, 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 Justice, September 2022, available at:
htti2s://oaR.ca.Rov/system/files/media/warehouse-besLEEr L tices.pdf, p. 8 —10. f7

+ 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.
• 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 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 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 i . i � i •
• Oversizing electrical rooms by 25 percent or providing a secondary electrical room to accommodate future expansion of electric vehicle charging capability. 10 • 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 dean air vehicles, electric vehicle charging, and bicycle parking. • Designing to LEER 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 CARE regulations, by attending CARE -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.
11 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.

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.

SWAPE has received limited discovery regarding this project. Additional information may become available in the future; thus, we retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional information becomes available. Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is 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 ...

Sincerely,
Matt Hagemann, 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 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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 ----------------------------*------------------------------_------------------------------=---------------i------------------}--------------- Refrigerated Warehouse
-No Rail

26.79 + 1000sgft
; 0.61 26,785.00
0 ------9 ---------------------5------------------------------_------------------------------=---------------i---------------------------------- Unrefri erated Warehouse -No Rail
488.90
i 1000sgft
; 11.22 488,900.00
0 ---------------------------:------------------------------4------------------------------=--------------� -------
--------------
ParkingLot
682.00
+ 1000sgft
; 15.70 0.00 1
0 + _ _
i _ i
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 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.
tblConstruction Phase
NumDays
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - y tblConstructionPhase
. . - - . . . . - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NumDays
-----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
NumDays
-----------------------------Y
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
NumDays
------- --- ---------4----------
tblConstructionPhase
------------
NumDays
-------- --------------------- 4----------------
tblConstructionPhase
-----------
NumDays
-------- --------------------- 4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
-----------------------------+
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
PhaseEndDate
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
-------- -------------------- 4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
-------- --------------------- 4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
-------- --------------------
tbIConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
PhaseEndDate
-----------------------------4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
----------------------------- _----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
-------- -------------------- 4--
tblConstructionPhase
--------------------------
PhaseStartDate
------------------ ----------y----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Y tblConstructionPhase
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PhaseStartDate
-------- --------------------- 4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
-----------------------------_----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate

35.00 45.00
-----------------------------
440.00
--------------------------
182.00
---------------------t-----

30.00 - ------ ----------

75.00 ------------ ---------------t----------

45.00 ----------

40.00 -----------------------------

35.00 --------------------------

20.00 -----------------------------

45.00 T--------------------------

37.00 -----------------------------
7/9/2026
-----------------------.--
3/31 /2025
----------- --- -----------t--------------------------
4/2/2026
3/31 /2025
-----------------------------
3/21 /2024
t--------------------------
5/23/2024
--------------------t---------
5/23/2024
------------
7/18/2024
-----------------------------
5/21 /2026

T--------------------------
3/7/2025
-----------------------------
7/25/2024
--------------------------
12/12/2024
-----------------------------
7/25/2024
--------------------------
10/18/2024
-----------------------------
5/22/2026
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1 /28/2025
-------------------------------------------------------- 7/26/2024
7/19/2024
----------------------------- -r.......................... 3/22/2024 5/24/2024
----------------------------- --.------.-..-------------- 4/3/2026 2/9/2025
----------------------------- -------------------------- 5/24/2024 10/23/2024
-----------------------------
7/26/2024 6/3/2024

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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

20.00 18.50
-----------------------------
tblGrading
4-----------------------------
AcresOfGrading
------------------------------ 4-------------------------- 1 111.00
120.00
-----------------------------Y----------------------------- tblGrading
Material Exported
------------------------------ -------------------------- 1 0.00
460.00
-----------------------------+----------------------------- tblGrading
MaterialExported
-}-------------------------------------------------------- i 0.00
75,000.00
- --- - - - --- - -'-
tblGrading
---- .... -- -------
Materiallmported
---------------------------- -----•-----•-•-•--------
1 0.00
460.00
-----------------------------
tblLandUse
4----------------------------�}------------------------------4-------------------------- Land UseSquareFeet
1 682,000.00

0.00 -----------------------------
tblLandUse
_-----------------9------------�'-----------------------------4-------------------------- LotAcrea e
f 15.66

15.70 ---------------------------_-----------------------------�i--------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
} 78.00

37.00 --------------- -P----------Y-----------------------------$-------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEqui ment
HorsePower
i 81.00

33.00 --------------- -P-------4-----------------------------�--------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEq---
ui ment
HorsePower
1 231.00
367.00
-----------------P----------4-----------------------------♦-----------------------------4-------------------------- tblOffRoadEq ui ment
HorsePower
i 158.00

36.00 ---------------------------_-----------------------------}----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
--------------------------
1 158.00

36.00 -----------------P----------Y-----------------------------�i-------------------------------*-------------------------- tblOffRoadEqui ment
HorsePower
i 89.00

82.00 -----------------P----------4----------------•------------�--------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEqui ment
HorsePower
} 84.00

14.00 ---------------------------4--------------------------}-----------------------------4-------------------------- tblOffRoadEq uipment
---
HorsePower
1 402.00
376.00
---------------------------+-----------------------------�j------------------------------ tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
*--------------------------
i 130.00

81.00 -----------------P----------4-----------------------------$-----------------------------4-------------------------- tblOffRoadEq ui ment
HorsePower
1 132.00

89.00 ---------------------------4-----------------------------}-------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower

80.00 36.00
- -- ......-------•---4----•-------------------------}-----------------------------4-------------------------- tblOffRoadEq uipment
HorsePower
i 247.00
367.00
-----------------4----_
tblOffRoadEq uipment
---------------•------
HorsePower
i--------------------------------------------------------- f 247.00
367.00
-----------------P----------+-----------------------------�------------------------------ tblOffRoadEqui ment
HorsePower
--------------------------
1 247.00
367.00
-- - ••---------------4----------•---•-•-------------}-------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
} 158.00

36.00 -----------------P----------4-----------------------------♦-------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEq ui ment
HorsePower
i 97.00

84.00 ---------------------------4-----------------------------}-----------------------------+�-------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
-
} 97.00

84.00 ---------------------------_----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
------------------------------ -------------------------- ' 97.00

84.00 ................ ............4------------------------------I------------------------------------------••-•---•------- tblOffRoadE ui ment
HorsePower
i 158.00

36.00 - -- ------------------4-----------------------------♦-----------------------------4-------------------------- tblOffRoadEq uipment
HorsePower
i 187.00
148.00
---------------------------+-----------------------------�------------------------------ tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
--------------------------
} 367.00
423.00
.... ...... ................. ..
y...... .... ... ............. 4--------------------------------- -----------
tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
402.00
376.00

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblOffRoad Equipment
LoadFactor
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
LoadFactor
-------------
------ ----------4----
tblOffRoadEquipment
-- -------
----- ----- ----
OffRoadEquipmentType
-----------------------------_
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
OffRoadEquipmentType
----------------------------- _----------------------------- tblOffRoad Equipment
OffRoadEquipmentType
----------------------------- 4--.------..------.--.-------- tblOffRoadEquipment
OffRoadEquipmentType
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblProjectCharacteristics
Precipitation Frequency
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblProjectCharacteristics
WindSpeed
-----------------------------
tbITripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
VendorTripLength
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
VendorTripLength
----------
-------- -----------4--------
tblTripsAndVMT
-------------
----- -
VendorTripLength
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Y tblTripsAndVMT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - VendorTripLength
-----------------------------
tbITripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
............................. 4----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
VendorTripLength
-----------------------------_
tblTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripNumber
-----...--------4----------
tblTripsAndVMT
----------------
WorkerTripLength
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripLength
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripLength
----------------------------- 4
tbITripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Y tblTripsAndVMT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WorkerTripLength
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripLength
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4
tblTripsAndVMT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WorkerTripLength
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Y tblTripsAndVMT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WorkerTripNumber
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripNumber
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripNumber

97.00 84.00
------------------------------ 4-------------------------- 402.00
376.00
•------------------------------T--------------------------

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

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

0.38 •------------------------------
----- - ------ ------
Off-Highway Trucks
•-----------------------------
--------------------------
Excavators
------------------------------t-------------------------- Off-Highway Trucks
•-----------------------------
--------------------------
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
------------------------------ T-------------------------- Off -Highway Trucks
-------------------------------
33 --------------------------
8 ------------------------------

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

2.3 ------------------------------

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

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

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

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

6.90 •T--------.----------

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

6.90 10.20
--------------------------------------------------------

6.90 10.20

6.90 6.90

90.00 14.70
--------------------------

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

10.20 89.80
r --------------------------

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

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

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

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

18.50 •-----------------------------

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

18.50 .-----------------------------t--------------------------

14.70 18.50
-------------------------------

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

18.50 ------------------------------T--------------------------

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 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
WorkerTripNumber
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
tblVehicleTrips
ST_TR
---------------------------- '
tblVehicleTrips
ST_TR
-----------------------------_
tblVehicleTrips
-----------------------------
ST_TR
tblVehicleTrips
SU_TR
tblVehicleTrips
SU_TR
-----------------------------_
tblVehicleTrips
-----------------------------
SU_TR
-----------------------------4----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips
WD_TR
tblVehicleTrips
WD_TR
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips
WD_TR

2.0 Emissions Summary

46.00 45.60
--------------------------
160.55
..... . .. ........ ......... .

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

0.20 ..... . .......... ......... .
160.55
......... . . .............. .

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

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

9.74 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 160.55
------------------------t...........

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 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
Mitigated Construction

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
PM2.3
Bio- CO2
NBio-0O2'
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5i PM2.5
Total
Percent

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 Reduction

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Area •i 2.1864 1.4000e- i

0.0157 j 0.0000 '

6.000Oe- 6.000Oe-
i 6.000Oe-

6.000Oe- • 0.0000
004
005 005
005
005
i
------ -------J-------J
-------J-------J-
i
------J-------J-------J-------'-
-------
-------+-------
Energy •i 6.9700e- 0.0633 j

0.0532 3.8000e-

4.8100e- 4.8100e- i

4.8100e-

4.8100e- • 0.0000
003
004
003 003
003
003
i i i
i i
i
Mobile •i 1.6264 1.7776

16.4623 0.0363

4.1460 i 0.0263 i 4.1723 1.1049
i 0.0244

1.1293 0.0000
i i i i
i i i
i
Waste •I j

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 • 102.1755
i
Water 1 i
i 0.0000 0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000 38.9613

0.0305 j 0.0305 8.0000e- ; 0.0000 0.0325
i 005 r
-
-J------- J------- J------ --- - -- --
520.4118 520.4118 0.0394 5.8800e- 523.1505
r 003 r
i i r
3,361.938 i 3,361.938 : 0.2336 0.1464 3,411.390
8 8 i r 8
• --J------- J-------- ---------------

0.0000 i 102.1755 6.0384 0.0000 It 253.1355
i i r r
i i t
287.8829 326.8442 4.0260 0.0974 1 456.5295
Total 3.8198 ' 1.8410 1 16.5312 I 0.0367 1 4.1460 1 0.0312 1 4.1772 I 11 1.1049 1 0.0293 1 1.1342 1 141.1368 1 4,1700.263 1 4,3111.400 1 10.3375 0.2497 ' 4,6444 238 ROG '
NOx
c0
$02 i
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
NBio-002
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM1i1
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 :5/23/2024 5: 75:
-- + ----------------------- 4 ---------- ------ ' t ---------------------- 2 :Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks +Grading i 5/24/2024 i 7/18/2024 1 5 40 + _ _ ___ T
3 :Grading/Undergroud Utilities :Grading :10/23/2024 12/12/2024 5' 37,

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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 •Off -Site Street Utilites
;Trenching
;6/3/2024
10/18/2024
5 100;
•-------%------------------------
5 :Building Construction

F------------------------------------------------------------------ 'Building Construction
+-------------------------
17/19/2024 :3/31/2025 5: 182:
•------- --
+ -- -----------
----
------4--------4------

T ------------------------
6 :Paving
'Paving
12/9/2025
13/7/2025
5:
20:
'
+
-r
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
----------------------------
Demolition/Site Preparation
--------•-------------------
Buildinq Construction
Air Compressors
--------------------------
Concrete/Industrial Saws
--------------------------
Cranes
----------------------------
Demolition/Site Preparation
--------------------------;
'Excavators ,
i
Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks
+Excavators i
----- ------------------------------------------------- i
r
Building Construction
Forklifts ;
----- ------------------------------------------------- -
Building Construction
+Generator Sets i
---------------------------I--------------------------� Grading/Undergroud Utilities
+Off -Highway Trucks ;
-------------•---•----------+--------------------------- i
Paving
Pavers
-------------------------------------------------------� Paving
+Paving Equipment i
-------------------------------------------------------- Paving
'Rollers ;
-------------------------------------------------------- Demolition/Site Preparation
'Rubber Tired Dozers ;
........................................................

Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks
+Rubber Tired Dozers ;
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
+Rubber Tired Dozers ;
1 6.00
37 :

0.48 11 8.001
33:

0.73 •-------------- j-------------
11 7.001
4--------------
367:

0.29 -}------------ +--------------
31 8.001
---------
36:
---'

0.38 }------------- -------------
4 --------------
'
21 8.001
36 0.38
.4------------ 11 -------------
:..............
31 8.001
82:

0.20 i
1 1 4.001
376 :

0.38 _}------------------------- -------------

I --------------
21 8.00i
81:

0.42'
}------------ 91 -------------
4 --
---
2! 8.001
89:

0.36 _}------------ i I--------------4--------------
21 8.001
36:

0.38 }------------ 91---------------
----
---- --- -
21 8.001
367:

0.40 _+ ------------ I
- - - - -
- - - - - -0.40
11 8.001-----------367
-}
1i ---------8.00i-----------367
' -----------0.40
-}------------I--------------
i
-------------
-
Off -Site Street UUMes +Excavators , 21 8.00i 36 0.38
----------------------------
-*
- ------- --------- G-- •-- - - - ---- - - - - - - - - - --- -- ---- - - Building Construction •Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3, 7.00, 84, 0.37

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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 ----------------------------i-------------------------------------------+------------a--------------'}-------------- Grad ing/Undergroud Utilities
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
; 21

8.001
84 '

0.37 --------------------------.---------------------------------------------------- 1 •
------------+----------------------------
Building Construction
'Welders
; 1 i

8.001
46,

0.45 1
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Excavators
i 21

8.001
36'

0.38 ---------------------------I-------------------------------------- Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Graders
---- ------- ----- +-------------------------------------- i 11

8.001
148'

0.41 -----------------------------
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
-------------------------
+Scrapers
- -------------------
;2!
------------I-------------

8.001
t
423'
'
------------

0.48 ------------------------- ---
Demolition/Site Preparation
.--------------------------
'Off -Highway Trucks
I
�--------------------------�---------------------------------------- ; 11
-I

4.001
376
'

0.38 ------------------------+
Street Utilites
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
1 ; 2l

8.001
'te
84'

0.37 --------------------------------------
r-BuildingConstructionn
------------*-----------------F------------r------------ :Off -Highway Trucks
1 4.00'
376'
-----------

0.38 Trips and VMT
Demolition/Site
4 7;

17.50 0.00� 1,969.00 18.50:

10.20;

20.00:LID
Drennrn4inn
................•.---------_____�---••.---
' 1
I -------------------1
----------.-...--_.-..-..--•-_-•-
Grading/Undergroud
y 9;

22.50- 0.001 9,375.001 18.50:

10.20;

20.00:LD_Mix
I Ifilifiec y
i
'--------- I 1
1 Off -Site Driveways &
a 5;

12.50� 0.00� 91.001 18.50�

10.20;

20.00;LD_Mix
C'rlc�..nlLc �
, 1 I
-
-
Building Construction
10;
228.0089.80: O.00i 18.50:

10.20;

20.00;LD_Mix
-------------------------------
=----------- --- ---- i---------- =--------- ----------- 4----------=---------=------------- Paving
i 6;

15.00- 0.00: 0.001 18.50:

10.20;

20.00:LD_Mix
---------------
--------------; - i-------------------------------4----------=---------=------------- Architectural Coating
i 1 ;

45.60: 0.00: 0.001 18.50:

10.20;

20.00: LD_Mix
I 1
Off -Site Street Utilites
4'

10.00' 0.00' 0.00' 18.50'

10.20'

20.00' LD Mix

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
HDT_Mix ;HHDT
HDT_Mix ;HHDT
i---------------
IHDT Mix -HHDT
I---t---------
IHDT_---Mix----iHHDT
1HDT_Mix ;HHDT
1-------------------
iHDT_Mix 1HHDT
}----------}..-......
'HDT_Mix HHDT

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Mitigated Construction Off -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
802
Fugitive
Exhaust
PMiO
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2 ".

Total CO2 CH4
N20
CO2e
WM70
PM10
I
Total ±
PM2.5
PM2.5
'Total
JNBio-0O21
Category
tons/yr
MTlyr
Fugitive Dust -i

0.1303
i 0.0000

0.1303
i 0.0673
i 0.0000

0.0673

0.0000

0.0000 0.0000
0A000
1, 0.0000
Off -Road •1 0.0306 0.2927 i 0.2971 i 4.2000e- 0.0129 i 0.0129 0.0119 0.0119 0.0000 i 36.6078 i 36.6078 i 0.0118 0.0000

6.9038
004
i
i
i
i
•
i
Total

0.0306

0.2927

0.2971 4.2000e-

0.1303

0.0129

0.1432

0.0673

0.0179

36.6078

36.6078 0.0118

0.0000

36.9038
11 004

70.0000
Mitigated Construction Off -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Mitigated Construction Off -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Off -Road -i 0.0225 0.2101 0.2951 4.000Oe-
.� 004
Total 0.0225 0.2101 0.2951 4.0000e-
11 004
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site

8.6400e-

8.6400e- '
j 7.9500e-

7.9500e- • 0.0000 i 35.2195 j 35.2195 j 0.0114 0.0000
003
003
003
003

8.6400e-

7.9500e-

0.0000
721951

35.2195
1 0.0114

0.0000
003
003
003
003

35.5043

35.6043

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
PM1d
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
810-0O2
NBio-0O2
TotalCO2
t H4
N 00
CO2e
PMiO
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
1 Category
tonslyt
MT/yr
Off -Road •i 0.0225 0.2101 j 0.2951 j 4.0000e- 8.6400e- i 8.6400e- j 7.9500e- 7.9500e- 0.0000 i 35.2195 35.2195 0.0114 0.0000 1 35.5043 004 003 003 003 003
Total

0.0225

0.2101

0.2951

4.000Oe-

8.6400e-

7.9500e-

0.0000

35.2195

0.0114

0.0000

35.5043
004
003
003
003
003
Mitigated Construction Off -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Mitigated Construction Off -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Mitigated Construction Off -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling
•i 0.0000

0.0000
l 0.0000 '1

0.0000 l 0.0000 l 0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 i

0.0000
j 0.0000

0.0000 1 0.0000 1

0.0000
q I I I I I
--ry__-----1 1 1 1 I
1 1
I 1 - •
+
- -1
1 1 1 i
T-
- - ---
Vendor
•1 0.0000 1

0.0000
1 0.0000
1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000
1 0.0000
I 1
1 0.0000
1 0.0000
�

0.0000

0.0000
1 0.0000
1 1 0.0000
1 i
1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1

0.0000
,
i
W orker
1 �� 4.8000e- 1
1 I I 1

3.7000e- 1 5.3900e- 1 2.00OOe- 1 2.1000e- 1 1.00OOe-
1 1 2.1100e-
1 1
1 5.6000e- 1 1.00OOe-

5.7000e- �

0.0000

1.5394
1 1.5394
1 i

3.00OOe- 4.00OOe-

1.5507
•1 004 1
004
1 003
1 005 1 003 1 005
1 003
1 004
1 005
004 .
�
1 1
1 1
1 005 1 005 1
,. r
I
1 1 1
I
1 1
•
1 I
I i (
Total

4.8000e-

3.7000e-

5.3900e-

2.00OOe-

2.1000e-

1.00OOe-

2.1100e-

5.6000e-

1.00OOe-

5.7000e-

0.0000

1.5394

3.00OOe-

4.00OOe-

1.5507
004 1
004
003
005
003
005
003
004
005
004
006
005

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Mitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling
•i 0.0000 '

0.0000

0.0000
1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 •

0.0000
i 0.0000 I

0.0000

0.0000
i 0.0000 1

0.0000
1 1
1 1
I
1 1 1
I
.

I I
1 1-
I
1 1 j
1 1
Vendor
1 •1 0.0000 1

0.0000
1 1 0.0000
1 1 0.0000
I
1 0.0000
1 1 1
1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1
I

0.0000 1 0.0000 �

0.0000 �

0.0000
1 1 0.0000 1

0.0000
1 1 0.0000
1 1 0.0000 11

0.0000
;� I
I
1 1
1 I I
1 •
� I
1 1 1
I
I
I
1 1 1 1 1
•
I
1 1 1
Worker
1 •1 4.8000e- 1

3.7000e-
1 1 5.3900e-
1 � 2.00OOe-
1 1 2.1000e-
I 1 1
1 1.00OOe- 1 2.1100e- 1
1 5.6000e- 1 1.00OOe-

5.7000e- •

0.0000
I
1 1.5394 1

1.5394
1 1 3.00OOe-
1 1 4.00OOe- 1

1.5507
••1 004 1
004
1 003
1 005
1 003
1 005 1 003 1
004 1 005
004
005
1 005 i
1 1
1 9
1 1'. I K
1 •
1 1
1 1 1
Total

4.8000e•

3.7000e-

5.39OOe-

2.00OOe- 2.1000e-

1.00OOe- 2.1100e-

5.6000e- 1.00OOe-

5.7000e-

0.0000

1.5394

3.00OOe-

4.00OOe-

1.6607
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 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
Unmitigated Construction Off -Site
Hauling -1 0.0000 1

0.0000
1 0.0000
1 0.0000 i

0.0000

0.0000
1 0.0000 1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 i

0.0000 1, 0.0000
i 0.0000 11

0.0000
I
ry-------I
I
I I
I I
I 1
-�-------I-
1 I
1 7----'-
Vendor 1 0.0000 1

0.0000
I
1 0.0000
I I
1 0.0000 1

0.0000
1 1
1 0.0000 1

0.0000
I 1
1 0.0000 1 0.0000

0.0000 •

0.0000
I
I 0.0000 1
I

0.0000 1 0.0000
I
1 0.0000 1

0.0000
I
•---
------ ----•i'-------'-------'
I
I I
------- '-------'-------'-------'-------'---------------_------ I I
I I
1-------'-------'-------'-------1
I
�
------
1 Worker -I 3.3200e- 1

2.5000e-
I
1 0.0368
1 I
1 1.1000e- 1

0.0144
I I
1 8.00OOe- 1

0.0144
I I
1 3.8100e- 1 7.00OOe-

3.8800e- •

0.0000
I
I 10.5292 1
I

10.5292 1 2.2000e-
1 1 2.4000e- 1

10.6067
�i 003
003
;
i 004
¢ 005
003 005
003 i
i
! 004
; 004
Total

3.3200e.

2.5000e.

0.0368

1.1000e-

0.0144

8.000Oe-
1 0.0144

3.8100e-

7.00OOe-

3.8800e-

0.0000

10.5292

2.2000e-

2.4000e-

10.6067
003
003
004
006
003
005
003
004
004

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Mitigated Construction Off -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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

4.2 Trip Summary Information
General Office Building • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • •
• • -
- - 3,211.00
3,211.00 --T
-
- 3211 00 - - - - - --10,344,111 - - - -' - - - --10,344,111 Other Asphalt Surfaces
......................................------------
+

0.00 ,

0.00 —
- -

0.00 ---------------------------------------------------- Parking Lot
..................................................
+
;----------t-----------

0.00 ,

0.00 0.00
------------------------ 5--------------------------
Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail
...............................
+
;-----------t------------

24.90 ,

24.90 ----------t...........

24.90 106,712 - - - - - - - 106,712
y....... .... .....-..--... ........ •.

Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail

97.78 ;

97.78 �.

97.78 419,057 419,057
Total 1 3,333.68 1 3,333.68 1 3,333.68 1 10,869,880 I 10,869,880

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles
Trip %
Trip Purpose %
Land Use
H-W or C-W
H-S or C-C
f -0 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 1 8.40

6.90 r 33.00 1 48.00 19.00 77
19 4
_ _
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 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 ........----------s---------� ---i ----- J------- --
e T------- �- -----T---41.00 ------ •----- -
Refrigerated Warehouse -No ; 16.60 8.40 6.90 r 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, -+ ------ ------ - - -
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.5378916 0.065289: 0.189998; 0.126515: 0.023567: 0.006518: 0.011114: 0.008084: 0.000933: 0.000591: 0.025474: 0.0007081 ------------ --------- + ------ -- ----
Parking Lot 0.537891 + 0.065289: 0.189998: 0.126515: 0.023567: 0.006518: 0.011114: 0.008084: 0.000933: 0.000591: 0.025474: 0.000708 E -- - - -- + ------ ----- --- ---- ---- ----- -+
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, --------------- --- --- - ------- ---- ------ - -
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, Rail

5.0 Energy Detail
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy

0.00331 f

0.003311
- 0.00331 f

0.00331 f

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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 q �
e s
� i �
r
i 0.0000 i 0.0000 �
r 0.0000 �

0.0000 •

0.0000
r
Y 451.4561 � 451.4561 � 0.0381 r 4.6200e- r 453.7851
Mitigated :�
003
i
-----------:I- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - J------- J------- J-------

J------- J------- J- - - -
- -- --------
.
-------
------•I-------

J-------J-------'-------------
Electricity •i �
� � �
i 0.0000 i 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 •
:

0.0000
i 451.4561 451.4561 0.0381 r 4.6200e- r 453.7851
Unmitigated
i
i
i
I i r 003 r
- - -
------ ----- --------- -------
--- -- --�------- -------
-------
--------
---•---
-------- --- ---J- ---- -- - ---- --
NaturalGas 9 6.9700e-

0.0633 0.0532 i 3.8000e- i

4.8100e- 4.8100e-

4.8100e-

4.8100e- •

0.0000

68.9557 68.9557 i 1.3200e- r e- r 69.3654
Mitigated 003
004
003 003
003
003 ;
003 r 003 1
.
_ . _ ._ ... - ■G_}.•••••__----- }....-•-_.____.}______________}_____________}______________}-.•_•••••___.}.__..._�__.}.------.__----r - - - - - - - +
_ .. _ .. _
G.__._.------.}_-------------}------- ------ }•-------- ---- * - - - - - - NaturalG. as •• 6.9700e-

0.0633 0.0532 3.8000e-

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 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
Unmiticiated
General Office
1 340600
Building
I
1 Other Asphalt
------
i 0
Surfaces
I
I
_ _
Parking Lot
0 I
Refrigerated
1 223119
Warehouse -No
I
- Rail
.
....--
Unrefrigerated
728461
Warehouse -No
I
Rail
!
Total

1.8400e-

0.0167 i 0.0140 i 1.000Oe- i

1.2700e- i 1.2700e-

1.2700e-

0.0000
i 18.1757 18.1757 3.5000e- 3.3000e-

18.2837
003 1
I 1 004 1
1 003 I 003 1
1 003
003 .
1 I 1 004 1 004 1
I
1 1 1 1
1 I 1 I
1 1 i
1 0.0000 I
I I I

0.0000 I 0.0000 1 0.0000 I
1 1 I
1 0.0000 I 0.0000 1
I
I 0.0000 �

0.0000 �

0.0000
I i i
1 0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 i Q.000Q

0.0000
I
I
------J-
1 I I
1 1 I
------J------- J------- J---
1 1 I I
1 1 1 I
---- J------- J------- J------- J--------
s
s
---------------I-
it
I I 1 i 1
I I 1 i
------ J ------- J-------J-------
- - - - --
I

0.0000 I
I I 1

0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 1
1 1 1
1 0.0000 1 0.0000 I
1 1 0.0000

0.0000 �

0.0000
I i i
1 0.0000 1 0.0000 I 0.0000 1 0.0000

0.0000
1 --i-
------1 I 1------1
i-------i-------i-
1 1 ------1 '
i-------i-------i- i-------+-------�-------I-
------1------1 i 1
i- i-------i-------t------

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- i 2.2000e-

11.9772
003
003 005
i 004 004
004 i
004 If
004 004 ;
- ---- -----
-- - --_
--- --

3.9300e- 1

0.0357 1 0.0300 1 2.1000e- 1
1 2.7100e- 1 2.7100e- 1
1 2.7100e- I

2.7100e- f

0.0000
1 38.8735 1 38.8735 1 7.S000e- i 7.1000e-

39.1045
003
i 004
003 003
003 j
003 1
1 004 004

6.9700e-

0.0634

0.0532

3.8000e-

4.8100e- 4.8100e-
1 4.8100e-

4.8100e.

