Extreme Ozone Attainment Attainment ......Extreme Ozone Attainment Attainment DemonstrationDemonstration PlanPlan OcOctober 8, 2004tober 8tober 8, 2004 , 2004 San Joaquin Valley Unified

San Joaquin San Joaquin San Joaquin San Joaquin ValleyValley ValleyValley Air Basin PlanAir Basin Plan Air Basin PlanAir Basin Plan

DemonstratingDemonstratingDemonstratingDemonstrating AttainmentAttainment AttainmentAttainment Of FederalOf FederalOf FederalOf Federal

1111----hour Ozone Standardshour Ozone Standardshour Ozone Standardshour Ozone Standards

ExtremeExtremeExtremeExtremeOzoneOzoneOzoneOzone AttainmentAttainment AttainmentAttainment

DemonstrationDemonstrationDemonstrationDemonstration PlanPlanPlanPlan

OcOcOcOctober 8, 2004tober 8, 2004tober 8, 2004tober 8, 2004

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

1990 E. Gettysburg Avenue

Fresno, California 93726

(559) 230-5800

www.valleyair.org

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

Governing Board, 2004

Barbara Patrick, Chair Supervisor, Kern County

Thomas W. Mayfield, Vice Chair

Supervisor, Stanislaus County

Mike Maggard Councilmember, City of Bakersfield

Michael G. Nelson Supervisor, Merced County

Susan B. Anderson Supervisor, Fresno County

Jack A. Sieglock Supervisor, San Joaquin County

Tony Barba Supervisor, Kings County

Ronn Dominici Supervisor, Madera County

Sam Armentrout Councilmember, City of Madera J. Steven Worthley Supervisor, Tulare County Dan Prince Councilmember, City of Ripon

Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer David L. Crow

Deputy Air Pollution Control Officer

Seyed Sadredin

CONTRIBUTORS The following individuals contributed to the preparation of the main document. Many members of the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District staff as well as staff from the California Air Resources Board and the San Joaquin Valley Councils of Government were involved in various aspects of developing the Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan. Names of contributing staff are listed alphabetically.

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

David L. Crow

Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer

Seyed Sadredin Deputy Air Pollution Control Officer

David L. Jones

Director, Planning Division

David Mitchell Planning Manager

Scott Nester

Planning Manager

Contributing Staff Jennifer Barba, Air Quality Specialist Elena Nuño, Air Quality Specialist Cynthia Echavarria, Air Quality Specialist Steve Shaw, Project Planner George Heinen, Supervising Air Quality Engineer Evan Shipp, Supervising AQ Meteorologist Don Hunsaker, Supervising Air Quality Planner Jim Sweet, Project Planner David Nunes, Project Planner

California Air Resources Board Ravi Ramalingam Adjith Kaduwela Kurt Karperos

Councils of Government Cari Anderson, CA Consulting, Inc

EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised October 20, 2005

SJVUAPCD Table of Contents i

TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................... v LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ vii 1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................. 1-1

1.1 PURPOSE OF THIS PLAN ....................................................................... 1-1 1.2 REGULATORY ASPECTS........................................................................ 1-2

1.2.1 Attainment Classification.............................................................. 1-2 1.2.2 Agency Responsibilities ............................................................... 1-3 1.2.3 Sanctions, FIP and penalties ....................................................... 1-4 1.2.4 Conformity.................................................................................... 1-4

1.3 SJVAB PLANNING HISTORY................................................................... 1-5 1.4 SERIOUS AREA REQUIREMENTS.......................................................... 1-8 1.5 PLAN DEVELOPMENT............................................................................. 1-10

1.5.1 Process ........................................................................................ 1-10 1.5.2 Schedule ...................................................................................... 1-11 1.5.3 Content ........................................................................................ 1-11

2 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR QUALITY ............................................................. 2-1 2.1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 AIR QUALITY DETERMINANTS IN THE SJVAB...................................... 2-2

2.2.1 General ........................................................................................ 2-2 2.2.2 Geography and Topography ........................................................ 2-2 2.2.3 Climate......................................................................................... 2-3 2.2.4 Ozone Transport .......................................................................... 2-6 2.2.5 Population .................................................................................... 2-7 2.2.6 Development Patterns.................................................................. 2-8

2.3 OZONE...................................................................................................... 2-9 2.3.1 Background.................................................................................. 2-9 2.3.2 Adverse Effects............................................................................ 2-9 2.3.3 Precursors and Formations.......................................................... 2-11 2.3.4 Design Value Determinations from Ozone Levels........................ 2-12 2.3.5 Area Classification for the One (1)-Hour Ozone Standard ........... 2-13 2.3.6 One (1)-Hour Ozone Exceedance Trends.................................... 2-13 2.3.7 Status of Federal 8-Hour Standard .............................................. 2-15

2.4 OZONE MONITORING ............................................................................. 2-16 2.4.1 Monitoring Network ...................................................................... 2-16 2.4.2 Other Ozone Monitoring............................................................... 2-18 2.4.3 Conclusion ................................................................................... 2-26


