A place to share and follow researchSubmit an Article or Content File →
Home  » 

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP

loading
Loading file Wait!

PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE DRAFT 2007 AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN

CONTRIBUTORS The following individuals contributed to the preparation of the proposed modifications document. Many members of the South Coast Air Quality Management District staff as well as staff from the California Air Resources Board and Southern California Association of Governments were involved in various aspects of the development of the 2007 AQMP and their contributions are also acknowledged in the appropriate proposed modifications to the Appendices.

South Coast Air Quality Management District Executive Officer Elaine Chang, DrPH Deputy Executive Officer Planning, Rule Development, & Area Sources Assistant Deputy Executive Officer Planning, Rule Development, & Area Sources Joseph Cassmassi Zorik Pirveysian Planning and Rules Manager Environmental Technology Assessment Manager Planning, Rule Development, & Area Sources Science & Technology Advancement Authors SCAQMD - Planning, Rule Development, Area Sources Wayne Barcikowski,- Air Quality Specialist Lori Berard ? Air Quality Specialist Kelly Brown - Air Quality Specialist Tom Chico, Program Supervisor Shoreh Cohanim, Air Quality Specialist Edward Eckerle, Program Supervisor Carol Gomez, Planning and Rules Manager Tracy Goss, P.E., Program Supervisor Kathryn Higgins, Program Supervisor Kathy Hsiao, Program Supervisor Contributors SCAQMD ? Planning, Rule Development, Area Sources Susan Yan, Air Quality Specialist Eyvonne Sells, Air Quality Specialist

Reviewed By Minh Pham, P.E., Air Quality Specialist Gary Quinn, Program Supervisor Jill Whynot, Planning and Rules Manager Science & Technology Advancement Henry Hogo, Assistant Deputy Executive Officer Southern California Association of Government Jonathan Nadler, Program Manager

Science & Technology Advancement Dave Coel, Program Supervisor Matt Miyasato, Tech. Demo. Manager Randall Pasek, Air Quality Specialist Dean Saito, Mobile Source Strategies Manager

PREFACE The South Coast Air Quality Management District has prepared the Draft 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP or Plan). The Draft 2007 AQMP was released for review on October 10, 2006.

Nine regional workshops were held from October 24 through December 6, 2006 to discuss the draft Plan and solicit public input. All written and oral comments on the Draft 2007 AQMP were reviewed and where appropriate, revisions were made to the draft Plan.

Based on comments received, modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP are contained in seven documents: (1) Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 Air Quality Management Plan containing revisions to the main document, Appendix II, Appendix IV-C, and Appendix VI (new appendix); (2) Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 Air Quality Management Plan ? Appendix III ? Base and Future Year Emission Inventories; (3); Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 Air Quality Management Plan ? Appendix IV- A ? District's Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures (4) Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 Air Quality Management Plan ? Appendix IV-B-1 ? Air Resources Board Proposed State Strategy for California's 2007 State Implementation Plan; (5) Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 Air Quality Management Plan for Appendix IV-B-2 ? District Staff's Proposed Policy Options to Supplement CARB's Control Strategy (formerly Appendix IV-B); (6) Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 Air Quality Management Plan for Appendix IV-B-3 - South Coast Air Quality Management District's Implementation of the Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program; and (7) Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 Air Quality Management Plan ? Appendix V ? Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations.

For documents previously released under the Draft 2007 AQMP, revisions are shown as strikeouts and underlines and are preceded by a description of each change. Tables, charts, figures, and text that have undergone significant revisions are shown in their final form without strikeouts and underlines for presentation purposes. Appendices which have recently been added are also shown without underline and strikeouts for clarity.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Preface Introduction What is the Overall Control Strategy to Meet the Current Air Quality What Are the Main Challenges of Attainment?

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP [Information that has been updated since the draft is added to the narrative. Also a chart is added to show trends in PM10 and PM2.5 air quality.] Yes. Over the years, the air quality in the Basin has improved significantly, thanks to the comprehensive control strategies implemented to reduce pollution from mobile and stationary sources. For instance, the total number of days on which the Basin exceeds the federal 8-hour standard has decreased dramatically over the last two decades from about 150 days to less than 90 while Basin station-days [detail follows] decreased by approximately 80 percent. However, the Basin still exceeds the federal 8-hour standard more frequently than any other location in the U.S. Under federal law, the Basin is designated as a "severe-17" nonattainment area for the 8-hour ozone standard. Figure ES-1 shows the long-term trend in ambient ozone counts over the federal standard since 1990. The figure depicts two types of exceedance measurements: the number of Basin- days and Basin-station-days above the federal 8-hour ozone standard, which represent, respectively the number of days the standard was exceeded anywhere in the Basin or by any station.

Lack of significant progress in ozone air quality for the last several years has raised some concern regarding the present-day effectiveness of control programs. The District held is planning to hold a technical forum in October 2006 on ozone air quality, to examine the issue of why progress has slowed in detail, including accuracy of emissions inventory, effectiveness of control strategies, ambient photochemistry, etc. It was generally believed that VOC reductions in the last several years have not kept up the pace with NOx reductions, especially with the MTBE phase-out and the introduction of ethanol that caused higher VOC emissions. The discussion outcome may help refine the draft control strategy approach. A key policy question explored at the technical forum was what could be done differently to more effectively reduce ozone levels, given the need to attain fine particulate standards that NOx reductions are needed not only to achieve the PM2.5 and ozone standards, but also to benefit downwind ozone levels. Since it is likely that the VOC emissions are underestimated in the inventory, concurrent VOC reductions are desirable to provide near-term ozone improvement.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP measuresexisting air quality programs. The District and a number of environmental organizations have litigated against U.S. EPA's revocation of the 1-hour standard; the case is still pending. In December 2006, the Court ruled that the U.S. EPA acted within its authority in revoking the 1-hour standard. However, the Court also decided that certain 1-hour control measures must stay in place including, New Source Review, conformity, and the Section 185 emission fee measure.

In 2005, the annual PM2.5 standard was exceeded at several locations throughout the Basin. However, the 24-hour PM2.5 standard (98th percentile greater than 65 ug/m3) was not exceeded during the year1. In 2005, the Basin did not exceed the standards for carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, sulfates or lead. Figure ES-2 shows the annual average PM2.5 concentrations in the Basin in 2005 and Figure ES-3 shows the trends in PM10 and PM2.5.

The Basin has met the PM10 standards at all stations except for western Riverside where the annual PM10 standard has not been met as of 2006. Additional efforts, through localized programs, are under way to ensure compliance with this standard. These efforts are also outlined in the Draft 2007 AQMP.

Station-Days 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 150 120 90

60 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Station-Days Basin-Days Basin-Days FIGURE ES-1 Total Basin-Days Above the Federal 8-Hour Ozone Standard from 1990-2005

1 In September 2006, U.S. EPA issued revised PM2.5 NAAQs lowering the 24-hr standard to 35 ug/m3. However, the present Plan is not required to address this standard.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP FIGURE ES-2 PM2.5 ? 2005 Annual Average Concentration Compared to Federal Standard

80 Concentration (ug/m3) 60 40 20 0 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Year PM10 PM2.5

FIGURE ES-3 Trends in Basin Maximum Annual PM10 and PM2.5 Concentrations

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP WHAT ARE THE MAJOR SOURCES CONTRIBUTING TO AIR QUALITY [The charts in this section are updated and renumbered to reflect revised emission inventories and the addition of a new figure in the previous section.] Figures ES-3 to ES-5ES-4 to ES-6 present the top ten categories for NOx, VOC, and SOx emissions.

FIGURE ES-3ES-4 Top Ten Categories for NOx Emissions NOx Annual Average Emissions - 2002 tpd 250 242 200 150 100 50 0

228 148 127 64 52 48 38 29 27 Off-Road Heavy-Duty Light-Duty Light-Duty Ships & Medium-Duty Heavy-Duty Trains RECLAIM Residential Equipment Diesel Trucks Passenger Trucks Commercial Trucks Gasoline Fuel Cars Boats Trucks Combustion

FIGURE ES-4ES-5 Top Ten Categories for VOC Emissions VOC Annual Average Emissions - 2002 tpd 200 150 100 50

0 178 110 99 91 49 44 31 28 25 35

Light-Duty Consumer Off-Road Light-Duty Architectural Recreational Heavy-Duty Medium-Duty Petroleum Coatings & Passenger Products Equipment Trucks Coatings Boats Gasoline Trucks Marketing Related Cars Trucks Processes

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP FIGURE ES-5ES-6 Top Ten Categories for SOx Emissions SOx Annual Average Emissions - 2002 tpd 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

12 7 2 111111 23 Ships & RECLAIM Petroleum Heavy-Duty Aircraft Trains Off-Road Light-Duty Manufacturing Light-Duty Commercial Refineries Diesel Trucks Equipment Passenger & Industrial Trucks Boats Cars Combustion

The combined Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach including sources such as ocean- going vessels, harbor craft, trains, trucks, and cargo handling equipment represent the largest single source of emissions in the Basin, accounting for 73% 60%of SOx, 24% 27% of NOx, and 10% 6% of PM2.5 in 20202023.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP [One new section was added to the Executive Summary to reflect the district's position on the bifurcation of the Plan into ozone and PM2.5 submittals.]

The formal deadline for submission of the ozone attainment plan is June 15, 2007. The formal deadline for submission of the PM2.5 plan is April 15, 2008. Therefore, technically speaking, the PM2.5 plan is not due until 2008. However, the PM2.5 attainment date (i.e., 2015) is earlier than the 8-hour ozone of 2021 or 2024. In order to design the most efficient path to clean air, it is imperative that an integrated plan including both PM2.5 and ozone be developed. Furthermore, there are only seven years left to implement the necessary measures to attain the PM2.5 standard. The South Coast region needs a road map now to commit its resources for rule development, public and private funding, and technology deployment.

If attainment of the PM2.5 standard was not considered in designing the overall control strategy, the pathway to lower ozone levels and attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard would be more based towards lowering VOC emissions first. However, this approach would seriously jeopardize the PM2.5 attainment by 2015 (which relies on significant NOx reductions) if the PM2.5 plan submittal was to be delayed until 2008.

[The following sections were revised to reflect the changes to the PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone attainment strategies and new carrying capacities. In addition, a new section was added to clarify the request for a ?bump up?.]

WHAT IS THE OVERALL CONTROL STRATEGY TO MEET THE The proposed modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP builds upon improvements accomplished from the previous plans, and aims to incorporate all feasible control measures while balancing costs and socioeconomic impacts. The few years remaining to meet attainment deadlines afford little margin for error in implementing such a comprehensive control strategy. Further, the combined control strategies selected to attain the federal PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone standards must complement each other, representing the most effective route to achieve and maintain the standards.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The proposed modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP relyies on a comprehensive and integrated control approach aimed at achieving the PM2.5 standard by 2015 through implementation of short-term and mid-term control measures and achieving the 8-hour ozone standard by 2021/2024 based on implementation of additional long-term measures. Table ES-1 presents the overall reductions necessary for demonstrating attainment of the PM2.5 standard by 2015 and the 8-hour ozone standard by 2024 2020. In order to demonstrate attainment by the prescribed deadlines, emission reductions needed for attainment must be in place by 2014 and 2020/2023, respectively. timeframe.

TABLE ES-1 Emission Reduction Targets for PM2.5 and 8-Hour ozone Attainment (tons per day, % reduction) 2014 2023 2020 NOx 203 (31%) 239 (36%) 383 (76%) 286 (50%) VOC 59 (11%) 142 (24%) 116 (22%) 300 (54%) SOx 24 (56%) 49 (70%) ---- PM2.5 14 (14%) 14 (14%) ---- Since PM2.5 in the Basin is overwhelmingly formed secondarily, the overall draft control strategy focuses on reducing precursor emission of SOx, directly-emitted PM2.5, NOx, and VOC instead of fugitive dust. Based on the District's modeling sensitivity analysis, SOx reductions, followed by directly-emitted PM2.5 and NOx reductions, provide the greatest benefits in terms of reducing the ambient PM2.5 concentrations. While VOC reductions are less critical to overall reductions in PM2.5 air quality (compared with equivalent SOx, directly-emitted PM2.5, and NOx reductions), they are heavily relied upon for meeting the 8-hour ozone standard. It is further determined that SOx is the only pollutant that is projected to grow in the future, due to ship emissions at the ports, requiring significant controls. Directly-emitted PM2.5 emission reductions from on-going diesel toxic reduction programs and from the short-term and mid-term control measures are also incorporated into the Proposed Modifications to The Draft 2007 AQMP. NOx reductions primarily based on mobile source control strategies (e.g.,

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP add-on control devices, alternative fuels, fleet modernization, repowers, retrofits) are essential also relied upon for both PM2.5 and ozone attainment. Adequate VOC controls need to be in place in time for achieving significant VOC reductions needed for the 8- hour ozone standard by 2024. 2021/2024. Reducing VOC emissions in early years would also ensure continued progress in reducing the ambient ozone concentrations. The 8-hour ozone control strategy builds upon relies on the implementation of the PM2.5 attainment control strategy augmented with additional long-term VOC and NOx reductions for meeting the ozone standard by 2020/20232024 timeframe. Based on the sheer magnitude of emission reductions needed for ozone attainment and the readiness of NOx control technologies, a NOx-heavy strategy is proposed for the daft final AQMP which provides the most efficient path to clean air. With respect to PM10, since the Basin will not attain the annual standard by 2006 for one station, additional local programs are proposed to address the attainment issue in an expeditious manner.

The Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP control measures consist of four three components: 1) the District's Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures; 2) CARB's Proposed State Strategy; 3) District Staff's Proposed Policy Options to Supplement CARB's Control Strategy State and Federal Control Measures recommended by CARB and/or District staff; and 43) Regional Transportation Strategy and Control Measures provided by SCAG. These measures are outlined in Appendixces IV-A (District's Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures), Appendix IV-B-1 (CARB's Draft Proposed State Strategy for California's 2007 State Implementation Plan), Appendix IV-B-2 (District's Proposed Policy Options to Supplement CARB's Strategy), and IV-C (Regional Transportation Strategy and control Measures)., respectively.

The District's control strategy for stationary and mobile sources is based on the following approaches: 1) facility modernization; 2) energy efficiency and conservation; 3) good management practices; 4) market incentives/compliance flexibility; 5) area source programs; 6) emission growth management; and 7) mobile source programs.

The Draft AQMP also includes District staff's recommended State and federal stationary and mobile source control measures since the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has only developed an overview of a possible control strategy for PM2.5 (see Chapter 4). The measures, prepared by District staff and recommended for CARB's consideration for inclusion into the final AQMP, include strategies such as Smog Check Program enhancements, extensive fleet modernization of on-road heavy-duty diesel vehicles and off-road diesel equipment, accelerated penetration of advanced technology vehicles, low-sulfur fuel for marine engines, accelerated turn-over of high-emitting off- road engines, and gasoline and diesel fuel reformulations.

Finally, the emission benefits associated with the 2004 Regional Transportation Plan and the 2006 Regional Transportation Improvement Program are also reflected in the Draft 2007 AQMP.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The South Coast Air Basin (Air Basin) is currently classified as a ?Severe-17? non- attainment area for the federal ambient 8-hour ozone air quality standard with an attainment date of 2021. For any non-attainment area, the Clean Air Act (CAA) also provides for voluntary reclassification of such areas to a higher classification by submitting a request for "bump-up." The District is considering a ?bump-up? to ?extreme? non-attainment classification for the Basin, which would extend the attainment date to 2024 and allow for the attainment demonstration to rely on emission reductions from measures that anticipate the development of new technologies or improving of existing control technologies (CAA Section 182(e)(5) measures). These measures are often referred to as ?black box? measures and go beyond the short-term measures that are based on known and demonstrated technologies.

Under its current non-attainment classification, the District is prohibited from relying on ?black-box? measures to demonstrate attainment. However, as shown in Table ES-2 approximately 41% of the ozone attainment strategy relies on ?black-box? measures and 59% of reductions come from short-term measures.

TABLE ES-2 Emission Reductions Needed for Ozone Attainment (2023) Preliminary Final Draft (tons per day) VOC NOx Overall Reductions 116 383 Short-Term Reductions 88 204 Black Box Reductions 28 179 Converting these ?black-box? reductions to short-term measures represents unique and complex challenges to this region and warrants additional time for development and implementation of more defined strategies, including in some cases sustainable funding.

If the region is unable to submit a SIP revision demonstrating attainment by the deadline, U.S. EPA must impose sanctions on the region. The first sanction, imposed after 18

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP months, is an offset ratio of 2 to 1 for major stationary sources (25 tpy or more). The second sanction (after 24 months) is withholding of all federal transportation funding for the region, except funding for transportation control measures and safety projects; in the South Coast, this amounts to billions of dollars. Finally, if the region cannot submit an approvable attainment demonstration, U.S. EPA must within 24 months adopt a ?federal implementation plan? (FIP) demonstrating attainment by the severe-17 deadline. The FIP likewise could not rely on ?black box? measures, and thus would likely impose draconian measures on mobile and stationary sources in the region.

Given the risk of becoming subject to sanctions and a FIP, and the benefits of a later attainment date and use of ?black box? measures, AQMD staff recommends a voluntary bump-up request to ?extreme? status as part of the 2007 AQMP submittal to the U.S. EPA. The bump-up would provide the basis for an approved plan for this region and implementation of short-term measures while providing an opportunity for a close collaboration among all agencies, industry, environmental organizations, and the public to define and implement these long-term measures as expeditiously as possible.

Despite the aggressive strategy proposed for the South Coast Air Basin, the Coachella Valley will not be able to meet the ozone standard by 2013, where the ozone problem is predominately a transport issue from the upwind South Coast Air Basin. Consequently, Ozone air quality will not meet the federal standard in the Coachella Valley until 2018 through the implementation of the Basin plan. Therefore, a ?bump-up? request is also being made for Coachella Valley from a non-attainment classification of ?serious? to ?servere-15 with an extended attainment date of 2018.

Attainment of the new federal PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone standards poses yet another tremendous challenge for the South Coast Air Basin. The latest emissions inventory and air quality modeling analysis employed in the Draft 2007 AQMP indicate that significant reductions above and beyond those already achieved are still needed for meeting these standards. In order to determine the optimal path to clean air and the overall design of the final Plan, the following issues are presented for soliciting input from all stakeholders, technical experts, and the general public.

? PM2.5 Attainment by 2015 Attainment of the federal health-based PM2.5 standard would demand significant emission reductions in PM2.5 components within the next seven years. Based on the District's recent air quality modeling analysis, these reductions are on the order of 203 tons per day of NOx, 59 tons per day of VOC, 24 tons per day of SOx, 14 tons per day of PM2.5 emissions. This range of reductions identifies the overall path to clean air and policy direction in designing the attainment strategy.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP In 2014, sources primarily under the state and federal jurisdictions will account for 88% of NOx, 72% of VOC, and 63% of SOx emissions in the Basin in 2014. Therefore, in order to meet the federal PM2.5 standard by 2014, significant reductions are required from these sources. CARB has the overall responsibility of developing the State Element of the SIP outlining the state's specific short-term and long-term strategies for reducing emissions from mobile sources and consumer products. CARB has recently released its draft Proposed State Strategy for California's 2007 State Implementation Plan. By 2014, the proposed measures are estimated to achieve 125 tons per day of NOx, 42 tons per day of VOC, 20 tons per day of SOx, and 9 tons per day of PM2.5 reductions.

However, CARB's proposed State strategy falls short of the required reductions for PM2.5 attainment by 2015. In fact, without additional reductions, the Air Basin will not meet the PM2.5 standard until 2020. Since not attaining the PM2.5 standard by 2015 is not an acceptable public policy, the District staff is proposing a number of policy options to fill the reduction gap (Table 4-7). District's proposed policy options are designed to achieve approximately 71 tons per day of NOx, 7 tons per day of VOC, 1.4 tons per day of SOx, and 2.6 tons per day of PM2.5 reductions by 2014 above and beyond the reductions estimated for the CARB's proposed strategy.

To achieve the necessary reductions poses several challenges. The most significant challenge is the short timeframe to achieve the necessary reductions. This challenge can be partially overcome with early actions to affect mobile source cleanup through voluntary incentive programs such as the Carl Moyer Program. However, additional public funds are needed to accelerate such efforts. Regulatory actions to mandate mobile source cleanup are also needed beyond those identified by CARB to date.

The District staff believes that a combination of regulatory actions and public funding is the most effective means of achieving emission reductions. As such, three policy options are proposed for the decision makers to consider in achieving additional reductions. The first option is the District staff's proposed additional control measures as a menu of selections to further reduce emissions from sources primarily under State and federal jurisdiction. The proposed additional control measures represent a menu of measures that the State could implement and are intended to complement CARB's mobile source control strategy with defined short-term and mid-term control measures needed for reaching attainment by 2015 and to meet legal requirements. The proposed additional control measures are also intended to highlight the level of stringency and reductions needed from State and federal sources for attainment. These measures can be modified or substitutes can be developed by the implementing agencies to achieve equivalent or greater reductions in the time frame needed for PM2.5 attainment. The proposed rate of progress for NOx under Policy Option 1 is shown in Figure ES-7. It should also be noted that full implementation of the proposed measures will result in significant reductions in air toxic contaminants.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The second option is to have the state fulfill its NOx emission reduction obligations under 2003 AQMP by 2010 for its short-term defined control measures plus additional reductions needed to meet the NOx emission target between 2010 and 2014. Under this option the state could include some of the proposed measures under the first option or other measures that the state identifies as part of the SIP public process. The rate of progress for NOx under Policy Option 2 is also shown in Figure ES-7.

Figure ES-7 NOx Rate-of-Progress for the Three Policy Options The third option is based on the same rate of progress under Policy Option 1, but it relies heavily on public funding assistance to achieve the needed NOx reductions via accelerated fleet turnover to post-2010 on-road emission standards or the cleanest off- road engine standards in effect today or after 2010. Under Policy Option 3, CARB or the District would assume the responsibility of implementing the incentive programs based on specific funding designated for this purpose. Based on the analysis performed for the Carl Moyer program, up to an estimated $600 million per year is needed between 2009 and 2014. Table ES-3 illustrates possible funding sources that have been suggested

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP in the past by various parties and the District staff has included these as a mater of perspective and is seeking comments and suggestions on appropriate funding sources.

TABLE ES-3 Example List of Past Suggested Funding Sources by Various Parties* Potential Funding Sources Potential Funding Levels Carl Moyer Program ~$35 - $50 million/yr MSRC Program ~ $8 - $10 million/yr Marine Ports User Fee Proposals ~$250 million/yr 1-cent Increase in Fuel Tax ~$70 - $80 million/yr * Sources listed in Table 4-6 are provided for discussion purposes only.

The District staff recognizes these are very difficult policy choices the Basin is facing, but not meeting the PM2.5 standard by 2015 is not an acceptable public policy in light of recent health studies on particulate matter, not to mention the potential adverse economic impacts on the region due to potential federal sanctions.

It is envisioned that the proposed policy options in this Proposed Modifications to the Draft Plan will undergo further agency and public review before inclusion into the Final Plan.

? 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Attainment of the 8-hr ozone standard by 2024 will require significant additional reductions above and beyond those necessary for PM2.5 attainment. These reductions are expected to be achieved through implementation of new and advanced control technologies as well as improvement of existing control technologies. Control techniques requiring substantial levels of committed funding for implementation would also fall under this category of long-term emission reductions.

Based on District staff's air quality modeling analysis, the additional ?black box? reductions needed for ozone attainment are estimated to be 179 tpd of NOx and 28 tpd of VOC reductions between 2015 and 2023 timeframe. These reductions are equally, if not more, challenging as the reduction gap for PM2.5, in that significant reductions are needed in a short timeframe. Actions are needed in the next couple of years to ensure technical readiness and significant quantity of product supply.

Table ES-4 provides a listing of some of the advanced technologies and innovative control approaches which could be relied upon to achieve the long-term reductions

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP needed for ozone attainment, highlighting the level of stringency and aggressiveness of controls required.

TABLE ES-4 Possible Approaches for Long-Term Control Measures Light Duty Vehicles ? Extensive retirement of high-emitting vehicles and accelerated penetration of PZEVs and ZEVs On-Road Heavy Duty Vehicles ? Expanded modernization and retrofit of heavy-duty trucks and buses ? Expanded Inspection and Maintenance Program ? Advanced Near-Zero and Zero Emitting Cargo Transportation Technologies Off-Road Vehicles ? Expanded modernization and retrofit of off-road equipment Fuels ? More stringent gasoline and diesel specifications; Extensive use of diesel alternatives Marine Vessels ? More stringent emission standards and programs for new and existing ocean-going vessels and harbor craft Locomotives ? Advanced Near-Zero and Zero Emitting Cargo Transportation Technologies Pleasure Craft ? Accelerated replacement and retrofit of high-emitting engines Aircraft ? More stringent emission standards for jet aircraft (engine standards, clean fuels, retrofit controls) Consumer Products ? Ultra Low-VOC formulations; Reactivity-based controls Renewable Enegry ? Accelerated use of renewable energy and development of hydrogen technology and infrastructure AB32 Implementation ? Concurrent criteria pollutant reduction technologies For light-duty vehicles, extensive retirement and replacement of high-emitting vehicles would be required through either mandatory or incentive-based programs. Furthermore, achieving further reductions from this source category will require an even more accelerated penetration of ATPZEVs and ZEVs beyond the 1 million target in 2020 currently proposed under short-term measures and could be as high as 4 to 5 million in 2023.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP For heavy duty vehicles, a more extensive modernization program could be instituted to require the replacement of the remaining trucks not meeting the 2010 model year standard in 2020 after implementation of short-term measures. For off-road heavy diesel equipment, opportunities may also exist to achieve additional reductions by requiring that all of these equipment meet Tier 4 off-road engine standards or better through replacements or retrofits by 2020/2023. Reformulation of gasoline and diesel fuels coupled with requirements for using diesel alternatives (e.g., CNG, LNG, gas-to-liquid) would also provide an opportunity for additional long-term NOx, VOC, and PM reductions from on-road and off-road mobile sources.

Advanced cargo transportation technologies such as Maglev and other types of linear induction motor technologies could also be used to transport containers to and from ports thereby significantly reducing emissions from locomotives and heavy-duty trucks. Such alternative electric propulsion systems would have the added benefit of reducing congestion and reliance on fossil fuels. Accelerated development and implementation of these advanced technologies would provide a tremendous opportunity for achieving the emission reductions needed for ozone attainment Further emission reductions from ocean-going vessels beyond those considered under CARB's goods movement plan could also be achieved through a more expanded main engine retrofit program which would target all vessels calling on the San Pedro Bay ports (i.e., including those making non-frequent or less frequent calls) to achieve higher levels of NOx reductions from existing vessels. CARB or the Ports have the ability to adopt and implement such programs, but may require authorization from U.S. EPA Accelerated replacement of existing pleasure craft with new models meeting the most stringent engine standards and application of potential retrofit technologies provides another strategy for achieving long-term reductions. In addition, aircraft emissions could be further reduced through strategies such as lower engine emission standards, reformulation of jet fuel, and installation of retrofit kits which would require extensive technology development.

Finally, additional VOC reductions from consumer products could be achieved based on the application of low-VOC technologies and formulations developed for industrial coatings and solvents categories. Also, reformulation based on lower reactive compounds could offer an additional alternative for achieving equivalent reductions.

? Uncertainties in Mobile Source Emissions Inventory Although the emissions inventory and projections in the Draft 2007 AQMP represent the latest available methodologies, emission factors, and growth projections, there are uncertainties in the mobile source emissions inventory which need to be addressed in the

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP final AQMP or, if necessary, immediately following the AQMP adoption. The mobile source inventory for this Draft AQMP represents an increase over the previous AQMP primarily because of ethanol permeation, heavy-duty vehicle in-use emissions, increased evaporative emissions for pleasure craft, and other adjustments. Furthermore, there are some concerns over the projected emissions in the off-road model because of the equipment life and turn-over rate assumptions which may result in under-estimation of future emissions.

As part of the on-road mobile source inventory evaluation, it became clear that the EMFAC VMT estimates portrayed a 2005 ?blip? as a result of CARB's methodology to adjust the 2005 VMT (provided by SCAG) based on Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) vehicle registrations and Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR) odometer readings collected through the Smog Check program.

AQMD staff examination of the EMFAC VMT indicated that for 2005 the difference in CARB's VMT estimates and SCAG's was on the order of 10 percent for light- and medium-duty vehicles (or 30 million more VMT per day in CARB's estimates) and 20 percent for heavy duty vehicles (or about 5 million more VMT per day). The AQMD's consultants reviewed CARB's assumptions and to the extent possible some of the DMV and BAR data used to produce the 2005 VMT estimates. They concluded that there is no independent evidence to support a decline in VMT between 2005 and 2010, and recommended conducting sensitivity analysis in the near-term (given the need to develop an AQMP Revision) to determine the magnitude of the differences.

A sensitivity analysis was conducted to estimate the emissions impact of projecting the SCAG linear VMT trend using the 2005 CARB estimate as the anchor. The analysis indicates that should the revised VMT projections be a more accurate representation of future estimates, the ozone attainment strategy would need additional 30 to 40 tons per day of NOx reductions.

While the technical work to improve the inventory is on-going, the past plan revisions have shown continuous upward adjustment of the mobile source inventory. The control strategy for attainment demonstration should provide a certain level of safety margin to address this potential underestimation of emissions with only seven years remaining for PM2.5 attainment.

?Adequacy of Reductions for PM2.5 Attainment Attainment of the federal health-based PM2.5 standard would demand significant emission reductions in PM2.5 components within the next seven years. Based on the District's air quality modeling analysis, these reductions are on the order of 239 tons per day of NOx, 49 tons per day of SOx, 14 tons per day of PM2.5, and 142 tons per day of VOC emissions. Although the District will continue to refine its modeling analysis over

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP the next few months for inclusion into the Final Plan, this range of reductions identifies the overall path to clean air and policy direction in designing the attainment strategy.

In 2014, emission sources under the District's jurisdiction will account for 11% of NOx and 24% of VOC and SOx emissions in the Basin. Although these stationary sources are currently subject to some of the most rigorous regulations known, in view of the magnitude of reductions for PM2.5 attainment, the District is proposing thirty short-term and mid-term control measures in the Draft AQMP. The estimated reductions from measures that have been quantified are 7.7 t/d of NOx, 3 t/d of SOx, 7.2 t/d of VOC, and 1.4 t/d of PM2.5 by 2014. Since emission reductions for many of the measures are to be better quantified at a later date, the total reductions will likely be higher.

However, in order to meet the federal PM2.5 standard by 2014, significant additional reductions are required from sources under state and federal jurisdictions. CARB has the overall responsibility of developing the State Element of the SIP outlining the state's specific short-term and long-term strategies for reducing emissions from mobile sources and consumer products. Traditionally, the District has incorporated CARB's proposed strategies in the Draft AQMP in developing the overall attainment strategy. However, for this Draft AQMP, CARB has not yet developed its Draft State Element and has only released its proposed concepts for reducing emissions from major mobile source categories and consumer products (Table 4-5).

Since CARB's proposed concepts appear to fall significantly short of the required reductions for PM2.5 attainment, the District staff is recommending a number of specific control measures with defined strategies and necessary reductions for mobile sources and consumer products for CARB's consideration (Table 4-6). Although CARB plans to release its Draft State Element in January 2007, the District staff believes that greater opportunity for public debate and review of the potentially alternative strategies for inclusion into the Final Plan is warranted. It is envisioned that the proposed measures in this Draft Plan will undergo further agency and public review and reflect any adjustments to emissions inventory and modeling before inclusion into the Final Plan.

?8-Hour Ozone Non-Attainment Classification ? Bump-Up Request ,The South Coast Air Basin is classified as a ?severe-17? non-attainment area for the federal 8-hour ozone standard with an attainment date of 2021. Such classification precludes the Basin from relying on undefined reductions (i.e., ?black box?) which are based on the anticipated development of new control technologies or improvement of existing technologies (Section 182(e)(5) of the federal Clean Air Act) for attainment demonstration. However, the federal regulation allows regions such as the Basin to request for a bump-up to an ?extreme? classification in order to be able to rely on 182(e)(5) measures for attainment. The District is considering exercising this option for the Draft 2007 AQMP because of the significant level of additional reductions required for attainment which are not likely to be achieved from existing technologies.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Although the ?extreme? classification for the Basin would allow the use of long-term measures and possibly extend the attainment date by three years to 2024, there are concerns associated with the resulting increased stringency of requirements for stationary sources (i.e., higher offset ratio, lower major source definition for Title V facilities) under an ?extreme? classification. Unless adequate defined control measures are identified for meeting the ozone reduction target by 2021, the District will have no choice but to request for this re-classification. During the public review process, the District will solicit additional control ideas to determine if existing technologies can be more aggressively implemented such that 182(e)(5) measures are not needed for the 8- hour attainment demonstration.

? Fair Share Agency Responsibility In order to achieve necessary reductions for meeting air quality standards, all four agencies (i.e., AQMD, CARB, U.S. EPA, and SCAG) would have to aggressively develop and implement control strategies through their respective plans, regulations, and alternative approaches for pollution sources within their primary jurisdiction. Even though SCAG does not have direct authority over mobile source emissions, it will commit to the emission reductions associated with implementation of the 2004 Regional Transportation Plan and 2006 Regional Transportation Improvement Program which are imbedded in the emission projections. Similarly, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have authority they must utilize to assist in the implementation of various strategies if the region is to attain clean air by federal deadlines.

The following figures (ES-87 and ES-98) represent the projected emission contributions by agency primary authority for major pollutants in 2014 and 2023 2020 for key pollutants.

Although the District has completely met its obligations under the 2003 AQMP and stationary sources subject to the District's jurisdiction account for only 12% 11% of NOx and 37% 24% of SOx emissions in the Basin in 2014, the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP contains several short-term and mid-term control measures aimed at achieving further NOx and SOx reductions (as well as VOC and PM2.5 reductions) from these already regulated sources. These strategies are based on facility modernization, energy conservation measures and more stringent requirements for existing equipment (e.g., space heaters, ovens, dryers, furnaces). In addition to short- term and mid-term control measures, the District is also committing to long-term VOC reductions of 32 t/d by 2020 for the 8-hour ozone attainment.

Clean air for this region requires CARB to aggressively pursue reductions and strategies for on-road and off-road mobile sources and consumer products. In addition, considering the significant contribution of federal sources such as marine vessels,

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP locomotives, and aircraft in the Basin (i.e., 56% 72% of SOx in 2014 and 37% 34% of NOx in 2023), it is imperative that the U.S. EPA pursue and develop regulations for new and existing federal sources to ensure that these sources contribute their fair share of reductions toward attainment of the federal standards. Unfortunately, regulation of these emission sources has not kept pace with other source categories and as a result, these sources are projected to represent a significant and growing portion of emissions in the Basin. Without a collaborative and serious effort among all agencies, attainment of the federal standards would will be seriously jeopardized.

[The following figures were revised to reflect changes to the emissions inventories and attainment year. For clarity, no strikeout or underlines are shown, except for the figure numbers and titles.]

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP FIGURE ES-6ES-8 Emissions Contribution by Primary Agency Responsibility (2014, Annual Average Inventory) NOx District 12% CARB 64%

EPA 24% Total NOx = 654 t/d SOx District 37% CARB 7% Emissions Contribution by Agency EPA (2020, Planning Inventory) 56% Total SOx = 43 t/d

FIGURE ES-7ES-9 Emissions Contribution by Primary Agency Responsibility (20232020, Planning Inventory) NOx CARB 49% District 14%

EPA 37% Total NOx = 506 t/d VOC District 32% CARB 64% EPA 4% Total VOC = 536 t/d

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP MODIFICATIONS TO CHAPTER 1

[The following section is revised to correct editorial errors.] CONSTRAINTS IN ACHIEVING STANDARDS The District is faced with a number of constraints or confounding circumstances that make achieving clean air standards difficult. These include the physical and meteorological setting, the large pollutant emissions burden of the Basin (including pollution from international goods movement), and the rapid population growth of the area.

Setting The Coachella Valley Planning Area is impacted by pollutant transport from the South Coast Air Basin. In addition, pollutant transport occurs to the Antelope Valley, Mojave Desert, Ventura county, and San Diego county. As part of this AQMP revision, transport issues relative to the Coachella Valley Planning Area will be specifically addressed in the next several months and incorporated into the next revision of the final 2007 AQMP.

Emission Sources The pollution burden of the Basin is substantial. In spite of substantial reductions already achieved, additional significant reductions of volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen, sulfur oxides, and particulate matter in the South Coast Basin (including. SSAB & and MDAB) are needed to attain the federal and state air quality standards.

Air pollution forms either directly or indirectly from pollutants emitted from a variety of sources. These sources can be natural, such as oil seeps, vegetation, or windblown dust. Emissions also result from fuel combustion, as in automobile engines; from evaporation of organic liquids, such as those used in coating and cleaning processes; and through abrasion, such as from tires on roadways. The air pollution control strategy in the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP is directed almost entirely at controlling man-made sources. The emission sources in the Basin are described in Chapter 3. Natural emissions are accounted for in the background and initial conditions for the air quality modeling analysis in Chapter 5.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTING THE 2003 AQMP District's Actions While the 2003 AQMP has not been approved by U.S. EPA into the SIP, the District continues to implement the 2003 AQMP. Progress in implementing the 2003 AQMP can be measured by the number of control measures that have been adopted as rules and the resulting tons of pollutants targeted for reduction. Emission reduction commitments and reductions achieved in 2010 are based on the emissions inventory from the 2003 AQMP. Since October 2002, sixteen control measures or rules have been adopted or amended by the District through June 2006. Table 1-2 lists the District's 2003 AQMP short-term commitment and the control measures or rules that were adopted through June 2006. The primary focus of the District's efforts had been the adoption and implementation of VOC control measures. As shown in Table 1-2, for the control measures adopted by the District, 29.2 tons per day of VOC reductions, 7.1 tons per day of NOx, 3.8 tons per day of SOx, and 2.4 tons per day of PM10 will result. Based on the updated 2002 emissions inventory, adopted rules as of June 2006, and the 2007 AQMP growth assumptions, the projected VOC and NOx emissions from District sources in 2010 will be 137 and 84 74 tons per day, respectively, representing 10 to 12 tons per day below the AQMD allowable emission commitment in the 2003 AQMP (Figure 1-5).

160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 137 86 74 147 VOC NOx 2003 AQMP Allowable 2007 AQMP Baseline FIGURE 1-5 Projected 2010 Emissions from AQMD Sources Compared with 2010 Allowable Emissions Committed To Under the 2003 AQMP

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP [The following sections are revised to reflect new material which addresses CAA & CCAA requirements.]

CAA Planning Requirements Addressed by the 2007 AQMP Table 1-6 summarizes the key CAA planning requirements addressed by the Draft 2007 AQMP. The table lists the relevant CAA section along with the AQMP document or chapter where the submittal is discussed. It may be used as a reference guide showing where each of the CAA planning requirements is addressed. Some chapters and appendices that address CAA planning requirements are not being released at this time, and will become available shortly after release of the Final Draft 2007 AQMP. These include Chapter 8 ? future Air Quality ? Desert Non-Attainment, Chapter 9 ? Contingency Measures, and Appendix V ? Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations. Other submittals such as the RACM and RACT will be released under separate covers prior to their respective deadlines.

TABLE 1-6 CAA SIP Revisions and Submittals in the 2007 AQMP Submittal CAA Section 2007 AQMP Reference PM2.5 Attainment Demonstration (Basin) 172(c) Chapter 5 Appendix V1 PM2.5 Reasonable Further Progress Milestones 172(c)(2) Chapter 6 Appendix V1 PM2.5 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget 176(c)(2)(A) Chapter 6 PM2.5 RACM/RACT Demonstration 172(c)(1) Separate Cover Appendix VI 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration (Basin) 182(c)(2)(A) Chapter 5 Appendix V1 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration for Salton 182(c)(2)(A) Chapter 8 Sea Air Basin (under District jurisdiction)1 Appendix V1 8-Hour Ozone Reasonable Further Progress 182(c)(2)(B) Chapter 6

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Milestones Appendix V1 8-Hour Ozone RACM/RACT Demonstration 172(c)(1) Separate Cover Appendix VI Maintenance Plan for Carbon Monoxide1 175A Chapter 5 and 6 Appendix V1 Maintenance Plan for Nitrogen Dioxide1 175A Chapter 5 and 6 Appendix V1 1. Pending release of Final Draft 2007 AQMP

Control Measure Ranking The CCAA requires the District Governing Board to determine that the AQMP is a cost- effective strategy that will achieve attainment of the state standards by the earliest practicable date (H&SC 40913). In addition, the Plan must include an assessment of the cost-effectiveness of available and proposed measures and a list of the measures ranked from the least cost-effective to the most cost-effective [H&SC 40922(a)].

In addition to the relative cost-effectiveness of the measures, the District must consider other factors as well in developing an adoption and implementation schedule [H&SC 40922(b)]. The other factors noted in the CCAA include technological feasibility, emission reduction potential, rate of reduction, public acceptability, and enforceability. Efficiency, equity, and legal authority were also included in the 2007 AQMP for prioritization purposes because of their importance. The results of the cost-effectiveness prioritization are given in Chapter 6 of the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMPnot available for inclusion in the Draft 2007 AQMP and will be provided with the Final Draft 2007 AQMP.

FORMAT OF THIS DOCUMENT This document is organized into eleven chapters, each addressing a specific topic. Each of the remaining chapters is summarized below.

Chapter 2, ?Air Quality and Health Effects,? discusses the Basin's air quality in comparison with the federal and state air pollution standards.

Chapter 3, ?Base Year and Future Emissions,? summarizes recent updates to the emissions inventories, estimates current emissions by source and pollutant, and projects future emissions with and without controlsgrowth.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Chapter 5, ?Future Air Quality,? describes the modeling approach used in the AQMP and summarizes the Basin's future air quality projections with and without controls.

Chapter 6, ?Clean Air Act Requirements,? discusses specific federal and state requirements as they pertain to the 2007 AQMP.

Chapter 7, ?Implementation,? presents the implementation schedule of the various control measures and delineates each agency's area of responsibility.

Chapter 8, ?Future Air Quality - Desert Nonattainment Areas,? describes the future air quality in the Coachella Valley Planning Area. This chapter is omitted in the Draft 2007 AQMP, but will be released upon completion of the Draft Final 2007 AQMP.

Chapter 9, ?Contingency Measures,? presents contingency measures as required by the federal CAA. This chapter is omitted in the Draft 2007 AQMP, but will be released upon completion of the Draft Final 2007 AQMP.

Chapter 10, ?Looking Beyond Current Requirements,? examines the recently approved lowering of the 24 hour PM2.5 standard from 65 ug/m3 to 35 ug/m3 as well as the technical uncertainties associated with the current plan analysis.

Chapter 11, ?Ultrafine Particles,? examines the extent, impacts, and sources of the air pollution problem caused by particles smaller than PM2.5.

Chapter 12. ?Request to Redesignate the South Coast Air Basin as Extreme nonattainment and the Coachella Valley Portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin as Severe- 15? describes the Basin's needs to reclassify to an extreme nonattainment area as well as requesting a bump-up for the Coachella Valley from serious to severe-15.

For convenience, a ?Glossary,? is provided at the end of the document, presenting definitions of commonly used terms found in the Draft 2007 AQMP.

MODIFICATIONS TO CHAPTER 3 Due to extensive changes to the inventories, Chapter 3 is reproduced in full here. Text changes are shown in strikeout for deletions and underline for additions. Replacements of figures and tables do not show revision marks in order to make the information easier to read.

Since the release of the Draft 2007 AQMP, improvements and refinements have been made to the emissions inventory for some source categories as more recent and accurate data have become available. The following is a list of the more significant changes made to the inventory, the magnitude of the changes, and the reasons behind them. Collectively, the 2020 summer planning baseline (no additional controls) reduced by 61 tons per day for VOC (from 599 tons per day to 538 tons per day), and 7 tons per day for NOx (from 531 tons per day to 524 tons per day). The figures and tables in the Chapter 3 incorporate these modifications.

On-Road Mobile Sources Application of the most recent CARB on-road emissions model EMFAC 2007 V2.3, instead of the previous EMFAC2007 Working Draft model, causes this source category's summer planning emissions to reduce from 151 tons per day to 114 tons per day for VOC and from 208 tons per day to 184 tons per day for NOx. The decrease in emissions is due to the following two reasons: (1) The number of pending vehicle registrations assumed in the EMFAC model changed. In the EMFAC2007 Working Draft, CARB staff assumed all vehicles with pending registrations were on the road, and incorporated these vehicles in the vehicle population. However, CARB staff later revised this assumption from further evaluation of the pending vehicle registrations and calculated the emissions based on 25 percent of the total vehicles with pending registration were driven on the road; (2) Some CARB additional adopted rules were added in to the baselines, resulting in more emission reductions. Several external adjustments were made to EMFAC 2007 V2.3 to make additional technical corrects to the inventories. The most significant was reduction of 22 percent in the 2005 heavy heavy-duty diesel truck category to correct vehicle population previously assumed. This, and other adjustments, are described in this chapter.

construction equipment life and inclusion of addition CARB adopted rules and regulations. External adjustments were also made to the OFFROAD model to more accurately reflect the baseline and future inventories. This is also described in this chapter. Figures 3-6A and 3-6B were added with Basin data for locomotives. The corresponding text was also modified.

Forest Management The total emissions for the forest management category were recalculated for the years 2005 and beyond because the year 2002 had abnormally low levels of burning for this category. The new emissions should be more representative of the normal emission level for the SIP purpose. This change causes PM2.5 emissions to increase from 0.2 tons per day to 4.3 tons per day in the year 2020.

Updated Top Ten Category Information Figures and Tables in Chapter 3 related to the top ten categories contributing to the emission inventory have been updated to reflect the revised emission data. The year 2020 data has been replaced with 2023.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP INTRODUCTION This chapter summarizes emissions that occurred in the Basin during the base year 2002, and projected emissions in the years 2014, 2020, and 2023. More detailed emission data analyses are presented in Appendix III of the Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP. Additional emission inventories for other interim years (i.e., 2005, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2017, and 2030) are also developed. These inventory years are selected to comply with federal and state Clean Air Act requirements. The 2002 base year emissions inventory reflects adopted air regulations with current compliance dates as of 2002; whereas future baseline emissions inventories are based on adopted air regulations with both current and future compliance dates. A list of AQMD and CARB rules and regulations that are part of the base year and future-year baseline emissions inventories is presented in Appendix III of the Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP. The District is committed to implement the AQMD rules that are incorporated in the Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP baseline emissions inventories.

The emissions inventory is divided into four major classifications: point, area, off- road, and on-road sources. The 2002 base year point source emissions are based principally on reported data from facilities. The area source and off-road emissions are estimated jointly by CARB and the District. The on-road emissions are calculated using the CARB EMFAC2007 Working DraftV2.3 emission factors and the transportation activity data provided by SCAG from their modified 2004 Regional Transportation Plan (2004 RTP). In this document Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) emissions (i.e. ships beyond the three-mile state waters line) are included in the ships emissions. The future emission forecasts are based on demographic and economic growth projections provided by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). In addition, emission reductions resulting from District regulations adopted by June 30, 2006 are included in the emission forecasts. CARB regulations adopted by June 2005 are also were included in the baseline for the Draft 2007 AQMP., except there are some rules that are not yet incorporated into the EMFAC2007 Working Draft V2.3 included additional CARB rules, such as chip reflash and idling emissions. and are therefore not reflected in the inventory. These reductions will be treated as external adjustments to the baseline emissions.

Several additional adjustments were made to EMFAC2007 V2.3 to make additional technical corrections to the inventory. The most significant adjustment was the application of a factor (0.78) to the 2005 heavy heavy-duty diesel truck emissions to correct the population estimates previously assumed in the inventory. Other adjustments were made to on-road categories in order to account for CARB's adopted rules which are not included in EMFAC2007 V2.3. Categories affected by

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP this change included light-duty passenger cars, light-, medium-, and heavy-duty trucks, buses, and motor homes.

Off-road emissions were updated using CARB's November 1, 2006 OFFROAD model. External adjustments were also made for inventory categories such as ships, dredging, industrial equipment, lawn and garden equipment, and others. Adjustments were made after the model was finalized to reflect information revising activity levels and patterns, and to include Carl Moyer benefits and CARB's adopted rules which are not included in the OFFRAD model.

This chapter also includes information on the top ten source categories that contribute to the majority of the emissions inventory in 2002, 2014, and 2020 2023. The data for the year 2023 is being presented because the South Coast will need to request a ?bump up? in attainment classification. Data for 2020 is included in portions of this Chapter and in Appendix III. Please see Chapter 12 for more information on the attainment status.

EMISSION INVENTORIES Three inventories are prepared for the Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP for the purpose of regulatory and SIP performance tracking and transportation conformity: an annual average inventory, a summer planning inventory, and a winter planning inventory. Baseline emissions data presented in this chapter are based on average annual day emissions (i.e., total annual emissions divided by 365 days) and seasonally adjusted planning inventory emissions. The Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP uses annual average day emissions to estimate the cost-effectiveness of control measures, to rank control measure implementation, and to perform PM2.5 modeling and analysis. The planning inventory emissions developed to capture the emission levels during a poor air quality season are used to report emission reduction progress as required by the federal and state Clean Air Acts.

Detailed descriptions of the base year and future baseline emission inventories are presented in Appendix III of the Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP.

Attachment F to Appendix III has been added to this AQMP due to the recent significance placed on diesel emissions, showing emissions associated with combustion of diesel fuel for various source categories.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP sources at a permitted facility with an identified location (e.g., power plants, refineries). Area sources generally consist of many small emission sources (e.g., residential water heaters, architectural coatings) which are distributed across the region. Their emissions over a given area may be calculated using socioeconomic data. For 2002, reported data are used for point sources emitting more than 4 tons per year of the following criteria air contaminants: VOC, NOx, SOx, and PM2.5. For CO, facilities report if they are over 100 tons per year. If any of these thresholds are triggered, all pollutants are reported by the facility.

Area source emissions were jointly developed by CARB and the District for approximately 350 categories. Several special studies were conducted to improve the area source inventory. Specific source categories such as gasoline dispensing, consumer products, architectural coatings, fugitive dust, and ammonia sources were updated (see Appendix III). For consumer products and architectural coatings, revised and updated survey data were used. For fugitive dust, the PM10 to PM2.5 ratio was changed based on a study by the Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP).

Mobile Sources Mobile sources consist of two subcategories: on-road and off-road sources. On- road vehicle emissions are calculated using socioeconomic data and transportation models provided by SCAG, spatial distribution data from Caltrans' Direct Travel Impact Model (DTIM4), and EMFAC2007 Working DraftV2.3 inventories obtained from CARB. The EMFAC2007 Working DraftV2.3 reflects SCAG's revised baseline activity data from the modified 2004 RTP. The 2000 Census data, combined with SCAG's 2001 origin and destination survey data, are used in SCAG's modified 2004 RTP and in this AQMP. Major improvements made to the EMFAC2007 Working DraftV2.3 include: 1. Heavy heavy-duty diesel vehicles population redistribution;

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP 8. New temperature and relative humidity profiles corresponding to the federal 8-hour ozone standard.

Figure 3-1A compares the on-road baseline emissions between EMFAC2002 and the EMFAC2007 Working DraftV2.3 used in the 2003 AQMP and Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, respectively. It should be noted that the comparison for 2002 reflects changes in methodology, but 2020 also includes adopted rules, and updated growth projections since the release of EMFAC2002.

Emissions from off-road vehicle categories (e.g., trains, ships, construction equipment, ports and rail cargo handling equipment) were developed primarily based on estimated activity levels and emission factors. The major changes made to the off-road model include: 1. Off-road equipment population, activity, and emission factor updates;

2. Locomotive inventory reflecting the 1998 South Coast Locomotive MOU and the 2005 CARB/Railroad MOU;

5. Marine vessel updates; and The inventory for trains was revised from the 2003 AQMP to reflect projected emission reductions based on the 1998 South Coast MOU and the 2005 CARB/Railroad MOU. Significant inventory improvements have been made to the marine vessel category, which includes ocean-going vessels, commercial harbor craft, and other ships. For both the Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach, more recent and comprehensive emission inventories and projections have been included in the Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP. New surveys and data sources for marine vessels have been used, as described in Appendix III.

Figure 3-1B shows a comparison of the off-road baseline emissions based on the OFFROAD model revisions used for the 2003 AQMP and Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP. As the inventory methodology has improved, more emissions have been quantified, resulting in equal or higher emissions than previously anticipated in spite of more rules being adopted. This creates a greater challenge for attainment. It should be noted that reductions from the Carl Moyer program from past projects are not reflected in the

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP baseline inventories. These reductions are quantified and applied externally to the baseline inventories, as described in Appendix III.

Uncertainty in the Inventory An effective AQMP relies on an adequate emission inventory. Over the years, significant improvements have been made to quantify emission sources upon which control measures are developed. Increased use of continuous monitoring and source tests has contributed to the improvement in point source inventories. Technical assistance to facilities and auditing of reported emissions by the District also have improved the accuracy of the emissions inventory. Area source inventories that rely on average emission factors and regional activities have inherent uncertainty. Industry-specific surveys or source-specific studies during rule development have provided much-needed refinement to the emissions estimates.

Mobile source inventories remain the greatest challenge due to the high number and types of equipment and engines involved, in-use performance variables, and complex emission characteristics. Every AQMP revision provides an opportunity to further improve the current knowledge of mobile source inventories. There is no exception to the Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP. As described earlier, many improvements were made to the EMFAC2007 Working DraftV2.3 and such work is still ongoing. However, it should be acknowledged that there are still areas that may not have been adequately addressed. For example, ethanol permeation not accounted for in the stationary source inventory for gasoline-powered equipment or gas stations, how best to reflect heavy heavy-duty truck in-use emissions with limited test data, and appropriate spatial and temporal distribution of recreational boats need to be examined further. The best available science should be followed to support the AQMP development.

In addition, there are also some CARB rules that are not yet incorporated into the EMFAC2007 Working Draft and the associated emission reductions will need to be reflected in the inventory in near-term refinements that will occur subsequent to the release of this Draft 2007 AQMP.

Relative to future growth, there are many challenges with making accurate projections. For example, where vehicle trips will occur, the distribution between various modes of transportation (such as trucks and trains), as well as estimates for population growth and changes to the number and type of jobs ? although they are forecast with the best information available; nevertheless, they contribute to the overall uncertainty in emission projections.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Gridded Emissions For air quality modeling purposes, the region is composed of the South Coast Air Basin, Coachella Valley, Antelope Valley, Ventura County (upwind area), and Mojave Desert. The modeling area is divided into a grid system composed of 5 km by 5 km grid cells defined by Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates. Both stationary and mobile source emissions are allocated to individual grid cells within this system. In general, the modeling emission data features episodic-day emissions. Seasonal variations in activity levels are taken into account in developing gridded stationary point and area source emissions. Variations in temperature, hours of operation, speed of motor vehicles, or other factors are considered in developing gridded motor vehicle emissions. Hence, ?gridded? emissions data used for ozone modeling applications (Chapter 5) differ from the average annual day or planning inventory emission data in two respects: 1) the modeling region covers larger geographic areas than the Basin; and 2) emissions represent day-specific instead of average or seasonal conditions. In the Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, gridded inventories associated with selected ozone episodes have been prepared for air quality modeling analyses. In addition, gridded emissions for 2005 and 2014 were developed to calculate annual average PM2.5 concentrations.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Tons/Day 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 360 337

117 114 Tons/Day 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 645 611**

187 184 2002 2020 2002 2020 VOC NOx Tons/Day 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 5 4 **

22 25 20 15 Tons/Day 10 5 0 18 16 1313 2002 2020 2002 2020 SOx PM2.5 2003 AQMP 2007 AQMP * FIGURE 3-1A Comparison of On-Road Emissions Between EMFAC2002 (2003 AQMP) and EMFAC2007 Working DraftV2.3 (Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP) (VOC & NOx ? Summer Planning; SOx & PM2.5 ? Annual Average Inventory) * Year 2020 inventories incorporate rules adopted since the release of EMFAC2002. ** Redistribution of the heavy-duty truck VMT in the EMFAC2007 Working DraftV2.3 causes heavy duty truck VMT reduction in the SCAB. As a result, NOx and SOx emissions are relatively lower in the Draft 2007 Note: External adjustments to the EMFA2007 V2.3 are included.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP 250 200 150 Tons/Day 100 50

0 222 219 146 125 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 2002 2020 2002 NOx 2020 VOC Tons/Day 378 323 271 250 Tons/Day 60 50 40 30 20 10

0 25 54 3332 27 20 15 Tons/Day 10 5 0 21 19 16 15 2002 2020 2002 2020 SOx PM2.5 2003 AQMP 2007 AQMP * FIGURE 3-1B Comparison of Off-Road Emissions Between EMFAC2002 (2003 AQMP) and EMFAC2007 Working Draft (Draft 2007 AQMP) 2003 AQMP and Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP (VOC & NOx ? Summer Planning; SOx & PM2.5 ? Annual Average Inventory) * Year 2020 inventories incorporate rules adopted since the release of EMFAC2002

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP BASE YEAR EMISSIONS 2002 Emission Inventory Tables 3-1A and 3-1B shows the 2002 emissions inventory by major source category. Table 3-1A shows annual average emissions, while Table 3-1B shows the planning inventories for summer and winter.

Overall, total mobile source emissions account for 69 64 percent of the VOC and 92 91 percent of the NOx emissions for these two ozone-forming pollutants, based on the annual average inventory. The on-road mobile category alone contributes about 47 43 and 58 57 percent of the VOC and NOx emissions, respectively, and approximately 77 76 percent of the CO for the annual average inventory.

Figure 3-2 characterizes relative contributions by stationary and mobile source categories. Stationary sources are subdivided into point (e.g., chemical manufacturing, petroleum production, and electric utilities) and area sources (e.g., architectural coatings, residential water heaters, and consumer products). Mobile sources consist of on-road (e.g., light-duty passenger cars) and off-road sources (e.g., trains and ships). Entrained road dust is also included in Figure 3-2.

On- and off-road sources continue to be the major contributors for each of the 5 pollutants, as seen in Figure 3-2. For example, mobile sources represent 69 64 percent of VOC emissions, 92 percent of NOx emissions, and 98 percent of CO emissions. For directly emitted PM2.5, mobile sources represent 41 39 percent of the emissions with another 20 percent due to vehicle-related entrained road dust.

Within the category of stationary sources, point sources contribute more SOx emissions than area sources. Area sources play a major role in VOC emissions, emitting about five times more than point sources. Area sources are the predominant source (30 32 percent) of directly emitted PM2.5 emissions, including sources such as cooking.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3-1A Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2002 Base Year Average Annual Day (tons/day1) Source Category VOC NOx CO SOx PM2.5 Stationary Sources Fuel Combustion 7 35 52 2 6 Waste Disposal 7 2 1 0 0 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 54 0 0 0 1 Petroleum Production and Marketing 35 0 9 7 1 Industrial Processes 21 0 2 0 5 Solvent Evaporation Consumer Products 110 0 0 0 0 Architectural Coatings 49 0 0 0 0 Others 3 0 0 0 0 Misc. Processes * 16 27 62 0 47 RECLAIM Sources 0 29 0 12 0 Total Stationary Sources 302 93 126 22 60 Mobile Sources On-Road Vehicles 362 628 3677 4 18 Off-Road Vehicles 180 372 1016 27 21 Total Mobile Sources 542 1000 4693 31 39 TOTAL 844 1093 4819 53 99 TABLE 3-1B Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2002 Base Year Planning Inventory** (tons/day1) SUMMER WINTER OZONE PRECURSORS INVENTORY Source Category VOC NOx NOx CO Stationary Sources Fuel Combustion 7 36 35 54 Waste Disposal 8 2 2 1 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 60 0 0 0 Petroleum Production and Marketing 35 1 1 9 Industrial Processes 22 0 0 2 Solvent Evaporation Consumer Products 110 0 0 0 Architectural Coatings 57 0 0 0 Others 4 0 0 0 Misc. Processes 14 21 33 102 RECLAIM SOURCES 0 29 29 0 Total Stationary Sources 317 89 100 168 Mobile Sources On-Road Vehicles 360 611 680 3630 Off-Road Vehicles 220 378 367 844 Total Mobile Sources 580 989 1047 4474 TOTAL 897 1078 1147 4642 * Travel-related road dust included. **Planning inventories are not used for PM2.5 analysis. 1 Values are rounded to nearest integer.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP 6% 35% 24%

30% 4% 57% 4% 40% VOC Emissions: 897 Tons/Day NOx Emissions: 1,079 Tons/Day

Note: Consumer products and architectural coatings under the area source category represent 110 and 57 tons per day of VOC emissions, respectively.

21% 77% 1% 1% CO Emissions: 4,819 Tons/Day 9% 38% 32% 21% 51% 18% 3% 8% 20% Directly Emitted PM2.5 Emissions: SOx Emissions: 53 Tons/Day 99 Tons/Day

On-Road Off-Road Point FIGURE 3-2 Area Entrained Road Dust

Relative Contribution by Source Category to 2002 Emission Inventory (VOC & NOx ? Summer Planning; CO, SOx & PM2.5 ? Annual Average Inventory)

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP In the mobile source category, emissions from on-road vehicles are much higher than those from off-road sources for all criteria pollutants except SOx and PM2.5. This can be explained by the fact that the sulfur content in fuels used for off-road vehicles is relatively higher than those for on-road vehicles, and commercial/industrial off-road equipment generates high levels of PM2.5.

FUTURE EMISSIONS Data Development The milestone years 2002, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2014, 2017, 2020, 2023, and 2030 are the target years for emissions rate-of-progress estimates under the federal Clean Air Act and the state Clean Air Act. Future emissions are divided into RECLAIM and non-RECLAIM emissions. Future NOx and SOx emissions from RECLAIM sources are estimated based on their allocations as specified by AQMD Rule 2002 ?Allocations for NOx and SOx. The forecasts for non-RECLAIM emissions were derived using: 1) emissions from the 2002 base year; 2) expected controls after implementation of District rules adopted by June 30, 2006, and most CARB rules adopted as of June 2005; and 3) emissions growth in various source categories between the base and future years. AQMD rules adopted after June 30, 2006 are treated as baseline adjustments for emissions reduction accounting purposes., while some CARB rules adopted prior to June 30, 2006 are not yet incorporated into the draft EMFAC2007 Working Draft or the inventories. A detailed description of the forecasting methodology is provided in Appendix III. For the Final 2007 AQMP, 1.29 tons per day of NOx and 21.7 tons per day of CO will be added to the year 2002 inventory to reflect increased emissions for stationary, non-agricultural engines subject to Rule 1110.2. Other future year inventories will be adjusted, as well.

Demographic growth forecasts for various socioeconomic categories (e.g., population, housing, employment by industry), developed by SCAG for their interim 2007 RTP, were used in the modified 2004 RTP to estimate future emissions. Industry growth factors for 2002, 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020, 2025, and 2030 were provided by SCAG. Growth factors for other interim years were interpolated between key forecast years. Table 3-2 summarizes key socioeconomic parameters used in the Draft 2007 AQMPProposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP for emissions inventory development.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3-2 Baseline Demographic Forecasts in the Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP Category 2002 2020 (% Growth) 2030 (% Growth) Population 15.1 18.4 22% 19.6 30% (Millions) Housing Units 4.8 5.9 23% 6.4 33% (Millions) Total Employment 6.8 8.2 21% 9.0 32% (Millions) Daily VMT 349 414 19% 453 30% (Millions) ______________________________________________________________________________________ Current forecasts indicate that this region will experience a population growth of 22 percent by the year 2020 with a 17 19 percent increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT).

As compared to the projection from the 2003 AQMP, the current projection for the year 2020 shows about a 200,000 (1%) increase in population, 300,000 (3.5%) decrease in total employment and 47.7 40.7 million mile (10 9%) decrease in the daily VMT forecast. The decrease in VMT forecast is primarily due to the redistribution of VMT to the eastern portion of the region outside of the SCAB.

CARB staff revised assumptions related to pending vehicle registrations, which affects emissions as well. EMFAC2007 includes an assumption that 25 percent of these vehicles are on the road, rather than the 100 percent estimate used in the EMFAC2007 Working Draft.

Comparing EMFAC2007 VMT to projections from SCAG shows a significant ?blip? or increase in VMT between 2002 and 2005, although 2010 VMT decreases and projections for 2010 and beyond are very close between EMFAC2007 and SCAG estimates. The District staff retained two technical experts in the area of transportation analysis to review the VMT estimates for 2005. The consultants reviewed CARB's assumptions and, to the extent possible, some of the DMV and BAR data used to produce the 2005 VMT estimates. They concluded that there is no independent evidence to support a decline in VMT between 2005 and 2010, and recommended conducting a sensitivity analysis in the near term, to determine the magnitude of the differences. Detailed discussions on the VMT sensitivity analysis is contained in Appendix-V of the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP. Based on the analysis, the District staff recommends that for purposes of attainment demonstration VMT estimates provided by SCAG be used instead of EMFAC2007.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Summary of Baseline Emissions Emission data by source categories (point, area, on-road mobile and off-road mobile sources) and by pollutants are presented in Tables 3-3 through 3-5 for the years 2014, 2020, and 2023. The tables provide annual average, and summer and winter planning inventories.

Without any additional controls, VOC, NOx, and CO emissions are expected to decrease due to existing regulations, such as controls on off-road equipment, new vehicle standards, and the RECLAIM program. Figure 3-3 illustrates the relative contribution to the 2020 inventory by source category. A comparison between Figures 3-2 and 3-3 indicates that the on-road mobile category continues to be a major contributor to CO and NOx emissions. However, due to the adopted regulations, by 2020 on-road mobile accounts for about 25 21 percent of total VOC emissions compared to 44 40 percent in 2002. Meanwhile, area sources become the major contributor to VOC emissions from 26 30 percent in 2002 to 39 43 percent in 2020. See Figures 3-7 through 3-18 for the top ten ranking by source category for 2002, 2014, and 2020.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3-3A Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2014 Base Year Average Annual Day (tons/day1) Source Category VOC NOx CO SOx PM2.5 Stationary Sources Fuel Combustion 7 24 51 3 6 Waste Disposal 8 2 1 0 1 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 41 0 0 0 1 Petroleum Production and Marketing 32 0 8 1 1 Industrial Processes 21 0 3 0 5 Solvent Evaporation Consumer Products 107 0 0 0 0 Architectural Coatings 24 0 0 0 0 Others 3 0 0 0 0 Misc. Processes* 14 23 115 0 55 RECLAIM Sources 0 27 0 12 0 Total Stationary Sources 257 76 178 16 69 Mobile Sources On-Road Vehicles 144 292 1393 2 17 Off-Road Vehicles 127 285 1006 24 16 Total Mobile Sources 271 577 2399 26 33 TOTAL 528 653 2577 42 102 TABLE 3-3B Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2014 Base Year Planning Inventory** (tons/day1) SUMMER WINTER OZONE PRECURSORS INVENTORY Source Category VOC NOx NOx CO Stationary Sources Fuel Combustion 7 25 24 53 Waste Disposal 8 2 2 1 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 45 0 0 0 Petroleum Production and Marketing 33 0 0 8 Industrial Processes 23 0 1 3 Solvent Evaporation Consumer Products 107 0 0 0 Architectural Coatings 29 0 0 0 Others 3 0 0 0 Misc. Processes 9 17 32 220 RECLAIM Sources 0 27 27 0 Total Stationary Sources 264 71 86 285 Mobile Sources On-Road Vehicles 148 287 312 1373 Off-Road Vehicles 157 292 278 839 Total Mobile Sources 305 579 590 2212 TOTAL 569 650 676 2497 * Travel-related road dust included. **Planning inventories are not used for PM2.5 analysis. 1 Values are rounded to nearest integer.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3-4A Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2020 Base Year Average Annual Day (tons/day1) Source Category VOC NOx CO SOx PM2.5 Stationary Sources Fuel Combustion 7 22 53 3 6 Waste Disposal 8 2 1 0 0 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 43 0 0 0 1 Petroleum Production and Marketing 34 0 8 1 1 Industrial Processes 23 1 3 0 6 Solvent Evaporation Consumer Products 112 0 0 0 0 Architectural Coatings 26 0 0 0 0 Others 3 0 0 0 0 Misc. Processes* 14 22 119 0 58 RECLAIM Sources 0 27 0 12 0 Total Stationary Sources 270 74 184 16 72 Mobile Sources On-Road Vehicles 110 187 973 2 16 Off-Road Vehicles 119 264 1071 32 15 Total Mobile Sources 229 451 2044 34 31 TOTAL 499 525 2228 50 108 TABLE 3-4B Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2020 Base Year Planning Inventory** (tons/day1) SUMMER WINTER OZONE PRECURSORS INVENTORY Source Category VOC NOx NOx CO Stationary Sources Fuel Combustion 7 24 23 55 Waste Disposal 8 2 2 1 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 49 0 0 0 Petroleum Production and Marketing 34 0 0 8 Industrial Processes 25 0 0 4 Solvent Evaporation Consumer Products 112 0 0 0 Architectural Coatings 30 0 0 0 Others 3 0 0 0 Misc. Processes 9 15 32 226 RECLAIM Sources 0 27 27 0 Total Stationary Sources 277 68 84 294 Mobile Sources On-Road Vehicles 114 184 199 958 Off-Road Vehicles 147 272 257 895 Total Mobile Sources 261 456 456 1853 TOTAL 538 524 540 2147 * Travel-related road dust included. **Planning inventories are not used for PM2.5 analysis. 1 Values are rounded to nearest integer.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3-5A Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2023 Base Year Average Annual Day (tons/day1) Source Category VOC NOx CO SOx PM2.5 Stationary Sources Fuel Combustion 7 22 54 3 6 Waste Disposal 9 2 1 0 0 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 45 0 0 0 1 Petroleum Production and Marketing 35 0 8 1 1 Industrial Processes 24 0 3 0 6 Solvent Evaporation Consumer Products 114 0 0 0 0 Architectural 26 0 0 0 0 Others 2 0 0 0 0 Misc. Processes* 14 23 120 1 59 RECLAIM Sources 0 27 0 12 0 Total Stationary Sources 276 74 186 17 73 Mobile Sources On-Road Vehicles 99 164 838 2 16 Off-Road Vehicles 120 268 1119 36 16 Total Mobile Sources 219 432 1957 38 32 TOTAL 495 506 2143 55 105 TABLE 3-5B Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2023 Base Year Planning Inventory** (tons/day1) SUMMER WINTER OZONE PRECURSORS INVENTORY Source Category VOC NOx NOx CO Stationary Sources Fuel Combustion 7 24 23 55 Waste Disposal 9 2 2 1 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 50 0 0 0 Petroleum Production and Marketing 35 0 0 8 Industrial Processes 26 0 1 4 Solvent Evaporation Consumer Products 114 0 0 0 Architectural 31 0 0 0 Others 3 0 0 0 Misc. Processes 9 16 32 229 RECLAIM Sources 0 27 27 0 Total Stationary Sources 285 69 85 297 Mobile Sources On-Road Vehicles 103 161 174 824 Off-Road Vehicles 148 275 261 936 Total Mobile Sources 251 436 435 1760 TOTAL 536 505 520 2057 * Travel-related road dust included. **Planning inventories are not used for PM2.5 analysis. 1 Values are rounded to nearest integer.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP 55% 9% 44% 7% 28% 6% 19% 32% VOC Emissions: 536 Tons/Day NOx Emissions: 506 Tons/Day

Note: Consumer products and architectural coatings under the area source category represent 114 and 31 tons per day of VOC emissions, respectively.

52% 3% 6% 39% CO Emissions: 2,143 Tons/Day 9% 41%

25% 15% 66% 15% 5% 20% 4% Directly Emitted PM2.5 Emissions: SOx Emissions: 55 Tons/Day 105 Tons/Day

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Impact of Growth To illustrate the impact of growth, year 2020 no-growth emissions were estimated by removing the growth factors from the 2020 baseline emissions. Figure 3-4 presents the comparison of the 2020 projected emissions with and without growth. It should be noted that in this analysis the benefit of New Source Review is not included. As shown in this figure, projected growth will offset significant progress made in VOC and NOx reductions through adopted regulations. PM2.5 represents directly emitted emissions. As shown in Table 3-2, the growth from year 2002 to 2020 is significant and presents a formidable challenge to our air quality improvement efforts. We are expecting 22% growth in population; 23% growth in housing units; 21% growth in employment; and 19% growth in vehicle miles traveled. The projected growth will offset the impressive progress made in reducing VOC and NOx emissions through adopted regulations. To overcome such challenges and meet EPA's more stringent standards necessitates continuing aggressive clean-up efforts from all air quality agencies.

600 500 400 300 200 100 0 538 524 422 386 223 174 103 50 36

84 VOC - G VOC - NG NOx - G NOx - NG **CO - G **CO - NG SOx - G SOx - NG PM2.5 - G PM2.5 -NG Point Area Road Dust Off-Road On-Road * G = Emissions with growth; NG = Emissions without growth ** CO emissions are divided by 10 FIGURE 3-4 2020 Emissions Forecast With and Without Growth (VOC & NOx ? Summer Planning; CO, SOx & PM2.5 ? Annual Average Inventory)

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Locomotive Emissions To illustrate the impact of growth on future emissions, the following information on locomotive emissions is provided. As part of the emissions inventory development, all adopted regulatory actions affecting future emissions limits are built into the baseline emissions inventory estimates. Relative to locomotive emissions, emission reductions associated with the current federal emissions standards, fuel standards, and the state MOU with the two major locomotive operators have been incorporated into the future projected baseline emissions inventory out to 2020 2030. In addition, projected future economic growth has been incorporated into the baseline inventories.

Recently, the U.S. EPA provided preliminary estimates of locomotive emissions of NOx and PM projected out to the year 2040. Figures 3-5 and 3-6 provide the emission projections from the various types of locomotives operating in the future. As older, uncontrolled locomotives (depicted in the figures as Uncontrolled and Tier 0 fleets) are turned over to newer, lower emission locomotives (depicted as Tier 1 and Tier 2 fleets, it is anticipated that the locomotive fleet will be cleaner in the future. However, with the economic growth projected out to 2040, locomotive emissions are projected to decrease at a much slower rate. Eventually, the emissions begin to increase if no further controls are placed on the new locomotives.