0.0000

68.9656

68.9556

1.3300e- 1.2600e-

69.3664
003
004
003 003
003
003
003 003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
General Office
1 340600
Building
1 1
Other Asphalt
------
i 0
Surfaces
1 1
_ _
Parking Lot
0 -r ------
Refrigerated i 223119
Warehouse -No I
Rail
Unrefrigerated i 728461
Warehouse -No 1
Rail l
Total

1.8400e-

0.0167 j 0.0140 i 1.000Oe-
i 1.2700e- '1 1.2700e- j

1.2700e-

0.0000
i 18.1757

18.1757 3.5000e- j 3.3000e- 1 18.2837
003 I
I 1 004 I
1 003 1 003 I
1 003
003 .

I 1
1 004 1 004 1
1 I I I
I I
I
1 1 1
1 1
I

0.0000
I I I
I I I
1 I
t t
I

0.0000 I 0.0000 1 0.0000 1
1 0.0000 I 0.0000 I
1 0.0000

0.0000 �

0.0000
1 0.0000 �

0.0000 1 0.0000 I 0.0000 0.0000
I
I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I
I
1 I
I
1 1

0.0000 1

0.0000 I 0.0000 I 0.0000 1
1 0.0000 I 0.0000 I
I 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
1 1 0.0000 1
i i

0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 it 0.0000
--i-
i-------i-------i-
i-------i-------i-
i-------7-------�------
1 i-------i-------i-------*------
i 1
i

1.2000e- 1
003

0.0109 1 9.1900e- 1 7.000Oe- I
003 005 i
1 8.3000e- 1 8.3000e- I
004 004
1 8.3000e- 1
004

8.3000e-
004 }

0.0000
1 11.9065 1
I I

11.9065 1 2.3000e- i 2.2000e- 11.9772
I004 004
I I I I I I I I 1
__---_-i-----_-_i-----__--i-----__i--___--_--i----___--i--------i--_--------i------___� T
-------f
- - - - - --F-----------i--------...-i-----_---_i_--------+ I 1 1 i
- - - - - -

3.9300e- 1

0.0357 1 0.0300 1 2.1000e- I
1 2.7100e- 1 2.7100e- 1
1 2.7100e- 1

2.7100e-

0.0000
1 38.8735 1

38.8735 1 7.5000e- i 7.1400e- 39.1045
003
004
003 003
003 j
003 *
004 004 ;

6.9700e-
1 0.0634

0.0532

3.8000e-

4.8100e-

0.0000

68.9566

68.9656

1.3300e-

1.2600e-

69.3654
003
004
003
003
003
003
1 003
003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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

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 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 Mitigated •i

2.1864 j 1.4000e- 0.0157 0.0000 1

6.000Oe- 6.000Oe-

6.000Oe-

6.000Oe- •

0.0000 i 0.0305 0.0305 8.000Oe- 0.0000 1 0.0325
•1
I 004 I I I
1 005 I 005 I
I 005
005
I I 1 005 I j
I

I I I I
•

I I I I
Unmitigated

2.1864 1.4000e- 0.0157 0.0000

6.000Oe- 6.000Oe-

6.000Oe-

0.0000 0.0305 0.0305 8.000Oe- - 0.0000 0.0325
004
005 005
005
005
005

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM1O
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- Cot
NBio-CTTotal02
CH4
720
CO2e
PMtO
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM3.5
Total
Subcategory
tons/yr
MT/yr
Architectural •1 0.2485 I i i I I 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 I 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating•I It
I I I I I I I 1 • I +II
'- +- II I -------
Consumer-_

1.9365 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 II 0.0000 0.0000 I o.0000 ProductsIt
..Lands.a.p.in.g. .---44-----J-------J------- J------- J-J--J------- J---------------------- II------- JI -------J------- J---------- ---.- 00e- 1400- 0.0157 0.0000 6.000Oe- 6.000Oe- 6.000Oe- 6.000Oe- 0.0000 1 0.0305 0.0305 8.0000e0.0000 I 0.0325 1 • 1
;I 003 I 004 I I I I 005 I 005 I 1 005 005 005 . 1
1 1 ;
1 1 1 1 1 1 I I i • I
I
Total

2.1854

1.4000e-

0.0157

0.0000
B.000Oe-
S.000Oe-
B.000Oe-
S.000Oe-

0.0000

0.0305

8.000Oe-

0.0000 0.0325
004
005
006
005
005
005

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 35 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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

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 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
Unmitigated
Indoor/Out
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
door Use
I
Land Use
Mgal
MT/yr
General Office

13.55467 / •i 13.6289 0.1169 j 2.8600e- I 17.4042
Building
1 2.17867 ;i I I 003
--
I
h--- ---�i-------J-------J-------* --
Other Asphalt
I 0 / 0 •I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 I 0.0000
Surfaces
i
I 1
Parking Lot
0/0 •I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000
I q I 1 I
I 1
Refrigerated

16.19519 / ZI 16.2715 i 0.2031 4.9100e- 22.8125
Warehouse -No
j 0 i 003
Rail
- -
G - - 3I_-
Unrefrigerated
—_—_—i-- ---- i-- —_—+ - - - -
'113.058 / h 296.9438 I 3.7060 I 0.0897 416.3129
i
Warehouse -No
0 Rail
Total

6.8442
F

4.0260

0.0974
458.5295

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 37 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
Indoor/Out
Total C 22
CH4
N20
cote
door Use
I
Land Use
Mgal
NIT/yr
General Office

3.55467 / ■1 13.6289 i 0.1169 2.8600e- 17.4042
Building
i 2.17867 ;: 003
- - -
i
r------ J-------i-------*-----
Other Asphalt
0/0 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Surfaces
Parking Lot
0/0 •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000
1 Refrigerated
r 6.19519 / h 16.2715 1 0.2031 1 4.9100e- 22.8125
Warehouse -No
j 0 003
Rail
------
I -- --�-------_
Unrefrigerated
113.058 / ii 296.9438 i 3.7060 i 0.0897 416.3129
Warehouse -No
i 0
Rail
Total
326.8442

4.0260

0.0974
456.6295

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 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 Category/Year

8.2 Waste by Land Use
Unmitigated
General Office

18.6 ■i 3.7756 0.2231 i 0.0000

9.3540
Building
I
1 1
" ."'.....h------�j-------J-------
Other Asphalt
---- ---*------
I 0 ■I 0.0000 0.0000 j 0.0000 1

0.0000
Surfaces
1 1 1 1
Parking Lot
0 7 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i

0.0000
41----- 1 1 1
Refrigerated

25.18 it 5.1113 1 0.3021 1 0.0000

12.6631
Warehouse -No
I I 1 1 ,
I 31 1 1
Rail
Unrefrigerated
I 459.57 I 93.2886 1 5.5132 I 0.0000
i1
231.1185
Warehouse -No
I I '
j
Rail
I
31 1 1
Total
102.1756

6.0384

0.0000
253.1365

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 39 of 40 Date: 1/19/2024 12:30 PM 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
GH4
N20
CO2e
Disposed
I
Land Use
tons
MT/yr
General Office

18.6 •1 3.7756 0.2231 1 0.0000 i 9.3540
Building
I
-----------I
•1 J-------J-------I
I I
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0 ■1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000
I 1
Parking Lot
0 •1 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 i 0.0000
I q 1 1
I •I 1
•1-------I 1 I
-----------
Refrigerated
- - - - - -

25.18 ;1 5.1113 1 0.3021 1 0.0000 12.6631
Warehouse -No
I •1 1 1
Rail
Unrefrigerated
459.57 h 93.2886 1 5.5132 1 0.0000 231.1185
Warehouse -No
Rail
Total
102.1765

6.0384

0.0000
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 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 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
0 -------9----------------------_------------------------------ _------------------------------=---------------i------------------ }---------------
Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail

26.79 + 1000sgft
; 0.61 26,785.00
0 ----------------------------+...........----
--------------_------------------------------=---------------i------------------1--------------- Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail
488.90
+ 1000sgft
; 11.22 488,900.00
0 ------------------------------
-------------------------------
A------------------------------=-
-------------i------------------}-
--------------
Parking Lot
682.00
+ 1000sgft
; 15.70 0.00 1
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.

CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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.
tblConstruction Phase
NumDays
-------- -------------------- 4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
NumDays
-------- --------------------- 4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
NumDays
----------------------------- Y----------------------------- tblConstruction Phase
NumDays
---.-... ----------- Y---------- ... ...... .
tblConstruction Phase
...... -------------
NumDays
-----------------------------
tblConstruction Phase
-----------------------------
NumDays
-------- -------------------- 4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
-------- •-------------------- 4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
----------------------------- _----------------------------- tblConstruction Phase
PhaseEndDate
-----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
PhaseEndDate
-------- --------------------+
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
PhaseEndDate
-------- --------------------- 4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Y tblConstructionPhase
. - - . - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PhaseEndDate
----------------------------- _----------------------------- tblConstruction Phase
PhaseStartDate
----------------------------- Y----------------------------- tblConstruction Phase
PhaseStartDate
-------- -------------------- +----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Y tblConstructionPhase
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PhaseStartDate
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T tblConstructionPhase
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PhaseStartDate
-----------------------------_
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
PhaseStartDate

35.00 45.00
-----------------------------
440.00
--------------------------
182.00
-----------------------------

30.00 --------------------------

75.00 -----------------------------

45.00 --------------------------

40.00 ----------- --------------- t-.--..--.-----

35.0E
.........-

20.00 -
------------------------

45.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

37.00 --------------�--------
---------
7/9/2026
---- ------------
3/31 /2025
------- ------------
4/2/2026
-----------------------'
3/31 /2025
---- ------------
3/21 /2024
----------------------
5/23/2024
---- — -------------
5/23/2024
------.. ... ......--
7/18/2024
-----------------------
5/21 /2026
--------------------------
3/7/2025
-----------------------
7/25/2024
--------------------------
12/12/2024
---- ----------------�
7/25/2024
------------------------
10/18/2024
-----------------------------
5/22/2026
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1 /28/2025
-----------------------------
7/26/2024
--------------------------
7/19/2024
----------- -------------
3/22/2024
--------------------------
5/24/2024
-----------------------------
4/3/2026
--. ---------------------
2/9/2025
-----------------------------
5/24/2024
--------------------------
10/23/2024
----------------------------- --------------------------- 7/26/2024
6/3/2024

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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

20.00 18.50
-----------------------------
tblGrading
4-----------------------------
AcresOfGrading
}-----------------------------+-------------------------- 1 111.00
120.00
-----------------------------
tblGrading
+------------------------_ ---♦-------------------------------------------------------- Material Exported
i 0.00
460.00
------- ------
tblGrading
- - ----
Material Exported
f-----------------------------+-------------------------- 1 0.00
75,000.00
---------------•-• - -
-------------------
----------------------------
•- ---------
tblGrading
Material Imported
i 0.00
460.00
-----------------------------
tblLandUse
----------------------------
Land UseSquareFeet
--------------------------------------------------------- 1 682,000.00

0.00 -----------------------------
tblLandUse
Y----------------------------�1------------------------------+-------------------------- LotAcreage
f 15.66

15.70 --------------- -----------4---------------------------}-------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
---
HorsePower
1 78.00

37.00 ---------------------------4--------------------------$-----------------------------4 tblOffRoadEquipment
---
HorsePower
1 81.00
--------------------------

33.00 ---------------------------+-----------------------------$-----------------------------4-------------------------- tblOffRoadEq uipment
HorsePower
a 231.00
367.00
---------------------------
tblOffRoadEq uipment
+-----------------------------
HorsePower
♦-----------------------------+-------------------------- i 158.00

36.00 ---------------------------Y-----------------------------f-----------------------------+-------------------------- tblOffRoadEq uipment
HorsePower
1 158.00

36.00 - ----- -P----------_-----------------------------}-------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEq ui ment
HorsePower
1 89.00

82.00 ---------------------------_------------------------------}-----------------------------4-------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
1 84.00

14.00 ---------------------------4------------------------------}-------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEq uipment
HorsePower
t 402.00
376.00
---------------------------4-----------------------------�--------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
i 130.00

