Comment-20375-R Yanez - Member of the Community of Eas Los Angeles

There are many issues with the model. It attempts to differentiate emission and exposure data from one property to the next. Case in point, in Boyle Heights, there is air quality monitoring data under the AB617 program at Resurrection Church. The data coming from this AQMD monitor is showing double the amounts of particulates than that of the district's Chinatown location. Yet the model shows downtown LA to have a higher PM2.5 level than that of Boyle Heights which is surrounded by freeways, trucks and over the years, rapidly expanding rail yards in the area.

Also, ground water monitoring data coming from the Exide Battery Monitoring wells at the time of the plant closure is showing high level of lead, arsenic and other contaminants yet the "water quality" in the area is better than in the City of Los Angeles? It doesn't make sense. Looking at the actual water quality provided by a water purveyor such as Cal Water, actual water quality exposure by the communities of East Los Angeles for which they serve contains high levels of water hardness (calcium and other minerals) as well as high levels of manganese. Looking at the annual water quality report does not provide an accurate representation of the water quality they serve to portions of their system within the EJ Community because the state allows the water company to average the amounts tested in the water they provide throughout their entire system. While they have exceedances in a couple of water wells, since their system takes make-up water or has MWD feeder lines, they are able to use the general testing data supplied by the Metropolitan Water District taken at the district's reservoir site rather than actual testing within the system and provide "averaged" data in their report. Meanwhile, the customers see reddish brown calcification build-up on their fixtures and in the water. Yet we are to believe that Maywood, Huntington Park, and a small area in Walnut Park has some of the best water quality in the entire LA Basin?

Recent DTSC soil sampling around the Boyle Heights / East Los Angeles / Commerce / Cudahy / Huntington Park recently shows super high levels of lead, arsenic, and other heavy metals (some of the data has not been released to the public as of yet) which shows lead levels and exposures to the community exceed the state maximum exposure levels by ten fold or more.

Diesel PM exposure in Huntington Park, Bell and South Gate shows that the community has levels in the 20-40 percentile, yet are immediately adjacent to the 710 FWY, City of Vernon, BNSF Commerce Railyard, Alameda Corridor, HWY 42 Firestone Blvd and Slauson AV as well as Atlantic Blvd, all known heavy Truck Routes being an island of little Diesel PM exposure showing levels of exposure in the 20-40 percentile while everywhere else are in the 90-100 percentile. Same is true of areas to the south in Compton, along the industrial areas along Del Amo BL, the 91 FWY and parts of the 710 and 405 FWYs in these areas, yet when you actually go into these areas, you can see the fallout from all of the diesel vehicles and black carbon in the streets, sidewalks and gutters.

Looking at CalEnviroScreen 4.0, one would think that the AB617 Communities of ELABHWC and Southeast LA has made some sort of transformational changes and recovery, with absolutely no other corrective efforts put into it all. All the while, cargo traffic from the port has doubled. There has been the doubling of the various nearby rail yard's capacity and the increases in truck traffic and construction pollution generated by the various freeway projects needed to help increase the allowable traffic and decrease the ongoing congestion in the freeways and surface streets, all of which couldn't be further from the ACTUAL data.

All of this inaccuracies of the CalEnviroScreen 4.0 will only go towards redirecting funds and sending a clear message to those in state politics that yet again, the very communities for which CalEnviroScreen was meant to highlight, will be forgotten as there is no longer a need as these very communities that have suffered for generations and continue to suffer from environmental justice and pollution have now been deemed by CalEnviroScreen 4.0 as islands of worry free pollution burdens in the same or better percentile as Pacific Palisades, Santa Monica, Manhattan Beach, Palos Verdes Estates, Rolling Hills Estates, and many other coastal and very affluent communities (Empirical data would show greatly otherwise). Clearly, this draft needs to be greatly calibrated before it's debut in primetime. Please have those working on this calibrate this model with actual field data that is accurate and vetted rather than from reports that have not been properly scrutinized. This is the very thing that continues to negatively impact communities of color and environmental justice communities. At many levels of government and agencies, they are producing or having consultants produce these huge reports but yet are not scrutinizing the data properly to ensure accuracy and base reports off of this poorly collected and sorted data that are hundred of pages long in hopes that no one will look at what's been reported and only look at executive summaries and base decisions on only what the author wants them to see based upon political will or pro-business interests.

I welcome questions from staff as I am an informed and affected member of the community.

Thank you in advance for your attention in correcting CalEnviroScreen 4.0's inaccuracies.