NOx (tpd) 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2002 2024 2020 2030 2014 2008

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP PM2.5 (tpd) 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 2002

2026 2022 2030 2020 2018 2028 2024 2016 2014 2012 2010 2008 2004 2006 Year FIGURE 3-5B Locomotive PM2.5 Baseline Emissions Trend

The 1998 California MOUs with the locomotive industry would seek greater penetration of require that the railroads meet a fleetwide Tier 2 locomotives emission standard on average to operate in the South Coast Air Basin. As shown in Figures 3-5 and 3-6, the South Coast would show a somewhat greater benefit in having cleaner engines earlier. In addition, the use of lower sulfur diesel fuel is expected to have a measurable benefit in NOx and PM emission reductions beginning in 2010. However, after 2012 there is a steady increase in emissions due to future growth projected for the rail industry. This growth is expected to overtake the benefits of the cleaner Tier 2 locomotives and low sulfur fuel standards. There is also significant uncertainty that the MOU will deliver the promised emission reductions.However, the emissions trend would be similar relative to future growth. As such, the anticipated growth will overtake the benefits of the cleaner Tier 2 locomotives. This AQMP seeks to provide the cleanest technologically feasible locomotives to accelerate emission reductions as early as possible.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP 3-6A and 3-6B show draft EPA model results for locomotives from 2006 to 2040 for NOx and PM, respectively. The national emission trends shown in these figures are similar to those for the South Coast Air Basin; that the anticipated growth will overtake the benefits of the cleaner Tier 2 locomotives.

FIGURE 3-6A Projected Nationwide NOx Emissions from Locomotives

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Source: U.S. EPA, Presentation at the Second Public Meeting to Discuss Future Locomotive Emissions Control Factors, CARB (July 13, 2006).

FIGURE 3-6B Projected Nationwide Particulate Matter Emissions from Locomotives TOP TEN SOURCE CATEGORIES (2002, 2014, 2020 2023) This portion of Chapter 3 provides the ranking of the top 10 contributors to the inventory for the years 2002, 2014, and 2020 2023. The annual average inventory for VOC, NOx, SOx and PM2.5 are shown in the following figures. VOC and NOx inventories are usually presented with a planning inventory, but the ranking would not change between planning and annual average. The categorization can be done several ways. These categories are fairly broad, intended for illustration purposes.

Table 3-6 lists the top 10 categories for each of the three years for VOCs. The top five categories in each year are fairly consistent, although the ranking changes slightly for some categories. Fuel storage ? gasoline cans is on the top 10 list only for 2002. Mobile source categories and consumer products are responsible for a large portion of the emissions; the top 10 categories account for 68 82 percent of the total VOC inventory in 2002.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3?6 Top Ten Ranking for VOC Emissions (2002, 2014, 2020 2023), from Highest to Lowest 2002* 2014* 2023* 1 Light-Duty Passenger Cars Consumer Products Consumer Products 2 Consumer Products Off-Road Equipment Off-Road Equipment 3 Off-Road Equipment Light-Duty Passenger Cars Recreational Boats 4 Light-Duty Trucks Light-Duty Trucks Light-Duty Trucks 5 Architectural Coatings Recreational Boats Petroleum Marketing 6 Recreational Boats Petroleum Marketing Light Duty Passenger Cars 7 Heavy-Duty Gasoline Trucks Architectural Coatings Architectural Coatings 8 Medium-Duty Trucks Coatings & Related Processes Coatings & Related Processes 9 Petroleum Marketing Medium-Duty Trucks Aircraft 10 Coatings & Related Processes Heavy-Duty Gasoline Trucks Medium-Duty Trucks * Refer to Figures 3-7 to 3-18 for the annual average emissions totals.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP VOC Annual Average Emissions-2002 tpd 200 150 100 50 0 178

110 99 91 49 44 28 2535 31 Heavy-Duty Gasoline Trucks Off-Road Equipment

Light-Duty Trucks Architectural Coatings Medium-Duty Trucks Light-Duty Passenger Cars

Consumer Products Coatings & Related Processes Recreational Boats

Petroleum Marketing FIGURE 3-7 Top Ten Categories for VOC 2002

VOC Annual Average Emissions-2014 tpd 200 150 100 50 0 107 61 50 41

28 24 22 17 13 35 Light-Duty Trucks

Heavy-Duty Gasoline Trucks Medium-Duty Trucks Architectural Coatings Petroleum Marketing Off-Road Equipment

Recreational Boats Consumer Products Light-Duty Passenger Cars

Coatings & Related Processes FIGURE 3-8 Top Ten Categories for VOC 2014

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP VOC Annual Average Emissions-2023 tpd 200 150 100 50 0

114 50 31 31 29 27 24 13 13 35 Aircra f t

Medium-Duty Trucks Architectural Coatings Petroleum Marketing Off-Road Equipment

Recreational Boats Light-Duty Passenger Trucks Consumer Products

Light-Duty Passenger Cars Coating & Related Processes FIGURE 3-9 Top Ten Categories for VOC 2020 2023

Table 3-7 shows the top 10 categories for each of the three years for NOx. As with their predominant contribution to VOC emissions, mobile source categories are the predominant contributor to NOx emissions. For NOx, RECLAIM and residential fuel combustion are the stationary and area source categories that are in the top 10 list. The top 10 categories account for 92 91 percent of the total NOx inventory in 2002.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3-7 Top Ten Ranking for NOx Emissions (2002, 2014, 2020 2023), from Highest to Lowest 2002* 2014* 2023* 1 Off-Road Equipment Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks Ships & Commercial Boats 2 Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks Off-Road Equipment Off-Road Equipment 3 Light-Duty Passenger Cars Ships & Commercial Boats Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks 4 Light-Duty Trucks Light-Duty Trucks Aircraft 5 Ships & Commercial Boats Light-Duty Passenger Cars Trains 6 Medium-Duty Trucks RECLAIM RECLAIM 7 Heavy-Duty Gasoline Trucks Heavy-Duty Gasoline Trucks Light-Duty Trucks 8 Trains ** Trains ** Residential Fuel Combustion 9 RECLAIM Residential Fuel Combustion Light-Duty Passenger Cars 10 Residential Fuel Combustion Aircraft Heavy-Duty Gasoline Trucks * Refer to Figures 3-7 to 3-18 for the annual average emissions totals. ** This assumes that the CARB railroad MOU is fully effective. It is likely that this may not occur because there are broadly worded exemptions in the MOU that could result in less emission reductions. However, if AQMD Rules 3501 - Recordkeeping for Locomotive Idling and 3502 - Minimization of Emissions from Locomotive Idling are implemented, more certainty in achieving emission reductions will occur. In the next several months, AQMD staff will work with CARB staff to quantify additional reductions from Rules 3501 and 3502, for incorporation into emission baselines. AQMD staff intends to submit these rules into the State Implementation Plan (SIP).

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP NOx Annual Average Emissions-2002 tpd 250 242 200 150 100 50 0

148 127 64 52 48 38 228 29 27 RECLAIM Light-Duty Trucks

Heavy-Duty Gasoline Trucks Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks Medium-Duty Trucks

Trains Off-Road Equipment Light-Duty Passenger Cars Ships & Commercial Boats

Residential Fuel Combustion FIGURE 3-10 Top Ten Categories for NOx 2002

NOx Annual Average Emissions-2014 tpd 250 200 150 100 50 0 145 137 87

43 37 24 23 22 2227 Aircraft RECLAIM Light-Duty Trucks Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks

Heavy-Duty Gasoline Trucks Trains Off-Road Equipment Light-Duty Passenger Cars Ships & Commercial Boats

Residential Fuel Combustion FIGURE 3-11 Top Ten Categories for NOx 2014

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP NOx Annual Average Emissions-2023 tpd 250 200 150 100 50 0

116 23 21 17 17 81 78

29 28 27 Aircraft RECLAIM Light-Duty Trucks Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks

Heavy-Duty Gasoline Trucks Trains Off-Road Equipment Light-Duty Passenger Cars Ships & Commercial Boats

Residential Fuel Combustion FIGURE 3-12 Top Ten Categories for NOx 2020 2023

Table 3-8 shows the top 10 categories for each of the three years for SOx. Ship emissions are a more significant contributor for SOx than for the other three pollutants in this section. RECLAIM is consistently in the top threesecond by ranking. Ships and commercial boats increase emissions significantly between 2002 and 2020are consistently the highest emitting source category. The top ten categories represent 94 95 percent of the total SOx inventory in 2002.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3-8 Top Ten Ranking for SOx Emissions (2002, 2014, 2020 2023), from Highest to Lowest 2002* 2014* 2023* 1 Ships & Commercial Boats Ships & Commercial Boats Ships & Commercial Boats 2 RECLAIM RECLAIM RECLAIM 3 Petroleum Refineries (non- RECLAIM) Aircraft Aircraft 4 Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks Manufacturing & Industrial Combustion Manufacturing & Industrial Combustion 5 Aircraft Light-Duty Passenger Cars Light-Duty Passenger Cars 6 Trains ** Light-Duty Trucks Light-Duty Trucks 7 Off-Road Equipment Service & Commercial Combustion Service & Commercial Combustion 8 Light-Duty Passenger Cars Petroleum Refineries (non- RECLAIM) Petroleum Refineries (non- RECLAIM) 9 Manufacturing & Industrial Combustion Waste Burning & Disposal Waste Burning & Disposal 10 Light-Duty Trucks Residential Fuel Combustion Residential Fuel Combustion * Refer to Figures 3-7 to 3-18 for the annual average emissions totals. ** This assumes that the CARB railroad MOU is fully effective. It is likely that this may not occur because there are broadly worded exemptions in the MOU that could result in less emission reductions. However, if AQMD Rules 3501 - Recordkeeping for Locomotive Idling and 3502 - Minimization of Emissions from Locomotive Idling are implemented, more certainty in achieving emission reductions will occur. In the next several months, AQMD staff will work with CARB staff to quantify additional reductions from Rules 3501 and 3502, for incorporation into emission baselines. AQMD staff intends to submit these rules into the State Implementation Plan (SIP).

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP SOx Annual Average Emissions-2002 tpd 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 23

111111 12 7 2 Aircraft RECLAIM Light-Duty Trucks Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks

Trains Off-Road Equipment Petroleum Refineries Light-Duty Passenger Cars

Manufacturing & Industrial Combustion Ships & Commercial Boats FIGURE 3-13 Top Ten Categories for SOx 2002

SOx Annual Average Emissions-2014 tpd 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 22

12 2 Aircraft RECLAIM Light-Duty Trucks Petroleum Refineries Light-Duty Passenger Cars

Waste Burning & Disposal Manufacturing & Industrial Combustion

Service & Commercial Combustion Ships & Commercial Boats Residential Fuel Combustion FIGURE 3-14 Top Ten Categories for SOx 2014

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP SOx Annual Average Emissions-2023 tpd 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 33

12 32 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 Aircraft RECLAIM

Light-Duty Trucks Petroleum Refineries Light-Duty Passenger Cars

Waste Burning & Disposal Ships & Commercial Boats Manufacturing & Industrial Combustion

Service & Commercial Combustion Residential Fuel Combustion FIGURE 3-15 Top Ten Categories for SOx 2020 2023

Table 3-9 shows the top 10 categories for each of the three years for directly emitted PM2.5. In contrast to the rankings for the other three pollutants in this section of the chapter, paved road dust and cooking are consistently at the top of the ranking for PM2.5 emissions. Each of these categories increases over time. The top ten categories represent 80 percent of the total directly emitted PM2.5 inventory in 2002, however, total directly emitted PM2.5 only accounts for about 25 percent of all ambient PM2.5.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3-9 Top Ten Ranking for Directly Emitted PM2.5 Emissions (2002, 2014, 2020 2023), from Highest to Lowest 2002* 2014* 2023* 1 Paved Road Dust Paved Road Dust Paved Road Dust 2 Commercial Cooking Commercial Cooking Commercial Cooking 3 Off-Road Equipment Residential Fuel Combustion Residential Fuel Combustion 4 Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks Off-Road Equipment Construction & Demolition Dust 5 Residential Fuel Combustion Construction & Demolition Dust Ships and Commercial Boats 6 Ships & Commercial Boats Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks Light-Duty Trucks 7 Light-Duty Passenger Cars Waste Burning & Disposal Light-Duty Passenger Cars 8 Construction & Demolition Dust Light-Duty Trucks Waste Burning & Disposal 9 Light-Duty Trucks Light-Duty Passenger Cars Recreational Boats 10 Wood & Paper Ships & Commercial Boats Off-Road Equipment * Refer to Figures 3-7 through 3-18 for the annual average emissions totals.

Directly Emitted PM2.5 Annual Average Emissions-2002 tpd 25 20 15 10 5 0 19

9 444 2 13 13 8 3 Light-Duty Trucks Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks

Wood & Paper Paved Road Dust Off-Road Equipment Commercial Cooking

Light-Duty Passenger Cars Construction & Demolition Dust Ships & Commercial Boats Residential Fuel Combustion FIGURE 3-16 Top Ten Categories for PM2.5 2002

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Directly Emitted PM2.5 Annual Average Emissions-2014 tpd 25 20 15 10 5 0 19

15 9 7 66 5 444 Light-Duty Trucks Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks Paved Road Dust

Off-Road Equipment Commercial Cooking Light-Duty Passenger Cars Waste Burning & Disposal Construction & Demolition Dust

Ships & Commercial Boats Residential Fuel Combustion FIGURE 3-17 Top Ten Categories for PM2.5 2014 Directly Emitted PM2.5 Annual Average Emissions-2023 tpd 25 20 15 10 5 0 20 16

9 7 6 5555 3 Light-Duty Trucks Paved Road Dust Off-Road Equipment Recreational Boats Commercial Cooking

Light-Duty Passenger Cars Waste Burning & Disposal Construction & Demolition Dust

Ships & Commercial Boats Residential Fuel Combustion FIGURE 3-18 Top Ten Categories for PM2.5 2020 2023

MODIFICATIONS TO CHAPTER 4 Revisions to this chapter are presented in the following pages in underline and strike-out format. The revised attainment strategy reflects the most recent updates to the emissions inventory (primarily mobile source inventory) and the modeling analyses since the release of the draft AQMP. A brief summary of the major modifications to the overall control strategy for the PM2.5 and ozone attainment are provided here: 1. District's Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures - The following major revisions are made to the District's proposed stationary source control measures: A) EGM-01, Emission Reductions from New or Redevelopment Projects Significant revisions were made to reflect a new conceptual approach for mitigating emission growth from new or redevelopment projects based upon input received from a working group of stakeholders. Details were added on the implementation of the new approach, implementation issues to be considered, and future steps to be taken during the rule development process. For purposes of illustrating the potential emissions inventory, a table showing emission sources that could be affected by the measure was added to the Emission Reduction Section. The emissions inventory in the Control Measure Summary was subsequently updated to reflect the 2007 data.

MOB-06 AB923 Medium-Duty Vehicle High-Emitter Identification Program [NOx, VOC] MOB-07 Concurrent Reductions from Global Warming Strategies [All Pollutants] 2. PM2.5 Attainment Strategy ? The Draft 2007 AQMP control strategy for sources under state and federal jurisdiction included CARB's proposed concepts as well as the District's recommended state and federal control measures. However, the attainment demonstrations relied on the reductions estimated for the District's recommended control measures since the CARB's concepts were not adequately defined yet.

The revised control strategy now incorporates the CARB's draft Proposed State Strategy for California's 2007 State Implementation Plan, which was released in January 2007. The proposed strategy includes a number of specific near-term control measures for mobile sources and consumer products. However, since the proposed measures will not achieve the necessary level of emission reductions needed for PM2.5 attainment by 2014, the District staff is proposing several policy options including additional complementary mobile source control measures for achieving the balance of reductions. Therefore, the revised state and federal control strategy now includes CARB's proposed draft state strategy with the corresponding emission reduction estimates plus three policy options. The new Appendix IV-B-1 and Appendix IV-B-2 provide descriptions of the CARB's proposed State strategy and the District staff's proposed policy options with additional control measures, respectively.

3. Ozone Attainment Strategy (Long-Term Measures) ? The revised long-term control strategy incorporates the latest revisions to the mobile source emissions inventory (since the release of draft AQMP) and air quality modeling which indicates that a NOx-heavy control approach with supplemental VOC reductions would provide the most effective ozone attainment strategy. Because of the new ozone attainment strategy, the long-term VOC control measures proposed in the draft AQMP have been removed or addressed under short-term measures (i.e., LTM-01, Reactivity-Based Controls; LTM-03, Long- Term Control Measure for Fugitive Emissions; and LTM-05, Further VOC Reductions from Mobile Sources).

activities for greenhouse gas (GHG) strategies and uncertainties about the types of strategies as well as the global trading provision now allowed under the State program. The District staff will work with CARB to quantify any concurrent criteria pollutant emission reductions from GHG strategies in the future and incorporate these reductions in the revised baseline emissions as part of the SIP revision process.

The revised long-term control strategy now incorporates three new long-term measures focusing on achieving additional long-term reductions from on-road and off-road mobile sources and consumer products for ozone attainment.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP INTRODUCTION The overall control strategy in the AQMP provides a path to achieving emission reductions and air quality goals. Implementation of the 2007 AQMP will be based on a series of control measures and strategies that vary by source type (i.e., stationary or mobile) as well as by the pollutant that is being targeted. Although great strides have been made in air pollution control technologies and emission reduction programs, air quality goals cannot be achieved without significant further emission reductions.

This chapter presents the control measures for the proposed modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP and associated emission reductions, where currently quantifiable. For additional information and details on control measures, please refer to Appendix IV-A: District's Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures; Appendix IV-B-1 Air Resources Board's Proposed State Strategy for California's 2007 State Implementation Plan; : Appendix IV-B-2: District Staff's Proposed Policy Options to Supplement CARB's Control Strategy Staff's Recommended State and Federal Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures; and Appendix IV-C: Regional Transportation Strategy and Control Measures. For additional information regarding baseline emission projections and air quality modeling, please refer to AQMP Chapter 3 and Appendix III as well as AQMP Chapter 5 and Appendix VChapter V, respectively.

OVERALL ATTAINMENT STRATEGY The overall control strategy for this draft Plan is designed to meet applicable federal and state requirements, including attainment of ambient air quality standards. The focus of the Plan is to demonstrate attainment of the federal PM2.5 ambient air quality standard by 2015 and the federal 8-hour ozone standard by 2024 2021 while making expeditious progress toward attainment of state standards. The proposed strategy, however, does not attain the previous federal 1-hour ozone standard by 2010 as previously required prior to the recent change in federal regulations.

As demonstrated herein, a ?bump-up? request is being will likely be made to the U.S. EPA for the South Coast Air Basin to be designated as an ?extreme? non-attainment area with a possible extended attainment date of 2024 for ozone as well as for Coachella Valley to be designated as ?severe-15? with an extended attainment date of 2018. The proposed modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP relies upon the most recent planning assumptions and the best available information such as CARB's latest EMFAC working draft for the on-road mobile source emissions inventory, CARB's off-road model for the off-road mobile source emission inventory, the latest

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP point source and improved area source inventories as well as the use of new episodes and air quality modeling analysis, and SCAG's forecast assumptions based on its modified 2004 Regional Transportation Plan.

The proposed control measures in the proposed modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP are based on implementation of all feasible control measures through the application of available technologies and management practices as well as development and implementation of advanced technologies and control methods. These measures rely on proposed actions to be taken by several agencies that currently have the statutory authority to implement such measures. Similar to the 2003 AQMP approach, the SIP commitment is to bring each control measure for regulatory consideration in a specified time frame. Each agency is also committed to achieve a total emission reduction target with the ability to substitute for control measures deemed infeasible, so long as equivalent reductions are met by other means. These measures are also designed to satisfy the federal Clean Air Act requirement of Rreasonably Aavailable Ccontrol Ttechnologies [Section 172(c)], and the California Clean Air Act requirement of Best Available Retrofit Control Technologies (BARCT) [Health and Safety Code Section 40919, Subsection C].

To ultimately achieve the PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone ambient air quality standards and demonstrate attainment, significant additional short- and mid-term as well as long- term emissions reductions will be necessary from sources including those primarily under the jurisdiction of CARB (e.g., on-road motor vehicles, off-road equipment, and consumer products) and U.S. EPA (e.g., aircraft, ships, trains, and pre-empted off-road equipment). Without an adequate and fair-share level of reductions from all sources, the emissions reduction burden would unfairly be shifted to sources that have already been doing their part for clean air. Moreover, the District will continue to use its available regulatory authority to further control mobile source emissions where federal or State action does not meet regional needs.

Designing the Overall Strategy To develop the Draft Plan's required control strategy for meeting state and federal requirements, an iterative process of technology/strategy review and ambient air quality modeling is utilized. Specifically, a remaining emissions target is initially defined utilizing air quality modeling that will achieve the ambient air quality standards based on reductions from all sources. Control measures based on technological advancements are then evaluated to determine their effectiveness in meeting this remaining emissions target. Further modeling analyses are conducted using the actual emissions reductions achieved based on the technology forecast. Ultimately an overall emissions target (i.e., carrying capacity) is determined that

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP achieves the ambient proposed.

Figure 4-1 illustrates No air quality standards and for which controls have been

this iterative process used to define the proposed control Control Strategy Development Future Air Quality Projection PM2.5 Attainment Yes 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Yes

Propose, Finalize, and Implement Control Strategy FIGURE 4-1 Iterative Process to Define Emission Reduction Scenario The proposed modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP relyies on a comprehensive and integrated control approach aimed at achieving the PM2.5 standard by 2015 first through implementation of short-term and mid-term control measures and achieving the 8-hour ozone standard by 2021/2024 based on implementation of additional long- term measures. The PM2.5 control strategy is designed to provide expeditious progress toward the 8-hour ozone attainment in conjunction with additional long- term reductions needed for full attainment. The District's air quality modeling analysis and carrying capacity determination outlined in Chapter 5 and later in Appendix V provide the basis for designing the attainment strategies. Ammonium

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP nitrates and ammonium sulfates represent a dominant fraction of PM2.5 components and are formed in the atmosphere through secondary reactions of precursor emissions of NOx, SOx, and ammonia. Based on the District's modeling sensitivity analysis, SOx reductions, followed by directly-emitted PM2.5 and NOx reductions, provide the greatest benefits in terms of reducing the ambient PM2.5 concentrations. Carbonaceous aerosols such as VOC reductions can contribute, to a lesser extent, to improvements in ambient PM2.5 air quality but are of lesser effectiveness, yet are critical for making progress toward to the 8-hour ozone attainmentcontrol strategy.

Therefore, the PM2.5 attainment strategy is primarily focused on SOx, directly- emitted PM2.5, and NOx reductions supplemented with additional VOC reductions which can be feasibly achieved by 2014 (the year in which full reductions have to be realized for demonstrating attainment in 2015). SOx and NOx emissions are both products of fuel combustion. Reducing the fuel sulfur content has proven to be one of the most effective strategies for achieving significant SOx reductions and has already been adopted for stationary sources, on-road mobile sources, and the majority of off-road mobile sources except for ocean-going vessels. Therefore, clean fuel strategies based on the use of low-sulfur marine fuel in this single source category will result in significant PM2.5 air quality improvements. In addition, NOx reductions are viable because technologies for implementing NOx control strategies (e.g., add-on control devices, alternative fuels, fleet modernization, repowers, retrofits) are commercially available and are continually undergoing further development. NOx reductions are also critical needed to attain the 8-hour ozone standard.

The PM2.5 strategy also builds upon on-going diesel toxic reduction programs which not only reduce the toxic impact of diesel emissions but also contribute to PM2.5 air quality benefits. The proposed modifications to the Draft AQMP incorporates the emissions benefit associated with these adopted programs as well as the PM2.5 reductions from the short-term and mid-term control measures. VOC emissions also contribute to the formation of secondary particulates (including organic carbon) and enhance ammonium nitrate production. While VOC reductions are less critical to overall reductions in PM2.5 air quality (compared with equivalent SOx, directly- emitted PM2.5, and NOx reductions), they are heavily relied upon for meeting the 8- hour ozone standard. Adequate VOC controls need to be in place in time for achieving the additional significant VOC reductions needed for the 8-hour ozone standard by 2021/2024. Reducing VOC emissions in early years would also ensure continued progress in reducing the ambient ozone concentrations. The 8-hour ozone control strategy relies on the implementation of the PM2.5 control strategy augmented with additional long-term VOC and NOx reductions for meeting the standard by 2023 2020 timeframe.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Based on the District's modeling analysis, the estimated reduction targets for PM2.5 attainment are approximately 203 239 tons per day (t/d) of NOx, 24 49 t/d of SOx, 14 t/d of PM2.5, and 59 142 t/d of VOC emissions in 2014, while the reduction targets for the 8-hour ozone attainment are estimated at 116 300 t/d of VOC and 383 286 t/d of NOx from the projected inventories in 2023 2020. The PM2.5 attainment strategy is based on the implementation of short-term and mid-term control measures by the District, CARB, U.S. EPA and SCAG. These measures have defined control methods and specific SIP reduction commitments with adoption dates in the 2007- 2010 timeframe with implementation dates from 2008 to 2020. Long-term measures are relied upon for the 8-hour ozone strategy, referring to measures which are based on further development and improvement of known low- and zero-emission control technologies in addition to new technological advancements. Long-term measures have adoption dates in the 2011-2015 timeframe and implementation dates in the 2015 to 2020/2023 timeframe.

The sheer magnitude of emission reductions needed for the attainment of the federal PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone standards poses a tremendous challenge to the South Coast Basin. Without an aggressive control strategy and close collaboration of efforts among the federal, state, and regional governments, local agencies, businesses, and the public, the attainment of these standards will not be likely. This chapter outlines the overall proposed control strategy and specific control measures required for achieving these air quality goals in the Basin.

Draft 2007 AQMP Control Measures The Draft 2007 AQMP control measures consist of four three components: 1) the District's Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures; 2) CARB's Proposed State Strategy; 3) District Staff's Proposed Policy Options to Supplement CARB's Control Strategy State and Federal Control Measures recommended by District staff; and 43) Regional Transportation Strategy and Control Measures provided by SCAG. Overall, the Plan includes 31 29 stationary and 30 29 mobile source measures which are defined at this time. A summary of these measures is provided below. A detailed description of each component's control measures is provided in the following appendices: Appendix IV-A: District's Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures Appendix IV-B-1: CARB's Proposed State Strategy for California's 2007 State Implementation Plan Appendix IV-B-2: District Staff's Proposed Policy Options to Supplement CARB's Control Strategy Staff's Recommended State and Federal Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures Appendix IV-C: Regional Transportation Strategy and Control Measures

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP These measures primarily rely on the traditional command-and-control approach, facilitated by market incentive programs, as well as advanced technologies expected to be implemented by 2015 (for PM2.5) and 2021/2024 (for 8-hour ozone).

DISTRICT'S STATIONARY AND MOBILE SOURCE SHORT- AND MID- TERM CONTROL MEASURES Since the adoption of the 2003 AQMP, the District has made significant strides in achieving further emission reductions from stationary sources. Table 1-2 of Chapter 1 provides a listing of rules adopted by the District since adoption of the 2003 AQMP as well as the SIP commitment and the emission reductions achieved for each rule.

For the draft 2007 AQMP control measure development, District staff conducted an AQMP Summit in June 2006 to solicit new control concepts and innovative ideas. Internal and external brainstorming sessions were also conducted for identifying additional control measures and assessing control feasibility. The stationary source control measures presented in the Draft 2007 AQMP are proposed to further reduce emissions from both point sources (permitted facilities) and area sources (generally small and non-permitted). The basic principles followed in developing the District's stationary source control measures included: 1) identify SOx and NOx reduction opportunities and maximize reductions by 2014, and 2) initiate programs or rule making activities for VOC control strategies aiming at maximum reductions by 20202023 timeframe. Therefore, the proposed control strategy for stationary sources under the District's jurisdiction include remaining revised and partially implemented measures from the 2003 AQMP and new measures that are deemed feasible to provide additional control opportunity. In addition, to foster further technology advancement, long-term measures are also included aimed at achieving additional reductions from stationary sources based on implementation and accelerated penetration of advanced technologies. For each control measure, the District will seek to achieve the maximum reduction potential that is if deemed technically feasible and cost-effective.

Furthermore, in light of significant reductions needed for PM2.5 and ozone attainment demonstrations, the District will expand its regulatory programs to mobile sources where the District has existing legal authority, and is evaluating the possibility of additional limited authority for cost-effective local controls. The District is also considering other innovative ideas to mitigate the impact of emissions growth. For example, the District is proposing a back-stop measure to ensure that port-related programs achieve their intended reductions, and a control measure with various approaches for reducing emissions from new and redevelopment residential, industrial and commercial projects.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The District's control strategy for stationary and mobile sources is also based on the following approaches: 1) facility modernization; 2) energy efficiency and conservation; 3) good management practices; 4) market incentives/compliance flexibility; 5) area source programs; 6) emission growth management; and 7) mobile source programs. Table 4-1 provides a listing of District's proposed control measures under each of the seven Draft Plan control approaches.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-1 District's Proposed Control Approaches and Measures Facility Modernization Number Title MCS-01 Facility Modernization [NOx, VOC, PM2.5][All Pollutants] Energy Efficiency/Conservation Number Title MCS-02 Urban Heat Island [All Pollutants] MCS-03 Energy Efficiency and Conservation [All Pollutants] Good Management Practices Number Title FUG-01 Improved Leak Detection and Repair [VOC] FUG-02 Emission Reductions from Gasoline Transfer and Dispensing Facilities [VOC] FUG-04 Emission Reductions from Pipeline and Storage Tank Degassing [VOC] BCM-01 PM Control Devices (Baghouses Bag Leak Detectors/, Wet Scrubbers/, Electrostatic Precipitators, and Other Devices) [PM2.5] MCS-04 Emissions Reduction from Green Waste Composting [VOC, PM2.5 and NH3] MCS-06 Improved Start-up, Shut-down & Turnaround Procedures [All Pollutants] Market Incentives/Compliance Flexibility Number Title CTS-02 Clean Coatings Certification Program [VOC] CMB-02 Further SOx Reductions for of Emissions in RECLAIM (BARCT) [SOx] FLX-01 Economic Incentive Programs [All Pollutants] FLX-02 Petroleum Refinery Pilot Program [VOC and PM2.5NOx] Area Source Programs CTS-01 Emission Reductions from Industrial Lubricants [VOC] CTS-03 Consumer Products Certification Labeling and Emission Reductions from Use of Consumer Products at Institutional and Commercial Facilities [VOC]

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-1 (continued) District's Proposed Control Approaches and Measures CTS-04 Emission Reductions from the Reduction of VOC Content of Consumer Products Not Regulated by the State Board [VOC] FUG-03 Emission Reductions from Cutback Asphalt [VOC] CMB-01 NOx Reduction from Non-RECLAIM Ovens, Dryers and Furnaces [NOx] CMB-03 Further NOx Reductions from Space Heaters [NOx]) CMB-04 Natural Gas Fuel Specifications [All PollutantsNOx] BCM-02 PM Emission Hot Spots ? Localized Control Program [PM2.5] BCM-03 Emission Reductions from Wood Burning Fireplaces and Wood Stoves [PM2.5] BCM-04 Additional PM Emission Reductions from Rule 444 ? Open Burning [PM2.5] BCM-05 Emission Reductions from Under-Fired Charbroilers [PM] MCS-05 Emission Reductions from Non-Dairy Livestock Waste [VOC, PM and NH3] MCS-07 Application of All Feasible Control Measures [All Pollutants] MCS-08 Emission Charges of $5,000 Per Ton of VOC for Stationary Sources with Potential to Emit Over 10 Tons per Year [VOC, NOx] Emission Growth Management Number Title EGM-01 Emission Reductions from New or Redevelopment Projects [NOx, VOC, PM2.5][All Pollutants] EGM-02 Emission Budget and Mitigation for General Conformity Projects [All Pollutants] EGM-03 Emissions Mitigation at Federally-Permitted Projects Clean Air Act Permit Sites [All Pollutants] Mobile Source Programs Number Title MOB-01 Mitigation Fee for Federal Sources [All Pollutants] MOB-02 Expanded Exchange Program [All Pollutants] MOB-03 Backstop Measures for Indirect Sources of Emissions from Ports and Port- Related Facilities [All Pollutants] MOB-04 Emissions Reductions from the Carl Moyer Program [NOx, PM2.5] MOB-05 AB923 Light-Duty Vehicle High-Emitter Identification Program [NOx, VOC] MOB-06 AB923 Medium-Duty Vehicle High-Emitter Identification Program [NOx, VOC] MOB-07 Concurrent Reductions from Global Warming Strategies [All Pollutants]

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP includes 30 28 short-term and mid-term stationary and 7 4 mobile source control measures proposed for District implementation. In order to demonstrate attainment by 2015 for PM2.5 and 2021/2024 for ozone, emission reductions needed for attainment must be in place by 2014 and 2020/2023. Table 4-2A provides a listing of the District's short-term and mid-term control measures in the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP for which the emission reductions are quantified. These measures are estimated to achieve a total of 6.8 7.7 tons per day of NOx, 3 tons per day of SOx, 10.4 7.2 tons per day of VOC, and 1.5 1.4 tons per day of PM2.5 emission reductions by 2014 and have proposed rule adoption schedules between 2007 and 2010 with implementation dates between 2008 and 2023 2020. The 2023 2020 reductions from these measures are estimated to be 19.3 18 tons per day of VOC, 9.2 14.2 tons per day of NOx, 3 tons per day of SOx, and 3.3 3.2 tons per day of PM2.5 reductions. Tables 4-2B presents the District's remaining control measures in the Draft 2007 AQMP which are either not quantified at this time due to data limitations or do not result in direct emission benefits (e.g., Urban Heat Island). In the next two months, District staff will continue its technical analysis to better quantify the estimated emission reductions.

Appendix IV-A provides detailed descriptions for the District's stationary and mobile source control measures. Overall, nine eight control measures originally contained in the 2003 AQMP have been updated or revised for inclusion into the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP. In addition, twenty eight four new measures are incorporated into the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP based on replacement of the District's long-term reduction measures from the 2003 AQMP with more defined control measures or development of new control measures.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-2A District's Short-Term and Mid-Term Stationary Control Measures with Quantified Emission Reduction Estimates Control Reduction Target1 Measure # Title (tons/day) Remaining 2003 AQMP Revision Control Measures FUG-02 Emission Reductions from Gasoline Transfer and Dispensing Facilities [VOC] 3.7/4.0 3.9 BCM-03 Emission Reductions from Wood-Burning Fireplaces and Wood Stoves 0.7/0.7 [PM2.5] New Control Measures CTS-01 Emission Reductions from Industrial Lubricants [VOC] 1.8/2.01.5/1.6 CTS-03 Consumer Products Certification and Emission Reductions from Use of Consumer 2.1/2.22 Products at Institutional and Commercial Facilities [VOC] CTS-04 Emission Reductions from the Reduction of VOC Content of Consumer Products 5.8/6.02 Not Regulated by the State Board [VOC] CMB-01 NOx Reduction from Non-RECLAIM Ovens, Dryers and Furnaces [NOx] 3.5/4.13.7/4.0 CMB-02 Further SOx Reductions of Emissions in for RECLAIM [SOx] 3.0/3.0 CMB-03 Further NOx Reductions from Space Heaters [NOx] 0.8/1.11.0/3.2 MCS-01 Facility Modernization [VOC] 2.0/9.22.0/12.0 [NOx] 1.6/2.23.0/6.0 [PM2.5] 0.4/1.70.7/2.0 MCS-05 Emission Reductions from Livestock Waste [VOC] 0.8/0.6 FLX-02 Petroleum Refinery Pilot Program [VOC] 0.7/1.6 [PM2.5] 0.4/0.4 EGM-01 Emission Reductions from New and Redevelopment Projects [NOx] 0.0/0.8 1.0 [VOC] 0.0/0.6 0.5 [PM2.5] 0.0/0.5 MOB-04 Emission Reductions from Carl Moyer Program32 [NOx] 7.5/12.910.1/13.4 [PM2.5] 0.2 0.3/0.4 MOB-05 AB923 Light-Duty Vehicle High-Emitter Identification Program [NOx] 0.4/0.4 [VOC] 0.8/0.7 MOB-06 AB923 Medium-Duty Vehicle High-Emitter Identification Program [NOx] 0.5/0.6 [VOC] 0.5/0.6 Total VOC 10.4/19.3 7.2/18.0 NOx 6.8/9.2 7.7/14.2 SOx 3.0/3.0 PM2.5 1.5/3.3 1.4/3.2

1 The emission reduction estimates are based on the 2014 annual average inventory and 2023 2020 planning inventory in the proposed modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP. The actual reductions are subject to change during the rulemaking based on the latest available emission inventory data.

2 Emission reductions resulting from the implementation of this control measure will be credited towards AQMD's SIP obligation provided ARB does not develop a similar regulation. Any remaining excess reductions will then contribute to fulfilling ARB's SIP commitment. Reductions for this measure are not included in total reductions in this table.

32 Emission reductions from the past and future projects under the Carl Moyer Program presented under this measure are reflected in the baseline adjustments and District staff's recommended control measures and are not included in total reductions in this table. Emission reductions associated with the past and future projects are reflected in the baseline adjustments and under the proposed mobile source control measures, respectively.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-2B District's Short-Term and Mid-Term Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures Without Emission Reduction Estimates Control Measure # Title Remaining 2003 AQMP Revision Control Measures BCM-05 Emission Reductions from Under-Fired Charbroilers [PM] MCS-02 Urban Heat Island [All Pollutants] MCS-08 Emission Charges of $5,000 Per Ton of VOC for Stationary Sources Emitting Over 10 Tons per Year [VOC CMB-04 Natural Gas Fuel Specifications [NOx] MCS-04 Emissions Reduction from Green Waste Composting [VOC, PM2.5, NH3] FLX-01 Economic Incentive Programs [All Pollutants] MOB-01 Mitigation Fee for Federal Sources [All Pollutants] New Control Measures CTS-02 Clean Coating Certification Program [VOC] CTS-03 Consumer Products Labeling and Emission Reductions from Use of Consumer Products at Institutional and Commercial Facilities [VOC] FUG-01 Improved Leak Detection and Repair [VOC] FUG-03 Emission Reductions from Cutback Asphalt [VOC] FUG-04 Emission Reductions from Pipeline and Storage Tank Degassing [VOC] BCM-01 PM Control Devices (Baghouses, Wet Scrubbers, Electrostatic Precipitators, and Other Control Devices [PM2.5] BCM-02 PM Emission Hot Spots -? Localized Control Program [PM2.5] BCM-04 Additional PM Emission Reductions from Rule 444 - Open Burning [PM2.5] FLX-02 Petroleum Refinery Pilot Program [VOC, NOx] MCS-03 Energy Efficiency and Conservation [NOx] MCS-05 Emission Reductions from Non-Dairy Livestock Waste [VOC, PM, NH3] MCS-06 Improved Start-up, Shut-down & Turnaround Procedures [All Pollutants] MCS-07 Application of All Feasible Control Measures [All Pollutants] EGM-02 Emission Budgets and Mitigation for General Conformity Projects [All Pollutants] EGM-03 Emissions Mitigation at Federally Permitted ProjectsClean Air Act Permit Sites [All Pollutants] MOB-02 Expanded Exchange Program [All Pollutants] MOB-03 Backstop Measures for Indirect Sources of Emissions from Ports and Port-Related Facilities [All Pollutants] MOB-07 Concurrent Reductions from Global Warming Strategies [All Pollutants]

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Stationary Source Control Methods and Associated Emission Reductions Stationary source control measures rely on a variety of control technologies and management practices, as identified in Table 4-3. Control technologies vary according to the source type and pollutant being controlled and generally include a process or physical modification such as product reformulation, installation of air pollution control equipment, etc. In addition, management practices include administrative changes such as improved leak detection techniques, inspection and maintenance programs, etc.

TABLE 4-3 Stationary Source Control Methods Source Category Control Method Coatings and Solvents ? Reformulation ? Higher Transfer Efficiency ? Process Improvements ? Add-On Controls ? Alternative Coating and Solvent Application Methods ? Market Incentives ? Improved Housekeeping Practices Petroleum Operations and ? Process Modifications Fugitive VOC Emissions ? Add-On Controls Systems ? Market Incentives ? Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance ? Improved Vapor Recovery Systems ? Good Management Practices Combustion Sources ? Add-On Controls ? Market Incentives ? Process Improvement ? Improved Energy Efficiency Fugitive Dust Sources ? Road Dust Suppression ? Watering or Revegetation of Disturbed Surface Areas ? Chemical Stabilization of Unpaved Areas ? Track-Out Prevention ? Reduced Vehicular Speeds on Unpaved Roads ? Add-On Controls Multiple Component Sources ? Process Modifications and Improvements ? Add-On Controls ? Best Management Practices ? Best Available Control Technology ? Market Incentives ? Energy Efficiency and Conservation

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-3 (continued) Stationary Source Control Methods Source Category Control Method Compliance Flexibility Programs ? Compliance Flexibility to Lower Costs ? Promotion of Early Reductions ? Incentivize Clean Technologies ? Investment in Clean Technologies Emission Growth Management ? Emission Increase Mitigations ? Mitigation Fees The following text provides describes a brief description of the District's short-term and mid-term measures for the eight groups of control measures: Group 1 ? Coatings and Solvents; Group 2 ? Petroleum Operations and Fugitive VOC Emissions; Group 3 ? Combustion Sources; Group 4 ? PM Sources; Group 5 ? Multiple Component Sources; Group 6 ? Compliance Flexibility Programs; Group 7 ? Emission Growth Management; and Group 8 - District's Mobile Source Control Measures.

Coatings and Solvents The category of coatings and solvents is primarily targeted at reducing VOC emissions from these VOC-containing products. This category includes four three proposed control measures that are based on additional emission reductions from lubricants, consumer products used by commercial and institutional facilities or not regulated by CARBat institutions, and a Clean Coating Certification program.

CTS-01 -? EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM INDUSTRIAL LUBRICANTS: This control measure would seek to reduce VOC emissions from industrial lubricants, a category under solvent operations, over a defined implementation period. Lubricants are used by various companies in the South Coast Basin including, but not limited to, machine shops, auto rebuilders, and auto parts manufacturers. Lubricants are believed to emit a significant amount of VOCs, as many lubricant compounds consist of at least 50 percent VOC solvents. It is important to note that there are low-emitting alternatives to petroleum-based lubricants available, including synthetics, semi-synthetics, and vegetable oils. Thus, the reduction requirements may apply to the end user, but may also be imposed at the point of sale.

CTS-02 - CLEAN COATING CERTIFICATION PROGRAM: VOC content in various industrial coatings has been regulated for many years. Many compliant products are significantly lower than the current rule limits. This measure is designed to encourage and to recognize supercompliant products. This proposed control measure would seek to implement an ultra-low VOC content certification

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP program for coatings similar to the certification program for the ultra-low VOC solvents under Rule 1171 or Rule 1122. The District's certification can be an effective marketing tool that it wcould encourage manufacturers to voluntarily lower their VOC content below the limits. This control measure would incorporate a Clean Air Coating Certification through amendments to existing rules under Regulation II - Permits and XI ? Source-Specific Standards, as well as be considered in any future regulatory development. The District will explore the feasibility of a voluntary program, as well as mandatory participation through source-specific rules. This method of control will include public education, outreach, and various marketing elements to help incentivize manufacturers and create consumer awareness and demand.

CTS-03 ? CONSUMER PRODUCT CERTIFICATION LABELING AND EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM USE OF CONSUMER PRODUCTS AT INSTITUTIONAL AND COMMERCIAL FACILITIES (VOC): Consumer products are defined under the California Health and Safety Code as chemically formulated products used by institutional and household consumers. This control measure would seek to reduce VOCs from consumer products used at commercial and institutional facilities by developing new rules or programs to establish a VOC certification labeling program, and by adopting usage limitations or prohibition of use for consumer products other than to incentivize the use of ultra low- or zero- VOC consumer products at high volume commercial and institutional facilities.

CTS-04 ? EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM THE REDUCTION OF VOC CONTENT OF CONSUMER PRODUCTS NOT REGULATED BY THE STATE BOARD: Consumer Products include a broad range of products that are regulated by CARB in the State of California. However, local Air Pollution Control Districts may develop requirements for consumer products that are not regulated by ARB, such as paint thinners. This control measure would seek to reduce VOC emissions from unregulated lacquer and paint thinners sold as consumer products by establishing a VOC content limit for each of those categories.

Petroleum Operations and Fugitive VOC Emissions This category pertains primarily to operations and materials associated with the petroleum, chemical, and other industries. Within this category, there is one proposed control measure targeting fugitive VOC emissions with improved leak detection and repair. Other proposed measures include reductions from gasoline transfer and dispensing, pipeline and storage tank degassing, and cutback asphalt facilities.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP FUG-01 ? IMPROVED LEAK DETECTION AND REPAIR: Proposed Control Measure FUG-01 affects a variety of VOC emissions sources including, but not limited to, oil and gas production facilities, petroleum refining and chemical products processing, storage and transfer facilities, marine terminals, and other sources, where VOC emissions occur from fugitive leaks in piping components, wastewater system components, and process and storage equipment leaks. Most of these facilities are required under District and federal rules to maintain a leak detection and repair (LDAR) program that involves individual screening of all of their piping components and periodic inspection programs of equipment to control and minimize VOC emissions. This measure is taking advantage of the latest technology, called optical gas imaging (Smart LDAR), using an infrared camera that readily detects and displays an image of a VOC leak in a manner that is less time consuming and labor intensive. The control measure would be implemented in two phases: Phase I would consist of a pilot program, followed by Phase II, during which full implementation would be expected. There are no emission reductions quantified for this control measure.

FUG-02 ? EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM GASOLINE TRANSFER AND DISPENSING FACILITIES: This proposed control measure applies to all gasoline dispensing facilities (GDF) in the District. The proposed measure seeks to reduce VOC and toxic emissions from GDF operations by improving the implementation of the CARB enhanced vapor recovery (EVR) regulation. The proposed methods of control include improvement of the functions of the in-station diagnostic (ISD) to provide early alerts of vapor recovery degradation and allow preventative repairs. The methods of control also redefine the function of the reset button of the ISD to allow dispensing of gasoline only after all the defective components of the vapor recovery system are repaired. The proposed methods of control include the installation of a ?shutdown? mechanism in the fuel line to stop fueling if the fueling flow rate drops below the system certification standards which may cause vapor recovery failure. The complete implementation of the EVR will achieve a 98 percent control efficiency of GDF emissions.

FUG-03 -? EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM CUTBACK ASPHALT: The purpose of this proposed control measure is to reduce emissions from asphalt paving applications by limiting the use of cutback asphalt and/or replacing it with emulsified asphalt. U.S. EPA Region 9 noted that District Rule 1108, - "Cutback Asphalt," does not contain RACT for asphalt paving (i.e. seasonal and usage limitations). U.S. EPA recommended staff to consider this option in the 2007 AQMP. In the District's RACT submittal to EPA, a commitment was made to evaluate the potential for limiting the use of cutback asphalt. This control measure is intended to fulfill this commitment.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP FUG-04 ? EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM PIPELINE AND STORAGE TANK DEGASSING: The purpose of this proposed control measure is to reduce emissions from pipeline and storage tank degassing and cleaning by requiring the vapor space exhaust to be vented to an air pollution control device that limits the exhaust concentration. The source category would be expanded to include previously unregulated aboveground storage tanks with capacities less than 19,815 gallons and pipeline degassing. The Reid vapor pressure limit for liquids subject to the rule would also be reduced. The same control devices used for tank degassing would be applicable to the expanded category sources. This control measure would impact refineries, chemical plants, gasoline stations, and an unknown number of new facilities in the paint, solvent, adhesive, and ink manufacturing industries.

Combustion Sources This category includes four proposed measures for targeting stationary combustion equipment. There is one control measure reducing NOx from non-RECLAIM ovens, dryers, and furnaces. A second proposed measure seeks targets the reduction of SOx emissions from RECLAIM facilities. In addition, there is one new proposed control measure that seeks to further reduce NOx emissions from space heaters. The last measure seeks to specify fuel standards for natural gas used in stationary sources as a means of preventing potential increase in NOx emissions.

CMB-01 ? NOX REDUCTIONS FROM NON-RECLAIM OVENS, DRYERS AND FURNACES: This proposed control measure applies to ovens, dryers and furnaces, incinerators and other external combustion equipment at non-RECLAIM facilities. Some of these equipment have NOx emission limits based on BACT/LAER requirements at the time the equipment was is permitted. In addition, equipment exempt from permit requirements are not currently subject to NOx controls. NOx emissions from these types of equipment can be reduced using low- NOx burners through retrofit or replacement. NOx emission reductions of 50 to 75% are achievable for the equipment which is not subject to current BACT limits.

CMB-02 ? FURTHER REDUCTIONS OF SOx FOR EMISSIONS IN RECLAIM (BARCT) [SOx]: This proposed control measure identifies a series of control approaches that can be implemented as part of the Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) from the SOx RECLAIM program. The District will seek further reductions in SOx allocations from the year 2011 through 2014.

CMB-03 ? FURTHER NOx REDUCTIONS FROM SPACE HEATERS: This control measure applies to natural gas-fired residential (and commercial) space heaters used for comfort heating. District Rule 1111 - NOx Emissions from Natural Gas-Fired Fan Type Central Furnaces regulates space heaters with input rates less than 175,000 Btu/hr. This measure proposes to establish more stringent emission

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP limit for new space heaters which can be achieved through the use of low-NOx burners or other technologies. This Ccontrol measure will be implemented through an amendment to Rule 1111.

CMB-04 ? NATURAL GAS FUEL SPECIFICATIONS (NOx): The purpose of this new control measure is to prevent emission increases from the combustion of natural gas with uncharacteristically high heating value (HHV) in stationary applications. The high heating value of such gas relative to natural gas with a lower heating value will may result in increased combustion temperature and, possibly, higher NOx emissions. This control strategy considers setting an upper limit of the heating value of natural gas. Natural gas producers/suppliers could achieve the objective of this control strategy by either not supplying hot gas to the District, or by removing higher hydrogen compounds, adding inert gases, and/or blending natural gas from different sources so that the end users supply meets a Wobbe Index of 1360 Btu/scf in the District. or otherwise reducing the Btu value of the hot gas. The District will continue data collection to further determine the relationship between the HHV for natural gas fuel and NOx emissions from gas-fired equipment. Based on this information, the District will make a final determination about the potential emission reductions that can be realized from this measure. However, the emission reduction potential of this measure exceeds more than 1 ton per day of NOx.

PM Sources This category includes three new proposed control measures which would require further reductions in fugitive dust emissions from PM control devices, a localized control program and an enhanced open burning program. The localized controls would be introduced in high PM areas to reduce community exposure. There are also two control measures that have been carried over from the 2003 AQMP, i.e., PM reductions from wood stoves and fireplaces and charbroilers.

BCM-01 - PM CONTROL DEVICES (BAGHOUSES/, WET SCRUBBERS, /ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS, OTHER DEVICES): This proposed control measure seeks to further reduce PM emissions from add-on control devices previously identified to achieve PM reductions (e.g., BACT or command-and-control requirements). AQMD rules establish particulate matter emissions limits and visible opacity standards that may be achieved with baghouse control equipment, electrostatic precipitators, wet scrubbers, or other PM control devices. This measure would establish requirements similar to Rule 1156 (cement operations) to establish and maintain operation and maintenance (O&M) procedures, install and operate Continuous Opacity Monitor System (COMS) or Bag Leak Detection System (BLDS) for top process emitters. under new, and/or install U.S. EPA certified filtration devices.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP BCM-02 ? PM EMISSION HOT SPOTS ? LOCALIZED CONTROL PROGRAM: This proposed new control measure seeks to reduce PM emissions in areas where local influence is the main contributor to the overall exposure. Due to the broad nature of the Basin with areas at various stages of economic development, certain locations may be prone to significantly higher levels of PM as compared to the broader surrounding area. For example, the highest levels of PM10 concentrations are measured at the AQMD's Rubidoux monitoring station. Primary contributors to those levels are sources of crustal material (better known as entrained fugitive dust). In and around the area of the Rubidoux monitoring station there are unstabilized vacant lots, many roads have unimproved road shoulders and are thereby not subject to street sweeping, and some roads and residential parking areas are unpaved. This proposed control measure would establish a localized program to supplement the regional approach to address PM hot spots through a cooperative effort with local agencies to reduce emissions from direct sources of PM.

BCM-03 ? EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM WOOD BURNING FIREPLACES AND WOOD STOVES: The 2003 AQMP included a control measure to reduce emissions, primarily PM, from wood burning fireplaces and wood burning stoves. Control options identified include voluntary or mandatory wood burning curtailment during periods of poor air quality; prohibiting the installation of indoor or outdoor uncontrolled fireplaces in new or existing developments; moisture content requirements for wood sold as seasoned; change-out of wood heating appliances during property transfers, and prohibition of burning non-wood items. PM emission reductions have been quantified for mandatory wood burning curtailments in other areas and the Bay Area and Sacramento AQMDs have estimated emission reductions for new residential development standards. It should be noted that AQMD staff is currently working on development of a regulation to implement this measure.

BCM-04 ? ADDITIONAL PM EMISSISON REDUCTIONS FROM RULE 444 ? OPEN BURNING [PM]: This control measure seeks to reduce PM emissions through further reduction of open burning practices. The Open Burning rule was adopted to reduce visible emissions and minimize public nuisance from smoke emissions. The rule now includes limits on prescribed and agricultural burning. PM emission reductions may be achieved through the establishment of ?no burn days? based on a PM2.5 threshold of the current 24-hour standard of 65 g/m3 or the future standard of 35 g/m3. Additional PM emission reductions may also be achieved through the phasing-out of agricultural burning by 2015, similar to San Joaquin Valley APCD's reduction strategy. That is, the requirement of alternatives (i.e, chipping/grinding and/or composting). Other measures include the establishment of stricter criteria for training burns that are conducted for fire protection purposes.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP BCM-05 ? EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM UNDER-FIRED CHARBROILERS: This control measure seeks to stimulate technology advancement in reducing PM emissions from under-fired charbroilers of which a significant fraction is in the PM2.5 range. In December 2004, a finding of infeasibility was made by the Governing Board for under-fired charbroilers due to the lack of identification of any cost-effective control technology. Emission substitutions were made for the purposes of the SIP. Monies were granted to support demonstration projects for possible controls but no applications have been received. On this basis, staff proposes this measure with the intent of stimulating technology advancement in the next few years and possible implementation prior to 2014.

Multiple Component Sources There are a total of eight seven control measures proposed in this category. The first measure seeks reductions of all criteria pollutants through the modernization of permitted equipment and the application of supercompliant materials. The approach for this measure is to either replace or retrofit existing equipment at the end of a pre- determined life span with BACT and utilize supercompliant materials. In addition, a new control measure has been proposed to promote energy efficiency and conservation.

Two control measures are included in this category that address VOC and ammonia emissions from non-dairy livestock waste and composting operations. A third measure promotes the use of lighter color roofing, road materials, or tree planting. Additional measures seek to minimize emissions during equipment startup and shutdown and reduce emissions by applying the state requirement of all feasible control measures. Finally, the control measure on the potential emission charges for major stationary sources (pending non-attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard in 2010) has been carried from the 2003 AQMP.

MCS-01 - FACILITY MODERNIZATION: This proposed measure is designed to achieve further emission reductions from permitted sources by means of facility modernization and use of supercompliant materials. Existing equipment would be retrofitted or replaced with BACT at the end of a pre-determined lifespan. The District would work with the legislature to develop federal and/or state tax credits to encourage early replacement of equipment. Consideration will be given to prior investment in equipment retrofits. During rule development, staff will explore opportunities to provide temporary emission reduction credits for meeting BACT earlier than required by the control measure.

MCS-02 ? URBAN HEAT ISLAND (ALL POLLUTANTS): This proposed measure seeks to provide incentives for voluntary actions to reduce VOC or NOx by lowering the ambient temperature through the use of lighter colored roofing and

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP paving materials. This measure is implemented in part through the U.S. EPA's Cool Communities Program. The U.S. EPA and the District have been moving forward with the promotion of the use of lighter color roofing and paving materials. Several demonstration projects are currently being conducted nationally (one with the City of Los Angeles). In addition, tree planting programs are being promoted throughout the region. The District has sponsored several studies to further quantify the benefits of these actions.

MCS-03 ? ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION: This proposed control measure seeks to provide incentives for businesses to use energy efficient equipment in the District and increase the effectiveness of energy conservation programs. The District will work with local governments to promote energy conservation programs, and with electric and natural gas utilities to identify source categories and provide additional incentives for property owners and businesses to purchase energy efficient equipment. The District may also examine its market incentive or fee programs to identify opportunities for implementation of energy conservation and efficiency measures.

MCS-04 ? EMISSIONS REDUCTION FROM GREENWASTE COMPOSTING: Greenwaste composting is an important component of the solid waste industry; it provides resource conservation through source reduction, recycling, and reuse. However, as with other industrial processes, greenwaste composting produces air emissions that are largely uncontrolled. Greenwaste composting is a direct source of fine particulate dust (PM10), volatile organic compounds (VOC), and ammonia (NH3), a precursor of particulate matter. Greenwaste composting also releases carbon dioxide, water vapor, and methane, which are greenhouse gases. Although PM10 emissions are unknown at this time, greenwaste composting results in approximately 4.4 tons per day VOC and 1 ton per day NH3. This control measure calls for the development and implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would aim for reductions of PM2.510, and VOC, and NH3. The District will convene a working group to involve all stakeholders in developing wholesale solutions to reduce greenwaste emissions.

MCS-05 - EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM NON-DAIRY LIVESTOCK WASTE: Although confined animal facilities have been relocating out of the District's jurisdictional boundaries for years, the District retains over nine million poultry (egg layers and broilers) and more than 15,000 hogs and pigs (swine). In accordance with SB 700 (Florez) ? Agricultural Sources, AQMD adopted Rule 223 ? Emission Reduction Permits for Large Confined Animal Facilities, that requires permitting and other requirements for large confined animal facilities. Additional VOC and NH3 emission reductions, above those required by Rule 223, could be achieved by requiring air pollution control devices (i.e., biofilters) where technically

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP and economically feasible. For example, AQMD Rule 1133.2 ? Emission Reductions from Co-Composting Operations includes a requirement for control devices at large-scale composting facilities with required efficiencies ranging from 70 to 80 percent from the baseline uncontrolled emissions. This proposed control measure would aim to require the Class Two Mitigation Measures of Rule 223 with a higher level of overall control efficiency for the larger facilities subject to Rule 223, and seek reductions from the smaller facilities not subject to the rule.

MCS-06 ? IMPROVED STARTUP, SHUTDOWN, AND TURNAROUND PROCEDURES: This proposed control measure seeks to reduce emissions during equipment startup, shutdown, and turnaround. Environmental organizations and community action groups have identified the minimization or optimization of these operations as a means to further reduce emissions. Opportunities for these emission reductions potentially apply at refineries as well as other industries. Examples of possible areas for improvement include better engineering and equipment design, diverting or eliminating process streams that are vented to flares, and installation of MCS-07 - APPLICATION OF ALL FEASIBLE MEASURES (ALL POLLUTANTS): This control measure addresses the attainment of further emission reductions through the amendment of existing RECLAIM and non- RECLAIM rules and regulations. In particular, existing regulations on VOC coatings and solvents would be targeted for further emission reductions as well as rules and regulations for other pollutants such as NOx and SOx. Existing rules and regulations for pollutants such as VOC, NOx, SOx and PM reflect current best available retrofit control technology (BARCT). However, BARCT continually evolves is ever evolving as new technology BARCT becomes available that is feasible and cost-effective. Through this proposed control measure, the District would commit to the adoption and implementation of the new retrofit control technology standards.

MCS-08 ? EMISSION CHARGES OF $5,000 PER TON OF VOC FOR STATIONARY SOURCE WITH POTENTIAL TO EMIT OVER 10 TONS PER YEAR: Due to recent court decision on the one-hour ozone standard, this control measure proposes that if the federal one-hour ozone ambient air quality standard is not met by the year 2010, the District shall impose an emissions fee of $5,000 per ton of VOC, emitted by each major source in excess of 80 percent of the sources' baseline emissions. The fee rate will be adjusted annually to reflect increases in the consumer price index. The fee shall be paid for each calendar year after the year 2010 and until the standard is met. Furthermore, this fee will be in addition to the annual emission fee required by SCAQMD Rule 301.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Compliance Flexibility Programs This category includes a proposed control measure carried over from the 2003 AQMP that enhances regulatory compliance by providing additional flexibility and compliance options thereby lowering compliance costs and incentivizing early reductions and advancement of clean technologies. A second control measure was mentioned in the 2003 AQMP but not previously listed as a control measure. This measure is a pilot program that could be used by the Petroleum Refining businesses as a compliance option to achieve their emission reduction obligations through either on-site or off-site controls.

FLX-01 ? ECONOMIC INCENTIVE PROGRAMS (ALL POLLUTANTS): Proposed Control measure FLX-01 (Intercredit Trading Program) is designed to complement command-and-control measures. The primary objectives of this measure are to enhance regulatory compliance flexibility by providing additional compliance options and thereby lowering compliance costs, and to incentivize early reductions and advancement of clean technologies through emission credit provisions. Regulatory flexibility programs, such as District credit rules and the Air Quality Investment Program, are essential to the successful introduction of the advanced control measures. The District will continue to develop incentive-based credit generation rules to provide technology advancement or early implementation of mobile, area, and stationary source emission reduction projects. Credit rules may be developed for use in RECLAIM, command-and-control programs, or for use by projects subject to New Source Review (Regulation XIII). The U.S. EPA Economic Incentive Program (EIP) guidance would be considered in development of rules to help facilitate CARB and EPA review and approval.

FLX-02 - PETROLEUM REFINERY PILOT PROGRAM: This proposed control measure is a pilot program that is geared to provide an alternative means of compliance to existing refineries by allowing them to achieve their emission reduction obligations by reducing emissions from on-site or off-site projects. Based on a recommendation provided in the 2003 AQMP, the District initiated a collaborative multi-stakeholder process to consider whether to implement this approach as a pilot program for refineries in the Basin. This process has been ongoing since the initial July 2005 Working Group meeting. If such a program is adopted, then upon achieving at least the equivalent reductions, the pilot program would subsume any short- and mid-term control measures and long-term reduction (if any) obligations proposed in the Draft 2007 AQMP for the refinery sector.

The implementation of this pilot program does not preclude future adjustments to the overall reduction targets established for this source category if warranted by attainment demonstrations or inventory changes in future SIP revisions.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Emission Growth Management There are three proposed control measures within this category. The first measure addresses emission reductions from new or redevelopment projects. Projects will evaluate significant air emissions pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The AQMD will encourage developers and local agencies to participate in a mitigation program. The last two new control measures address the General Conformity projects. The first of these measures creates a budget and mitigation program for these projects. The second measure addresses the impacts of these projects at federally permitted projects Clean Air Act Permit sites.

EGM-01 - EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM NEW OR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS (NOX, VOC, AND PM2.5): The purpose of this proposed control measure is two-fold: (1) compliance with the ?all feasible measures? requirement of the state law, and (2) capturing emission reduction opportunities during project development phase. The AQMD convened a working group made up of stakeholders from industry, local governments, and community representatives. Three working group meetings were held and staff prepared the following approach: AQMD will put forth a plan that contains a control measure which will establish applicability criteria for new or redevelopment projects and will involve the selection of mitigation measures from a menu of technically feasible mitigation options.The purpose of this proposed control measure is to mitigate the significant impacts from new development and redevelopment projects. The measure will evaluate three potential approaches for projects with significant VOC, PM2.5, and NOx emissions to implement applicable mitigation measures, namely the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District's approach; a new development project threshold approach, and a CEQA approach. The District will establish a working group involving local governments, and residential, commercial, and industrial developers to explore these approaches.

EGM-02 - EMISSION BUDGET AND MITIGATION FOR GENERAL CONFORMITY PROJECTS (ALL POLLUTANTS): A General Conformity determination is required by the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) for federal actions other than transportation actions. The requirements for General Conformity are contained in the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and must, in general, support the goals of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). One method of determining conformity is for the District to identify applicable emission budgets for the federal agencies to determine if the total of the direct and indirect emissions from the General Conformity project meets the emission budget in the SIP. The District proposes to make this determination through a combination of setting aside emissions from each source category, offsetting emissions exceeding budgets, and mitigation fees.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP EGM-03 - EMISSIONS MITIGATION AT FEDERALLY PERMITTED PROJECTS SITES (ALL POLLUTANTS): This control measure addresses mitigation measures for federally permitted projects impacting the District. This need for mitigations was the result of a recently proposed liquefied natural gas facility to be located in federal waters offshore of Ventura County. While this project is located within Ventura County and must obtain an air permit from the U.S. EPA, the Basin is downwind and will be directly impacted by the proposed project and the quality of natural gas may significantly affect the District's progress towards achieving air quality goals in the Basin.

District's Mobile Source Control Measures In order to complement the proposed state and federal source control strategies, the District is proposing seven four local control measures aimed at achieving additional emission reductions from mobile sources, described below. One control measure seeks to impose a mitigation fee program on federal sources such as planes, trains, and ships in order to fund emission reduction projects. The second measure promotes accelerated turnover of in-use small off-road engines (SORE) and other engines such as recreational outboard engines through expanded exchange programs. The third measure introduces backstop measures for indirect sources of emissions from ports and port-related facilities. The District will exercise its existing legal authority or seek additional authority to adopt and implement these measures. Finally, a Four new control measure are also is added based on implementation of the Carl Moyer Program, identification and repair (or retirement) of high-emitting vehicles, and concurrent emission reductions from global warming strategies.

MOB-01 ? MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM FOR FEDERAL SOURCES (ALL POLLUTANTS): In order to achieve a fair share reduction commitment from federal sources, this new control measure proposes to implement a mitigation fee program which is to be adopted by U.S. EPA with the mitigation fee to be paid by federal sources through EPA rulemaking and/or U.S. EPA grants to the District. Federal sources include emission source categories such as aircraft, ocean-going vessels, trains, and pre-empted off-road equipment that are under the jurisdiction of U.S. EPA. These sources continue to represent a significant source of emissions in the Basin in the absence of adequate federal regulations. Under this control measure, the District will use the monies collected to implement strategies for both federal and non-federal sources to achieve equivalent reductions for SIP purposes. Projects funded by the Mitigation Fee Program for federal or other sources would be selected based on specific criteria, including but not limited to: quantifiable emission benefits, emission reduction potential, cost-effectiveness, and proximity to affected areas (e.g., environmental justice areas). These projects would have to be approved by the District's Governing Board.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP MOB-02 ? EXPANDED EXCHANGE PROGRAM (ALL POLLUTANTS): In order to increase the penetration of electric equipment or new low emission gasoline- powered equipment, this control measure seeks to expand the existing lawn mower/leaf blower exchange programs. This expansion will be accomplished by increasing the number of exchange events and available funding for these programs. In addition, other small off-road equipment (SORE) equipment, as well as recreational outboard engines used in pleasure craft, may also be considered for exchange programs for accelerating the turnover of existing engines.

MOB-03 - BACKSTOP MEASURE FOR INDIRECT SOURCES OF EMISSIONS FROM PORTS AND PORT-RELATED FACILITIES [ALL POLLUTANTS]: This proposed control measure will address emissions from all new and existing stationary and mobile sources at ports and port-related facilities, including nonattainment criteria pollutants and toxics emissions. The objective of this backstop measure is to ensure the adequacy of and effective implementation of port measures and strategies proposed or developed by ports or CARB. Possible control approaches include limitations on increases in health risks caused by toxic air contaminants; reduction of health risks caused by toxic emissions from ports and port projects; prevention of emission increases of nonattainment pollutants for port projects; and emission reduction goals for ports to implement AQMP measures.

MOB-04 ? EMISSIONS REDUCTION FROM CARL MOYER PROGRAM [NOx, PM2.5]: Thise proposed control measure is based on the implementation of the Carl Moyer Program by the District. The measure proposes to take credit for the emission reductions achieved through past and future projects funded under this program for SIP purposes, in two phases. Examples of projects include on-road heavy-duty vehicle modernization, installation of retrofit units, and engine repowers. Phase I of this control measure is based on the projects implemented from 1998 to 2006. Phase II of this measure is based on the reductions to be achieved from the implementation of new projects under the Carl Moyer Program. These reductions were estimated based on the committed level of funding for this Program and a conservative cost-effectiveness assumption of $14,300 per ton specified in the Carl Moyer Program guidelines (although existing projects have substantially lower (better) cost-effectiveness estimates).

MOB-05 ? AB923 LIGHT-DUTY HIGH-EMITTER IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM: This measure calls for the identification of high-emitting on-road light- and medium-duty vehicles up to 8,500 lbs gross vehicle weight. The District is currently conducting a pilot program to identify high-emitters using remote sensing technologies. Owners of identified vehicles will be offered the ability to repair or scrap their vehicles as part of the program. The District is currently allocating a portion of the AB 923 funds for this purpose and CARB has developed guidelines to implement the program.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP MOB-06 ? AB923 MEDIUM-DUTY HIGH-EMITTER IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM: This measure is similar to SCONRD-02 and would include medium- duty and light-heavy-duty vehicles with 8,501 lbs and up to 14,000 lbs gross vehicle weight. Currently, vehicles in this weight category are not subject to in-use testing program. The AB923 program described in MOB-05 could be expanded to cover this category of vehicles.

MOB-07 ? CONCURRENT REDUCTIONS FROM GLOBAL WARMING STRATEGIES (ALL POLLUTANTS): Achieving the AB32 greenhouse gas reduction targets would require significant development and implementation of energy efficiency technologies and extensive shifting of energy production to renewable sources. In addition to reducing GHG emissions, such strategies could concurrently reduce emissions of criteria pollutants associated with fossil fuel combustion. This control measure proposes to quantify the concurrent emission reductions associated with Statewide GHG programs targeted at stationary and mobile sources in the Basin working with various state agencies. Every three to five years, concurrent emission reductions associated with these programs will be quantified and incorporated in the revised baseline emissions as part of the SIP revision process.

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS' (SCAG'S) REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY AND CONTROL MEASURES Transportation plans within the Basin are statutorily required to conform to air quality plans in the region, as established by the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act and subsequently reinforced by the Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficiency Act (ISTEA), Transportation Equity Act for the 21st-Century (TEA-21) and the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU).

The region must demonstrate that its transportation plans and programs conform to the mandate to meet the NAAQS in a timely manner. The regulations governing the implementation of transportation projects within air basins are stipulated in U.S. EPA's Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR Parts 51 and 93) and also the Joint Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)/Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regulations, "Planning Assistance and Standards," 23 CFR Part 450 and 49 CFR Part 613.

The long-term transportation planning requirements for emission reductions from on- road mobile sources within the Basin are met by SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) which is developed every four years with a 20-year planning horizon.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The short-term implementation requirements of the Transportation Conformity Rule are met by SCAG's biennial Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), the first two years of which are fiscally constrained and demonstrate timely implementation of a special category of transportation projects called Transportation Control Measures (TCMs).

The region is required to identify TCMs, as specified in the Federal Clean Air Act (Section 108 (f)(1)(A)) and also by U.S. EPA's Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR Part 93). In the event the region fell out of conformity, only those projects identified as TCMs may go forward. However, once a project is identified as a TCM, certain special conditions and obligations arise.

Timely Implementation: Projects identified as TCMs are tracked for timely implementation. In the event that a particular TCM project is delayed or otherwise fails, a substitute project must be implemented. SAFETEA-LU includes specific requirements on the substitution of TCMs, including similar time frame and emissions reductions, adequate funding and implementation through a collaborative process.

Emission Reductions: In the event that a TCM project is not implemented, an alternative project that provides equal or greater emissions reduction must be provided as a replacement for the original project.

Reasonably Available Control Measure (RACM) Analysis: The region must demonstrate that it has considered all reasonably available control measures, and that projects identified as TCMs have been chosen on the basis of such an analysis.

In general, TCMs are those projects that provide emission reductions from on-road mobile sources, based on changes in the patterns and modes by which the regional transportation system is used. The various strategies considered as part of the 2004 RTP and 2006 RTIP are defined, collectively, as a single TCM, with specific strategies grouped into its following three components: High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Strategy: This strategy attempts to reduce the proportion of commute trips made by single occupancy vehicles - the clearly preferred mode of travel within the Southern California region, constituting over 75% of all home-to-work trips, according to the 2000 U.S. Census - by increasing the share of HOV ridership within the region. HOV lanes are one example of such projects, where particular segments of heavily used freeways are designated for exclusive use by HOV vehicles, particularly during rush-hour traffic. The purpose of such measures is to make car-pooling and ride-sharing

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP practices more attractive to individuals who may otherwise prefer the convenience of a single occupancy vehicle commute trip.

Transit and Systems Management: This strategy relies primarily on the provision of facilities and infrastructure that incentivize an increase in the proportion of regional trips that make use of transit as a transportation mode. Such measures also promote the use of alternative modes of transportation (e.g., bicycle and pedestrian modes) and seek to incentivize increases in the average vehicle occupancy (AVO) or ridership (AVR) by facilitating van-pools, smart shuttles and other such strategies. Systems management measures include projects such as grade separation and traffic signal synchronization.

Information-based Transportation: This strategy relies primarily on the innovative provision of information in a manner that successfully influences the ways in which individuals use the regional transportation system. Typically, such measures seek to induce changes in trip behavior that beneficially influence the congestion and air pollution impacts of travel. One strategy attempts to increase the proportion of ride-sharing and car-pooling trips by providing information that makes it easier to match up people traveling to and from particular sets of origin and destination points. Another strategy attempts to shift the time-profile of demand - thus, transportation demand management (TDM) - by redistributing traffic flows from peak to off-peak hours. This strategy relies on providing single occupancy vehicle operators with realistic and near-real time estimates of congestion using internet-based information networks, in an effort to influence their decision to defer traveling to a less congested time of day.

The TCMs specified in the 2004 RTP, as well as the projects listed for implementation in the first two years of the 2006 RTIP, were developed as part of an extensive and comprehensive decision-making process that actively sought the input of key stakeholders throughout the region. At the culmination of the process, SCAG's Regional Council approved the transportation control measures and strategies included in the 2004 RTP, and subsequently the investment commitments contained in the 2006 RTIP. These measures and recommendations have accordingly been moved forward for inclusion in the region's air quality plans.

Table 4-4 provides the categories of TCMs as included in the 2006 RTIP, and based on the 2004 RTP, and consistent with the 1994, 1997/99 and 2003 AQMP/SIPs. Listings of the draft 2007 AQMP TCMs and the fiscally constrained projects from the 2004 RTP are contained in Appendix IV-C, Attachments A and B, respectively.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP It should be noted that while there have been and continue to be significant improvements in the emission control technology required for on-road vehicles1, trends assessed as part of the regional transportation planning process indicate that the increase in vehicle emissions resulting from increases in the number of vehicles on the road and the number of vehicle miles they each are driven may overwhelm future benefits from technology improvements. As a result, it is imperative that the region seek alternative and innovative ways to reduce transportation-related air pollution and environmental impacts.