81.00 ---------------------------+------------------------------�-------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
1 132.00

89.00 ---------------------------+-----------------------------♦-------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEq uipment
HorsePower
1 80.00

36.00 --------------- -P----------Y-----------------------------�------------------------------+-------------------------- tblOffRoadEqui ment
HorsePower
1 247.00
367.00
---------------------------_----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
------------------------------
i 247.00
--------------------------
367.00
---------------------------4------------------------------�--------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
1 247.00
367.00
---------------------------+•-----------------------------�--------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
} 158.00

36.00 ----------------------------_-----------------------------�------------------------------4-------------------------- tblOffRoadEqui ment
HorsePower
1 97.00

84.00 ---------------------------Y-----------------------------f-----------------------------4-------------------------- tblOffRoadEq uipment
HorsePower
i 97.00

84.00 -----------------P----------_-----------------------------}-------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEq ui ment
HorsePower
1 97.00

84.00 ---------------------------4------------------------------}------------------------------4-------------------------- tblOffRoadEq
uipment
HorsePower
i 158.00

36.00 --------------------------+--------------------------f-------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEq uiP ment
---
HorsePower
1 187.00
148.00
---------------------------Y-----------------------------i------------------------------+-------------------------- tblOffRoadEq uipment
HorsePower
1 367.00
423.00
. ... . .............
- -----------
------------------------------
--------- --------
tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
402.00
376.00

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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

97.00 84.00
--------------- -P----------4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEqui ment
HorsePower
-----------------------------+-------------------------- 1 402.00
376.00
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
_-----------------------------
LoadFactor
♦-------------------------------------------------------- 1 0.38

0.38 - - -----------------+-----------------------------♦-------------------------------------------------------- tblOffRoadEq uipment
LoadFactor
1 0.38

0.38 .............................I-------..-------.-.-..-------�----------------------------------..---.-.--------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
OffRoadEquipmentType
Off -Highway Trucks
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
+-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
i
--------------------------------------------------------- Excavators
- -- ---- - ---+---
tblOffRoadEquipment
- -------------�-------------------------------*
OffRoadEquipmentType
i
i
----- -- ---
Off -Highway Trucks
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
+-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-------------------------------I
i
--------------------------
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
_-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
-}-------------------------------------------------------- i
Off -Highway Trucks
-----------------------------_----------------------------- tblProjectCharacteristics
Precipitation Frequency
}-------------------------------------------------------- i 33
8 -----------------------------
tblProjectCharacteristics
y-----------------------------
WindSpeed
------------------------------ t-------------------------- i 2.2

2.3 -----------------------------_----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
VendorTripLength
,i------------------------------
i 6.90
--------------------------

10.20 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
+-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
♦-----------------------------

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

10.20 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
y-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
t}
------------------------------ t-------------------------- i 6.90

10.20 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
_-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-------------------------------'-------------------------- i 6.90

10.20 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
_-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
------------------------------ 4-------------------------- i 6.90

10.20 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
+-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
i------------------------------4--------------------------

6.90 10.20
---- - - ------- - -
tblTripsAndVMT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- VendorTripLength
i
f 6.90

10.20 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
y-----------------------------
VendorTripNumber
------------------------------ T---------.-..------------- i 90.00

89.80 - - - -- -----�%
tblTripsAndVMT
------------------------------------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength
} 14.70

18.50 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
_-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
------------------------------ 4
f� 14.70
--------------------------

18.50 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
,*-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
*-----------------------------t-------------------------- i 14.70

18.50 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
_-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
i------------------------------
i 14.70
--------------------------

18.50 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
4-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
------------------------------ t--------------------------

14.70 18.50
- - --- - -- ---
tblTripsAndVMT
+-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
i
-}-------------------------------------------------------- 1 14.70

18.50 ------ -- •-- - ----I---------------------------•-}----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripLength
1 14.70
--------------------------

18.50 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT

I -----------------------------
WorkerTripNumber
-*------------------------------T--------------------------

18.00 17.50
----------------------------Y----------------------------�i------------------------------4-------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripNumber
i
i 23.00

22.50 ----------------------
----------------
---------------------------
-•------- ------------
tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripNumber

13.00 12.50

CalEEMod Version: CaiEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
WorkerTripNumber

46.00 45.60
-----------------------------¢----------------------------- tblVehicleTri s
ST_TR
----------------------------- 4--------------------------

2.21 160.55
- - -p- -- -�%-
tblVehicleTri s
---------------♦-------------------------------------------------------- ST_TR
i
t 2.12

0.93 ----------------------------_-----------------------------^i--------------------------------------------------------- tblVehicleTrips
ST_TR
1 1.74

0.20 ------------------p----------;.
tblVehicleTri s
-----------------------------
SU_TR
'i------------------------------
1 0.70
--------------------------
160.55
-----------------------------_----------------------------- tblVehicleTri s
SU_TR
--------------------------------------------------------- 1 2.12

0.93 ----------------------------_-----------------------------i--------------------------------------------------------- tblVehicleTrips
SU_TR
i 1.74

0.20 -----------------------------_----------------------------- tblVehicleTri s
WD_TR
i---------------------------------------------------------

9.74 160.55
------------------p----------
tblVehicleTri s
-----------------------------
WD_TR
i
-}-----------------------------t-------------------------- i 2.12

0.93 ----------------------
----------
-----------------------------
------------ ---------
tblVehicleTrips
WD_TR

1.74 0.20

2.0 Emissions Summary

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
2024 q 6.9828

89.1219 69.8804
j 0.2966 18.5121

2.4344 i 20.9465 6.1131 2.2548

8.3679
0,0000 1 30,957.35 30,957.35 j 3.9969

2.9805 il 31,945.45
.I I
I
I I 1
I 1 1
.
02 1 02 1
1 1 87
... ..'-- -- - --
....20.25
----J------- J-------J-------J
-------J-------J-------J----------------.......I1-------J -------J-------J
-------Y1'-------
116.1034

26.6942 38.8110

0.1020 4.9082

1.0272 5.9354 1.3208 0.9540

2.2748

0.0000 10,171.16I10,171.161.4360

0.4288 10,334.85
'I I
I
I I I
I I 1
•
I
19 19 I
1 23
�
;
Maximum
116.1034

89.1219

69.8804

0.2966 18.6121

2.4344 20.9466 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

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
PM2.5 B10-002
NBio-COZI
TotaiCO2
CH4
N20
G02e
PM10
PM10 Total
PM2.5 PM2.5
Total
Percent

0.00 0.00 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 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
Mitigated Operational

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 34
Date: 1 /19/2024 12:29 PM
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

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
1 •Demolition/Site Preparation
'Demolition
12/9/2024
15/23/2024
5:
75�
-----------
-----------
--------------------
2 •Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks
'Grading
15/24/2024
i7/18/2024
5:
40 --------------
-----------
----
----------
;-------
4--------t
------------------------
3 •Grading/Undergroud Utilities
+Grading
110/23/2024
i 12/12/2024
5:
37 ------%-------------- ----------

A- - - - - - - - - ------------

I- ------
a ------------
,--------
;--------
4 -----------------------
4 'Off -Site Street Utilites
+Trenching
16/3/2024
:10/18/2024
5:
100:
----- -C---------------
+ --- -------
- ------
4 ------------
4 --------
'
t ----------------------
5 •Building Construction
'Building Construction
17/19/2024
i3/31/2025
5:
182:
- ----------------------------------------
- ----
------------
,--------
4------

T ----------------------
6 :Paving
'Paving
12/9/2025
:317/2025
5:
20:
----- --- ------------ - --
+ -- - ----
— — — — — — — — 1---------- ' I--------
----------------------
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
Coating
Compressors
------ ---------------------
)emolition/Site Preparation 'Concrete/Industrial Saws i 1 ---------------------------- -- --- — ------�
tuilding Construction 'Cranes i 1
----------------------------i
--------------------------------------------
I
)emolition/Site Preparation Excavators 3
37,
:

0.48 ------ --------------
33 ,

0.73 ------------------ 367

0.29 -------�--------------
36:

0.38 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
• ----- ------- -- -- -- - - --------
Building Construction
--- ---------- ---- ---------
'Forklifts
y-------
;
Building Construction
'Generator Sets
i
-- -------
+ ------ - - - - --
---
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Off -Highway Trucks
;
---- ---------------------
+ ------ -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
--------
Paving
+Pavers
;
+ -------------------------
-—----—----—-
Paving
'Paving Equipment
----------------------
---------------------------
------------
Paving
±Rollers
;
---------
Demolition/Site Preparation
------------------------------
Off-Site Driveways & Sidewalks
--- -------------------------I
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
-----------------------------I
Off -Site Street Utilites
-----------------
Rubber Tired Dozers---------------------------
;
Rubber Tired Dozers ;
-------------------------
Rubber Tired Dozers ;
------------------------
Excavators ;
2; 8.00; 36; 0.38
Building Construction
— -- —
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes ; 3e
---------------------------------------------------------------------------4 Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
; 21
Grad ing/Undergroud Utilities
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
i 4
; 21
4 Building Construction
+welders------------------------------------------------------- i
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Excavators
; 21
4 Grading/Undergroud Utilities
!Graders
; 1
4 Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Scrapers
; 2
4 Demolition/Site Preparation
+Off -Highway Trucks
; 1
_
i _4
Steet Utilites
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
;— 2---------------------------------------------------*----------------- r6uil�i`ngSite
Construction
:Off -Highway Trucks
1'
Trips and VMT
------------i-------------*--------------

8.00 82'
t

0.20 t

4.00 j
t
376'

0.38 8.001
t
81'

0.42 ------------i-----------
36'--------------

0.38 ------------ j-----------367
--------------

0.40 ------------ I-----------367
--------------

0.40 ------------ l-----------367
--------------

0.40 ------------ j-----------
36 --------------

0.38 ---i ----------
84-----------

0.37 - --------7-00j-----------

8.001
t
84'

0.37 ------------ i-----------------------------

8.00 j
t
46'

0.45 ---------8.00i-----------148
--

0.41 ---------

8.001
------i-------------
423,
- -------

0.48 ------------ 4-------------

4.00 j
t
t--------------
376'

0.38 t
----------------------376--------------
___
-

0.38 Demolition/Site iHDT_Mix (HHDT
tHDT_Mix IHHDT
t
HDT_Mix ;HHDT
7;

17.50; 0.001 1,969.00

18.50: 10.20: 20.00:LD Mix
Grading/Undergroud
y 9;

22.50� 0.00� 9,375.00�

18.50� 10.20; 20.00;L—Mix
i i
,
Off -Site Driveways &
5'

12.50' 0.00' 91.00'

18.50, 10.20, 20.00'LD_Mix

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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 - LDMix
_
- HDT_Mix HHDT
----------------}--------------
Paving
;----------t--------- 1--------- y----------+----------1--------- + 6; 15.00� 0.00� 0.00� 18.50� 10.20;
1-------------,

20.00;LD_Mix
---+----------
iHDT_Mix IHHDT
---------------------------------------
Architectural Coating
'------------------4----------=-----------------------1--------------------- 1; 45.60: 0.00: 0.00: 18.50:

10.20:

20.00;LD_Mix
'HHDT
+
iHDT_Mix
i —'
Off -Site Street Utilites
4: 10.00, 0.00, 0.00, 18.50-

10.20,

20.00,LD_Mix
-HDT_Mix FHHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

3.2 Demolition/Site Preparation - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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 I
CO
I S 2
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10 I
Fugitive
I Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2 ' NBio- CO2 Total CO2 GH4
N20
CO2e
t'M70
PM10
Total
PM2,5
PM2,5
Total
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling
•1

0.0566 I

3.4346

0.9305

0.0151

0.4596
1 0.0218 �,

0.4813 i

0.1260

0.0208

0.1468 •
1 1,663.304 i 1,663.304 0.0938

0.2642 1 1,744.390'
I
1 1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
I
�
'
1 7 7
�
$
•1
---•-
1 1
�
--
1 1
I
1 T------®
Vendor
•1
I

0.0000 I
I

0.0000 1

0.0000
I I
1 0.0000 I

0.0000
I I
1 0.0000 I
I

0.0000 I

0.0000
I
1 0.0000

0.0000 •
I I
I 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
1 0.0000 1

0.0000
1 1
1 I
--•1-------1
Worker •I

0.0605 I
1 0.0420
1 I

0.7207 2.1100e- 0.2461
1 1

1.4000e-
1 0.2475 0.0653
1 1.2900e-
�

0.0666 •
1 I 1
1213.1685 213.1685
1 7-------

4.4800e- 1
214.6190
•I
9 1
1 1
1 I
1 003 I
1 I
1 003 1
1 1
1 1 003
;
1 14.5700e-
1 1 I 003
1 I 003 i
1 1
1 1
1 I
1 I
•
! 1 I
1 1
Total

0.1170

3.4785

1.5512

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

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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

3.4 Grading/Undergroud Utilities - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site
Fugitive Dust •w i i � � 9.7044
o
� 0.0000 � 9.7044 � 3.7184
w 0.0000 3.7184

0.0000

0.0000
. ......... •I -- - - - - - J------- J------- J-------J-------J------J-------J-------J--------- Off -Road •i 3.9038 i 37.3675 33.8090 0.0673

1.5915 i 1.5915 i
............