SJVUAPCD Table of Contents ii

2.5 OTHER POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY..................................................................................................... 2-26 2.5.1 Particulate Matter ......................................................................... 2-26 2.5.2 Carbon Monoxide......................................................................... 2-28 2.5.3 Toxic Air Pollutants ...................................................................... 2-28

2.6 REFERENCES.......................................................................................... 2-29 3 EMISSIONS INVENTORY ................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 INVENTORY TYPES................................................................................. 3-1

3.2.1 Modeling Inventory....................................................................... 3-1 3.2.2 Planning Inventory ....................................................................... 3-3 3.2.3 Data Sources and Accuracy......................................................... 3-3 3.2.4 Emission Source Types ............................................................... 3-4

3.3 BASELINE YEAR EMISSIONS ................................................................. 3-6 3.4 FUTURE INVENTORIES........................................................................... 3-12

3.4.1 Growth Factors ............................................................................ 3-12 3.4.2 Control Factors ............................................................................ 3-13 3.4.3 Inclusion of Emission Reduction Credits ...................................... 3-13

3.5 CONFORMITY BUDGETS ........................................................................ 3-23 3.6 EMISSIONS INVENTORY UNCERTAINTIES........................................... 3-24 3.7 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................... 3-25

4 CONTROL STRATEGY ....................................................................................... 4-1

4.1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 DISTRICT RULE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE....................................... 4-1

4.2.1 District Control Measures............................................................. 4-4 4.2.2 Control Measures Table............................................................... 4-5 4.2.3 2004-2007 Control Measures....................................................... 4-8 4.2.4 Potential Control Measures Requiring Further Study................... 4-28 4.2.5 Reasonably Available Control Technologies................................ 4-35 4.2.6 Clean Fuels or Advanced Control Technologies .......................... 4-37

4.3 FUTURE STUDY MEASURES.................................................................. 4-37 4.3.1 Mobile Source Measures............................................................. 4-38 4.3.2 Other Sources ............................................................................. 4-39 4.3.3 Sustainable Incentives................................................................. 4-40 4.4 DISTRICT INCENTIVE PROGRAMS........................................................ 4-41

4.4.1 Heavy-Duty Engine Incentive Program ........................................ 4-42 4.4.2 Electric Lawn Mower Incentives................................................... 4-42 4.4.3 Future Programs .......................................................................... 4-43


SJVUAPCD Table of Contents iii

4.5 PUBLIC EDUCATION ............................................................................... 4-43 4.5.1 Outreach Program........................................................................ 4-44 4.5.2 District Publications...................................................................... 4-45 4.5.3 Youth Education........................................................................... 4-45 4.5.4 Events/Activities ........................................................................... 4-46

4.6 OVERVIEW OF REGIONAL TPA RACM .................................................. 4-46 4.6.1 Introduction .................................................................................. 4-46 4.6.2 Overview of existing measures .................................................... 4-47 4.6.3 Suggested measures ................................................................... 4-50 4.6.4 Adopted measures....................................................................... 4-51 4.6.5 Public Participation....................................................................... 4-51

4.7 STATE EMISSION REDUCTIONS FOR THE SJVAB............................... 4-53 4.7.1 Introduction .................................................................................. 4-53 4.7.2 Current Implementation Status .................................................... 4-54 4.7.3 ARB Commitments for Extreme OADP for SJVAB....................... 4-55

4.8 CONTINGENCY MEASURES................................................................... 4-57 4.9 LONG-TERM MEASURES........................................................................ 4-58

5 FUTURE OZONE AIR QUALITY ......................................................................... 5-1

5.1 INTRODUCTION & SUMMARY ................................................................ 5-1 5.2 PARTICIPANTS ........................................................................................ 5-1 5.3 MODEL CHOICE....................................................................................... 5-1 5.4 MODEL BASE CASE ................................................................................ 5-2 5.5 FUTURE YEAR PROJECTIONS............................................................... 5-5 5.6 ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION ........................................................... 5-9 5.7 MODELING CAVEATS AND FUTURE WORK ......................................... 5-13

6 OUTREACH......................................................................................................... 6-1

6.1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................... 6-1 6.2 PRE-DRAFT PLAN WORKSHOPS........................................................... 6-1 6.3 CITIZEN’S ADVISORY COMMITTEE ....................................................... 6-2 6.4 DISTRICT GOVERNING BOARD ............................................................. 6-2 6.5 WEB SITE POSTINGS.............................................................................. 6-3 6.6 STUDY AGENCY ...................................................................................... 6-3 6.7 DRAFT EXTREME OADP ......................................................................... 6-3 6.8 PROPOSED EXTREME OADP................................................................. 6-4

7 RATE OF PROGRESS (ROP) DEMONSTRATION ............................................ 7-1

7.1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................... 7-1 7.2 1990 RATE OF PROGRESS BASELINE INVENTORIES......................... 7-1 7.3 FUTURE YEAR (2008 AND 2010) INVENTORIES ................................... 7-3 7.4 1990-2008 MILESTONE (51 PERCENT) DEMONSTRATION.................. 7-3