1 Such measures are outside the definition of TCMs, which are discussed in more detail in Appendix IV-C: Regional Transportation Strategy and Control Measures.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-4 TCM Project Categories Based on the 2006 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) Project Description A. High Occupancy Vehicle Measures HOV projects, and their pricing alternatives ? New HOV Lanes ? Extensions and Additions to Existing Facilities ? New HOV Lanes ? With New Facility Projects ? New HOV Lanes -- With Facility Improvement Projects ? HOV to HOV Bypasses, Connectors, and New Interchanges with Ramp Meters ? High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes and Pricing Alternatives B. Transit and System Management Measures Bus, rail and shuttle transit expansion and improvements; park and ride lots and inter-modal transfer facilities; bicycle and pedestrian facilities; railroad consolidation programs such as the Alameda Corridor, grade separation projects, channelization, over-passes, underpasses; traffic signalization; intersection improvements Transit ? Rail Track ? New Lines ? Rail Track ? Capacity Expansion of Existing Lines ? New Rolling Stock Acquisition -- Rail Cars and/or Locomotives ? Express Busways ? Bus Rapid Transit and Dedicated Bus Lanes ? Buses ? Fleet Expansion ? Shuttles and Paratransit Vehicles ? Fleet Expansion Intermodal Transfer Facilities ? Rail Stations ? New ? Rail Stations ? Expansion ? Park & Ride Lots ? New ? Park & Ride Lots ? Expansion ? Bus Stations & Transfer Facilities ? New ? Bus Stations & Transfer Facilities ? Expansion Non-motorized Transportation Mode Facilities (non-recreational) ? Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities - New ? Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities - Expansion ? Bicycle Facilities ? New ? Bicycle Facilities - Expansion ? Pedestrian Facilities ? New ? Pedestrian Facilities - Expansion

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-4 (continued) TCM Project Categories Based on the 2006 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) C. Information-based Transportation Strategies Programs that promote and popularize multi-modal commute strategies to maximize alternatives to single-occupancy vehicle commute trips; marketing and promoting the use of HOV lanes or rail lines to the general public; educating the public regarding cost, locations, accessibility and services available at Park and Ride lots; promoting and marketing vanpool formation and incentive programs; promoting ride-matching services through the Internet and other means of making alternative travel option information more accessible to the general public; Urban Freeway System Management improvements; Smart Corridors System Management programs; Congestion Management Plan-based demand management strategies; county-/corridor-wide vanpool programs; seed money for transportation management associations (TMAs); and TDM ? Marketing for Rideshare Services and Transit/TDM/Intermodal Services ? Intelligent Transportation Systems/Control System Computerization ? Telecommuting Programs/Satellite Work Centers ? Real-time Rail, Transit, or Freeway Information Systems (changeable message signs)

The emission benefits associated with the regional transportation strategy are estimated to be 1.8 tons per day of VOC and 0.24 tons per day of PM2.5 reductions in 2014 and 1.7 tons per day of VOC and 0.2 ton per day of NOx reductions in 2023 which 2004 RTP and 2006 RTIP are already reflected in the projected emissions. For a detailed discussion of the emission reductions associated with the regional transportation strategy, refer to Appendix IV-C (Regional Transportation Strategy and Control Measures).

STATE AND FEDERAL SHORT-TERM AND MID-TERM CONTROL MEASURES In addition to District and SCAG's measures, the draft 2007 AQMP includes additional short- and mid-term control measures aimed at reducing emissions from sources that are primarily under State and federal jurisdiction, including on-road and off-road mobile sources, and consumer products. These measures are required in order to achieve the remaining emission reductions necessary for PM2.5 attainment.

The on-road motor sources category includes passenger cars, light-duty trucks, medium-duty vehicles, heavy-duty vehicles, and motorcycles. There are currently approximately 12 million vehicles in this category in the South Coast Basin. In 2002, these vehicles traveled more than 349 million miles per day; they are projected to travel about 407 million miles per day by the year 2020. CARB and U.S. EPA have primary authority to reduce emissions from on-road mobile sources, through the

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP adoption of emission standards and other related requirements. The District has some restrictions on its authority to impose requirements to reduce emissions from these sources. However, the District has reduced emissions from this source category through its trip reduction requirements for large employers (Rule 2002), public fleet rules, vehicle scrapping programs, and incentive programs.

Off-road mobile sources refer to off-road vehicles and mobile non-vehicular equipment categories such as aircraft, trains, marine vessels, farm and construction equipment (e.g., bulldozers), industrial equipment (e.g., forklifts), and utility equipment (e.g., lawn mowers). The authority to develop and implement regulations for off-road mobile sources lies primarily with the U.S. EPA and CARB. The District has limited authority to adopt retrofit requirements for some off-road mobile sources and has authority to adopt use and operation limits for such equipment.

Consumer products include products such as detergents, polishes, cosmetics, hairsprays, and disinfectants that are used primarily by household and institutional consumers. These products represent a significant source of VOC emissions in the Basin. Overall emissions from this category are determined both by the emissions characteristics of the types of products within the category, and by increases in product usage that are largely tied to population increases. CARB has the authority and responsibility to achieve the maximum technologically and commercially feasible VOC emission reductions from consumer products. However, CARB is prohibited from eliminating a product type (e.g., mode of dispensing).

Since the adoption of the 2003 AQMP, CARB has adopted a number of rules for mobile sources and consumer products as outlined in Table 1-3. However, these reductions fall short of CARB's commitment for its short-term measures in the 2003 AQMP. Collectively, mobile sources and consumer products which are primarily under state and federal jurisdiction account for 72% 76% of VOC (380 487 t/d), Therefore, a significant component of the PM2.5 (and ozone) attainment strategy is based on achieving substantial reductions from these sources.

On January 31, 2007, CARB released its draft Proposed Strategy for California's 2007 State Implementation Plan which identifies a number of near-term control measures aimed at reducing emissions from mobile sources and consumer products. In addition, several potential long-term concepts are also presented for achieving the needed reductions for ozone attainment by 2024. As indicated in the State strategy, CARB's proposed mobile source NOx measures are essential for attainment of both PM2.5 and ozone standards in the Basin. CARB also acknowledges that the proposed state measures do not provide adequate level of reductions for PM2.5 attainment by 2015 and proposes to delay the PM2.5 SIP submittal until April 2008

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP (i.e., official due date to U.S. EPA). CARB is proposing to make use of the available time to conduct further technical analyses on modeling and strategy development.

However, the District staff believes that an integrated PM2.5 and ozone Plan would provide a more appropriate control approach given the PM2.5 fast-approaching 2014 attainment deadline and the need for achieving substantial levels of emission reductions in the next several years. The District is concerned that if the PM2.5 SIP is delayed and the reduction targets are not established now, opportunities for rule development in the 2007/2008 timeframe would potentially be lost delaying the implementation of control strategies and jeopardizing the PM2.5 attainment. The District believes that additional emission reduction measures necessary for PM2.5 attainment beyond those proposed by CARB are technically and economically feasible through regulatory programs and/or incentive funding programs and should be incorporated into the 2007 AQMP. Therefore, for the proposed modifications to the draft AQMP, the District is proposing a comprehensive control strategy for attaining both PM2.5 and ozone standards which would be submitted to U.S. EPA for approval by June 2007.

The proposed modifications to the draft 2007 AQMP control strategy for sources under state and federal jurisdiction consist of two components: 1) CARB's Draft Proposed State Strategy and 2) District Staff's Proposed Policy Options to Supplement CARB's Control Strategy. CARB's draft proposed strategy and the District's proposed policy options are presented in Appendix IV-B-1 and IV-B-2, respectively.

CARB's PROPOSED STATE STRATEGY Introduction CARB staff is proposing a set of new measures to achieve emission reductions to help address California's most challenging ozone and PM2.5 problems. These measures are designed to make progress toward the federal 8-hour ozone standard in the South Coast and the San Joaquin Valley. The measures include near-term NOx and SOx emission reduction goals, reflecting the nature and scope of the PM2.5 problem in these regions. To achieve the emission reductions needed for both ozone and PM2.5, the State Strategy proposes new near-term actions that can be completed by 2010 or soon thereafter.

Need for Fleet Modernization CARB's mobile source program has moved the State's nonattainment areas closer to meeting federal air quality standards. California has dramatically tightened emission

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP standards for new on-road and off-road mobile sources and fuels. As new engines have become cleaner and cleaner, the emissions contribution from older vehicles has been growing to the extent that it will soon make up the majority of mobile source emissions. For example, by 2014, heavy-duty trucks 14 years or older will produce 51 percent of total heavy-duty truck NOx emissions while only traveling 20 percent of total truck miles. The same holds true for all on-road vehicles combined, where vehicles over 14 years old will produce almost 60 percent of total NOx emissions by 2014 but just 20 percent of total miles traveled.

While California has made significant strides in reducing emissions from mobile sources as they age, the benefits of in-use control programs are limited by the underlying engine technology and controls. The majority of new measures in the State Strategy are in-use measures ? programs to help clean up or replace older, dirtier vehicles and equipment. We simply cannot wait for the natural turnover of older vehicles and equipment (1-5 percent annual turnover depending on vehicle or equipment type) being replaced with newer, cleaner vehicles. The challenge is that these measures have a much more direct impact on businesses and individuals in California than do engine standards that have a more direct impact on manufacturers. ARB's fleet rules will affect owners of public and private vehicles and equipment that operate in nonattainment areas throughout the State.

Compliance flexibility has historically been included in CARB regulations ? allowing the most cost-effective methods to be used by those who must meet emission requirements. And while lower-cost emission control devices will likely play an important role in lowering emissions from existing mobile fleets, a certain degree of more costly engine and vehicle replacements will be needed to lower fleet emissions. This will place a larger financial burden on owners of vehicles and equipment, so the appropriate role of incentive funds will be an issue. It will be important to prioritize the use of any incentive funds in a way that generates maximum emission reductions and health protection benefits, while helping to reduce the burden for those most in need of financial assistance. It is also important to recognize that the current public funds can pay for only a portion of the cost for necessary modernization of California's diesel engine fleets.

The nature of the proposed new measures (enforceable rules) and California's history of supportive financial incentives provide a sound basis for reductions from incentive programs to meet federal requirements for SIP approval.

Accountability for Emission Reductions California's SIP must outline the plan for meeting air quality standards in all of its nonattainment areas. When ARB staff proposes its SIP State Strategy for Board approval, it will include an enforceable commitment to achieve the overall goals set.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The details of each new measure are publicly considered during separate formal rulemaking processes. If a particular measure does not ultimately achieve the emission reductions estimated in the SIP, the State is still bound to achieve the total aggregate emission reduction commitment, whether this is realized through additional reductions from other new measures, or from alternative control measures or incentive programs.

Summary of Proposed New SIP Measures ON-ROAD SOURCES Passenger Vehicles Improvements and Enhancements to California's Smog Check Program Low Pressure Evaporative Test. Require low pressure evaporative system testing and repair of evaporative system leaks for all vehicles subject to Smog Check inspection.

More Stringent Cutpoints. Set more stringent pass/fail cutpoints to ensure more cars would have more complete and durable repairs.

Annual Inspections for Older Vehicles. Inspect older vehicles annually rather than every two years. Older vehicles tend to have greater deterioration of emission controls, and consequently, higher emissions.

Annual Inspections for High Annual Mileage Vehicles. Inspect annually, rather than every two years, vehicles that accrue very high mileage on an annual basis. High mileage vehicles tend to have greater deterioration of emission controls and, consequently, higher emissions.

Add Visible Smoke Test. As part of the Smog Check test, include a check for visible smoke to identify vehicles with excess particulate matter (PM) emissions.

Inspection of Light- and Medium-Duty Diesels. Include light- and medium-duty diesel vehicles in the Smog Check program to provide for improved maintenance and reduced emissions for this part of the fleet, and require the repair of poorly maintained or old emission systems.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Inspection of Motorcycles. Include motorcycle inspections as part of Smog Check. Studies indicate that motorcycles are subject to high rates of exhaust system tampering.

Expanded Passenger Vehicle Retirement. Increase the number of vehicles that are voluntarily retired by implementing a scrappage program for vehicles that are off-cycle from their Smog Check inspections.

Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program. Modify California's Reformulated Gasoline Program to offset ROG emissions due to the increased use of ethanol. This rulemaking activity is currently underway and is intended to fully mitigate the emission increase, which has been incorporated in the current emissions inventory.

Trucks Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks. This proposed measure is a comprehensive in-use diesel truck emissions reduction program that includes a fleet modernization rule and an enhanced screening and repair program. Fleet modernization would focus on overcoming the typically slow rate of heavy-duty truck turnover by requiring truck owners to meet specified emission levels through replacing or cleaning up the oldest trucks in their fleets, and would also include a program for out-of-state trucks. ARB's roadside heavy-duty vehicle inspection program would be expanded to more effectively identify and screen trucks that need emission control system repairs.

GOODS MOVEMENT SOURCES Auxiliary Ship Engine Cold Ironing and Other Clean Technology. Reduce emissions from ships at berth with at-dock technologies such as cold ironing (electrical power) and other clean technologies.

Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel. Further reduce emissions from main engines through added retrofits such as selected catalytic reduction. Support efforts by ports and appropriate local entities to accelerate use of cleaner ships and rebuilt engines through other tools such as lease restrictions. Require ships to use low sulfur diesel fuel in main engines when operating within 24 nautical miles of shore.

Port Truck Modernization. Retrofit or replace older heavy-duty diesel trucks that service ports. Work with port authorities to prevent adding older trucks to the fleet. ARB rulemaking process for this proposed measure has begun.

Accelerated Introduction of Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives. Replace existing locomotive engines with cleaner Tier 3 engines beginning in 2012 and conduct concurrent rebuilds of older engines to Tier 2.5 standards. This measure can only occur if U.S. EPA adopts Tier 3 engines standards for locomotives.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Clean Up Existing Commercial Harbor Craft. Require owners of existing commercial harbor craft to replace old engines (both propulsion and auxiliary) with newer cleaner engines and/or add emission control technologies that clean up engine exhaust. ARB rulemaking for this proposed measure is underway.

OFF-ROAD SOURCES Construction and Other Equipment Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment. Establish fleet average emission limits for off- road equipment (over 25 horsepower) that would require older, dirtier engines to be replaced with engines reflecting current technologies or retrofitted with emission control devices. ARB rulemaking for this proposed measure is in process.

Agricultural Equipment Agricultural Equipment Fleet Modernization. Accelerate the modernization of the fleet of agricultural equipment used in California, removing older, dirtier equipment from service to be replaced with engines reflecting cleaner technologies.

Evaporative and Exhaust Strategies New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats. Adopt catalyst-based standards (5 g/kW-hr) for new outboard engines and evaporative emission standards to address all sources of recreational boat evaporative emissions.

Off-Road Recreational Vehicle Expanded Emission Standards. Adopt exhaust and evaporative emission standards to reduce the amount of ROG from off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles.

Portable Outboard Marine Tank Evaporative Standards. Set evaporative standards for removable fuel tanks used on outboard recreational boats.

Refueling Gasoline Tank Evaporative Standards. Set evaporative standards for refueling gasoline tanks typically mounted on pickups and large recreational vehicles and used to refuel equipment and other smaller vehicles.

Gas Station Refueling Hose Evaporative Standards. Set evaporative standards for gas station pump hoses.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above Ground Storage Tanks. Implement an enhanced vapor recovery certification process and new performance standards and specifications for large fuel tanks used extensively in agricultural operations.

AREAWIDE SOURCES Consumer Products Tighten Standards. Tighten standards or require product reformulation for consumer products categories through several rulemakings through 2010.

Pesticides New Pesticide Strategies. The California Department of Pesticide Regulation will further reduce emissions from commercial and agricultural pesticide use in California through reformulation, reduced usage, and innovative technologies and practices.

The following tables show the expected emission reductions from the CARB's proposed new SIP measures in 2014, 2020, and 2023. It should be noted that the reductions associated with three off-road measures (i.e., portable outboard marine tank, refueling gasoline storage tank, and gas station fueling hose evaporative standards) presented here are not used for SIP purposes since the source categories for these measures are not reflected in the baseline at this time.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-5A 2014 Expected Emission Reductions from CARB's Proposed New SIP Measures (tons per day) Proposed New SIP Measures NOx ROG PM2.5 SOx ON-ROAD SOURCES

Passenger Vehicles 14.4 17.7 0.2 -- Smog Check Improvements (BAR) 12.0 10.5 0.2 -- Expanded Vehicle Retirement 2.4 2.8 0.05 -- Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program -- 4.4 -- -- Trucks 47.3 5.1 3.0 -- Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks 47.3 5.1 3.0 -- GOODS MOVEMENT SOURCES 49.4 1.2 3.6 20.3 Auxiliary Ship Engine Cold Ironing and Other Clean Technology 18.5 -- 0.3 0.4 Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel 20.0 -- 2.4 19.7 Port Truck Modernization 2.0 -- 0.5 -- Accelerated Introduction of Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives* 4.3 0.7 0.2 -- Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 4.6 0.5 0.2 -- OFF-ROAD SOURCES OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 13.8 2.2 2.5 -- Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment (over 25hp) 13.8 2.2 2.5 -- AGRICULTURAL EQUIPMENT NYQ NYQ NYQ 0 OTHER OFF-ROAD SOURCES 0.4 16.9 -- -- New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 0.4 4.2 -- -- Expanded Off-Road Recreational Vehicle Emission Standards -- 1.4 -- -- Portable Outboard Marine Tank Evaporative Standards (1) -- 1.8 -- -- Refueling Gasoline Storage Tank Evaporative Standards(1) -- 1.6 -- -- Gas Station Fueling Hose Evaporative Standards(1) -- 1.5 -- -- Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above Ground Storage Tanks -- NYQ -- -- Proposed New SIP Measures NOx ROG PM2.5 SOx REAWIDE SOURCES CONSUMER PRODUCTS -- 12.9 -- -- CONSUMER PRODUCTS PROGRAM -- 12.9 -- -- PESTICIDES -- NYQ -- -- DPR 2008 Pesticide Plan Total Emission Reductions from Proposed New Measures 125 45 9 20 NYQ = Not Yet Quantified. BAR = Bureau of Automotive Repair. DPR = Department of Pesticide Regulation Locomotive measure relies on U.S. EPA rulemaking and industry agreement to accelerate fleet turnover. Note: Emission reductions reflect the combination impact of regulations and supportive incentive programs. (1) These measures are not considered for SIP purposes since the source categories for these measures are not reflected in the baseline at this time.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-5B 2020 Expected Emission Reductions from CARB's Proposed New SIP Measures (tons per day) Proposed New SIP Measures NOx ROG PM2.5 SOx ON-ROAD SOURCES Passenger Vehicles 9.6 12.9 0.3 -- Smog Check Improvements (BAR) 8.3 8.7 0.2 -- Expanded Vehicle Retirement 1.3 1.2 0.06 -- Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program -- 3.0 -- -- Trucks 26.9 2.6 1.5 -- Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks 26.9 2.6 1.5 -- GOODS MOVEMENT SOURCES 87.1 2.3 4.3 26.1 Auxiliary Ship Engine Cold Ironing and Other Clean Technology 28.3 -- 0.4 0.7 Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel 32.3 -- 3.1 25.4 Port Truck Modernization 8.0 -- 0.3 -- Accelerated Introduction of Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives* 13.4 1.8 0.3 -- Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 5.1 0.5 0.2 -- OFF-ROAD SOURCES OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 13.2 2.1 1.7 -- Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment (over 25hp) 13.2 2.1 1.7 -- AGRICULTURAL EQUIPMENT NYQ NYQ NYQ 0 OTHER OFF-ROAD SOURCES 1.6 33.7 -- -- New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 1.6 12.8 -- -- Expanded Off-Road Recreational Vehicle Emission Standards -- 2.4 -- -- Portable Outboard Marine Tank Evaporative Standards(1) -- 2.9 -- -- Refueling Gasoline Storage Tank Evaporative Standards(1) -- 1.9 -- -- Gas Station Fueling Hose Evaporative Standards(1) -- 1.6 -- -- Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above Ground Storage Tanks -- NYQ -- -- AREAWIDE SOURCES CONSUMER PRODUCTS -- 13.5 -- -- CONSUMER PRODUCTS PROGRAM -- 13.5 -- -- PESTICIDES -- NYQ -- -- DPR 2008 Pesticide Plan Total Emission Reductions from Proposed New Measures 138 49 8 26 NYQ = Not Yet Quantified. BAR = Bureau of Automotive Repair. DPR = Department of Pesticide Regulation * Locomotive measure relies on U.S. EPA rulemaking and industry agreement to accelerate fleet turnover. Note: Emission reductions reflect the combination impact of regulations and supportive incentive programs.

(1) These measures are not considered for SIP purposes since the source categories for these measures are not reflected in the baseline at this time.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-5C 2023 Expected Emission Reductions from CARB's Proposed New SIP Measures (tons per day) South Coast Proposed New SIP Measures NOx ROG ON-ROAD SOURCES

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP CARB is developing a new statewide emission reduction strategy to achieve federal PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone standards in California. While the most severe ozone nonattainment areas have up to 2024 to achieve the federal standard, the PM2.5 standard must be achieved no later than 2015. CARB staff is focusing first on near- term emission reductions to meet the 2015 deadline. These strategies will provide additional new reductions post-2015 and form the foundation for longer term strategies needed for ozone attainment. Table 4-5 shows emission reduction estimates for the concepts CARB is evaluating for possible inclusion in the new statewide strategy. CARB has also provided brief descriptions of these concepts.

Over the next several months, CARB staff will provide a number of opportunities for the public to participate in the formal process to develop the Statewide control strategy. On October 12, 2006, CARB staff will host a SIP Symposium to seek public input into developing emission reduction strategies necessary to achieve federal clean air standards.1 In November, CARB will hold additional public meetings to provide more opportunity for public comment on the concepts presented at the Symposium. In early 2007, CARB staff will release a Draft State strategy and hold additional workshops. CARB will hold a public hearing to consider adoption of a proposed Statewide strategy in Spring 2007 .

Table 4-5 Summary of the New Statewide Strategy Under Evaluation by CARB Staff Emission Reduction Estimate2 from Near-Term Concepts Under Evaluation for State and Federal Measures Ozone and PM2.5 Precursor Reductions (2014, tpd) NOx VOC Passenger Vehicles 24 39 Smog Check Improvements Expanded BAR Vehicle Retirement plus Parts Replacement California Phase 3 Reformulated Gasoline Modifications Expanded Motorcycle Standards 1 For further information on the SIP Symposium, please refer to the ARB website at (http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2006sym/2006sym.htm) 2 These are initial concepts. ARB staff will work closely with the regulated communities, manufacturers of emission control technologies and equipment, environmental and community advocacy groups, and local, state and federal governmental agencies to develop the emission control strategy the Board ultimately considers in the spring of 2007.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Ozone and PM2.5 Precursor Reductions (2014, tpd) NOx VOC Trucks 51 5 Expanded Diesel Truck Fleet Modernization Program Additional Reductions from Out-of-State Trucks in California Diesel Truck Emissions Tracking and Inspection Program Goods Movement1 40 1 Tugboat Cold Ironing Auxiliary Ship Engine Hotelling Main Ship Engine Clean Fuel Enhanced Main Ship Engine Control Table 4-5 (Concluded) Ozone and PM2.5 Precursor Reductions (2014, tpd) Goods Movement (continued) Port Truck Modernization Locomotive Engines Construction Equipment 15 2 Construction Equipment Fleet Averages/Fleet Modernization Construction Equipment Idling Limitations Agricultural Equipment NYQ NYQ Other Engine Exhaust and Evaporation 6 11 Accelerate Turnover of Pre-1999 Outboard/Personal Water Craft (PWC) Engines Lower (Catalyst-Based) Exhaust Standards for Outboard/PWCs GSE - Increase Percent ZEVs / Lower Fleet Averages Recreational Vehicle Evaporative Standards 1 Emission benefits are based on the full implementation of the strategies in the Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement in California adopted by ARB in April 2006, excluding emission reductions from the private truck fleet rule component. Emission reductions from the private truck fleet rule are evaluated in the ?Trucks? category.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Ozone and PM2.5 Precursor Reductions (2014, tpd) 2006 Large Spark Ignited Engine Regulation Consumer Products 0 9 Pesticides1 0 NYQ Approximate Total from State and Federal Measures 135 65 * NYQ ? Not Yet Quantified CARB'S DESCRIPTION OF CONTROL CONCEPTS PASSENGER VEHICLES SMOG CHECK IMPROVEMENTS Low Pressure Evaporative Test. Require low pressure evaporative system testing and repair of evaporative system leaks for all vehicles subject to Smog Check inspection.

More Stringent Cutpoints. Set more stringent Smog Check cutpoints. Many vehicles that are repaired under Smog Check are likely to fail the next time they are tested. More stringent cutpoints would require more cars to be repaired, and help ensure more complete and durable repairs.

Annual Inspections for Older Vehicles. Inspect older vehicles annually rather than every two years. Older vehicles tend to have more deterioration of emission controls, and consequently, higher emissions.

Annual Inspections for High Annual Mileage Vehicles. Inspect annually, rather than every two, vehicles that accrue very high mileage on an annual basis years. High mileage vehicles tend to have more deterioration of emission controls, and consequently, higher emissions.

Add Visible Smoke Test. Check for visible smoke as part of the Smog Check inspection to identify vehicles with excess PM emissions that would otherwise pass Smog Check.

1 The California Department of Pesticide Regulation is currently developing pesticide emission control concepts for inclusion in the statewide strategy.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Idle Testing in Enhanced Smog Check Areas. Supplement the dynamometer testing currently required in Enhanced Smog Check areas with an idle emissions test. Results from a pilot program conducted in Enhanced Smog Check areas indicate that testing emissions at idle has the potential to identify excess emissions that would not be identified through dynamometer testing alone.

Inspection of Light and Medium Duty Diesels. Include light and medium duty diesel vehicles in the Smog Check program. This control concept would reduce excess emissions from these vehicles by encouraging improved maintenance for this part of the fleet, and by requiring the repair of poorly maintained or old emission systems.

Inspection of Motorcycles. Include motorcycle inspections as part of Smog Check. Studies indicate that motorcycles are subject to high rates of exhaust system tampering.

EXPANDED BAR VEHICLE RETIREMENT PROGRAM PLUS PARTS REPLACEMENT. Ramp up BAR scrappage program from current 18,000 per year. Offer scrap for vehicles within 20 percent of cutpoints and off the regular Smog Check cycle. Additionally, provide consumer incentives to replace emission control system parts (particularly catalysts) in vehicles that pass their Smog Check Inspections but have ROG or NOx emissions concentrations within 20 percent of cut-points.

Modify California's Reformulated Gasoline Program to offset ROG emissions due to the increased use of ethanol. This rulemaking activity is currently underway and is intended to fully mitigate the emission increase. These increases are in the current inventory.

TIGHTER MOTORCYCLE STANDARDS. Reduce motorcycle exhaust and evaporative emissions standards by 50 percent beginning in 2013.

TRUCKS EXPANDED TRUCK FLEET MODERNIZATION PROGRAM. Accelerate the modernization of California's heavy-duty truck fleet by requiring older trucks to be replaced with newer, cleaner trucks that use advanced technology engines (trucks that meet ?Tier 3? standards) in calendar years 2010-2015. Use incentive funds, where available, to assist in the replacement, repowering, or retrofit of older ?captive? fleets used for short to medium distance hauling.

ADDITIONAL REDUCTIONS FROM OUT-OF-STATE TRUCKS IN CALIFORNIA. Reduce emissions from out-of-state trucks that operate in California, using either a rule or another mechanism such as an MOU. Trucks registered outside of California are estimated to account for approximately 25 percent of statewide mileage accrued by heavy-duty trucks.

TRUCK EMISSIONS TRACKING AND INSPECTION PROGRAM. Reduce excess emissions from heavy-duty trucks that can be attributed to engine deterioration, poor

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP maintenance, or tampering by expanding the Heavy-Duty Vehicle Inspection Program (HDVIP) to include visual, under-the-hood inspections of the emission control devices, an electronic check of the truck's on-board computer, and use of remote emission sensing technology to identify and screen trucks for roadside inspections.

GOODS MOVEMENT TUGBOAT COLD IRONING. Require tugboats to use shore-based electrical power when idling.

AUXILIARY SHIP ENGINE HOTELLING. Reduce hotelling emissions with at-dock technologies such as cold ironing and other clean technologies (i.e., the ?hood?).

MAIN SHIP ENGINE CLEAN FUELS. Require ships to use low sulfur diesel fuel (0.1 percent) in main engines when operating within 24 miles of shore.

ENHANCED MAIN SHIP ENGINE CONTROL. Modernize main engines through added retrofits such as selected catalytic reduction. Support efforts by ports and appropriate local entities to encourage the accelerated use of cleaner ships and rebuilds through other tools such as lease restrictions.

PORT TRUCK MODERNIZATION. Retrofit or replace the older heavy-duty diesel trucks that service ports, and work with port authorities to prevent older trucks from joining the fleet. Retrofit all trucks with diesel particulate filter by 2010 and, where feasible, NOx retrofits. Require trucks entering port service in 2007 and later years to meet 2003 standards; trucks entering port service after 2012 to meet 2007 standards, and trucks entering port service after 2015 to meet 2010 standards. Require remaining pre-2007 trucks to be retired or replaced with newer trucks by 2019.

LOCOMOTIVE ENGINES. Replace existing line haul locomotive engines with newer, cleaner Tier 3 engines beginning 2012; concurrently rebuild older engines to more modern (Tier 2.5) standards. Efforts are already underway to reduce community exposure to toxic diesel particulate matter from locomotives through reduced locomotive idling, the increased use of clean fuels, and the accelerated replacement of older ?switcher? locomotives with newer, cleaner technologies.

CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT Establish fleet average emission limits for construction fleets that would require older, dirtier engines to be replaced with engines reflecting current technologies.

CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT IDLING LIMITATIONS. Adopt regulations to eliminate unnecessary idling by construction equipment.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP AGRICULTURAL EQUIPMENT FLEET MODERNIZATION. Accelerate the modernization of the fleet of agricultural equipment used in California, removing older, dirtier equipment from service to be replaced with engines reflecting cleaner technologies.

OTHER ENGINE EXHAUST AND EVAPORATION OUTBOARD MOTORS. Accelerate the retirement of pre-1999 two-stroke outboard engines. Adopt catalyst-based standards (5 g/kW-hr) for new outboard engines.

RECREATIONAL VEHICLE EVAPORATIVE STANDARDS. Adopt evaporative emission standards to reduce the amount of reactive organic gases that evaporate from sources such as fuel tank, carbon canisters, and fuel lines.

AIRPORT GROUND SERVICE EQUIPMENT. Set requirements for the use of zero emission equipment and lower fleet average emission.

2006 LARGE SPARK-IGNITION (LSI) ENGINE REGULATION. More stringent exhaust standards and declining fleet average to accelerate turnover of older, higher emitting engines. (adopted in 2006) CONSUMER PRODUCTS CONSUMER PRODUCTS. Continue setting standards based on the current survey and reformulation approach in the near-term followed by new more innovative approaches post- 2015.

PESTICIDES PESTICIDES. The California Department of Pesticide Regulation will identify strategies to reduce emissions from commercial and agricultural pesticide use in California through reformulation, reduced usage, and use of innovative technologies and practices.

DISTRICT STAFF'S PROPOSED POLICY OPTIONS TO SUPPLEMENT CARB'S CONTROL STRATEGY Additional reductions in mobile source emissions beyond the reductions identified in CARB's mobile source control strategy are needed in order for the South Coast Air Basin to attain the federal PM2.5 ambient air quality standard by 2015. To achieve the necessary reductions poses several challenges. The most significant challenge is the short timeframe to achieve the necessary reductions. This challenge can be partially overcome with early actions to affect mobile source cleanup through voluntary incentive programs such as the Carl Moyer Program. However, additional public funds are needed to accelerate such efforts. Regulatory actions to mandate mobile source cleanup are also needed beyond those identified by CARB to date.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The District staff believes that a combination of regulatory actions and public funding is the most effective means of achieving emission reductions. As such, the 2007 AQMP proposes three policy options for the decision makers to consider in achieving additional reductions. The first option is the District staff's proposed additional control measures as a menu of selections to further reduce emissions from sources primarily under State and federal jurisdiction. The proposed additional control measures represent a menu of measures that the State could implement and are intended to complement CARB's mobile source control strategy with defined short-term and mid-term control measures needed for reaching attainment by 2015 and to meet legal requirements.

The proposed additional control measures are also intended to highlight the level of stringency and reductions needed from State and federal sources for attainment. These measures can be modified or substitutes can be developed by the implementing agencies to achieve equivalent or greater reductions in the time frame needed for PM2.5 attainment. The proposed rate of progress for NOx under Policy Option 1 is shown in Figure 4-2. It should also be noted that full implementation of the proposed measures will result in significant reductions in air toxic contaminants.

The second option is to have the state fulfill its NOx emission reduction obligations under 2003 AQMP by 2010 for its short-term defined control measures plus additional reductions needed to meet the NOx emission target between 2010 and 2014. Under this option the state could include some of the proposed measures under the first option or other measures that the state identifies as part of the SIP public process. The rate of progress for NOx under Policy Option 2 is also shown in Figure 4-2.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP FIGURE 4-2 NOx Rate-of-Progress for the Three Policy Options The third option is based on the same rate of progress under Policy Option 1, but it relies heavily on public funding assistance to achieve the needed NOx reductions via accelerated fleet turnover to post-2010 on-road emission standards or the cleanest off-road engine standards in effect today or after 2010. Under Policy Option 3, CARB or the District would assume the responsibility of implementing the incentive programs based on specific funding designated for this purpose. Based on the analysis performed for the Carl Moyer program, up to an estimated $600 million per year is needed between 2009 and 2014. Table 4-6 illustrates possible funding sources that have been suggested in the past by various parties and the District staff has included these as a mater of perspective and is seeking comments and suggestions on appropriate funding sources.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-6 Example List of Past Suggested Funding Sources by Various Parties* Potential Funding Sources Potential Funding Levels Carl Moyer Program ~$35 - $50 million/yr MSRC Program ~ $8 - $10 million/yr Marine Ports User Fee Proposals ~$250 million/yr 1-cent Increase in Fuel Tax ~$70 - $80 million/yr * Sources listed in Table 4-6 are provided for discussion purposes only.

The District staff recognizes these are very difficult policy choices the Basin is facing, but not meeting the PM2.5 standard by 2015 is not an acceptable public policy in light of recent health studies on particulate matter, not to mention the potential adverse economic impacts on the region due to potential federal sanctions. The following sections further describe the three policy options.

Policy Option 1 Table 4-7 provides a list of the proposed additional control measures for on-road and off-road mobile sources with estimated reductions in 2014 and 2023 for CARB's consideration under this option. Based on CARB's proposed mobile source control strategy, District staff refined its evaluation of the control measures recommended in the Draft AQMP. Depending on the mobile source sector and the proposed control approach, District staff analyzed the need to accelerate the penetration of cleaner engine technologies. The control measures proposed in Table 4-6 represent strategies that are technologically feasible. However, implementation challenges such as cost and need to implement as soon as possible must be overcome. For goods movement source categories such as marine vessels, trucks, rail, and cargo handling equipment, the control measures proposed by the District are primarily based on a hybrid approach that relies on measures and strategies outlined in CARB's Goods Movement Emissions Reduction Plan and the adopted San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan. However, where warranted, a number of measures from these plans have been revised to reflect a higher level of stringency or fleet penetration in order to achieve the necessary reductions for attainment. Detailed descriptions of these control measures are provided in the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-B-2.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-7 Additional Mobile Source Control Measures Proposed by the District Control Measure Title Estimated Reductions (t/d) Number 2014 2023 SCONRD-01 Accelerated Penetration of Advanced VOC: 0.4 VOC: 2.1 Technology Partial Zero-Emission and Zero NOx: 0.9 NOx: 4.5 Emission Vehicles PM2.5: 0.04 PM2.5: 0.4 SCONRD-02 Deployment of On-Board Diagnostics (Phase VOC: 0.4 VOC: 1.2 III) in Light- and Medium-Duty Vehicles NOx: 2.9 NOx: 4.7 SCONRD-03 Further Emission Reductions from On-Road VOC: VOC: Heavy-Duty Vehicles NOx: 20.9 NOx: 5.0 PM2.5: 1.2 PM2.5: 0.2 SCONRD-04 Further Emission Reductions from Heavy- NOx: 6.3 NOx: 0.0 Duty Trucks Providing Freight Drayage PM2.5: 0.02 PM2.5: 0.0 Services SCOFFRD-01 Construction/Industrial Equipment Fleet VOC: 3.0 VOC: 1.3 Modernization NOx: 15.8 NOx: 15.9 SCOFFRD-02 Further Emission Reductions from Cargo NOx: 1.1 NOx: 0.6 Handling Equipment PM2.5: 0.02 PM2.5:0.01 SCOFFRD-03 Further Emission Reductions from NOx: 11.0 NOx: 3.3 Locomotives PM2.5: 0.4 PM2.5: 0.1 SCOFFRD-04 Emission Reductions from Airport Ground VOC: 0.3 VOC: 0.3 Support Equipment NOx: 0.8 NOx: 0.6 SCOFFRD-05 Emission Reductions from Transport NOx: 1.1 NOx: 5.3 Refrigeration Units SCOFFRD-06 Accelerated Turnover and Catalyst-Based VOC: 2.9 VOC: 12.6 Standards for Pleasure Craft NOx: 1.0 NOx: 9.1 PM2.5: 0.6 PM2.5: 4.0 SCFUEL-01 Further Emission Reductions from Gasoline NOx: 5.2 NOx: 2.7 Fuels SOx 1.4 SOx: 1.5 SCFUEL-02 Further Emission Reductions from Diesel NOx: 3.9 NOx: 4.2 Fuels SOx: 0.05 SOx: 0.1 PM2.5: 0.2 PM2.5: 0.2 VOC: 7.0 VOC: 17.3 Total NOx: 70.9 NOx: 55.7 SOx: 1.4 SOx: 1.6 PM2.5: 2.6 PM2.5: 4.9

The recommended mobile source control measures focus on aggressive accelerated turnover of older, existing vehicles with the cleanest engines commercially available. This would require the commercial availability of on-road advanced technology

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP partial zero emissions vehicles (ATPZEV) such as plug-in hybrids or cleaner vehicles in the light- and medium-duty sector and heavy-duty vehicles that meet future exhaust emission standards. Several automobile manufacturers are producing gasoline hybrid electric vehicles that meet the PZEV levels. Some of the newer models meet the cleanest PZEV level (commonly termed, advanced technology PZEV or ATPZEV). Control Measure SCONRD-01 calls for accelerated sales of about 100,000 new plug-in hybrid vehicles that meet the ATPZEV by 2014 and additional 900,000 vehicles by 2020. Based on the estimated annual sales of about 600,000 new vehicles per year, District staff believes that if such a program is implemented, the proposed replacement could occur. Relative to heavy-duty vehicles, Control Measure SCONRD-03 target an additional 15 percent of the oldest, pre-2010 heavy-duty vehicles (about 21,000 older existing heavy-duty diesel vehicles) be replaced with new vehicles or retrofitted with after-treatment control devices meeting 2010 exhaust emission standards . This would be in addition to CARB's proposed control strategy for on-road heavy-duty vehicles, which is envisioned to affect about 38,000 heavy-duty vehicles. There are about 190,000 heavy-duty vehicles estimated to be operating in the South Coast Basin in 2014. The accelerated replacement program would seek essentially a replacement of 30 percent of the total fleet with the cleanest commercially available vehicles.

For the off-road mobile source sector, proposed additional control measures call for the replacement of these mostly uncontrolled emissions with newer, cleaner models. Control Measure SCOFFRD-01 proposes that older construction and industrial equipment be replaced or repowered with the cleanest available engines through more stringent NOx fleet average requirements than those proposed by CARB. Control Measure SCOFFRD-04 calls for accelerated replacement of airport ground support equipment with electric models to, at a minimum, meet the emission reductions provided in the Memorandum of Understanding that was terminated by the Air Transport Association in 2006. Also, a large number of pleasure craft are powered by older two-stroke engines. As such, Control Measures SCOFFRD-06 would seek accelerated replacement of older two stroke engines that emit higher levels of VOC, NOx, and PM.

In addition to accelerated fleet turnover, several of the measures recommend accelerated retrofits of vehicle and equipment with after-treatment control devices to further reduce NOx and PM emissions. Specifically, Control Measure SCONRD-03 seeks for post-2007 to 2009 on-road heavy-duty vehicles to be retrofitted with control devices to reduce NOx emissions by at least 30 percent. Control Measure SCOFFRD-05 calls for similar emission benefits through an accelerated replacement or retrofit programs for truck refrigeration units.

Relative to goods movement related sources, Control Measures SCOFFRD-02 ? cargo handling equipment and SCOFFRD-03 ? locomotives, seek accelerated

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP replacement and retrofitting of existing engines and equipment consistent with the measures provided in the adopted San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan and CARB's Goods Movement Emissions Reduction Plan. Other goods movement related measures called for in the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan are covered in CARB's proposed control strategy. However, relative to on-road trucks providing drayage services to the marine ports, SCONRD-04 is included to reflect the implementation of the heavy-duty truck measure provided in the adopted San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan.

In addition to proposed additional reduction from on-road and off-road mobile sources, two measures are proposed for lower sulfur content gasoline fuels and greater use of diesel fuel alternatives, which will provide additional NOx emission reduction benefits as well as lower sulfur emissions.

Furthermore, the proposed additional control measures include three long-term measures to be implemented after 2015, which call for additional NOx emission reductions in the on-road and off-road mobile sectors and VOC reductions from consumer products. The long-term strategies include cleaner gasoline and diesel fuels, greater use of diesel fuel alternatives, expanded modernization programs for heavy-duty vehicles, off-road equipment, marine vessels, advanced cargo transportation systems, and additional reductions from aircraft.

The District staff's proposed additional mobile source control measures are estimated to achieve 7 tons per day of VOC, 70.9 tons per day of NOx, 1.4 tons per day of SOx, and 2.6 tons per day of PM2.5 emission reductions in 2014. In 2023, the estimated reductions for these measures are 17.3 tons per day of VOC, 55.7 tons per day of NOx, 1.6 tons per day of SOx, and 4.9 tons per day of PM2.5 emissions.

The following text provides a brief description of the proposed additional mobile source control measures: SCONRD-01 ? ACCELERATED PENETRATION OF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY PARTIAL ZERO-EMISSION AND ZERO-EMISSION VEHICLES: This proposed control measure focuses on the accelerated penetration and implementation of advanced technologies that are capable of achieving partial zero-tailpipe emissions. CARB through its fleet averaging requirements under the current Low Emission Vehicle II program can ensure the availability of advanced technology partial zero-emission vehicles (ATPZEVs) in the California market. This proposed measure would require new sales of ATPZEVs such as plug-in hybrids or cleaner vehicles beginning in 2011 such that there will be about 100,000 new vehicles operating by 2014 and a total of 1 million operating by 2020. This proposal is consistent with the Governor's recent announcement to have 7 million alternative fueled or hybrids on the road by 2020.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP SCONRD-02 ? DEPLOYMENT OF ON-BOARD DIAGNOSTICS (PHASE III) IN LIGHT- AND MEDIUM-DUTY VEHICLES: This measure calls for the deployment of Phase III on-board diagnostics (OBD-III) in new vehicles beginning in 2011 and a program to retrofit existing vehicles with OBD-III. OBD-III has enhanced capabilities to monitor vehicle emissions and implementation of such device would eliminate the need for periodic smog check programs.

SCONRD-03 ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM ON-ROAD HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLES: This measure calls for accelerated replacement of on-road heavy-duty vehicles with vehicles meeting the 2010 on-road heavy-duty exhaust emissions standards, beginning in 2011. The proposal calls for resources to be directed at cleaning up the6 older ?captive? fleet used for short to medium distance hauling that are not covered in CARB's control strategy for on-road heavy- duty vehicles. This measure covers all heavy-duty vehicles except for Class 8 over- the-road trucks that provide freight drayage services at marine ports. This measure would target approximately 210,000 heavy-duty diesel vehicles, between 2001 through 20095 model-year for retrofitting or replacement by CY 2014 to meet 2010 on-road emission standards. An alternative implementation option could focus on retrofit/replacement programs targeting model years 2001 through 2009 heavy-duty vehicles. By 2014, a majority of these vehicles will be approaching the end of their useful lives and would be replaced with vehicles meeting 2010 on-road emission standards. Other vehicles would meet retrofit requirements, which would include at a minimum, a 30 percent reduction in NOx and at least an 85 percent reduction in particulate matter, depending on the model year of the vehicle.

SCONRD-04 ? FURTHER EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM HEAVY- DUTY TRUCKS PROVIDING FREIGHT DRAYAGE SERVICES: This measure calls for the retrofit or replacement of existing over-the-road trucks providing drayage services at marine ports, intermodal facilities, or warehouse distribution centers consist with the program is provided in the adopted San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan. The state is currently developing a regulation on trucks operating at marine ports and intermodal facilities. However, the state's proposal would be implemented over a 10 to 12 year period. The San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan calls for all trucks calling at the marine ports to be cleaned up by the end of 2011. As such, the proposed control measure would complement statewide actions and the emissions reductions associated with this measure would be beyond the reductions sought by CARB.

SCOFFRD-01 ? CONSTRUCTION/INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT FLEET MODERNIZATION: Over the last ten years and over the next seven years, new off-road diesel engines will have met or will need to meet more stringent emissions standards. These standards are designated by different Ttiers with Tier 0 (uncontrolled) and older engines being the most polluting through Tier 4 engines

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP which will be the cleanest off-road engines with emission standards somewhat higher than those for similarly aged on-road engines. CARB is proposing regulatory actions on this sector, which when implemented by 2014 will result in about 15 tons per day of oxides of nitrogen emissions reductions.

After discussions with CARB staff, the District staff believes that additional NOx emission reductions could be achieved if CARB staff's proposed NOx fleet average requirements were accelerated. The more stringent fleet average requirements would require that Tier 1 equipment be replaced or retrofitted to meet Tier 3 standards in addition to the uncontrolled (Tier 0) engines that would be covered by the proposed regulations. In addition, after the 2015 timeframe, Tier 2 and Tier 3 engines are proposed to be retrofitted with verified diesel emission control (VDEC) equipment that reduces their diesel PM emissions by 85% and meet Tier 4 NOx levels. By 2020, it is further assumed that certain pre Tier 4 engines are replaced or retrofitted to meet the 2010 on-road emissions standards or better.

SCOFFRD-02 ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM CARGO HANDLING EQUIPMENT: This control measure seeks additional emission reductions from cargo handling equipment beyond the state regulation. This measure would implement the proposed San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan beyond the five year horizon of the Clean Air Action Plan. The Plan calls for accelerated turnover of existing equipment with engines that meet 2007 or 2010 on-road emissions standards or Tier 4 off-road emissions standards by 2014. This measure could be implemented through further state regulatory actions or the marine ports' authority over its tenants.

SCOFFRD-03 ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM LOCOMOTIVES: This measure calls for all locomotives operating in the Basin to meet Tier 3 equivalent emissions by 2014. In addition, the measure proposes that all locomotives moving in and out of the twin ports in the Southern California region to be equipped with Tier 3-equivalent controls by 2011. Existing technologies can reduce oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter emissions by over 90 percent.

SCOFFRD-04 ? EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM AIRPORT GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT: This measure would seek emission reductions from airport ground support equipment through additional electrification originally provided in the MOU terminated by the Air Transport Association. In addition, equipment that could not be electrified would be required to use cleaner fuels or be repowered to meet a more stringent fleet average emissions rate.

SCOFFRD-05 ? EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM TRANSPORT REFRIGERATION UNITS: This measure calls for the development of regulations to reduce NOx emissions from truck refrigeration units based on

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP replacement with electric units or retrofits. CARB could development new retrofit or replacement requirements to accelerate NOx reductions. In addition, incentives could be provided to increase fleet turnover prior to regulatory actions.

SCOFFRD-06 ? ACCELERATED TURNOVER AND CATALYST BASED STANDARDS FOR PLEASURE CRAFT: This measure proposes to accelerate the turnover of outboard engines, personal watercraft, and inboard/sterndrive boats to ensure that by 2014 that the outboard engines and personal watercraft fleet average meets Tier 3 standard levels (the most stringent levels in place today), and the inboard/sterndrive fleet average meets 2008 standard levels (the cleanest levels currently promulgated). By 2020, CARB is proposing new emission standards for outboard engines and personal watercraft, which by 2020 will have fleet average emission levels approximately three times more stringent than the 2014 levels. This control measure calls for accelerated turnover prior to regulatory mandates. In the 2015 to 2020 timeframe, this measure calls for new inboard/sterndrive fleet average emission standards approximately 10 times more stringent than the 2014 levels. In addition, it is proposed that incentives be provided to accelerate turnover prior to implementation of the new standards.

SCFUEL-01 ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM GASOLINE FUELS: This measure would seek a maximum sulfur content for gasoline fuels to be set at 10 ppm compared to the current maximum of 30 ppm. This would result in a 67 percent reduction in direct sulfur emissions and somewhat lower oxides of nitrogen emissions.

SCFUEL-02 ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM DIESEL FUELS: This measure seek greater use of diesel fuel alternatives such as alternative fuels, gas-to-liquid fuels, dimethyl ether, or other cleaner diesel blends. Emission reduction benefits for oxides of nitrogen, sulfur oxides, and directly emitted particulate matter could result with the use of diesel fuel alternatives. This measure calls for 10 percent of the current diesel fuel be replaced with diesel fuel alternatives by 2014.

Policy Option 2 Under this option the state would fulfill its NOx emission reduction obligations under the 2003 AQMP by 2010. An additional 208 tons per day would be needed to meet the NOx emission target between 2010 and 2014. Under this option the state could include some of the proposed measures under the first option or other measures that the state identifies as part of the SIP public process. The rate of progress for NOx under Policy Option 2 is shown in Figure 4-2.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP As shown in Figure 4-2, the projected 2010 base year emissions for NOx is estimated to be at 775 tons/day. When the state submitted the 2003 AQMP to the U.S. EPA, the State provided as its obligation to reduce NOx emissions by 156 tons/day in order to meet the 1-hour ozone ambient air quality standard by 2010. Based on the state's actions since the submittal of the 2003 AQMP, 32 tons/day of NOx emission reductions have been achieved, leaving another 124 tons/day to be achieved by 2010. After 2010, an additional 208 tons/days of NOx emission reductions are needed to meet the federal PM2.5 ambient air quality standard by 2014.

The state may choose to meet the 2010 obligation through a combination of the remaining commitments under 2003 AQMP (shown in Table 1-3 of this document), its proposed control strategy plus the measures provided under Option 1 or any other measures the state may identify. In addition, the state would need to identify additional reductions to be implemented by 2014 to meet the NOx emissions reduction levels needed to attain the federal PM2.5 ambient air quality standard. Again, this can be any set of measures the state identifies for this option, which could be a combination of its proposed control strategy, measures identified under Option 1, or any other measure not identified at this time.

Policy Option 3 The third option is based on the same rate of progress under Policy Option 1, but relies heavily on public funding assistance to achieve the needed NOx reductions via accelerated fleet turnover to post-2010 on-road emission standards or the cleanest off-road engine standards in effect today or after 2010. This would include funding for the replacement of on-road heavy-duty vehicles, off-road mobile equipment, pleasure craft, and off-road vehicles.

Under Policy Option 3, CARB and the District would assume the responsibility of implementing the incentive programs based on specific funding levels designated for this purpose. Based on the analysis performed for the Carl Moyer program, up to an estimated $600 million per year is needed between 2009 and 2014. In addition, significant funding would be made available beginning in mid-2008 through 2014. The total public funding estimated to achieve the additional NOx emission reductions of 70 tons/day as identified in Table 2-11, is about $3 billion based on the current Carl Moyer Program cost-effectiveness criteria of $14,300/ton with a 10-year project life. This is a conservative estimate since many of the projects would be more cost- effective than the $14,300/ton criteria.

The total public funding needed of about $600 million per year would need to begin in mid-2008. Currently, the District receives about $55 million per year, which a significant portion has been allocated by the District Governing Board to accelerate

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP vehicle turnover. In addition, the Mobile Source Emissions Reduction Review Committee (MSRC) allocates a significant amount of funds to cleaner vehicles. The MSRC is currently allocating funding assistance for on-road engines meeting 2010 emissions standards and replacement of off-road equipment with current commercially available Tier 3 engines. In order to implement this option, additional funding must be identified within the next year and a half. Funding proposals such as user fees, surplus fuel tax, or other mechanisms such as port tariff fees (which would facilitate cleanup of goods movement related sources) are examples of funds that could be made available to cover the implementation of this option.

Relative to total emission reductions, each policy option would reach the same NOx emissions levels as identified in the PM2.5 attainment demonstration (i.e., 443 tons/day of remaining NOx emissions). CARB has identified 125 tons/day of NOx emission reductions from its proposed control strategy. An additional 70 tons/day of NOx emission reductions would be needed to demonstrate attainment. As such, all three policy options would achieve the additional 70 tons/day of reductions, but through different implementation mechanisms and on different implementation schedules. Appendix IV-B-2 provides more specific descriptions of the three mobile source control options.

DISTRICT STAFF'S RECOMMENDED STATE AND FEDERAL STATIONARY AND MOBILE SOURCE CONTROL MEASURES For this Draft 2007 AQMP, based on CARB's proposed concepts, District staff is recommending for CARB's consideration more defined control measures for reducing emissions from sources under State and federal jurisdiction that local authorities, the California Air Resources Board, U.S. EPA, and the District could implement in order to attain applicable air quality standards. This is done because: 1) the reductions associated with CARB's proposed concepts are not expected to achieve the reductions necessary for the PM2.5 and ozone attainment, as initially proposed; 2) these concepts lack the specificity in the proposed control measures which are needed for public review and federal approval; and 3) the PM2.5 attainment strategy cannot rely on undefined or long-term control measures because ?black box? or Section 182(e)(5) measures of the federal Clean Air Act are not allowed for PM2.5 attainment purposes. Thus, the recommended measures are intended to better define short-term and mid-term control measures needed for reaching attainment by 2015 and to meet legal requirements.

The District staff's recommended measures are also intended to highlight the level of stringency and reductions needed from State and federal sources and to initiate discussions on the extent these sources need to be controlled in order to attain the

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP fine particulate air quality standards by 2015 and the 8-hour ozone air quality standard by 2021. More importantly, full implementation of the proposed measures will result in significant reductions in air toxic contaminants by 2021. The District will exercise its existing legal authority or seek additional authority to adopt and implement cost-effective mobile source controls as necessary. It is envisioned that during the public review process (i.e., CARB's symposium in October and other public meetings, AQMP public workshops), these control measures will be further refined for possible inclusion into the final 2007 AQMP based on additional technical feasibility and economic feasibility (e.g., funding) considerations.

Table 4-6 provides a listing of District staff's recommended control measures for on- road and off-road mobile sources as well as consumer products with estimated reductions in 2014 and 2020. These measures represent District staff's initial technical assessment of potential strategies for sources under the jurisdiction of CARB and U.S. EPA. For goods movement source categories such as marine vessels, trucks, rail, and cargo handling equipment, the proposed control measures are primarily based on a hybrid of measures and strategies outlined in CARB's Goods Movement Emissions Reduction Plan and the draft San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan. However, where warranted, a number of measures from these plans have been revised to reflect a higher level of stringency or fleet penetration in order to achieve the necessary reductions for attainment. Detailed descriptions of these control measures are provided in Draft Appendix IV-B.

For example, the recommended mobile source control measures focus on aggressive accelerated turnover of older, existing vehicles with the cleanest engines commercially available. This would require the commercial availability of on-road partial zero emissions vehicles (PZEV) or cleaner vehicles in the light- and medium- duty sector and heavy-duty vehicles that meet future exhaust emission standards. Several automobile manufacturers are producing gasoline hybrid electric vehicles that meet the PZEV levels. Some of the newer models meet the cleanest PZEV level (commonly termed, advanced technology PZEV or AT-PZEV). Control Measure ONRD-06 calls for an accelerated replacement of about 1.2 million older existing vehicles with vehicles that meet the AT-PZEV by 2014 and additional 1.2 million vehicles by 2020. Based on the estimated annual sales of about 600,000 new vehicles per year, District staff believes that if such a program is implemented, the proposed replacement could occur. Relative to heavy-duty vehicles, Control Measures ONRD-09 and ONRD-12 would seek about 20,000 older existing heavy- duty diesel vehicles be replaced with new vehicles meeting either the 2007 or 2010 exhaust emission standards (depending on year of implementation). There are about 190,000 heavy-duty vehicles estimated to be operating in the South Coast Basin in 2014. The accelerated replacement program would seek essentially a replacement of 10 percent of the total fleet with the cleanest commercially available vehicles.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP For the off-road mobile source sector, the recommended control measures call for the replacement of these mostly uncontrolled emissions with newer, cleaner models. Control Measure OFFRD-01 proposes that older construction and industrial equipment be replaced or repowered with the cleanest available engines. A large number of recreational vehicles and pleasure craft are operated on older two-stroke engines. As such, Control Measures OFFRD-02 and OFFRD-03 would seek accelerated replacement of older two stroke engines that emit higher levels of VOC, NOx, and PM. Control Measures OFFRD-12 and OFFRD-13 call for accelerated replacement of lawn and garden equipment and airport ground support equipment with electrified units.

In addition to accelerated fleet turnover, several of the measures recommend accelerated retrofits of vehicle and equipment with after-treatment control devices to further reduce NOx and PM emissions. Specifically, Control Measure ONRD-08 seeks about 20,000 pre-2007 on-road heavy-duty vehicles to be retrofitted with control devices to reduce NOx emissions by at least 30 percent and PM emissions on the order of 30 to 85 percent (depending on model year). Control Measure OFFRD- 01 calls for similar emission benefits through an accelerated retrofit program for construction and industrial equipment operating on diesel fuel.

Relative to goods movement related sources, Control Measures OFFRD-05 ? locomotives, OFFRD-08 ? cargo handling equipment, and OFFRD-10 ? ocean-going vessels and harbor craft, seek accelerated replacement and retrofitting of existing engines and equipment similar to proposals in the draft San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan and CARB's Goods Movement Emissions Reduction Plan. OFFRD- 07 calls for an aggressive implementation of shore-side power for marine vessels as provided in the Goods Movement Emissions Reduction Plan. In addition, OFFRD- 09 calls for mandatory speed reduction for ocean-going vessels entering and leaving the ports similar to the proposal in the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan.

Furthermore, the District staff's recommended control measures include three measures that call for cleaner fuels and greater use of diesel fuel alternatives. Control Measure ONRD-03 calls for a reformulation of gasoline to mitigate the impacts of low-level blending of gasoline with ethanol. Control Measure ONRD-07 calls for a cleaner diesel fuel reformulation that would reduce NOx and PM emissions. In addition, ONRD-07 calls for greater use of diesel fuel alternatives such as gas-to- liquid fuels, emulsified diesel, and dimethyl ether fuels. These two control measures affect all categories of engines that rely on gasoline or diesel fuel. Control Measure OFFRD-06 calls for all ocean-going vessels to begin using a 0.2 percent sulfur content fuel beginning in 2008 with the expectation that these vessels will begin using a 0.1 percent sulfur content fuel beginning in the 2010 timeframe. Finally, Control Measure CONS-01 recommends achieving an aggressive target of 30% VOC reduction by 2014 through extensive product reformulation.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The District staff's recommended State and federal control measures are estimated to achieve 135 tons per day of VOC, 231 tons per day of NOx, 46 tons per day of SOx, and 13 tons per day of PM2.5 emission reductions in 2014. In 2020, the estimated reductions for these measures are 203 tons per day of VOC, 233 tons per day of NOx, 60 tons per day of SOx, and 13 tons per day of PM2.5 emissions.

An alternative approach based on higher NOx reductions and lower emission reductions of SOx, VOC, and PM2.5 will also demonstrate attainment of the PM2.5 standard by 2014. The overall reductions for this approach will be 86 tons per day of VOC and 337 tons per day of NOx augmented with 40 tons per day of SOx, and 2 tons per day of PM2.5 reductions in 2014. This type of control approach will also have the added benefit of making expeditious progress toward the 8-hour ozone standard and the new 24-hour PM2.5 standard.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Table 4-6 District staff's Recommended Control Measures for Sources Under State and Federal Jurisdiction Control Measure Title Estimated Reductions (t/d) Number 2014 2020 ONRD-01 Smog Check Improvements VOC: 18.7 VOC: 16.5 NOx: 13.3 NOx: 12.7 PM2.5: 0.1 PM2.5: 0.1 ONRD-02 Expanded BAR Vehicle Retirement and VOC: 0.6 VOC: 0.4 Mandatory Part Replacement NOx: 0.9 NOx: 0.4 ONRD-03 California Phase 3 Reformulation Gasoline VOC: 10.6 VOC: 11.2 Modifications NOx: 14.9 NOx: 10.0 ONRD-04 More Stringent Motorcycle Standards VOC: 0.8 VOC: 1.6 NOx: 0.3 NOx: 0.6 ONRD-05 PM Testing for Light- and Medium-Duty PM2.5: 0.01 PM2.5: 0.01 Vehicles ONRD-06 Accelerated Penetration of Partial Zero- VOC: 18.2 VOC: 13.1 Emission and Zero Emission Vehicles NOx: 7.5 NOx: 6.6 PM2.5: 0.6 PM2.5: 0.8 ONRD-07 Greater Use of Diesel Fuel Alternatives and NOx: 30.3 NOx: 19.1 Diesel Fuel Reformulation PM2.5: 2.3 PM2.5: 1.2 ONRD-08 Accelerated Retrofits of Heavy-Duty Vehicles NOx: 3.2 NOx: 4.6 PM2.5: 0.2 PM2.5: 0.3 ONRD-09 In-Use Emission Reductions from On-Road VOC: 0.3 VOC: 0.3 Heavy-Duty Vehicles NOx: 6.1 NOx: 5.1 PM2.5: 0.1 PM2.5: 0.1 ONRD-10 Further Emission Reductions from Out-of- NOx: 0.4 NOx: 0.6 State/International Registered Heavy-Duty PM2.5: 0.03 PM2.5: 0.03 Vehicles ONRD-11 Enhanced Inspection and In-Use Emissions VOC: 1.5 VOC: 1.4 Tracking of Heavy-Duty Vehicles NOx: 16.7 NOx: 17.8 PM2.5: 0.2 PM2.5: 0.1 ONRD-12 Further Emission Reductions from Heavy-Duty VOC: 0.1 VOC: 0.1 Trucks Providing Freight Drayage Services NOx: 2.6 NOx: 2.3 PM2.5: 0.1 PM2.5: 0.1 OFFRD-01 Construction/Industrial Equipment Fleet VOC: 5.6 VOC: 4.1 NOx: 48.6 NOx: 33.6 Modernization PM2.5: 2.1 PM2.5: 1.1

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Table 4-6 (Concluded) Control Measure Title Estimated Reductions (t/d) Number 2014 2020 OFFRD-02 Accelerated Turnover and Catalyst-based VOC: 14.4 VOC: 36.1 Standards for Pleasure Craft NOx: 3.8 NOx: 10.3 PM2.5: 2.2 PM2.5: 2.1 OFFRD-03 More Stringent Exhaust Standards for Off-Road VOC: 12.9 VOC: 21.3 Recreational Vehicles NOx: 0.4 NOx:0.6 OFFRD-04 Evaporative Standards for Recreational VOC: 7.9 VOC: 23.8 Vehicles and Pleasure Craft OFFRD-05 Further Emission Reductions from Locomotives NOx: 15.3 NOx: 17.7 PM2.5: 0.5 PM2.5: 0.7 OFFRD-06 Clean Marine Fuel Requirements for Ocean- NOx: 7.3 NOx: 9.3 Going Marine Vessels SOx: 45.6 SOx: 59.6 PM2.5: 4.0 PM2.5: 5.2 OFFRD-07 Further Emission Reductions from Ocean- VOC: 0.5 VOC: 0.7 Going Marine Vessels and Harbor Crafts While NOx: 20.4 NOx: 27.4 at Berth SOx: 0.6 SOx: 0.8 PM2.5: 0.6 PM2.5: 0.9 OFFRD-08 Further Emission Reductions from Cargo NOx: 1.0 NOx: 0.6 Handling Equipment OFFRD-09 Vessel Speed Reduction NOx: 17.4 NOx: 23.2 OFFRD-10 Further Emission Reductions from Ocean- NOx: 13.9 NOx: 24.1 Going Vessels OFFRD-11 Emission Reductions from Aircraft VOC: 2.4 VOC: 2.8 NOx: 4.4 NOx: 5.3 OFFRD-12 Lower Exhaust and Evaporation Standards and VOC: 5.7 VOC: 13.3 Fleet Modernization for Lawn and Garden Equipment OFFRD-13 Emission Reductions from Airport Ground VOC: 0.4 VOC: 0.3 Support Equipment NOx: 2.3 NOx: 1.4 PM2.5: 0.04 PM2.5: 0.02 CONS-01 Further Emission Reductions from Consumer VOC: 34.6 VOC: 56.0 Products Total VOC: 135 VOC:203 NOx: 231 NOx: 233 SOx: 46 SOx: 60 PM2.5: 13 PM2.5: 13

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The following text provides a brief description of the District staff's proposed mobile source and consumer products control measures: ONRD-01 ? SMOG CHECK IMPROVEMENTS: This control measure proposes improvements and enhancements to the existing Smog Check II Program for light- and medium- duty vehicles in the South Coast. Enhancements include: evaporative leak check tests; more stringent testing cutpoints; accelerated simulation monitoring (ASM) testing for all-wheel and four-wheel drive vehicles; enhanced on-board diagnostics; remote sensing for purposes of identifying high emitting vehicles and subsequent off-cycle repairs or vehicle retirement through incentives; two-speed idle emission testing in urbanized regions; inclusion of diesel-powered light- and medium-duty vehicles; and inclusion of motorcycles into California's Smog Check Program.

ONRD-02 ? EXPANDED BAR VEHICLE RETIREMENT AND MANDATORY PART REPLACEMENT: This proposed control measure calls for promoting the permanent retirement of eligible vehicles through financial incentives currently offered through the California Smog Check Program. In addition, the proposal includes the implementation of a mandatory parts replacement program of critical emission control systems after a vehicle has reached a certain mileage cap. The proposal calls for increasing the current vehicle retirement program within BAR's Consumer Assistance Program from approximately 18,000 vehicles per year statewide to 50,000 vehicles, with approximately half targeted for the South Coast Air Basin. This proposed control measure would only affect those vehicles currently on-cycle (those vehicles within three months of their Smog Check test date).

ONRD-03 ? CALIFORNIA PHASE 3 REFORMULATION GASOLINE MODIFICATIONS: This measure seeks to offset the impacts of greater use of ethanol in low level blended gasoline. The proposed reformulation would offset a portion of the ethanol impacts and provide additional oxides of nitrogen benefits. However, not all of the ethanol impacts will be mitigated through reformulation and other measures must be implemented to fully mitigate the impacts of low ethanol gasoline blends.

ONRD-04 ? MORE STRINGENT MOTORCYCLE STANDARDS: This proposed control measure calls for the establishment of a 50 percent reduction target applicable to the exhaust emission standards over all three classes of motorcycles beginning with the 2010 model year. Given that the tightest passenger car emission standards are approximately 40 times more stringent that the current applicable emission standards, a significant reduction in current on-road motorcycle emission standards should be technologically and commercially feasible. Expected technologies that could be deployed on motorcycle engines could include improved fuel delivery, engine modifications, catalytic converter enhancements, and engine calibrations techniques. Additionally, the proposed control measures would also be augmented with a 50 percent increase in stringency from the current evaporative standard.

ONRD-05 ? PM TESTING FOR LIGHT- AND MEDIUM-DUTY VEHICLES: This proposed control measure calls for the inclusion of light- and medium-duty diesel vehicles into the current Smog Check program. The proposed program would incorporate a visible smoke test requirement into the existing Smog Check test requirements within the next year. Additionally,

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP this proposed control measure would have the State of California adopt an in-use particulate matter criteria (PM cutpoint) for gasoline and diesel powered vehicles subject to the Smog Check test requirements by the year 2010 with applicable test methods for purposes of measurements.

ONRD-06 ? ACCELERATED PENETRATION OF PARTIAL ZERO-EMISSION AND ZERO-EMISSION VEHICLES: This proposed control measure focuses on the accelerated penetration and implementation of advanced technologies that are capable of achieving partial zero-tailpipe emissions. CARB through its fleet averaging requirements under the current Low Emission Vehicle II program can ensure the availability of partial zero-emission vehicles (PZEVs) in the California market. In conjunction with an aggressive vehicle retirement program targeting older high-emitting vehicles identified via a remote sensing program, the proposed control measure would offer sufficient vouchers to replace such vehicles with vehicles achieving PZEV emission standards. This proposed measure would generally replace the oldest model year vehicles identified via remote sensing with one of the cleanest commercially available vehicles. This proposal would call for a 50 percent sales target of PZEV's beginning in calendar year (CY) 2010. In CY 2014, the fleet of PZEVs would grow to 1.2 million in the South Coast.

ONRD-07 ? GREATER USE OF DIESEL FUEL ALTERNATIVES AND DIESEL FUEL REFORMULATION: This measure calls for a two-phase approach to achieve additional emission benefits from engines powered by diesel fuel. The first phase would have CARB adopt by mid-2007, enhanced diesel fuel specifications. The proposal reflects the achievement of tighter in-use aromatic controls being feasible and the improvements in sulfur control technology now allowing for diesel fuel to be refined down to the detection limit of sulfur. Additionally, recent test data indicates that higher cetane levels are associated with lower emissions of VOC and NOx. The proposed reformulation will also reflect the application of the latest refining technology to reduce polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which have been associated with higher levels of mutagenicity and toxic impacts relative to other diesel components, such as paraffinic compounds.

The second phase of the control measure calls for greater use of alternatives to diesel fuel including gas-to-liquid fuels, dimethyl ether, alternative fuels, or other emulsified diesel fuel that provide additional oxides of nitrogen or particulate matter reductions. User or supplier incentives would be established to ensure that at least 50% of current volume of conventional diesel fuel ? approximately 1.5 billion gallons statewide annually ? would be displaced with diesel alternatives.

ONRD-08 ? ACCELERATED RETROFITS OF HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLES: This measure calls for accelerated retrofit programs for heavy-duty vehicles operating primarily in the South Coast jurisdictional boundaries. This measure covers all heavy-duty vocations except for Class 8 over-the-road trucks that provide freight drayage services. This measure would target approximately 20,000 heavy-duty diesel vehicles, between 1988 through 2009 model-year for retrofitting by CY 2014. In addition, for calendar year 2020, an additional 20,000 heavy-duty diesel vehicles will be targeted for retrofitting. The retrofit requirement would include a 30 percent reduction in oxides of nitrogen and either a 25 or 85 percent reduction in particulate matter, depending on the model year of the vehicle.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP ONRD-09 ? IN-USE EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM ON-ROAD HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLES: This measure would call for accelerated replacement of on-road heavy-duty vehicles with vehicles meeting the 2010 on-road heavy-duty exhaust emissions standards, beginning in 2010. The proposal calls for resources to be directed at replacing the older ?captive? fleet used for short to medium distance hauling. About 12,000 heavy-heavy-duty diesel and medium-heavy-duty diesel vehicles would be targeted for replacement in the jurisdictional boundaries of the SCAQMD over a 10-year period. It is envisioned that half the truck replacement would be diesel powered and the remaining half would be alternative fuel powered.

ONRD-10 ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM OUT-OF- STATE/INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLES: This measure calls for the development of a federal incentives program similar to the state's Carl Moyer Program for heavy-duty vehicles registered outside of California. The federal program would provide funding assistance to either retrofit or replace older over-the-road trucks with commercially available control technologies. There are a number of retrofit technologies that are commercially available that could be used to potentially support this program.

ONRD-11 ? ENHANCED INSPECTION AND IN-USE EMISSIONS TRACKING OF HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLES: This measure would have CARB develop an expanded inspection and maintenance program for heavy-duty-diesel vehicles. The current tools that CARB has available include the current smoke inspection program which the proposal calls for expansion of, to include the following: 1) a visual under-the-hood inspection of the emission control devices, 2) an electronic check of the truck's on-board computer, and 3) use of remote sensing technology to assess in-use heavy-duty diesel trucks emissions. An added component to this measure is to incorporate a not-to-exceed limit for 1998 and older trucks to ensure in-use emissions are kept to a minimum.

ONRD-12 ? FURTHER EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM HEAVY-DUTY TRUCKS PROVIDING FREIGHT DRAYAGE SERVICES: This measure calls for the retrofit or replacement of existing over-the-road trucks providing drayage services at marine ports, intermodal facilities, or warehouse distribution centers. This measure contains elements of ONRD-08 and ONRD-09. A similar program is proposed in the Draft San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan. The state is currently developing a regulation on trucks operating at marine ports. The proposed control measure would complement statewide actions.

OFFRD-01 ? CONSTRUCTION/INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT FLEET MODERNIZATION: Over the last ten years and over the next seven years, new off-road diesel engines will have met or will need to meet more stringent emissions standards. These standards are designated by different Tiers with pre-Tier 0 engines being the oldest and most polluting through Tier 4 engines which will be the cleanest off-road engines with emission standards somewhat higher than those for similarly aged on-road engines. This measure will, through incentives and regulation, replace or retrofit the oldest diesel engines with new engines that will meet the diesel engine on-road 2010 emission standards. Reductions from this measure were calculated by assuming that by 2014 all pre-Tier 2 off-road engines for construction,

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP industrial, and transport refrigeration unit (TRU) engines are replaced with new on-road engines meeting the 2010 standard or retrofitted with equipment that meets the 2010 standard. In addition all Tier 2 and Tier 3 engines are retrofitted with verified diesel emission control (VDEC) equipment that reduces their diesel PM emissions by 85%. By 2020 it is further assumed that all pre Tier 4 engines are replaced with on-road engines meeting the 2010 standard or better.

OFFRD-02 ? ACCELERATED TURNOVER AND CATALYST BASED STANDARDS FOR PLEASURE CRAFT: This measure proposes to accelerate the turnover of outboard engines, personal watercraft, and inboard/sterndrive boats to ensure that by 2014 that the outboard engines and personal watercraft fleet average meets Tier 3 standard levels (the most stringent levels in place today), and the inboard/sterndrive fleet average meets 2008 standard levels (the cleanest levels currently promulgated). By 2020, new emission standards will be developed and the outboard engines and personal watercraft fleet average will meet emission levels approximately three times more stringent than the 2014 levels, and the inboard/sterndrive fleet average will meet emission standard levels approximately 10 times more stringent than the 2014 levels.

OFFRD-03 ? MORE STRINGENT EXHAUST STANDARDS FOR OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES: New emission standards and accelerated fleet turnover are proposed to reduce emissions from this category. Off-road motorcycles and all terrain vehicles (ATV) must meet a standard that was promulgated in 1994. This measure would propose that new standards be adopted based on catalyst technology, and incentives be developed to accelerate fleet turnover such that by 2014 the fleet average meets the new standard. By 2021, it is assumed that new emission standards approximately 10 times more stringent than those in place in 2014 are adopted and incentives are in place to accelerate fleet turnover to ensure that the average fleet emission level meets or exceeds the new emission standard levels.