1.4642 1.4642 •
------ J-------J-------J-------.'......
i 6,518.048 6,518.048 2.1081
6,570.750
i i
7 i 7
j 5
Total

3.9038 37.3575

33.8090

0.0873

9.7044

1.5915

11.2959

3.7184

1.4542
S.1828
6,518.048
5,518.048

2.1081
6,574.750
7 7
5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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

3.5 Off -Site Street Utilites - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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

3.6 Building Construction - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
FLOG
NOx
CO
802
Fugitive Exhaust
PM1b
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
1 PM10 PM1b
1 Total
PM2.5
PM2.�S
Total
INWo-=021
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling �i

0.0000 1

0.0000
1 0.0000

0.0000
1 0.0000 1 0.0000
' 0.0000
1 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000
1 0.0000
1 0.0000
I
1 1
1 1
I
I
1 • � 1 1
- •
---•I-------'-------'-------
I
1 1 1 1 I 1 1
------- '------- ' ------- '---------------'--------------+-------I-------'-------'-------'-------t------- • 1 1
1 Vendor •1

0.1201
I
1 4.6250
1 1 1.5386
I
1 0.0237
1 I
1 0.8492 1 0.0255
1 1 0.8747
I
1 0.2444
1 1 0.0244

0.2688
I I 1
1 2,551.347 1 2,551.347 1 0.0870 1

0.3662
2,662.636'
'1
1 1
I
I 1
1 1
1 • 1 9 I 9 I
1 1 4
1 ---
Worker
� 0.7879
1 1 0.5475
I
1 9.3895
1 1 0.0275
1 1
1 3.2067 1 0.0182
I
1 3.2249
I
1 0.8504
I
1 0.0168

0.8671
I 1
2,777.280 1 2,777.280 1 0.0595
1 1 0.0584
1 2,796.179
i
1 1
1 1 I
1 1
1 i 4 1 4 I
1 1 1
'1
1 1
1 1 1
1 1
1 � 1 1 I
1 1
Total

0.9079

6.1725

10.9281

0.0612

4.0559

0.0437

4.0996

1.0948

0.0412

1.1359
5,328.628 5,328.628

0.1465

0.4246
6,458.815
_i�
1 1
4 4
51 Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
Hauling
•i

0.0000 1

0.0000
1 0.0000

0.0000
1 0.0000
j 0.0000 1

0.0000 j

0.0000

0.0000
i 0.0000 1 0.0000 1

0.0000

0.0000
110.0000
--
q
-ry------
I
I I
1 1 I
I
1 ,
� I 1
1 1
1 t" - - "-
Vendor
•1
1 0.1201 1

4.6250
1 1
1 1.5386 1

0.0237
I
I 0.8492
1 1
I 0.0255 1
I

0.8747 1

0.2444
1 1 0.0244

0.2688
12,551.347 2,551.347

0.0870

0.3662
1 2,662.636
9 1 9 1
1 4
1 Worker
•1

0.7879 I

0.5475
1 9.3895 1

0.0275
I 3.2067
1 0.0182 I

3.2249 1

0.8504
1 0.0168

0.8671
12,777.280 2,777.280 i

0.0595

0.0584
12,796.179
1 I
4 4
1 1
1 I
'
;
Total

0.9079

5.1725

10.9281

0.0512

4.0569

0.0437

4.0996

1.0948

0.0412

1.1369
5,328.628
5,328.628

0.1466

0.4246
5,458.815
4 4
5 3.6 Building Construction - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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

3.7 Paving - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
Hauling

0.0000 1

0.0000
j 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
• i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 j 0.0000 1

0.0000
• 1
I
1 I
I I
I
1 • 1 1 1 1
-- I
I
Vendor
I
i 0.0000 1

0.0000
1 1 0.0000
1 1
1 0.0000 1

0.0000
1 1
I 0.0000 1
1 0.0000 1

0.0000
I
1 0.0000

0.0000
1 1 1
� 0.0000 1 0.0000 I 0.0000 1 0.0000

0.0000
•1 1
1 1 I
1 1
1 1
11 i
• I I 1 1 I
• I
--
1 1 1
I 1
I
1 • I 1 1 I
Worker
1 •1 0.0485 I

0.0323
I
1 0.5741
1 1

11.7500e- 1

0.2110
1 1
1 1.1400e- I
1 0.2721 1

0.0559
1 1 1.0500e-

0.0570
I I 1
• 1 176.4913 1 176.4913 13.5200e- 13.5900e- 1177.6482
003 I
1 003 I
I
1 003
; I I I 003 I 003
I
1 1 1
I I
1 1
•
I 1
I I I
Total

0.0486

0.0323

0.5741

1.7500e-

0.2110

1.1400e-

0.2121

0.0659

1.0500e- 1

0.0570
1 176.4913 176.4913

3.5200e- 1 3.5900e-
177.64 22
003
003
003
003 1 003

3.8 Architectural Coating - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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

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 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

4.2 Trip Summary Information
• • • • • • • • • •General Office Building
....................
6 - 3,211.00
---;---------
3,211.00 --T
- 3211.00 10,344,111 ' - - - - 10,344,111 -
-- -------------------------
Other Asphalt Surfaces
+

0.00--------

0.00 0.00
......................................------------
Parking Lot
.....................................--------------;-----------t------------------------------------5-------------------------- +
;-----------t-----------+------------------------

0.00 ,

0.00 ----•--•------------------

0.00 • • • • • Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail
.....................i
+ -

24.90 ,
- - - - - - - - - - - - -----------T

24.90 24.90 106,712-106,712 - - _ - -
- - - - - - - - - - - it - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - i - Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail
;

97.78 ,

97.78 97.78 419,057 419,057
Total

4.3 Trip Type Information
.68
68 880
880
General Office Building
; 16.60 1

8.40 1

6.90 33.00 i

48.00 19.00 ;
77 ; 19 ;
4 ........................--------------
--�
r '---------T-----------.---------------------------------------- Asphalt S. rtaces.
; 16.60 i

8.40 6.90
ti 0.00

0.00 0.00 ;
0 0 ;
0 • . •Other
..•+----------------------r----------'tY",
-------- J---------T-----------r----------------------.----------------• Pa.ki Lot.

16.60 1

8.40 6.90
t 0.00 i

0.00 0.00 ;
0 ; 0 ;
0 • • • • • • . :g ........----------�-------
�
--
t I--------
----
---------�-----------------
Refrigerated Warehouse -No

16.60 8.40

6.90 t 59.00

0.00 41.00
92 5
3 ............:...........----------r---------t-
----
-----
------- - - -
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 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
--- ------------
+
- -----
------
--- - --
- -
- - --
- - ----
-- --
- - - - --
-- - - -- - I
---
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
------------------
+
-.
-----------
__-
-----•
_-_--_
_-____
-____--T-__
Parking Lot r

0.5378911

0.065289:

0.189998:

0.126515:

0.023567:

0.006518;

0.011114:

0.008084:

0.000933:

0.000591;

0.025474:

0.0007081

0.003318
. . . . . .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - f
........ I -
- - - - - - .
- - - - -
- - - - - - . .
_ . _ . _ _
- _
_
- - - _ ........
- - - - - -
- _
- - - - - _
..... _ ..
........ ........
-
_ - - - -
- _
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
------------------------'--
+
-------.
-- .
----
------
------
------
--
-------
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

w
N
N
T
N
O
N
T
{Y
4—
O
0 ca
LL

5 d
a
N
CN
r
N
a
N
M
r
cc
d

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
Unmitigated
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.6
Bio-0O2
N13io-702
Tota[CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
SubCategory
lb/day!
lb/day
Architectural •i 1.3614 � i i � � 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • i i 0.0000 i r r 0.0000 Coating •� i r
i i i i i i . r
-•-
Consumer •1 10.6109 � � � � i 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 • i i 0.0000 0.0000 Products ,i i ; i i r i
r
- -----•i-------'-------'-------'-------'-------'-------'-------'-------'---------------+-- - I------- '------- '------- '-------+--- - Landscaping •i 0.0115 � 1.1400e- i 0.1253 i 1.000Oe- � � 4.5000e- 4.5000e- 4.5000e- 4.5000e- • i 0.2692 i 0.2692 7.000Oe- 0.2867 003 i 005 i 004 004 i 004 004 i 004 i
Total

11.9839

1.1400e-

0.1263

1.000Oe-

4.5000e-

0.2692

7.000Oe-

0.286]
003
005
004
004
004
004
004

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:29 PM 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
Architectural

1.3614

0.0000
i 0.0000
I 0.0000

0.0000 •
i i 0.0000
i F 1

0.0000
Coating
•1
1 I
I 1
1 I 1
I
;
1 1
1 1
--•1
1 1
I 1
1 1 1
I
.
1 1
I t 1
Consumer
•1
1 1

10.6109 1 1
1 1
1 1
I
1 0.0000
1 1
1 0.0000 1
1 1 0.0000

0.0000 •
1 1 1 0.0000
I 1
1 1 1

0.0000
Products
1 I
1 1
1 1 I
I
•
1 I 1 1
Landscaping
•1
1 I

0.0115 1 1.1400e- 1
I I

0.1253 1 1.00OOe- 1
1 1 4.5000e-
1 1
1 4.5000e- 1
1 1 4.5000e- �

4.5000e- •
1 1 0.2692 1 0.2692
1 1
1 7.00OOe- 1 1

4.2867
•1
q
1 003 1
1 005 1
1 004
1 004 1
1 004
004 ;
1 1
1 004 1 1
1 1
1 i
!
E S
1 •.
1 1'.

I
1 j
Total

11.9839

1.1400e-

0.1253

1.00OOe-

4.5000e-

0.2692 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 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
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
User Defined Equipment

11.0 Vegetation

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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----------------------_------------------------------_---------------------------------------------i------------------+--------------- Refrigerated Warehouse -No Rail

26.79 + 1000sgft
; 0.61 26,785.00
0 -------—---------------------:-
-----------------------------
---------------------------- --
---------------i----------------------------------
Unrefri erated Warehouse -No Rail
488.90
+ 1000sgft
; 11.22 488,900.00
0 ---------------9 -------------
------------------------------_---------------------------------------------i--------------------------- Parkin Lot
682.00
+ 1000sgft

15.70 0.00
0 -- --- -------------- _ _. _.....
t........... .... .�.
- ------------
--- ----r--------------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 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
-----------------------------
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
NumDays
-------- ----------------y
tblConstructionPhase
-----.--. .------------
NumDays
-----------------------------y
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
NumDays
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4
tblConstructionPhase
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NumDays
-----------------------------_
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
NumDays
-----------------------------_
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
PhaseEndDate
-------- --------------------_
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
PhaseEndDate
-------- --------------------- 4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
-------- --------------------+
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
PhaseEndDate
-----------------------------4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Y tblConstructionPhase
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PhaseEndDate
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseEndDate
----- -
tblConstruction Phase
-----------------------------
PhaseStartDate
-----------------------------_----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
............................ Y............................. tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
-------- -------------------- _----------------------------- tblConstructionPhase
PhaseStartDate
-----------------------------_
tblConstructionPhase
-----------------------------
PhaseStartDate
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T
tblConstructionPhase
- - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - -
PhaseStartDate

35.00 45.00
•-----------------
440.00
--------------------------
182.00
------------------ T..........................

30.00 75.00
------------------

45.00 --------------------------

40.00 .-----------------

35.00 ..........................

20.00 .-- ---------------------------------------

45.00 37.00
-------------------
7/9/2026
--------------------------
3/31 /2025
-----------------------------
4/2/2026
-r--------------------------
3/31 /2025
-----------------------t
3/21 /2024
----------.-----------
5/23/2024
-----------------------------
5/23/2024
--------------------------
7/18/2024
-----------------------------
5/21 /2026
--------------------------
3/7/2025
-----------------------------
7/25/2024
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
12/12/2024
------------------------------4-------------------------- 7/25/2024
10/18/2024
------------------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5/22/2026 1 /28/2025
----------------------------- ------------------
7/26/2024 7/19/2024
---------------------- --------------------------
3/22/2024 5/24/2024
------------------------------
4/3/2026
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2/9/2025
-----------------------------
5/24/2024
--------------------------
10/23/2024
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7/26/2024
-� - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
6/3/2024

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
-----------------------------
MaterialExported
-----------------------------
tblGrading
-----------------------------
Material Exported
.......... .............. y
tblGrading
----------------------- .

Material Imported
tblLandUse
Land UseSquareFeet
. . . . . . .. ........ . . .. . . ....... Y
tblLandUse
.. _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . . . .. .

LotAcreage
-----------------------------_-----------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
----------
HorsePower
............................. y..__.__._______________..__._ tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
. . . ....... .. . . . .. ... . . . . .. . . . Y
tblOffRoadEquipment
. _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . . . . . . . .. - - - - - - - - - - .

HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
............................. y..____.__.__..._.____------__ tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
........ --------------------- 4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
---------------------------4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEq uipment
HorsePower
tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
-----------------P----------
tblOffRoadEqui ment
-----------------------------
HorsePower
tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower
-----------------P----------�%----------------------------- tblOffRoadEqui ment
HorsePower
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
HorsePower

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

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

0.00 --------------------------
75,000.00
•-----------------------------t.....---------------------

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

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

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

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

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

37.00 •-----------------------------

81.00 --..----------------------

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

36.00 ------------------------------
158.00
-.-._....-----------------

36.00 -----------------------------

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

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

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

14.00 ------------------------------ T-------------------------- 402.00
376.00
-----------------------------
130.00
--------------------------

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

89.00 80.00

36.00 --------------------------------------------------------- 247.00
367.00
247.00
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
367.00
247.00
367.00

F-----------------------------
158.00
..........................