OFFRD-04 ? EVAPORATIVE STANDARDS FOR RECREATIONAL VEHICLES AND PLEASURE CRAFT: Some vehicles or vessels in the off-road recreational vehicle and the pleasure craft categories need to meet or will soon be required to meet evaporative emission control standards. However, technology exists that could provide additional reductions. This measure proposes through retrofit, incentives, and regulation, to reduce evaporative emissions by 45% in 2014 and 90% in 2020. More stringent evaporative controls are proposed which will include methods for controlling permeation and venting emissions from off-road recreational vehicles such as motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and from pleasure craft including personal watercraft, outboard motors, and inboard/sterndrive boats.

OFFRD-05 ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM LOCOMOTIVES: This measure calls for all locomotives operating in the Basin to meet Tier 3 equivalent emissions by 2014. In addition, the measure proposes that all locomotives moving in and out of the twin ports in the Southern California region to be equipped with Tier 3-equivalent controls by 2011. Existing technologies can reduce oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter emissions by over 90 percent.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP OFFRD-06 ? CLEAN MARINE FUEL REQUIREMENTS FOR OCEAN-GOING MARINE VESSELS: This measure would require all ocean-going vessels to use 0.2 percent sulfur content marine distillate fuels beginning in 2008. Ocean-going vessels would be required to switch to the cleaner fuel when traveling within 40 nautical miles of Point Fermin.

OFFRD-07 ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM OCEAN-GOING MARINE VESSELS AND HARBOR CRAFT WHILE AT BERTH: This control measure would require ocean-going vessels and harbor craft to use shore-side power or other equivalently clean alternative technology while at berth. It is envisioned that a specific number of berths can be equipped with shore-side power by 2014 and a majority of the berths will provide shore-side power by 2020.

OFFRD-08 ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM CARGO HANDLING EQUIPMENT: This control measure seeks additional emission reductions from cargo handling equipment beyond the state regulation. This measure would implement the proposed San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan beyond the five year horizon of the Clean Air Action Plan. The Plan calls for accelerated turnover of existing equipment with engines that meet 2007 or 2010 on-road emissions standards or Tier 4 off-road emissions standards.

OFFRD-09 ? VESSEL SPEED REDUCTION: This measure would implement a 12 knot speed limit to ocean-going vessels traveling within 40 nautical miles of Point Fermin. A majority of ocean-going vessels are currently complying with a 12 knot speed limit within 24 nautical miles on a voluntary basis. Implementation of the proposed measure would further reduce oxides of nitrogen emissions.

OFFRD-10 ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM OCEAN-GOING MARINE VESSELS: This measure seeks further emission reductions of oxides of nitrogen or particulate matter from ocean-going vessels and harbor craft. Current technologies such as advanced slide valve designs can provide immediate emissions benefits on the order of 30 percent. Combining this technology with other control technologies such as water injection can lead to greater than 50 percent reduction in oxides of nitrogen emissions.

OFFRD-11 ? EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM AIRCRAFT: This measure calls for the federal government to establish more stringent emissions standards for aircraft engines. In addition, recent research in fuel reformulation could lead to cleaner aviation fuels that would result in additional emission reductions.

OFFRD-12 ? LOWER EXHAUST AND EVAPORATION STANDARDS AND FLEET MODERNIZATION FOR LAWN AND GARDEN EQUIPMENT: With over 6 million pieces of lawn and garden equipment in the South Coast region, there exist many options to continue reducing emissions from this category. Through an appropriate mix of more stringent exhaust and evaporative standards and incentives for accelerated fleet turnover as well as electrification, a 25% reduction in NOx and VOCs are proposed by 2014. Following similar strategies through to 2020, an additional 25% reduction is assumed for year 2020.

OFFRD-13 ? EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM AIRPORT GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT: This measure would seek emission reductions from airport ground support

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP equipment primarily through electrification. In addition, equipment that could not be electrified would be required to use cleaner fuels or be repowered.

CONS-01 ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM CONSUMER PRODUCTS: Consumer products include products such as detergents, polishes, cosmetics, hairsprays, and disinfectants that are used primarily by household and institutional consumers. Consumer products represent a significant source of VOC emissions in the Basin. Although existing regulations for consumer products have reduced projected emissions from this category, VOC emissions from this category are estimated to be about 108 tons per day, or 18% of the total VOC inventory in the Basin in 2014. Under Health and Safety Code 41712, CARB has the authority and responsibility to achieve the maximum technologically and commercially feasible VOC emission reductions from consumer products. However, CARB is prohibited from eliminating a product type (e.g., mode of dispensing). The proposed measure seeks to achieve about 30% reduction by 2014 and 50% reduction by 2020. The 2020 reduction target is incorporated as part of the long-term Control Measure LTM-01 (Reactivity-Based Controls).

LONG-TERM CONTROL STRATEGY [(182)(E)(5) MEASURES OR "BLACK BOX"] In order to demonstrate attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard, long-term emission reductions above and beyond those achieved from short-term and mid-term measures by the District, CARB, and SCAG are required by 2023 the 2020/2023 timeframe. Although the PM2.5 strategy would provide continuous progress in improving the ozone air quality, additional long-term VOC and NOx reductions are needed for full ozone attainment. Based on the District's recent modeling analysis (described in Chapter 5) which incorporates the latest revisions to the mobile source inventory, a NOx-heavy control approach supplemented with additional VOC reductions will be the most effective ozone attainment strategy for this region. By 2023, mobile sources would account for over 90% of NOx emissions in the Basin. Therefore, the long- term strategy for this Plan primarily focuses on reductions from mobile sources. Long-term reductions are primarily based on long-term measures that anticipate the development of new control techniques or improvement of existing control technologies. The federal Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 182(e)(5) specifically authorizes the inclusion of such long-term measures for extreme ozone nonattainment areas ? these measures are often referred to as the ?black box.? The size of the black box is based on the difference between the final attainment target (carrying capacity) for each pollutant and the emissions remaining after the implementation of short-term and mid-term control measures.

Although the South Coast Air Basin is classified as a ?severe-17? non-attainment area for the 8-hour ozone standard with an attainment date of 2021, the federal regulation allows such regions to request for a bump up to ?extreme? classifications in order to be able to rely on 182(e)(5) measures for demonstrating attainment The

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP District is proposing to exercise will likely consider this option because of the magnitude of additional reductions required for attainment not achievable through existing pollution control approaches. The new attainment date under the ?extreme? classification will be 2024 with necessary reductions achieved by 2023.

Achieving the reductions ascribed to the black box by the 2021/2024 attainment deadline will pose a tremendous challenge to the agencies, businesses, and residents of California. Based on the latest emission inventory and modeling analysis, the overall reduction targets for meeting the 8-hour ozone standard are 116 300 tons per day of VOC and 383 286 tons per day of NOx in 2023 2021(or 2024) (i.e., from 2023 projected baseline)..

The Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP's long-term strategy builds upon the long-term reductions associated with the implementation of short- and mid- term control measures or actions proposed by the District, SCAG, and CARB. For achieving the remainder of reductions needed for attainment, the long-term strategy primarily relies on long-term control measures based on new advanced technologies and control techniques or significant improvement of existing technologies which cannot be specifically defined at this time (i.e., ?black box?). After implementation of the short-term and mid-term control measures, the size of the black box is estimated to be 28 tons per day of VOC and 179 tons per of NOx reductions in 2023, representing 41% of the overall combined VOC and NOx reductions needed for ozone attainment. 135 tons per day of VOC and 40 tons per day of NOx reductions.

The following table provides a list of some of the advanced technologies and innovative control approaches which could be relied upon to achieve the long-term reductions needed for ozone attainment highlighting the level of stringency and aggressiveness of controls required.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-8 Possible Approaches for Long-Term Control Measures Light Duty Vehicles ? Extensive retirement of high-emitting vehicles and accelerated penetration of PZEVs and ZEVs On-Road Heavy Duty Vehicles ? Expanded modernization and retrofit of heavy-duty trucks and buses ? Expanded inspection and maintenance program ? Advanced near-zero and zero-emitting cargo transportation technologies Off-Road Vehicles Expanded modernization and retrofit of off-road equipment

? Fuels ? More stringent gasoline and diesel specifications; Extensive use of diesel alternatives Marine Vessels ? More stringent emission standards and programs for new and existing ocean-going vessels and harbor craft Locomotives Advanced near-zero and zero emitting cargo transportation technologies

? Pleasure Craft ? Accelerated replacement and retrofit of high-emitting engines Aircraft ? More stringent emission standards for jet aircraft (engine standards, clean fuels, retrofit controls) Consumer Products ? Ultra Low-VOC formulations; Reactivity-based controls Renewable Enegry ? Accelerated use of renewable energy and development of hydrogen technology and infrastructure AB32 Implementation ? Concurrent criteria pollutant reduction technologies

These control approaches are presented under four long-term control measures which are briefly described here. More detailed descriptions of these measures are provided in Appendix IV-B-2.

SCLTM-01A ? FURTHER REDUCTIONS FROM ON-ROAD MOBILE SOURCES: This control measure proposes to achieve further NOx reductions from on-road mobile source categories beyond the reductions achieved from the short- term measures through 1) accelerated turn-over of high-emitting vehicles and penetration of ATPZEVs and ZEVs; and 2) expanded modernization of heavy-duty vehicles through replacements or retrofits; 3) fuel reformulations and use of diesel fuel alternatives; and 4) advanced near-zero, and zero emitting cargo transportation technologies.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP SCLTM-01B ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTIONS FROM ON-ROAD HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLES: This control measure proposes the development of an expanded inspection and maintenance (I/M) program for heavy-duty diesel trucks by 2015. Specifically, the current smoke inspection program should be expanded to include (1) a visual under-the-hood inspection of the emission control devices, (2) an electronic check of the truck's on-board computer, and (3) use of remote sensing technology to assess in-use heavy-duty diesel truck emissions.

SCLTM-02 ? FURTHER RERDUCTIONS FROM OFF-ROAD MOBILE SOURCES: This control measure proposes to achieve further NOx reductions from various off-road mobile source categories beyond the reductions achieved from the short-term measures through 1) accelerated turn-over of existing equipment and vehicles and replacement with new equipment meeting the new engine standards; 2) retrofit of existing vehicles and equipment with add-on controls such as SCR; and 3 new engine standards (e.g., aircraft, ships).

SCLTM-03 ? FURTHER REDUCTIONS FROM CONSUMER PRODUCTS: After implementation of adopted regulations and the short-term measure, consumer products category would remain the largest VOC category in the Basin at 88 tons per day in 2023. This measure proposes to implement low-VOC technologies developed for stationary sources into categories with similar uses in consumer products. In addition, the use of lower reactive VOC compounds could offer the potential for achieving equivalent reductions.

In addition to the proposed long term measures described above, reductions from the following programs can be used to fulfill, in part, the ?black-box? commitment: ? NSR: Any excess reductions from the NSR program due to BACT or offset ratio beyond the AQMP assumptions; and ? AQMD short-term measures: Any emission reductions achieved from these measures that are beyond the District's SIP commitment will be used to offset CARB's `black-box? commitment. Furthermore, permanent reductions in emission estimates due to improvement in inventory methodology are SIP creditable if the changes are approved by the AQMD Governing Board at its regularly scheduled public meetings.

Under AB32, the State has established a goal of reducing the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 through an enforceable statewide emissions cap which will be phased in starting in 2012. AB32 directs CARB to establish a mandatory reporting and tracking system, update the emissions inventory, and develop appropriate regulations to achieve maximum technologically feasible and

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP cost-effective emission reductions in meeting the GHG reduction target in 2020. Strategies underway or being considered include, but are not limited to vehicle climate change standards, accelerated renewable portfolio standard, energy efficiency programs and standards, and recycling programs among others.

The Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), established in 2002, requires that all load serving entities achieve a goal of 20% of retail electricity sales from renewable energy sources by 2017. The Governor has increased this goal to 33% renewable which was adopted by CPUC and CEC in 2005 as described in the 2005 Energy Action Plan II. The two agencies have already commenced review of the legal, regulatory, and infrastructure changes necessary to achieve the Governor's goal. It is estimated that this measure would result in 11 million tons CO2 equivalent emission reductions by 2020. This measure not only reduces power plant emissions, but also provides a clean energy source to support other control strategies (e.g., plug-in hybrid vehicles). Concurrent reductions in criteria pollutants associated with the implementation of these measures will be credited towards the AQMP's long-term reduction commitments. The recently-adopted energy penetration targets could be viewed as highly challenging, and yet, they present unique opportunities in reshaping many aspects of our economy including power generation, transportation just to name a couple. To that end, the District is committed will work collaboratively with the responsible agencies to facilitate the implementation of GHG measures and maximize their benefits in this region (e.g., funding mechanisms).

The following sections describe the long-term strategy proposed by the District for stationary sources as well as for the State and federal sources.

District's Portion of Long-Term Strategy ? By 2020, emission sources under the District's jurisdiction account for 27% of VOC and 13% of NOx emissions in the Basin. Nevertheless, in view of the magnitude of the reductions required for attainment demonstration, the District is prepared to do its fair share of long-term measures to achieve additional reductions from stationary sources. These measures primarily rely on the development of reactivity-based reformulations for coatings, advanced controls for fugitive VOC sources, and long-term reductions from the RECLAIM Program (e.g., efficiency improvements. Specifically, the District is proposing the following long-term measures: LTM-01 Reactivity-Based Controls LTM-02 Further Emission Reduction from NOx RECLAIM Facilities LTM-03 Long-Term Measure for Fugitive Emissions For the purpose of this Draft 2007 AQMP, the District's long-term reduction target associated with Control Measures LTM-01 and LTM-03 is estimated at 32 t/d of VOC in 2020. Control Measure LTM-01 is proposed to be implemented by the District for the architectural coatings and miscellaneous coatings and solvent categories and by CARB for consumer products. The

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP long-term emission reductions from Control Measure LTM-02 are not quantified at this time. For the Final 2007 AQMP, the District will refine its long-term reduction commitment to incorporate any revisions to the emissions inventory, air quality modeling analysis, and carrying capacity. A brief description of the District's long-term measures is presented below. Appendix IV-A provides a more detailed description of these measures.

LTM-01 ? REACTIVITY-BASED CONTROLS (VOC): Under this control measure, the District is proposing to further reduce the air quality impacts of the VOC-containing materials by reducing the overall reactivity of these materials. The proposed measure would require architectural coatings and miscellaneous coatings and solvent categories to be formulated with a minimum 50 percent by volume acetone reactivity-equivalent materials beginning in 2015 or achieve equivalent mass reductions of about 24 tons per day by 2020.

LTM-02 ? FURTHER EMISSION REDUCTION FROM NOx RECLAIM FACILITIES (NOx): The proposed measure is separated into two implementation phases. Under Phase I, beginning in 2008 the RECLAIM allocations will be reduced to offset potential emission increases due to the introduction of natural gas with a Wobbe Index greater than 1360 (See Control Measure CMB-04 for details). Phase II addresses the potential reduction of NOx emissions due to evolving BARCT in the next 10 to 15 years and any BACT installations due to RECLAIM NSR requirements.

LTM-03 ? LONG-TERM MEASURE FOR FUGITIVE EMISSIONS (VOC): The emission sources targeted under this control measure include a variety of fugitive emissions from gasoline dispensing facilities, petroleum refineries, chemical plants, and green waste composting. This control measure will be implemented in two phases. In the first phase, emissions data and characteristics for each source category will be developed and refined. Depending on the result of the assessment, specific control strategies will be developed for implementation in the second phase.

Any excess reductions achieved during implementation of the District's short-term and mid-term measures will also be credited toward the long-term commitment. Furthermore, permanent reductions in emission estimates due to improvement in inventory methodology are SIP creditable if the changes are approved by the AQMD Governing Board at its regularly scheduled public meetings.

In addition, Iin order to achieve the District's long-term emission reduction commitments, several mechanisms will be used by District staff to identify and implement new control strategies. These mechanisms described below include, but are not limited to: 1) Annual Technology Assessment Workshops; 2) Emissions Inventory Updates/Studies; 3) VOC Reactivity Studies; 4) Periodic BACT Evaluations, and 5) Collaboration with State Agencies on Concurrent Reductions. In addition to these mechanisms, advanced control technologies (mobile and stationary sources) and innovative control approaches (e.g., market incentive programs, localized controls), presented later in this Chapter, are also expected to play a major role in achieving the long-term reductions required for

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP demonstrating attainment with the federal 8-hour ozone standard. A brief description of the above mechanisms is provided here: (1) Annual Technology Assessment Workshops The District will conduct annual technology assessment workshops with participation from a broader audience including consultants, technical experts, and other interested parties to identify the latest technology improvements and process changes which could lead to implementation of cost-effectiveness control strategies to further reduce NOx and VOC emissions. Potential control methods will include, but are not limited to near-zero or zero-VOC coating and solvent formulations and technologies (e.g., water-based, ultraviolet/electrobeam curing technologies, powder coatings), add-on controls, improved inspections and maintenance programs, and process modifications. Manufacturing processes identified through the enforcement of stationary source rules such as Rule 442 ? Usage of Solvents, will also be used to identify potential control strategies.

(2) Emissions Inventory Updates/Studies As part of the effort in identifying new source categories for potential controls, specific emission studies will be conducted to refine emission inventories. Any emission studies conducted that resulted in permanent emission reductions (relative to 2007 AQMP inventory) due to changes in inventory methodology or emission factor update, will be credited toward the District's SIP commitment for long-term measures. These changes will be approved by the AQMD Governing Board at a public meeting to allow public review and comments. Also, studies conducted as part of implementing the Annual Emissions Reporting (AER) Program (i.e., reviewing/auditing AER filings from large facilities) will be used to identify any new emission reduction strategies voluntarily implemented by facilities (for reducing annual emission fees) which may exceed the limits under the District's existing regulations.

(3) VOC Reactivity Studies Studies conducted to evaluate the reactivity of VOC compounds will lend support to the possibility of using low-reactivity-based products for incorporation into future rule development for further VOC reductions.

(4) Periodic BACT Evaluations BACT evaluations will be conducted periodically to identify new control strategies that may result from add-on controls or process changes for existing sources.

(5) Collaboration with State Agencies on Concurrent Reductions

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The District will work closely with State agencies responsible for implementing global warming strategies (i.e., CARB, California Energy Commission, Public Utilities Commission) to quantify concurrent emissions reductions of criteria pollutants associated with strategies for stationary and mobile sources.

New control measures identified through any of the above five mechanisms will be reported to the Governing Board in December of every year, as part of the District's Annual Rule and Control Measure Forecast Report. This report will also provide a preliminary estimate of the expected emission reductions from each newly identified measure along with the proposed rule adoption calendar. Furthermore, in January of each year, District staff will provide a summary of the emission reductions achieved through adoption of the control measures by the Governing Board in the previous year(s) to track the performance of its SIP commitment.

The District is committed to continue actively seeking cost-effective and technically feasible control measures. Once these measures are identified, they will be adopted and implemented as early as practicable while meeting all public notification requirements. The reductions achieved in aggregate would then be used first to satisfy the District's short-term commitment, if there is a shortfall ? otherwise, the District's long-term SIP commitment. Any excess reductions achieved would be contributed to the State/federal long-term reduction goals. However, it bears repeating that all source categories should produce their fair share of cost-effective emission reductions.

District staff's Recommended State and Federal Portion of Long-Term Strategy ? To support attainment of the federal 8-hour ozone standard in the South Coast Basin, the state and federal governments have the responsibility to further reduce emissions from sources under their jurisdictions. These sources, namely on-road and off-road mobile sources and consumer products, account for 73% of VOC emissions and 86% of NOx emissions in 2020. Therefore, significant long-term emission reductions from these sources will still be required through new technological advancements and or early fleet turnover and improvement of existing mobile source control technologies and consumer products strategies (e.g., reformulation, product replacement). The long-term reduction target for these sources is estimated to be 103 tons per day of VOC and 40 tons per day of NOx based on the implementation of the following three long-term control measures. However, CARB could consider any combination of long-term measures in the final AQMP which are capable of achieving equivalent emission reductions needed for attainment.13 LTM-01 ? REACTIVITY-BASED CONTROLS (VOC): Under this control measure, additional VOC reductions will be sought from consumer products by reducing the overall reactivity of these products. The proposed measure would require consumer

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP products to be formulated with a minimum 50 percent by volume acetone reactivity- equivalent materials beginning in 2015 or achieve equivalent mass reductions of approximately 56 tons per day by 2020.

LTM-04 ? CONCURRENT REDUCTIONS FROM GLOBAL WARMING STRATEGIES (ALL POLLUTANTS): Achieving the AB32 greenhouse gas reduction targets would require significant development and implementation of energy efficiency technologies and extensive shifting of energy production to renewable sources. In addition to reducing GHG emissions, such strategies would concurrently reduce emissions of criteria pollutants associated with fossil fuel combustion. This long-term measure proposes to quantify the concurrent emission reductions associated with Statewide GHG programs targeted at stationary and mobile sources in the Basin working with various state agencies. Emission reductions from these programs will be applied toward the long-term reduction targets for meeting the federal ozone standard by 2021 (or 2024). The District will continue to collaborate with various State agencies in quantifying the concurrent combustion emission reductions. The control measure assumes a 15% reduction of emissions from all combustion sources by 2020.

LTM-05 ? FURTHER VOC REDUCTIONS FROM MOBILE SOURCES ? Under this long-term control measure, CARB will achieve further VOC reductions from various on-road and off-road mobile source categories by 2020 beyond the reductions achieved through the short-term control measures based on the implementation of various control strategies (e.g., accelerated vehicle and equipment turnover, retrofits).

CARB should establish a formal process to examine the universe of source categories for which the State has jurisdiction to determine how additional reductions can be achieved to satisfy the remainder of the long-term commitment. The examination should also include approaches that require federal participation and implementation to meet reduction goals.

Table 4-7 contains an initial list of the District's recommended approaches for CARB to consider in identifying suitable long-term measures. The proposed approaches illustrate the types of aggressive strategies which are needed from mobile sources and consumer products given the significant level of emission reductions required for attainment in the Basin. CARB should also solicit additional proposals for innovative control concepts from the public and conduct technical workshops to further explore promising ideas. CARB has indicated that it will identify the remaining measures needed to fulfill the long-term commitment in an expeditious manner, and to commit to adopt such measures by the earliest feasible date and implement them prior to the beginning of the ozone season in 2021/2024.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-7 Additional Recommended State and Federal Long-Term Control Approaches Light/Medium Duty Vehicles ?Extensive retirement of all high-emitting vehicles and accelerated penetration of PZEVs and ZEVs Smog Check ?Expanded parts replacement program On-Road Heavy Duty Vehicles ?Expanded modernization and retrofit of heavy-duty trucks and buses ?Advanced Cargo Transportation Technologies Off-Road Vehicles ?Expanded modernization and retrofit of off-road equipment Marine Vessels ?More stringent emission standards and programs for new and existing ocean-going vessels and harbor craft Aircraft ?More stringent emission standards for jet aircraft (engine standards, clean fuels, retrofit controls) Locomotives ?More stringent emission standards for new and remanufactured line-haul and switcher locomotives Pleasure Craft ?Accelerated replacement and retrofit of high-emitting engines Lawn and Garden Equipment ?Extensive replacement of existing residential and commercial equipment with electric models Fuels ?Extensive infrastructure for zero emission vehicles ? electric, fuel cell, hydrogen Consumer Products ?Extensive product reformulations toward ultra low or zero-VOC products and product replacements Pesticides ?Pursue approaches to further reduce emissions from pesticides

Advanced Technologies The proposed attainment strategy will require an aggressive development and commercialization of advanced mobile and stationary source control technologies. In addition, significant use of new and advanced technologies into in-use applications is Some of the advanced technologies and innovative control approaches which may be relied on to achieve the additional emission reductions, needed for attainment demonstration, are briefly described below.

Fuel Cells Fuel cells are electrochemical devices that convert hydrogen and oxygen directly into electricity and water with little or no pollutant emissions. Most fuel cell systems use

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP ambient air as the oxygen source, and the hydrogen fuel is either provided directly to the fuel cell or produced first from a fossil fuel (e.g. natural gas or methanol). The process of producing hydrogen from a fossil fuel is termed ?reforming? and can be done external to the fuel cell or internally within the stack, such as with the high temperature molten carbonate fuel cells. Fuel cells are similar to batteries in that both offer zero or near-zero emissions, high efficiency, responsive power, few moving parts, and low noise. A battery, however, is an energy storage device and can only provide power until its reservoir of stored chemical reactants is spent, at which point it must be recharged. Fuel cells, on the other hand, are energy conversion devices which can provide power as long as the fuel and oxidant are provided. Although fuel cells have been around for decades, the major hurdles affecting their commercialization are their high (but improving) cost of production, fueling infrastructure (for mobile applications), and reliability and durability.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) adopted the Freedom Car Program in January 2002 to accelerate the introduction and commercialization of fuel cell vehicles. Additionally, the District's Technology Advancement Office program has played a leading role toward addressing these issues and expediting the commercialization of fuel cells for both mobile and stationary applications. For example, the District is contributing resources to support both the California Fuel Cell Partnership (?Partnership?) and the California Stationary Fuel Cell Collaborative (?Collaborative?). The goals of both statewide initiatives are to advance the deployment and commercialization of fuel cell technologies for clean air and efficiency benefits engendered by the technology. Both the Partnership and the Collaborative seek to form alliances between government agencies and industry to the benefit of California residents. The District has also participated in the development of the California Hydrogen Network Blueprint Plan and continues to provide input as the plan is being implemented. This coordinated effort has resulted in OEM announcements of deploying hundreds of fuel cell vehicles by 2010.

In addition, the District has been proactive in establishing demonstration projects for the advancement of stationary fuel cells in California. In 2004, the Governing Board awarded two contracts to install two-250 kW molten carbonate fuel cell units at TST- Timco metal foundry in Fontana. This is part of an effort to deploy multiple fuel cell units in industrial/commercial applications to capitalize on the heat recovery potential of these higher temperature fuel cell technologies. The fuel cell units at TST-Timco have been in operation since Spring 2006. Demonstrating fuel cells in these industrial/commercial settings, where high efficiency and economical operation are demanded, will provide excellent opportunities to identify optimum performance scenarios. These data can then be used by other industries to select the most appropriate fuel cell technology for deployment.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The District is developing and demonstrating an integrated hydrogen production, storage, and fuel cell power facility located at the AQMD's Diamond Bar headquarters. Currently, hydrogen is produced renewably using an electrolyzer powered by an upgraded solar array; the hydrogen is used for fueling hybrid internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles and fuel cell vehicles, and can be used to fuel an ICE generator for backup and premium power. The AQMD is also considering adding an energy station, which is a stationary fuel cell coupled with hydrogen production for vehicle fueling. This demonstration project exemplifies the required technology integration for a near-zero emission hydrogen economy. The engineering, operational, and economical integration scenarios will be addressed to provide data for key decision makers. All of these types of projects will help assess the different fuel cell technologies in realistic situations and advance the commercialization of truly viable products.

Hybrid-Electric Vehicles and Advanced Batteries Hybrid electric systems can vary significantly in their design configurations as well as components. Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) are typically either parallel or series systems, but the variety of designs is increasing. Engines of various sizes can either drive a generator to charge the batteries or provide power directly to the wheels or both. The batteries can provide primary power to the traction drive motor or supplement the internal combustion engine (ICE). The major automobile manufacturers have been actively developing and commercializing HEVs with the objective of meeting the CARB LEV II regulations, which provide mechanisms for technologies other than battery electric and hydrogen fuel cells to earn partial ZEV credits.

Innovative approaches to HEV systems are also under development that could improve performance, fuel efficiency, and reduce emissions relative to the first HEVs commercially introduced. Innovations that may be considered for demonstration include: advancements in the auxiliary power unit, either ICE or other heat engine, especially using alternative fuels including natural gas and hydrogen; battery-dominant hybrid systems utilizing off-peak re-charging; and non-conventional light-duty and medium- duty HEVs including delivery vans, shuttles, and other medium-duty vehicles.

Of particular interest are HEV strategies that can plug in to an ordinary wall socket to recharge the larger battery pack, enabling the vehicle to operate on battery-only for several miles with the engine coming on just as needed to sustain the batteries. This type of ?plug-in? HEV can provide true zero-tailpipe emissions for a portion of the driving cycle but can also make extended trips by refueling quickly with gasoline or other fuel.

One major OEM has partnered with AQMD and others to demonstrate prototype plug-in hybrid vans with up to 20 miles electric range.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The District has also been involved in the development and demonstration of energy storage systems for electric and hybrid-electric vehicles, including lead acid, nickel- cadmium, and lithium-ion (Li-Ion) battery packs. Lead acid batteries continue to be preferred for low speed vehicle applications and serve as cost-effective energy storage as well as counterweight for electric forklifts. Over the past few years, additional technology consisting of nickel sodium chloride and lithium manganese batteries have been used in light- and heavy-duty applications. NiMH batteries have been deployed in most gasoline fueled passenger hybrid vehicles from major OEMs, but increasing competition for nickel in the production of stainless steel has increased the cost of all nickel containing products. Commercialization of Li-Ion advanced batteries for consumer electronics and power tools may help increase production volumes and reduce the cost for these batteries, enabling Li-Ion power batteries to replace NiMH in many hybrid vehicle applications. A variety of Li-Ion battery designs are in development to optimize power, energy, life, and cost/weight reductions for safe implementation in vehicles.

Other technology providers are developing alternative energy storage devices, including ultracapacitors, flywheels and hydraulic systems. Flywheel systems can capture the kinetic energy from internal combustion engines, microturbines, and regenerative braking systems, store the energy, and then re-release the energy to provide electric power. Hydraulic energy storage systems are available in various forms. Typically, these systems can store retardation energy and provide this energy as a secondary source of propulsion, especially during acceleration. These hydraulic hybrid systems have shown significant fuel economy benefits in refuse truck applications. Both energy storage systems can be retrofitted into existing platforms to significantly increase fuel economy, especially in medium- and heavy-duty vehicles with frequent stopping in urban environments.

Goods Movement Related Sources (Marine Vessels, Portside Equipment, Locomotives, and On-Road Vehicles) Marine vessels and portside equipment, which primarily run on diesel fuel, contribute a significant portion of NOx, PM10, greenhouse gas and toxic emissions particularly in coastal regions and in and around shipping ports. However, implementation of the cost- effective District and CARB programs has resulted in significant emission reductions through incentive programs such as RECLAIM Executive Order Emissions Mitigation, RECLAIM AQIP, Rule 2202 AQIP, Carl Moyer, and State Emissions Mitigation programs. The primary emission reduction technologies are outlined below.

Replacement with Cleaner Technologies/Equipment Replacement existing older trucks and cargo handling equipment (CHE) with new models offers major opportunities for NOx and PM emission control. The District, CARB, Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, and Gateway Cities are involved in

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP implementing fleet modernization and expansion programs, and one segment of the program involves the use of natural gas drayage trucks at the ports. Existing diesel CHE can be replaced with cleaner technologies using on-road diesel or alternative fueled engines. Relative to ocean-going vessels, new ships that are cleaner than the International Maritime Organization (IMO) emission standards could be routed to South Coast marine ports. This approach is adopted in CARB's Goods Movement Emission Reduction Plan and is being considered for the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan. Existing diesel locomotives could be replaced with hybrid (Green Goat type) locomotives, alternative fueled locomotives, or fuel cell locomotives in the future.

Retrofit with Cleaner Technologies Retrofitting trucks, CHE, locomotives, and marine vessels with diesel particulate filters (DPF), selective catalytic reduction (SCR), diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC), and emulsified fuel offer significant emission reduction opportunities. In Europe, DPFs are being used on locomotives and NOx reductions are achieved on ocean-going vessels through the use of SCR and water emulsification technologies. Water emulsification and slide valves are cost effective approaches to reduce oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter from ocean-going vessels.

Another alternative is to use SCR and DPF in stationary units and direct the emissions of the idling locomotives and marine vessels into the cleanup apparatus through a ?bonnet? system. Advanced Cleanup Technologies, Inc. has developed this technology and successfully demonstrated the system at the Roseville Railyard in partnership with CARB, the District, and Union Pacific. This technology will also be applied at the Port of Long Beach in 2007. Both the on-road and stationary SCR systems offer the potential for greatly reducing NOx and PM by up to 90%.

Use of Alternative Fuels and Other Cleaner Fuels Significant oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter emission reductions have been associated with the use of alternative fuels such as natural gas, liquid petroleum gas (LPG), emulsified diesel, or biodiesel (as long as any associated oxides of nitrogen emission increases are mitigated) wherever possible in on-road heavy-duty vehicles, CHE, locomotives, and marine vessels. Alternatives to diesel such as gas to liquids (Fisher-Tropsch Diesel) and Di-Methyl Ether (DME) can also reduce NOx and PM emissions. The use of biodiesel can also have beneficial impacts relative to PM reductions. Depending upon the biodiesel blends, increased NOx emissions may be mitigated through fuel borne additives. CARB recently adopted a regulation requiring the use of 0.5% sulfur marine distillate fuels in auxiliary engines when marine vessels are within 24 miles of the California coastline. Maersk, one of the largest cargo shipping lines, announced in 2006 that they will be using a 0.2% marine distillate fuel immediately.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP For light-duty vehicles, greater attention has been given to E-85 fuel to reduce dependency on petroleum fuel. Presently, auto manufacturers only manufacture flexible fuel vehicles that operate on either gasoline or E85. However, encouraging greater use of E85 fuel would result in additional emission benefits.

Electrification of goods movement related vehicles and equipment should also be considered. Electrification of the infrastructure at the ports and the Alameda Corridor can significantly reduce emissions from on-road trucks and locomotives. Providing shore-side power for marine vessels while at berth will also greatly reduce the emissions that would otherwise result from hotelling.

Advanced Transportation Infrastructure Advanced container transportation systems such as Maglev or other linear induction technologies could be used to transfer containers from the ports to ?distant? intermodal facilities thereby significantly reducing emissions from on-road trucks and locomotives. A test Maglev track capable of moving 20-foot cargo containers, built by General Atomics, is in operation in San Diego. The Texas Transportation Institute has proposed a ?Freight Shuttle System? using linear induction motors to move cargo containers between the ports and inland facilities. The Maglev and Freight Shuttle System approaches also reduce noise pollution and fugitive dust. On-dock container loading onto locomotives instead of moving containers by trucks to an interim intermodal site can also reduce significant amounts of emissions from on-road trucks. Emission reductions from on- dock container loading can be further enhanced/increased with the use of automated crane systems operating on electricity or incorporating cleaner advanced control technologies.

Advanced Engine and After-Treatment Technologies With the introduction of low-sulfur diesel, many emission control technologies that were not otherwise possible with conventional diesel fuel are now being planned for use in diesel engines. These technologies include diesel particulate filters (DPFs), diesel oxidation catalysts (DOCs), exhaust gas recirculation (EGR), improved fuel injection and electronics, and improved air handling (variable geometry turbochargers). Most on-road diesel engines starting in 2007 will have DPFs and EGR.

Heavy-duty engine technologies are also under development to meet the 0.2 g/bhp-hr NOx standard for 2010 models. These include lean NOx absorbers, selective catalyst reduction (SCR), lean NOx catalysts, advanced fuel injection, and more powerful electronics. For natural gas engines, additional technologies include advanced natural- gas direct-injection systems, three-way catalysts (TWC) with stoichiometric combustion, and electronically controlled engine valves (?throttleless? engine). These technologies will enable heavy-duty engines to operate with very low emissions while retaining good

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP performance and acceptable fuel economy. Two major natural gas engine manufacturers announced their intentions to have natural gas engines certified to 2010 emissions standards as early as 2007. Once these technologies are adopted on new engines and vehicles, they have the capability to achieve even lower emissions as the technologies mature. Future emission performance includes reduced deterioration, possible ULEV- or SULEV-type emissions (0.05 g/bhp-hr NOx or lower), zero air toxics, and better fuel economy.

The reduction in heavy-duty emissions can be multiplied by incorporating these low- emission engines into hybrid vehicles. Such vehicles use two propulsion schemes: a low- emission engine and auxiliary propulsion such as an electric drive system, or a low- emission engine with hydraulic pump and pressure storage system. In addition to propelling the vehicle, the auxiliary systems are used to store energy normally lost during braking and re-use this energy to propel the vehicle, reducing both emissions and fuel consumption. With new heavy-duty engine technologies, natural-gas hybrid vehicles have the capacity to achieve near-zero emissions, as low as fuel cell vehicles with onboard fuel reforming.

Renewable Power Generation Technologies Renewable power generation technologies such as solar and wind electric power generation technologies may also play a role in long-term attainment strategies. The District will evaluate the application of renewable power generation technologies through market incentive programs in order to achieve additional emission reductions (e.g., area source credit rule). Future market incentive programs will focus on renewable power generation technologies used in residential and commercial applications.

Other possible strategies for increasing the penetration of renewable power generating technologies include encouraging solar and wind turbine use where applicable. Examples of possible renewable energy applications include powering electric motors used to run agricultural pumps with wind energy and utilizing solar panels in the residential and commercial sectors. The District has provided incentive money to convert diesel powered agricultural pumps to electric motors. The eastern portion of the district may have sufficient wind resources such that these electric motors could be cost- effectively driven by wind energy.

For the last few years, there have been substantial incentives available from California Public Utilities Commission and California Energy Commission to install solar panels on private residential rooftops. These incentives have been heavily utilized by the commercial sector, but those for the residential sector remain substantially unused, due to lack of awareness by the public. While LADWP is vigorously advertising the availability of their incentives, other energy providers have done less in this regard. The District can

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP possibly promote and, depending on the availability of funds, leverage the incentives for rooftop solar panels currently available from other public agencies.

The District has also recently augmented its current 20 kW solar array with an additional 80 kW system consisting of 344 semi-crystalline solar panels. The 100 kW of solar energy is used to help offset the District's electrical load while also providing an educational opportunity with a computer kiosk in the headquarters main lobby to show visitors the real-time benefits of solar power.

The District is also investigating renewable fuels, including biodiesel, ethanol, and gas- to-liquids. All of these projects are being conducted to ensure the air quality emissions are not increased when using these fuels. The District is keenly interested in reducing both greenhouse gas emissions and petroleum use, but not at the expense of addressing criteria pollutants.

Advanced Low-VOC Technologies VOC emissions from stationary sources result primarily from the use of VOC containing materials such as coatings, inks, adhesives and cleaning solvents. The VOC-containing materials are used in a wide variety of industries which include: manufacturing and coating of metal, wood, plastic, and other products; printing operations such as lithography, flexography, screen printing, gravure and letterpress; cleaning operations at repair and maintenance facilities; and numerous industries where adhesives are used.

Some of the advanced low-VOC alternative technologies developed by the industry include: waterborne technologies, radiation-curing technologies, and high solids, powder coating technologies, and exempt solvent-based formulations.

Waterborne Technology One way of eliminating VOC emissions is to replace solvent-based products with waterborne products. Typical solvent-based products are comprised of resins and solids dissolved in the solvent, which evaporates and leaves behind the pigment and resin to form the dried film. With waterborne products, the resins are dissolved in water, but typically dry to a non-water soluble film upon the substrate. Waterborne products also contain some VOCs, which work as a coalescent, provide resin stability, and help achieve certain desirable properties for application. Waterborne technology is quite advanced in most chemistry types, with recent research being done to minimize the amount of solvent or to attempt to switch to the non-HAP (Hazardous Air Pollutant) solvents.

The drying properties of waterborne products are more sensitive to ambient temperature and humidity characteristics, as compared to their solvent-based counterparts. The newer resin chemistries and formulations offer many advantages, which include lower VOC emissions, reduced fire hazards, increased worker safety, lower odor, ease of application,

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP and easy cleanup. Waterborne technology has been successfully used in automotive refinish, wood refinishing, industrial maintenance, architectural and marine coatings; flexographic, screen and gravure printing; adhesives, and cleaning solvents. Overall performance studies completed to date indicate equivalent or superior performance compared to their higher-VOC solvent-based counterparts.

Radiation-Curing Technologies Radiation-curing products are liquids with low viscosity that are 100 percent solids. The main difference between traditional solvent-based products and radiation-curing products is the curing mechanism. Radiation-curing products do not dry in the sense of losing solvents to the atmosphere as is the case with solvent-based products. Instead, when radiation-curing products are exposed to radiation, a polymerization reaction starts which converts the liquid to a hard, tough, cured solid film in a fraction of a second. This process typically results in significantly lower VOC emissions compared to solvent-based products. The most common radiations used to cure the products are ultraviolet light (UV) and electron beam (EB). The UV-curing products need a chemical called photoinitiator, which initiates the polymerization (curing) process when exposed to UV- light. The EB-cured products do not contain photoinitiators and are cured when the electrons generated with the EB equipment react directly with monomers and polymers in the liquid product.

Due to almost instant curing of these products, the concept of drying time is eliminated which allows any post-application operation to commence immediately or in-line. Other advantages include the attainment of very high gloss levels, reduction of VOC emissions and solvent odors, and reduced energy consumption. UV and EB-curing products can be used on virtually all substrates, from metal and wood to glass and plastic. Applications of UV and EB-curing products are numerous and proliferating rapidly. Examples include: paper, furniture, automotive components, no-wax flooring, credit cards, packaging, lottery tickets, golf balls, eyeglass lenses, CDs, baseball bats, beer cans and hundred of other items. These technologies have also registered significant progress toward alleviating previous limitations in technology for field applications. UV applications are also making headway in automotive field repair, and efforts are underway for applying this technology for aerospace and military field uses.

High Solids Technology Another way of reducing VOC emissions is to replace conventional low solids products with higher solids products, thus reducing VOC content. This requires product formulators to increase the solid content, while maintaining the important application and performance characteristics. The characteristics of higher and low solids products are significantly different. This makes the development of high-performance, higher solids products a more difficult formulating task than simply replacing the amount of solvent used in low solids products. A higher solids content increases the viscosity and, in some

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP cases, the surface tension, as well as affecting application and performance properties. While these increases can be minimized by the utilization of lower molecular weight polymers, they can be further reduced by the incorporation of a good solvent system into the formulation. The combination of reducing the molecular weight of the polymer and employing a balanced solvent system has contributed to the successful development of many of the commercial higher solids products in use today.

Powder Coating Technology Powder coating is a 100 percent solid coating with virtually no VOC emissions. In a powder coating application process, dry paint particles are supplied to a spray gun where particles acquire electrostatic charge. The charged particles are sprayed and attracted to a grounded object and form a uniform layer of powder coating on its surface. The coating is then cured by applying heat.

Some of the benefits of this technology are: solvent-free systems, reduced fire risk and associated insurance costs, reduced waste disposal cost, good solvent and chemical resistance, flexibility and impact resistance. Due to these benefits, powder coatings have become popular with OEM baked coating markets, especially in the decorative market. This system also has limited application for field finishing.

Exempt Solvent Technology Over the past ten years, the U.S. EPA exempted several solvents with low photochemical reactivity from consideration as a VOC. These exempt solvents are used to extend or replace many organic solvents, including toluene, xylene, mineral spirits, acetone, methyl ethyl ketone, tricholorethylene, and percholoroethylene. Acetone, para chlorobenzotrifluoride, and to a limited degree, tertiary butyl acetate, have been incorporated into coating, adhesive, and cleaning solvent formulations, and have contributed to significant reduction in VOCs as well as HAPs.

Innovative Control Approaches Because of the significant level of reductions needed for attainment demonstration, innovative control approaches need to be explored which can be implemented in conjunction with advanced emission control technologies. Three i Innovative approaches including market incentive programs, reactivity-based controls, localized controls, and public awareness and education programs are briefly discussed here.

Market Incentive Programs Since the adoption of the 1997/1999 SIP, the District has adopted several market incentive programs designed to offer stationary sources short-term compliance flexibility while at the same time incentivizing the introduction of low-emission mobile and area source technologies. In 2001, five pilot credit generation mobile and area source rules

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP were adopted to allow generation of mobile source emission reduction credits (MSERCs) and area source credits (ASCs) that could be used as RECLAIM trading credits in the RECLAIM compliance program. A sixth pilot credit generation rule was adopted in 2002. The District has used collected monies from the Executive Order (EO) RECLAIM Mitigation Fee Program for power producing facilities to maximize the funding for low emission mobile and area source projects through the pilot credit generation programs. In turn, these programs have allowed RECLAIM sources to obtain short-term compliance with their RECLAIM allocations while long-term solutions to meeting their allocations are sought. Credit generated under these programs cannot be used past a specific year Market incentive programs can continue to play a key role in the development and penetration of low-emission technologies. These programs can be expanded by maximizing the funding sources (e.g., private funding) to provide monies to purchase low-emission technologies. Expansion of these programs will continue to provide short- term flexibility for stationary sources while also producing creditable emission reductions after emission reduction credits can no longer be used (i.e., 2006 ? 2010). Thus, any emission reductions still occurring after the rule's specific deadlines may be credited toward the current and future SIP commitments.

Reactivity-Based Controls Over the past two decades, regulations for coating and solvents have primarily focused on lowering the VOC content which has significantly reduced the VOC emissions from these categories. Reformulation of high-VOC compounds to low-VOC alternatives has resulted in substantial reductions in VOC emissions and improvement of ambient air quality. However, different chemicals used in coatings and solvents would exhibit different reactivity rates in forming ozone in the atmosphere. Therefore, because of the need to achieve additional VOC reductions for ozone attainment demonstration, reformulation based on lower reactive compounds needs to be evaluated and considered in future rulemakings for coatings and solvents in order to provide a viable compliance option. Further study would also be required to evaluate the reactivity of different compounds under various meteorological conditions.

Localized Controls To complement the 2007 AQMP's overall control strategies, localized controls may also be considered to achieve reductions from specific areas which contribute to the exceedance of ambient air quality standards. In instances where the exceedances of the air quality standards are attributed only to emissions from a specific geographical area, it would be infeasible to develop region-wide regulations for the purpose of attaining the standard in a local area. For example, it appears that local PM10 sources in the eastern portion of the Basin are primarily responsible for the remaining exceedance of PM10 air

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP quality in that area. Therefore, it would be more feasible and cost-effective to develop localized controls to achieve the necessary reduction rather than subject the entire Basin to additional regulations which would not benefit the attainment in the local area. For this local area, the District is proposing to establish a localized program through a cooperative effort with local agencies to reduce emissions from direct sources of PM. As the District nears the attainment dates for other federal air quality standards, localized controls may offer a more viable approach in meeting these standards.

Demand-Side Strategies Demand-side strategies use differential pricing as a mechanism to influence consumer choice when purchasing or operating a product. Examples include charging higher fees for registering or purchasing a higher-emitting vehicle or a consumer product. Another example may include charging higher user fees for recreational boats for access to water ways unless their engines meet a low-emission standard. Charging a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) or emission-based fee for higher mileage and higher emitting vehicles, respectively, is another example. A pilot project could be considered as a way of initiating and evaluating this type of strategy. A task force could be convened to further explore and evaluate demand-side strategies. To improve public acceptance, these programs can be designed to be minimize the socioeconomic impacts on low-income residents of the Basin.

Public Awareness and Education Programs The concept of public awareness and education programs is to educate consumers and select area and stationary sources about lower-emitting products and process alternatives. The District instituted a program called Clean Air Choice in 2003 to increase public awareness of the availability of low-emission motor vehicles. AQMD staff recruited voluntary support from new car dealerships in the four counties to place window stickers on new vehicles meeting the program's criteria for low emissions. The AQMD is in the process of refocusing the program on direct outreach to consumers and new car buyers.

A possible method to implement a similar concept relative to consumer products would be through a certification program for manufacturers. Manufacturers of consumer products that meet or exceed a specified emission limit would be eligible for a label certified by CARB or the AQMD that indicates that their product contains low or zero For stationary and area sources, a series of public awareness programs could be established to educate facilities about control methods that would reduce emissions at their facility or business. Public awareness and education programs could include, but are not limited to, educational brochures, videos, articles, and workshops.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP DISTRICT'S SIP EMISSION COMMITMENT The SIP commitment of the 2007 AQMP is structured into two components: reductions from adopted rules and reductions from the 2007 AQMP control measures. Taken together, these reductions are relied upon to demonstrate expeditious progress and attainment of the federal PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone standards. The following sections first describe the methodology for SIP emission reduction calculations and the creditable SIP reductions, then describe what procedures will be followed to ensure fulfillment of the commitment.

SIP Emission Reduction Tracking For purposes of tracking progress in emission reductions, the baseline emissions for the year 2014 annual average and 2023 2020 planning inventory in the 2007 AQMP will be used, regardless of any subsequent new inventory information that reflects more recent knowledge. This is to ensure that the same ?currency? is used in measuring progress as was used in designing the AQMP. This will provide a fair and equitable measurement of progress. Therefore, whether progress is measured by emission reductions or remaining emissions for a source category makes no difference. However, current emission inventory information at the time of rule development will continue to be used for calculating reductions, and assessing cost- effectiveness and socioeconomic impacts of the proposed rule. Therefore, for future rulemaking activity, both the current and AQMP inventories will be reported.

Any non-mandatory emission reductions achieved beyond the existing District regulations are creditable only if they are also SIP-enforceable. Therefore, in certain instances, the District may have to adopt regulations to reflect the existing industry practices in order to claim SIP reduction credit with the understanding that there may not be additional reductions beyond what has already occurred. Exceptions can be made where reductions are real, quantifiable, surplus to the 2007 AQMP baseline inventories, and enforceable through other State and/or federal regulations. Also, any emissions inventory revisions, which have gone through a peer review and public review process, can also be SIP creditable.

Reductions from Adopted Rules A number of control measures contained in the 2003 AQMP have been adopted as rules. These adopted rules and their projected emission reductions become assumptions in developing AQMP's future year inventories. Although they are not part of the control strategy in the 2007 AQMP, continued implementation of those rules is essential in achieving clean air goals and maintaining the attainment

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP demonstration. Table 1-2 of Chapter 1 lists the rules adopted by the District since the adoption of the 2003 AQMP and their expected emission reductions.

Reductions from District's Stationary Source Control Measures For purposes of implementing an approved SIP, the District is committed to adopt and implement control measures that will achieve, in aggregate, emission reductions specified in Table 4-8 9 (short- and mid-term measures) as well as the long-term reductions (i.e., 32 t/d of VOC reductions). Emission reductions achieved in excess of the amount committed to in a given year can be applied to the emission reduction commitments of subsequent years. The District is committed to adopt the control measures in Table 4-2A and 4-2B unless these measures or a portion thereof are found infeasible and other substitute measures that can achieve equivalent reductions in the same adoption/implementation timeframes are adopted. Findings of infeasibility will be made at a regularly scheduled meeting of the District Board with proper public notification. For purposes of SIP commitment, infeasibility means that the proposed control technology is not reasonably likely to be available by the implementation date in question, or achievement of the emission reductions by that date is not cost-effective. The District acknowledges that this commitment is enforceable under Section 304(f) of the federal Clean Air Act.

Adoption and Implementation of District's Stationary Source Control Measures (Table 4-2A and 4-2B) ? In response to concerns raised by the regulated community that costly controls may be required to meet the SIP obligations, the District establishes a threshold of $16,500 per ton of VOC reduction for tiered levels of analysis. Specifically, proposed rules with an average cost-effectiveness above the threshold will trigger a more rigorous average cost-effectiveness, incremental cost- effectiveness, and socioeconomic impact analysis. A public review and decision process will be instituted to seek lower cost alternatives. In addition, the District staff, with input from stakeholders, will attempt to develop viable control alternatives within the industry source categories that a rule is intended to regulate. If it is determined that control alternatives within the industry source category are not feasible, staff will perform an evaluation of the control measure as described in the next paragraph. Viable alternatives shall be reviewed by the District Governing Board at a public meeting no less than 90 days prior to rule adoption and direction given back to staff for further analysis. During this review process, incremental cost- effectiveness scenarios and methodology will be specified, and industry-specific affordability issues will be identified as well as possible alternative control measures. The District Governing Board may adopt the original or an alternative that is consistent with state and federal law. In addition, staff shall include in all set hearing items a notification that proposed rules do or do not exceed the cost threshold.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Adoption and Implementation of Alternative/Substitute Measures ? Under the 2007 AQMP, the District will be allowed to substitute District stationary source measures in Table 4-2A with other measures, provided the overall equivalent emission reductions by adoption and implementation dates in Table 4-8 9 are maintained and the applicable measure in Table 4-2A is infeasible. In order to provide meaningful public participation, when new control concepts are introduced for rule development, the District is committed to provide advanced public notification beyond its regulatory requirements (i.e., through its Rule Forecast Report). The District will also report quantitatively on the AQMP's implementation progress annually at its regularly scheduled Board meetings. Included in the reports will be any new control measures being proposed or measures, or portions thereof, that have been found to be infeasible and the basis of such finding. In addition, at the beginning of the year, any significant emission reduction related rules to be considered would be listed in the Board's Rule Forecast Report. Upon finding of a new feasible control measure, rule development will be completed no later than 12 months from the adoption date of the control measure substituted, and implementation of the new measure will occur no later than two years from the final implementation date of the measure substituted. The existing rule development outreach efforts such as public workshops, stakeholder working group meetings or public consultation meetings will continue to solicit public input. In addition, if additional technical analysis, including source testing, indicates that actual emissions are less than previously estimated, the reductions would then be creditable toward SIP commitments. In order for reductions from improved emission calculation methodologies to be SIP creditable, a public review process will also be instituted to solicit comments and make appropriate revisions, if necessary.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-9 Short- and Mid-Term VOC, NOx, SOx, and PM2.5 Emission Reductions Commitment by AQMD to be Achieved Through Rule Adoption and Implementation 2014 Annual Average Inventory/2023 Planning Inventory (Tons/Day)

Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total 10.4/19.3 19.3 VOC Based on Based on Date Datea PM2.5 Based on Based on Date Datea NOx Based on Based on Date Datea 0.8/0.7 --- 3.1/4.2 --- 4.5/5.2 --- 2.0/9.2 3.6 --- 0.6 --- 4.0 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 11.1 0.7/0.7 --- 0.4/0.4 0.7 0.4/2.2 --- --- 0.4 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 2.2 0.4/0.4 --- 5.6/6.9 --- 0.8/1.9 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 4.1 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 5.1 1.5/3.3 3.3 6.8/9.2 9.2 SOx Based on Based on Date Datea --- --- 3.0/3.0 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 3.0 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 3.0/3.0 3.0 a Represents the final, full implementation date; typically a rule contains multiple implementation dates.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Short- and Mid-Term VOC, NOx, SOx, and PM2.5 Emission Reductions Commitment by AQMD to be Achieved Through Rule Adoption and Implementation -2014 Annual Average Inventory/2023 Planning Inventory- (Tons/Day)

Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total 9.1/18.0 18.0 VOC Based on Based on Adoption Implementation Date Datea PM2.5 Based on Based on Adoption Implementation Date Datea NOx Based on Based on Adoption Implementation Date Datea --- --- 2.6/3.6 --- 4.5/5.2 --- 2.0/9.2 3.6 --- 0.6 --- 4.0 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.7/0.7 --- 0.4/0.4 0.7 0.4/2.2 --- --- 0.4 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 5.1/6.3 --- 0.8/1.9 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 4.1 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 9.8 --- 2.2 --- 4.1 1.5/3.3 3.3 5.9/8.2 8.2 SOx Based on Based on Adoption Implementation Date Datea --- --- 3.0/3.0 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 3.0 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 3.0/3.0 3.0 a Represents the final, full implementation date; typically a rule contains multiple implementation dates.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP OVERALL EMISSION REDUCTIONS A summary of emission reductions for the proposed control measures for the years 2014 and 2023 2020 is provided in Tables 4-9 10 through 4-1112. These reductions reflect the emission reductions associated with implementation of control measures under local, State, and federal jurisdiction. Emission reductions represent the difference between the projected baseline and the remaining emissions. For 2014, Table 4-9 10 identifies projected reductions based on the annual average inventory for all criteria pollutants (VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, and PM2.5). It represents the level of emission reductions needed to achieve the federal PM2.5 standard. For 2023 2020, Tables 4-110 and 4-121 identify projected reductions based on the summer planning inventory for VOC and NOx emissions and the winter planning inventory for CO and NOx emissions. Emission reductions by 2023 2020 illustrate the extent of controls needed for achieving the federal ozone standard.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-109 Emission Reductions for 2014 Based on Average Annual Emissions Inventory (tons per day) Sources VOC NOx CO SOx PM2.5 Year 2014 Baseline1 527 594 654 668 2577 43 70 102 98 2772 Baseline Adjustment2 (0.5) (5) 8 --- 3 ---- 2 ---- 0 Emission Reductions: District's Short-Term and Mid- 10 7 7 8 0 3 2 1 Term Control Stationary Source Control Measures CARB's Draft Proposed State 42 125 --- 20 9 Strategy District Staff's Proposed additional Recommended State 7 135 71 231 38 267 1 46 3 and Federal Stationary and 13 Mobile Source Control Measures Total Reductions (All Measures) 59 142 203 239 38 267 24 49 14 2014 Remaining Emissions 469 457 443 421 2535 19 88 84 2502 1 Emission benefits from SCAG's 2004 Regional Transportation Strategy and Control Measures are already reflected in the AQMP baseline for the draft AQMP. These emission benefits will be reflected in the final 2 Reflects baseline inventory adjustments for CARB's adopted rules in 2006 for large spark-ignited engines (2.4 t/d NOx) and consumer products (4.5 t/d VOC) Rule 1118, emissions for the purpose of set-aside tracking (5 t/d VOC increase) and emission benefits from the Carl Moyer Program (4.2 6.8 t/d NOx and 0.2 t/d PM2.5) and NSR Program benefits (1.2 t/d NOx). Emission benefits from the Carl Moyer Program presented in this table reflect the additional reductions not included in the baseline. () denotes emission increases. See Appendix III.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-110 Emission Reductions for 2023 2020 Based on Summer Planning Inventory (tons per day) Sources VOC NOx Year 2023 2020 Baseline1 536 599 506 531 Baseline Adjustment2 (0.2) (5) 9 7 Emission Reductions: District's Short-Term and Mid-Term Control Stationary Source Control Measures 1918 9 13 CARB's Draft Proposed State Strategy 52 139 District Staff's Proposed Additional 17 147 56 233 Recommended State and Federal Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures3 Long-Term Measures4 28 135 179 40 Total Reductions (All Measures) 116 300 383 286 2023 2020 Remaining Emissions 420 304 114 238 1 Emission benefits from SCAG's 2004 Regional Transportation Strategy and Control Measures are already reflected in the AQMP baseline. for the draft AQMP. These emission benefits will be reflected in the final 2 Reflects baseline inventory adjustments for CARB's adopted rules in 2006 for large spark-ignited engines (1.9 t/d NOx) and consumer products (4.8 t/d VOC), Includes emissions for the purpose of set-aside tracking (5 t/d VOC increase) and emission benefits from Carl Moyer Program (6.2 6.3 t/d NOx) and NSR Program benefits (1.2 t/d NOx). Emission benefits from the Carl Moyer Program presented in this table reflect the additional reductions not included in the baseline. () denotes emission increases. See Appendix 3 Emission reductions from consumer products in 2020 are incorporated in the long-term measure for 4 Includes long-term reductions from SCLTM-01A, SCLTM-01B, SCLTM-02. and SCLTM-03. Refer To Appendix IV-B-2. LTM-01, LTM-03, LTM-04, and LTM-05. Emission reductions for LTM-01 are based on a 50% reduction in reactivity which is equivalent to about 80 tons per day of VOC reductions.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4-121 Emission Reductions for 2023 2020 Based on Winter Planning Inventory (tons per day) Sources CO NOx Year 2023 2020 Baseline1 2058 2157 520 548 Baseline Adjustment2 0 3 9 7 Emission Reductions:

District's Short-Term and Mid-Term Control 0 12 16 Stationary Source Control Measures ---- CARB's Draft Proposed State Strategy 140 District Staff's Proposed Additional 92 223 52 235 Recommended State and Federal Stationary and Mobile Source Control Measures Long-Term Measures3 ---- 270 186 41 92 500 390 292 Total Reductions (All Measures) 1966 1661 121 249 2020 Remaining Emissions 1 Emission benefits from SCAG's 2004 Regional Transportation Strategy and Control Measures are already reflected in the baseline. These emission benefits will be reflected in the final AQMP. 2 Reflects baseline inventory adjustments for CARB's adopted rules in 2006 for large spark-ignited engines (1.9 t/d NOx), Reflects baseline inventory adjustments for Rule 1118, emission benefits from Carl Moyer Program (6.2 6.3 t/d NOx) and NSR Program benefits (1.2 t/d NOx). Emission benefits from the Carl Moyer Program presented in this table reflect the additional reductions not included in the baseline. See 3 Includes long-term reductions from SCLTM-01A, SCLTM-01B, and SCLTM-02. (Refer To Appendix IV- B-2). LTM-04.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP INTRODUCTION Air quality modeling is an integral part of the planning process to achieve clean air. As mentioned in Chapter 1, the submittal of the 2003 California Ozone SIP served as the ozone attainment demonstration for the South Coast Air Basin and those portions of the Southeast Desert Modified Nonattainment Area which are under the District's jurisdiction. The attainment demonstrations provided in this Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Plan reflect the updated emissions baseline estimates, new technical information, enhanced air quality modeling techniques, and the control strategy provided in Chapter 4.

The Basin is currently designated Nonattainment for PM2.5, and Severe-17 nonattainment for ozone. The District will request that U.S. EPA accept a voluntary reclassification for the Basin from ?Severe-17? to ?Extreme? nonattainmnet through the Governing Board's adoption of this Draft Final AQMP and resolution. This action will enable the use of long-term measures in the control strategy and extend the attainment date to June 15, 2024. These two pollutants PM2.5, and ozone - are linked to common precursor emissions. The District's goal is to develop an integrated control strategy which: 1) ensures that ambient air quality standards for all criteria pollutants are met by the established deadlines in the federal Clean Air Act (CAA); and 2) achieves an expeditious rate of reduction towards the state air quality standards. The overall control strategy is designed so that efforts to achieve the standard for one criteria pollutant do not cause unnecessary deterioration of another. A two-step modeling process has been conducted for the Draft 2007 AQMP. First, future year annual and 24-hour average PM2.5 is simulated to demonstrate attainment by 2015. The future year 8-hour average ozone emissions control strategy then builds upon the PM2.5 strategy to demonstrate attainment of the federal 8-hour average ozone standard in 20214. This two-step approach is consistent with the approach used in the 2003 AQMP to first demonstrate attainment in 2006 of the PM10 standard and subsequent attainment of the 1-hour average ozone standard in 2010.

During the development of the 2003 Plan, the District convened a panel of seven experts to independently review the regional air quality modeling conducted for ozone and PM10. The consensus of the panel was for the District to move to the more current state-of-the-art dispersion platforms and chemistry modules. The model selected for the Draft 2007 AQMP attainment demonstrations is the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions (CAMx) [Environ, 2002], using SAPRC99 chemistry. Moreover, this model and chemistry package is consistent with the previous advice of the outside peer reviewers. CAMx is a state-of-the-art air quality model that can simulate ozone and PM2.5 concentrations together in a ?one-atmosphere? approach for the attainment demonstrations.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP currently continues to be met. Future year projections of CO provided in the 2003 AQMP and projections from CARB's EMFAC2002 emissions model were used to support the redesignation request and provide the basis for a CO maintenance plan for the Basin. EPA's final approval of the redesignation request is currently pending.

On September 21, 2006 the U.S. EPA administrator signed the final documents that eliminated the existing annual PM10 standard. Only one Basin monitoring station (Riverside-Rubidoux) reports annual levels of PM10 that exceeds the revoked standard. It is expected that the Rubidoux will continue to nominally exceed the federal standard in 2006. In spite of EPA's recent decision on the annual PM10 standard, efforts are underway to work towards meeting the attainment target to protect public health and assist in on-going compliance of the retained 24-hour PM10 standard in the Basin.

Detailed information on the modeling approach, data gathering, model development and enhancement, model application, and interpretation of results is presented in Appendix V. The following sections summarize the results of the modeling efforts. Future ozone air quality projections for the Coachella Valley are presented in Chapter 8 and in Appendix V.

MODELING APPROACH Design Values and Relative Reduction Response Factors (RRF) The Draft 2007 AQMP modeling approach to demonstrate attainment of the air quality standard relies heavily on the use of design values and relative reductionresponse factors to translate regional modeling simulation output to the form of the air quality standard. Both ozone and PM2.5 have standards that require three consecutive years of monitored data, averaged by a designed form, to assess compliance. In the case of ozone, compliance to the standard is determined from a three year average of the 4th highest daily ozone 8-hour average concentration. The PM2.5 annual design value is determined from quarterly average PM2.5 concentrations, averaged by year, for a three year period. For the 24-hour average PM2.5 design value, the 98th percentile daily concentration sampled from a year is selected and then averaged for a three year period. The complexity of the design values does not lend itself to a direct attainment demonstration that relies on explicit air quality model simulation predictions of future air quality based on one or several meteorological episodes.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP design value centered around 2002, the preferred year for the baseline inventory development and is used in the ozone attainment demonstration.

The trend in the Basin PM2.5 design values from 2001 through 2005 (Figure 5-1b) is significantly different from ozone, depicting a sharp reduction in concentration over the period. The design value for 2001 is 30.1 ?g/m3 while the 2005 design value (based on data from 2003, 2004 and 2005) is 22.6 ?g/m3. The reduction of seven and one half micrograms per cubic meter occurred for the same meteorology as the ozone design trend. Similar reductions can be observed in the component contributions of nitrate and sulfate in the PM10 FRM data over the same period. Since the trend in PM2.5 is consistently moving in the direction of air quality improvement, it is more reasonable to use a representative design value that is not locked in a multiple year average. It is more consistent to use a design that reflects the speciated data (monitored in 2005) that is used in the attainment demonstration. To reflect the ambient trend of PM2.5 and preserve data consistency, the PM2.5 attainment demonstration is based on the 2005 design value.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Relative Response Factors and Future Year Design Values To bridge the gap between air quality model output evaluation and applicability to the health based air quality standards, EPA guidance has proposed the use of relative reductionresponse factors (RRF). The RRF is simply a ratio of future year predicted air quality with the control strategy fully implemented to the simulated air quality in the base year. The attainment demonstration consists of multiplying the non-dimensional RFF to the base year design value to predict the future year design value. Thus, the simulated improvement in air quality, based on one or more meteorological episodes, is translated as a metric that directly determines compliance in the form of the standard. Equations 5-1 and 5-2 summarize the calculation.

RRF = Future-Year Model Prediction / Base-Year Model Prediction

Attainment Demonstration = RRF X Design Value ? Air Quality Standard

The modeling analyses described in this chapter use the RRF and design value approach to demonstrate future year attainment of the standards.

PM2.5 Within the Basin, PM2.5 particles are either directly emitted into the atmosphere (e.g., primary particles), or are formed through atmospheric chemical reactions from precursor gases (e.g., secondary particles). Primary PM2.5 includes road dust, diesel soot, combustion products, and other sources of fine particles. Secondary products, such as sulfates, nitrates, and complex carbon compounds are formed from reactions with oxides of sulfur, oxides of nitrogen, VOCs, and ammonia.

The Draft 2007 AQMP employs CAMx using the ?one atmosphere? approach comprised of the CB-IV gas phased chemistry and a static two-mode particle size aerosol module as the particulate modeling platform. The CAMx ?one atmosphere? chemistry approach preserves mass consistency is more mass consistent and takes advantage of an advanced dispersion platform. Parallel testing was conducted to evaluate the CAMx/AERO-LT performance against CAMx indicated that the two model/chemistry packages performance were similar.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Speciated PM2.5 data measured at 108-sites from the Multiple Air Toxic Evaluation Program (MATES-III) conducted during 2005 provided the characterization for evaluation and validation of the CAMx annual and episodic demonstrations.

The following section summarizes the PM2.5 modeling approach conducted in preparation for this Plan. Details of the PM2.5 modeling are presented in Appendix V.

Annual PM2.5 Modeling Approach The Draft 2007 AQMP annual average PM2.5 modeling employs a deterministic approach to demonstrate attainment of the PM2.5 in 2015. CAMx was used to simulate 2005 meteorological and air quality data to determine Basin annual average and episodic PM2.5PM2.5 concentrations. Model performance was evaluated against speciated particulate PM2.5PM2.5 air quality data for ammonium, nitrates, sulfates, secondary organic matter, elemental carbon, primary and total particulate mass for nineeight MATES-III monitoring sites (Los Angeles, Anaheim, Wilmington, Long Beach, Compton, Burbank, Pico Rivera, Rubidoux, and Fontana). The future year attainment demonstration was analyzed for 2015, the target set by the federal CAA. The 2015 simulation relied on projected controlled emissions for 2014, thus enabling a full year demonstration based on a control strategy that would be fully implemented by January 1, 2015.

Future year PM2.5 air quality was determined using site and species specific relative reductionresponse factors applied to 2005 PM2.5 design values per EPA guidance documents. The air monitoring station design values were calculated using the federal reference method Source Selective Inlet (SSI) High-Vol PM2.5 data measured at the District's air monitoring network from 2003-2005. The SSI PM2.5 data were apportioned by species based on the distribution observed in the MATES-III data. This enabled a direct comparison of the total PM2.5 mass to the design value and standard. The breakdown by species provided guidance to the development and effectiveness of the control strategy.

CAMx was simulations used the same gridded region (5 km squared grid, 280 easting and 3650 northing, 65 by 40 grid cells) as that used for the 2003 UAMAERO-LT analyses. The vertical structure was increased to 11 layers (compared with the 5-layer analysis of UAMAERO-LT) but less than the 19 layers used for the MM5 simulations in effort to conserve computational resources. MM5 was used to generate the meteorological profile for each day in 2005. The MM5 simulations were generated for the larger SCOS97 modeling domain employing a 5 km square grid and fit to the smaller PM2.5 grid. The MM5 simulations were initialized from NCEP analyses and run for 5- day increments without the option for four dimensional data assimilation (FDDA).

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Sunday profiles based on CALTRANS weigh-in-motion and vehicle population data. Monthly anthropogenic and biogenic emissions were temperature and humidity corrected. Monthly boundary conditions were derived from the Western Regional Air Partnership Regional Haze CMAQ simulations. As with the 2003 AQMP, the simulations benefited from enhancements made to the emissions inventory including updated an ammonia inventory, improved emissions characterization that split organic compounds into coarse, fine and primary categories, and updated spatial allocation of primary paved road dust emissions.

Calculation of the future year design value for the 9eight sites was based on quarterly modeling performance (base and future year controlled) and the 2005 quarterly design values (based on 2003, 2004 and 2005 observed data). Table 5-1 provides the 2005 quarterly, annual and 24-hour average annual PM2.5 design values for the Basin.

Episodic 24-Hr Average PM2.5 Modeling Approach Per PM2.5 guidance, two options are provided to determine RRFs for the future year 24- hour average PM2.5 attainment demonstration. The first option uses episodic modeling with day-specific emissions for representative meteorological episodes to calculate RRFs. The Draft 2007 AQMP uses the second approach proposed by EPA that relies on the annual model performance.

For this approach, the 2005 observational data are sorted by quarter of year and further into the top 25 percent of days in each quarter. PM2.5 RRFs arewere calculated on a quarterly basis from the future and base year annual simulations for only those days in the top 25 percentile per quarter. The quarterly RRFs are then applied to the quarterly 24-hour average PM2.5 design values to develop quarterly future year design values which are later aggregated into an annual 24-hour future year design value to assess attainment. (The quarterly 24-hour average PM2.5 design values were comprised of the 98th percentile data in each quarter for the years 2003, 2004 and 2005. The quarterly 24- hour average PM2.5 design values are presented in Appendix V).

Weight of Evidence PM2.5 modeling guidance strongly recommends the use of corroborating evidence to support the future year attainment demonstration. The weight of evidence demonstration for the Draft 2007 AQMP includes emissions trends analysis, speciated linear rollback analyses, as well as future year PM2.5 predictions at "hot spot" grids, where emissions have significant uncertainty. A supplemental PM2.5 simulation is provided for the 2010 future-year control scenario to provide a mid-course evaluation of the control strategy and comparison with the 2003 AQMP UAMAERO-LT projections for that year. Detailed discussions of all model results and the weight of evidence demonstration are provided in Appendix V.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 5-1 PM2.5 2005 Design Values* (g/m3) Monitoring Site Quarter-1 Quarter-2 Quarter-3 Quarter-4 Annual 24-Hours Anaheim 17.6 12.4 15.4 20.0 16.3 47.0 Azusa 16.2 15.9 21.1 19.6 18.2 54.2 Big Bear 12.8 8.0 7.7 14.7 10.8 30.3 Burbank 18.7 15.2 20.7 24.3 19.7 53.3 Los Angeles 19.7 16.3 20.2 22.2 19.6 60.7 Fontana 18.7 19.2 20.2 23.2 20.3 54.8 Long Beach 18.0 12.7 15.7 22.9 17.3 44.6 Lynwood 19.3 14.6 18.3 22.9 18.8 51.3 Mission Viejo 12.0 10.2 12.7 12.9 11.9 33.5 Ontario 21.0 17.9 20.5 25.3 21.2 58.8 Pasadena 15.5 14.6 18.6 18.5 16.8 46.0 Pico Rivera 20.3 14.4 18.8 23.2 19.2 52.2 Reseda 14.3 13.4 15.9 17.8 15.4 47.0 Magnolia 18.9 19.8 20.6 22.5 20.5 49.0 Rubidoux 21.2 21.9 22.6 24.9 22.6 64.8 San Bernardino 18.2 20.3 21.6 21.8 20.5 58.1 * Calculated based on quarterly observed data between 2002 - 2005 Ozone The CAA requires that ozone nonattainment areas designated as serious and above use a photochemical grid model to demonstrate attainment. As previously discussed, the 2003 AQMP ozone attainment demonstration relied upon UAM as the photochemical modeling platform for the analysis. Responding to the recommendations of the expert panel as well as EPA updated ozone modeling guidance including revised Appendix W, the Draft 2007 AQMP 8-hour ozone standard attainment demonstration was conducted using CAMx (version 4.4) with SAPRC99 as the primary modeling tool. Performance statistics and model inputs are discussed extensively in Appendix V.

Modeling Approach CAMx simulations were conducted using a Lambert Conformal grid projection overlayed on the 5 km squared grid over the SCOS97 modeling domain. Specifically, the UTM Zone 11 coordinates of the domain are 150-700 km UTM East and 3580-3950 km UTM North. The modeling analyses were run using 16 vertical layers up to 5000 m above ground level. Per EPA modeling guidance, since the CAMx regional modeling is based on a 5 km squared grid, the ozone performance evaluation and peak RRF calculation is based on a comparison of the observed concentration and the predicted concentration within a 15 km radius of the grid hosting the observation. (Data are evaluated for a 7 X 7 grid area).

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP CAMx simulations were generated for six meteorological episodes: including twoone periods in 2004, threefour periods in 2005 and one in 1997. The August 1997 SCOS97 meteorological episode was retained for this analysis to provide a bridge from linkage to the 2003 AQMP attainment demonstration. Table 5-2 characterizes the selected episodes two ways: first by an assessment of the meteorological profile using a statistical model to rank the episodes based on meteorological stagnation potential and second by comparing observed 8-hour average maximum ozone concentrations to the annual design values. The meteorological classification is based on an empirical analysis presented in the 2003 AQMP which provides both a stagnation severity rank (1 being the highest) and the percentile the meteorological episode had in a 22-year distribution. The observed maximum 8-hour average concentrations on each episode day, and the average of the 8-hour maximum concentrations observed for each multi-day episode are also provided for comparison to the annual 4th highest 8-hour average ozone value observed in the year that the episode takes place.

Briefly, the selected episode days mostly rank in the 95th percentile or higher for meteorological stagnation potential. (Note: the meteorological classification scheme was developed using 1-hour maximum ozone as the classifying variable. Confirmatory analyses indicate that in the Basin the 1-hour ozone episodes are a subset of the 8-hour episodes and that the meteorological profile required to generate each event are essentially equivalent). As shown in Table 5-2, tThe episode average of the 8-hour maximum concentrations is either equal to or with 512 ppb of the annual 4th highest 8- hour observed concentration for four of the six simulation periods. The episodes failing to meet this criterion were characterized by more severe stagnation and higher average concentrations.

The five episodes observed in 2004 and 2005 occurred during MATES-III, a period of enhanced air quality monitoring in the Basin. Supporting MATES-III, the District operated three radar wind profilers in the Basin, with radio acoustic sounders. Additional profiler data was obtained from operating sites in Ventura and San Diego Counties. Routinely monitored surface and upper air measurements augmented the enhanced field program sampling.

Selection of episodes from 2004 and 2005 was also made attempted to minimize the impact of avoid the commingling associated with the Phase III California Fuel Reformulation in 2003 where the primary oxygenate was changed from MTBE to ethanol. Commingling of ethanol and non-ethanol based fuels leads to enhanced evaporative VOC emissions and thus more ozone. Quantification of the amount of commingling taking place on a daily or episodic basis was nearly impossible. Implementation of the fuel switch from MTBE to ethanol took place in California during 2003 and was assumed to be completed by December 31, 2003. Selecting meteorological episodes post 2003 reduced the uncertainty associated with the estimation of the VOC emissions inventory due to commingling.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The meteorological fields used for the CAMx ozone simulations were generated using MM5 with the FDDA option. The meteorological fields were developed using a Lambert Conformal grid that roughly overlaid the SCOS97 modeling domain. MM5 was simulated using 34 vertical layers and simulations were initialized using NCEP global weather forecast model analysis. The MM5 fields were post processed to layer averaged winds to the levels defined for the CAMx simulations and to adjust coordinates to the UTM system.

[Table 5-2 has been replaced in the Proposed Modifications Document] TABLE 5-2 Ozone Meteorological Episodes Used for the Ozone Attainment Demonstration Ranking Applied to Historical 22-Year Period (1981-2002) Episode Stagnation Severity Rank Percentile 8-Hour Maximum Ozone (ppb) Episode Average 8-Hour Maximum Ozone (ppb) Annual 4th Highest Observed 8-Hour Maximum Ozone /Station (ppb) 8/4/1997 570 93 110 124 127 San Bernardino 8/5/1997 198 98 124 8/6/1997 203 97 130 8/7/1997 515 95 130 8/7/2004 331 96 127 125 116 Crestline 8/8/2004 144 98 122 5/21/2005 389 95 112 129 125 Crestline 5/22/2005 50 99 145 7/15/2005 265 96 143 132 7/16/2005 22 99 141 7/17/2005 15 99 141 7/18/2005 73 99 127 7/19/2005 567 93 110 8/4/2005 270 97 108 113 8/5/2005 399 95 110 8/6/2005 288 96 119 8/7/2005 341 96 114 8/27/2005 160 98 130 126 8/28/2005 138 98 121

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Application of RRF's Unlike the regional ozone modeling conducted for the 2003 AQMP that based the attainment demonstration on the direct results of a future year simulations, the procedure for determining future year attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard for the Draft 2007 AQMP relies on the use of site specific RRF's determined from a series of simulations for the 2002 and 2020 controlled emissions. The basic procedure is outlined earlier in this chapter. The ozone attainment demonstration is anchored by the 2002 base-year emissions. The meteorological episodes are first validated based on model performance in the using day-specific emissions for each base-case (e.g. 1997, 2004 or 2005). The suites of validated episodes are then simulated using the 20203 controlled and 2002 emissions to determine a site specific average set of RRFs. The site specific RRF is applied to the 2002 design value to determine whether attainment has been satisfied.

A minimum of 5-episode days isare requiredrecommended to determine the site specific RRF. The evaluation requires that the model performance for the day is within specific performance goals including observation with 25 percent of the station design value, absolute prediction accuracy within 25 percent guidelines and that a minimum observed concentration at each site used in the analysis exceeds 70 ppb or is simulated at 85 ppb or greater. If a site did not meet the 5-episode day threshold, the average of the RRFs for all Basin sites was applied to estimate the future design value at that station. Per EPA modeling guidance, since the CAMx regional modeling is based on a 5 km squared grid, the ozone performance evaluation and peak RRF calculation is based on a comparison of the observed concentration and the predicted concentration within a 15 km radius of the grid hosting the observation. (Data are evaluated for a 7 X 7 grid area).

Weight of Evidence As with PM2.5 the modeling guidance strongly recommends the use of corroborating evidence to support the future year ozone attainment demonstration. The weight of evidence demonstration for the Draft 2007 AQMP includes ozone air quality, population exposure and emissions trends analyses, supplemental air quality simulations for 2010 (1-hour and 8-hour average impacts), and 2013 and 2018. Additional model sensitivity simulations including stress tests and varying base and future year modeling emissions are presented and discussed. Detailed discussions of all model results and the weight of evidence demonstration are provided in Appendix V.

Carbon Monoxide As discussed above, the request to re-designate the Basin attainment for the 8-hour federal CO standard has been forwarded to U.S. EPA and is currently being evaluated. No additional regional or hot-spot monitoring is provided in the Draft 2007 AQMP to further demonstrate attainment of the 8-hour average ozone standard.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP PM10 As previously discussed, on September 21, 2006 the U.S. EPA administrator signed the final documents that eliminated the existing annual PM10 standard. The action retained 24-hour PM10 standard at its existing concentration of 150 ?g/m3. The form of the 24- hour PM10 standard allows for one violation of the standard annually. The Basin currently meets the 24-hour average federal standard. (The only days that exceed the standard are associated with high wind natural events or exceptional events due to wildfires).

For this analysis, the annual second maximum concentration is used for the attainment demonstration (given the standard allows for one violation annually). Riverside Rubidoux has been the PM10 24-hour design site in nine of the past ten years when high wind days have been excluded from the analysis. The 2005 design value at Rubidoux is 86 percent of the federal standard. The standard attainment demonstration is conducted to assure that the Basin will continue to be in compliance in future years.

As a conservative analysis, only emissions reductions associated with the PM2.5 portion of the 24-hour PM10 concentration are assumed to be impacted by future year emission controls. Future year predictions of maximum and second maximum 24-hour average PM10 are calculated using the site specific annual average PM2.5 RRFs applied to the PM2.5 portion of the PM10 design concentration. The average PM2.5 RRFs calculated fromfor the nineeight sites, for 2005 to 2014, are applied to the fine portion of the 24- hour PM10 distribution for sites other than the MATES III which have the PM2.5 speciation. The coarse portion of the PM10 is assumed to be held constant in this analysis. The predicted reductions to the fine portion are then added to the coarse to estimate a 2015 second maximum PM10 24-hour average concentration.

Visibility In July 1999, U.S. EPA adopted the federal Regional Haze Regulations [40 CFR Part 51] to address Section 169A of the CAA which set forth a national goal for future visibility with specific focus to remedy any visibility impairments to Class I areas nationwide. States are required to provide to EPA emissions reduction strategies to improve visibility in all mandatory Class I national parks and wilderness areas. In response to the requirements of the regulations, California joined the Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP), a multi-agency organization that is coordinating implementation of the regional haze rules. States with PM2.5 non-attainment areas are require to submit ?haze plans? to EPA within 3-years following PM2.5 designation and develop future year (2018) inventories of emissions that lead to visibility reduction. The ARB has assumed the responsibility for the plan and inventory development requirements for the state.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP contribute to an extinction coefficient value of 0.23 per kilometer (or 10 miles of visual range) when relative humidity is less than 70 percent. The previous form of the standard assessed the number of days when visual range was less than 10 miles for the same humidity consideration. Visibility is among the strongest indicators to air quality and its value is paramount. As such, future year visibility is used in the socioeconomic evaluation of the AQMP to estimate monetary benefits that arise from improved visual range through the implementation of the plan. Future-year visibility in the Basin is projected empirically using the results derived from a regression analysis of visibility with air quality measurements. The regression data set consisted of aerosol composition data collected during a special monitoring program conducted concurrently with visibility data collection (prevailing visibility observations from airports and visibility measurements from District monitoring stations). A full description of the visibility analysis is given in Technical Report V-C of the 1994 AQMP.

FUTURE AIR QUALITY PM2.5 Under the federal Clean Air Act, the Basin must comply with the federal PM2.5 air quality standards by April, 2010 [Section 172(a)(2)(A)]. An extension of up-to five years could be granted if attainment cannot be demonstrated and several other conditions are satisfied. As indicated in Chapter 1, the District is formally requesting U.S. EPA to grant the five-year extension based upon the severity of the problem and the modeled attainment demonstration that clearly indicates that significant reductions in daily emissions of NOx and SOx are required to meet the 2015 attainment date. Figure 5-12 depicts future annual average PM2.5 air quality projections at nineeight PM2.5 monitoring sites having comprehensive particulate species characterization compared to federal and state annual PM2.5 standards, respectively. Shown in the figure are the estimated baseline design conditions for 2005 along with projections for 2015, and 20214 with control measures in place. All sites will attain the federal annual standard by the year 2015. None of the sites will meet the state annual PM2.5 standard (12 g/m3) by 2015. Implementation of the 8-hour ozone control strategy will continue to lower annual PM2.5 concentrations.

The projections for the 24-hour state and federal standards are shown in Figure 5-23. The results are similar to those for the annual standards. All areas will be in attainment of the federal 24-hour standard (65 g/m3) by 2015. However, as shown in Figure 5-23, the Draft 2007 AQMP does not achieve the revised 24-hour PM2.5 standard (35 g/m3) by 2015 or 20214. Additional controls are needed. California does not have a separate 24-hour PM2.5 standard.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Spatial Projections of PM2.5 Design Values Figures 5-4 through 5-6 provide a Basin perspective of the spatial extent of annual average PM2.5 impact in the base year 2005 and in 2015, with and without the control strategy being implemented. In each figure the PM2.5 annual average design values based on either observations at the air monitoring stations (2005) or simulations (2015) are interpolated throughout the Basin. Figure 5-4, depicts the 2005 distribution based on observation data, where the design value concentrations range from below 10 g/m3 to above 22g/m3. As discussed in Chapter 2, the peak concentrations occur in the east Basin communities of northwest Riverside and Southwest San Bernardino Counties. By 2015, without implementing the control strategy (Figure 5-5), simulated PM2.5 design values will be reduced. However, projected concentrations will continue to exceed the standard through a large portion of the Basin. With the control strategy implemented in 2015, (see Figure 5-6), all areas of the Basin will meet the federal standard.

[The following Figures 5-2 and 5-3 replace previous Figures 5-1 and 5-2.] PM2.5 Annual Average Design ug/m3 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 Rubidoux Fontana

Compton Anaheim Burbank N. Long Beach Los Angeles Wilmington 2005 Design 2015 Controlled Design 2024 Controlled Design Federal Std.

FIGURE 5-12 Annual Average PM2.5 Design Concentrations: 2005, 2015 Controlled, and 20214 Controlled

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP PM2.5 24-Hour Average Design ug/m3 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Rubidoux Fontana

Anaheim Compton Burbank N. Long Beach Los Angeles Wilmington 2005 Design 2015 Controlled Design 2024 Controlled Design New Federal Std.

FIGURE 5-23 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM2.5 Design Concentrations: 2005 Baseline, 2015 Controlled, and 20214 Controlled

FIGURE 5-4 2005 Baseline Annual PM2.5 Design Concentrations (g/m3)

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP FIGURE 5-5 2015 Baseline Annual PM2.5 Design Concentrations (g/m3)

FIGURE 5-6 2015 Controlled Annual PM2.5 Design Concentrations (g/m3)

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Control Strategy Choices PM2.5 has five major precursors that contribute to the development of the aerosol including ammonia, NOx, SOx, VOC, and directly emitted PM2.5. Various combinations of reductions in these pollutants could all provide a path to clean air. The attainment strategy presented in this Draft 2007 AQMP relies on the maximum extent possible reductions of SOx, direct PM2.5, followed by VOC and NOx. As discussed in Chapter 4, the proposed strategy focuses on the reductions of SOx and primary PM2.5 through cleaner marine fuels and extensive diesel trap retrofits respectively.

It is useful to weigh the value of the per ton precursor emissions to microgram reductions of PM2.5. Recent trends of PM2.5 and NOx emissions suggest a direct response between lower emissions and improving air quality. This weight of evidence discussion is valuable to the control strategy development however, the formation of PM2.5 is non-linear and as such individual precursors contribute differently to the overall mass. The CAMx simulations provide a relative rate of reduction per ton of emissions reduced based on complex aerosol chemistry. Similarly, linear rollback can also provide a weight of evidence directional rate of reduction but no interaction among species is assumed in the analysis. This is a major limitation because interactions between VOC and NOx are critical to secondary aerosol formation and the competition between SOx and NOx for ammonium sets the rate of formation of sulfates and nitrates. In general, the rollback calculation will provide a ballpark estimate of the range of emissions reductions needed to attain the standard but can't be relied on for an attainment demonstration. Using the simulated chemistry provides individual precursor to pollutant weighting to estimate a per ton reduction currency. For PM2.5, the simulations determine that VOC emissions reductions have the lowest return in terms of micrograms reduced per ton reduction. NOx reductions are approximately three times more effective in lowering PM2.5 concentrations but not as effective as sulfate and direct PM2.5 emissions reductions. Table 5-4 summarizes the relative importance of precursor emissions reductions to the analysis.

The District's proposed control strategy maximizes reductions of direct PM2.5 and SOx to the extent possible due to their effectiveness as well as the likelihood schedule of implementation within the next seven years. Substantial additional VOC and NOx emissions reductions are also required for attainment. However the strategy, nonetheless attempts to maximize the potential PM2.5 concentration reduction per identified ton precursor emissions reduction. Table 5-4 lists the mix of the four primary precursor's emissions reductions targeted for the SOx ? PM2.5focused approach.

During Plan preparation a series of sensitivity model runs were performed indicating that it is possible to demonstrate attainment using lower SOx (50%), VOC (10%) and direct PM2.5 (5%) emissions while substantially higher NOx controls (50%). It would require an additional 105 TPD of NOx emissions reductions.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 5-4 Relative Contributions of Precursor Emissions Reductions to Simulated Controlled Future-Year PM2.5 Concentrations

Precursor PM2.5 Component (g/m3) Standardized (TPD) Contribution to Mass VOC Organic Carbon Factor of 1 NOx Nitrate Factor of 3 PM2.5 Elemental Carbon & Others Factor of 5 SOx Sulfate Factor of 10

TABLE 5-5 Draft 2007 AQMP PM2.5 Attainment Strategy Allowable Emissions (TPD)

VOC NOx SOx PM2.5 2014 594527 668654 7043 98102 Baseline Allowable 457469 421443 19 8488 Emissions

Reduction 23%11% 37%31% 73%56% 14%

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP PM10 Dependent upon the PM10 sampling protocol (one-in-six days, one-in-three days, or daily) either the annual maximum or 2nd maximum is used to determine compliance. As such, the future year (2015) assessment of the PM10 compliance to the 24-hour standard is conducted by examining the both the predicted maximum and 2nd maximum for all Basin stations. Table 5-6 summarizes the results of the analysis.

In general, all monitoring locations in the Basin are predicted to continue to meet the federal 24-hour PM10 standard through 2015. While the bulk of the sites are predicted to have concentrations less than half of the current federal standard only one quarter of the locations are projected to meet the more restrictive California 24-hour average PM10 standard of 50 g/m3 .

Ozone With redesignation, tThe Basin is will be designated as an Severe-17 Extreme non- attainment area, and must meet the federal 8-hour ozone air quality standard by 20214. The attainment demonstration shown here addresses this requirement. As discussed earlier, selected days from six meteorological episodes are used in the ozone attainment demonstration. The ozone modeling discussion differs from previous AQMP's in that future year attainment is projected using modeling results applied to a base year design value as opposed to being explicitly compared to the standard. The analysis is structured to address the form of the 8-hour standard which allows the standard threshold concentration (80 ppb) to be exceeded on three or more days in any year, under varying meteorological conditions. The design value accounts for the historical frequency of meteorological episodes that lead to higher ozone concentrations. In this analysis, base year (2002) and future year emissions (20203) are simulated for several meteorological episodes to develop an average response to reducing ozone precursor emissions. The response factor or RRF is calculated for each site that has a base year design value that exceeds the federal standard. The site-specific RRFs are applied to the base year design to estimate the future year (20214) design value for comparison to the standard.

Control Strategy Choices Table 5-7 summarizes the emissions inventories used for the 2002 and 20203 baseline and the 20203 controlled scenarios with and without long-term control measures. Without long-term measures, the regional modeling results indicate that the federal 8- hour ozone standard would not be attained. Attainment will require additional long-term emissions reductions based upon the development of new technology. The inclusion of the additional long term-control measures will require the District petition U.S. EPA prior to or at submittal of this Plan to revise the current attainment status from Severe-17 to Extreme to enable the use of long-term measures under Section 182(e)(5) of the CAA.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 5-6 24-Hour Average Maximum and Average 2nd Maximum Basin PM10: 2003-2005 Baseline Design and 2015 Controlled City 2003-2005 2015 Controlled Average Average 2nd Average Average Maximum Maximum Maximum 2nd Maximum (?g/m3) (?g/m3) (?g/m3) (?g/m3)

Azusa 93 79 7481 6568 Burbank 82 73 6772 6062 Long Beach 96 63 7576 5250 Los Angeles 74 69 61 5756 Santa Clarita 60 54 5152 47 Hawthorne 53 61 4746 5253 Anaheim 78 67 6468 5758 Mission Viejo 51 44 4542 40 Rubidoux 141 129 103112 95111 Perris 102 88 7788 6876 Banning Airport 79 55 6268 4648 Crestline 49 47 4442 4241 Fontana 105 96 8597 7987 San Bernardino 96 85 7982 7076 Redlands 80 70 6769 5961 Mira Loma 90 77 6980 6164

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 5-7 2002, 20203 Base Year and 20203 Future Year Controlled Emissions Scenarios (TPD)

Year Scenario VOC NOx CO 2002 Baseline 1030844 10901096 55254819 20203 Baseline 599496 531515 24752058 20203 Controlled 439402 278317 19152058 without Long- Term Measures 20203 Controlled 304420 238114 16611966 with Long- Term Measures

Table 5-8 provides the 2002 base year design value, the predicted 20214 base year with out additional controls and the predicted 20214 design values with the control strategy implemented for the required monitoring sites in the Basin. With controls in place, it is expected that all stations in the Basin will meet the federal 8-hour ozone standard. The east Basin stations of Crestline and Fontana are projected to have the highest 8-hour controlled design values. Both sites are downwind receptors along the primary wind transport route that moves precursor emissions and developing ozone eastward during by the daily sea breeze. Future year projections of ozone along the northerly transport route through the San Fernando Valley indicate that the ozone design value in the Santa Clarita Valley will be approximately 132 percent below the standard.

It is important to reiterate that the form of the ozone standard allows for at least 3-days to have 8-hour average concentrations that exceed 80 ppb in any year. So, although the demonstration satisfies the criteria for attainment, areas of the Basin are likely to experience occasional higher ozone days (greater than 80 ppb) under severe meteorological conditions.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP baseline emissions estimate. The 2003 AQMP simulations were conducted using UAM for the August 1997 meteorological. CAMx simulations were adjusted to account for the difference in model performance noted between the two platforms in the 2003 AQMP for the August episode, (CAMx under-predicting the peak concentration compared with UAM). The results of the sensitivity analysis indicated that the currently predicted 1- hour average ozone concentrations for 2010 are expected to be approximately 20 32 percent above the revoked 1-hour federal standard assuming full implementation of the 2007 AQMP District and CARB mobile and port-related measures prior to 2010. Table 5-9 summarizes the comparison. It is estimated that the former 1-hour ozone standard will not be met until 2020.

Spatial Projections of 8-Hour Ozone Design Values The spatial distribution of ozone design values for the 2002 base year is shown in Figure 5-36. Future year ozone air quality projections for 20204 with and without implementation of all control measures are presented in Figures 5-47 and 5-58. The predicted ozone concentration will be significantly reduced in the future years in all parts of the Basin with the implementation of proposed control measures in the South Coast Air Basin.

Appendix V provides base year model performance statistics, grid level spatial plots of simulated ozone (base cases and future year controlled) as well as weight of evidence discussions to support the modeling attainment demonstration.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP [The following table is new to Chapter 5 TABLE 5-9 Model-Predicted 2010 1-Hour Maximum Ozone Concentrations: August 5, 1997 and August 6, 1997 Meteorological Episode

Simulation AQMP VOC NOX Maximum Maximum (TPD) (TPD) Ozone Ozone (ppb) (ppb) August 5, August 6, 1997 1997 UAM 2003 310 530 123 120 CAMx 2007 578 818 143 158 Adjusted

FIGURE 5-36 2002 Baseline 8-Hour Ozone Design Concentrations (ppb)

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP FIGURE 5-47 Model-Predicted 20214 Baseline 8-Hour Ozone Design Concentrations (ppb)

FIGURE 5-58 Model-Predicted 20214 Controlled 8-Hour Ozone Design Concentrations (ppb)

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Visibility The results of the visibility analysis for Rubidoux are illustrated in Figure 5-69. With future year reductions of PM2.5 from implementation of all proposed emission controls for 2015, the annual average visibility would improve from 12 miles (calculated for 2005) to over 20 miles at Rubidoux.

Visual Range (Miles) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2005 2015 2021 Baseline Controlled FIGURE 5-69 Annual Average Daytime Visibility Projections at Rubidoux

Visual range in 2021 is estimated Visibility at all other Basin sites is expected to equal or exceed the Rubidoux visual range. Visual range is expected to double from 2005 due to reductions of secondary PM2.5, (by more than one third), direct PM2.5 emissions including diesel soot and lower nitrogen dioxide concentrations as a result of 2007 AQMP controls.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Figure 5-710 shows the 2002 observed and model-predicted regional peak concentrations for the three nonattainment criteria pollutants, as percentages of the most stringent federal standard, for the years 2010, 2015, and 20214, (with and without further emission controls). Figure 5-811 shows similar information related to the most stringent California state standards. Note: the revoked federal 1-hour standard comparison has been included for reference. The 2010 baseline 1-hour average ozone concentrations are projected to exceed the revoked standard.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP [The following chart replaces Figure 5-10] Percent of Standard 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

Federal Standard 1-Hour 8-Hour Annual 24-Hour 24-Hour Ozone Ozone PM2.5 PM2.5 PM10 2002 Baseline 2015 Controlled 2010 Controlled 2024 controlled FIGURE 5-710 Projection of Future Air Quality in the Basin in Comparison with the Most Stringent Federal Standards.

[The following chart replaces Figure 5-8] Percent of Standard 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1-Hour 8-Hour Annual 24- Annual 24- Ozone Ozone PM2.5 Hour PM10 Hour PM2.5 PM10 2002 Baseline 2015 Controlled 2024 controlled California Standard

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Table 5-910 summarizes the expected year for attainment of the various federal and state standards for the four pollutants analyzed. As shown, the Basin will be in compliance with federal standards by the year 20214. The Basin will require additional time beyond 20214 to meet the state ozone, PM2.5 and PM10 standards.

BASIN EMISSIONS CARRYING CAPACITY (EMISSIONS BUDGET) The District is required to separately identify the emission reductions and corresponding type and degree of implementation measures required to meet federal and state ambient air quality standards. Section 40463(b) of the California State Health and Safety Code specifies that, with the active participation of the Southern California Association of Governments, a South Coast Air Basin emission carrying capacity for each state and federal ambient air quality standard shall be established by the South Coast District Board for each formal review of the Plan and shall be updated to reflect new data and modeling results.

A carrying capacity is defined as the maximum level of emissions that enable the attainment and maintenance of an ambient air quality standard for a pollutant. Emission carrying capacity for state standards shall not be a part of the State Implementation Plan requirements of the Clean Air Act for the South Coast Air Basin.

Emission carrying capacity as defined in the Health and Safety Code is an overly simplistic measure of the Basinwide allowable emission levels for specific ambient air quality standards. It is highly dependent on the spatial and temporal pattern of the emissions. Because of the multi-component nature of PM2.5, the carrying capacity for the contributing emittants can vary significantly and like ozone it is a non-linear function among their precursors.

The federal Clean Air Act requires that plans contain an emissions budget that represents the remaining emissions levels that achieve the applicable attainment deadline. Based on the modeling results, a set of carrying capacities can be defined corresponding to federal and state ambient air quality standards for annual PM2.5, and ozone. VOC and oxides of nitrogen are used for ozone. PM2.5 additionally requires reductions of sulfur oxides and directly emitted PM2.5. Table 5-1011 shows the emissions carrying capacities for the Basin to meet federal air quality standards. These estimates are based on emission patterns estimated for each of the federal attainment years: 2015 for PM2.5, and 20214for ozone.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 5-910 Expected Year of Compliance with State and Federal Standards for the Four Criteria Pollutants Concentration Expected Pollutant Standard Level Compliance Year Ozone NAAQS 8-hours 12584 ppb 20214 CAAQS 1-hour 90 ppb beyond 20214 CAAQS 8-hours 70 ppb beyond 20214 PM2.5 NAAQS Annual 15 ug/m3 2015 NAAQS 24-hours 65 ug/m3 2005 NAAQS 24-hours* 35 ug/m3 2005beyond 2020 CAAQS Annual 120 ug/m3 beyond 20214 PM10 NAAQS 24-hours 150 ug/m3 2000 CAAQS 24-hours 50 ug/m3 beyond 20214 CAAQS Annual 20 ug/m3 beyond 20214 CO** NAAQS 1-hour 35 ppm 1990 NAAQS 8-hours 9 ppm 2002 CAAQS 8-hours 9 ppm 2002

NO2 NAAQS Annual 0.0534 ppm 1995 CAAQS 24-hours 0.25 ppm 2003

* EPA adopted the new 24-Hour PM2.5 standard in September 2006. The current SIP requirements address the 65 ug/m3 standard in place in 2005 when national area attainment ** The Basin has been achieving the federal 1-hour CO air quality standard since 1990. In 2002, the Basin achieved the 8-hour CO air quality standard. The Basin is still considered nonattainment until a petition for redesignation is submitted by the state and is approved by EPA.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 5-611 Emissions Carrying Capacity Estimations1 for the South Coast Air Basin (tons/day) based on the Planning Inventory a) PM2.5 Attainment Strategy to meet NAAQS (2015) VOC NOx SOx PM2.5

457469 421443 19 8488

b) Ozone Attainment Strategy to meet NAAQS (20214) VOC NOx CO

304420 238114 16611966

PROJECTED EMISSION TRENDS THROUGH 2030 Figures 5-12 through 5-15 show the projected emission trends for both NOx and VOC through the year 2030. Depicted are scenarios for the baseline cases (e.g., no further rules), and for the controlled cases (with the 2007 AQMP Measures). Categories are described slightly different than most emission inventory summaries in that permitted sources (e.g., those emission sources which are permitted with the District) are specifically delineated. These figures show that emission levels continue to decrease through the year 2030, especially for the 2024 controlled case, when attainment with the federal ozone standard is expected. For VOCs, emissions are initially dominated by mobile sources, but in the later periods area sources will become an equal fraction. For NOx emissions, mobile sources are expected to be the dominant source through the ozone attainment year.

1 On October 6, 2006, CARB released its preliminary estimates of the Basin carrying capacity for PM2.5. Based on rollback, CARB estimated that new regional emissions reductions of at least 25 percent NOx, 10 percent VOC and 50 percent SOx would be needed in beyond the 2014 baseline to meet the 2015 standard. CARB also stated that further reductions beyond those previously defined may be required to achieve attainment in areas of the Basin with the most persistent PM2.5 problems. CARB did not release any preliminary target for future year Basin 8- hour average ozone attainment .

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Tons Per Day 1000 800 600 400 200 0 2024 2005

2013 2010 2018 2015 2030 2002 Point Area On-Road Off-Road FIGURE 5-12 VOC Emissions - Baseline Scenario

Tons Per Day 1000 800 600 400 200 0 2005 2015 2030 2018 2002

2010 2024 2013 Point Area On-Road Off-Road FIGURE 5-13 VOC Emissions - Under 2007 AQMP

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Tons Per Day 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 2015

2024 2018 2005 2013 2002 2010 2030 Point Area On-Road Off-Road FIGURE 5-14 NOx Emissions - Baseline Scenario

Day Tons Per 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 2002 2023 2009 2005

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP MODIFICATIONS TO CHAPTER 6

[The following section is revised to include a reference to the District's Ozone SIP for the Salton Sea Air Basin under the District's jurisdiction.] INTRODUCTION The purpose of the 2007 revision to the AQMP for the South Coast Air Basin is to set forth a comprehensive program that will lead the Basin and those portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin under the District's jurisdiction into compliance with all federal and state air quality planning requirements. Specifically, the 2007 AQMP revision is designed to satisfy the SIP submittal requirements of the federal CAA to demonstrate attainment of the new 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 ambient air quality standards, the California CAA triennial update requirements and fulfill the District's commitment to update transportation emission budgets based on the latest approved motor vehicle emissions model and planning assumptions. Specific requirements related to the planning requirements for portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin under the District's jurisdiction are will be included in the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Final Plan and can be found in Chapter 8 ? Future Air Quality ? Desert Nonattainment Areascheduled for release late fall of 2006. The Final Plan will be submitted to U.S. EPA as SIP revisions once approved by the District's Governing Board and CARB.

[The following section is revised to include a reference to the District's ?bump-up? request.] Ozone Attainment Demonstration and Modeling The CAA requires areas classified as nonattainment to attain the 8-hour ozone standard as expeditiously as practicable and within the CAA's deadlines. For the Basin, which is classified as Severe-17, the deadline for achieving the 8-hour standard is June 2021. The Phase 2 rule provides the timing and guidelines and identifies the modeling guidance to make the demonstration required. As required by the Phase 2 rule, areas required to submit an attainment demonstration must do so no later than three years after the effective date of designation for the 8-hour ozone standard. Thus, the AQMD District must submit the Final 2007 AQMP to U.S. EPA by June of 2007. Under Section 181(b)(3) of the CAA, areas may elect to request a voluntary reclassification to the next higher classification. The District is requesting that CARB formally submit a request to EPA for voluntary redesignation (bump-up) of the South Coast Air Basin from a

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP designation of ?severe-17? to ?extreme? for 8-hour average ozone and modify the attainment date to June 15, 2024. In addition, the District is also requesting a bump up for the Coachella Valley from ?serious? to ?severe 15? and modify the attainment date to June 15, 2018. A discussion of this action is included in Chapter 12 of the Proposed Modifications to the draft 2007 AQMP.This so called ?bump up? provision is being considered by the AQMP, but as of this date, no decision has been made to request a ?bump up.? Any ?bump up? would mean that the Basin would be subject to the requirements of the CAA under the Extreme classification; delaying the attainment 3 years and allowing for 182(e)(5) measures. A summary of the 8-hour ozone attainment demonstration is provided in Chapter 5. The ozone attainment demonstration is fully described in Appendix V ? Modeling and Attainment Demonstrationwhich will be released with the Draft Final 2007 AQMP later this year.

The following section is revised to include a new RFP demonstration due to a revised emissions inventory, control strategy, and carrying capacity.] Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) The CAA requires SIPs for most nonattainment areas to demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) toward attainment through emission reductions phased in from the time of the SIP submission out to the attainment date. The reasonable further progress requirements in the CAA are intended to ensure that each ozone nonattainment area provide for sufficient precursor emission reductions to attain the ozone national ambient air quality standard. Specifically, Section 182(b)(1)(A) requires that each moderate or above area provide for VOC reductions of at least 15 percent from baseline emissions within six years from the baseline year (i.e., 2002). Furthermore, Section 182(c)(2)(B) requires that serious and above areas provide VOC and/or NOx reductions of an additional 3 percent per year starting at the end of the baseline year and out to their attainment year. However, U.S. EPA in its Phase 2 rule specified that areas which have already completed and received approval for their 15 percent VOC Rate of Progress (ROP) for the 1-hour ozone standard will not be required to do another 15 percent VOC- only reduction plan for the 8-hour ozone standard. Therefore, the AQMDDISTRICT is only required to provide for VOC and/or NOx reductions of 3 percent per year from the 2002 baseline year averaged over each consecutive three-year period beginning in 2008 until the Basin's attainment date (i.e., June 20072023). Table 6-1 shows the percent emission reductions for both VOC and NOx emissions necessary to meet the 3 percent requirement. Tables 6-2A and 6-2B summarize the RFP calculations. Figures 6-1A and 6-1B depict the target level and projected baseline RFP demonstration.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP and 2020, and 2023 the baseline VOC emission levels are below the target levels. Beginning In in 2017, projected NOx VOC planned reductions from control measures in the Draft Plan baseline emissions are needed to show compliance with the targeted VOC thresholds. Year 2020 is the attainment year and the Phase 2 implementation rule requires the District to meet the percent reduction targets necessary for attainment, regardless whether the targets are above the 3 percent per year target level. In the case of 2020, the ozone carrying capacities require reduction target levels beyond the 3 percent per year goal, and are estimated to be 70.4 and 78.2 percent for VOC and NOx, TABLE 6-1 Percent of VOC and NOx Emission Reductions from the 2002 Baseline to meet RFP Requirements Year VOC NOx CAA* 2008 18.0 0.0 18.0 2011 27.0 0.0 27.0 2014 36.0 0.0 36.0 2017 45.039.0 0.06.0 45.0 2020 70.440.0 78.214.0 Attainment54.0 2023 40.0 23.0 63.0 * The percent VOC and NOx reductions must equal the CAA percent reduction requirements listed here.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 6-2A Summary of Reasonable Further Progress Calculations- VOC ROW CALCULATION STEP a 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 1 2002 Base Year Emissions b 1028.1 1028.1 1028.1 1028.1 1028.1 2 Required Reduction (%) c 18% 27% 36% 45% 70.4% 3 Emission Reductions d 185.1 277.6 370.1 462.6 723.8 4 Target Level e 843.0 750.5 658.0 565.5 304.0 5 Projected Baseline f 754.8 686.5 644.0 617.2 598.9 6 Additional Planned Reductions Neededg ---- ---- ---- 164.6 294.9 7 Adjusted Projected Baselineh ---- ---- ---- 452.6 304.0 a Units are in tons per day (summer) unless otherwise noted; b Contains only anthropogenic emissions; c 3% per year (total VOC reductions from 2002 baseline year); d [(Row 3) x (Row 4)]/100; e (Row 1) ? (Row 3); f Projected baseline emissions shown in Appendix III taking into account existing rules and projected growth.; g Planned emission reductions from 2007 AQMP control measures; h (Row 5) ? (Row 6) Emissions (tpd) 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 843 754 750 686 658 644 566 453

304 304 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 Milestone Year Target Level Projected Baseline* * Projected Baseline for year 2017 incorporates planned emission reductions needed; Targeted and Projected Baseline for 2020 reflects Basin carrying capacity FIGURE 6-1A Reasonable Further Progress ? VOC

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 6-2B Summary of Reasonable Further Progress Calculations ? NOx ROW CALCULATION STEP a 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 1 2002 Base Year Emissions b 1090.2 1090.2 1090.2 1090.2 1090.2 2 Required Reduction (%) c 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 78.2% 3 Emission Reductions d 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 848.2 4 Target Level e 1090.2 1090.2 1090.2 1090.2 238.0 5 Projected Baseline f 864.7 753.3 663.2 585.1 530.9 6 Additional Planned Reductions Neededg ---- ---- ---- ---- 292.9 7 Adjusted Projected Baselineh ---- ---- ---- ---- 238.0 a Units are in tons per day (summer) unless otherwise noted; b Contains only anthropogenic emissions; c Total % NOx reductions substituted for VOC from 2002 baseline year; d [(Row 3) x (Row 4)]/100; e (Row 1) ? (Row 3); f Projected baseline emissions shown in Appendix III taking into account existing rules and projected growth.; g Planned emission reductions from 2007 AQMP control measures; h (Row 5) ? (Row 6)

1200 1000 800 600 Emissions (tpd) 400 200 0 1090 1090 1090 1090

864 753 663 585 238 238 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 Milestone Year Target Level Projected Baseline* * Targeted and Projected Baseline for 2020 reflects Basin carrying capacity FIGURE 6-1B Reasonable Further Progress ? NOx

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 6-2A Summary of Reasonable Further Progress Calculations - VOC ROW CALCULATION STEP a 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 1 2002 Base Year Emissions b 896.7 896.7 896.7 896.7 896.7 896.7 2 Required Reduction (%) c 18% 27% 36% 45% 54% 63% 3 Emission Reductions Needed d 161.4 242.1 322.8 403.5 484.2 564.9 4 Target Level e 735.3 654.6 573.9 493.2 412.5 331.8 5 Projected Baseline f 654.9 603.1 569.1 549.5 538.4 536.0 6 Percent Reduction Achieved (%) g 27% 33% 37% 39% 40% 40% a Units are in tons per day (summer) unless otherwise noted; b Contains only anthropogenic emissions; c 3% per year (total VOC reductions from 2002 baseline year); d [(Row 1) x (Row 2)]/100; e (Row 1) ? (Row 3); f Projected baseline emissions shown in Appendix III taking into account existing rules and projected growth.; g [(1-(Row 5)/(Row 1))] x 100 Emissions (tpd) 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 735 655 655 603 574 569 550 538 536 493 413 332

2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 Milestone Year Target Level Projected Baseline* FIGURE 6-1A Reasonable Further Progress - VOC

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 6-2B Summary of Reasonable Further Progress Calculations - NOx ROW CALCULATION STEP a 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 1 2002 Base Year Emissions b 1078.5 1078.5 1078.5 1078.5 1078.5 1078.5 2 Required Reduction (%) c 0% 0% 0% 6% 14% 23% 3 Emission Reductions Needed d 0.0 0.0 0.0 64.7 151.0 248.1 4 Target Level e 0.0 0.0 0.0 1013.8 927.5 830.4 5 Projected Baseline f 848.2 738.5 650.3 578.4 523.9 505.6 6 Percent Reduction Achieved (%) g 21% 32% 40% 46% 51% 53% a Units are in tons per day (summer) unless otherwise noted; b Contains only anthropogenic emissions; c 3% per year (total VOC reductions from 2002 baseline year); d [(Row 1) x (Row 2)]/100; e (Row 1) ? (Row 3); f Projected baseline emissions shown in Appendix III taking into account existing rules and projected growth.; g [(1-(Row 5)/(Row 1))] x 100

1200 1079 1079 1079 1000 800 600 Emissions (tpd) 400 200 0 1014 928 848830 739 650 578 524507

2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 Milestone Year Target Level Projected Baseline* FIGURE 6-1B Reasonable Further Progress - NOx

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP [The following section is revised to include a reference to the District's RACM analysis.]

Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) For each nonattainment area required to submit an attainment demonstration, Section 172(c)(1) and (c)(2) of the CAA requires the region to demonstrate that it has adopted all control measures necessary to show that it will attain the 8-hour ozone standard as expeditiously as practicable and to meet any RFP requirements. In order to comply with this provision, AQMD the District must identify and evaluate all measures it has implemented or plans to implement in the future and compare them with measures implemented by other agencies within and outside of the state. During the recently completed evaluation process for the AQMD's District's RACT determination, the AQMD District concluded that: (1) all Control Technique Guideline (CTG) and non- CTG sources in the Basin were subject to SIP approved rules; and (2) all AQMD District rules fulfilled RACT for the 8-hour ozone standard. In addition, pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 39614 (SB 656), the DistrictAQMD evaluated a statewide list of feasible and cost-effective control measures to reduce directly emitted particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) and their precursor emissions (e.g., NOx). The DistrictAQMD concluded that for the majority of stationary and area source categories, the DistrictAQMD was identified as having the most stringent rules in California. However, one control measure (Wood Burning Fireplaces/Heaters) from the statewide list was identified for adoption by the DistrictAQMD and is included in the Draft 2007 AQMP for near-term adoption. Under the RACM guidelines, transportation control measures must be included in the analysis. Consequently, SCAG has completed a RACM determination for transportation control measures in the Draft 2007 AQMP, included in Appendix IV-C. The District staff has completed its RACM analysis on its existing rules and proposed control measures in approved SIPs, and it can be found in Appendix VI of the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP.

[The following section is revised to include a reference to the District's Contingency Measure Chapter as well a commitment to adopt contingency measures for Long Term Measures.] Contingency Measures The federal CAA requires ozone contingency measures to be implemented in the event of failure to meet milestone emission reduction targets and/or failure to attain the standard by the attainment date in 2014 2023 (CAA Section 172(c)(9)). A discussion of cContingency measures are not included in the Chapter 9 ? Contingency Measures of the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP, but will appear in Chapter 9 ?

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Contingency Measures of the Draft Final 2007 AQMP. The full descriptions of each of the contingency measures will be contained in Appendix IV-A of the Proposed Modifications to the Draft Draft Final 2007 AQMP.

Section 182(e)(5) of the CAA allows areas classified as ?Extreme? to submit reduction strategies which rely on advanced technologies as part of their ozone demonstration. Since the DISTRICT is requesting a ?bump up? to the ?Extreme? classification under the provisions of 181(b)(3), these so called ?black box? reduction strategies are included the DISTRICT's Plan as long-term measures. Under Section 182(e)(5)(B) of the CAA, areas including ?black box? measures in their SIP must also adopt contingency measures to be implemented if the anticipated technologies do not achieve the planned reductions. No contingency measures which address the long-term measures are contained in this Plan. However, the DISTRICT is committing to adopt and submit to U.S. EPA, contingency measures to address these planned reductions from the long-term measures, no later than three years before such measures are scheduled to be implemented.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP [The following section is revised to include a reference to the District's Contingency Measure Chapter.] Contingency Measures for PM2.5 The federal CAA requires PM2.5 contingency measures to be implemented in the event of failure to meet milestone emission reduction targets and/or failure to attain the standard by the attainment date in 2014 (CAA Section 172(c)(9)). A discussion of Contingency contingency measures are not included in Chapter 9 ? Contingency Measures of this the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP, but will be included in Chapter 9 ? Contingency Measures of the Draft Final 2007 AQMP. The full descriptions of each of the contingency measures will be contained in Appendix IV-A, Section 2 of the Proposed Modifications to the Draft Final 2007 AQMP.

[The following sections is revised to include a reference to Appendix V ? Modeling and Attainment Demonstration.] Carbon Monoxide Attainment Demonstration The South Coast Basin has historically had a persistent CO problem. However, there has been considerable improvement in CO air quality in the Basin from 1976 to 2005. In 2001, the Basin met both the federal and state 8-hour CO standards for the first time at all monitoring stations. The 2003 AQMP revision to the CO plan served a dual purpose: it replaced the 1997 attainment demonstration that lapsed at the end of 2000, and it provided the basis for a CO maintenance plan in the future. In 2004, the AQMDDISTRICT formally requested U.S. EPA to redesignate the Basin as in attainment with the CO ambient air quality standard. No formal action has been taken on this submittal and On February 14, 2007, U.S. EPA proposed to approve the 2005 CO redesignation request and maintenance plan (Federal Register, Vol. 72, No 30, Page 6986-6998). the The Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP serves as an update to the maintenance plan submitted as part of the 2003 AQMP. It shows that continuous attainment occurred through the third quarter of 2006. The update to the CO maintenance plan will is be further described in Chapter 5 ? Future Air Quality, and Appendix V - Modeling and Attainment Demonstration, in the Draft Final 2007 AQMP.

Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires maintenance plans contain contingency measures, if deemed necessary by the U.S. EPA, to assure that the region will promptly correct any violation occurring after redesignation of an area as an attainment area. Due to the continuing improvement in CO air quality it is unlikely that the CO standard would be exceeded in the future. Therefore, no CO contingency measures are included in the Draft 2007 AQMP.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Nitrogen Dioxide Maintenance Plan The federal annual NO2 standard was met for the first time in 1992 and the standard has been met every year since. The South Coast Air Basin was redesignated as an attainment area in 1998. Section 175A(a) of the CAA states that any district that submits a request for redesignation of a nonattainment area to attainment must submit a revision of the applicable SIP that provides for maintenance for at least 10 years after the redesignation. In addition, Section 175A(b) requires that 8 years after redesignation of an area to attainment status, the area must submit an additional revision to the NO2 plan for maintaining the NO2 standard for an additional 10-year period after the original 10- year maintenance cycle. It has been 8 years since the Basin was redesignated as attainment for NO2 and the Draft 2007 AQMP serves as an update to the original maintenance plan. Based on the ambient nitrogen dioxide measurements and the projected baseline future-year emissions, the Basin will maintain the federal nitrogen dioxide air quality standard. As with the update to the CO maintenance plan, the update to the NO2 maintenance plan will beis further described in Chapter 5 ? Future Air Quality, and Appendix V - Modeling and Attainment Demonstration, in the Draft Final 2007 AQMP.

[Table 6-4 is revised to reflect new baseline inventories.] CALIFORNIA CLEAN AIR ACT REQUIREMENTS Emission Reductions The CCAA requires that each district plan be designed to achieve a reduction in district- wide emissions of 5 percent or more per year for each non-attainment pollutant or its precursors, averaged every consecutive three-year period (H&SC 40914). If this cannot be achieved, a plan may instead show that it has implemented all feasible measures as expeditiously as possible Furthermore, for each district that is designated nonattainment for both state and federal ambient air quality standards for a single pollutant subject to the planning requirements (i.e., ozone), reductions in emissions shall be calculated with respect to the actual emissions during the baseline year applicable to the implementation plan required by the federal CAA. This baseline year is 2002.

The planning inventory 2002 baseline emissions and estimated emission reductions for the reporting year 2005 are presented in Table 6-4. These estimates are based on the controlled emissions. As seen in the table, the existing control strategy falls short of the CCAA emission reduction goals (i.e., five percent per year for all nonattainment pollutants) even with the implementation of maximum feasible controls. Nonetheless,

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP the strategy represents ?all feasible control measures? and an ?expeditious adoption schedule? as permitted under H&S Code 40914.

TABLE 6-4 Summary of 2007 AQMP Emissions Based on Planning Inventory Emissions (tons/day)* Summer Ozone Inventory Year VOC NOx

2002 Baseline 1,028897 1,0901,079 Emission Reductions 2005 891796 (1311%) 1,0231,020 (65%) CCAA Requirement (15%) (15%)

[Tables 6-5 and 6-6 are added to this section to show the control measures ranked by cost-effectiveness. For clarity, no underlining is shown in the tables.] Cost Effectiveness Ranking The CCAA requires that each plan revision shall include an assessment of the cost effectiveness of available and proposed control measures and shall contain a list which ranks the control measures from the least cost-effective to the most cost-effective. Table 6-5 provides a list of stationary source control measures ranked by cost-effectiveness. Table 6-6 provides a list of mobile source control measures including those proposed by both CARB and the DISTRICT.Cost-effectiveness ranking is not included in the Draft 2007 AQMP, but will be included in the Draft Final 2007 AQMP once the measures are further refined and the cost-effectiveness analysis is competed.

In developing an adoption and implementation schedule for a specific control measure, the district shall consider the relative cost effectiveness of the measure as well as other factors including, but not limited to, technological feasibility, total emission reduction potential, the rate of reduction, public acceptability, and enforceability. The implementation schedule is provided in Chapter 7 ?Implementation.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 6-5 Cost-Effectiveness Ranking of District's Stationary Source Control Measures Measure Description Dollars/Ton Ranking by Number Cost Effectiveness a, b

CTS-03 Consumer Products Labeling and Emissions No Additional 1 Reductions from Use of Consumer Products at Cost Institutional and Commercial Facilities [VOC] CTS-01 Industrial Lubricants [VOC] $1,000 - $5,000 2 FUG-02 Emission Reductions from Gasoline Transfer and $1,673 3 Dispensing Facilities [VOC] CTS-05 2010 Standard - Emission Charges of $5,000 per $5,000 4 Ton of VOC for Stationary Sources with Potential to Emit Over 10 Tons Per Year [VOC] FUG-04 Emission Reductions from Pipeline and Storage $2,500 - $22,900 5 Tank Degassing [VOC] CMB-01 NOx Reduction from Non-RECLAIM Ovens, $4,000 - $13,000 6 Dryers, and Furnaces [NOx] CMB-03 Further NOx Reductions from Space Heaters $10,000 7 [NOx] CMB-02 Reduction of Emissions in RECLAIM [SOx] $10,100 - $16,000 8 MCS-01 Facility Modernization [NOx] $10,600 - $17,000 9 [VOC] $10,000 [PM2.5] $19,000 FLX-02 Petroleum Refinery Pilot Program [VOC] $12,800 10 [PM2.5] a The cost-effectiveness values of these measures are based on the Discount Cash Flow methodology and four percent b Where a range exists, the ranking was done based on the low end of the range.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 6-6 Cost-Effectiveness Ranking of Mobile Source Control Measures Measure Description Dollars/Ton Ranking by Number Cost Effectiveness a, b CARB Proposed Control Measures ARB-OFFRD-3 Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft [VOC, NOx, $600 1 PM] ARB-OFFRD-5 New Emiss Stds for Recreational Boats [VOC, $2,100 - $4,700 2 NOx] ARB-OFFRD-4 Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment [VOC, $5,900 - $8,100 3 NOx, PM] ARB-ONRD-1 Smog Check Enhancements [VOC, NOx, PM] $6,700 - $12,000 4 ARB-ONRD-4 Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks [VOC, $11,000 5 NOx, PM] ARB-OFFRD-2 Accelerate Introduction of Cleaner Line-Haul $15,100 6 Locomotives [VOC, NOx, PM] ARB-ONRD-5 Port Truck Modernization [NOx, PM] $17,500 7 ARB-ONRD-2 Expanded Vehicle Retirement [VOC, NOx, $17,700 8 PM] ARB-OFFRD-1 Marine Vessels ? Fuel, Aux. & Main Eng. $30,300 9 [VOC, NOx] ARB-OFFRD-6 Expanded Off-Road Rec. Vehicle Emission $55,700 - $95,200 10 Standards [VOC] ARB-ONRD-3 Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Not Estimated Program [VOC] ARB-CONS-1 Consumer Products [VOC] Not Estimated District Proposed Control Measures Under Policy Option 1 SCONRD-2 Deployment of On-Board Diagnostics (Phase Savings 1 III) in Light-and Medium-Duty Vehicles [VOC, NOx] SCOFFRD-6 Accelerated Turnover Pleasure Craft [VOC, $850 2 NOx] SCOFFRD-4 Emission Reductions from Ground Support $1,200 3 Equipment [VOC, NOx] SCOFFRD-3 Further Emission Reductions from $5,100 4 Locomotives [NOx, PM] SCOFFRD-5 Further Emission Reductions from Truck $6,400 5 Refrigeration Units [NOx, PM]

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 6-6 (continued) Cost-Effectiveness Ranking of Mobile Source Control Measures a,b Measure Number Description Dollars/Ton Ranking by Cost Effectiveness SCOFFRD-1 Construction/Industrial Equipment Fleet $9,100 6 Modernization [VOC, NOx, PM] SC-FUEL-1 Further Emission Reductions from Gasoline $10,000 7 Fuels [NOx, SOx] SC-FUEL-2 Greater Use of Diesel Fuels Alternatives [NOx, $10,500 8 SOx, PM] MOB-05 AB 923 Light-Duty Vehicle High-Emitter $14,300 9 Identification Program [VOC, NOx] MOB-06 AB 923 Medium-Duty Vehicle High-Emitter $14,300 10 Identification Program [VOC, NOx] SCONRD-3 Further Emission Reductions from Heavy-Duty $15,000 11 Vehicles [NOx, PM] SCONRD-4 Further Emissions Reductions from Port $19,200 12 Trucks [NOx, PM] a The cost-effectiveness values of these measures are based on the Discount Cash Flow methodology and four percent b Where a range exists, the ranking was done based on the low end of the range.

[The following section has been revised to reflect to new budget dates (e.g., 2023 instead of 2020) and reflect a change in the emissions inventories and control strategies affecting on-road mobile sources. All the tables in this section have been renumbered and changed. However for clarity, tables 6-5 through 6-8 are shown without strikeout and underline.]

TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY BUDGETS The Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP sets forth the strategy for achieving the federal 8-hour ozone, PM2.5, and maintaining the federal CO and NO2 standards. For on-road mobile sources, Section 176(c) of the CAA requires that transportation plans and programs do not cause or contribute to any new violation of a standard, increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation, or delay the timely attainment of the air quality standards. Therefore, on-road mobile sources must "conform" to the attainment demonstration contained in the SIP.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP U.S. EPA's transportation conformity rule, found in 40 CFR parts 51 and 93, details the requirements for establishing motor vehicle emissions budgets in SIPs for the purpose of ensuring the conformity of transportation plans and programs with the SIP attainment demonstration. The on-road motor vehicle emissions budgets act as a "ceiling" for future on-road mobile source emissions. Exceedances of the budget indicate an inconsistency with the SIP, and could jeopardize the flow of federal funds for transportation improvements in the region. As required by the CAA, a comparison of regional on-road mobile source emissions to these budgets will occur during the periodic updates of regional transportation plans and programs.

The on-road motor vehicle emissions estimates for the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP were analyzed using the EMFAC2007 Working Draft for estimating on-road mobile source emissions in conjunction with the most recent motor vehicle activity data from SCAG. For the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP, on- road motor vehicle emissions forecasts are provided in Tables 6-56-7 through and 6-8 for milestone years 2014 and 2020 2023, and 2030. The motor vehicle emission budgets should be considered preliminary for discussion purposes and will be revised upon release of the EMFAC2007 in November 2006, and be part of the Draft Final 2007 AQMP. Emissions were generated for the summer, winter, and annual average planning inventory for each milestone year. Table 6-7 shows the budgets for the PM2.5 standard, while the budgets for the 8-hour ozone standard are shown in Table 6-8. The District is retaining the 1-hour ozone on-road budgets because of the recent ruling on the 1-hour standard, and are shown in Table 6-9. The ozone emissions budgets for VOC and NOx are derived from the summer planning inventory and the reductions from defined new measures in the 2007 SIP. The PM2.5 emissions budgets for PM2.5, and the PM2.5 precursors VOC and NOx, are derived from the annual average inventory. These budgets reflect existing control programs and new commitments for technology and transportation control measures. The CO and NO2 emissions budgets established in the Proposed Modifications to the 2003 2007 AQMP for CO and NOx, respectively, remain unchanged are also provided for base year 2002 and are shown in Tables 6-10 and 6-11. The baseline winter planning inventories for CO and NO2 indicate that the region will continue to meet the budgets for these two pollutants.

This approach is consistent with U.S. EPA's transportation conformity rule, which provides that if emissions budgets rely on new control measures, these measures should be specified in the SIP and the emissions reductions from each control measure should be quantified and supported by agency commitments for adoption and implementation schedules. Moreover, the rule provides that conformity analyses by transportation agencies may not take credit for measures which have not been implemented unless the measures are "projects, programs, or activities" in the SIP supported by written implementation commitments by the responsible agencies (62 FR 43780, 40 CFR 93, subpart A).

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The emissions budgets for ozone and PM2.5 are provided here for up to the respective attainment year. However, since transportation analyses are needed beyond the attainment dates, the carrying capacities for PM2.5 and ozone attainment demonstration also serve as the budgets for future years (e.g., 2030 for PM2.5 and ozone). Ozone precursor emissions from motor vehicles are projected to continue declining through these extended periods.

TABLE 6-7 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets: PM2.5 (Annual Average - Tons Per Day)* 2014 2023 2030 VOC Baseline Inventory 144.1 99.0 83.2 New Defined State Measures** 22.5 15.1 12.8 Mobile Source Emission Budgets*** 122 84 71 2014 2023 2030 NOx Baseline Inventory 292.0 164.0 132.3 New Defined State Measures** 102.4 53.1 44.8 Mobile Source Emission Budgets*** 190 111 88 2014 2023 2030 PM2.5 Baseline Inventory 16.8 16.0 16.6 Re-entrained road dust (paved) 19.0 20.8 21.4 Re-entrained road dust (unpaved) 1.0 1.0 1.0 Road Construction dust 0.2 0.2 0.3 Adjusted Inventory 37.0 38.0 39.3 New Defined State Measures** 5.1 2.3 2.2 Mobile Source Emission Budgets*** 32 36 38 ** Based on CARB's Proposed State Strategy for California's 2007 SIP and the District staff's proposed measures affecting on-road mobile categories w/o long-term strategies *** Rounded up to the nearest ton.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 6-8 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets: 8 Hour Ozone (Summer Planning - Tons Per Day)* 2014 2023 VOC Baseline Inventory 147.9 103.2 New Defined State Measures** 23.1 15.6 Mobile Source Emissions*** 125 88 2014 2023 NOx Baseline Inventory 286.8 161.3 New Defined State Measures** 101.6 52.4 Mobile Source Emissions*** 186 109 ** Based on CARB's Proposed State Strategy for California's 2007 SIP and the District staff's proposed measures affecting on-road mobile categories w/o long-term strategies *** Rounded up to the nearest ton.

TABLE 6-9 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets: 1 Hour Ozone (Summer Planning - Tons Per Day)* 2008 2010 2014 2023 VOC Baseline Inventory 213.7 185.7 147.9 103.2 New Defined State Measures** 3.9 21.5 23.1 15.6 Mobile Source Emissions*** 210 165 125 88 2008 2010 2014 2023 NOx Baseline Inventory 426.6 379.3 286.8 161.3 New Defined State Measures** 3.3 48.8 101.6 52.4 Mobile Source Emissions*** 424 331 186 109 ** Based on CARB's Proposed State Strategy for California's 2007 SIP and the District staff's proposed measures affecting on-road mobile categories w/o long-term strategies *** Rounded up to the nearest ton.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 6-10 Preliminary Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets: Carbon Monoxide (Winter Planning - Tons Per Day)* 2005 2010 2015 2020 CO Baseline Inventory 2,940 1,793 1,287 1,287 New Defined State Measures 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Mobile Source Emission Budgets** 2,940 1,793 1,287 1,287 * 2015 budget being the last year of the maintenance plan is applicable to future years ** Rounded up to the nearest ton.

TABLE 6-11 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets: Nitrogen Dioxide (Winter Planning - Tons Per Day)* 2002 NO2 Baseline Inventory 682.0 New Defined State Measures 0.0 Mobile Source Emission Budgets** 682 * 2002 budget is applicable to all future years and beyond 2020 ** Rounded up to the nearest ton.

[Table 6-9 in the Draft 2007 AQMP has been renumbered to Table 6-12 and is amended to insert the new attainment date (i.e., 2023 instead of 2020) and reflect a change in the emissions inventories and control strategies affecting port-related mobile sources..]

PORT EMISSIONS Port related sources such as ships, trucks, cargo handling equipment, harbor craft, and locomotives are a major contributor to the emissions inventory in the Basin. In April 2006, CARB adopted its Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement in California (GMP) which established the framework for actions to reduce the air quality and health impacts from the Ports and other goods movement activities in the state. In NovemberJune 2006, both ports approvedreleased the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP) which set out emission reduction goals and control strategies

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP necessary to reduce the emissions from port-related sources. Emission reductions from port-related sources are required in order to show attainment with the ambient air quality standards for both PM2.5 and 8-hour standard. The Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP contains port-related measures that build upon both the GMP and CAAP with enhancements by the District to reflect the reductions needed for attainment. Specifically, the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP proposes locomotives go beyond the GMP and achieves consistency with the CAAP by requiring all locomotives operating in the Basin to be Tier 3 equivalent by 20202014. For ocean going vessels, the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP is consistent with the GMP by proposinges that all ships operating within 40 nautical miles to operate on 0.2 percent sulfur fuel beginning in 2008, with another reduction to 0.1 percent sulfur beginning in 2010. In addition, the draft plan calls out for ships to comply with the vessel speed reduction proposal specified in the CAAP, as well as similar retrofit penetration rates for 2014 and 2020 to what is called for in the GMP. The estimated emission reductions and final emissions targets needed from port-related sources to demonstrate attainment are shown in Table 6-96-12.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 6-96-12 Preliminary Port Emissions Targets (tpd)* 2002 2014 20202023** NOx Baseline Inventory 116.0 117.6 119.9 117.4 128.7 136.5 Emission Reductions 71.1 59.2 96.0 87.7 Port Emissions Targets 116.0 117.6 48.8 58.2 32.7 48.8 2002 2014 20202023 SOx Baseline Inventory 24.1 47.8 22.1 62.433.1 Emission Reductions 46.2 20.0 60.4 29.5 Port Emissions Targets 24.1 1.6 2.1 2.0 3.6 2002 2014 20202023 PM2.5 Baseline Inventory 6.66.5 7.9 5.4 9.3 6.3 Emission Reductions 4.5 3.9 6.5 4.9 Port Emissions Targets 6.6 6.5 3.4 1.5 2.8 1.4 * Port emissions estimated by assigning all ships, harbor craft, and port-related cargo handling equipment emissions to port inventory. Emissions from trucks and locomotives operating at the ports are based on the percentage of international goods movement compared to all goods movement (international plus domestic) emissions ** The 2023 budgets for NOx do not include the ?black-box? reductions as part of the ozone attainment strategy. As more defined measures are developed in future plan revisions, the 2023 and future year budgets will be revised accordingly.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP MODIFICATIONS TO CHAPTER 7 [Tables 7-3 and 7-4 have been modified to reflect the updated control measures previously proposed under the Draft 2007 AQMP. Other minor changes to the text in several sections were made as well and are shown in strikeout and underline. Significant unmodified text is not included in the following pages.]

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 7-3 2007 AQMP Control Measures, Implementing Agency, Adoption Date and Implementation Period Control Control Measure Implementing Adoption Implementation Measure Name Agency Date Period Facility Modernization MCS-01 Facility Modernization [All SCAQMD 2008-2010 Beginning 2012 PollutantsNOx, VOC, PM] Energy Efficiency/Conservation MCS-02 Urban Heat Island [All Pollutants] SCAQMD On-going On-going MCS-03 Energy Efficiency and Conservation SCAQMD 2008-2010 Beginning 2010 [All Pollutants] Good Management Practices FUG-01 Improved Leak Detection and Repair SCAQMD 2008-2009 2009-2010 [VOC] FUG-02 Emission Reductions from Gasoline SCAQMD 2009 2010-2012 Transfer and Dispensing Facilities [VOC] FUG-04 Emission Reductions from Pipeline SCAQMD 2007 2008-2009 and Storage Tank Degassing [VOC] BCM-01 PM Control Devices (Baghouses Leak SCAQMD 2008-2009 2010-2012 Detectors, Wet Scrubbers, Electrostatic Precipitators, Other Devices) [PM] MCS-04 Emissions Reductions from Green SCAQMD Phase 1: 2009-08 2012 Waste Composting [VOC, PM, NH3] Phase 2: 2010 MCS-06 Improved Start-up, Shut-down and SCAQMD 2010 2012 Turnaround Procedures [All Pollutants] Market Incentives/Compliance Flexibility CTS-02 Clean Coating Certification Program SCAQMD 2008-2009 2010 [VOC] CMB-02 Further SOx Reductions of SCAQMD 2007-2008 2011-2014 Emissions infor RECLAIM (BARCT) [SOx] FLX-01 Economic Incentive Programs [All SCAQMD On-going On-going Pollutants] FLX-02 Petroleum Refinery Pilot Program SCAQMD 2007-2008 2010 [VOC and NoxPM2.5]

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP 2007 AQMP Control Measures, Implementing Agency, Adoption Date and Implementation Period Control Control Measure Implementing Adoption Implementation Measure Name Agency Date Period ONRD-04 More Stringent Motorcycle Standards [VOC, Nox] ONRD-05 PM Testing for Light/Medium Duty Vehicles [PM] ONRD-06 Accelerated Penetration of Partial Zero-Emission and Zero Emission Vehicles [All Pollutants] ONRD-07 Greater Use of Diesel Fuel Alternatives and Diesel Fuel Reformulation [NOx, PM] ONRD-08 Accelerated Retrofits of Heavy Duty Vehicles [NOx, PM] ONRD-09 In-Use Emission Reductions from ON- Road Heavy-Duty Vehicles [VOC, NOx, PM] ONRD-10 Further Emission Reductions from Out- of-State/International Registered Heavy- Duty Vehicles [NOx, PM] ONRD-11 Enhanced Inspection and In-Use Emissions Tracking of Heavy-Duty Vehicles [VOC, NOx, PM] ONRD-12 Further Emissions Reductions from Heavy-Duty Trucks Providing Freight Drayage Services [VOC, NOx, PM] Suggested Off-Road Mobile Source Control Measures* OFFRD-01 Construction/Industrial Equipment Fleet Modernization [VOC, NOx, PM] OFFRD-02 Accelerated Turnover and Catalyst Based Standards for Pleasure Craft [VOC, NOx, PM] OFFRD-03 More Stringent Exhaust Standards for Off-Road Recreational Vehicles [VOC, NOx] OFFRD-04 Evaporative Standards for Recreational Vehicles and Pleasure Craft [VOC] OFFRD-05 Further Emission Reductions from Locomotives [NOx, PM] OFFRD-06 Clean Marine Fuel Requirements for Ocean-Going Marine Vessels [NOx, SOx, PM] CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020

CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020

CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020

CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020

CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020

CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 U.S. EPA 2007-2010 2010-2020 CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP 2007 AQMP Control Measures, Implementing Agency, Adoption Date and Implementation Period Control Control Measure Implementing Adoption Implementation Measure Name Agency Date Period OFFRD-07 Further Emission Reductions from CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 Ocean-Going Marine Vessels and Harbor Craft while at Berth [All Pollutants] OFFRD-08 Further Emission Reductions from CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 Cargo Handling Equipment [NOx] OFFRD-09 Vessel Speed Reduction [NOx] CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 OFFRD-10 Further Emission Reductions from CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 Ocean-Going Vessels [NOx] OFFRD-11 Emission Reductions from Aircraft CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 [VOC, NOx] OFFRD-12 Lower Exhaust and Evaporation CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 Standards and Fleet Modernization for Lawn and Garden Equipment [VOC] OFFRD-13 Emission Reductions form Airport CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 Ground Support Equipment [VOC, NOx, PM] Mobile Source and Consumer Product Control Measures Developed By CARB* ARB-ONRD-01 Smog Check Enhancements [VOC, BAR 2007-2008 By 2010 NOx, PM] ARB-ONRD-02 Expanded Vehicle Retirement [VOC, CARB/BAR 2010 2010 NOx, PM] ARB-ONRD-03 Modifications to Reformulated CARB 2007 2008 Gasoline Program [VOC] ARB-ONRD-04 Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks CARB 2007-2008 2010-2015 [VOC, NOx, PM] ARB-ONRD-05 Port Truck Modernization [NOx, PM] CARB/ 2007 2008-2020 SCAQMD ARB-OFRD-01 Marine Vessels ? Fuel, Auxiliary & U.S. EPA/ 2007-2009 2007-2010 Main Engines [VOC, NOx] CARB/ SCAQMD ARB-OFRD-02 Accelerate Introduction of Cleaner CARB/ 2007-2008 By 2012 Line-Haul Locomotives [VOC, NOx, U.S. EPA PM] ARB-OFRD-03 Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft CARB 2007 2008-2018 [VOC, NOx, PM] ARB-0FRD-04 Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment CARB 2007 Phase in [VOC, NOx, PM] starting 2008

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 7-3 (continued) 2007 AQMP Control Measures, Implementing Agency, Adoption Date and Implementation Period Control Control Measure Implementing Adoption Implementation Measure Name Agency Date Period ARB-OFRD-05 New Emission Standards for CARB 2009-2010 2012-2013 Recreational Boats [VOC, NOx] ARB-OFRD-06 Expanded Off-Road Recreational CARB By 2010 2012-2015 Vehicle Emission Standards [VOC] ARB-CONS-01 Consumer Products [VOC] CARB 2007-2012 2010-2014 Recommended Mobile Source and Clean Fuel Control Measures* SCONRD-01 Accelerated Penetration of Advanced CARB 2007-2008 2010-2020 Technology Partial Zero and Zero Emission Vehicles [VOC, NOx, CO] SCONRD-02 Deployment of On-Board Diagnostics CARB/BAR 2008 2012-2020 (Phase III) in Light- and Medium Duty Vehicles [VOC, NOx, CO, PM] SCONRD-03 Further Emission Reductions From CARB/ 2007-2008 2010-2014 On Road Heavy-Duty Vehicles [NOx, SCAQMD PM] SCONRD-04 Further Emission Reductions from CARB/ 2007 2007-2020 Heavy-Duty Trucks Providing Freight Marine Ports/ Drayage Services [NOx, PM] SCAQMD SCOFFRD-01 Construction/Industrial Equipment CARB 2007 2009 Fleet Modernization [VOC, NOx] SCOFFRD-02 Further Emission Reductions from CARB/ 2007-2010 2023 Cargo Handling Equipment [NOx, Marine Ports PM] SCOFFRD-03 Further Emission Reductions from U.S.EPA 2007-2010 2023 Locomotives [NOx, PM] SCOFFRD-04 Emission Reductions from Airport CARB 2007-2010 2023 Ground Support Equipment [NOx, VOC, PM] SCOFFRD-05 Emission Reductions from Transport CARB 2009 2010 Refrigeration Units [NOx] SCOFFRD-06 Accelerated Turnover and Catalyst CARB 2007 2010 Based Standards for Pleasure Crafts [VOC, NOx, PM] SCFUEL-01 Further Emission Reduction from CARB 2007-2010 2012 Gasoline Fuels [NOx, SOx] SCFUEL-02 Greater Use of Diesel Fuel CARB/ 2008 2015 Alternatives [NOx, SOx, PM] SCAQMD

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 7-3 (continued) 2007 AQMP Control Measures, Implementing Agency, Adoption Date and Implementation Period Control Control Measure Implementing Adoption Implementation Measure Name Agency Date Period Suggested Consumer Products Control Measure* CONS-01 Further Reductions for Consumer CARB 2007-2010 2010-2020 Products [VOC] Transportation Control Measures TCM-A HOV Improvements SCAG, CTCs, 2007 2007-2023 Local Gov't TCM-B Transit & Systems Management SCAG, CTCs, 2007 2007-2023 Local Gov't TCM-C Information Based Measures SCAG, CTCs, 2007 2007-2023 Local Gov't Long-Term Mobile Source and Consumer Product Control Measures SCLTM-01A Further Emission Reductions from On- CARB 2009-2012 2015-2023 Road Mobile Sources [NOx] SCLTM-01B Further Emission Reductions from On- CARB/BAR 2009-2012 2015-2023 Road Heavy-Duty Vehicles [NOx] SCLTM-02 Further Emission Reductions from Off- CARB/ 2009-2012 2015-2023 Road Mobile Sources [NOx] U,S. EPA SCLTM-03 Further Reductions from Consumer CARB 2009-2012 2015-2023 Products [VOC] LTM-01 Reactivity Based Controls [VOC] SCAQMD, 2009-2012 2012-2014 CARB LTM-02 Further Emission Reductions from NOx SCAQMD 2009-2012 2012-2014 RECLAIM Facilities [NOx] LTM-03 Long-Term Control Measure for SCAQMD 2009-2012 2012-2014 Fugitive Emissions [VOC] LTM-04 Concurrent Reductions from Global CARB On-going On-going Warming Strategies [All Pollutants] LTM-05 Further VOC Reductions from Mobile CARB 2009-2012 2012-2014 Sources [VOC] * Annual rulemaking schedule to be developed by CARB within adoption date window but at earliest practicable date.

TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENT The District's Technology Advancement Office (TAO) sponsors public-private research and development partnerships in order to identify and promote low- and zero-emissions technologies for both stationary and mobile sources. The TAO has several programs through which advanced mobile and stationary source control

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP strategies are funded, demonstratedresearched, and commercialized. One such program is the Carl Moyer Program which is a state-wide funding program that provides monies to purchase low-emission on- and off-road vehicles and equipment and marine engines to reduce NOx and PM. A second program overseen by TAO is the RECLAIM Executive Order Fee Program which channels monies collected from funds established under Executive Order and Rule 2020 ? RECLAIM Reserve to fund projects with approved protocols established under Regulation XVI ? Mobile Source Offset Programs. The TAO also administers projects funded through the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC). The MSRC, which was established in 1990 with the adoption of Assembly Bill 2766, funds projects to reduce air pollution from motor vehicles as needed for implementing the California Clean Air Act of 1988. The fourth mechanism where advanced mobile and stationary source control strategies are funded, demonstratedresearched, and commercialized is under the Clean Fuels Program, which was established in state law in 1988 under the California Health and Safety Code, 40448.5. The Clean Fuels Program leverages cost-share from other government agencies (e.g., CARB, CEC, U.S. EPA, and DOE) as well as the technology providers themselves.

Table 7-4 lists some key recently-completed or currently-underway or potential projects being considered sponsored by the TAO to facilitate development and commercialization of low-polluting technologies. Some of the stationary source projects do not have specific linkages to the control measures but serve as future technologies that may be available to meet current regulations with future compliance dates or AQMP control measures.