36.00 F-----------------------------

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

84.00 F-----------------------------

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

84.00 j-----------------------------

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

84.00 -----------------------------
158.00
--------------------------

36.00 F-----------------------------
' 187.00
--------------------------
148.00

F-------------------------------------------------------- 367.00
423.00

E----------------------------- --------------------------- 402.00
376.00

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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

97.00 84.00
-----------------P----------¢-----------------------------}-----------------------------4-------------------------- tblOffRoadEq ui ment
HorsePower
f 402.00 376.00
---------------------------_----------------------------- tblOffRoadEquipment
LoadFactor
�--------------------------------------------------------- i 0.38

0.38 -----------------P----------
tblOffRoadEqui ment
-----------------------------
LoadFactor
--------------------------------------------------------- 1 0.38

0.38 - -- -- --------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
_-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
------------------------------ 4-------------------------- Off -Highway Trucks
.............................
tblOffRoadEquipment

4........................-----
OffRoadEquipmentType
i
-----------------------------------
----------------------
Excavators
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
4-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
i
------------------------------ 4-------------------------- i
Off -Highway Trucks
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
4-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
------------------------------ 4-------------------------- i
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
-----------------------------
tblOffRoadEquipment
4-----------------------------
OffRoadEquipmentType
1-------------------------------------------------------- if
Off -Highway Trucks
-----------------------------
tbIProjectCharacteristics
-----------------------------
Precipitation Frequency
---------------------------------------------------------- f 33
8 -----------------------------%----------------------------- tblProjectCharacteristics
WindSpeed
------------------------------
1 2.2
--------------------------

2.3 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
_-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
-------------------------------*-------------------------- 1 6.90

10.20 -----------------------------_----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
VendorTripLength
--------------------------------------------------------- i 6.90

10.20 --- -----
tblTripsAndVMT
_-----------------------------}----------------------------- VendorTripLength
i 6.90
--------------------------

10.20 .............................I
tblTripsAndVMT
-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
---------------------------------------------------------

6.90 10.20
- - --
tblTripsAndVMT
+-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
f
--------------------------------------------------------- i 6.90

10.20 ----- - -----+-----------------------------♦-------------------------------------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
VendorTripLength
1 6.90

10.20 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
y-----------------------------
VendorTripLength
--------------------------------------------------------- 1 6.90

10.20 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
----------------------------------------------------------- VendorTripNumber
1 90.00
--------------------------

89.80 -----------------------------_----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripLength
-------------------------------'-------------------------- i 14.70

18.50 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
4-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
i------------------
t 14.70

18.50 -----------------------------_----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripLength
-i------------------------------
i 14.70
--------------------------

18.50 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
y-----------------------------
WorkerTripLength
--------------------------------------------------------- i 14.70

18.50 ------ --------
tblTripsAndVMT
_-----------------------------♦-------------------------------------------------------- WorkerTripLength
i 14.70

18.50 - --- -- -- -- -----+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripLength
i 14.70

18.50 .............................

Y.............................
------------------------------ T-------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripLength
f 14.70

18.50 -----------------------------%----------------------------- tblTripsAndVMT
WorkerTripNumber
-i--------------------------------------------------------- f 18.00

17.50 -----------------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
y-----------------------------
WorkerTripNumber
------------------------------- 4-------------------------- i 23.00

22.50 -----------------------
tblTripsAndVMT
-------
WorkerTripNumber
-------------- -------------

13.00 ---------- ----------

12.50 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
WorkerTripNumber
-----------------------------¢
-----------------------------
tblVehicleTrips
ST_TR
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Y tblVehicleTrips
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ST_TR
-----------------------------_
tblVehicleTrips
-----------------------------
ST_TR
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Y
tblVehicleTrips
- - . - - - - - . - . . - - - - - - - - - - - -
SU_TR
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips
SU_TR
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips
SU_TR
----------------------------- _
tblVehicleTrips
------------ -- ------------
WD_TR
----------------------------- 4----------------------------- tblVehicleTrips
WD_TR
-------- - ----------- 4----------
tblVehicleTrips
-----------
WD_TR

2.0 Emissions Summary

46.00 45.60
-----------------------------
--------------------------

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

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

0.93 -----------------------------+--------------------------

1.74 0.20
----------------------------- T--------------

0.70 ----------
160.55
-----------------------------

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

0.93 -----------------------------t------------

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

0.20 -----------------------------+--------------------------

9.74 160.55
-----------------------------

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 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
Mitigated Construction

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
PM70
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
B o- CO2
NBio-0O2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
G02e r
PM10
PM10
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 12:28 PM 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
Mitigated Operational

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 34
Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM
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

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
1 :Demolition/Site Preparation
2 :Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks
--------------------------------
3 •Grading/Undergroud Utilities
--------------------------------
4 -Off-Site Street Utilites
--------------------------------
5 :Building Construction
--------------------------------
6 :Paving
--------------------------------
7 :Architectural Coating
Demolition
----------------------
----------------------
Building Construction
----------------------
Paving
-----------------------
,Architectural Coating :1/28/2025
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
2/9/2024
15/23/2024

1. 5"
75 ------------
a ------------
-------- 4--------T-------------------------
5/24/2024
17/18/2024
5:
40 -------------I------------
10/23/2024
1 12/12/2024
5:
37 ------------
a ------------
I
6/3/2024
1 10/18/2024
5 :
100
------------
a ------------
4 7/19/2024
: 3/31 /2025
i 5:
182
------------
a ------------ 4--------
4---------
-------------------------
2/9/2025
:317/2025
5:
20 — —-------4--------------
'--------- I--------
=-------------------------
3/31 /2025 5. 45
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
Compressors
)emolition/Site Preparation '.Concrete/Industrial Saws
—Ir - - - - - - - - - - - -
1 i 8.00
30ding Construction 'Cranes ; 1 7.001
i
- ---- ------------------------------------+-----------------G------------- )emolition/Site Preparation Excavators 3: 8.00;
37,

0.4 ------�-------------
33 :

0.7 ------ 4-------------
367 :

0.2 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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•
---------------------------+--------------------------
Building Construction
'Forklifts
-----------------4
; 3e
------------ --- ------- -----
Building Construction
---- -- ---- - - - - -- - -- - - -�---------
+Generator Sets
- ----
; 1
------------------------------------------------------------- Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Off -Highway Trucks
------------------
-- ---------------------- - -
--- ---- ----------------=-------
+Pavers
---- ----
Paving
;
21 ----------------------------
-------------------------
---------------------
Paving
'Paving Equipment
;
21 ----------------------------+
Paving
+Rollers
;
2 ----------------------------
---------------------------
----------------------
a
Demolition/Site Preparation
+Rubber Tired Dozers
;
21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Off-Site Driveways & Sidewalks
+Rubber Tired Dozers---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ;
1�
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
+Rubber Tired Dozers
1 ; 1
-------------------------------------------------------� Off-Site Street Utilites
+Excavators
--------------------------
; 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Building Construction
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
;
31 - ----------------------
t--------------------------:

Off -Site Driveways &Sidewalks
;Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
;
2 -- --------- ---------------
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
i---------------------------
+Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
------------------------------------------------------
Building Construction
+Welders
---- ---- -------
--- + --------------- -- ----- --
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
!Excavators
-----------------------
-------------------------------
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
!Graders
-- ---------------------
-------------------------------
Grading/Undergroud Utilities
'Scrapers
-------- --- --
---------------------------
Demolition/Site Preparation
'Off -Highway Trucks

8.00 ------------

8.00 ---------8.00
---------4.00
---------8.00
---------8.00
---------8.00
------------

8.00 ------------

8.00 ---------8.00
------------

8.00 ------------

7.00 ------------

8.00 ------------

4.00 -------- - --- -- - ---- -----t-------------
r-B-
Site Street Utilites +Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes2v 8.00-- -------------------------------------------------*----------------- -------uilding Construction -Off-Highway Trucks s1 ; 4.00• Trips and VMT
Demolition/Site
+
7;

17.50i

0.00.,
Grad ing/Undergroud
s
9;

22.50,,

0.00 1
Off -Site Driveways &

5. 12.50 •

0.00 ,
36 ;

0.38 •------------+--------------
82 :

0.20 -----------14;--------------

0.74 ------------:
376
--------------
---------- 81:--------------
---------- 89
--------------

0.36 ---------- 3:----------
6 - 0.3
------------ :--------------
367 •

0.40 ----------367
- - - - - - - - - - 0.40
------------
36 --------------
---------- 36t--------------

0.38 ---------- a4--------------

0.37 ------------
84'
--------------

0.37 ------------ 4------
84'

0.37 --- - - - - -
46, •
- - - - - - - - -

0.45 --:--------------
36 •

0.38 --:--------------
148•

0.41 ---'-------------
423 •

0.48 -------------- - - - - -
376,
- - - - - - - - -

0.38 ------------ --------------
84,

0.37 ---------- ----------
- -

0.3 1,969.00

18.50:

10.20:

20.00: LD_Mix
I
9,375.00i

18.50:

10.20:

20.00;LD_Mix
I

91.00 •

18.50 •

10.20 ,

20.00 - LD_Mix
HDT_Mix I HHDT
t----------*---------
HDT_Mix !HHDT
-HDT_Mix HHDT

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
}.......... -4---------y----------
+ 6; 15.00- 0.001 0.00: 18.50: 10.20:

20.00:LD_Mix
--4 ----------
WDT_Mix ;HHDT
--------------------------------
Architectural Coating
---------- --------- -------------------'---------=---------------- + 1; 45.60: 0.001 0.00: 18.50�

10.20:

20.00;LD_Mix
---
;HHDT
iHDT_Mix
Off -Site StreetUtilites

4. 10.00, 0.00, 0.00. 18.50-

10.20,

20.00,LD_Mix
;HDT_Mix ;HHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

3.2 Demolition/Site Preparation - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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

3.3 Off -Site Driveways & Sidewalks - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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

3.4 Grading/Undergroud Utilities - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
R0G
N0x
CO
St 2
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM10
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
810- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Category
lb/day
lb/day
Hauling
1 0.5105

34.6113

9.1010
i 0.1461

4.4353

0.2108 1

4.6461

1.2161
1 0.2016

1.4177 1 16,070.18 1 16,070.18 1 0.9037

2.5529
96,853.54
1 1
1 I
1 1
1 I
I
10 10
;
93 .... ---------------
;
Vendor
I

0.0000 1

0.0000
I
1 0.0000
1 1 0.0000
1 I 0.0000
1 I
1 0.0000 I

0.0000
1 1 0.0000
1 I 0.0000

0.0000
1 I
� i 0.0000 1 0.0000 I 0.0000
1 1 0.0000
11 0.0040
q
1 1
1 I
I 1
1 I
• 1 1 1
1 1
•
1 1 I I 1 I
1 1 . I I 1 1
Worker
I
•1 0.0847 1

0.0597
1 1 0.8458
I
1 2.5700e-
I
I 0.3165
I I
1 1.8000e- 1

0.3183
I
1 0.0839
I

11.6500e-

0.0856
I I 1
• 1 259.6037 1 259.6037 15.8900e- 1 6.1600e-
1 261.5857
003
I
1 003 1
I
I 003
; ! 1 I 003
I 003
1 1
1 1
I I
1 1.
• 1 1
I
I
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
17,116.13
47 47
s0

3.5 Off -Site Street Utilites - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CaIEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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

3.6 Building Construction - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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 i
CO "
S02
Fugitive
Exhaust
PMtd
Fugitive
Exhaust
PM2.5
Bio- CO2 NBio- C(Y2 Total CO2
GH4
N20
CO2e
PM10
PM10
I
Total
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
I
Category
lb/day
lb(day
Hauling
•1 0.0000
1 0.0000
I 0.0000
I 0.0000
1 0.0000
1 0.0000
j 0.0000
j 0.0000 I

0.0000

0.0000
• 1 0.0000 1 0.0000 1 0.0000

0.0000
! 0.0000
'
Vendor
•I 0.1173
1 I 4.8342
I
1 1.5782
1 I 0.0237
I
1 0.8492
I
1 0.0256
1 1 0.8748
I 1
I 0.2444 1

0.0245
� 0.2689
1 I
• 12,554.39512,554.3951 0.0867
1 1 0.3669
12,665.898
•I
I
1 I
1 1
1 1 1
• I I 1
' • 5 5
1 1
1 2
q
'-
1 1 1 I 1 ! 1 1
1 1 1
+' I
r
1 t
Worker
•I 0.8584
I
1 0.6048
I
1 8.5702
1 1 0.0260
I
1 3.2067
I
1 0.0182
I
1 3.2249
1 I
1 0.8504 1

0.0168
1 1 1

0.8671 1 2,630.650 12,630.650 0.0597 I

0.0624
2,650.735
•1
•1.
1 I
I
1 I
I
I !
1 • 1 8 1 8 1
1 1 0
1 I
1 I
1 I S
• ! 1 1
!
!
Total

0.9757

5.4390

10.1484

0.0498

4.0569

0.0438

4.0997

1.0948

0.0413

1.1360
5,186.046
6,185.046 0.1464

0.4293
5,316.633
3 3
2 Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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

3.6 Building Construction - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
Hauling
•i

0.0000

0.0000
j 0.0000 i

0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000
0,0000 i

0.0000

0.0000
■ i 0.0000 i 0.0000 1

0.0000
1 0.0000
1 0.0000
�
---ry-------I
q
1 -------
1 1
-------
-------�-------�----------------------
1 1
I I
1 �---------------
-1
. I 1
�'1
'-....------- - -
�- 1
1 -------
1 t-- - - - -°
Vendor
•1

0.1133 1

4.8112
1 1
1 1.5470 1

0.0233
1 1 0.8492
1 1 0.0257
1 I
1 0.8749 1

0.2444 1

0.0246

0.2690
• 1 2,508.430 : 2,508.430 :

0.0874

0.3605
1 2,618.053
'1
I
1 I
1 1
1 I
I
• 1 1 1
1 1
1 1
j
Worker
1 0.8059

0.5422

7.9690

0.0251 3.2067

0.0173

3.2241

0.8504

0.0160

0.8663
•

0.0538

0.0582 12,560.035
1 1 1
1 1
1 1
1 12,541.34812,541.3481
2 1 1
2 1
1 1
8 1 I
I
i
Total