SCAQMD Clean Fuels Program ? Technology Advancement Plan SCAQMD Cleans Fuels Program ? Technology Advancement Plan is a formal plan required by state law to be adopted by the District's Governing Board. The most recent update of the Technology Advancement Plan for 2006 focused on potential projects for research, development, demonstration, deployment and commercialization of alternative and clean fuels technologies and advanced technologies that may reduce emissions and help meet the clean air goals of the District. The key areas of the 2006 Technology Advancement Plan are summarized below.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 7-4 Current or Potential Recently Completed TAO Projects Project Description Pollutant(s) Goal(s) Associated Control Measure Alternative Fuels ? On-Road Applications Remote Sensing of High Emitting Light/Medium-Duty VOC, NOx, CO, Vehicles PM10

Development & Demonstration of Advanced Natural VOC, NOx, CO, Gas Engine Meeting 2010 On-Road Heavy-Duty PM10 Exhaust Emission Standards Aftertreatment Technologies for PM Emissions Control PM10 of natural gasedCNG-Fueled Heavy-Duty Engines Demonstrate Fischer-Tropsch Synthetic Fuel in Heavy- NOx, PM10 & Medium-Duty Vehicles Demonstration of Fischer Tropsch Synthetic Fuel in VOC Heavy & Medium-Duty Vehicles; and Advanced Diesel Fuels, Engines, NOx Absorber Catalyst & Diesel Particulate Filter Project Perform Evaporative Emission Testing on Gasoline VOC, NOx, CO, Heavy-Duty Hybrid-Electric Bus PM10 Development of Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines Meeting NOx, PM10 2010 On-Road Heavy-Duty Exhaust Emissions Standards Alternative Fuels ? Infrastructure Cost-Share Small-Scale Natural Gas Liquefaction Plant VOC, NOx, CO, PM10 Cost-share Installation of CNG Fueling Facility VOC, NOx, CO, PM10 Incentive Buydown Program for CNG Home Refueling VOC, NOx, CO, Appliances PM10 Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Technologies Develop, Demonstrate & Evaluate Truck Fuel Cell VOC, NOx, CO, Auxiliary Power Unit PM10 Develop & Demonstrate Advanced Storage Tanks for VOC, NOx, CO, Storing CNG/LNG and Compressed and Liquid PM10 Hydrogen Demonstrate & Develop Hydrogen Refueling Stations VOC, NOx, CO, PM10 A, B, C ONRD- 01MOB-06 ONRD- 05MOB-07 A, B, C SCONRD-038 SCONRD-049 ONRD-12 A, B SCONRD-038 SCONRD-04 A, B, C SCFUEL- 02ONRD-07 A, B, C SCFUEL- 02ONRD-08 SCONRD-03 SCONRD-04 A, B, C SCONRD-039 SCONRD-04 A, B, C SCONRD-039 SCONRD-0410 ONRD-12

B SCONRD-039 SCONRD-0412 B SCONRD-039 SCONRD-0412 B SCONRD-016

A, D SCONRD-039 SCONRD-0410 A, D SCONRD-036 SCONRD-049 A, D SCONRD-036 SCONRD-04

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 7-4 (continued) Current or Potential Recently Completed TAO Projects Project Description Pollutant(s) Goal(s) Associated Control Measure Develop & Demonstrate Hydrogen Internal VOC, NOx, CO, A SCONRD-016 Combustion Engine Vehicles PM10 SCONRD-03 SCONRD-04 Electric and Hybrid Electric Technologies Develop & Demonstrate Hydrogen-Internal VOC, NOx, CO, A, D SCONRD-039 Combustion Engine for Hybrid-Electric Buses PM10 SCONRD-04 Evaluate Hybrid Electric Vehicles VOC, NOx, CO, A, B, C SCONRD-016 PM10 Optimize & Demonstrate Plug-In Hybrid Electric VOC, NOx, CO, A, B, C SCONRD-016 Vehicles PM10 Develop & Demonstrate Hydraulic-Hybrid System for VOC, NOx, CO, A, B, C SCONRD-038 Heavy-Duty Vehicles PM10 SCONRD-049 Alternative Fuels ? Off-Road Applications Demonstrate Retrofit Technologies on Switcher and NOx, PM10 A, B, C SCOFFRD-035 Head End Power Locomotives Demonstration of Particulate Trap Technologies VOC, NOx, CO, A, B, C, D SCONRD- PM10 03OFFRD-01 SCONRD- 04OFFRD-08 SCOFFRD-02 Emissions Analysis Conduct In-Use Emissions Testing of On-Road Heavy- VOC, NOx, CO, C, D SCONRD-039 Duty Trucks PM10 SCONRD-0410 ONRD-12 Stationary Sources - Clean Energy Technologies Low and Zero Emission Stationary VOC, NOx, CO, A, B, C Long-Term TechnologiesProfessional Wet Cleaning Technology PM10 Measure Demonstration & Pilot Incentive Program Stationary Sources ? VOC Reduction Technologies Zero- & Low-VOC Resin Technology for Advance VOC A, B, C CTS-01 Control Measure Development ARB-CONS-01 A. Supports technical feasibility B. Supports commercialization C. Demonstration of current or potential CARB standards or guidelines D. Enhances databases (e.g., emission factors, inventories, health data, etc.)

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Carl Moyer Program The Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Program (Carl Moyer Program) provides incentive funding to reduce emissions from heavy-duty diesel-powered vehicles and equipment as well as gross polluting passenger cars and small trucks. The main objective of the program is to support projects that would provide emission reductions that are not already required by statute, rule, order, or regulation. The program was first funded in 1998 by the Governor, formally established by the Legislature in 1999, and is administered by the CARB and local and regional air pollution control districts. The District will be administering incentive funds through the Carl Moyer Program for the replacement of diesel- fueled on- and off-road vehicles including refuse haulers, heavy-duty trucks, transit and school buses, construction equipment, marine and port applications and other vehicles and equipment. New engines, re-powers and retrofits are allowed within the program.

A variety of vehicle classes and types are funded under the Carl Moyer Program to help purchase new vehicles or new engines/repowers and for installation of retrofit units on older engines. New vehicles and engines must achieve at least a 30 percent reduction, and repowered vehicles and retrofits must achieve at least a 15% reduction of NOx emissions compared to current emission standards. New engines must be CARB-certified, when applicable, and retrofits must be CARB-verified. Projects reducing PM and/or VOC are also eligible for funding provided they are cost-effective. Alternative fuel engines, such as those using compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas, propane and electricity will be given preference for funding. Cleaner diesel engines may also be considered in the off-road category. In addition, the District is conducting a car and small truck remote sensing and repair or scrap project under the program.

As part of the Draft 2007 AQMP, the District will continue to aggressively seek out Carl Moyer dollars and fund projects that produce surplus, verifiable, and enforceable emission reductions. Surplus emission reductions achieved through the Carl Moyer Program are important to the success of the PM2.5 and ozone attainment strategies.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP in October 2006), 86 lower-emitting new diesel buses and the retrofitting of 2,101 diesel buses with particulate emission traps (an additional 452 diesel school buses will be considered by the District's Governing Board in October 2006). Recent state budget cuts have resulted in a reduction of about $2 billion from school budgets, potentially affecting the transition to less-polluting school buses.

The District recently proposed that $14M of its AB923 funds be recognized in the ?Lower-Emission School Bus Replacement & Retrofit Program Fund? and used to facilitate the acquisition of new compressed natural gas buses by school districts and the concomitant reduction or elimination of diesel-fueled school buses. Distribution of the funds for school buses will take into consideration several elements, including, but not limited to, the environmental justice provisions of the Health & Safety Code as amended by AB-1390 (Firebaugh), population distribution among various counties, and the mix of older versus newer buses.

Alternative Fuels - On-Road Major emission reductions are required in this area, particularly from heavy-duty vehicles. Continued efforts focused on the development of lower-NOx and PM emitting heavy-duty natural gas and diesel engines, as well as development and demonstration of alternative fuel school buses and other heavy-duty vehicles. The District has initiated projects for the development of heavy-duty natural gas engines that will meet the 2010 on-road heavy-duty exhaust emissions standard of 0.2 g/bhp- hr NOx. Two of the major natural gas engine manufacturers have announced their intentions to certify heavy-duty natural gas engines meeting 2010 emission standards as early as 2007. Additionally, plans to demonstrate zero-emission technology for idling heavy-duty trucks and trailers were included.

The District is interested in ethanol (E85) and biodiesel and has initiated projects to evaluate the emissions benefits of these renewable fuels. There are many flexible fuel vehicles (FFVs) that can run on either E85 or gasoline. E85 should exhibit decreased HC emissions due to the fuel's lower volatility, but the District is investigating the potential for permeation issues in older vehicles when E85 is mixed with conventional gasoline. The District is also concerned that no FFVs has been certified to SULEV emissions levels.

The District has also initiated a program to evaluate the emissions from biodiesel in heavy-duty trucks. High levels of biodiesel blends (e.g., B99) have shown greatly reduced PM but with higher NOx emissions. The District is evaluating biodiesel in tandem with two different SCR systems to mitigate any NOx increases.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP manufacturing, distribution, and detection technologies are contained in the 2006 update. Another area of focus will be to develop best practices that can lead to standardization and modularization, as well as upgrade existing older natural gas refueling stationsdevelop templates for the design and installation of alternative fuel re-fueling stations. The continued support and development of home refueling for alternative fuels is also an area of interest.

The District is also focused on the development and deployment of renewable biofuels, including ethanol and biodiesel. The specifications of the fuels themselves and their emissions under different load cycles and applications will be carefully evaluated to ensure that any increases in pollutant emissions are mitigated.

Fuel Cell and Hyrdogen Technologies The District is currently demonstrating fuel cell vehicles in its daily fleet activities and plans to expand the demonstration of fuel cell vehicles in other conventional and non-conventional fleets. The plan also proposed to co-sponsor studies to develop more realistic demonstration specifications for fuel cell transit buses, specifically to evaluate realistic operational availability, training, on site service, and warranty issues.

In the area of hydrogen fueling infrastructure, the plan included development and demonstration of distributed hydrogen production and refueling stations for fleet and commercial uses, as well as home refueling appliances. Furthermore, the plan included additional work on cosponsoring studies for certifying hydrogen components and subsystems, as well as the personnel involved in the installation, operation, and maintenance of hydrogen systems. To facilitate the development of the hydrogen refueling infrastructure, the District funded the development and demonstration of thirty hydrogen-powered internal combustion engines. The thirty vehicle demonstration also serves as a transition path to dedicated hydrogen and fuel cell vehicle technologies.

Aftertreatment The heavy-duty in-use fleet is responsible for a large portion of the mobile source emissions in the Basin. The District continues to evaluate after treatment technologies to be used on a wide variety of model year trucks, including diesel particulate filters, oxidation catalysts, and selective catalytic reduction systems.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP trucks. There will also be continued focus on advanced energy storage devices such as ultra-capacitors, lithium-technology, and high-speed flywheel battery applications. The District also plans to upgrade hybrid-electric development and demonstration projects with current, better-performing components resulting in enhanced reliability and lower emissions, as well as plug-in recharging capability.

The District is also evaluating the use and application of electric technologies for container movement. Examples of such technologies include electrification of gantry cranes, linear induction motors, and magnetic levitation systems for container movement within and from the ports.

Alternative Diesel Fuels - Off-Road Applications The District plans to evaluate various off-road technologies. Some of these include demonstration of low- and zero-emission locomotives, low-emission alternative fuel off-road engines using technology developed for on-road engines, including retrofit equipment. Another area of focus will be the use of gas-to-liquid fuels, emulsified fuels, bio-diesel, and low-sulfur diesel fuels in construction equipment and other off- road uses. These alternative diesel fuels offer the potential for large PM and NOx reductions especially when used in tandem with after treatment devices. Demonstration of particulate control technologies is a high priority area. The plan also includes projects pertaining to low-emission marine engines, including hybrid- electric technology.

Stationary Sources The District funded numerous projects for the use of microturbines for stationary power generation as well as stationary fuel cell units. The District plans to further investigate low and zero-emission technologies such as low NOx burners, renewable fuels (e.g., digester and landfill), hydrogen blends, hybrids and fuel cell/micron turbine power plants.support this effort in assembling and demonstrating portable microturbine technology that utilizes natural gas or propane. Another distributed generation project of interest will be the demonstration of a hybrid fuel cell/microturbine power plant that could provide electricity at much higher efficiencies than conventional generator systems. Another area of focus will be the development and demonstration of emulsified fuel technology for portable power generators. The District will also continue to focus on demonstration of low-cost emission monitoring systems. The 2006 plan also included projects focusing on technology assessments of future VOC limits in various District rules, as well as additional development and demonstration of near-zero or zero-VOC technologies for solvents, coatings, and adhesives.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT ACTIVITIES Implementation of the 2007 AQMP will require support activities sponsored by the District and SCAG. These efforts are described in the following subsections.

District Assistance and Outreach Programs Since the adoption of the 1991 AQMP the District has provided assistance to the agencies charged with implementing the Plan. A key accomplishment was the District's CEQA Air Quality Handbook to assist local governments in assessing and mitigating air quality impacts from projects within their jurisdiction. The District has designed and implemented a City Executive Outreach Campaign to raise awareness among city managers and administrators of District programs affecting them and the types of District resources available to them. Areas being covered during this process include: ? Fleet rule compliance and funding opportunities, including technical assistance available ? Complaint Process/Constituents Issues ? Building Department Services ? No-cost, no-fault, compliance assistance for small businesses ? Training programs for city and county building and safety staff, and ? Incorporation of a model air quality element into General Plans.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP implemented by the District and the local governments. Other feasible strategies include modernization of corporate fleet on-road and off-road vehicles, low-emitting shuttles for city transportation, energy efficiency and conservation programs, and public outreach and education programs. The District could set aside funding for city contractors who could meet the minimum air quality criteria. The District will work with local governments to develop a model for green contracting requirements which could be used by local governments at other public and private entities.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP INTRODUCTION The 1990 federal Clean Air Act revised the planning requirements for many areas that have not attained NAAQS. The District has jurisdiction over the South Coast Air Basin and the desert portion of Riverside County in the Salton Sea Air Basin (see Figure 1-1). The Coachella Valley, located in the desert portion of Riverside County, exceeds the federal ozone standard and is classified as a ?serious? ozone nonattainment area. The federal Clean Air Act requires that the Coachella Valley: ? demonstrate attainment of the federal ozone standard by June 15, 2013; and ? provide contingency measures or actions in the event of a failure to attain or to meet interim milestones.

This Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP revision addresses these requirements and satisfies the State Implementation Plan requirements under Title I of the CAA.

On April 18, 2003, U.S. EPA approved the CVSIP, which addressed future year attainment of the PM10 standards and incorporated the latest mobile source emissions model results and planning assumptions. Over the past five years, annual average PM10 concentrations have met the levels of the revoked federal standard (50 g/m3) and peak 24-hour average PM10 concentrations have not exceeded the current federal standard (150 g/m3) and is currently eligible for redesignation as attainment.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM There are a number of circumstances that are unique to the Coachella Valley that make it difficult to develop a local control strategy that satisfies CAA requirements. For example, with little in the way of local emissions, and with the significant growth projected, it is difficult to satisfy the reasonable further progress requirements of the CAA. Pollutant transport from the South Coast Air Basin to the Coachella Valley is the primary cause of its ozone nonattainment status. As a result, the District believes that aggressive control of the South Coast Air Basin emissions is an effective strategy to substantially improve air quality in the Coachella Valley. Each of these issues is addressed in further detail below.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Regulatory Requirements State Implementation Plan requirements under Title I of the CAA depend on the severity of the nonattainment problem. For the Coachella Valley, the CAA requirements for moderate through severe areas must be addressed. Thus, the area is subject to the reasonable further progress requirements of the CAA, as discussed in Chapter 6 for the South Coast Air Basin; these requirements are intended to ensure that each ozone nonattainment area provide for sufficient VOC emission reductions to attain the ozone national ambient air quality standard. The expected population growth for the Coachella Valley is significant; thus the rate-of-progress requirements of the CAA cannot be met unless further local controls are implemented.

The CAA also requires that ?serious? ozone nonattainment areas, such as the Coachella Valley, demonstrate attainment of the federal ozone air quality standard by June15, 2013 using a photochemical grid model and modeling techniques. The South Coast Air Basin modeling domain, as shown in Figure 8-1, was expanded to include the Coachella Valley so that this CAA requirement could be addressed. It is clear from available data that federal ozone standard exceedances in the Coachella Valley largely result from pollutant transport from the upwind South Coast Air Basin. Photochemical grid modeling for the Draft 2007 AQMP, using the U.S. EPA guidelines and CAMx show that attainment of the ozone standard is possible with the proposed control strategy described in the Draft 2007 AQMP for the South Coast Air Basin, and control of locally generated emissions via state and federal regulations. This 2007 Plan carries forward the 1997 AQMP, 1999 AQMP Amendment and 2003 AQMP control approach for the Coachella Valley.

Population Growth The Coachella Valley is a rapidly growing area, as shown in Table 8-1. By 2020, the population in the Coachella Valley is projected to double. It is clearly more challenging to meet the rate-of-progress requirements of the CAA in such rapidly growing areas.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Photochemical Modeling

Coachella FIGURE 8-1 Modeling Domain [Note: A New District (Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District) was formed in September 1996 and was effective on July 1, 1997.]

TABLE 8-1 Historical Population and Population Forecasts Area 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 South Coast Air Basin ~10,500,000 13,022,000 14,681,000 16,880,000 18,359,000 Coachella Valley 139,000 267,000 320,892 490,226 619,900

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Pollutant Transport The pollutant transport pathway from the South Coast Air Basin to the Salton Sea Air Basin is through the Banning Pass to the Coachella Valley.1 The transport pathway to the Coachella Valley is well recognized and has been an intensely studied phenomenon. An experiment to study this transport pathway concluded that the South Coast Air Basin was the source of the observed high oxidant levels in the Coachella Valley.2 Transport from Anaheim to Palm Springs was directly identified with an inert sulfur hexafluoride tracer release3. The most comprehensive study to date of transport from the South Coast Air Basin to the Salton Sea air basin confirmed the transport pathways to the Coachella Valley.4 Ozone pollutant transport to the Coachella Valley can be demonstrated by examining ozone exceedance frequencies as a function of distance from the source areas. Figure 8- 2 shows the frequency of exceedances of the federal one-hour ozone standard by hour for the period 2002 through 2006. The Coachella Valley transport route is represented in Figure 8-2, starting at Pico Rivera near the source region and passing through Fontana and Banning and finally through Banning Pass to Palm Springs in the Coachella Valley. Note that near the source region exceedances occur most frequently at mid-day (noon to 1:00 p.m.) during the peak of incoming solar radiation and therefore the peak of ozone production. As one goes downwind of the source region, exceedances occur later and later in the day as the ozone cloud is transported downwind. For example, at Palm Springs exceedances occur most frequently at 6:00 p.m. If this peak were locally generated, it would be occurring near mid-day and not in the late afternoon or early evening.

Table 8-2 compares the 2002, 2012 and 2017 emission inventories of the South Coast Air Basin with those for the Coachella Valley. The South Coast Air Basin emissions, upwind of the Coachella Valley, overwhelm the locally-generated emissions. Depending on the pollutant, emissions in the South Coast Air Basin are five (for PM10) to 50 (for SOx) times greater than emissions in the Coachella Valley. It is clear that improved air quality in the Coachella Valley depends on reduced emissions in the South Coast Air Basin. This is illustrated by the trends in ozone air quality described in the following section.

1 R.W. Keith. 1980. A Climatological Air Quality Profile: California's South Coast Air Basin. Staff Report, South 2 E.K. Kauper. 1971. Coachella Valley Air Quality Study. Final Report, Pollution Res. & Control Corp., Riverside 3 P.J. Drivas and F.H. Shair . 1974. A Tracer Study of Pollutant Transport in the Los Angeles Area. Atmos. Environ. 4 T.B. Smith et al. 1983. The Impact of Transport from the South Coast Air Basin on Ozone Levels in the Southeast Desert Air Basin. CARB Research Library Report No. ARB-R-83-183. ARB Contract to MRI/Caltech.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP 0.12 0.1 0.08 Frequency 0.06

0.04 0.02 0 0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00 22:00 20:00 18:00 16:00 14:00 12:00 Hour of the Day Palm Springs Pico Rivera Fontana Banning

FIGURE 8-2 Frequency of Federal Ozone Exceedances Along the Coachella Valley Transport Route, 2002-2006 TABLE 8-2 Comparison of 2002, 2012 and 2017 Annual Average Emissions Emissions (tons/day) Year Area VOC NOx PM10 2002 South Coast Air Basin 844 1093 275 Coachella Valley 21 51 16 2012 South Coast Air Basin 548 712 285 Coachella Valley 17 35 20 2017 South Coast Air Basin 509 581 294 Coachella Valley 16 26 22

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Trends in Ozone Air Quality The ozone air quality trends for stations along the Coachella Valley transport route since 1990 are shown in Figure 8-3. The statistic used here to illustrate trends is the average of the 30 highest daily maximum one-hour ozone concentrations in each year, referred to as the ?Top 30 Mean.? Over this time period, population growth in the Coachella Valley was much greater than that in the South Coast Air Basin, as shown in Table 8-1. Since emissions are directly related to population for many source categories, emissions growth was also greater in the Coachella Valley relative to the South Coast Air Basin. However, the downward trend in the Top 30 Means at Palm Springs parallels the trend of the upwind stations, which are in the South Coast Air Basin. This observation confirms the conclusion that ozone air quality in the Coachella Valley is largely due to transport from the upwind source region of the South Coast Air Basin and that attainment in the valley is only possible with emission reductions in the Basin.

From 1999 through 2006, the trend of the Top 30 Mean levels off in both the Basin and Coachella Valley. Figure 8-4 offers a more focused look at the Top 30 8-hour average ozone trends over the past 5-years from 2002 through 2006. Note that while the fluctuations in the trend are dampened with the 8-hour average concentrations the trends at the four stations along the transport route are consistent. More specifically, the trend of the Top 30 mean 8-hour average ozone concentrations at Banning Airport (located at the mouth of the Coachella Valley) and at Palm Springs are closely matched. The Top 30 mean 8-hour average ozone concentrations at Palm Springs decreases by more than 5 percent from 2002 to 2006 while the trend at Banning Airport decreases by more than 3 percent during the period. The trends at the upwind east-Basin sites are generally mixed.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP 25 20 15 10 Mean Concentration (pphm) 5

0 1990 1991 1993 1992 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2002 2001

2003 2004 2005 2006 Fontana Redlands Banning Palm Springs FIGURE 8-3 Mean of the Top 30 Daily Peak 1-Hour Average Ozone Concentrations (1990-2006) Coachella Valley Transport Route

Mean Concentration (pphm) 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Azusa Banning Fontana Palm Springs FIGURE 8-4 Recent Years (2003-2006) Mean of the Top 30 Daily Peak 8-Hour Average Ozone Concentrations - Coachella Valley Transport Route

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Figure 8-5 depicts the trends of days exceeding the federal 8?hour average ozone concentrations at Palm Springs and several of the upwind Basin stations situated along the Coachella Valley transport route. The number of days exceeding the federal standard increased from 1999 through 2003 at all sites then began to subside through 2006. In the mid 1990's, California Phase II Fuel Reformulation resulted in a significant lowering of the tons of emissions of volatile organic substances and in the reactivity of the fuels. The net impact of the reformulations was regionally lower ozone concentrations however the lower reactivity translated to a delay in the photochemical production of the daily maximum ozone concentration. Under typical wind transport, this amounted to a shift in the ozone maximum concentration (all be it lower in concentration) to the east. With the bulk of the population and hence emissions located in the western Basin, the majority of the impact was noted in the far eastern portion of the Basin and downwind desert areas.

The increase in the number of days above the standard (depicted in Figure 8-5) from the late 1990's continues through 2003, when California Phase III Fuel Reformulation was implemented. The 2003 ozone peak in the trend reflects both and exceedingly favorable meteorological year for ozone generation coupled with the side effects of introducing ethanol as a substitute oxygenate gasoline additive. Commingling of the outgoing fuel using MTBE as an additive and those being introduced with ethanol as the oxygenate lead to enhance evaporative emissions. The increase in evaporative emissions was further enhanced due to the exceedingly warmer temperatures observed that summer. Post 2003, the trend of days exceeding the 8-hour standard has been lowered. Days Exceeding Standard 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Palm Springs Banning Airport Fontana Redlands

FIGURE 8-5 The Number of Days Exceeding the 8-Hour Average Ozone Federal Ozone Standard Along the Coachella Valley Transport Route

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP The impact of trend of air quality, in particular the shift in the ozone maximum due to pollution transport and slower reactivity of the air mass has resulted in an overall increase in the Coachella Valley 8-hour ozone design value over time. (The design values are calculated as three-year averages of the 4th highest 8-hour average concentration). As shown in Figure 8-6 the 2002 Coachella Valley design concentration is 10.5 pphm (105 ppb) and when using a weighted (5-year design centered around 2002) the design increases to 10.6 pphm (106 ppb). Even if a 2006 based design value (based solely on ozone data observed in 2004 through 2006) is considered, the design would be 10.2 pphm (102 ppb). While somewhat lower in 2006, the movement of the Coachella Valley design values upward presents a substantial obstacle for an ozone attainment demonstration, particularly one that clearly relies on emissions reductions being implemented in the upwind South Coast Air Basin.

Concentration (pphm) 11 10.8 10.6 10.4 10.2 10 9.8 9.6 9.4 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

FIGURE 8-6 Trend of the Coachella Valley 8-Hour Average Design Value ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION Air quality modeling is an integral part of the planning process to achieve clean air. The CAA requires that ozone nonattainment areas designated as serious and above be required to use a regional photochemical model to demonstrate attainment. To meet this requirement, CAMx, is used in the attainment demonstration for Coachella Valley. The CAMx modeling system is described in Chapter 5 and Appendix V. CAMx was run for six meteorological episodes to develop relative response factors (RRFs) to project future

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP air quality. The 8-hour average ozone design values (based on a 3-year weighted average) for the Coachella Valley air quality stations located in Palm Springs and Indio were 106 and 95 ppb, respectively. Performance evaluations for the meteorological episodes are discussed in Appendix V.

Future-year air quality projections in the Coachella Valleys are presented in detail in Appendix V; the results for 2013 are summarized in the following discussion. In 2012, selected region wide controls are projected to be implemented to reduce emissions beyond the baseline tonnage. Many of the proposed controls will address goods movement and fleet turnover. The controlled 2012 emissions are projected to be lower than the baseline emissions. (?Baseline? assumes no further control beyond existing rules and regulations and ?controlled? assumes implementation of the proposed control strategy described in Chapters 4 and 7). The results of the CAMx model simulations and corresponding RRFs using the controlled emissions for 2012 project a maximum 2013 8- hour concentration of 0.088 ppm, approximately four percent above the federal standard. The analysis indicates that additional emissions reductions beyond those stated in Table 8-2 for 2012 will be required to meet the federal standard.

As a consequence, the District will voluntarily request that EPA re-designate the Coachella Valley portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin from ?Serious? non-attainment to ?Severe-15? and extend the attainment date of the 8-hour ozone standard to 2018. CAMx simulations of the ozone episodes using the 2017 controlled emissions indicate that the federal 8-hour standard will be attained in the Coachella Valley by 2018. The implications for stationary sources are discussed in Chapter 12.

REASONABLE FURTHER PROGRESS The CAA requires SIPs for most nonattainment areas to demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) toward attainment through emission reductions phased in from the time of the SIP submission out to the attainment date. The reasonable further progress requirements in the CAA are intended to ensure that each ozone nonattainment area provide for sufficient precursor emission reductions to attain the ozone national ambient air quality standard. Specifically, Section 182(b)(1)(A) requires that each moderate or above area provide for VOC reductions of at least 15 percent from baseline emissions within six years from the baseline year (i.e., 2002). Furthermore, Section 182(c)(2)(B) requires that serious and above areas provide VOC and/or NOx reductions of an additional 3 percent per year starting at the end of the baseline year and out to their attainment year. However, U.S. EPA in its Phase 2 rule specified that areas which have already completed and received approval for their 15 percent VOC Rate of Progress (ROP) for the 1-hour ozone standard will not be required to do another 15 percent VOC- only reduction plan for the 8-hour ozone standard. Therefore, the District is only required to provide for VOC and/or NOx reductions of 3 percent per year from the 2002

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP baseline year averaged over each consecutive three-year period beginning in 2008 until the Basin's attainment date (i.e., June 2017). Table 8-3 shows the percent emission reductions for both VOC and NOx emissions necessary to meet the 3 percent requirement. Tables 8-4A and 8-4B summarizes the RFP calculations for VOC and NOx, respectively. Figures 8-7A and 8-7B depicts the target level and projected baseline RFP demonstration for VOC and NOx, respectively.

As mentioned a number of times in this chapter, poor ozone air quality in the Coachella Valley is primarily due to transport of ozone and its precursors from the upwind source region of the South Coast Air Basin and attainment in Coachella Valley is only possible with substantial emission reductions in the Basin. With this in mind, the proposed control strategy consists of two components: 1) an aggressive control strategy for VOC and NOx emission sources in the South Coast Air Basin; and 2) control of locally generated emissions via proposed control measures implemented by state and federal actions.

As shown by Tables 8-3A and 8-4B, the milestone years are 2008, 2011, 2014, and 2017. For each of the milestone years the District is able to show that the required progress is met on the basis of reductions from the existing control program using a combination of VOC and NOx reductions. No reductions from the proposed control measures in the Plan are needed for progress purposes.

TABLE 8-3 Percent VOC and NOx Reductions from the 2002 Baseline to meet RFP Requirements Milestone Year VOC NOx* CAA** 2008 12.0 6.0 18.0 2011 16.0 11.0 27.0 2014 19.0 17.0 36.0 2017 20.0 25.0 45.0 * The percent NOx reduction needed to meet CAA percentage reduction targets ** The percent VOC and NOx reductions must equal the CAA percent reduction requirements listed here.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 8-4A Summary of Reasonable Further Progress Calculations for the Coachella Valley - VOC ROW CALCULATION STEP a 2008 2011 2014 2017 1 2002 Base Year Emissions b 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 2 Required Reduction (%) c 18% 27% 36% 45% 3 Emission Reductions Needed d 4.1 6.1 8.1 10.1 4 Target Level e 18.4 16.4 14.4 12.4 5 Projected Baseline f 19.9 18.9 18.3 18.1 6 Percent Reduction Achieved (%) g 12% 16% 19% 20% a Units are in tons per day (summer) unless otherwise noted; b Contains only anthropogenic emissions; c 3% per year (total VOC reductions from 2002 baseline year); d [(Row 1) x (Row 2)]/100; e (Row 1) ? (Row 3); f Projected baseline emissions shown in Appendix III taking into account existing rules and projected growth.; g [(1-(Row 5)/(Row 1))] x 100;

25 20 15 Emissions (tpd) 10 5 0 18.4 19.9 18.9 18.3 18.1 16.4 14.4 12.4

2008 2011 2014 2017 Milestone Year Target Level Projected Baseline* FIGURE 8-7A Reasonable Further Progress ? VOC

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 8-4B Summary of Reasonable Further Progress Calculations for the Coachella Valley - NOx ROW CALCULATION STEP a 2008 2011 2014 2017 1 2002 Base Year Emissions b 51.9 51.9 51.9 51.9 2 Required Reduction (%) c 6% 11% 17% 25% 3 Emission Reductions Needed d 3.1 5.7 8.8 12.9 4 Target Level e 48.8 46.2 43.1 39.0 5 Projected Baseline f 46.5 38.5 31.6 26.5 6 Percent Reduction Achieved (%) g 10% 26% 39% 49% a Units are in tons per day (summer) unless otherwise noted; b Contains only anthropogenic emissions; c 3% per year (total VOC reductions from 2002 baseline year); d [(Row 1) x (Row 2)]/100; e (Row 1) ? (Row 3); f Projected baseline emissions shown in Appendix III taking into account existing rules and projected growth.; g [(1-(Row 5)/(Row 1)) x 100]

60 50 40 30 Emissions (tpd) 20 10 0 48.8 46.5 46.2 43.1 38.539.0 31.6 26.5

2008 2011 2014 2017 Milestone Year Target Level Projected Baseline* FIGURE 8-7B Reasonable Further Progress ? NOx

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY BUDGETS The 2007 AQMP sets forth the strategy for achieving the federal 8-hour ozone, for the Coachella Valley Planning Area. For on-road mobile sources, Section 176(c) of the CAA requires that transportation plans and programs do not cause or contribute to any new violation of a standard, increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation, or delay the timely attainment of the air quality standards. Therefore, on-road mobile sources must "conform" to the attainment demonstration contained in the SIP.

U.S. EPA's transportation conformity rule, found in 40 CFR parts 51 and 93, details the requirements for establishing motor vehicle emissions budgets in SIPs for the purpose of ensuring the conformity of transportation plans and programs with the SIP attainment demonstration. The on-road motor vehicle emissions budgets act as a "ceiling" for future on-road mobile source emissions. Exceedances of the budget indicate an inconsistency with the SIP, and could jeopardize the flow of federal funds for transportation improvements in the region. As required by the CAA, a comparison of regional on-road mobile source emissions to these budgets will occur during the periodic updates of regional transportation plans and programs.

The on-road motor vehicle emissions estimates for the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP were analyzed using EMFAC2007 for estimating on-road mobile source emissions in conjunction with the most recent motor vehicle activity data from SCAG. The ozone emissions budgets for VOC and NOx are derived from the summer planning inventory and the reductions from defined new measures in the 2007 SIP. These budgets reflect existing control programs and new commitments for technology and transportation control measures.

This approach is consistent with U.S. EPA's transportation conformity rule, which provides that if emissions budgets rely on new control measures, these measures should be specified in the SIP and the emissions reductions from each control measure should be quantified and supported by agency commitments for adoption and implementation schedules. Moreover, the rule provides that conformity analyses by transportation agencies may not take credit for measures which have not been implemented unless the measures are "projects, programs, or activities" in the SIP supported by written implementation commitments by the responsible agencies (62 FR 43780, 40 CFR 93, subpart A).

The emissions budgets for ozone are shown in Table 8-5 and are provided for the attainment year (i.e., 2017). However, since transportation analyses are needed beyond the attainment dates, the carrying capacities for ozone attainment demonstration also serve as the budgets for future years (e.g., 2030 for ozone). Ozone precursor emissions from motor vehicles are projected to continue declining through these extended periods.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 8-5 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets: 8-hour Ozone (Summer Planning - Tons Per Day)* 2017 VOC Baseline Inventory** 5.3 New Defined State Measures*** 1.1 Mobile Source Emissions Budgets**** 5 2017 NOx Baseline Inventory 17.2 New Defined State Measures*** 7.2 Mobile Source Emissions Budgets**** 10 **The baseline inventory for 2017 has been adjusted to reflect changes to the SCAG transportation demand model made subsequent to SCAG's submission of model activity data to the District in April 2006 *** Based on CARB's Proposed State Strategy for California's 2007 SIP and the District staff's proposed measures affecting on-road mobile categories w/o long-term strategies **** Rounded up to the nearest ton.

CONCLUSIONS District will voluntarily request that EPA re-designate the Coachella Valley portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin from ?Serious? non-attainment to ?Severe-15? and extend the attainment date of the 8-hour ozone standard to 2018. The District's proposed control strategy includes two components: a strategy for the South Coast Air Basin as described in Chapter 4 and control of locally generated emissions in the Coachella Valley via regulations at the state and federal level. CAMx simulations of the ozone episodes using the 2017 controlled emissions indicate that the federal 8-hour standard will be attained in the Coachella Valley by 2018.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP CHAPTER 9 CONTINGENCY MEASURES

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP INTRODUCTION The federal CAA requires contingency measures to be implemented in the event of failure to meet milestone emission reduction targets (i.e., RFP) and/or failure to attain the standard by the attainment date (i.e., 2014 for PM2.5, 2023 for ozone). In providing inadequate progress in meeting the interim emission reduction goals or failing to meet attainment, the District must take action to bring forward measures that are scheduled for later adoption or implementation, or to implement certain "contingency" control measures. These contingency measures are control options that could be instituted in addition to the AQMP control measures. Both state and federal Clean Air Acts require that district plans include contingency measures.

CONTINGENCY MEASURES The Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP contains 4 contingency control measures (Table 9-1). Although implementation of these measures is expected to reduce emissions, there are issues that limit the viability of these measures as AQMP control measures at this time. Issues surrounding these measures include, but are not limited to the availability of District resources to implement and enforce the measure, cost- effectiveness of the measure, potential adverse environmental impacts, potential economic impacts, effectiveness of emission reductions, and availability of methods to quantify emission reductions. A complete discussion of the control measures is included in Appendix IV-A, Section 2; however a summary is provided in this chapter.

TABLE 9-1 Contingency Control Measures AQMP Title Measure CTY-01 Offsetting The Potential Emission Increase Due to the Change In Natural Gas Specifications [All Pollutants] CTY-02 Emission Charges of $5,000 Per Ton For Stationary Sources With Potential To Emit Over 10 Tons Per Year [NOx, VOC] CTY-03 Banning Pre-Tier 3 Off-Road Diesel Engines During High Pollution Days [NOx, PM, VOC] CTY-04 Accelerated Implementation of CARB's Mobile Source Control Measures [All Pollutants]

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP CTY-01 ? OFFSETTING THE POTENTIAL EMISSION INCREASE DUE TO THE CHANGE IN NATURAL GAS SPECIFICATIONS [ALL POLLUTANTS] The proposed control measure proposes to offset any potential emission increases at RECLAIM facilities due to the introduction of natural gas with a Wobbe Index greater than 1360. For further information, refer to Control Measure CMB-04. The emission reductions, costs and cost effectiveness associated with this contingency control measure have not yet been determined.

CTY-02 ? EMISSION CHARGES OF $5,000 PER TON FOR STATIONARY SOURCES WITH POTENTIAL TO EMIT OVER 10 TONS PER YEAR [NOx, VOC] The l990 federal Clean Air Act requires that the AQMP include all control measures, means or techniques, including economic incentives such as fees, as may be necessary to reach attainment. Further, the Act requires that all stationary sources of VOC or NOx emissions (greater than 10 tons per year) in an extreme nonattainment area that has failed to attain the ambient air quality standard for ozone pay a fee as a penalty for such failure (Title I, Section 185). This control measure proposes that if the federal ambient air standards are not met by the year 2024, the District shall impose an emissions fee of $5,000 per ton of any pollutant emitted by each major source in excess of 80 percent of the sources baseline emissions. The fee rate will be adjusted annually to reflect increases in the consumer price index. The fee shall be paid for each calendar year after the year 2024 and until the area is redesignated as an ozone attainment area. This fee will be in addition to the annual emission fee required by District Rule 301.

CTY-03 ? BANNING PRE-TIER 3 OFF-ROAD DIESEL ENGINES DURING HIGH POLLUTANT DAYS [NOX, PM, VOC] CARB is currently proposing to establish declining fleet average emission levels for off- road equipment over 25 horsepower (Control Measure ARB-OFRD-04) and CARB staff is currently in the process of developing a statewide regulation to implement this measure. The District is also proposing a complementary strategy for this source category to achieve additional reductions (Control Measure SC-OFFRD-01). CARB control measure can be augmented to include replacement of all Tier 0 through Tier 2 off-road engines with Tier 3 or Tier 4 engines. This measure specifically proposes to ban the use of pre-Tier 3 off-road diesel engines after 2023 during high pollution days should the Basin fail to meet the 8-hour ozone standard.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP CTY-04 ? ACCELERATED IMPLEMENTATION OF CARB'S MOBILE SOURCE CONTROL MEASURES This contingency control measure proposes to accelerate the adoption and implementation dates of the mobile source control measures by one year. Upon determining that an RFP milestone target has not been reached, or the air basin fails to demonstrate attainment with the PM2.5 standard by 2015 or the ozone standard by 2024, the District will request that CARB proceed with accelerating the adoption and/or implementation of the remaining control measures by one year for those measures that have not yet been adopted or fully implemented, to the extent feasible.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP INTRODUCTION This Chapter presents additional analyses which are not required under law to be included in this draft AQMP, but are presented here for informational purposes because they have significant future implications to the region's ability to reach clean air. Specifically this chapter provides a first look at projected ozone concentrations b eyond the 2010 attainment year and the impact of the new federal 24-hour PM2.5 ambient air quality standard.

A FIRST LOOK AT THE YEAR 2030 OZONE AIR QUALITY With continued growth in the South Coast Air Basin, concerns have been raised whether the South Coast Air Basin can maintain the federal ozone air quality standard beyond 2021. As such, an ozone air quality analysis for 2030 was performed. Data on the projected growth in the Basin and surrounding areas were provided by SCAG.

The future year (2030) ozone air quality projections suggest that additional emissions reductions will be required to offset growth to maintain the 8-hour ozone standard. Mobile source emissions projections through 2030 indicate that continued reductions in VOC, NOx and CO will occur as newer vehiles are introduced. Mobile source VOC and NOx emissions will be reduced by about 25 and 15 percent respectively. CO emissions will be reduced by roughlt 15 percent, assuring continued maintenance of the federal standard. Nominal growth is projected in the area source category that will partially act to offset the mobile source VOC reductions by 2030. Since the projected growth in this category is small, it is not expected to reverse the trend of lowering ambient ozone concentrations.

PROPOSAL TO CONSIDER NEW FEDERAL AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR OZONE The CAA requires U.S. EPA to periodically review the existing air quality standards in light of the findings of new and emerging epidemiololgical and health studies. As part of this process, EPA is considering modifications to the current 8-hour average ozone standard of 0.08 ppm which is based on a three year average of the 4th highest value at an air monitoring station. No formal proposal has been relased to the pubic to date, however, it is anticipated that a recommendations will be put forth in the Spring of 2007. The discussions in the proposal would involve the structure of the standard that could potentially result in an equivalent lowering of the standard as it exists to below 0.08 ppm. Should the 8-hour ozone standard be lowered, it will require a SIP revision with a new attainment date. The attainment strategy would likely call for further NOx reductions.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP NEW FEDERAL AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR FINE PARTICULATES In September 2006, U.S. EPA revised the national ambient air quality standards for particulate matter.

As part of the requirements of the CAA, every five years the U.S. EPA must review the ambient air quality standards and propose revisions, if necessary, to ?protect public health with an adequate margin of safety,? based on the latest, best-available science. This review process includes a comprehensive evaluation of the latest health studies; a redrafting, if appropriate, of the relevant pollutant criteria document; and a staff report recommending the position of the U.S. EPA staff relative to the air quality standards. Further, these documents and U.S. EPA staff recommendation are reviewed by a panel of independent experts authorized by the CAA, the Clean Air Science Advisory Committee (CASAC).

In promulgating the new standards, U.S. EPA followed the elaborate review process described above, which took several years to complete. The evaluation of thousands of peer-reviewed scientific studies led to the conclusion that existing standards for the two pollutants, ozone and particulates, were not adequately protective of public health and resulted in the promulgation of the new standards. The studies indicated that for PM2.5PM2.5, short-term exposures at levels below 24-hour standard of 65 ?g/m3 were found to cause acute health effects, including asthma attacks, breathing and respiratory problems. With regards to the annual PM2.5PM2.5standard debate focused on a proposal to lower the standard from the current value of by as much as three ?g/m3.

The debate also extended to coarse particulate matter. The proposal revoked the annual PM10 standard and replaced it with an annual PM10-2.5PM10-2.5 standard. In addition, the 24-hour PM10 standard would remain in effect for selected urban areas until implementation of a new 24-hour average PM10-2.5PM10-2.5 standard could be finalized.

A brief summary of the effects associated with these pollutant exposures at levels observable in Southern California is presented. A more detailed discussion of health effects is provided in Appendix I.

The major categories of adverse health effects associated with PM2.5PM2.5 include: increase in mortality associated with acute and chronic exposures; exacerbation of preexisting respiratory and cardiovascular diseases leading to an increase in hospital admissions and emergency room visits; school absences; work loss days and restricted activity days; changes in lung function and structure; and altered lung defense mechanisms.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP A review and statistical analysis of recent population studies published on acute adverse effects of PM2.5PM2.5 indicates that an incremental increase can lead to a significant increase in both mortality and morbidity risks. The elderly, people with preexisting respiratory and/or cardiovascular disease(s) and children appear to be most susceptible to the effects of PM2.5PM2.5. These findings suggest that even when an area meets the existing NAAQS for PM2.5PM2.5 the community is likely to continue to have the adverse impact from ambient PM2.5PM2.5 exposures.

The focus on the health effect of particulate matter exposure has moved through the years from epidemiological assessments of total supended particulates to the impacts from the respireable portions less than 10 micons in size. More and more studies confirm the impacts of both PM110PM10 and PM2.5PM2.5 on health with greater focus on smaller particles. Current research is focusing on the health impacts of ultrafine particulate of aerodynamic diameter less than 1 micron. An extensive discussion on ultrafine particulate its characterisitics, health impacts and prospect for future control is presented in Chapter 11 of this document.

On September 21, 2006, U.S. EPA signed the ?Final Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle Pollution (Particulate Matter).? Through this action U.S. EPA established a lower 24-hour average standard for the fine fraction of particulates. The new 24-hour average PM2.5PM2.5 standard is set at 35 ?g/m3. No changes were made to existing annual PM2.5PM2.5 standard which remains at 15 ?g/m3. The annual component of the standard was set to provide protection against typical day- to-day exposures as well as longer-term exposures, while the daily component protects against more extreme short-term events. For the new 24-hour PM2.5PM2.5 standard, the form of the standard continues to be based on the 98th percentile of 24-hour PM2.5PM2.5 concentrations measured in a year (averaged over three years) at the monitoring site with the highest measured values in an area. This form of the standard will reduce the impact of a single high exposure event that may be due to unusual meteorological conditions and thus provide a more stable basis for effective control programs.

EPA's action immediately revoked the annual PM110PM10 standard, yet retained the 24- hour average standard at the current level (150 ?g/m3). No action was taken to establish either an annual or short-term ?coarse particulate- PM10-2.5PM10-2.5 standard.

While retaining the 24-hour PM110PM10 standard, U.S. EPA has also retained the current form of the 24-hour PM10 standard set at 150 ?g/m3. not to be exceeded more than once per year averaged over a three year period.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Implementation of the New Federal Standard It is expected that EPA will designate the new 24-hour PM2.5PM2.5 nonattainment areas by Novemeber 2009, and they will become effective April 2010. A SIP revision will be due to EPA by April, 2013 demonstrating an attainment date of April, 2015 with a possible extension to April, 2020. The modifications made to the 24-hour PM2.5PM2.5 standard will not change the planning requirements for the 2007 AQMP attainment demonstration. However, the plan should be designed with the new standard in mind with respect to the need for future controls. The existing standard of 65 ?g/m3 standard that will remain in effect until 2010.

Assessment of the New Federal 24-Hour PM2.5 Standard A comparison of the current PM2.5PM2.5 standards, the PM110PM10 24-hour standard and the new 24-hour PM2.5PM2.5 standard for 2005, 2015 and 2021 are shown in Table 10-1. The 2005 values are derived from the measurements sampled through the routine Basin particulate air monitoring. The 2005 design values are presented to assess compliance to the federal standards. The 2015 and 2021 PM2.5PM2.5 and PM110PM10 values are estimated from the particulate modeling applications (discussed in Chapter 5 and Appendix V).

While the 2005 maximum 24-hour avererage PM2.5PM2.5 concentration exceeded the 65 ?g/m3 threshold, the design value for the Basin based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile observation met the standard. When the 2005 maximum 24-hour average concentration and 3-year design value is compared to the new standard, the concentration exceeds the threshold by 279 percent and the design value by 85 percent. The 2005 Basin annual average PM2.5PM2.5 maximum concentraion of 21.0 ?g/m3 was 40 above the federal standard and contributed to a design value of 22.6 ?g/m3 which was 51 percent above the standard. The maximum observed 24-hour average PM110PM10 concentration in 2005 was approximately 80 percent of the federal standard and the 3- year average standard is met.

As projected in 2015, the current 24-hour PM2.5PM2.5 and PM110PM10 average and annual PM2.5PM2.5 standard will be met. The estimated 24-hour average 2015 design value of 57 ?g/m3 will exceed the new PM2.5PM2.5 standard by 2963 percent. The current simulations project a similar profile for particulate air quality in 20201. The projected 24-hour PM2.5PM2.5 design value is expected to nominally exceed the new standard PM2.5PM2.5 by 649 percent.

It is also important in looking into the future to understand the significant components of PM2.5PM2.5 as projected for the years 2015 and 20201. The 2005 annual average PM2.5PM2.5 mass is comprised of approximately 5760 percent ammonium, nitrate and sulfate. Figure 10-1 shows the relative contributions of these components to the total annual mass in 2015 and the 24-hour maximum concentration in 2021. Ammonium,

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP nitrate and sulfate are reduced increase slightly to approximately 463 percent in 2015. due to the focus on reductions of NOx and SOx emissions. Other's, including crustal metals, sea salts, bonded water, organic and elemental carbon are percentage-wise greater lesser contributors to the total mass in 2015. By 2021, the estimated 24-hour average maximum PM2.5PM2.5 estimated maximuim concentration will continue to be mostly (67 percent of the mass) comprised of ammonium, sulfate and nitrate, (64 percent of the mass), despite the significant NOx and SOx emissions reductions. The other's category continues to will contribute about 2112 percent to the total mass. In essence, Bbackground or boundary conditions will become very important to future year standard attainment for both annual and episodic (24-hour) basis.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 10-1 Comparison of Federal Particulate Matter Standards Standard Observed Max Value (g/m3) % above Design Value (g/m3) % above Std Predicted Design (g/m3) % above Std Predicted Design (g/m3) % above Std 2005 2005 2015 Controlled 2021 Controlled Current 24-hour PM110PM10 (150 g/m3) 131 Met 117 Met ~92 111 Met ~77 ~93 Met Current Annual PM2.5PM2.5 (15 g/m3) 21.0 40 22.6 51 15.0 < 15.0 Met 15.0 < Met Current 24-hour PM2.5PM2.5 (65 g/m3) 133 104 64.8 Met 45 57 Met 37 51 Met New 24-hr Annual PM2.5PM2.5 (35 g/m3) 133 279 64.8 85 45 57 29 63 37 52 6 49

CALIFORNIA PM AIR QUALITY STANDARDS On June 2002, CARB also adopted stricter standards for particulate matter that affect both the corse as well as fine particulate fraction. The recently adopted standards reduced the PM110PM10 annual average standard from 30 microgram per cubic meter to 20 micrograms per cubic meter and retained the 24-hour PM10 standard of 50 micrograms per cubic meter. The PM2.5PM2.5 annual average standard was set at 12 micrograms per cubic meter. The California standards are one third the federal PM110PM10 24-hour standard, 80 percent the federal annual PM2.5PM2.5 threshold.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Obviously, achieving these standards poses an even greater challenge than meeting the new federal 8-hour ozone and PM2.5PM2.5 standards.

(a) Estimated 2015 Annual Average PM2.5 Design Value (15.0 ug/m3) 14% 18%

11% 13% 34% SO4 NO3 NH4 OC EC Others 11% (b) Estimated 2021 Maximum 24-Hour Average PM2.5 Design Value (57 ug/m3)

12% 28% 9% 15% 10% SO4 NO3 NH4 OC EC Others 26% FIGURE 10-1 PM2.5PM2.5 Components in the (a) estimated 2015 Annual Average Design Value and (b) estimated 2021 Maximum 24-hour Average Design Value.

CHAPTER 12 REQUEST TO REDESIGNATE THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN AS EXTREME NONATTAINMENT AND THE COACHELLA VALLEY PORTION OF THE SALTON SEA AIR BASIN AS SEVERE-15

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP INTRODUCTION The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act created a classification scheme for ozone nonattainment areas based on the degree to which their pollution exceeded the national ambient air quality standard for ozone, which was 0.12 parts per million on an hourly basis. The classification was based on the area's ?design value,? or highest one-hour level of ozone experienced in the design year. Areas with a design value of 0.280 parts per million and above were classified as ?extreme? nonattainment areas and the South Coast Air Basin was the only area in the country classified as ?extreme.? Section 182(e)(5) of the CAA provides areas designated as ?extreme? to rely on emission reductions from measures that anticipate the development of new technologies or improving of existing control technologies. These long-term measures are often referred to as ?black box? measures and go beyond the short-term measures that are based on known and demonstrated technologies. The severity of the Basin ozone problem and the needed reductions in precursor emissions has required the AQMP and its revisions to rely on the use of long-term ?black-box? measures to demonstrate attainment of the federal standard.

Concurrently, the classification scheme for ozone nonattainment specified in the CAA, designated the Coachella Valley portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin as ?severe-17? setting an attainment date of 2007, three years sooner than the Basin. The Coachella Valley has limited local emissions and is located directly downwind from the Basin. The area is impacted by overwhelming pollutant transport from the Basin. While local emissions controls benefit Coachella Valley air quality, the area must rely on emissions controls being implemented upwind to demonstrate improved air quality and attainment of the federal standard.

Through the 2004 revisions to the federal ozone standard, EPA, promulgated the current standard for ozone at 0.08 parts per million measured over an eight-hour period. Using a revised classifications scheme, the South Coast Air Basin was classified as ?severe-17? for the eight-hour ozone standard, the second highest classification possible. EPA also revoked the one-hour ozone standard, effective June 2005. Since that time, the South Coast Air Basin has been classified as ?severe-17? for the eight hour ozone standard, and the ?extreme? classification for the one-hour standard is no longer in effect. Under the ?severe-17? classification, the area has seventeen years to reach attainment. Thus the Basin's current attainment year for the eight-hour ozone standard is 2021. However, under its current non-attainment classification, the District is prohibited from relying on ?black-box? measures to demonstrate attainment.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Similarly, the Coachella Valley was designated as serious nonattainment for the eight-hour ozone with an attainment date set at 2013, eight years sooner than the Basin. The earlier attainment date created an inconsistency in the timing of attainment between Basin attainment and the Coachella Valley which is directly reliant upon the Basin control strategy being implemented. CAMx ozone model simulations conducted as part of the attainment demonstration for the Coachella Valley show that even with implementation of the aggressive control strategy proposed for the upwind Basin to attain the federal PM2.5 standard by 2015, including all feasible emissions reductions that can be implemented by 2012, that ozone air quality in the downwind area will not sufficiently improve to meet the federal standard by 2013.

REQUEST TO REDESIGNATE THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN AS EXTREME NONATTAINMENT Section 181(b)(3) of the CAA, ?voluntary reclassification,? provides that ?the EPA Administrator shall grant the request of any State to reclassify a nonattainment area in that State in accordance with table 1 of subsection (a) to a higher classification.? The voluntarily request for reclassification to a more severe designation is commonly referred to as a ?bump-up.? Through the 2007 AQMP and accompanying Resolution of the Governing Board adopting the 2007 AQMP, the District is formally requesting CARB to submit a request to EPA for a voluntary reclassification of the South Coast Air Basin from ?Severe-17? to ?Extreme? nonattainment for ozone and that the EPA Administrator grant such request upon receipt.. Through this request, the District is also seeking an extension of the ozone attainment date from June 15, 2021 to June 15, 2024.

REQUEST TO REDESIGNATE THE COACHELLA VALLEY PORTION OF THE SALTON SEA AIR BASIN SEVERE-15 NONATTAINMENT Through this document the Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP and the Resolution of the Governing Board, the District is formally requesting CARB to submit a request to EPA for a voluntary reclassification of the Coachella Valley Portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin from ?Serious? to ?Severe-15? nonattainment for ozone and that the EPA Administrator grant such request upon receipt.. Through this request, the District is also seeking an extension of the ozone attainment date from June 15, 2012 to June 15, 2018.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Under its current non-attainment classification, the District is prohibited from relying on ?black-box? measures to demonstrate attainment. The regional ozone modeling analyses presented in Chapter V, demonstrate that without the use of the ?black-box? measures, the 2024 maximum projected ozone design for the Basin would be, approximately 100 ppb, or 120 percent of the standard. Additional emissions reductions through 2023 are required to demonstrate ozone attainment.

Table 12-1 illustrates the issue further. Despite the very aggressive ozone attainment strategy defined in Chapter 4, emissions reductions identified that come from enforceable commitments to develop, adopt, and implement new control measures account for approximately 58 percent of the reductions needed (NOx and VOC reductions combined) to meet the Basin's carrying capacity. Therefore, for the remaining 42 percent of the reductions needed, the ozone attainment strategy must rely on the not fully defined/or ?black- box? measures.

TABLE 12-1 Emission Reductions Needed for Ozone Attainment Reductions Preliminary Final Draft (tons per day) VOC NOx % Total Overall 116 389 100 Short-Term 88 204 58 Black Box 28 185 42

Converting these ?black-box? reductions to short-term measures represents unique and complex challenges to this region and warrants additional time for development and implementation of defined strategies with adequate and sustainable funding.

Through the comprehensive attainment strategy outlined in Chapter 4, the District has attempted to limit the size of the ?black box? to the extent feasible

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP and is committed through the successive revision to the AQMP to further minimize the size of the ?black box? and ultimately completely eliminate it.

As previously stated, with an aggressive strategy proposed for the South Coast Air Basin it is still not soon enough for the Coachella Valley to meet the ozone standard by 2013, where the ozone problem is predominately a transport issue from the upwind South Coast Air Basin. Consequently, Ozone air quality will not meet the federal standard in the Coachella Valley until 2018 through the implementation of the Basin plan.

IMPLICATIONS OF FAILURE TO DEMONSTRATE ATTAINMENT If the region is unable to submit a SIP revision demonstrating attainment by the ?severe-17? deadline without using ?black box? measures, EPA must impose sanctions on the region. The first sanction, imposed after 18 months, is an offset ratio of 2 to 1 for major stationary sources (25 TPD or more). The second sanction (after 24 months) is withholding of all federal transportation funding for the region, except funding for transportation control measures and safety projects. This amounts to billions of dollars. Finally, if the region cannot submit an approvable attainment demonstration, EPA must within 24 months adopt a ?federal implementation plan? (FIP) demonstrating attainment by the severe-17 deadline. The FIP likewise could not rely on ?black box? measures, and thus would likely impose draconian measures on mobile and stationary sources in the region.

District staff recommends a voluntary bump-up to ?extreme? status as part of the 2007 AQMP submittal to the U.S.EPA. The bump-up would provide the basis for an approved plan for this region and implementation of short-term measures while providing an opportunity for a close collaboration among all agencies, industry, environmental organizations, and the public to define and implement these long-term measures as expeditiously as possible.

The implications to the Coachella Valley of submitting a SIP that does not demonstrate attainment are similar: sanctions may be imposed. While the ?bump-up? does not provide the use of long term control measures, it does provide the needed extension of the attainment date to make attainment feasible.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP IMPLICATIONS TO STATIONARY SOURCES Concerns were raised regarding the potential adverse effects on stationary sources from such a ?bump-up.? The primary impacts to stationary sources would be on the threshold definition of a major source in New Source Review (NSR) and Title V where the definition would be lowered from 25 tons per year (VOC and NOx) to 10 tons per year. Until July of 2005, the Basin was classified as ?extreme? and the corresponding definition of major source for NSR and Title V was set at 10 tons per year. Staff concludes that New Source Review requirements would not be affected, based on both state and federal law provisions requiring AQMD to keep in place its existing NSR program, which uses ?extreme? area thresholds. However, Title V permit programs could be affected.

Title V does not impose any new emission reduction requirements on the facility, but merely incorporates all existing requirements into the facility permit. However, the Title V permit includes certain additional monitoring, recording and recordkeeping requirements that may not have been included in the facility's pre-existing permits. Absent a bump-up, the AQMD could amend its Title V permit program to include only sources meeting the ?severe? area threshold (25 tpy VOC and NOx). The program currently applies to all sources meeting the ?extreme? threshold (10 tpy). Such a change could save considerable staff resources in the permitting program, as well as unknown amounts of facility resources.

The ramifications of not being able to demonstrate attainment are severe. If AQMD does not submit an approvable ozone attainment demonstration by June of this year, EPA is required to implement sanctions and a federal implementation plan, beginning 18 months after disapproving the AQMD's plan. Staff believes that Section 182(e)(5) ?black box? measures are needed to demonstrate attainment, such that the benefits of the bump-up in avoiding sanctions outweigh the detriments in the way of staff resources and effects on facilities.

The impact to sources in the Coachella Valley from a ?bump-up? would not significantly affect Title V facilities because the existing threshold under the 1-hour ozone standard had a threshold of 25 tons per year, while any ?bump- up? from ?serious? to ?severe-17? would keep the threshold at 25 tons per year. In addition, the New Source Review offset ratio would similarly stay constant at 1.2 to 1.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP SUMMARY The District is requesting that CARB formally submit a request to EPA for voluntary redesignation (bump-up) of the South Coast Air Basin from a designation of ?severe-17? to ?extreme? for 8-hour average ozone and modify the attainment date to June 15, 2024.

The District is also requesting that CARB formally submit a request to EPA for voluntary redesignation of the Coachella Valley Portion of the Air Basin from a designation of ?serious? to ?severe-15? for 8-hour average ozone and modify the attainment date to June 15, 2018.

The reclassifications will ? enable the use of long-term ?black-box? control measures for the South ? ensure that the ozone attainment demonstration meets the federal standard; and ? alleviate the risk of potential federal sanctions be imposed.

While the reclassifications may eliminate some potential savings in reporting requirements, the benefits of the bump-up in avoiding sanctions outweigh the detriments in the way of staff resources and effects on facilities.

PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE DRAFT 2007 AQMP APPENDIX II CURRENT AIR QUALITY

Proposed Modifications to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality (Table of Contents revised for the added PM2.5 tables and corresponding changes in the table numbers.) ATTACHMENT LIST: Table A-1: Ambient Air Quality Standards Table A-2: Episode Criteria Table A-3: Air Monitoring Stations and Source/Receptor Areas Figure A-1: South Coast Air Basin and Adjoining Areas of Salton Sea Air Basin Table A-4: Ozone - Number of Days Exceeding the Federal Standard (0.08 ppm, 8-Hour Average) Table A-5: Ozone - Number of Days Exceeding the Federal Standard (0.12 ppm, 1-Hour Average) Table A-6: Ozone - Number of Days of First/Second Stage Episodes, 1990-2005 Table A-7: Ozone - Annual Maximum 1-Hour, ppm, 1976-2005 Table A-8: Suspended Particulates (PM10), Annual Arithmetic Mean, 3 g/m , 1990-2005 Table A-9: Suspended Particulates (PM10) - Percent of Sampling Days Exceeding State Standard and Federal Standards, 1990-2005 Table A-10: Suspended Particulates (PM10), Annual Maximum 24-Hour 3 Average, g/ m , 1990-2005 3 Table A-11-: Suspended Particles (PM2.5), Annual Arithmetic Mean, g/m , 1999-2005 Table A-12: Suspended Particulates (PM2.5) - Percent of Sampling Days 3 Exceeding Federal Standard (65 g/m ), 1999-2000 Table A-13: Suspended Particulates (PM2.5) - Percent of Sampling Days 3 Exceeding the New Federal Standard (35 g/m ), 1999-2000 Table A-14: Suspended Particulates (PM2.5), Annual Maximum 24-Hour 3 Average, g/m , 1999-2005 Table A-15: Suspended Particulates (PM2.5) - 24-Hour Average 98th Percentile 3 Concentration, g/ m , 1999-2005

Proposed Modifications to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality Table A-161: Carbon Monoxide - Number of Days Maximum 8-Hour Average Exceeded the Federal Standard, 1990-2005 Table A-172: Carbon Monoxide - Number of Days Maximum 8-Hour Average Exceeded the Federal Alert Level, 1990-2005 Table A-183: Carbon Monoxide, Annual Maximum 8-Hour Average, ppm, 1990-2005 Table A-194: Nitrogen Dioxide - Annual Average of All Hours, pphm, 1990-2005 Table A-2015: Nitrogen Dioxide - Number of Days 1-Hour Average Exceeded the State Standard, 1990-2005 Table A-2116: Nitrogen Dioxide, Annual Maximum 1-Hour, ppm, 1990-2005 Table A-2217: Sulfur Dioxide - Annual Average, pphm, 1990-2005 Table A-2318: Sulfur Dioxide, Annual Maximum 1-Hour Average, ppm, 1990-2005 Table A-2419: Sulfate - Percent of Sampling Days Exceeding the State Standard, 1990-2005 Table A-250: Sulfate - Maximum 24-Hour Averages, 1990-2005 3 Table A-261: Lead - Highest Calendar Quarter Mean, g/m , 1990-2005 3 Table A-272: Lead - Highest Monthly Averages, g/m , 1990-2005

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality

(Corrected typo, the word ?ozone? was deleted from the first paragraph of page II-S- 1.) SUMMARY This appendix contains a summary of the year 2005 air quality in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) and the portion of Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) monitored by the SCAQMD. The Basin includes Orange County and the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. For those pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment of the federal standards (ozone, O3; PM10; and PM2.5), air quality trends through the year 2005 are presented. Chapter 1 of this appendix presents brief descriptions of the pollutant emissions in the Basin, ambient air quality standards, and criteria air pollutant concentrations and trends in the region. Chapters 2 and 3 present a description of each of the criteria pollutant's properties, current concentration compared to the state and federal standards, and spatial, seasonal, and diurnal variations in the Basin and SSAB.

In 2005, the SCAQMD monitored concentrations of air pollutants at 34 locations in southern California's Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Pollutant concentrations exceeded the federal and state standards for ozone and particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5). Standards for carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, sulfate, and lead were not exceeded. In the year 2005, the U.S. location with the highest number of days exceeding the federal ozone standard was located in the Basin.

South Coast Air Basin In 2005, there were a total of 89 days on which the federal standards for 8-hour ozone or 24-hour PM2.5 were exceeded at one or more Basin locations. (The other criteria pollutants did not exceed the daily federal standards.) The number of days exceeding the federal ozone standard varied widely by area, from zero to 69 days, depending on location. Exceedances were fewest at the coast, increasing to a maximum in the Basin's Central San Bernardino Mountains and inland valleys. The Central San Bernardino Mountains area exceeded the federal 8-hour average ozone standard most frequently (69 days). The previous federal 1-hour ozone standard was exceeded on 18 days. The more stringent 1-hour and 8-hour average state standards were exceeded on 80 and 102 days, respectively, in the same area. The highest 1-hour average and 8-hour average ozone concentration recorded in 2005 (0.182 ppm and 0.145 ppm) were 146 percent and 171 percent of the federal 1-hour and 8-hour standards, respectively.

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality (Corrected typo on page II-2-3, ?1-hour? replaced ?8-hour? ozone standard.) and fight infection. People with respiratory diseases, children, the elderly, and people who exercise heavily are more susceptible to the effects of ozone.

Plants are sensitive to ozone at concentrations well below the health-based standards and ozone is responsible for significant crop damage. Ozone is also responsible for damage to forests and other ecosystems.

8-Hour Ozone Standard The federal 1-hour ozone standard was revoked by the U.S. EPA and replaced by the 8- hour average ozone standard. Studies have shown that even relatively low concentrations of ozone, if continued for several hours, can significantly reduce lung function in normal healthy people. In July 1997, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) adopted an 8-hour average federal ozone standard with a level of 0.08 ppm. The 8-hour ozone standard is more stringent than the 1-hour standard and provides greater protection to public health than the 1-hour standard. It will help protect people who spend a significant amount of time working or playing outdoors -- a group that is particularly vulnerable to the effects of ozone. CARB has also established a new 8-hour average state ozone standard of 0.07 ppm effective May 2005. The state 1-hour ozone standard continues to remain in effect.

The effect of the adopted 8-hour ozone standard on this region's attainment of federal ozone standards has been evaluated by comparing the number of exceedances of the previous 1-hour standard (0.12 ppm 1-hour average) with the number of exceedances of 8-hour average concentrations of 0.08 ppm. The number of exceedances in different areas in the Basin and SSAB vary; however, the federal 8-hour ozone standard level is exceeded more frequently in the inland valleys and adjacent mountains where high ozone concentrations normally occur.

Current Ozone Air Quality In 2005, the District measured ozone concentrations at 29 regular ambient monitoring locations. The maximum 1-hour average and 8-hour ozone concentrations in the Basin in 2005 (0.182 ppm and 0.145) were 146 percent and 171 percent of the federal 1-hour and 8-hour standards, and 192 percent and 193 percent of the state standards, respectively. The federal 1-hour 8-hour ozone standard was exceeded at one or more Basin locations on a total of 30 days, the 8-hour standard was exceeded on 84 days. The California state 1-hour and 8-hour standards were exceeded on 102 days and 120 days, respectively. The stage 1 episode level (1-hour average ? 0.20 ppm) was not exceeded anywhere in the Basin for the second consecutive year, but the health advisory level (0.15 ppm) was exceeded on 11 days.

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality (Replaced Figure 2-2 on page II-2-5 with the correct figure showing the number of days exceeding federal 1-hour ozone standard.)

FIGURE 2-2 Ozone - 2005 Number of Days Exceeding 1-Hour Federal Standard (1-hour average ozone > 0.12 ppm)

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality (Text was added to page II-2-15 referring to the PM2.5 added trend tables in the Attachment.)

Figure 2-12 Suspended Particulate Matter (PM2.5) - 2005 Annual Arithmetic Mean, g/m3 The annual arithmetic mean, the percent of days exceeding the federal standards, the maximum 24-hour average concentration, and the 98th percentile concentration for the years 1999 - 2005 are given in Tables A-11 to A-15 in the Attachment.

Seasonal and Day of Week Variation in PM2.5 Seasonal and day-of-week variations in PM2.5 concentrations are complex and location dependant, and require further analysis to determine the reasons for the variation. Preliminary analysis shows that the PM2.5 concentrations tend to be higher in fall. Figure 2-13 shows the average PM2.5 concentration for each month in the Basin for the year 2005.

Preliminary analysis of daily variation shows no specific day-of-week pattern in PM2.5 concentrations in the Basin. Figure 2-14 shows the total number of days exceeding the federal standard in the Basin by day of week for the three-year period 2003-2005.

Figure 2-15 shows average PM2.5 concentration for each hour of the day for the period 2003-2005 at two monitoring sites in the Basin. On average, PM2.5 concentrations show a peak around 8-9 a.m.

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality (Corrected typo on page II-2-18: ??no exceedances of the stage 1 episode?since 1997.? Also, corrected table numbers.) concentrations frequently occur on weekdays at times consistent with rush hour traffic and late night during the coolest, most stable portion of the day.

When carbon monoxide is inhaled in sufficient concentration, it can displace oxygen and bind with the hemoglobin in the blood, reducing the capacity of the blood to carry oxygen. Individuals most at risk from the effects of CO include heart patients, fetuses (unborn babies), smokers, and people who exercise heavily. Normal healthy individuals are affected at higher concentrations, which may cause impairment of manual dexterity, vision, learning ability, and performance of work. The results of studies concerning the combined effects of CO and other pollutants in animals have shown a synergistic effect after exposure to CO and ozone.

Current Carbon Monoxide Air Quality The District currently monitors carbon monoxide air quality at 25 of its 34 air monitoring stations. The highest CO concentrations are found in coastal and central Los Angeles county. The highest 8-hour average CO concentration in 2005 (5.9 ppm) was recorded in South Central Los Angeles county and was 62 percent of the federal standard and 65 percent of the state standard. This was the lowest concentration recorded in the Basin since carbon monoxide monitoring began in this region. The highest 1-hour average concentration in 2005 (7 ppm) was 19 percent of the federal and 33 percent of the state 1-hour standards. Concentrations in the less urbanized areas of the Basin and in the SSAB were well below the standards.

In 2005, carbon monoxide standards continued to remain below the standards at all locations monitored for the third consecutive year. Highest concentrations were recorded in Los Angeles county areas, in the areas of South Central Los Angeles County. There have been no exceedances of the stage 1 episode (federal alert) level (8- hour average CO greater than or equal to 15 ppm) since 1997 1994. Table 1 below shows the 2005 maximum 8-hour average carbon monoxide concentrations by Basin and county.

The annual number of days exceeding the federal carbon monoxide standard at all monitoring sites during the period 1990-2005 is given in Table A-16A-11 in the Attachment. Tables A-17A-12 and A-18A-13 list the annual number of federal alerts and maximum CO concentrations for all sites for the years 1990-2005.

The District has requested redesignation to attainment for CO, which is pending at the time of publication of this report.

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality (Corrected table numbers on pages II-2-20 thru II-2-22.) Table 2 shows the 2005 maximum annual average nitrogen dioxide concentrations by Basin and county. The maximum annual average nitrogen dioxide concentration (0.0313 ppm recorded in the Northwest San Bernardino Valley) was 59 percent of the federal standard. Concentrations in the downwind SSAB areas were much lower. The maximum 1-hour average concentration in the Basin (0.14 ppm in South Coastal Los Angeles County) was 56 percent of the state standard.

The annual averages, number of days exceeding the state standard, and maximum 1-hour average concentrations for each individual area of the District for the years 1990-2005 are given in Tables A-19 to A-21 A-14 to A-16 in Attachment.

Though the state and federal standards were not exceeded in 2005, nitrogen dioxide is still a concern since it is a precursor to both ozone and particulate matter. Further control of oxides of nitrogen will be required to attain the ozone and particulate standards.

TABLE 2 2005 Maximum Annual Average Nitrogen Dioxide Concentrations* Maximum Percent Basin/County Annual Avg. Federal Area ppm Standard South Coast Air Basin Los Angeles 0.0312 58% Orange 0.0249 47% Riverside 0.0222 41% San Bernardino 0.0313 59% Salton Sea Air Basin Riverside 0.0120 22% Ponoma/Walnut Valley North Orange County Metropolitan Riverside County Northwest San Bernardino Valley

Coachella Valley * Federal standard = 0.0534 ppm SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2)

Properties Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is a colorless gas with a sharp odor. It reacts in the air to form sulfuric acid (H2SO4), which contributes to acid precipitation, and sulfates, which is a

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality component of PM10 and PM2.5. Most of the SO2 emitted into the atmosphere is produced by the burning of sulfur-containing fuels.

At sufficiently high concentrations, sulfur dioxide affects breathing and the lungs' defenses, and can aggravate respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. Asthmatics and people with chronic lung disease or cardiovascular disease are most sensitive to its effects. Sulfur dioxide also causes plant damage, damage to materials, and acidification of lakes and streams.

Current Sulfur Dioxide Air Quality In 2005, sulfur dioxide was measured at seven Basin locations. No violations of federal or state standards occurred. The federal standards were last exceeded in the 1960's and the state standard was last exceeded in 1990.

The maximum 24-hour average SO2 concentrations recorded in the District in 2005 are shown in Table 3. The highest 24-hour average SO2 concentration (0.012 ppm in East San Fernando Valley) was 9 percent of the federal 24-hour standard. The highest 1-hour average (0.07 ppm in Central Los Angeles) was 29 percent of the state standard.

Detailed statistics including annual average and maximum 1-hour average SO2 concentrations for each location monitored for the years 1990-2005 are given in Tables A-22 and A-23 A-17 and A-18 in the Attachment.

While sulfur dioxide concentrations in the Basin no longer exceed standards, SO2 is a precursor of PM10 and sulfate.

TABLE 3 2005 Maximum 24-Hour Average Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations* Maximum Percent Basin/County 24-hr Avg. Federal Area ppm Standard South Coast Air Basin Los Angeles 0.012 9% Orange 0.008 6% Riverside 0.011 8% San Bernardino 0.004 3% Salton Sea Air Basin Riverside N.D.

Southwest Coastal LA County North Coastal Orange County Metropolitan Riverside County Central San Bernardino Valley

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality

SULFATE (SO4=) Properties Sulfates are chemical compounds which contain the sulfate ion (SO4=), and are part of the mixture of solid materials which make up PM10 and TSP. Most of the sulfates in the atmosphere are produced by oxidation of sulfur dioxide. Oxidation of sulfur dioxide yields sulfur trioxide (SO3) which reacts with water to give sulfuric acid (H2SO4), which contributes to acid precipitation. The reaction of sulfuric acid with basic substances such as ammonia yields sulfates, a component of PM10.

Current Sulfate Air Quality In 2005 sulfate concentrations were measured at 12 Basin locations. Table 4 shows the 2005 maximum 24-hour average concentrations in the District by Basin and county. The maximum sulfate concentration (17.3 g/m3) recorded in the District was 69 percent of the state standard.

The percent of days exceeding the standard and the maximum 24-hour average concentration at each monitoring location for the years 1990-2005 are given in Tables A-24 and A-25 A-19 and A-20 in the Attachment.

TABLE 4 2005 Maximum 24-Hour Average Sulfate Concentrations Maximum Percent Basin/County 24-hr. Avg. State Area g/m3 Standard South Coast Air Basin Los Angeles 17.3 69% South Central LA County Riverside 10.3 41% Metropolitan Riverside County San Bernardino 10.9 44% Central San Bernardino Valley Salton Sea Air Basin Riverside N.D.

N.D. = No Data. Historical measurements indicated concentrations were well below the standard. * State standard = 25 g/m3

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality (Corrected table numbers on pages II-2-24.) of the federal standard, and a maximum monthly average (0.44 g/m3) 29 percent of the state standard.

Maximum quarterly average and monthly average lead concentrations at each of the regular monitoring sites for the years 1990-2005 are given in Tables A-26 and A-27 A- 21 and A-22 in the Attachment.

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality (Added PM2.5 trend tables in Attachment and corrected table numbers for all tables following the five new tables.) TABLE A-11 Suspended Particulates (PM2.5) Annual Arithmetic Mean, g/m3 STN# LOCATION 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 060 East San Gabriel Valley 25.6 20.1 21.8 20.8 19.2 18.4 17.0* 069 East San Fernando Valley 23.3 23.8* 24.9 24.0 20.9 19.2 17.9 072 South Coastal Los Angeles County 1 21.5 19.2* 21.4 19.5 18.0 17.6 16.0 074 West San Fernando Valley 17.5* 18.1 18.5 18.9 16.4 15.6 13.9 077 South Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- -- 16.6 14.7 084 South Central Los Angeles County 24.2 23.0 24.5 23.3 20.2 18.5 17.5 085 South San Gabriel Valley 25.7 24.1 26.1 23.9 20.6 19.9 17.0* 087 Central Los Angeles 23.1 22.0 22.9 21.8 21.3 19.6 18.1 088 West San Gabriel Valley 20.6* 19.3 20.9 20.3 18.6 16.6 15.1 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 24.4 21.0* 22.4* 18.6 17.3 16.8 14.7 3812 Saddleback Valley 16.8* 14.7 15.8 15.5 13.1 12.1 10.7 RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** -- 9.6 10.8 10.0 9.0 9.0 8.4* 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 1 30.9 28.2* 31.1 27.5 24.9 22.1 21.0 4146 Metropolitan Riverside County 2 26.9 25.5 28.3 27.1 22.6 20.8 18.0 4157 Coachella Valley 2** 12.6* 11.2 12.2 12.0 11.4 10.7 10.5 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 25.9 24.5 24.8 24.3 21.8 20.0 18.9 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 25.7 25.4* 26.2 25.7 22.2 22.0 17.4 5817 Southwest San Bernardino Valley 25.7 24.2 26.2 25.2 23.8 20.9 18.8 5818 East San Bernardino Mountains 10.3 10.6 10.9 11.3 10.5 9.5 12.1 District Maximum 30.9 28.2 31.1 27.5 24.9 22.1 21.0 ** Salton Sea Air Basin

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality TABLE A-12 Suspended Particulates (PM2.5) - Percent of Sampling Days Exceeding Federal Standard (65 g/m3) STN# LOCATION 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 060 East San Gabriel Valley 2 1.5 1.3 0.3 1.0 0.4 0.3* 069 East San Fernando Valley 1 4.3* 3.4 0 1.1 0 0 072 South Coastal Los Angeles County 1 1 1.3* 0.3 0 0.9 0.3 0 074 West San Fernando Valley 1* 1.9 0.9 0 0 0 0 077 South Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- -- 0 0 084 South Central Los Angeles County 1 1.7 2.6 0 0 0 0 085 South San Gabriel Valley 2 3.4 3.2 0 0.9 0 0* 087 Central Los Angeles 2 3.3 1.2 0.3 1.5 0.6 0.6 088 West San Gabriel Valley 1* 0.9 0.9 0 0.9 0 0 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 2 2.2* 0.4* 0.3 0.9 0 0 3812 Saddleback Valley 0* 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** -- 0 0 0 0 0 0* 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 1 6 3.6* 5.8 2.5 2.3 1.5 1.2 4146 Metropolitan Riverside County 2 2 4.5 4.7 1.7 0.9 1.8 0.9 4157 Coachella Valley 2** 0* 0 0 0 0 0 0 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 3 1.8 3.5 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.9 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 4 2.9* 4.5 2.6 0.8 3.8 0.9 5817 Southwest San Bernardino Valley 2 1.8 1.8 0 2.5 1.8 0.9 5818 East San Bernardino Mountains 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 District Maximum 6 4.5 5.8 2.6 2.5 3.8 1.2 ** Salton Sea Air Basin

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality TABLE A-13 Suspended Particulates (PM2.5) - Percent of Sampling Days Exceeding the New Federal Standard (35 g/m3)*** STN# LOCATION 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 060 East San Gabriel Valley 17 9 14 12 9 8 6* 069 East San Fernando Valley 18 14* 16 19 14 10 8 072 South Coastal Los Angeles County 1 9 11* 14 9 7 7 4 074 West San Fernando Valley 8* 8 7 10 7 4 4 077 South Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- 10 5 2 084 South Central Los Angeles County 18 14 16 18 9 7 7 085 South San Gabriel Valley 20 13 22 19 9 9 9* 087 Central Los Angeles 15 13 15 13 14 7 7 088 West San Gabriel Valley 9* 6 8 11 10 6 4 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 17 14* 16* 9 7 6 4 3812 Saddleback Valley 4* 4 5 3 3 3 0 RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** -- 0 1 1 0 0 0* 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 1 30 26* 33 25 21 15 11 4146 Metropolitan Riverside County 2 25 22 23 24 19 13 5 4157 Coachella Valley 2** 0* 0 0 0 0 0 2 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 17 19 15 19 14 14 6 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 21 21* 23 24 15 15 3 5817 Southwest San Bernardino Valley 22 14 21 18 17 13 7 5818 East San Bernardino Mountains -- 0 0 0 0 0 4 District Maximum 30 22 33 25 21 15 11 ** Salton Sea Air Basin ***Effective December 17, 2006, U.S. EPA has strengthen the standard level from 65 g/m3 to 35 g/m3.

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality TABLE A-14 Suspended Particulates (PM2.5) Annual Maximum 24-Hour Average, g/m3 STN# LOCATION 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 060 East San Gabriel Valley 81.3 92.5 79.7 72.4 121.2 75.6 132.7* 069 East San Fernando Valley 79.5 84.4* 94.7 63.0 120.6 60.1 63.2 072 South Coastal Los Angeles County 1 66.9 81.5* 72.9 62.7 115.2 66.6 53.9 074 West San Fernando Valley 79.0* 67.5 71.1 48.8 47.5 56.2 39.6 077 South Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- -- 59.7 50.8 084 South Central Los Angeles County 67.8 82.1 73.1 64.0 54.8 55.8 54.6 085 South San Gabriel Valley 85.6 89.5 77.3 61.0 90.3 60.7 58.2* 087 Central Los Angeles 69.3 87.8 73.4 66.3 83.7 75.0 73.7 088 West San Gabriel Valley 73.0* 66.3 78.1 57.8 89.0 59.4 62.9 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 68.7 113.9* 70.8* 68.6 115.5 58.9 54.7 3812 Saddleback Valley 56.6* 94.7 53.4 58.5 50.6 49.4 35.4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** -- 28.5 44.7 42.3 21.2 27.1 26.2* 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 1 111.2 119.6* 98.0 77.6 104.3 91.7 98.7 4146 Metropolitan Riverside County 2 90.0 79.3 74.9 75.5 73.3 93.8 95.0 4157 Coachella Valley 2** 29.6* 28.6 33.5 26.8 26.8 28.5 44.4 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 98.0 72.9 74.8 66.6 98.1 71.4 96.8 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 121.5 89.8* 78.5 82.1 73.9 93.4 106.3 5817 Southwest San Bernardino Valley 85.8 73.4 71.2 64.8 88.9 86.1 87.8 5818 East San Bernardino Mountains 32.1 29.0 34.6 34.1 35.0 28.6 38.8 District Maximum 121.5 119.6 98.0 82.1 121.2 93.8 132.7 ** Salton Sea Air Basin

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality TABLE A-15 Suspended Particulates (PM2.5) 24-Hour Average 98th Percentile Concentration, g/m3 STN# LOCATION 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 060 East San Gabriel Valley 64 62 61 51 56 54 53 069 East San Fernando Valley 50 83 69 55 60 49 51 072 South Coastal Los Angeles County 1 51 64 49 47 47 46 41 074 West San Fernando Valley 40 50 57 45 45 53 36 077 South Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- -- 42 38 084 South Central Los Angeles County 53 63 66 53 52 53 48 085 South San Gabriel Valley 60 71 67 58 50 52 54 087 Central Los Angeles 52 73 58 55 61 50 53 088 West San Gabriel Valley 60 54 55 49 48 47 43 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 66 66 59 48 52 48 42 3812 Saddleback Valley 45 37 46 46 38 39 31 RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** -- 23 33 23 20 23 25 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 1 79 77 74 66 77 60 58 4146 Metropolitan Riverside County 2 62 67 66 64 56 54 41 4157 Coachella Valley 2** 30 26 30 22 25 27 25 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 66 65 70 57 54 63 48 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 72 70 68 66 58 72 43 5817 Southwest San Bernardino Valley 86 65 65 57 67 60 50 5818 East San Bernardino Mountains 31 27 30 32 29 23 37 District Maximum 86 83 74 66 77 72 58 ** Salton Sea Air Basin

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality TABLE A-1611 Carbon Monoxide - Number of Days Maximum 8-Hour Average*** Exceeded the Federal Standard (? 9.5 ppm) STN# LOCATION 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 060 East San Gabriel Valley 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 069 East San Fernando Valley 10 8 3 0 5 4 0* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 072 South Coastal Los Angeles County 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 074 West San Fernando Valley 12 9 1 0 4 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 075 Pomona/Walnut Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 084 South Central Los Angeles County 1 42 37 31 22 22 13 20 14 10 8 2 0 1 0 0 0 085 South San Gabriel Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 087 Central Los Angeles 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 088 West San Gabriel Valley 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 090 Santa Clarita Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 091 Northwest Coastal Los Angeles County 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 094 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 1 10 7 7 3 5 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 820 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0 591 East San Gabriel Valley 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0* 0 0 0 0 3177 North Orange County 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3186 Saddleback Valley 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* -- -- -- -- -- 3195 North Coastal Orange County 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 3812 Saddleback Valley 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0* 0 0 0 0 0 RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4146 Metropolitan Riverside County 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 0 4150 San Gorgonio Pass -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4155 Norco/Corona -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4158 Lake Elsinore -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5175 Northwest San Bernardino Valley 0 0* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 5181 Central San Bernardino Mountains -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 0 0* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0* -- 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 5204 East San Bernardino Valley 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ** Salton Sea Air Basin *** Refer to 2003 AQMP for 1976 to 1989 data

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality Table A-1712 Carbon Monoxide - Number of Days Maximum 8-Hour Average*** Exceeded the Federal Alert Level (> 15 ppm) STN# LOCATION 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 060 East San Gabriel Valley 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 069 East San Fernando Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 072 South Coastal Los Angeles County 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 074 West San Fernando Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 075 Pomona/Walnut Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 084 South Central Los Angeles County 1 4 3 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 085 South San Gabriel Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 087 Central Los Angeles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 088 West San Gabriel Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 090 Santa Clarita Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 091 Northwest Coastal Los Angeles County 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 094 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 820 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0 591 East San Gabriel Valley 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0* 0 0 0 0 3177 North Orange County 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3186 Saddleback Valley 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* -- -- -- -- -- 3195 North Coastal Orange County 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 3812 Saddleback Valley 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0* 0 0 0 0 0 RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** 0 0 0* 0* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4146 Metropolitan Riverside County 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 0 4150 San Gorgonio Pass -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4155 Norco/Corona -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4158 Lake Elsinore -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5175 Northwest San Bernardino Valley 0 0* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0 0 0 5181 Central San Bernardino Mountains -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 0 0* -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0* -- 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 5204 East San Bernardino Valley 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- District Maximum 4 3 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** Salton Sea Air Basin *** Refer to 2003 AQMP for 1976 to 1989 data

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality Table A-183 Carbon Monoxide Annual Maximum 8-Hour Average, ppm*** STN# LOCATION 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 060 East San Gabriel Valley 1 5.1 5.9 4.9 4.0 4.5 6.3 4.0 4.3 3.9 3.9 4.9 2.9 2.4 2.6 2 1.7 069 East San Fernando Valley 13.0 10.6 10.5 8.4 10.7 12.0 9.3 7.4 7.5 9.0 6.1 4.9 4.6 4.7* 3.7 3.4 072 South Coastal Los Angeles County 9.1 9.3 8.1 6.9 8.9 6.6 6.9 6.7 6.6 5.4 5.8 4.7 4.6 4.7 3.4 3.5 074 West San Fernando Valley 14.9 13.5 9.9 9.0 10.8 10.3 8.5 9.8 9.3 7.6 9.8 6.0 4.8 4.1 3.5 3.5 075 Pomona/Walnut Valley 7.5 7.1 8.3 5.5 6.8 6.1 5.0 5.0 7.3 6.7 4.9 3.4 3.3 4.4 3.1 2.5 084 South Central Los Angeles County 1 16.8 17.4 18.75 14.63 18.10 13.86 17.3 17.0 13.4 11.0 10.0 7.7 10.1 7.3 6.7 5.9 085 South San Gabriel Valley 9.4 9.1 8.62 6.43 9.29 7.86 8.1 6.2 6.1 5.6 5.3 4.0 4 4 3.6 2.4* 087 Central Los Angeles 9.9 9.0 9.50 6.75 8.43 8.37 8.4 7.9 6.1 6.3 6.0 4.6 4 4.6 3.2 3.1 088 West San Gabriel Valley 10.0 9.5 7.25 6.25 8.50 9.12 7.1 6.0 6.3 6.6 7.4 5.0 4 3.8 3.4 2.8 090 Santa Clarita Valley 4.6 5.1 3.71 3.86 3.86 4.12 3.9 6.8 3.4 3.6 4.9 3.1 1.9 1.7 3.7 1.3 091 Northwest Coastal Los Angeles County 8.0 6.1 5.87 5.43 6.00 5.62 4.5 4.4 4.5 3.8 4.3 3.0 2.7 2.7 2.3 2.1 094 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 1 12.7 11.3 12.29 10.71 12.00 8.86 11.6 10.3 9.4 8.4 7.0 5.1 6.1 5 4.4* -- 820 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3.0* 2.1 591 East San Gabriel Valley 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3.1 2.5-- 2.3 2.1 2 1.9 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 11.7 8.6 9.37 7.71 8.62 8.00 7.5 5.8 5.3 5.3 6.8 4.7 5.4 3.9 4.1 3.3 3177 North Orange County 9.6 8.0 9.14 6.00 8.75 6.62 6.9 6.0 6.1 5.3 6.1 4.7 4.4 4.1 4 3.1 3186 Saddleback Valley 1 5.6 4.8 7.25 4.13 5.37 4.00 4.0 3.6 3.1 2.5 2.3 -- -- -- -- -- 3195 North Coastal Orange County 10.7 8.1 9.14 7.33 7.86 6.57 7.3 5.8 7.0 6.4 6.3 4.6 4.3 5.8 4.1 3.2 3812 Saddleback Valley 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3.3 2.4 3.6 1.8 1.6 1.6 RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.00 1.87 1.50 1.6 1.4 1.6 1.8 1.6 1.5 1.2 1.3* 1 0.8 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 1 6.3 7.4 5.25 7.13 5.75 5.71 5.0 5.8 4.6 4.4 4.3 3.4 3 3.7 3 2.5 4146 Metropolitan Riverside County 2 7.3 6.9 6.12 6.25 7.25 6.50 5.4 5.0 4.6 4.1 4.3 4.5 3.9 3.4 2.1 2.4 4157 Coachella Valley 2** -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.1 -- -- -- -- -- 4158 Lake Elsinore -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.0 2.0 2 1.3* 0.9 1 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5175 Northwest San Bernardino Valley 6.6 4.6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.6 1.8 1.6 2.9 2.1 1.8 5181 Central San Bernardino Mountains -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 4.9 4.4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.1* 2.1 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 6.0 7.0 5.9 6.0 6.5 6.3 4.6 6.0 4.6 4.0 4.3 3.3 3.3 4.6 3.3 2.4 5204 East San Bernardino Valley 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- District Maximum 16.8 17.4 18.8 14.6 18.1 13.9 17.3 17.0 13.5 11.7 10.0 7.7 10.1 7.3 6.7 5.9 ** Salton Sea Air Basin *** Refer to 2003 AQMP for 1976 to 1989 data

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality TABLE A-194 Nitrogen Dioxide - Annual Average of All Hours, pphm*** (To Be Compared to Federal Standard of 5.34 pphm, Annual Average of All Hours) STN# LOCATION 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 060 East San Gabriel Valley 1 4.10 4.50 4.03 4.00 4.30 4.64 4.15 3.38 3.64 3.90 3.66 3.31 3.36 2.96 2.04 2.51 069 East San Fernando Valley 4.79 4.68 5.01 4.40 4.97 4.54 4.61 4.24 4.16 4.56 4.15 4.19 4.02 3.56* 3.32 2.94 072 South Coastal Los Angeles County 3.93 4.11 3.89 3.57 3.46 3.67 3.42 3.33 3.39 3.42 3.13 3.08 2.98 2.88* 2.80 2.41 074 West San Fernando Valley 3.40 3.99 3.17 3.06 3.39 3.17 3.07 2.60 2.66 2.87 2.85 2.66 2.48 2.6* 2.14 2.02 075 Pomona/Walnut Valley 1 5.55 5.50 5.07 4.99 4.80 4.56 4.26 4.33 4.33 5.03 4.35 3.71 3.65 3.52 3.14 3.12 084 South Central Los Angeles County 1 4.08 4.37 4.55 4.09 4.99 4.63 4.12 4.28 3.93 4.28 3.86 3.69 3.57 3.12 3.01 -- 085 South San Gabriel Valley 4.99 4.69 4.43 4.28 4.49 4.56 3.93 3.63 3.69 3.91 3.66 3.52 3.44 3.53 3.05 3.12 087 Central Los Angeles 4.67 4.93 4.04 3.32 4.76 4.50 4.36 4.30 3.98 3.91 4.04 3.78 3.27 3.38 3.28 3.08* 088 West San Gabriel Valley 4.74 5.02 4.23 3.90 4.28 3.75 3.78 3.41 3.51 3.79 2.96 3.45 3.35 3.22 2.70 2.78 090 Santa Clarita Valley 3.16 3.24 2.76 2.89 3.27 3.05 -- -- -- 2.84 2.46 2.39 2.00 2.21 2.04 2.41 091 Northwest Coastal Los Angeles County 3.24 2.78 2.84 2.87 2.96 2.78 2.89 2.85 2.71 2.91 2.73 2.51 2.49 2.31 1.98 1.90 094 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 1 3.39 2.98 3.20 3.00 3.22 3.05 2.85 2.80 2.95 2.95 2.75 2.50 2.44* 2.38 3.10* 1.78 820 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.36* 1.34 591 East San Gabriel Valley 2 3.77 4.30 3.53 3.39 3.62 3.80 3.28 3.00 2.76 3.28 2.90 2.74 2.72 2.71 2.40 2.24 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 4.69 4.48 3.94 3.54 3.80 3.71 3.19 3.32 3.36 3.27 3.00 2.93* 2.44 2.40 1.99 2.11 3177 North Orange County 4.47 4.26 3.79 3.87 4.14 3.91 3.54 3.29 3.44 3.51 3.04 2.75 2.56 2.84 2.52 2.49 3195 North Coastal Orange County 2.72 2.60 2.49 2.20 2.44 2.39 2.06 1.99 2.00 2.09 2.05 1.82 1.87 1.99 1.51 1.31 RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** 2.06 2.08 2.10 1.95 2.19 2.23 2.10 1.58 1.70 1.95 1.78 1.75 1.72 1.73* 1.30 1.20 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 3.36 3.51 3.04 2.98 3.20 3.06 2.94 2.62 2.25 2.25 2.36 2.47 2.37 2.17 1.72 2.22 4149 Perris Valley 2.82 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4157 Coachella Valley 2** -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.99 -- -- -- -- -- 4158 Lake Elsinore -- -- -- -- 2.12 2.08 1.82 1.65 1.74 2.00 1.75 1.85 1.73 1.82* 1.51 1.42 4164 Banning Airport -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.15 2.43 2.37 2.11 1.99 1.93* 1.65 1.48 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5175 Northwest San Bernardino Valley 4.11 4.28 3.96 4.21 4.15 4.64 3.87 3.41 3.59 3.98 3.80 3.84 3.69 3.49 3.05 3.13 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 3.43 3.77 3.44 3.72 4.03 4.24 3.86 3.65 3.62 3.88 3.64 3.58 3.34* 3.07 2.73 3.10 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 3.93 3.55 3.56 3.76 4.11 4.04 3.84 3.53 3.39 3.58 3.25 3.03 2.96 2.70 2.61 2.59 District Maximum 5.55 5.50 5.07 4.99 4.99 4.64 4.61 4.33 4.33 5.03 4.35 4.19 4.02 3.56 3.32 3.13 ** Salton Sea Air Basin *** Refer to 2003 AQMP for 1976 to 1989 data

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality Table A-2015 Nitrogen Dioxide - Number of Days 1-Hour Average Exceeded the State Standard (> .25 ppm)*** STN# LOCATION 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 060 East San Gabriel Valley 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 069 East San Fernando Valley 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 072 South Coastal Los Angeles County 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 074 West San Fernando Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 075 Pomona/Walnut Valley 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 084 South Central Los Angeles County 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 085 South San Gabriel Valley 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 087 Central Los Angeles 3 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 088 West San Gabriel Valley 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 090 Santa Clarita Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 091 Northwest Coastal Los Angeles County 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 094 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 820 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0 591 East San Gabriel Valley 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3177 North Orange County 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3195 North Coastal Orange County 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3812 Saddleback Valley RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4149 Perris Valley 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4157 Coachella Valley 2** -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 -- -- -- -- -- 4158 Lake Elsinore -- -- -- -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4164 Banning Airport -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5175 Northwest San Bernardino Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** Salton Sea Air Basin *** Refer to 2003 AQMP for 1976 to 1989 data

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality Table A-2116 Nitrogen Dioxide Annual Maximum 1-Hour, ppm*** STN# LOCATION 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 060 East San Gabriel Valley 1 0.21 0.25 0.15 0.17 0.19 0.22 0.15 0.16 0.14 0.16 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.1 0.09 069 East San Fernando Valley 0.23 0.29 0.19 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.2 0.2 0.14 0.18 0.17 0.25 0.26 0.14 0.12 0.09 072 South Coastal Los Angeles County 0.27 0.28 0.18 0.2 0.2 0.21 0.17 0.2 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.12 0.14 074 West San Fernando Valley 0.19 0.17 0.17 0.15 0.17 0.14 0.16 0.2 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.13 0.08 0.09 075 Pomona/Walnut Valley 1 0.21 0.22 0.18 0.2 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.14 0.13 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.08 084 South Central Los Angeles County 1 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.23 0.2 0.21 0.25 0.2 0.16 0.18 0.14 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.1 0.11 085 South San Gabriel Valley 0.27 0.25 0.27 0.26 0.24 0.23 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.16 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.14 0.12 0.09 087 Central Los Angeles 0.28 0.38 0.3 0.21 0.22 0.24 0.25 0.2 0.17 0.21 0.16 0.14 0.14 0.16 0.16 0.13 088 West San Gabriel Valley 0.23 0.32 0.22 0.18 0.18 0.22 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.12 0.10 090 Santa Clarita Valley 0.15 0.17 0.11 0.13 0.12 0.16 -- -- -- 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.09 0.09 091 Northwest Coastal Los Angeles County 0.2 0.25 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.2 0.18 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.09 0.08 094 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 1 0.23 0.21 0.19 0.16 0.22 0.18 0.15 0.17 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.12 0.08 -- 820 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.09* 0.09 591 East San Gabriel Valley 2 0.19 0.23 0.16 0.16 0.19 0.2 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.09 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 0.21 0.2 0.21 0.2 0.19 0.18 0.15 0.1 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.10 0.13 0.12 0.09 3177 North Orange County 0.22 0.2 0.17 0.18 0.23 0.2 .16. 0.15 0.13 0.16 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.16 0.12 0.09 3195 North Coastal Orange County 0.22 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.08 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.09 RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.15 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.10 0.06 0.07 0.10 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 0.16 0.16 0.23 0.14 0.18 0.15 0.11 0.12 0.1 0.13 0.1 0.15 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 4149 Perris Valley 0.11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4157 Coachella Valley 2** -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.06 -- -- -- -- -- 4158 Lake Elsinore -- -- -- -- 0.11 0.21 0.1 0.11 0.09 0.11 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.08 0.06 0.07 4164 Banning Airport -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.26 0.31 0.21 0.24 0.15 0.09 0.08 0.07 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5175 Northwest San Bernardino Valley 0.19 0.21 0.14 0.16 0.17 0.2 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 0.2 0.19 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.13 0.12* 0.12 0.06 0.10 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 0.2 0.16 0.13 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.11 0.14 0.1 0.11 0.11 0.1 0.12 0.0.08 District Maximum 0.28 0.38 0.3 0.26 0.22 0.24 0.25 0.2 0.26 0.31 0.21 0.25 0.26 0.16 0.16 0.14 ** Salton Sea Air Basin *** Refer to 2003 AQMP for 1976 to 1989 data

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality Table A-2217 Sulfur Dioxide - Annual Average, pphm*** STN# LOCATION 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 060 East San Gabriel Valley 1 0.11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 069 East San Fernando Valley 0.18 0.09 0.10 0.12 0.07 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.05 0.14* 0.26 0.25 072 South Coastal Los Angeles County 0.31 0.43 0.37 0.36 0.31 0.23 0.25 0.24 0.18 0.27 0.15 0.22 0.12 0.23 0.50 0.18 074 West San Fernando Valley 0.15 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 084 South Central Los Angeles County 1 0.33 0.30 0.31 0.23 0.26 0.30 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 085 South San Gabriel Valley 0.43 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 087 Central Los Angeles 0.17 0.17 0.15 0.03 0.07 0.10 0.15 0.07 0.08 0.23 0.09 0.28 0.21 0.21* 0.24 0.18 088 West San Gabriel Valley 0.15 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 090 Santa Clarita Valley 0.09 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 091 Northwest Coastal Los Angeles County 0.21 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 094 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 1 0.35 0.40 0.57 0.31 0.22 0.27 0.25 0.14 0.39 0.40 0.17 0.41 0.08 0.06 0.08* -- 820 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.28* 0.56 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 1 0.18 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3177 North Orange County 0.11 0.12 0.06 0.06 0.09 0.09 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3190 Central Orange County 2 0.19 0.11 0.11 0.08 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3195 North Coastal Orange County 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.15 0.12 0.10 0.16 0.16 RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.11 0.14 0.08 0.09 0.00 0.21 0.34 0.34 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5175 Northwest San Bernardino Valley 0.12 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 0.01 0.05 0.12 0.00 0.02 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.07 0.18 0.18 0.21 0.22* 0.08 0.10 0.21 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 0.01 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- District Maximum 0.43 0.43 0.57 0.36 0.31 0.30 0.25 0.24 0.39 0.40 0.18 0.41 0.22 0.23 0.50 0.56 ** Salton Sea Air Basin *** Refer to 2003 AQMP for 1976 to 1989 data

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality Table A-2318 Sulfur Dioxide Annual Maximum 1-Hour Average, ppm*** STN# LOCATION 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 60 East San Gabriel Valley 0.03 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 69 East San Fernando Valley 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01* 0.02 0.01 72 South Coastal Los Angeles County 0.05 0.14 0.11 0.05 0.04 0.14 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 74 West San Fernando Valley 0.02 - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 84 South Central Los Angeles County 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.03 0.02 0.03 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 85 South San Gabriel Valley 0.04 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 87 Central Los Angeles 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.14 0.05 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.05* 0.08 0.07 88 West San Gabriel Valley 0.02 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 90 Santa Clarita Valley 0.01 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 91 Northwest Coastal Los Angeles County 0.02 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 94 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 1 0.31 0.12 0.15 0.07 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.1 0.03 0.09 0.17 0.04 0.07 0.03 0.03* -- 820 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.02* 0.04 ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 1 0.02 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3177 North Orange County 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3190 Central Orange County 2 0.03 0.03 0.1 0.02 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3195 North Coastal Orange County 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.01 RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.11 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5175 Northwest San Bernardino Valley 0.01 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 0.01 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.03* 0.01 0.01 0.01 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 0.01 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- District Maximum 0.31 0.14 0.15 0.07 0.04 0.14 0.06 0.1 0.14 0.09 0.17 0.05 0.07 0.05 0.08 0.07 ** Salton Sea Air Basin *** Refer to 2003 AQMP for 1976 to 1989 data

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality Table A-2419 Sulfate - Percent of Sampling Days Exceeding the State Standard*** (? 25 g/m3, 24-hour Average)

STN# LOCATION 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 60 East San Gabriel Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 East San Fernando Valley 2 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 72 South Coastal Los Angeles County 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 84 South Central Los Angeles County 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 South San Gabriel Valley 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 Central Los Angeles 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 West San Gabriel Valley 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 91 Northwest Coastal Los Angeles County 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 94 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3186 Saddleback Valley 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3190 Central Orange County 2 0 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4146 Metropolitan Riverside County 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4149 Perris Valley 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4150 San Gorgonio Pass 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4157 Coachella Valley 2** 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5171 Southwest San Bernardino Valley 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5175 Northwest San Bernardino Valley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5181 Central San Bernardino Mountains 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** Salton Sea Air Basin *** Refer to 2003 AQMP for 1976 to 1989 data

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality TABLE A-2520 Sulfate - Maximum 24-Hour Averages*** (To Be Compared to State Standard of 25 g/m3, 24-Hour Average) STN# LOCATION 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 60 East San Gabriel Valley 16.0 19.2 16.8 19.1 17.5 12.9 17.1 12.7 10.2 17.8 17.2 14.1 11.3 11.7 10.6 10.2 69 East San Fernando Valley 25.9 18.6 12.9 20.1 18.3 13.7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 72 South Coastal Los Angeles County 22.6 19.9 22.6 15.6 17.1 16.9 19.9 11.4 14.5 13.7 26.7 15.9 17.8 17.8 15.9 16.8 84 South Central Los Angeles County 28.1 22.4 18.7 13.7 23.1 18.8 16.0 11.4 12.0 15.6 11.4 15.4 15.3 14.9 14.7 17.3 85 South San Gabriel Valley 21.1 21.6 17.0 15.5 26.2 16.3 13.7 13.1 12.0 25.6 13.1 14.5 11.2 14.4 12.4 9.9 87 Central Los Angeles 25.3 23.1 19.4 17.6 21.7 15.5 12.8 14.3 10.6 17.9 16.4 15.9 15.2 14.6 12.7 14.2 88 West San Gabriel Valley 28.4 20.1 11.5 18.8 14.5 13.2 12.0 11.6 9.2 16.4 13.9 13.4 10.5 12.7 11.2 11.2 91 Northwest Coastal Los Angeles County 24.8 20.9 12.3 18.1 26.8 13.3 12.2 14.0 11.2 13.9 14.1 15.6 14.6 14.3 11.4 11.7 94 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 24.8 24.7 17.6 20.5 26.7 20.4 18.4 14.4 13.5 18.8 16.2 20.6 15.6 16.4 13.1 -- ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 1 18.3 20.6 16.0 15.3 14.5 12.8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3186 Saddleback Valley 13.4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3190 Central Orange County 2 16.8 16.9 16.0 14.7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4137 Coachella Valley 1** 5.6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 1 19.9 14.8 12.3 13.7 20.4 26.3 14.9 13.1 10.1 10.7 11.0 10.7 11.7 10.1 9.8 10.3 4146 Metropolitan Riverside County 2 19.3 12.8 12.1 15.1 15.7 22.9 17.0 10.4 12.8 10.6 10.2 9.2 10.5 10 9.1 10.3 4149 Perris Valley 12.9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4150 San Gorgonio Pass 8.6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4157 Coachella Valley 2** 7.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5171 Southwest San Bernardino Valley 19.9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5175 Northwest San Bernardino Valley 18.7 19.0 13.2 17.1 15.8 12.5 13.6 9.7 10.5 11.7 11.5 10.7 11.5 11.8 9.2 8.4 5181 Central San Bernardino Mountains 6.6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5197 Central San Bernardino Valley 1 18.3 20.2 13.4 16.7 15.5 13.4 13.6 10.2 10.1 12.4 10.7 10.7 13.5 11.9 10.8 10.4 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 2 17.3 18.3 12.9 17.2 14.9 12.5 11.2 9.1 11.5 10.9 12.4 12.4 10.8 12.1 9.6 10.9 District Maximum 28.4 24.7 22.6 20.5 26.8 26.3 19.9 14.4 14.5 25.6 26.7 20.6 17.8 17.8 15.9 17.3 ** Salton Sea Air Basin *** Refer to 2003 AQMP for 1976 to 1989 data

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality TABLE A-261 Lead - Highest Calendar Quarter Mean, g/m3*** (To Be Compared to Federal Standard of 1.5 g/m3, Calendar Quarter Average)

STN# LOCATION 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 69 East San Fernando Valley 0.07 0.07 0.09 0.05 0.05 0.04 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 72 South Coastal Los Angeles County 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.01 84 South Central Los Angeles County 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.07 0.04 0.09 0.06 0.12 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 85 South San Gabriel Valley 0.11 0.14 0.10 0.11 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.09 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.03 87 Central Los Angeles 0.09 0.14 0.11 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.04 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.15 0.03 0.02 94 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.10 0.01 -- ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 1 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 4146 Metropolitan Riverside County 2 0.05 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5175 Northwest San Bernardino Valley 0.05 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.08 0.01 0.01 District Maximum 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.07 0.05 0.09 0.06 0.12 0.05 0.15 0.03 0.03 ** Salton Sea Air Basin *** Refer to 2003 AQMP for 1976 to 1989 data

Proposed Modification to Draft Appendix II: Current Air Quality TABLE A-272 Lead - Highest Monthly Averages, g/m3*** (To Be Compared to State Standard of 1.5 g/m3, Monthly Average)

STN# LOCATION 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 LOS ANGELES COUNTY: 69 East San Fernando Valley 0.08 0.10 0.16 0.05 0.06 0.05 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 72 South Coastal Los Angeles County 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.10 0.02 0.01 84 South Central Los Angeles County 0.14 0.17 0.11 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.07 0.04 0.17 0.09 0.23 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 85 South San Gabriel Valley 0.13 0.19 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.07 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.21 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.03 87 Central Los Angeles 0.09 0.21 0.16 0.10 0.11 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.13 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.15 0.03 0.02 94 Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.08 0.04 0.02 0.17 0.01 -- ORANGE COUNTY: 3176 Central Orange County 0.10 0.08 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.04 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- RIVERSIDE COUNTY: 4144 Metropolitan Riverside County 1 0.08 0.06 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.088 0.07 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 4146 Metropolitan Riverside County 2 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.10 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY: 5175 Northwest San Bernardino Valley 0.07 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 5203 Central San Bernardino Valley 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.14 0.02 0.01 District Maximum 0.14 0.21 0.16 0.15 0.11 0.07 0.09 0.08 0.10 0.21 0.09 0.23 0.06 0.17 0.03 0.03 ** Salton Sea Air Basin *** Refer to 2003 AQMP for 1976 to 1989 data

PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE DRAFT 2007 AQMP APPENDIX IV-C REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY AND CONTROL MEASURES

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP: Appendix IV-C

[The section entitled Regional Benefits of Compass has been updated. Appendix IV-C, page 8, 4th paragraph] Regional Benefits of Compass As part of the 2004 RTP planning process, the RTP was analyzed relative to baseline conditions. The analysis revealed that the strategies of the 2004 RTP contribute benefits to mobility, transit boarding, air quality and energy consumption over the forecast period. Of the benefits attributed to the 2004 RTP in year 2030, it was estimated that the Compass Vision distribution contributed approximately 50% of the VMT reduction, approximately 20% of the vehicle hours traveled (VHT) reduction, approximately 10% increased transit boarding, and approximately 70% of the reactive organic gas (ROG) emission reductions.The 2007 AQMP, while based on the 2004 RTP, incorporates changes to emission factors based on ARB's EMFAC2007 and to the socioeconomic data based on actual changes since the 2004 RTP was prepared. While the Compass 2% Strategy assumptions remain the same, these other changes result in revised emission projections and benefits compared to what was shown for the 2004 RTP. For example, Growth Visioning in the 2007 AQMP is estimated to contribute a reduction of approximately 0.5 ton per day of ROG in the year 2020 (approximately 30% of total reductions) versus a reduction of approximately 2 tons per day in 2020 (approximately 70% of total reductions) when analyzed for the 2004 RTP. It should be noted that the emission benefits attributed to Compass reflect only grosser changes in land use, and do not account for the micro land use changes that are assumed in Compass and are expected to provide additional transportation and emission benefits. SCAG is working to develop additional analytical tools to better calculate the benefits attributable to the Compass program.

[Additional information has been added to the section entitled SCAG's Goods Movement Program and Studies. Appendix IV-C, page 13, added after 1st paragraph]

Goods Movement Control Measure As part of the Transportation Strategy for the 2007 AQMP, SCAG is proposing a Goods Movement Control Measure which consists of three main components: High Speed Rail System, Truck-Only Lanes, and Shipping Line Emission Controls.

High Speed Rail Transport System SCAG has recently advanced a vision of additional regional movement systems based on the introduction of a high speed, high performance, environmentally sensitive regional transport system (HSRT). Envisioned to move both cargo and people throughout the region, the HSRT would serve to:

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP: Appendix IV-C ? Link the San Pedro Bay ports with an inland port facility. This would provide capacity to handle containers relieving a major constraint to port expansion while providing an environmentally sound and cost effective solution to the goods movement challenge.

? Create a direct, high-speed link between the urban centers and the airports. This would enable a higher level of service for airport access and connecting passengers, improved operation of the aviation system for passengers and airborne cargo, and optimize investment in aviation system infrastructure. This view envisions the continued use of Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) as a hub while allocating future traffic to other regional airports based on a high-speed connection via the HSRT.

? Link the urban centers, serving the needs of commuters while reducing the number of private vehicles on the road mode. This would lead to reduced traffic congestion, enhanced accessibility, as well as reduced air and noise pollution from automobiles. Additionally, enhanced accessibility at transit stations would enable intensification of land uses and thereby encourage more effective land use patterns Relative to goods movement, an HSRT system can provide greater throughput and reliability with near zero emissions (see section on Innovative Goods Movement Technology below). Essentially, goods would be shuttled from the Ports to an inland port at San Bernardino and/or Palmdale via a HSRT container movement system. A HSRT system capitalizes on the inherent savings of multiple uses on a single infrastructure by operating on shared alignments with the HSRT people movement system. The technology permits operation of HSRT freight vehicles on a shared guide-way with passenger vehicles even during peak hour service. Freight vehicle trips can be interspersed with passenger trips while still meeting required passenger vehicle headways. Additionally, full utilization of the freight line can be achieved during the passenger system's off-peak hours.

Implementation of the HSRT is being proposed on the basis of a business plan approach whereby it will be self-financing based on aviation, commuter, and freight operations and further bolstered by HSRT related development. The deployment of a HSRT system would create value in associated components which could in turn contribute to the HSRT's total financial performance. A business and institutional structure for the movement of people, movement of goods, and associated development patterns has been developed by SCAG to serve as the basis for implementation of the movement systems. The results reached by SCAG's business planning effort indicate that HSRT-based systems for aviation, goods, and people movement can fulfill the objective of financial independence and feasibility.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP: Appendix IV-C A schematic of the business plan is shown below.

Efforts to evaluate a smaller scale advanced technology system are being undertaken by the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles. The Ports have jointly initiated a Request for Proposal to conduct a systems analysis of advanced transportation technologies for moving containers from the ports to near-dock rail facilities. The study will compare and contrast the costs and benefits of these systems to conventional drayage, with and without cleaner truck engines and cleaner fuels. Additionally, the I-710 Corridor Project, led by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, will evaluate a range of alternatives for improving corridor congestion, including a review of advanced technologies capable of transporting freight from the ports to downtown Los Angeles. Further, SCAG expects to issue an RFP (1st quarter 2007) to conduct a feasibility study of alternative freight transport system from the ports to a potential inland port location.

Truck-Only Lanes SCAG is formulating a business plan for a regional truckway system comprising 142 center-line miles of dedicated truck lanes extending from the San Pedro Bay ports eastward toward Barstow. The dedicated truckways offer a viable and partially self-financing solution for mitigating congestion and reducing mobile source emissions. The system would have a graduated toll rate based on a number of factors including the relative emissions associated with each vehicle. The truck-only lane would allow each truck to carry multiple containers, further improving the efficiency and financial viability of the system. The EIR/EIS for the I-710 Corridor project mentioned above will include evaluation of specific alternatives for the first segment of a truckway system from the ports to downtown Los Angeles.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP: Appendix IV-C Ship Emissions Control SCAG is also in discussions with shipping lines and shippers to develop a financing mechanism to provide monies for emissions mitigation and system efficiencies for ships delivering goods to the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles.

Taken together, the various components of an overall goods movement strategy are the basis for a goods movement transportation control measure. The enforceability of this measure is predicated on binding agreements, financing, and pricing mechanisms through existing Joint Powers Authorities or other applicable institutions or agencies.

A supplemental/alternative approach to achieving emission reductions could take the form of an emissions reduction market based on binding agreements among the parties and performance commitments included in the SIP.1 Because of the complexity of the issues and the numerous on-going and planned efforts of the goods movement stakeholders, the this control measure will be further refined as part of the 2007/8 RTP.development of a comprehensive goods movement plan is beyond the timeframe of the 2007 AQMP. It is expected that the efforts underway will primarily help refine the goods movement strategies in the existing 2004 RTP, as well as introduce new technological strategies and environmental mitigation measures being investigated throughout the region. Accordingly, they will provide the basis for the goods movement portion of the next RTP update which is scheduled for adoption in December 2007 or the first quarter of 2008. The goods movement strategy developed for the RTP could then become the basis for a SIP amendment which incorporates applicable emission reduction strategies.

[A footnote has been added to Table 2 - Goods Movement Programs and Studies. Appendix IV-C, page 14, to indicate that three of the studies are being combined to one study - Goods Movement Conceptual System Design Phase I & II, Feasibility of Innovative Freight Technologies, and Study of Freight Movement by High Speed Rail]

[The sections entitled Rollover of TCM Projects and Adoption Procedures for RTIP Rollover of TCM Projects have been updated. Appendix IV-C, page 36] Rollover of TCM Projects (RTIP Update) Approximately every two years, as the RTIP is updated, additional TCMs will be added to the AQMP/SIP TCM list based on the new RTIP and the RTIP Guidelines. Theis ?rollover? of TCMslist will update the AQMP/SIP to include new projects in addition to ongoing projects from previous RTIPs. Completed projects (projects that have completed construction or have service in place) will be reported as complete and removed from the list. The rollover TCMslist

1 A proposal along these lines was included as Appendix G: Maritime Good s Movement Coalition Proposal, Proposed Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement in California, Approved by ARB on April 20, 2006.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP: Appendix IV-C ?rolled over? will be monitored for adherence to the schedule established in the RTIP at the time a project is identified as a committed TCM. The identification of TCMs from the RTIP shall be agreed upon by both SCAG and the appropriate CTCs.

For tracking and monitoring purposes, SCAG prepares a timely implementation report with each RTIP. Once a TCM project or program is committed for implementation in the first two years of the RTIP, that project must be implemented by the completion date in the prevailing RTIP or timely implementation report. The list of TCMs included in the AQMP/SIP appropriately does not include a timely implementation report. Completed projects (projects that have completed construction or have service in place) will be reported as complete and removed from the timely implementation report. Timely implementation reporting is done only when the RTIP is updated. The list of TCMs included in the AQMP/SIP does not include a timely implementation report.

The rollover process will apply to any RTIP that requires a full conformity analysis and finding. Generally, a new RTIP is required every two years in accordance with state and federal planning requirements. However, a new RTIP can be more frequent, for example a new RTIP is required within six months of the adoption of a new RTP. The described TCM rollover process shall apply in such cases as well.

Adoption Procedures for RTIP Rollover of TCM Projects The rollover of the RTIP must be adopted by SCAG's Regional Council, in accordance with the RTIP adoption process, as described below.

? The Draft RTIP is reviewed by various SCAG Committees, Task Forces, and Working Groups, such as the standing Transportation and Communication Committee, and the ? The Transportation Conformity Working Group (TCWG), which serves as the ? Public notification is provided through major newspapers in the affected sub-regions as ? Draft RTIP materials are distributed, with appropriate cover letters, to approved public libraries and facilities and also made available on SCAG's website for access by the ? Input received is compiled and analyzed, and responses to comments are provided by ? A summary of comments received during the public comment period along with SCAG's responses, following the close of the public comment period, is incorporated into the ? The Final RTIP is adopted by SCAG's Regional Council; and ? Pursuant to SAFETEA-LU, the additional TCMs are submitted to the State air pollution control agency and the US EPA Administrator for concurrence. Upon approval, the TCMs become part of the applicable AQMP/SIP; and

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP: Appendix IV-C ? SCAG's adopted RTIP is submitted to the State for funding approval and to the federal agencies (FHWA, FTA and EPA) for final funding and conformity approval. ? Upon federal approval of the RTIP, the new TCMs become part of the applicable AQMP/SIP.

[The discussion of substitution of individual TCM projects has been updated. Appendix IV-C, page 37, 2nd paragraph] Substitution of individual TCMs will follow the process specified in the CAA section 176(c)outlined in SAFETEA-LU. Section 6011(d) of SAFETEA-LU 176(c) of the CAA allows for the substitution of individual TCMs if certain conditions are met. These include:

[The section on regional transportation emissions has been revised to account for the use of EMFAC2007. Appendix IV-C, page 42] REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS Based on the data generated from SCAG's Transportation Demand Model (e.g., traffic volumes, vehicle speeds, transit ridership, etc.), an estimate of emissions associated with on-road mobile sources can be generated using CARB's emission factor model (EMFAC). Through this process, future emissions from on-road mobile sources can be compared for the regional transportation system assuming implementation of the RTP versus a baseline case without RTP implementation.

One of the key goals of conventional transportation planning has been the provision of sufficient roadway capacity to reduce congestion and improve mobility through improvements to regional networks of highways and arterials. And, to the extent that congestion is relieved, there are significant regional air quality benefits to such flow-improving interventions. Thus, the emissions benefits historically demonstrated in previous AQMPs and air quality analyses performed for the RTP and the RTIP have been based on the congestion relief effects associated with both added infrastructure capacity and implementation of TCMs. It is generally understood, however, that potential future improvements in air quality deriving from the RTP and TCMs will be minimalmuch smaller, since motor vehicle emissions have and will continue to be substantially reduced through technology (i.e., emission standards for new engines and in- use standards for existing fleets). For instance, the emissions of ROG go from approximately 300 tons per day in 2005 to approximately 82 tons per day in 2030. Further, most of the TCM projects in the South Coast Air Basin were adopted into the SIP to meet the one-hour ozone standard by 2010 and have already been implemented. Thus, the emission reductions associated with these projects are now included in the baseline emissions and no longer show up in the TCM benefit values.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP: Appendix IV-C The modeling exercises performed for the Final Draft 2007 AQMP are intended to evaluate emissions associated with the transportation strategy (i.e., the RTP) relative to baseline conditions for ROG, NOx, and PM2.5. Additional modeling exercises were performed to estimate the contribution of TCMs and the Compass Growth Visioning program to the emissions profile of the overall transportation strategy. For the TCM modeling exercise, socio-economic data variables were held constant and the transportation network was modified to account for the TCMs. To estimate the benefits of Compass, the transportation network was held constant and socio-economic data associated with Compass was modified between baseline and project conditions. It must be noted, however, that the regional transportation strategy is appropriately viewed on a systems-level basis and not by its components (e.g., TCMs, Compass, etc.) since each of the individual transportation improvements and strategies affect each other and the system. Isolating and summing the emissions effect of each transportation improvement and strategy cannot provide an accurate representation of the system's emissions because the interactions and feedback among these components alters the end results. Nevertheless, for purposes of discussion, Table 7 provides the results of the modeling analyses for the RTP as a whole as well as those for the TCM and Compass components of the RTP for the attainment years 2014 (PM2.5), 2020 (8-hour ozone), and 2023 (8-hour ozone assuming a ?bump-up? to extreme nonattainment). demonstrates a decrease in ROG, CO, and PM2.5 emissions from on- road mobile sources for the milestone years of 2010, 2015, 2020, and 2023. However, while NOx emissions decrease in the year 2010, the currently available emissions model (EMFAC2002) predicts NOx increases in the milestone years 2015, 2020, and 2023 (see Table 7) The increase in NOx emissions is attributed to heavy duty trucks. Based on the best data available at the time the EMFAC2002 was developed, this emissions model includes a NOx ?speed curve? for heavy duty trucks that predicts an increase in NOx emissions as vehicle speeds exceed approximately 35 miles per hour. It is assumed that the NOx increase seen in later years is due to the congestion relief effects of the RTP and TCMs.

CARB is currently in the process of developing the next generation EMFAC (i.e., EMFAC2007) with a scheduled release date of November 2007. The EMFAC2007 development process includes a proposal to revise heavy duty truck speed correction factors to account for new information. The proposed NOx speed curves have a much flatter shape relative to EMFAC2002. This may demonstrate lower NOx emissions associated with heavy duty trucks in future years, though, considering changes are also proposed to the heavy duty truck emission factors, the ultimate effect of the new EMFAC model on the draft NOx emissions values reported here cannot be accurately predicted.

The draft emissions values shown below will be updated once the new EMFAC model is publicly available. Additionally, It should be noted that SCAG has been working with modeling experts and practitioners to develop a new Transportation Demand Model that is expected to more accurately forecast highway traffic volumes, speeds, and other aspects of the transportation system. The new Transportation Demand Model will be used for the Final 2007 AQMP if available within the development schedule of the AQMP.The new model is in the process of being calibrated and validated. Model runs, with a preliminarily calibrated and validated model, seem to be consistent with the interim model emissions in the South Coast.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP: Appendix IV-C Table 7 Transportation Strategy Emissions (tons per day) Pollutan t 2010 2014 2020 2023 RTP TCMs Compass RTP TCMs Compass RTP TCMs Compass RTP TCMs Compass ROG -2.86 ** *** -1.79 -1.07 *** -1.68 -0.83 -0.50 -1.74 -0.90 -0.67 NOX -1.01 ** *** -0.01 -3.54 *** 0.25 -2.20 -0.47 -0.21 -2.11 -0.64 PM2.5 * -0.26 ** *** -0.24 -0.18 *** **** **** **** **** **** **** Note: negative value indicates an emissions reduction PM2.5 and all 2014 values based on annual emissions inventory; all others are summer planning inventory ** TCMs benefit shown for attainment years only *** Implementation of Compass Growth Visioning Program occurs after 2014 **** PM2.5 attainment required by 2015

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP: Appendix IV-C

Pollutant 2010 2015 2020 2023 ROG - 3.76 - 2.68 - 1.64 - 1.04 NOx - 0.75 +1.06 + 2.51 + 2.51 PM2.5 - 0.37 - 0.44 - 0.60 - 0.55 CO - 37.64 - 27.59 - 19.36 - 13.47

[The RACM analysis discussion has been revised. Appendix IV-C, page 48, 1st paragraph] To develop a list of candidate RACM, SCAG performed a review of available TCMs in California, as well as in other states. SCAG reexamined the candidate RACM identified during the comprehensive RACM analysis performed for the 2003 AQMP. Additionally, SCAG coordinated with other MPOs and air quality districts to identify measures that are being implemented or considered in other nonattainment areas. SCAG reviewed TCMs implemented in California from various nonattainment areas (Sacramento, San Joaquin Valley, and the Bay Area). SCAG also coordinated with other agencies outside of the SCAG region in an effort to ensure that all RACM were considered (the Houston-Galveston Area Council [H-GAC] in Texas; Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments [MWCOG] in Washington D.C.; the Maricopa County Air Quality Department in Arizona, and the North Central Texas Council of Governments [NCTCOG].2 SCAG also utilized information from Arizona and Texas obtained in the 2003 AQMP RACM Analysis. The comprehensive list of candidate TCMs for RACM compiled in the UC Davis-Caltrans Air Quality Project, Transportation Control Measures: Guidance for Conformity and State Implementation Plan Development (August 2004), was also reviewed as part of the current RACM analysis.

2 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.(December 13, 2006). Dallas-Fort Worth 8-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area Attainment Demonstration: Revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Control of Ozone Air Pollution. Available at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/air/sip/dfw.html.

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment A: 2007 AQMP TCM Projects

Modifications to Attachment A: 2007 AQMP TCM Projects [HOV Improvements - New HOV Lanes, Extensions, Additions to Existing Facilities has been updated. Projects LA990353, LA0C56, and LA0C57 were removed from this category and appropriately included under the Systems Management. category; Appendix IV-C, Attachment A, page A-2] HOV Improvements - New HOV Lanes, Extensions, Additions to Existing Facilities Lead Agency Project ID Description 2006 RTIP Completion Date LOS ANGELES COUNTY LA990353 ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST - NOGALES ST. GRADE SEP (T21-491, SGVCG) 2008 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COG LA0C56 ACE/GATEWAY CITIES-CONSTRUCT GRADE SEPARATION AT VALLEY VIEW AVENUE IN SANTA FE SPRINGS (PART OF ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST PROJECT) 2008 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COG LA0C57 ACE/GATEWAY CITIES-CONSTRUCT GRADE SEPARATION AT PASSONS BLVD IN PICO RIVERA (AND MODIFY PROFILE OF SERAPIS AVENUE)(PART OF ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST PROJECT). 2010

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment A: 2007 AQMP TCM Projects

Modifications to Attachment A: 2007 AQMP TCM Projects [High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes and Pricing Alternatives has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment A, page A-6] High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes and Pricing Alternatives Lead Agency Project ID Description 2006 RTIP Completion Date TCA 10254 SJHC, 15 MI TOLL RD BETWEEN I-5 IN SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO & RTE 73 IN IRVINE, EXISTING 3/M/F EA.DIR.1 ADD'L M/F EA DIR, PLUS CLIMBING & AUX LNS AS REQ, BY 2015 PER SCAG/TCA MOU 4/5/01. [2008 COMPLETION DATE FOR PHASE 1 ONLY] 2008 TCA ORA050 ETC (RTE 241/261/133) TOLL RD (RTE 91TO I-5/JAMBOREE) EXISTING 2 M/F EA.DIR, 2 ADD'L M/F IN EA. DIR, PLUS CLIMB AND AUX LNS AS REQ, BY 2015 PER SCAG/TCA MOU 4/05/01. [2010 COMPLETION DATE FOR PHASE 1 ONLY] 2010 TCA ORA051 (FTC-N) TOLL RD ( OSO PKWY TO ETC) (13MI) EXISTING 2 MF IN EA. DIR; 3 MF EA. DIR BY 2010; 4 MF EA. DIR BY 2015, PLS CLMBNG & AUX LANS PER SCAG/TCA MOU 4/05/01. [2010 COMPLETION DATE FOR PHASE 1 ONLY] 2010 TCA ORA052 (FTC-S) TOLL RD (I-5 TO OSO PKWY) (15MI) 2 MF EA. DIR BY 2010; AND 1 ADDITIONAL M/F EA. DIR. PLS CLMBNG & AUX LANES AS REQ BY 2015 PER SCAG/TCA MOU 4/05/01. [2010 COMPLETION DATE FOR PHASE 1 ONLY] 2010

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment A: 2007 AQMP TCM Projects

Modifications to Attachment A: 2007 AQMP TCM Projects [Transit - Express Busways, Bus Rapid Transit, and Dedicated Bus Lanes has been updated. Project LA0D45 was removed from this category. Appendix IV-C, Attachment A, page A-9] Transit - Express Busways, Bus Rapid Transit, and Dedicated Bus Lanes Lead Agency Project ID Description 2006 RTIP Completion Date ALAMEDA TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR AGENCY LA0D45 ALAMEDA CORRIDOR TRUCK EXPRESSWAY. ELEVATED 4-LANE EXPRESSWAY BETWEEN COMMODORE HELM BRIDGE AND ALAMEDA STREET (SR-47). 2011

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment A: 2007 AQMP TCM Projects

Modifications to Attachment A: 2007 AQMP TCM Projects [A new project category labeled System Management ? Railroad Consolidation Programs has been added. This category was developed from language originally contained in Project Category B. Transit and System Management Systems (Appendix IV- C, Table 4, TCM Project Categories, page 39).

Projects LA990353, LA0C56, and LA0C57, which were originally under HOV Improvements - New HOV Lanes, Extensions, Additions to Existing Facilities, and LA0D45, which was originally under Transit - Express Busways, Bus Rapid Transit, and Dedicated Bus Lanes, were moved to this category.] System Management ? Railroad Consolidation Programs Lead Agency Project ID Description 2006 RTIP Completion Date LOS ANGELES COUNTY LA990353 ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST - NOGALES ST. GRADE SEP (T21-491, SGVCG) 2008 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COG LA0C56 ACE/GATEWAY CITIES-CONSTRUCT GRADE SEPARATION AT VALLEY VIEW AVENUE IN SANTA FE SPRINGS (PART OF ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST PROJECT) 2008 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COG LA0C57 ACE/GATEWAY CITIES-CONSTRUCT GRADE SEPARATION AT PASSONS BLVD IN PICO RIVERA (AND MODIFY PROFILE OF SERAPIS AVENUE)(PART OF ALAMEDA CORRIDOR EAST PROJECT). 2010 ALAMEDA TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR AGENCY LA0D45 ALAMEDA CORRIDOR TRUCK EXPRESSWAY. ELEVATED 4-LANE EXPRESSWAY BETWEEN COMMODORE HELM BRIDGE AND ALAMEDA STREET (SR-47). 2011

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 1. Programs for Improved Public Transit has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-1]

Section 108 (f) 1. Programs for Improved Public Transit Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 1.7 Free transit during special events Require free transit during selected special events to reduce event-related congestion and associated emission increases. No The Legislature significantly reduced authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, HSC 40717.9).

Transit agencies should decide individually whether this measure is economically feasible for them.

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-based Transportation Management Plans, Including Incentives has been updated. A footnote has been added to these measures to indicate their relation to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Vehicle Mitigation Options. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, pages C-4 through C- 6]

Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-based Transportation Management Plans, Including Incentives Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 3.1? Commute solutions The federal law that complements parking cash- out is called the Commuter Choice Program. It provides for benefits that employers can offer to employees to commute to work by methods other than driving alone. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.2* Parking cash-out State law requires certain employers who provide subsidized parking for their employees to offer a cash allowance in lieu of a parking space. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.3* Employer Rideshare Program Incentives Employer rideshare incentives and introduction of strategies designed to reduce single occupant vehicle trips. Examples include: public awareness campaigns, Transportation Management Associations among employers, alternative work hours, and financial incentives. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.4* Implement Parking Charge Incentive Program Evaluate feasibility of an incentive program for cities and employers that convert free public parking spaces to paid spaces. Review existing parking polices as they relate to new development approvals. Yes AQMD, Cities, Employer 3.5* Preferential parking for carpools and vanpools This measure encourages public and private employers to provide preferential parking spaces for carpools and vanpools to decrease the Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-based Transportation Management Plans, Including Incentives Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies The preferential treatment could include covered 3.6? Employee parking fees Encourage public and private employers to charge employees for parking. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.7* Merchant transportation incentives Implement ?non-work? trip reduction ordinances requiring merchants to offer customers mode shift travel incentives such as free bus passes and requiring owners/managers/developers of large retail establishments to provide facilities for non- motorized modes. No The Legislature has limited removed authority to implement indirect source control employee trip reduction measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, HSC 40717.9.)

3.8* Purchase vans for vanpools Purchase a specified number of vans for use in employee commute travel. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.9* Encourage merchants and employers to subsidize the cost of transit for employees Provide outreach and possible financial incentives to encourage local employers to provide transit passes or subsidies to encourage less individual vehicle travel. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.10 Off-days for Ozone Action Days similar to sick days On Ozone Action Days, notify employees through email that there is an ozone alert. Employees are given a pre-specified number of days they can decide not to come in to work on Ozone Action Days. Yes AQMD 3.11 Pay for in-house meals on Ozone Employer pays for meals in-house on Ozone No The Legislature significantly

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-based Transportation Management Plans, Including Incentives Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies Action Days Action Days so that employees do not travel to off-site locations. reduced authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, 3.12 Voluntary business closures on Ozone Action Days A more expensive version of ?off-days? for Ozone Action Days. Yes AQMD 3.13 Close government offices on Ozone Action Days to serve as an example Similar to voluntary business closures. No The Legislature removed authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, HSC 40717.9).

3.14? Compressed work weeks Self explanatory. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.15* Telecommuting Goal of specified percentage of employees telecommuting at least once per week. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 4. Trip Reduction Ordinance has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-7]

Section 108 (f) 4. Trip Reduction Ordinance In December 1995, Congress changed the Clean Air Act Amendments to make the Employee Commute Option program voluntary (no longer mandatory). California State Law prohibits mandatory employer based trip reduction ordinance programs (SB437). (HSC 40717.9) To account for these restrictions, SCAQMD Rule 2202 provides employers with a menu of options to reduce mobile source emissions generated from employee commutes. Rule 2202 complies with federal and state Clean Air Act requirements, HSC 40458, and HSC 182(d) (1) (B) of the federal Clean Air Act. Nevertheless, some jurisdictions continue to implement Trip Reduction Ordinances. For example, the City of Santa Monica requires new and existing non-residential development projects to adopt Emission Reduction Plans and pay transportation impact fees to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality in the city

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 5. Traffic Flow Improvement Programs that Achieve Emissions Reductions has been updated. Measures 5.11 and Measure 5.12, which relate to Ozone Action Days, were removed because they do not meet the TCM criteria. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-9]

Section 108 (f) 5. Traffic Flow Improvement Programs that Achieve Emissions Reductions Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 5.11 Consider coordinating scheduling of arterial and highway maintenance to exclude Ozone Action Days if the maintenance activities require lane reductions on heavily utilized arterials and highways Self explanatory. Yes AQMD, Caltrans 5.12 Re-routing of trucks Ozone Action Days Self explanatory. Yes AQMD

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak Use has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, pages C-13 through C-15]

Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak Use Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 7.1 Off-peak goods movement Implement an ordinance to restrict truck deliveries by time or place in order to minimize traffic congestion during peak periods. YesNo Not economically feasible. AQMD 7.2 Truck restrictions during peak periods Implement an ordinance to restrict truck travel during peak periods in order to minimize traffic congestion. YesNo Not economically feasible. AQMD 7.4 Adjust school hours so they do not coincide with peak traffic periods and ozone seasons Measure to reduce travel during peak periods and ozone-contributing periods in the early morning. Yes AQMD School Districts 7.6 Increase parking fees Reduce driving by limiting parking through pricing measures. No Attorney General ruled AQMD lacks authority to implement this measure.The Legislature significantly reduced authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, HSC 40717.9).

7.8 Buy parking lots and convert to other land use Limit parking by converting available parking to other land uses to discourage driving. Yes Cities 7.9 Limit the number of parking spaces at commercial airlines to support mass transit Reduce airport travel by limits on parking at airports. No Regulatory agencies do not have the legal authority to make local land use decisions. It is at the discretion of the regional or local airport authority to make

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak Use Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies local land use decisions pertaining to airports.

It is necessary to have significant mass transit available at airports before this measure can be implemented. This is 7.10 No Central Business District (CBD) vehicles unless LEV or alt fuel or electric Define high-use area and ticket any vehicles present unless they are low emitting, alternative fueled or electric. No The Legislature significantly reduced authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (40717.6, 40717.8, and 40717.9).

Regulatory agencies do not have the legal authority to make local land use decisions. It is at the cities discretion to make local land use decisions.

7.14 Incentives for cities with good development practices Provide financial or other incentive to local cities that practice air quality-sensitive development. Yes AQMD,SCAG 7.15 Cash incentives to foster jobs/housing balance Specific to locality ? encouraged by California Clean Air Plan. YesNo No dedicated source of funding for this measure.

7.16 Trip reduction oriented development Specific to locality ? encouraged by California Clean Air Plan. Land use decisions that encourage trip reductions. Yes SCAG

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak Use Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 7.17 Transit oriented development Specific to locality ? encouraged by California Clean Air Plan. Land use decisions that encourage walkable communities and multi-modal transit systems. Yes SCAG 7.18 Sustainable development Specific to locality ? encouraged by California Clean Air Plan. Land use decisions that create equitable standards of living to satisfy the basic needs of all peoples, all while taking the steps to avoid further environmental degradation. Yes SCAG

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 8. Programs for the Provision of All Forms of High-Occupancy, Shared-Ride Services has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-16]

Section 108 (f) 8. Programs for the Provision of All Forms of High-Occupancy, Shared-Ride Services Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 8.1 Financial Incentives, Including Zero- Bus Fares Provide financial incentives or other benefits, such as free or subsidized bus passes and cash payments for not driving, in lieu of parking spaces for employees who do not drive to the workplace. Yes AQMD, Employer 8.3 Preferential parking for carpoolers Provide free, covered, near-building or similar incentives to carpoolers. Yes AQMD, Employer 8.4 Credits and incentives for carpoolers Self-explanatory ? form depends on locality. Yes AQMD, Employer 8.5 Employers provide vehicles to carpoolers for running errands or emergencies Having vehicles available for workday errands makes it easier to go to work without one. Yes AQMD, Employer 8.6 Subscription services Free van services to provide transportation for the elderly, handicapped or other individuals who have no access to transportation. Yes County, Employer 8.7 School car pools Self explanatory. No Regulatory agencies do not have the legal authority to make local land use decisionsNot economically feasible and insufficient resources available for 8.8 Guaranteed ride home Self explanatory. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 9. Programs to Limit Portions of Road Surfaces or Certain Sections of the Metropolitan Area to the Use of Non-Motorized Vehicles or Pedestrian Use, Both as to Time and Place has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-17]

Section 108 (f) 9. Programs to Limit Portions of Road Surfaces or Certain Sections of the Metropolitan Area to the Use of Non-Motorized Vehicles or Pedestrian Use, Both as to Time and Place Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 9.7 Cash rebates for bikes Provide financial incentives to purchase bicycles and thereby encourage use. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 10. Programs for Secure Bicycle Storage Facilities and Other Facilities, Including Bicycle Lanes, for the Convenience and Protection of Bicyclists, in Both Public and Private Areas has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-19]

Section 108 (f) 10. Programs for Secure Bicycle Storage Facilities and Other Facilities, Including Bicycle Lanes, for the Convenience and Protection of Bicyclists, in Both Public and Private Areas Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 10.1 Bike racks at work sites Self Explanatory. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 13. Employer-Sponsored Programs to Permit Flexible Work Schedules has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C- 23]

Section 108 (f) 13. Employer-Sponsored Programs to Permit Flexible Work Schedules Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 13.1 Alternative work schedules Enables workers to choose their own working hours within certain constraints. Flextime provides the opportunity for employees to use public transit, ridesharing, and other Nonmotorized transportation. A related strategy, staggered work hours, is designed to reduce Alternative workweeks have been implemented extensively by large private and public employers. Yes AQMD, Employer 13.2 Modifications of work schedules Implement alternate work schedules that flex the scheduled shift time for employees. Encourage the use of flexible or staggered work hours to promote off-peak driving and accommodate the use of transit and carpooling. Yes AQMD, Employer 13.3 Telecommunications- Telecommuting/Teleconferencing Encourage the use of telecommuting- telecommuting/teleconferencing in place of motor vehicle use where appropriate. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 14. Programs and Ordinances to Facilitate Non-Automotive Travel, Provision to and Utilization of Mass Transit, and to Generally Reduce the Need for Single-Occupant Vehicle Travel, as Part of Transportation Planning and Development Efforts has been updated. A footnote has been added to measures 14.5 and 14.8 to indicate their relation to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Vehicle Mitigation Options. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, pages C-24 and C-25]

Section 108 (f) 14. Programs and Ordinances to Facilitate Non-Automotive Travel, Provision to and Utilization of Mass Transit, and to Generally Reduce the Need for Single-Occupant Vehicle Travel, as Part of Transportation Planning And Development Efforts Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 14.5? Evaluation of the air quality impacts of new development and mitigation of adverse impacts Evaluate the air quality impacts of new development and mitigate any adverse impacts. Yes AQMD, SCAG 14.8* Incentives for cities with good development practices Provide financial or other incentive to local cities that practice air quality-sensitive development. Yes AQMD, SCAG

? This measure relates to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options. Rule 2202 provides a menu of options for employers in choosing how they will comply with the rule. The primary implementer is the employer.

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 16. Program to Encourage the Voluntary Removal From Use and the Marketplace of Pre-1980 Model Year Light Duty Vehicles and Pre-1980 Model Light Duty Trucks has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-27]

Section 108 (f) 16. Program to Encourage the Voluntary Removal From Use and the Marketplace of Pre-1980 Model Year Light Duty Vehicles and Pre-1980 Model Light Duty Trucks Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 16.2 Buy vehicles older than 1975 Self explanatory. Yes ARB, AQMD 16.3 Demolish impounded vehicles that are high emitters Self explanatory. YesNo Not economically feasible.

AQMD 16.4 Do whatever is necessary to allow cities to remove the engines of high emitting vehicles (pre-1980) that are abandoned and to be auctioned Self explanatory. YesNo Not economically feasible.

AQMD 16.5 Accelerated retirement program Identify high emitting vehicle age groups and develop a program to remove them from use. Yes ARB, AQMD

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 1. Programs for Improved Public Transit has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-1]

Section 108 (f) 1. Programs for Improved Public Transit Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 1.7 Free transit during special events Require free transit during selected special events to reduce event-related congestion and associated emission increases. No The Legislature significantly reduced authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, HSC 40717.9).

Transit agencies should decide individually whether this measure is economically feasible for them.

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-based Transportation Management Plans, Including Incentives has been updated. A footnote has been added to these measures to indicate their relation to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Vehicle Mitigation Options. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, pages C-4 through C- 6]

Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-based Transportation Management Plans, Including Incentives Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 3.1? Commute solutions The federal law that complements parking cash- out is called the Commuter Choice Program. It provides for benefits that employers can offer to employees to commute to work by methods other than driving alone. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.2* Parking cash-out State law requires certain employers who provide subsidized parking for their employees to offer a cash allowance in lieu of a parking space. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.3* Employer Rideshare Program Incentives Employer rideshare incentives and introduction of strategies designed to reduce single occupant vehicle trips. Examples include: public awareness campaigns, Transportation Management Associations among employers, alternative work hours, and financial incentives. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.4* Implement Parking Charge Incentive Program Evaluate feasibility of an incentive program for cities and employers that convert free public parking spaces to paid spaces. Review existing parking polices as they relate to new development approvals. Yes AQMD, Cities, Employer 3.5* Preferential parking for carpools and vanpools This measure encourages public and private employers to provide preferential parking spaces for carpools and vanpools to decrease the Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-based Transportation Management Plans, Including Incentives Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies The preferential treatment could include covered 3.6? Employee parking fees Encourage public and private employers to charge employees for parking. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.7* Merchant transportation incentives Implement ?non-work? trip reduction ordinances requiring merchants to offer customers mode shift travel incentives such as free bus passes and requiring owners/managers/developers of large retail establishments to provide facilities for non- motorized modes. No The Legislature has limited removed authority to implement indirect source control employee trip reduction measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, HSC 40717.9.)

3.8* Purchase vans for vanpools Purchase a specified number of vans for use in employee commute travel. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.9* Encourage merchants and employers to subsidize the cost of transit for employees Provide outreach and possible financial incentives to encourage local employers to provide transit passes or subsidies to encourage less individual vehicle travel. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.10 Off-days for Ozone Action Days similar to sick days On Ozone Action Days, notify employees through email that there is an ozone alert. Employees are given a pre-specified number of days they can decide not to come in to work on Ozone Action Days. Yes AQMD 3.11 Pay for in-house meals on Ozone Employer pays for meals in-house on Ozone No The Legislature significantly

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-based Transportation Management Plans, Including Incentives Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies Action Days Action Days so that employees do not travel to off-site locations. reduced authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, 3.12 Voluntary business closures on Ozone Action Days A more expensive version of ?off-days? for Ozone Action Days. Yes AQMD 3.13 Close government offices on Ozone Action Days to serve as an example Similar to voluntary business closures. No The Legislature removed authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, HSC 40717.9).

3.14? Compressed work weeks Self explanatory. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.15* Telecommuting Goal of specified percentage of employees telecommuting at least once per week. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 4. Trip Reduction Ordinance has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-7]

Section 108 (f) 4. Trip Reduction Ordinance In December 1995, Congress changed the Clean Air Act Amendments to make the Employee Commute Option program voluntary (no longer mandatory). California State Law prohibits mandatory employer based trip reduction ordinance programs (SB437). (HSC 40717.9) To account for these restrictions, SCAQMD Rule 2202 provides employers with a menu of options to reduce mobile source emissions generated from employee commutes. Rule 2202 complies with federal and state Clean Air Act requirements, HSC 40458, and HSC 182(d) (1) (B) of the federal Clean Air Act. Nevertheless, some jurisdictions continue to implement Trip Reduction Ordinances. For example, the City of Santa Monica requires new and existing non-residential development projects to adopt Emission Reduction Plans and pay transportation impact fees to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality in the city

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 5. Traffic Flow Improvement Programs that Achieve Emissions Reductions has been updated. Measures 5.11 and Measure 5.12, which relate to Ozone Action Days, were removed because they do not meet the TCM criteria. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-9]

Section 108 (f) 5. Traffic Flow Improvement Programs that Achieve Emissions Reductions Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 5.11 Consider coordinating scheduling of arterial and highway maintenance to exclude Ozone Action Days if the maintenance activities require lane reductions on heavily utilized arterials and highways Self explanatory. Yes AQMD, Caltrans 5.12 Re-routing of trucks Ozone Action Days Self explanatory. Yes AQMD

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak Use has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, pages C-13 through C-15]

Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak Use Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 7.1 Off-peak goods movement Implement an ordinance to restrict truck deliveries by time or place in order to minimize traffic congestion during peak periods. YesNo Not economically feasible. AQMD 7.2 Truck restrictions during peak periods Implement an ordinance to restrict truck travel during peak periods in order to minimize traffic congestion. YesNo Not economically feasible. AQMD 7.4 Adjust school hours so they do not coincide with peak traffic periods and ozone seasons Measure to reduce travel during peak periods and ozone-contributing periods in the early morning. Yes AQMD School Districts 7.6 Increase parking fees Reduce driving by limiting parking through pricing measures. No Attorney General ruled AQMD lacks authority to implement this measure.The Legislature significantly reduced authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, HSC 40717.9).