0.9193

5.3534

9.5161

0.0484

4.0559

0.0430

4.0990

1.0948

0.0405

1.1353
5,04-9.778
6,049.778

0.1411

0.4187
5,178.088
3 3
8 Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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

3.7 Paving - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
Mitigated Construction On -Site

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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

3.8 Architectural Coating - 2025
Unmitigated Construction On -Site

too
6U9'M
62 Wo nog-cu
VLOSTU
0000j
ELMO cao 0
ao 0
ELMO
-000179* 96"3
tZ98*0 9Z99*0
11401
COO
6C99-M 6UO-0 VLOTEEL VLOTM 1 0000'0 ELMO CLMO UZO-0
CLMO
ootg, L 96C L LZqq'o PeOW-40
r r - - - - - - - - -
r - - - - - - -
r - - - - - - -
r --r - - - - - - - r - - - - - - - r - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0000.0 0000*0 00WO o0wo -0
I 1 0000
o0wo
gavoL L Bul 800 .)!LIOJV
R
Aeplql Aepiql Ajo6e1eo
i
I
I 1
11401
S*ZWd
I-xa
I
Nd
I
1 nop
OZN
WD
ZOO 10101 ZOO-1 -018N
ZOO -0M 9* d
Isneq
!Un:i ZO S
00 XON
allg-J10 uolj*njjsuo:Dpale DlI;wun
SZOZ - BuileoD leinjoelitioiV S-C
peilddV ION alnH 010140A 3JVS 041.iol jun000V 04 010140A f%ln(3 14613 euijoseE) .col wojoej 4uew4snfpV IOPOW-110 3V4W3 jaluiAA 'Alunoo Iseoo qjnoS-s9j96uV so-1- Z8 109fWd s16010'd A9umOG INd 9Z:Z6 tZOZ/6L/6 :91eCl 17C 10 9Z 96ed 0*t7*0Z0Z*P0lN331e0:u0'sJ9A P0V4331eO

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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

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 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 Mitigated •i

9.0854 I 9.6371 p 89.7542 '1 0.1975 22.8883 j 0.1446 j 23.0330 6.0973 0.1343 6.2316 • 20,151.45 j 20,151.45

1.4217 0.8814 t 20,449.66
75 75
32 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
• •General Office Building •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • •
a
• •
3,211.00 ;
..
3,211.00 --T
3211 00 -_
-
10,344,111 '
- - - -- -
10,344,111
OtherAsphalt Surfaces
......................................-------------;-----------t-----------+------------------------ ;

0.00 ,

0.00 0.00
- - -
- - - - - - - - --
..........................

Parking Lot
......................................-------.....
r

0.00 ,

0.00 0.00
Ref �igerated Warehouse -No Rail
......................---
+
;-----------t-----------+--------------------------------------------------- 24 90 ,
- - ---�-----------t

24.90 24.90 -
---�
- - - - --106,712
106,712
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No Rail
r

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
Office Building ; 16.60

8.40 6.90 i
•..General
..............r----------4---------�
Asphalt S: rfa:es. ; 16.60 1

8.40 6.90 i
.. •Other
...r--------'-�------'
Kr in Lot• 16.60 1
- - T

8.40 - - - - - - - - - - Y

6.90 t
..... • .

Refrigerated Warehouse -No ; 16.60

8.40 6.90 r
--
-.......................r-------------------T-- ----
Unrefrigerated Warehouse -No 16.60

8.40 6.90

4.4 Fleet Mix

33.00 1 48.00

19.00-
77 19
4 - --�,.........T
---■
- - - ----
- - -------

0.00 i 0.0o

0.00 0
:- .
0 0
--------�------ -t-------------------•--------------:---------------- 0_00 0.00

0.00 0
0 0
--
-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - -
. - - - -
- - - - - - -

59.00 0.00
:

41.00 92
.
5 3

59.00 0.00

41.00 92
5 3

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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 i - 0.065289: 0.189998: 0.126515: 0.023567: 0.006518: 0.011114: 0.008084: 0.000933: 0.000591: 0.025474, 0.000708i 0.003318� -------=--------=--------=--------=--------=--------=--------=--------=------- L--------=----------------- Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.5378916 0.065289: 0.189998: 0.126515: 0.023567: 0.006518: 0.011114: 0.008084: 0.000933: 0.000591: 0.025474: 0.0007081 0.003318 .-------------------------- '------. ----r
_ --•�• _�-__..... �...---. .�. -----• _�........ �.------ _-.-......-._---- _. -........-.------ _-_- __ T--•----- 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 . ----------------- -------_ -___ -----• _ _ _-__ _-_--_ _ r 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, 0.000708,1 0.003318 ........ . . . . ... . . . r - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - T - - - - - - - - T - - - - - - - - T - - - - - - - - T - - - - - - - - T _ , , 1 T - - - - - - - - T - 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
NaturalGas •i 0.0382 i 0.3471 i 0.2916 2.0800e-
Mitigated_ -- - 003
i4------ _.}..............}.._......_..}---.__-..-._.-� NaiuralGas 0.0382 0.3471 0.2916 2.0800e-
Unmitigated •, 003

0.0264 ' 0.0264

0.0264 - 0.0264
i 0.0264 ; 0.0264

0.0264 0.0264
i 416.4964 1416.4964 7.9800e- 17.6400e- r 418.9714
i
003 003
----------- ---------------- �------------- _- - • --* - - - - - 416.4964 - 416.4964 - 7.9800e- 7.6400e- 418.9714
003 003 ,

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
General Office
1 933.151 �i

0.0101 0.0915 0.0769 5.5000e- I

6.9500e- 'I 6.9500e- I
j 6.9500e-

6.9500e-
Building
1 004 i
003 : 003 i
003
003
----------

I -----J-------J-------J-------J------
-J-------J-------J-------J--------
-------
Other Asphalt
I 0 •1

0.0000 j 0.0000 j 0.0000 j 0.0000 j

0.0000 j 0.0000 j
j 0.0000

0.0000
Surfaces
j •1

I I I I
I I I
1 Parking
..1I1 I 1 I I
I
I 1 I 1
Lot
0 •1

0.0000 0.0000 j 0.0000 0.0000
i 0.0000 0.0000 j
j 0.0000

0.0000
j •I
I 1 1 I
I I I
I
�
----- ------
•I
� •1-------1 I I 1
I I I
1 Refrigerated erated
611.285 R 6.5900e- 1 0.0599 1 0.0503 1 3.6000e- 1
1 4.5500e- 1 4.5500e- 1
1 4.5500e- I

4.5500e- v
Warehouse -No
j ;I
003 ' 1 1 004 1
1 003 ' 003 1
' 003 i
003 v
Rail
-----------
i_______-
_------- - . - - - -
Unrefrigerated
I 1995.78 ;a

0.0215 1 0.1957 1 0.1644 1 1.1700e- 1
1 0.0149 1 0.0149 1
1 0.0149 I

0.0149 v
Warehouse -No
003
Rail
Total

0.0382 0.3471 0.2916 2.0800e-

0.0264 0.0264

0.0264

0.0264
003
i 109.7824 1109.7824 12.1000e- 2.0100e- 1 110.4348
1 003 003 1
1 _-J_______J------- J_-------------
i 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
I I I 1 1
I I I 1 1
--J-------J-------J-------*------
1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
I 1 I 1 I
I 1 1 1 I
1 71.9159 1 71.9159 1 1.3800e- 1 1.3200e- 72.3433
003 003 '
I I I 1
1 234.7981 1 234.7981 1 4.5000e- i 4.3000e- + 236-1934
003 003
4 I 1 1
416.4964 416.4964 7.9800e- 7.6300e- 418.9714
003 1 003

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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
General Office

0.933151 •i 0.0101 0.0915
j 0.0769
j 5.5000e-

6.9500e- 6.9500e- j
j 6.9500e-

6.9500e- •
i 109.7824 109.7824 2.1000e- j 2.0100e- i 110.4348
Building
i
004
003 003
003
003 ;
' i r 003 1 003
-
i
-----------------------------------------------------J-------J---------------_-------I------- ------------------------�
Other Asphalt
0 •i 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 i

0.0000 0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000 •
i 0.0000 i 0.0000 r 0.0000 r 0.0000 0.0000
Surfaces
i '' i
i
i i i
i
•
' i r r
Parking Lot
0 •1 0.0000 i 0.0000
i 0.0000
i 0.0000

0.0000 i 0.0000

0.0000

0.0000 •
i 0.0000 i 0.0000 1 0.0000 1, 0.0000 1 0.0000
1---- - - -i-
i-
i-------i-
i-------i-------i-
i-------*-------�-------�
---i-------i-------i-------
Refri erated

0.611285 ;i 6.5900e- i 0.0599
i 0.0503
i 3.6000e- i

4.5500e- 4.5500e- 1

4.5500e-

4.S500e-

71.9159 i 71.9159 1 1.3800e- r 1.3200e- 72.3433
Warehouse -No
i 003
004
003 003
003 i
003
F 003 003
Rail
.... -......

I ------;------
- ------
Unrefrigerated
.I i-----------i---------i-------_-i----------i-----------i-----------i---------i--------- f 1.99578 fi 0.0215 1 0.1957
i 0.1644
i 1.1700e- i
1 0.0149 1 0.0149 1
1 0.0149
i

0.0149 r
- - - - - - - I---------i------------i---•-----i-------------+ - - - - - - i 234.7981 i 234.7981 r 4.5000e- r 4.3000e- 236.1934
Warehouse -No
r '' '
,i i
'
i
' 003 '
i
' ' '
i i i
'
i
r
' ' ' 003 ' 003
i i r r
Rail
�' •i1.

Total
11 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

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 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
Unmitigated

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 34 Date: 1/19/2024 12:28 PM 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

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 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
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day DaysNear Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat;Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating % Fuel Type User Defined Equigment

11.0 Vegetation

Attachment B
Technical Consultation, Data Analysis and
Litigation Support for the Environment
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagernann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949)887-9013
mhagemann@swapexom
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 SWAPS, 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);

• 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 Califomia.

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.
2 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.

Hydrogeoloev
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 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.

Pol1CV:

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 principles into the policy -making process.
• Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents.

Geology
With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:
• Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical models to determine slope stability.
• Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource protection.
• Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the city of Medford, Oregon.

As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern Oregon. Duties included the following:

Supervised year -long effort for soil and groundwater sampling.

Conducted aquifer tests.

Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.

Teaching:

From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university levels:
• At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater contamination.
• Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students. • Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.

Matt is currently a part time geology instructor at Golden West College in Huntington Beach, California where he taught from 2010 to 2014 and in 2017.

Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations:

Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.

Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.

EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.

Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).
5 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.

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., Fukanaga, 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 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.

Attachment C
Technical Consultation, Data Analysis and
Litigation Support for the Environment
Patel Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

Principal Environmental Chemist
Education

SOIL WATER AIR PROTECTION ENTERPRISE
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, California 90405
Attn: Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

Mobil: (310) 795-2335
Office: (310) 452-5555
Fax: (310) 452-5550
Email: prosenfeld a mape.eom
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 SWAPS, 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

Professional Histor
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher) UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer
San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager Bechtel, San Diego, California, 1999 — 2000; Risk Assessor King County, Seattle, 1996 -- 1999; Scientist
James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist
Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1993; Scientist Publications'
Rosenfeld P. E., Spaeth K., Hallman R., Bressler R., Smith, G., (2022) Cancer Risk and Diesel Exhaust Fxposure Amon4L 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., Sea, 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 Aennod 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 DioxinslFurans 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 Woad 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

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. TWIT 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. Otganohalogen 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 Farmer 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, ' tvnthetic 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 (TWEFTEC) 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

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 (PFAS): What makes remediation so hard?" Law Seminars International, (May 9-10, 2018) 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 101 Seattle, WA.

Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 44th Western Regional Meeting, American Chemical Sociem 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 Xi II.- Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and Management of Air Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing Facility. The 231 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

ZZOZ jaqoloo z I Jo 5 3oud *Cl*qd 'pliju;)soN *g imed
-s'Ou'Hl O2e3(qD'F)IOH uzuld ssa.'BuOD Luoaj polonpuoD oinloo-I -djua-afuO,),'Kv7 IDjuawuod.IAUJ -uo!jvldossvlajvAtPunojq JDuOyvA[,Ai!j!qui-j pog!luunbufl pue waiqojd IruoileN V ls2olooixol PUB �jq!qv!-j loqoz)IV j,(jnq-jx)jL (j700Z 19-g XuA) -0--d ossaH qoN PUB -G-qd NiviD saLuef pule (I*qd `plajuasou ined -puuikmAajoLuilIL,U'joqJBH'Ouula'OwlllugwuqpuiCMLuojjpolonpuoz)a,ira3z)-I 'dOud4dfuOJ."v7lDludwuO-"Au-7 puv jalvAl punodD uoyvyjossV ddivmpunodD Ivuo.ilvV SOoj -uotju!poLuo-d PUB XBolooixol 'uogso2uj uuLunH of sXumqjvd :iojrmpunojE) ui slutpaep-a owuij paluuiLuo.18 -(gooZ IZZ-[Z Xinf) *([,qd plajuasoR lnbj -purjXjejN ajowt.1jug ljoq'VH JOUUI OlOwIlluig umqpu,SM wojj polonpum iini3o-I aauara000 mD7 lvludwuO."Aug PUV ddIvAl punodD uo.ilv.ijossV ddlompunodg IvuoilvAT goo.7 -s[u3=qooionjjjod POMION Put' VOM JO X2010MOI PUB 03WISISIOd IjjodsuviL oluj *(gooZ IZZ-IZ �Inf) -(I-qj plajuasoN ined T"u'211A VEaH efuli?JIA 'F)TOH luOIJue;)30 uO)BJ0qS
wo.ij p;)13npuoo omoo-I -sluvu iuivluoo Dlktoliaui,7 uo sn,)og :.Vd a * lyuio_l jvjudWUOf.IAU_Vjb Qd.l,?Og JVUO�lIVUJalUj
-sj-e3iwoqD p;)Ie[;)-d pu-e Vojd jo omalsisiol PUB, liodsuulL ';)I'eA '(90OZ '8-L ounf) *(I*qd plajuasoN jnvj -uiLuoj![uD Xu-d 1;)C[ uutivIN ljaIoI4 uolliu:D zl!,d uioij p;)Ionpuo3 ijmoo-I -iajwApuno.iD s,,fajDaN sggQd 3o aaualslsaad puu liodsuvij, 'ajvj '(900Z'LZ-9ZioqLu3jd3S) -(I-ql plajuasoH ine'l '9IUJO3!I*eD'au'/ul ul 1010H uoll!H wojj p;)13npuoz) airnoarl 'doualq fuoD luvu * lwvluoD.Oltq2.ldtuj VKJd 'dDJ,-EZ'i JO ;)OUOISIS'Od puV '/�4!3mL 'liodsuril 'z)ilej *(900Z '61 ioqLuojdz)S) *(I,qd plajuasou Inud TfUJOJ! IUD OUIAll T)IOH
u011!H wojj polonpuoo oirva-I -dduajdfuoD iuDu.zwviuoj 2kio'jawj VNjd uo!Mlpdwdg puo aolod.lxol 'Uollso2ul uBwnH of skemqjud :njumpunoaD ut sjurpiRION MPH POI-eu'UJOJ9 '(900Z '61 jz)qLuojdoS) -([-qj plajuasoN ined *Vd Iatqdlape[!qd
`1310H asnoquou!N oqL Luoij polonpum oinjo3-1 -adudidfuoj uo!10$.11.17 y Wg 'Odudlis *Void/8D S,A;)IL,;)IN -SjR3lLU;Dq0 POIBION PUB VOJj JO aOu3jslsnd puu liodsuejL ;)ILj -(gooZ gZ-t7Z loqoloo) -(I-qj plajuasou Ine'd -sjj;DsnqoussejN uolsog wojj p;)13npuo3 ojmaal -uo.ii.isodxw y gktldaN IvnuuV 6j*1 VHdV -Xj!j!ouj luounvoi.L pooh jouuol V leoN pajoi[IoD soldwuS poo[S uvwnH pupa IsnCl oi)JV BuiutuiuoD urxotCl -(900Z '8-17 ioqUJOAON) 'f*f*f 'I'VID "9*d PlaJuasON '*V 'UOOS "d-V � OlsuaH -,(um.iox OISO Ul JOJOH
VIABUIPUUOS SVS UOSSIPR-d Luoij polonpuo3 ampa-I -900,7NIXOI(7 Yiuvinllod dM02-10 lualsYs-Idd pdlvuagolvH uo wn - isodwfc jvuo�yvudaiuj qjqZ attj -1c4jj!3,e_q luounuoij, pooh jauuoj V je;)N poloolloD soldiuvS poolS uvwnH puv Isn(I 3113V JululleluOD ulxO[G 1900Z '9Z — IZ IsnSnV) 'fTf "H'd Pl;)JuOsOH '*V 'UOOS "Id-V X)IsuOUI -V3 'oi?;)iCl weS woij pajonpuoo wtwo-j lkijdaN IvnuuV SHJV dq—r -,eLuvqu[V le[ejolj ul ;)jnsodxg IRINN PUB 'HVd 'uRJnJ/uixoi(j joj 2uqdwvS 3'uV PUB P0019 '(LOOZ qmA) -g A PlaJuasOH -Vj'o23iCl u-eS woij pDl3npUO3
ainjoa-I -3tqjddjA, lonuuV (SHgV),sddualdS puv qllvdH Iviumuo.i.mug jof uo.i1v.z.7ovsV dqL '(dDI) ouedoidotolqaill -EIZI I jo saipruS asuo wowivail W '� 2olwixol IsoiliodOld luoiwoqD luoil3nPOd '(LOOZ qoiulN) *g *,d plajuasou -VW Jsloqwv 'suosnqoussujNjo U XI!SJOAI11 WOIJ
polonpuoo airvo-j -.tan?jj puv mawipas spog uo sajuatafuoj Imoymialuj IvnuuV pFj aqj -suoissiLug Xj!j!3eA lu;)wluaj,L pooh tuoij slueuitueluoD ol;Djnsodxg fl!unwLuoD o[j!AjotuoS *(LOOZ'8 loqoloo) *g *a `plajuasou lsjaqwV 4suosnq3ussujN jo XIISIOAtUfl UJOIJ POI:)npuoz) ainlool uuojiBld -.iaivljl pun ivata!paS vl!oE uo saoua-tafuoD lmogmialuj jvnuuV ,.cZ aqj -jueld jamod jualonN V woj_4 s[l!dS ojsBAk palrod3-d uuoj Xl!unwtuoD 2uipunonnS V olul jajuAk pojvuituvjuoj-wnij!jj, jo sseds;)jl pajuodo-d aqL -(LOOZ 8i-gi iz)qol30) -3 -d 1plajuasoN

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.

Drvcleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento, California.

Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southwest Focus Conference. Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wastewater and Industrial Processes. Szrth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor.

Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Biocycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration.

Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington..

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November I 1-14, 2002). Using High -Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Societe 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 ofAmerica. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 12 October 2022

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 Sante Fe, New Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage tanks.

National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites.

California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design.

UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation.

University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry, Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability.

U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10.

Academic Grants Awarded:

California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment.

Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001.

Synagro Technologies, Corona California. $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University.

Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000.

King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on VOC emissions. 1998.

Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 7 of 12 October 2022

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. CIVDS 1711810
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. I O-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-CCO020
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-CCO3191
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. 3:21-cv-05288-RJB
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-11-2022
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 12 October 2022

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 et. 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-cv-1633
Rosenfeld Deposition 4-4-2022
In the Circuit Court of the 41 Judicial Circuit, in and For Duval County, Florida Barbara Steele vs. CSX Transportation
Case No. I 6-219-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-cv-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

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. 0i9-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 dlbla

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 dlbla 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. 18STCV0I 162
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

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-0I624-ES-SCM
Rosenfeld Deposition 6-7-2019
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division M1T 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-cv-02531-RBJ
Rosenfeld Deposition 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018
In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 1121 Judicial District Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants Cause No. 1923
Rosenfeld Deposition I 1-17-2017
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. C 12-01481
Rosenfeld Deposition 11-20-2017
In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants Case No.: No. 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-cv-00315-RHW
Rosenfeld Deposition 4-22-2020
In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles Warrn Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC Case No. LC102019 (ctw 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

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. RG 147I 1115
Rosenfeld Deposition September 2015
In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County
Russell D. Winbum, 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. cc-11-01650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial April 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants Case No. 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. wt 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
Jaeanette Moss Anthony, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Drummond Company Inc., et al., Defendants Civil Action No. CV 2008-2076
Rosenfeld Deposition September 2010
In the United States District Court, Western District Lafayette Division Ackle et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Citgo Petroleum Corporation, et al., Defendants.

Case No. 2:07CV 1052
Rosenfeld Deposition July 2009
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 12 of 12 October 2022

(b) Appeals of a Commission Decision.
(1) Written Notification and Timing. A decision of the Commission, within fifteen (15) calendar days after the date of such action, may be appealed by written notice of appeal filed in duplicate with the City Clerk. Such appeal shall specify where it is claimed that the Commission's findings were in error, and where the decision of the Commission is not supported by the evidence in the matter, and where the public necessity, convenience, and welfare require such exception or permit. The City Clerk shall not accept for filing a notice of appeal until and unless the appellant or person requesting the hearing has submitted to the City Clerk a filing fee as determined by resolution of the Council.
(2) Records. Upon the receipt of such notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall transmit one (1) copy of the notice of appeal to the City Planner with notice of the date, time, and place when the appeal shall be given before the Council. The City Planner shall transmit to the Council a copy of all pertinent information contained in the Commission's permanent file.

The City Clerk shall transmit a copy of such notice of appeal and place such appeal on the Council's first available meeting.
(3) Stay. On the date a notice of appeal is filed pursuant to this section, all proceedings in furtherance of the determination, order, decision, condition, or requirement appealed from, including the effective date of any permit or variance in question, shall be stayed until the final determination of the appeal or review by the Council.
(4) Public Hearing. The Council may not approve, reverse, or modify, in whole or in part, the Commission's final determination, decision, order, requirement, or condition which is appealed until the Council has held a public hearing. Such public hearings shall be set and notice given by the City Clerk in the same manner and time as provided in Section 9804 of this chapter.
(5) Decision. The Council shall announce its findings and decision in an appeal proceeding by formal action. Such action shall recite, among other things, the reasons which, in the opinion of the Council, make the Council's determination of the matter necessary to carry out the general purpose of this article and shall order that the Commission's decision be affirmed, reversed, or modified. The Council shall effect such determination, or any portion thereof, by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the total membership of the Council present at the hearing; otherwise, the appeal shall be denied. The action of the Council shall be final and conclusive.

GSEJA Public Comment Downey Planning Commission Meeting 3-6-24 Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project EIR Public Hearing Item 2 Steven Piepkorn
Sun 313/2024 3:58 PM
To:[email protected] ,[email protected]
1 1 attachments (369 KB)
GSEJA letter Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse EIR P-C Meeting 3-6-24.pdf; To Whom It May Concern,
Attached and below are public comments on behalf of Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance.

These comments are submitted to the Planning Commission to be included in the record for the Planning Commission's consideration regarding Downey Planning Commission Meeting 3-6-24 Prologis Stewart and Gray Road Warehouse Project EIR Public Hearing Item 2 For clarification purposes, only the highlighted yellow portion of the body of this email is the public comment to be added into the record along with the attachment.

Please confirm receipt of this email.

Public Comment
Good evening, my name is Steven Piepkorn and I'm with the Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance. We submitted a comment letter to the Draft Environmental Impact report. Our letter identified several deficiencies with the EIR.

During these turbulent times, we as citizens expect and deserve our local government's elected and appointed officials to protect us from environmental and social injustice, to aid in the preservation and rehabilitation of the environment in which we all share, and to ensure accountability and responsibility regarding the environmental decisions they may make.

We stand by our comment letter and believe the EIR is flawed, and must be redrafted and recirculated for public review. In closing we call on this commission to be a leader on the

aforementioned issues and be the first line of defense for our citizenry and environment. Only by working together can we continue to be excellent stewards of our environment, outstanding stewards to our citizens and each ether. Thank You.

Please confirm receipt of this email.

Thank You,
Steven Piepkorn

To: CItv of Downey Planning Commiss]on
From: Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance
Sukiect: Prologis Stewart and Gray Road EIli
this letter is to serve as further comment in addition to all previously submitted comments and documents by Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance.

CalEnviroScreen Information
CalEnviroScreen is a mapping tool that helps identify California communities that are most affected by many sources of pollution. and where people are often especially -vulnerable to pollution's effects. CalEnviroScreen uses environmental. health, and socioeconomic information to produce scores for even, census tract in the state. The scores are mapped so that different communities can be compared. An area with a high score is one that experiences a much higher pollution burden than areas with low scores. CalEnviroScreen ranks communities based on data that are available from state and federal government sources. CalEnviroScreen is updated and maintained by The Office of Environmental Health Ha7.ard Assessment. on behalf ofthe California Environrnental Protection Agency.

CalEnviroScreen Data on : Prologis Stewart and Crag EIR Project Location/Area The above listed prqject is in census tract (6037551102). Overall, when compared to other census tracts, the project site census tract is in the 89th percentile regarding pollution. As far as pollution burden is concerned, this census tract is in the 98th percentile. In terms Of 070ne, this census tract is in the 47th percentile. Particulate Matter 2.5 88th percentile. Diesel Particulate Matter 86" percentile. Toxic Releases 92nd percentile and Traffic 66percentile to name a few.

Ati M
Consider the above referenced information when making this important decision. Realize that vou and the citizens of this area face some of the WORST POLLUTION in the entire state of °alifbrnia.

It Is the responsibility of the City*s elected and appointed officials to make environmentally responsible development decisions, Based on the CalEnviroScreen data, this is more than sufficient evidence of the further air quality impacts that the citizenry of Downey will continue to encounter with further development of another warehouse. We are not against development. as we believe it is necessary for further economic growth in our current society. Development needs to be conducted NNith the highest of expectations to ensure the local pop'ulation does not suffer further air quality burdens.

We stand b-%, our comments and believe the EIR is flawed and should be redrafted and I
recirculated for public review.

Respectfully Submitted.
%veto, Pftf4�
Steven Piepkom
GSLJA

Source -
hups://experience.arcgis.com/experience/4af93cf9888a42448I d2868391 af2d821p age/home/?data id=dataSource_2-1754d6afdb4-layer-9%3A'7306 Glossary of Terms
Ozone - Amount of daily maximum 8-hour Ozone concentration Particulate Matter 2.5 - Annual mean PM 2.5 concentrations Diesel Particulate Matter - Diesel PM emissions from on -road and non -road sources Toxic Releases - Toxicity -weighted concentrations of modeled chemical releases to air from
facility emissions and off -site incineration.

Traffic -Traffic density, in vehicle -kilometers per Dour per road length, within 150 meters of the census tract boundary.

Downey City CouncilJune 11, 2024

Downey City Council
June 11, 2024