7.8 Buy parking lots and convert to other land use Limit parking by converting available parking to other land uses to discourage driving. Yes Cities 7.9 Limit the number of parking spaces at commercial airlines to support mass transit Reduce airport travel by limits on parking at airports. No Regulatory agencies do not have the legal authority to make local land use decisions. It is at the discretion of the regional or local airport authority to make

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak Use Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies local land use decisions pertaining to airports.

It is necessary to have significant mass transit available at airports before this measure can be implemented. This is 7.10 No Central Business District (CBD) vehicles unless LEV or alt fuel or electric Define high-use area and ticket any vehicles present unless they are low emitting, alternative fueled or electric. No The Legislature significantly reduced authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (40717.6, 40717.8, and 40717.9).

Regulatory agencies do not have the legal authority to make local land use decisions. It is at the cities discretion to make local land use decisions.

7.14 Incentives for cities with good development practices Provide financial or other incentive to local cities that practice air quality-sensitive development. Yes AQMD,SCAG 7.15 Cash incentives to foster jobs/housing balance Specific to locality ? encouraged by California Clean Air Plan. YesNo No dedicated source of funding for this measure.

7.16 Trip reduction oriented development Specific to locality ? encouraged by California Clean Air Plan. Land use decisions that encourage trip reductions. Yes SCAG

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak Use Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 7.17 Transit oriented development Specific to locality ? encouraged by California Clean Air Plan. Land use decisions that encourage walkable communities and multi-modal transit systems. Yes SCAG 7.18 Sustainable development Specific to locality ? encouraged by California Clean Air Plan. Land use decisions that create equitable standards of living to satisfy the basic needs of all peoples, all while taking the steps to avoid further environmental degradation. Yes SCAG

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 8. Programs for the Provision of All Forms of High-Occupancy, Shared-Ride Services has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-16]

Section 108 (f) 8. Programs for the Provision of All Forms of High-Occupancy, Shared-Ride Services Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 8.1 Financial Incentives, Including Zero- Bus Fares Provide financial incentives or other benefits, such as free or subsidized bus passes and cash payments for not driving, in lieu of parking spaces for employees who do not drive to the workplace. Yes AQMD, Employer 8.3 Preferential parking for carpoolers Provide free, covered, near-building or similar incentives to carpoolers. Yes AQMD, Employer 8.4 Credits and incentives for carpoolers Self-explanatory ? form depends on locality. Yes AQMD, Employer 8.5 Employers provide vehicles to carpoolers for running errands or emergencies Having vehicles available for workday errands makes it easier to go to work without one. Yes AQMD, Employer 8.6 Subscription services Free van services to provide transportation for the elderly, handicapped or other individuals who have no access to transportation. Yes County, Employer 8.7 School car pools Self explanatory. No Regulatory agencies do not have the legal authority to make local land use decisionsNot economically feasible and insufficient resources available for 8.8 Guaranteed ride home Self explanatory. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 9. Programs to Limit Portions of Road Surfaces or Certain Sections of the Metropolitan Area to the Use of Non-Motorized Vehicles or Pedestrian Use, Both as to Time and Place has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-17]

Section 108 (f) 9. Programs to Limit Portions of Road Surfaces or Certain Sections of the Metropolitan Area to the Use of Non-Motorized Vehicles or Pedestrian Use, Both as to Time and Place Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 9.7 Cash rebates for bikes Provide financial incentives to purchase bicycles and thereby encourage use. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 10. Programs for Secure Bicycle Storage Facilities and Other Facilities, Including Bicycle Lanes, for the Convenience and Protection of Bicyclists, in Both Public and Private Areas has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-19]

Section 108 (f) 10. Programs for Secure Bicycle Storage Facilities and Other Facilities, Including Bicycle Lanes, for the Convenience and Protection of Bicyclists, in Both Public and Private Areas Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 10.1 Bike racks at work sites Self Explanatory. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 13. Employer-Sponsored Programs to Permit Flexible Work Schedules has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C- 23]

Section 108 (f) 13. Employer-Sponsored Programs to Permit Flexible Work Schedules Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 13.1 Alternative work schedules Enables workers to choose their own working hours within certain constraints. Flextime provides the opportunity for employees to use public transit, ridesharing, and other Nonmotorized transportation. A related strategy, staggered work hours, is designed to reduce Alternative workweeks have been implemented extensively by large private and public employers. Yes AQMD, Employer 13.2 Modifications of work schedules Implement alternate work schedules that flex the scheduled shift time for employees. Encourage the use of flexible or staggered work hours to promote off-peak driving and accommodate the use of transit and carpooling. Yes AQMD, Employer 13.3 Telecommunications- Telecommuting/Teleconferencing Encourage the use of telecommuting- telecommuting/teleconferencing in place of motor vehicle use where appropriate. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 14. Programs and Ordinances to Facilitate Non-Automotive Travel, Provision to and Utilization of Mass Transit, and to Generally Reduce the Need for Single-Occupant Vehicle Travel, as Part of Transportation Planning and Development Efforts has been updated. A footnote has been added to measures 14.5 and 14.8 to indicate their relation to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Vehicle Mitigation Options. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, pages C-24 and C-25]

Section 108 (f) 14. Programs and Ordinances to Facilitate Non-Automotive Travel, Provision to and Utilization of Mass Transit, and to Generally Reduce the Need for Single-Occupant Vehicle Travel, as Part of Transportation Planning And Development Efforts Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 14.5? Evaluation of the air quality impacts of new development and mitigation of adverse impacts Evaluate the air quality impacts of new development and mitigate any adverse impacts. Yes AQMD, SCAG 14.8* Incentives for cities with good development practices Provide financial or other incentive to local cities that practice air quality-sensitive development. Yes AQMD, SCAG

? This measure relates to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options. Rule 2202 provides a menu of options for employers in choosing how they will comply with the rule. The primary implementer is the employer.

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 16. Program to Encourage the Voluntary Removal From Use and the Marketplace of Pre-1980 Model Year Light Duty Vehicles and Pre-1980 Model Light Duty Trucks has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-27]

Section 108 (f) 16. Program to Encourage the Voluntary Removal From Use and the Marketplace of Pre-1980 Model Year Light Duty Vehicles and Pre-1980 Model Light Duty Trucks Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 16.2 Buy vehicles older than 1975 Self explanatory. Yes ARB, AQMD 16.3 Demolish impounded vehicles that are high emitters Self explanatory. YesNo Not economically feasible.

AQMD 16.4 Do whatever is necessary to allow cities to remove the engines of high emitting vehicles (pre-1980) that are abandoned and to be auctioned Self explanatory. YesNo Not economically feasible.

AQMD 16.5 Accelerated retirement program Identify high emitting vehicle age groups and develop a program to remove them from use. Yes ARB, AQMD

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 1. Programs for Improved Public Transit has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-1]

Section 108 (f) 1. Programs for Improved Public Transit Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 1.7 Free transit during special events Require free transit during selected special events to reduce event-related congestion and associated emission increases. No The Legislature significantly reduced authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, HSC 40717.9).

Transit agencies should decide individually whether this measure is economically feasible for them.

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-based Transportation Management Plans, Including Incentives has been updated. A footnote has been added to these measures to indicate their relation to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Vehicle Mitigation Options. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, pages C-4 through C- 6]

Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-based Transportation Management Plans, Including Incentives Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 3.1? Commute solutions The federal law that complements parking cash- out is called the Commuter Choice Program. It provides for benefits that employers can offer to employees to commute to work by methods other than driving alone. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.2* Parking cash-out State law requires certain employers who provide subsidized parking for their employees to offer a cash allowance in lieu of a parking space. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.3* Employer Rideshare Program Incentives Employer rideshare incentives and introduction of strategies designed to reduce single occupant vehicle trips. Examples include: public awareness campaigns, Transportation Management Associations among employers, alternative work hours, and financial incentives. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.4* Implement Parking Charge Incentive Program Evaluate feasibility of an incentive program for cities and employers that convert free public parking spaces to paid spaces. Review existing parking polices as they relate to new development approvals. Yes AQMD, Cities, Employer 3.5* Preferential parking for carpools and vanpools This measure encourages public and private employers to provide preferential parking spaces for carpools and vanpools to decrease the Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-based Transportation Management Plans, Including Incentives Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies The preferential treatment could include covered 3.6? Employee parking fees Encourage public and private employers to charge employees for parking. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.7* Merchant transportation incentives Implement ?non-work? trip reduction ordinances requiring merchants to offer customers mode shift travel incentives such as free bus passes and requiring owners/managers/developers of large retail establishments to provide facilities for non- motorized modes. No The Legislature has limited removed authority to implement indirect source control employee trip reduction measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, HSC 40717.9.)

3.8* Purchase vans for vanpools Purchase a specified number of vans for use in employee commute travel. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.9* Encourage merchants and employers to subsidize the cost of transit for employees Provide outreach and possible financial incentives to encourage local employers to provide transit passes or subsidies to encourage less individual vehicle travel. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.10 Off-days for Ozone Action Days similar to sick days On Ozone Action Days, notify employees through email that there is an ozone alert. Employees are given a pre-specified number of days they can decide not to come in to work on Ozone Action Days. Yes AQMD 3.11 Pay for in-house meals on Ozone Employer pays for meals in-house on Ozone No The Legislature significantly

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis Section 108 (f) 3. Employer-based Transportation Management Plans, Including Incentives Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies Action Days Action Days so that employees do not travel to off-site locations. reduced authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, 3.12 Voluntary business closures on Ozone Action Days A more expensive version of ?off-days? for Ozone Action Days. Yes AQMD 3.13 Close government offices on Ozone Action Days to serve as an example Similar to voluntary business closures. No The Legislature removed authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, HSC 40717.9).

3.14? Compressed work weeks Self explanatory. Yes AQMD, Employer 3.15* Telecommuting Goal of specified percentage of employees telecommuting at least once per week. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 4. Trip Reduction Ordinance has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-7]

Section 108 (f) 4. Trip Reduction Ordinance In December 1995, Congress changed the Clean Air Act Amendments to make the Employee Commute Option program voluntary (no longer mandatory). California State Law prohibits mandatory employer based trip reduction ordinance programs (SB437). (HSC 40717.9) To account for these restrictions, SCAQMD Rule 2202 provides employers with a menu of options to reduce mobile source emissions generated from employee commutes. Rule 2202 complies with federal and state Clean Air Act requirements, HSC 40458, and HSC 182(d) (1) (B) of the federal Clean Air Act. Nevertheless, some jurisdictions continue to implement Trip Reduction Ordinances. For example, the City of Santa Monica requires new and existing non-residential development projects to adopt Emission Reduction Plans and pay transportation impact fees to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality in the city

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 5. Traffic Flow Improvement Programs that Achieve Emissions Reductions has been updated. Measures 5.11 and Measure 5.12, which relate to Ozone Action Days, were removed because they do not meet the TCM criteria. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-9]

Section 108 (f) 5. Traffic Flow Improvement Programs that Achieve Emissions Reductions Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 5.11 Consider coordinating scheduling of arterial and highway maintenance to exclude Ozone Action Days if the maintenance activities require lane reductions on heavily utilized arterials and highways Self explanatory. Yes AQMD, Caltrans 5.12 Re-routing of trucks Ozone Action Days Self explanatory. Yes AQMD

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak Use has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, pages C-13 through C-15]

Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak Use Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 7.1 Off-peak goods movement Implement an ordinance to restrict truck deliveries by time or place in order to minimize traffic congestion during peak periods. YesNo Not economically feasible. AQMD 7.2 Truck restrictions during peak periods Implement an ordinance to restrict truck travel during peak periods in order to minimize traffic congestion. YesNo Not economically feasible. AQMD 7.4 Adjust school hours so they do not coincide with peak traffic periods and ozone seasons Measure to reduce travel during peak periods and ozone-contributing periods in the early morning. Yes AQMD School Districts 7.6 Increase parking fees Reduce driving by limiting parking through pricing measures. No Attorney General ruled AQMD lacks authority to implement this measure.The Legislature significantly reduced authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (HSC 40717.6, HSC 40717.8, HSC 40717.9).

7.8 Buy parking lots and convert to other land use Limit parking by converting available parking to other land uses to discourage driving. Yes Cities 7.9 Limit the number of parking spaces at commercial airlines to support mass transit Reduce airport travel by limits on parking at airports. No Regulatory agencies do not have the legal authority to make local land use decisions. It is at the discretion of the regional or local airport authority to make

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak Use Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies local land use decisions pertaining to airports.

It is necessary to have significant mass transit available at airports before this measure can be implemented. This is 7.10 No Central Business District (CBD) vehicles unless LEV or alt fuel or electric Define high-use area and ticket any vehicles present unless they are low emitting, alternative fueled or electric. No The Legislature significantly reduced authority to implement indirect source control measures through revisions to the Health & Safety Code (40717.6, 40717.8, and 40717.9).

Regulatory agencies do not have the legal authority to make local land use decisions. It is at the cities discretion to make local land use decisions.

7.14 Incentives for cities with good development practices Provide financial or other incentive to local cities that practice air quality-sensitive development. Yes AQMD,SCAG 7.15 Cash incentives to foster jobs/housing balance Specific to locality ? encouraged by California Clean Air Plan. YesNo No dedicated source of funding for this measure.

7.16 Trip reduction oriented development Specific to locality ? encouraged by California Clean Air Plan. Land use decisions that encourage trip reductions. Yes SCAG

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis Section 108 (f) 7. Programs to Limit or Restrict Vehicle Use in Downtown Areas or Other Areas of Emission Concentration Particularly During Periods of Peak Use Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 7.17 Transit oriented development Specific to locality ? encouraged by California Clean Air Plan. Land use decisions that encourage walkable communities and multi-modal transit systems. Yes SCAG 7.18 Sustainable development Specific to locality ? encouraged by California Clean Air Plan. Land use decisions that create equitable standards of living to satisfy the basic needs of all peoples, all while taking the steps to avoid further environmental degradation. Yes SCAG

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 8. Programs for the Provision of All Forms of High-Occupancy, Shared-Ride Services has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-16]

Section 108 (f) 8. Programs for the Provision of All Forms of High-Occupancy, Shared-Ride Services Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 8.1 Financial Incentives, Including Zero- Bus Fares Provide financial incentives or other benefits, such as free or subsidized bus passes and cash payments for not driving, in lieu of parking spaces for employees who do not drive to the workplace. Yes AQMD, Employer 8.3 Preferential parking for carpoolers Provide free, covered, near-building or similar incentives to carpoolers. Yes AQMD, Employer 8.4 Credits and incentives for carpoolers Self-explanatory ? form depends on locality. Yes AQMD, Employer 8.5 Employers provide vehicles to carpoolers for running errands or emergencies Having vehicles available for workday errands makes it easier to go to work without one. Yes AQMD, Employer 8.6 Subscription services Free van services to provide transportation for the elderly, handicapped or other individuals who have no access to transportation. Yes County, Employer 8.7 School car pools Self explanatory. No Regulatory agencies do not have the legal authority to make local land use decisionsNot economically feasible and insufficient resources available for 8.8 Guaranteed ride home Self explanatory. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 9. Programs to Limit Portions of Road Surfaces or Certain Sections of the Metropolitan Area to the Use of Non-Motorized Vehicles or Pedestrian Use, Both as to Time and Place has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-17]

Section 108 (f) 9. Programs to Limit Portions of Road Surfaces or Certain Sections of the Metropolitan Area to the Use of Non-Motorized Vehicles or Pedestrian Use, Both as to Time and Place Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 9.7 Cash rebates for bikes Provide financial incentives to purchase bicycles and thereby encourage use. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 10. Programs for Secure Bicycle Storage Facilities and Other Facilities, Including Bicycle Lanes, for the Convenience and Protection of Bicyclists, in Both Public and Private Areas has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-19]

Section 108 (f) 10. Programs for Secure Bicycle Storage Facilities and Other Facilities, Including Bicycle Lanes, for the Convenience and Protection of Bicyclists, in Both Public and Private Areas Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 10.1 Bike racks at work sites Self Explanatory. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 13. Employer-Sponsored Programs to Permit Flexible Work Schedules has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C- 23]

Section 108 (f) 13. Employer-Sponsored Programs to Permit Flexible Work Schedules Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 13.1 Alternative work schedules Enables workers to choose their own working hours within certain constraints. Flextime provides the opportunity for employees to use public transit, ridesharing, and other Nonmotorized transportation. A related strategy, staggered work hours, is designed to reduce Alternative workweeks have been implemented extensively by large private and public employers. Yes AQMD, Employer 13.2 Modifications of work schedules Implement alternate work schedules that flex the scheduled shift time for employees. Encourage the use of flexible or staggered work hours to promote off-peak driving and accommodate the use of transit and carpooling. Yes AQMD, Employer 13.3 Telecommunications- Telecommuting/Teleconferencing Encourage the use of telecommuting- telecommuting/teleconferencing in place of motor vehicle use where appropriate. Yes AQMD, Employer

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 14. Programs and Ordinances to Facilitate Non-Automotive Travel, Provision to and Utilization of Mass Transit, and to Generally Reduce the Need for Single-Occupant Vehicle Travel, as Part of Transportation Planning and Development Efforts has been updated. A footnote has been added to measures 14.5 and 14.8 to indicate their relation to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Vehicle Mitigation Options. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, pages C-24 and C-25]

Section 108 (f) 14. Programs and Ordinances to Facilitate Non-Automotive Travel, Provision to and Utilization of Mass Transit, and to Generally Reduce the Need for Single-Occupant Vehicle Travel, as Part of Transportation Planning And Development Efforts Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 14.5? Evaluation of the air quality impacts of new development and mitigation of adverse impacts Evaluate the air quality impacts of new development and mitigate any adverse impacts. Yes AQMD, SCAG 14.8* Incentives for cities with good development practices Provide financial or other incentive to local cities that practice air quality-sensitive development. Yes AQMD, SCAG

? This measure relates to AQMD Rule 2202, On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options. Rule 2202 provides a menu of options for employers in choosing how they will comply with the rule. The primary implementer is the employer.

Proposed Modifications to Draft 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-C Attachment C: Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

Modifications to Attachment C: RACM Analysis [Section 108 (f) 16. Program to Encourage the Voluntary Removal From Use and the Marketplace of Pre-1980 Model Year Light Duty Vehicles and Pre-1980 Model Light Duty Trucks has been updated. Appendix IV-C, Attachment C, page C-27]

Section 108 (f) 16. Program to Encourage the Voluntary Removal From Use and the Marketplace of Pre-1980 Model Year Light Duty Vehicles and Pre-1980 Model Light Duty Trucks Measure # Measure Title Description Has It Been Implemented Reasoned Justification for Not Implementing Measure Implementing Agency or Agencies 16.2 Buy vehicles older than 1975 Self explanatory. Yes ARB, AQMD 16.3 Demolish impounded vehicles that are high emitters Self explanatory. YesNo Not economically feasible.

AQMD 16.4 Do whatever is necessary to allow cities to remove the engines of high emitting vehicles (pre-1980) that are abandoned and to be auctioned Self explanatory. YesNo Not economically feasible.

AQMD 16.5 Accelerated retirement program Identify high emitting vehicle age groups and develop a program to remove them from use. Yes ARB, AQMD

PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE DRAFT 2007 AQMP APPENDIX VI REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROLMEASURES (RACM) DEMONSTRATION

CONTRIBUTORS South Coast Air Quality Management District Executive Officer Elaine Chang, DrPH Deputy Executive Officer Planning, Rule Development, & Area Sources Assistant Deputy Executive Officer Planning, Rule Development, & Area Sources Joseph Cassmassi Zorik Pirveysian Planning and Rules Manager Environmental Technology Assessment Manager Planning, Rule Development, & Area Sources Science & Technology Advancement

Author SCAQMD - Planning, Rule Development, Area Sources Minh Pham, P.E., Air Quality Specialist Contributors SCAQMD ? Planning, Rule Development, Area Sources Edward Eckerle, Program Supervisor Kennard Ellis, Air Quality Specialist Bill Milner, Air Quality Specialist Ed Muehlbacher, P.E., Program Supervisor Pamela Perryman, Air Quality Specialist Gary Quinn, P.E., Program Supervisor Dan Russell, Air Quality Specialist Science & Technology Advancement Marty Kay, P.E. Program supervisor Engineering And Compliance Kien Huynh, P.E., Air Quality Engineer Ngoc Tran, Air Quality Engineer Charles Tupac, P.E., Air Quality Analyses Compliance Supervisor CARB Lucille Van Ommering, Staff Air Pollution Specialist SCAG Jonathan Nadler, Program Manager U.S. EPA David Jesson, EPA Region IX, Staff Member

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ VI-1

CONTROL MEASURES - ......................................................................................... VI-1

EVALUATION OF SCAQMD'S 2007 CONTROL MEASURES ................................. VI-3

Step 1 - AQMP Summit .............................................................................................. VI-3

Step 2 - U.S. EPA Suggested List of Control Measures ............................................. VI-4

Step 3 - RACT Revised by U.S. EPA in September 2006 .......................................... VI-4

Step 4 - Other Districts' Current Rules and Regulations ............................................ VI-5

Step 5 - Additional Studies and Analyses ................................................................... VI-6

CONCLUSION................................................................................................................. VI-6

Table 1 - 8-Hour Ozone Designations ...................................................................... VI-10

Table 2 ? U.S. EPA Control Measures for PM2.5 Implementation.......................... VI-11

Table 3 ? Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations ...................................... VI-12

Table 4 ? Evaluation of South Coast's Stationary Source Control Measures .......... VI-37

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP INTRODUCTION The Clean Air Act, Section 172(c)(1), requires a non-attainment plan to: ?provide for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as practicable (including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology), and shall provide for attainment of the national primary ambient air quality standards.? Reasonable measures are those measures that are technologically and economically feasible within the non-attainment area. A demonstration for RACM should be provided with the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The U.S. EPA's long-standing interpretation of the RACM provision is that the states should consider all candidate measures that are available, including any measures that have been suggested; however, states are not obligated to adopt all measures. However, the RACM demonstration should show that there are no additional reasonable measures available that would advance the attainment date by at least one year or contribute to RFP for the area.1 On July 2, 2002, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld U.S. EPA's definition of RACM, including the consideration of economic and technological feasibility, the ability to cause substantial widespread and long-term adverse impacts, the collective ability of the measures to advance a region's attainment date, and whether an intensive or costly effort will be required to implement the measures. The objective of this Appendix is to demonstrate that District staff has satisfied the requirement of the Clean Air Act in developing the control measures for the 2007 AQMP.

PROCESS OF IDENTIFYING REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL MEASURES The South Coast air basin is the only area in the nation currently classified as Severe-17 for 8-hour ozone. To achieve attainment for ozone by 2015, the South Coast's AQMP is built on a two-step strategy, first to attain PM2.5 in 2015 and then to attain 8-hour ozone in 2021. District staff's goal is to incorporate all feasible control measures for directly emitted PM2.5 and precursors of PM2.5 and ozone (NOx, SOx, VOC, ammonia) while balancing costs and socioeconomic impacts.

To identify all Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM), which include all Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT), District staff conducted multiple internal meetings with the Technology Advancement Office and Engineering & Compliance Division as well as with staff from the California Air Resources Board (CARB), California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), technical experts from

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures a variety of fields, local government representatives, and the public, to collect a wide range of innovative ideas and concepts.

In order to ensure that all feasible control measures for PM2.5 were considered, District staff reviewed for inclusion the control measure concepts suggested by the U.S. EPA for PM2.5 non-attainment areas in the preamble of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.2 Because it is classified as Severe-17, the South Coast air district rules and regulations should be at least as stringent as the rules and regulations implemented by other agencies. Staff re-evaluated all 82 SCAQMD source-specific rules and regulations, and compared current requirements in these rules with those implemented by the Sacramento Metropolitan, San Joaquin Valley, Ventura, and San Francisco Bay Area air districts. Staff selected the four districts above based on the severity of their 8-hour ozone non- attainment classification and their near-term attainment dates as shown in Table 1 ? 8- Hour Ozone Designations, as follows: ? San Joaquin Valley, classified as Serious with a June 2013 attainment date ? Sacramento Metro, classified as Serious with a June 2013 attainment date ? Ventura, classified as Moderate with a June 2010 attainment date, and ? San Francisco Bay Area, classified as Marginal with a June 2007 attainment In addition, District staff compared the applicable rules with the four control technique guidelines recently published by the U.S. EPA in September 2006 for coating and printing operations.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP To be considered as RACM, feasible clean-air technologies must be cost-effective including the analysis for health benefits, as indicated by the U.S. EPA in the preamble of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking:

?In regard to economic feasibility, EPA is not proposing a fixed dollar per ton cost threshold for RACM, just as it is not doing so for RACT?Where the severity of the nonattainment problem makes reductions more imperative or where essential reductions are more difficult to achieve, the acceptable cost of achieving those reductions could increase. In addition, we believe that in determining what are economically feasible emission reduction levels, the States should also consider the collective health benefits that can be realized in the area due to projected improvements.?

In this Appendix, staff considered that clean-air technologies included in the air quality management plans of other air quality management districts in California, as well as outside of California, were reasonably cost-effective to be included in the SCAQMD 8- Hour Ozone AQMP. Cost effectiveness analyses of the control measures, when available, were provided in Appendix IV-A and IV-B. District staff will continue its efforts to develop cost effectiveness estimates for the remaining measures. During the rule development process, cost effectiveness, as well as emission inventories and potential emission reductions, will be carefully reviewed and assessed. An evaluation of the SCAQMD control measures is provided below.

EVALUATION OF SCAQMD'S 2007 CONTROL MEASURES Step 1 - AQMP Summit District staff conducted a 2007 AQMP Summit in June 2006 with participation over 125 attendees including experts from a variety of areas and the public to solicit new and innovative concepts to assist the Basin in attaining the ambient air quality standards for PM10 by 2015 and ozone by 2021. In total, District staff received about 200 control measure suggestions. In general, District staff was advised to 1) promote electrification; 2) focus on technology that improves energy efficiency and protects global warming; 3) influence consumer awareness and choice on low- or zero-VOC products; 4) incentivize low- or zero-emission control technologies; 5) promote the use of remote sensing to detect high polluters, and 6) improve public participation and multi-agency collaboration.

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures Step 2 - U.S. EPA Suggested List of Control Measures Clean Air Act Section 172 does not provide a specific list of source categories and control measures that must be evaluated for PM2.5 or ozone RACM. To provide guidance to states on PM2.5 RACM, the U.S. EPA reviewed the emission inventory information for more than 200 counties in the nation that are currently classified as PM2.5 non-attainment and a wide variety of information sources to identify a list of available control measures. Consequently, the U.S. EPA published a list of suggested potential RACM for PM2.5 in the preamble of the Federal Register. The U.S. EPA does not have any list for 8-hour ozone RACM. As shown in Table 2 ? Control Measures from U.S. EPA for PM2.5 Implementation, District staff has developed control measures for each PM2.5 RACM provided by the U.S. EPA.

Step 3 - RACT Revised by U.S. EPA in September 2006 As required in Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 172(c)(1) the State Implementation Plan for non-attainment areas must include RACM, which in turn must reflect RACT. The U.S. EPA defines RACT as: ?lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility?.

Section 182(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act provides that States must revise their State Implementation Plan to include RACT for VOC sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document issued by the U.S. EPA after November 15, 1990 and prior to the area's date of attainment. The Clean Air Act requires the U.S. EPA to revise RACT, update existing CTG documents, or develop new documents, on a frequent basis to provide states and local agencies with most current technical information and assist them in determining RACT. In September 2006, the U.S. EPA updated the CTGs of: ? Offset Lithographic and Letterpress Printing ? Flexible Packaging Printing ? Industrial Cleaning Solvents ? Flat Wood Paneling Coatings District staff compared the current requirements in the SCAQMD's Rule 1104 ? Wood Flat Stock Coating Operation (amended 8/13/99), Rule 1171 ? Solvent Cleaning Operations (amended 7/14/06), and Rule 1130 ? Graphics Arts (amended in 10/8/99) with the requirements in the revised CTGs. Rule 1104 and Rule 1171 meet the stringency requirements in the CTGs; however, Rule 1130 does not meet the recommended alcohol content in fountain solution for sheet-fed presses and heat-set web presses. District staff will make the necessary corrections in forthcoming rulemaking as

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP part of Control Measure MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures as shown in Table 3.

Step 4 - Other Districts' Current Rules and Regulations District staff reviewed all rules and regulations recently adopted or amended, from 2000 to 2006, by San Joaquin Valley, Sacramento, Ventura and San Francisco air districts, and compared the requirements in these rules with those in the South Coast. District staff selected these districts based on the severity of their classifications and near-term attainment dates.

Table 3 contains a brief description of the 82 source-specific rules that staff analyzed and a summary of other districts' requirements, only if they were more stringent than the South Coast's rules. In addition, Table 3 also includes a description of the control measures adopted by other agencies for their own 8-hour Ozone AQMP, and information on advanced technologies or U.S. EPA consent decrees that District staff is aware of that may result in additional emission reductions. In general, the District's current rules and regulations are equivalent to or more stringent than those developed by other air districts, with few exceptions shown in Table 3 where improvements are possible. Consequently, District staff developed several control measures to address these areas, such as Control Measure MCS-01 ? Facility Modernization, MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures, CMB-02 ? Reduction of Emissions in RECLAIM. Table 3 identifies these control measures. In general, the areas identified are to explore the feasibility of: ? Lowering emission limit and increasing level of control in order to promote ? Establishing standards and test methods for generic control equipment; ? Lowering release or leak thresholds, encouraging continuous wireless monitoring, improving leak detection, repair, inspection and maintenance, and Regarding technological and economic feasibility, District staff expected that technologies and measures which are available and cost-effective to implement in other air districts in California, would be available and cost-effective for use in the South Coast Basin in a timely manner. Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) is reevaluated every three years. Emission inventory, emission reduction, and cost- effectiveness including health benefits are fine-tuned on an ongoing basis, especially during the rule development process. In addition, District staff commits to monitor the rule development in other air districts, and will conduct further study and reevaluate the feasibility of revising the requirements in existing rules if necessary. Instead of amending existing rules, new rules may be adopted to implement the control measures

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures described in the 2007 AQMP in a more effective manner. Prioritization and schedule of adoption and implementation is discussed in Chapter 7.

Step 5 - Additional Studies and Analyses In addition to all of the above analyses, District staff and SCAG have completed the following analyses to meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act: ? Evaluating control measures developed by other air districts for their air quality ? Specific costs and cost analyses of each SCAQMD's stationary source and mobile source control measure, if available, are provided in Appendix IV-A and ? Schedule for implementing the control measures is discussed in Chapter 7, which demonstrates that District staff will implement the control measures as ? Transportation control measures must be included in the RACM analysis. Consequently, SCAG has completed a RACM determination for transportation control measures as shown in Appendix IV-C - Regional Transportation Strategy ? A SCAQMD 8-Hour Ozone Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Demonstration project was completed and subsequently forwarded to U.S. EPA in June 2006. District staff concluded that 1) All SCAQMD rules to implement the 1-hour ozone SIP fulfill RACT for the 8-hour ozone SIP; 2) All CTG sources and all major non-CTG sources in the Basin are subject to SIP-approved rules and therefore meet RACT requirements.

CONCLUSION Following is the summary of District staff's findings: 1) District staff has evaluated and analyzed all reasonable control measures that were currently available for inclusion in the 2007 AQMP.

2) The control measures in the 2007 AQMP have included all RACM provided by the public and experts.

3) The control measures in the 2007 AQMP have included all RACM recommended by U.S. EPA.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP existing source-specific rules may be amended to lower the emissions standards, promote cleaner technologies, add additional best management practices, and improve enforceability. District staff will monitor the rule development of other air districts, explore all feasibilities, and conduct further analyses to refine the emission inventory, emission reductions, and cost-effectiveness analysis. Nevertheless, District staff has included one or more control measures in its 2007 AQMP to facilitate these activities.

5) District staff has developed 37 stationary source control measures that contained all measures included in other districts' air quality management plans. In addition, District staff has developed many innovative stationary source control measures, such as Control Measure MCS-01 ? Facility Modernization, CTS-02 - Clean Coating Certification, MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures, and FLX-01 ? Economic Incentive Programs, that were not included in other districts' air quality management plans.

6) The few available control measures that District staff did not include collectively would not advance the attainment date or contribute to RFP for the Basin because of the insignificant or non-quantifiable amount of emission reductions that they may potentially generate.

7) The RACM demonstration for transportation control measures are included in Appendix IV-C, and all mobile source control measures provided by CARB to SCAQMD are deemed RACM.3

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures REFERENCES CARB, Discussion Paper - Air Resources Board SIP Symposium - Concepts for State and Federal Measures & Descriptions of Draft Near-Term State and Federal Control Concepts, October 2006.

EPA Control Techniques Guidelines for Industrial Cleaning Solvents, EPA 453/R-06-001, September 2006.

EPA Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing, EPA 453/R-06-002, September 2006.

EPA Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing, EPA 453/R-06-003, September 2006.

EPA Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, EPA 453/R-06-004, September 2006.

EPA Memorandum, Guidance on the Reasonably Available Control Measure (RACM) Requirement and Attainment Demonstration Submissions for Ozone Non-attainment Areas, from John S. Seitz, Director of Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to Regional Air Division Directors, Region I ? X, November 30, 1999. www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html EPA Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard ? Phase 2; Federal Register, Volume 70, pages 71659 ? 71661.

EPA Proposed Rule to Implement the Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standard; Federal Register, Volume 70, pages 66026 ? 66030.

North Central Texas Council of Governments, Final 8-Hour Attainment Demonstration SIP Control Strategies ? Review of Emission Reduction Control Strategies for Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) for the North Central Texas Ozone Non- attainment Area, Prepared by Environ, August 29, 2006.

Port of Los Angeles & Port of Long Beach - Final San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan, November 20, 2006.

Personal Communication, e-mails from David Jesson of EPA Region IX to Minh Pham of SCAQMD ? RACM Requirements and Final Draft 2007 AQMP, November & December 2006.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP Personal Communication, e-mail from Lucille Van Ommering of CARB to Minh Pham of SCAQMD ? Response on the Offer to Work on Mobile Source RACM Analysis, dated February 7, 2007.

San Joaquin Valley APCD, Final Draft 2007 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan, January 29, 2007.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, Draft 2007 Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan ? Proposed Control Measures, November 2006.

SCAQMD, Status Report on Port of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach Clean Air Action Plan, and AQMD Staff Comments; and Adopt Resolution to Set Aside Heavy-Duty Vehicle Clean-up Assistance Funding, Agenda #27, Governing Board Meeting November 3, 2006.

SCAQMD, Adopt SCAQMD 8-Hour Reasonably Available Control Technology State Implementation Plan, Agenda #37, Governing Board Meeting, July 7, 2006.

SCAQMD, Technical Assessment for Rule 1125 ? Metal Container, Closure, and Coil Coating Operations, February 2005.

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Dallas-Forth Worth Cement Kiln Study - Assessment of NOx Emissions Reduction Strategies for Cement Kilns ? Ellis County, Final Report, July 14, 2006.

Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, RACT SIP Analysis & Letter from Michael Villegas, Ventura APCD, to Andrew Steckel, EPA Region 9, June 2006.

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 1 8-Hour Ozone Designations Non-Attainment Area Classification Attainment Date Los Angeles South Coast Air Basin, California Severe-17 June 2021 San Joaquin Valley, California Serious June 2013 Sacramento Metro, California Serious June 2013 Ventura County, California Moderate June 2010 San Francisco Bay Area, California Marginal June 2007 Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas (DFW) Moderate June 2010 Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, Texas (HGB) Moderate June 2010

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 2 U.S. EPA Control Measures for PM2.5 Implementation Control Measure Concept for PM2.5 1 AQMP Control Measure Stationary Source Measures Stationary diesel engine retrofit, rebuild or replacement, with catalyzed particle filter Rule 1470 Proposed Rule 1110.2 New or upgraded emission control requirements for direct PM2.5 emissions at stationary sources (e.g., baghouse or electrostatic precipitator; improved monitoring methods) BCM-01 New or upgraded emission controls for PM2.5 precursors at stationary sources (e.g., wet/dry scrubbers) MCS-07 Energy efficiency measures to reduce fuel consumption MCS-03 Mobile Source Measures EPA-verified technologies ARB-ONRD-04 Nonroad diesel engine retrofit, rebuild/replace with catalyzed particle filter ARB-OFFRD-04 Diesel idling programs for trucks, locomotive, and other mobile sources Existing rule2 ARB-ONRD-013 Transportation control measures (including those listed in section 108(f) of the CAA as well as other TCMs), as well as other transportation demand management and transportation systems management strategies TCM Programs to expand use of clean burning fuels SC-FUEL-01, 02 Opacity/emissions standards for ``gross-emitting'' diesel equipment or vessels ARB-ONRD-01 Reduce dust from paved and unpaved roads BCM-02 Area Source Measures New open burning regulations and/or measures BCM-04 Smoke management programs to minimize emissions from forest and agricultural burning activities BCM-04 Reduce emissions from woodstoves and fireplaces BCM-03 Regulate charbroiling/other commercial cooking operations BCM-05 Reduce solvent usage or solvent substitution (particularly for organic compounds with 7 carbon atoms or more, such as toluene, xylene, and trimethyl benzene) CTS-03 Dust control - construction activities/vacant disturbed areas BCM-02 Note: 1) Federal Register, Volume 70, page 66029, November 1, 2005. 2) CARB Title 13, Section 1956.8. 3) In ARB- ONRD-01, CARB proposes to include emissions testing and repair/maintenance programs for on-road mobile sources in its Smog Check program in order to identify high emitters and initiate repair of such vehicles appropriately.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1105.1 PM, NH3 Reduction of PM10 and Ammonia Emissions From Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units (Adopted 11/7/03) 0.005 grain/dscf PM10 and 10 ppmv NH3 slip 1106 VOC Marine Coating Operations (Amended 1/13/95) Coating-specific emission limits from 275 ? 780 g/L. In lieu of complying with specific emission limits, operator can use air pollution control system with at least 85% efficiency. Solvent cleaning operations must comply Ventura Rule 74.24 (Amended 11/11/03) generally has the same limits as South Coast Rule 1106, except the limit for special marking of items such as flight decks, ship numbers is 420 g/l instead of 490 g/l in South Coast Rule 1106.

Bay Area Rule 8-43 (Amended 10/16/02) generally has the same limits as South Coast Rule 1106, except it has lower limit for pretreatment wash primer at 420 g/l compared to 780 g/l in South Coast Rule 1106 There is no known source subject to the 420 g/l limit for special marking of items in Ventura Rule 74.24.

In addition, the sources that subject to the 420 g/l limit for pretreatment wash primer in Bay Area Rule 8-43 have very low usage that would not amount to significant air quality 1106.1 VOC Pleasure Craft Coating Operations (Amended 2/12/99) Coating-specific emission limits from 340 ? 780 g/L. Solvent cleaning operations must comply Ventura Rule 74.24.1 (Amended 01/08/02) has similar coating limits as South Coast Rule 1106.1 and requires coating be applied by methods capable of achieving at Due to a variance, District staff removed transfer efficiency requirements from Rule 1106.1.

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1107 VOC Coating of Metal Parts and Products (Amended 1/6/06) Coating-specific emission limits from 2.3 lbs/gal ? 3.5 lbs/gal. In lieu of complying with specific emission limits, operator can use air pollution control system with at least 95% control efficiency (or 5 ppmv outlet) and 90% capture efficiency. Solvent cleaning operations must comply Ventura Rule 74.12 (Amended 11/11/03) generally has the same coating-specific limits as South Coast Rule 1107, except for metallic coating limit is 3 lb/gal which is slightly lower than South Coast's limit at 3.5 lb/gal; and requires solvents used for surface preparation and clean up to meet 70 g/l, higher than South Coast Explore the feasibility of lowering VOC limits considering the diversity of applications, and if feasible, implementing through one of the following control measures: MCS-01 ? Facility Modernization MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures 1108 VOC Cutback Asphalt (Amended 2/1/85) 0.5% by volume VOC Ventura Rule 74.28 ? Asphalt Roofing Operations (Adopted 5/10/94) has work practice requirements for asphalt roofing operations. South Coast does not Restrict the use of cutback asphalt through the implementation of: FUG-03 ? Emission Reductions from Cutback Asphalt 1108.1 VOC Emulsified Asphalt (Amended 11/4/83) 3% by volume VOC evaporated at 500 degrees F 1109 NOx Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Boilers and Process Heaters ? Petroleum Refineries (Amended 8/5/88) 0.03 lbs/mmBTU of heat input (~25 ppmv). Subsumed by RECLAIM. RECLAIM (amended 1/2005 version) used 5 ppmv for >110 mmbtu/hr and 25 San Joaquin current Rule 4306 limits are 6 ppmv for refinery units > 110 mmbtu/hr, 9 ppmv for units > 20 mmbtu/hr, 15 ppmv for units Lower NOx limits through: MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1110.2 NOx, VOC, CO Emissions from Gaseous and Liquid Fueled Engines (Amended 6/3/05) Applicable to engines > 50 bhp ? 36 ppmv NOx, 5% oxygen on a dry basis, averaged over 15 minutes ? 250 ppmv VOC, 15% oxygen on a dry basis, averaged over 15 minutes ? 2000 ppmv CO, 5% oxygen on a dry basis, averaged over 15 minutes.

Standards are less stringent for engines that are used for electric power generation; or fired landfill gas, sewage digester gas, or used to drive a water supply or conveyance pump; or used for integral engine compressor application operating less than 4000 hours per year.

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1111 NOx NOx Emissions from Natural-Gas-Fired, Fan-Type Central Furnaces (Amended 7/8/83) 40 nanograms per joule heat output 1112 NOx Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Cement Kilns (Amended 6/6/86) 11.6 lbs/ton clinker averaged over 24 hours and 6.4 lbs/ton Subsumed by RECLAIM.

RECLAIM, amended 1/2005 version, had no recommendation However, RECLAIM BARCT analysis is an on-going process and will be evaluated every three North Central Texas proposes to reduce NOx from cement kilns to 80%-85% using technology such as SCR or LoTOx Potentially lower NOx allocations through: MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures 1112.1 PM Emissions of Particulate Matter from Cement Kilns (Amended 2/7/86) 0.4 lbs PM/tons of kiln feed for kilns rating less than 75 tons per hour; or 30 lbs per hour for kiln rating of 75 tons per hour or Note: Rule 1156 has more 1113 VOC Architectural Coatings (Amended 7/9/04) Coating-specific emission limits from 50 g/L ? 730 g/L. Allow 1115 VOC Motor Vehicle Assembly Line Coating Operations (Amended 5/12/95) Limits from 1.2 lbs VOC/gal coating for electrophoretic primer to 15 lbs/gal of applied solids for primer, primer surfacer and topcoat. Cleaning operations must comply with Rule 1171.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1124 VOC Aerospace Assembly and Component Manufacturing Operations (Amended 9/21/01) Coating-specific emission limits from 160 ? 1000 g/L. Specific high transfer coating applications (e.g. HVLP spray). In lieu of complying with specific emission limits, operator can use air pollution control system with at least 95% control efficiency (or 50 ppmv outlet) and 90% capture efficiency. Solvent cleaning operations must comply 1125 VOC Metal Container, Closure, and Coil Coating Operations (Amended 1/13/95) Coating-specific emission limits from 0 g/L (for non food cans) ? 660 g/L. Specific high transfer coating applications (e.g. HVLP spray). In lieu of complying with specific emission limits, operator can use air pollution control system with at least 95% control efficiency (or 50 ppmv outlet) and 90% capture efficiency, which is equivalent to an overall control efficiency of 85%. Solvent cleaning operations must comply with San Joaquin Rule 4603 and 4604 have limits for 11 categories of specialty coatings ranging from 20 g/l ? 750 g/l and some coatings such as end seal compounds at 20 g/l which are more stringent than South Coast limit at 440 g/l (for food/beverage cans). San Joaquin is in the rule making process to lower these standards.

Midwest RPO proposes 100% capture and 90% - 95% control efficiency for existing sources and 97% for new/reconstructed sources Explore the feasibility of lowering VOC limits through: MCS-01 ? Facility Modernization MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures

The incremental increase from 85% to 90%-97% in control efficiency is not cost-effective for the sources in the South Coast air basin.(note) Note: Staff Technical Assessment, 2005.

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1126 VOC Magnet Wire Coating Operations (Amended 1/13/95) Coating-specific emission limits less than 200 g/L, or use control equipment to achieve equivalent reduction. Solvent cleaning operations must comply with 1127 VOC Emission Reductions from Livestock Waste (Adopted 8/6/04) Good housekeeping practices.

Note: The District just adopted Rule 223 in June 2006 to reduce emission for large confined animal facilities. Rule 223 includes series of good management practices that are Sacramento Rule 496 ? Large Confined Animal Facilities (Adopted 8/24/06), has more stringent control and good management practices than South Coast Rule 1127 (e.g. venting to control system with at least 80% control efficiency).

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1130 VOC Graphic Arts (Amended 10/8/99) VOC content limits: 80 g/l ? 100 g/l for fountain solution, 150 g/l for adhesives, 225 g/l - 300 g/l for inks and coatings. In lieu of meeting specific emission limits, control device with overall control efficiency from 75% - 85% can be used to achieve equal or better emission reductions.

VOC limits for cleaning solutions for printing presses are in Rule 1171 ranging from 25 g/l (0.21 lb/gal) for flexographic printing to 100 g/l (0.83 lb/gal) for lithographic printing (even though 500 g/l is allowed up to end of year 2007.) The U.S. EPA CTG for lithographic and letterpress, September 2006, recommends: ? Destruction efficiency of 90% to 95% depending on the date of installation (or 20 ppmv VOC outlet concentration) for heat-set web offset presses with potential to emit, prior to controls, of at least 25 tpy.

? For all operations emitting 15 lb/day, requirements for fountain solution are: ? 1.6% by weight alcohol or less as applied, or 3% if refrigerated chiller is used, or 5% alcohol substitute for heat-set ? 5% alcohol for sheet-fed ? 5% alcohol substitute and no alcohol in fountain solution for cold-set web Rule 1130 requires overall control efficiency from 75% - 85%, with destruction efficiency typically 95% or more. The level of alcohol in fountain solution will be reduced through the implementation of:(note) MCS-01 - Facility Modernization MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures Note: Per communication with Bill Milner on February 13 and 21, 2007.

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1130 (Cont.) The U.S. EPA CTG for rotogravure and flexographic, adopted in September 2006, recommends an overall control efficiency of 80% for presses installed after March 1995, and 65% - 75% for older presses.

In addition, Midwest 2007 Ozone Plan candidate control measure for rotogravure and flexography printing proposes to increase the requirements for capture efficiency to 100% and destruction efficiency 1130.1 VOC Screen Printing Operations (Amended 12/13/96) VOC content limits ranges from 400 g/l ? 800 g/l for materials used in screen printing. In lieu of specific emission limits, control device can be used to achieve equal or better reductions, at least 95%.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1131 VOC Food Product Manufacturing and Processing Operations (Amended 6/6/03) VOC content limits from 120 ? 200 g/L, or air pollution control system with at least 95% control efficiency and 90% capture efficiency. Solvent cleaning operations must contain 15% or less VOC or 85% VOC must be 1132 VOC Further Control of VOC from High Emitting Spray Booths (Amended 5/7/04) Further reduce emissions by 65% from the baseline primarily through the installation of control devices, beyond and above the use of coatings that comply with existing coating 1133, 1133.1, 1133.2 VOC, NH3 Composting and Related Operations Air pollution control must have 80% control efficiency or greater. Existing operations must reduce up to 70% baseline Baseline emission factors are 1.78 lbs VOC/ton throughput and 2.93 lbs NH3/ton throughput.

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1134 NOx Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Stationary Gas Turbines (Amended 8/8/97) Standard = Reference Limit x (Unit Efficiency/25%), where reference limit depends on size of units, varying from 9 ppmv for units rating at equal to or larger than 10MW to 25 ppmv for units rating from 0.3 MW to less than 2.9 MW.

RECLAIM, amended 1/2005 version, indicated that 5 ppmv was achieved in practice but not cost effective, therefore did not propose BARCT. This analysis may need to be revised based on new information. RECLAIM BARCT is an on-going process that is planned to be reviewed Sacramento Rule 413 (Amended 03/24/05) has standards from 9 ppmv ? 25 ppmv depending on size of units, but are independent on equipment efficiency.

San Joaquin Rule 4703 (Amended 8/17/06) has standards from 5 ppmv ? 50 ppmv depending on size of units. Combined cycle units > 10 MW has limit of 3 ppmv. San Joaquin is now proposing to revisit its current rule for further reduction.

Ventura Rule 74.9 (Amended 11/08/05) has standards from 25 ? 125 ppmv depending on fuel type but are independent from Control efficiency 90% - 96% control efficiency. In addition, all Reevaluate whether there is a need to allow units with higher efficiency to have higher limits. Potentially lower NOx standards, and establish ammonia standard through: MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1135 NOx Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen From Electric Power Generating Systems (Amended 7/19/91) Mass emission limits and emission reduction goals for utility boilers. Only City of Glendale is subject to Rule 1135, which is allowed to meet 0.2 lb/MW-hr (or a daily mass limit of 390 lb NOx per day, or an annual limit of 35 tons per year).

Other utility boilers are in RECLAIM subject to declining NOx allocations which were determined based on a level of 7 ppmv (about 0.07 lb/MW-hr assuming a heat rate of 8130 Btu/kw-hr), and are operated at various BARCT levels from 5 ppmv ? 30 ppmv. (Note) Ventura Rule 59 (amended 7/15/97) requires: ? 0.1 lb NOx/MW-Hr for utility boilers and ? 0.04 lb/MW-hr for auxiliary boilers.

San Joaquin Rule 4306 ? Phase 3 (amended 3/17/2005) requires boilers more than 20 mmbtu/hr to comply with the following options: ? Standard option of 9 ppmv (or 0.011 lb/mmbtu) complied by 2005-2007, or ? Enhanced option of 6 ppmv (or 0.007 lb/mmbtu) complied by 2006-2008. (Assuming a heat rate of 8130 Btu/kw-hr, 6 ppmv is about 0.06 lb/MW-hr.) Explore the feasibility of lowering the emission targets through: MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures 1136 VOC Wood Products Coatings (Amended 6/14/96) VOC content limits range from Averaging provisions and add-on control are allowed. Transfer efficiency is at least 65%, or operator must use certain type of equipment (e.g. HVLP). Solvent cleaning operations must comply Ventura Rule 74.30 (Amended 6/27/06) generally has similar limits as South Coast's Rule 1136 except that the limit in Ventura is 2 lbs/gal, lower than 2.9 lbs/gal in South Coast, for high-solid stains on new wood products. In lieu of coating specific limits, control equipment achieving 90% efficiency is allowed. No Explore the feasibility of lowering VOC limits for new wood products through: MCS-01 ? Facility Modernization MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures Note: RECLAIM facilities have flexibility to operate their utility boilers provided that the total facility emissions must be at or below their allocations determined based on a level of 7 ppmv. Regarding BARCT levels, per Marty Kay and John Yee, the utility boilers at Southern California Edison, Department of Water and Power, and City pf Burbank are operated at a level from 5 ? 7 ppmv (1-hr to 1-month avg time) whereas City of Pasadena boilers are operated at a level of 30 ppmv. In addition, since heat rate (mmbtu per kw-hr) varies with each utility boiler, District staff used 8130 BTU/kw-hr to convert the ppmv to lb/MW-hr for the unit operated by City of Glendale.

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1137 PM PM10 Reduction From Woodworking Operations (Amended 2/1/02) Good housekeeping practices Rule 1156 contains emission Set emission standards or control efficiency through: BCM-01 ? PM Control Devices MCS-01 ? Facility Modernization MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures 1138 PM Control Of Emissions From Restaurant Operations (Amended 11/14/97) Require catalytic oxidizer for Exemption provided for under- fired charbroilers and units Ventura Rule 74.25 (Adopted 10/12/04) which has equivalent 1140 PM Abrasive Blasting (Amended 1141 VOC Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Resin Manufacturing (Amended 11/17/00) 95% - 98% control or 0.12 ? 0.5 lbs/1000 lbs of resin produced 1141.1 VOC Coatings and Ink Manufacturing (Amended 11/17/00) Operational work practices 1141.2 VOC Surfactant Manufacturing (Amended 1/11/02) 95% control or 0.5 lbs/1000 lbs of surfactant produced 1142 VOC Marine Tank Vessel Operations (Amended 7/19/91) 2 lbs/1000 barrels liquid loaded or 95% emissions reduced 1145 VOC Plastic, Rubber, Leather and Glass Coatings (Amended 12/3/04) VOC limits: 50?800 lbs VOC per gallon. Avg provisions and add-on control at 95% control efficiency (50 ppmv outlet), 90% capture efficiency. High transfer Solvent cleaning operations must comply with Rule 1171.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1146 NOx Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Industrial, Institutional and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters (Amended 11/17/00) Applicable to units rating of Current limits are: ? 30 ppmv NOx for units rating more than 40 mmbtu/hr and > 25% annual capacity factor ? 40 ppmv NOx for units ratings from 5 mmbtu/hr to 40 mmbtu/hr and units > 40 mmbtu/hr and < 25% annual capacity factor ? 400 ppmv CO Many Rule 1146 units are in RECLAIM. RECLAIM (Amended 1/2005 version) recommended 12 ppmv for units less than 20 mmbtu/hr and 9 ppmv for units more than 20 mmbtu/hr Sacramento Rule 411 (Amended 10/27/05) limits for gaseous fuel are 9 ppmv for units greater than 20 mmbtu/hr, and 15 ppmv for units from 5 mmbtu/hr to 20 mmbtu/hr.

San Joaquin Rule 4306 (Amended 03/17/05) has limits from 5 ppmv ? 30 ppmv depending on type/size of boilers ? 5 ppmv for refinery units greater than 110 mmbtu/hr, ? 6 ppmv for units greater than 20 mmbtu/hr, ? 9 ppmv for units less than 20 mmbtu/hr San Joaquin 2007 control measure proposes to lower the limit for boilers/heaters to 6 pppmv for units less than 20 mmbtu/hr by Explore the feasibility of lowering NOx standards through one of the following control measures: MCS-01 ? Facility Modernization MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures Rule Forecast: June 2007

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1146.1 NOx Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Small Industrial, Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters (Amended 5/13/94) Applicable to units rating from 2 mmbtu/hr to 5 mmbtu/hr.

Current limits are: ? 30 ppmv NOx (0.037 lb/mmbtu of heat input) ? 400 ppmv CO Many Rule 1146.1 units are in RECLAIM, and RECLAIM (Amended 1/2005 version) BARCT analysis recommended 12 ppmv for less than 20 mmbtu/hr units based on ultra low NOx technology that is Bay Area Rule 9-11 (Amended 5/17/00) has following limits for boilers using gaseous fuel 1) 10 ppmv for boilers with rated input greater than 1.75 mmbtu/hr, 2) 25 ppmv for boilers from 1.5-1.75 mmbtu/hr, 3) 30 ppmv for boilers less than 1.5 million btu/hr. Non- gaseous fuel combustion devices have higher limits than gaseous fuel devices.

San Joaquin's draft 2007 AQMP proposes to promote the use of electric heaters in place of small Explore the feasibility of lowering NOx standards or promote the use of electric units through incentives through one of the following: MCS-01 ? Facility Modernization MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures FLX-01 ? Carl Moyer-type incentive program for stationary sources Rule Forecast: June 2007 1146.2 NOx Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers (Amended 5/5/06) Applicable to units less than 2 mmbtu/hr.

Current limits are: ? 30 ppmv for units from 0.4 ? 2 mmbtu/hr ? 55 ppmv for units rating less than 400,000 btu/hr North Central Texas Final 2007 SIP ? Small Boilers & Heaters proposes to use NOx standards for small boilers/heaters less than 2 mmbtu/hr adopted by San Joaquin Valley APCD Rule 4308, amended 10/05, which are equivalent to current standards in Rule 1146.2. .

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1148 VOC Thermally Enhanced Oil Recovery Wells (Amended 11/5/82) 4.5 lbs/day or less per well 1149 VOC Storage Tank Degassing (Amended 7/14/95) Degassing operations must be controlled by control equipment achieving 90% efficiency for a minimum time limit estimated in the rule based on volume of the gas to be freed in the tank and the flow rate through control Ventura Rule 74.26, 74.27 (Adopted 10/12/04) requires degassing of crude oil, gasoline and other high TVP liquid storage tanks be controlled by vapor recovery or flare having 95% control efficiency until the vapor concentration in the tanks is less than 10,000 ppmv.

Bay Area Rule 8-10 (Adopted 1/21/04) sets requirements for depressurizing process vessels at petroleum refineries and chemical plants. The gases must be vented to control devices until the vapor concentration in the tanks is less than 10,000 ppmv.

Rule development is in progress at San Joaquin to eliminate exemptions and require more Set VOC emission standards or increase control efficiency requirements through: FUG-04 ? Further Emissions Reduction from Pipeline and Storage Tank Degassing. Propose to establish limits and require enhanced control technology.

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1151 VOC Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Non-Assembly Line Coating Operations (Amended 12/2/05) VOC content limits range from Averaging provisions are allowed. High transfer coating equipment (e.g. HVLP) is required. Solvent cleaning operations must comply with Midwest RPO proposes increasing requirements to 100% capture and 95% control efficiency for surface coating operations for automotives 1153 VOC Commercial Bakery Ovens (Adopted 1/13/95) Emission reduction of 70% or more is required for existing ovens emitting between 50 lbs ? 100 lbs VOC/day, 95% or more for ovens emitting more than 100 lbs/day, and 95% or more for 1156 PM PM10 Emission Reductions from Cement Manufacturing Facilities (Adopted 11/4/05) PM standards for PM control devices (0.01 gr/dcsf for existing and 0.005 gr/dcsf for new devices). Good operational practices to reduce PM emissions from aggregate and related operations

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1157 PM PM10 Emissions Reductions from Aggregate and Related Operations (Amended 9/8/06) Good operational practices to reduce PM emissions from aggregate and related operations 1158 PM Storage, Handling and Transport of Petroleum Coke (Amended 6/11/99) Reduce PM emissions through good management practices 1159 NOx Nitric Acid Units ? Oxides of Nitrogen (Amended 12/6/85) ? 450 ppmv 15 min avg, or ? 237 ppmv, 60 min avg; or ? 3 lbs/ton acid produced, 60 1162 VOC Polyester Resin Operations (Amended 7/8/05) VOC limits (monomer content) from 10-48% by weight or alternatively 90% control efficiency for add-on control 1164 VOC Semiconductor Manufacturing (Amended 1/13/95) VOC limit for cleanup solvents is 200 g/l or low vapor pressure Photoresist applications must be 1166 VOC Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Decontamination of Soil Ventura Rule 74.29 ? Soil Decontamination Operations (Amended 1/8/02) has standards for soil decontamination (e.g. 50 - 100 ppmv ).

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1166 (Cont.) San Joaquin Valley proposes a control measure to call for eliminating allowances for aeration and increasing overall capture and control efficiency requirements for VOC collection and control 1168 VOC Adhesive and Sealant Applications (Amended 1/7/05) VOC limits for solvents range from 30 ? 775 lbs VOC per gallon. Require the use of high transfer efficiency equipment (e.g. HVLP spray). In lieu of meeting the VOC limits, using add-on control with 80% control 1171 VOC Solvent Cleaning Operations (Amended 7/14/06) VOC limits for solvents are 25 g/l in general, and have a 100- 800 g/l VOC for specific cleaning operations. In lieu of meeting the VOC limits, add-on control having 90% collection efficiency and 95% destruction efficiency or meeting 50 ppmv The U.S. EPA RACT published in September 2006 limit is 50 g/l or an overall control efficiency of 85%. The U.S. EPA is not recommending limits beyond 50 g/l; however it recommends states to adopt higher limits based on individual performance requirements of specific applications. Rule 1171 meets the U.S. EPA RACT.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1173 VOC Fugitive Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds (Amended 12/6/02) ? Require to connect atmospheric PRDs to vapor recovery or add-on control by first turnaround, if the facility experiences: ? a second release of more than 500 lbs VOC within any five year period, or ? any release of 2,000 lbs VOC in any 24 hour In lieu of connecting PRDs to control, operator may elect to pay mitigation fee of $350,000 for any release ? Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) program to reduce fugitive emissions. Leak thresholds are: ? for light liquid/gas/vapor service >10,000 ppmv, ? for PRDs >200 ppmv, ? for pumps in heavy liquid >100 ppmv Bay Area Rule 8-28 (amended 12/21/05) requires atmospheric PRDs to be: ? vented to vapor recovery or equivalent control devices that have 95% control efficiency within one year of the second release event of ? equipped with at least two or three redundant preventive measures to minimize episodic releases, and ? equipped with tell-tale indicators.

North Central Texas ? Final 2007 SIP, Oil & Gas Production, Natural Propose to revise leak definitions and requirements for shorter repair periods based on recently revised San Joaquin Valley Rule 4409, Potentially improve the requirements in Rule 1173 by: ? reducing the release threshold to 10 lbs for atmospheric PRDs ? requiring prompt action (such as connecting atmospheric PRDs to vapor recovery or add-on control within one year of the second release of more than 10 lbs VOC), and ? improving monitoring by encouraging the use of wireless monitoring device through: MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures Rule Forecast: March 2007 1174 VOC Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from the Ignition of Barbecue Charcoal (Amended 10/5/90) VOC emissions less than 0.02 lb VOC per start.

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1175 VOC Control of Emissions from the Manufacture of Polymeric Cellular (Foam) Products (Amended 5/13/94) VOC limit for expandable polystyrene molding operations is less than 2.4 lbs/100 lbs of raw material processed 1176 VOC Sumps and Wastewater Separators (Amended 9/13/96) ? Wastewater: 500 ppmv ? Sumps and wastewater separators must have floating cover with seals; or fixed cover vented to control ? Sewer lines: totally enclosed ? Process drains: with SCAQMD approved water seals ? Junction boxes: totally enclosed ? Control device: ? 95% efficiency or ?500 ppmv leak above background ? Monthly to annually inspection Bay Area Rule 8-8 (Amended 9/15/04) in general is similar to South Coast Rule 1176, with the following exceptions: ? Floating covers must have double seals; and ? Semi-annual inspection is allowed.

In their 2007 AQMP, San Joaquin Valley proposes to further study the following areas: ? Require crude oil production sumps to have fixed roof and vented to control with 99% ? Require wastewater separators to have fixed roof and vented to control with 95% control efficiency, and ? Require floating roofs to be equipped with double seals Monitoring rule development in San Joaquin Valley, further study additional active control techniques to reduce emissions from wastewater separators (e.g. open hatch emissions, negative pressure), and implementing through: MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures FUG-01 ? Improved Leak Detection and Repair

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 3 (continued) Evaluation of SCAQMD Rules and Regulations Rule No. Type Rule Title Current Rule Requirements Other Districts' 2000-2006 Rules, Control Measures, U.S. EPA CTGs, and Other Studies Evaluation 1178 VOC Further Reductions of VOC Emissions From Storage Tanks at Petroleum Facilities (Amended 12/21/01) Applicable to high emitting facility that has 20 tpy VOC emissions or more and tanks >19,815 gals with liquids having TVP > 0.1 psia. Rule 1178 requires doming for high emitting external floating roof tanks, better seals and better (Note that Rule 463 is applicable for tanks >19,815 gals at all facilities and have requirements for fixed roof tanks and floating roof tanks.) In the 2007 AQMP, San Joaquin proposes to revise Rule 4623 to lower tank capacity applicability, lower TVP threshold, and revisit exemptions to broaden source applicability.

Midwest RPO control measure proposes to expand source applicability of LADCO state rules Monitor rule development in other air districts and, if feasible, implementing through: MCS-07 ? Application of All Feasible Measures FUG-01 ? Improved Leak Detection and Repair (A technical assessment conducted by District staff in November 2005 indicated that there were negligible air quality benefits to lower the applicability thresholds.) (Note) 1179 VOC Publicly Owned Treatment Works Operations (Amended 3/6/92) Include recordkeeping 1183 VOC Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Air Regulations (Amended 4/2/04) Adopt by reference Code of 1186 PM PM10 Emissions from Paved and Unpaved Roads, and Livestock Operations 1186.1 PM Less Polluting Sweepers (Amended 5/5/06) Require operators to purchase less polluting or alternative 1189 VOC Emissions From Hydrogen Plant Process Vents (Adopted 1/21/00) For existing plants, 2.5 lbs VOC per million cubic feet of hydrogen produced. For new plants, 0.5 lbs VOC per million Note: Technical Assessment for Rule 463, November 2005.

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4 Evaluation of South Coast's Stationary Source Control Measures This table lists the South Coast's stationary source control measures and a comparison with other control measures contained in other regional air quality management plans and an evaluation of the concepts of the control measures. Cost effectiveness estimates of the South Coast's control measures, if available, are provided in Appendix IV-A.

Stationary Source Control Measures - Facility Modernization 2007 South Coast Control Measures Control Measures Contained In Other Regional Air Quality Management Plans Evaluation MCS-01 - Facility Modernization. Propose to ensure timely replacement of existing equipment to meet today's BACT, and use of low VOC coatings/solvents. Early retirement of equipment may qualify for tax incentives or emission credits. Applicable to all combustion sources, all facilities using coatings/solvents beginning with >20 tpy facilities, and all facilities generating Other districts do not have a specific control measure for facility modernization, but they do recommend various BARCT analyses for cement kilns, boilers/heaters etc. as listed in SCAQMD's proposal is similar to other Districts' proposal in concepts and is applicable to a broader industrial and Stationary Source Control Measures - Energy Efficiency and Conservation 2007 South Coast Control Measures Control Measures Contained In Other Regional Air Quality Management Plans Evaluation MCS-02 - Urban Heat Island. Propose to encourage activities that would lower ambient temperatures in urban areas (e.g. lighter roofing and building materials and tree planting) Sacramento Draft 2007 AQMP - Urban Propose to add 4.9 million low-emitting trees to SCAQMD's proposal is similar to Propose to use incentives to promote the use of North Central Texas 2007 SIP ? Credit for Energy Conservation and Efficiency. Take emission reduction credits for implementing SB 5 and SB 7 which require electric utilities and other political entities to reduce electricity SCAQMD's proposal is similar to North Central Texas's proposal in concept but applies to broader combustion sources.

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 4 (continued) Evaluation of South Coast's Stationary Source Control Measures Stationary Source Control Measures - Good Management Practices 2007 South Coast Control Measures Control Measures Contained In Other Regional Air Quality Management Plans Evaluation Propose to improve the effectiveness of the facility's leak detection and repair (LDAR) program through the application of optical gas imaging to detect leaks (Smart LDAR), and expand the application of LDAR to other sources Sacramento Draft 2007 AQMP. Propose to implement LDAR at natural gas production and processing facilities. Propose to expand the applicability of LDAR to process stream containing more than 1% by weight VOC, instead of 10% VOC by weight which is currently required by many districts such as South Coast, San Joaquin, Ventura, Bay Area, North Central Texas Final 2007 SIP Gasoline Dispenser Hoses. Propose to impose stricter material standards for marine fueling station hoses to fuel hoses at gasoline dispensing facilities to reduce permeation losses Oil & Gas Production, Natural Gas Processing. Proposes to revise leak definitions and requirements for shorter repair periods based on recently revised San Joaquin Valley Current SCAQMD Rule 1173 already requires LDAR at natural gas processing plants. However, Rule 1173 provides an exemption for components handling fluids with a VOC content of 10% by weight or In lieu of lowering the exemption limit in Rule 1173 and regulating components handling heavy liquid with VOC content of 1% by weight, SCAQMD proposes to expand the application of LDAR program to other facilities that are currently not regulated by Rule 1173 since reducing leaks from other facilities will potentially provide FUG-02 ? Emission Reductions from Gasoline Transfer and Dispensing Facilities. Propose to improve implementation of the Enhanced Vapor Recovery (EVR) Regulation, raise compliance rate from 75% to 98% by requiring one or several additional preventive mechanisms (e.g. alert signal for in-station diagnostic (ISD) system to detect potential failure and initiate preventative repairs). None

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4 (continued) Evaluation of South Coast's Stationary Source Control Measures 2007 South Coast Control Measures Control Measures Contained In Other Regional Air Quality Management Plans Evaluation FUG-04 - Further Emission Reductions from Propose to reevaluate current existing Rule 1149 to require enhanced control technology, increase control efficiency, establish concentration limits, and expand the source categories of affected equipment. None BCM-01 - PM Control Devices. Propose to set standards for PM control devices and promote automatic monitoring system. None MCS-04 - Emissions Reduction from Green Waste Composting. Propose to maintain optimal aerobic conditions thru best management practices, or utilizing state-of-the art emissions control technologies. None MCS-06 - Improved Start-up, Shut-down & Turnaround Procedures. Propose to use best operating practices and procedures None

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 4 (continued) Evaluation of South Coast's Stationary Source Control Measures Stationary Source Control Measures - Area Source Programs 2007 South Coast Control Measures Control Measures Contained In Other Regional Air Quality Management Plans Evaluation CMB-01 (Continued) San Joaquin Valley APCD Rule 4309 adopted 12/15/05 has very stringent limits: ? 3.5 ppmv ? 4.3 ppmv NOx for dryers, ovens, and dehydrators using gaseous fuel ? 3.5 ppmv ? 12 ppmv NOx for dryers, CMB-03 - Further NOx Reductions from Space Heaters. Propose to set standards in a range of 15 ppmv ? 30 ppmv all natural gas fired fan-type furnaces currently regulated under Rule 1111, <175,000 Btu/hr. None Applicable to all combustion sources of natural gas. Propose to limit maximum Wobbe Index to 1360 Btu/scf. None BCM-02 - PM Emission Hot Spots ? Localized Control Program. Applicable to all localized PM hot spot areas that do not meet clean air standards. Propose to implement local measures such as paving, curbing, street sweeping etc, to reduce PM through cooperative efforts between AQMD and local governments None BCM-03 - Emission Reductions from Wood Burning Fireplaces and Wood Stoves. Propose to implement potential strategies such as banning installation of new uncontrolled appliances in new None. However, SCAQMD's proposal is based on rules that are adopted and implemented by various districts in California (e.g. San Joaquin Valley, Rule 4901, Amended 7/17/03).

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4 (continued) Evaluation of South Coast's Stationary Source Control Measures Stationary Source Control Measures - Area Source Programs 2007 South Coast Control Measures Control Measures Contained In Other Regional Air Quality Management Plans Evaluation BCM-04 - Additional PM Emission Reductions from Rule 444 ? Open Burning. Propose to add administration and compliance streamlining of the San Joaquin Draft 2007 AQMP. Propose to identify alternatives to burning agricultural SCAQMD's measure is equivalent to San BCM-05 - Emission Reductions from Under- Fired Charbroilers. Propose to continue research/development and evaluate potential credit generation opportunities. None MCS-05 - Emission Reductions from Non- Dairy Livestock Waste. Propose to use best management practices such as enclosed equipment and vented to control. None MCS-07 - Application of All Feasible Measures. Propose to revise current rules or adopt new rules to implement new BARCT. See MCS-01 ? Facility Modernization.

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 4 (continued) Evaluation of South Coast's Stationary Source Control Measures Stationary Source Control Measures - Emission Growth Management 2007 South Coast Control Measures Control Measures Contained In Other Regional Air Quality Management Plans Evaluation EGM-01 ? Emission Reductions from New or Redevelopment Projects. Propose to set threshold standards for new and redevelopment projects. Projects that exceed the threshold will Mitigation measures would be identified through Sacramento Draft 2007 AQMP Propose to expand mitigation requirements from the current CEQA mitigation & fees, which currently require to mitigate 100% of emissions from the grading portion of construction projects over 10 acres. The goal is to reduce off-road construction emissions associated with new land use development of large commercial, industrial, retail, and residential projects Propose to implement an operational indirect source rule to reduce emissions associated with new land use development of large commercial, industrial, retail, and residential projects after construction is Note: San Joaquin Valley Rule 9510 ? Indirect Source Review has similar SCAQMD's proposal is similar to EGM-02 ? Emission Budget and Mitigation for General Conformity Projects. Propose to set aside emission budgets to mitigate general conformity projects. If mitigation measures are not sufficient to offset emission increase, the Board will decide if and how much mitigation fees would be needed to offset the residual emissions, and staff would use the money collected to invest in emission reduction projects. None

Proposed Modifications to the Draft 2007 AQMP TABLE 4 (continued) Evaluation of South Coast's Stationary Source Control Measures SCAQMD's Mobile Source Control Measures EGM-03 ? Emissions Mitigation at Federally Permitted Projects. Propose to recommend U.S. EPA to adopt measures to mitigate emission increases or provide funding for AQMD to seek mitigation emission reductions. None MOB-01 ? Mitigation Fee Program for Federal Sources. Applicable to all federal sources (e.g. ships, trains, aircraft). Propose to ask U.S. EPA to adopt/administer mitigation fee program and provide funding/grants for /AQMD to seek alternative emission reductions, similar to Carl Moyer program. None Propose to promote early retirement of small Off-Road Mobile Sources (SORE) and Recreational Outboard Engines in exchange for electric engines through incentives. On-going projects at many Districts MOB-03 ? Backstop Measures for Indirect Sources of Emissions from Ports and Port- Related Facilities. Propose to set emission target milestones and ?backstop? measures for ports to attain PM2.5 and ozone ambient air quality standards. None MOB-04 ? Emission Reductions from Carl Moyer Program. Propose to take SIP credits for existing and new programs funded by Carl Moyer Program. None

Appendix VI: Reasonably Available Control Measures TABLE 4 (continued) Evaluation of South Coast's Stationary Source Control Measures 2007 South Coast Control Measures Control Measures Contained In Other Regional Air Quality Management Plans Evaluation MOB-05 ? AB 923 Light-Duty Vehicle Propose to identify high emitter vehicle using remote sensing technologies None MOB-06 ? AB 923 Medium-Duty Vehicle Propose to identify high emitter using remote sensing technologies. None MOB-07 ? Concurrent Reductions from Global Warming Strategies. Propose to seek concurrent reductions from all combustion sources from global warming strategies. None