7.4.1 Required 51 Percent Reduction for 2008 ..................................... 7-4 7.4.2 2008 Rate of Progress Demonstration......................................... 7-4


SJVUAPCD Table of Contents iv

7.5 1990-2010 MILESTONE (57 PERCENT) DEMONSTRATION.................. 7-6 7.5.1 Required 57 Percent Reduction for 2010 ..................................... 7-6 7.5.2 2010 Rate of Progress ................................................................. 7-9

7.6 PRIOR ROP & MILESTONE COMPLIANCE DEMONSTRATION ............ 7-13 7.6.1 Prior ROP .................................................................................... 7-13 7.6.2 Milestone Compliance Demonstration ......................................... 7-15 7.7 REFERENCES.......................................................................................... 7-16

8 CALIFORNIA CLEAN AIR ACT TRIENNIAL PROGRESS REPORT AND

PLAN REVISION ................................................................................................. 8-1 8.1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................... 8-1

8.1.1 Attainment Demonstration............................................................ 8-2 8.1.2 Air Basin Description.................................................................... 8-2

8.2 OZONE AIR QUALITY INDICATORS ....................................................... 8-3 8.2.1 Air Quality Indicators .................................................................... 8-3 8.2.2 Expected Peak Day Concentration (EPDC) ................................. 8-3 8.2.3 Exposure Indicators ..................................................................... 8-4

8.3 PROGRESS TOWARD AIR QUALITY STANDARD ATTAINMENT.......... 8-6 8.4 TRANSPORT MITIGATION ...................................................................... 8-13 8.5 CONTROL MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION ............................................. 8-16

8.5.1 Stationary Source Control Measures ........................................... 8-16 8.5.2 Mobile Source Control Measures................................................. 8-19 8.5.3 Land Use Programs ..................................................................... 8-22

8.6 PLAN REVISION....................................................................................... 8-23 8.6.1 Introduction .................................................................................. 8-23 8.6.2 Control Strategy ........................................................................... 8-23 8.6.3 Updated Strategy and Expected Reductions ............................... 8-25 8.6.4 Further Study Measures............................................................... 8-26

8.7 REFERENCES.......................................................................................... 8-27 9 ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY .......................................................................... 9-1 9.1 ACRONYMS ............................................................................................. 9-1 9.2 GLOSSARY .............................................................................................. 9-4 APPENDICES A. County Emission Inventories for On-Road Motor Vehicles .................................. A-1 B. Current List of Emission Reduction Credits.......................................................... B-1 C. Regional Transportation Planning Agency Commitments .................................... C-1 D. Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations ........................................................... D-1 E. Cap on Stationary Source Growth by Pollutant .................................................... E-1 F. Suggested Control Measures............................................................................... F-1 G. Clean Air Act Requirements................................................................................. G-1 H. Comments and Responses: Public Review of Draft Extreme OADP ................... H-1


SJVUAPCD List of Tables v

LIST OF TABLES

Table # Title Page #Table 1-1 Nonattainment Classifcation and Design Value Assignment .....................1-2 Table 1-2 Requirements for Severe versus Extreme Nonattainment Areas ..............1-9 Table 2-1 SJVAB Populations and Land Area...........................................................2-8 Table 2-2 Ozone Monitoring Stations in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin................2-19 Table 3-1 SJVAB 2000, 2008 and 2010 Planning Emissions Inventories..................3-7 Table 3-2 Estimated NOx Growth, Control and Estimated Offset Use for

Stationary Sources ....................................................................................3-15 Table 3-3 Estimated VOC Growth, Control and Estimated Offset Use for

Stationary Sources ....................................................................................3-18 Table 3-4 Transportation Conformity Budgets...........................................................3-24 Table 4-1 District Control Measure Schedule (2004-2007)........................................4-2 Table 4-2 Potential Control Measures Requiring Further Study ................................4-6 Table 4-3 Defined State Measures from the 2003 Statewide Strategy ......................4-56 Table 5-1 SJVAB Federal 1-Hour Ozone Attainment Concept ..................................5-11 Table 7-1 1990 ROP Baseline Year Inventory...........................................................7-2 Table 7-2 1990 Adjusted Base Year VOC Inventory Calculations (Tons/Day) ..........7-3 Table 7-3 Reductions from Adopted Rules and Regulations Not Included in

the 2008 and 2010 Projected Inventories..................................................7-4 Table 7-4 2008 Rate of Progress Demonstration Summary ......................................7-7 Table 7-5 2010 Rate of Progress Demonstration Summary ......................................7-11 Table 7-6 Comparison of Unadjusted Emissions Inventories used in Amended

2002/2005 ROP Plan and Extreme OADP ................................................7-14 Table 8-1 San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Ozone Exceedances...................................8-7 Table 8-2 BARCT Rules ............................................................................................8-15 Table 8-3 2001-2003 Rulemaking Schedule..............................................................8-16 Table 8-4 Actual Emissions Reductions for District Rules Affecting Ozone

Precursor Emissions (2000-2002) .............................................................8-19 Table 8-5 Rulemaking Schedule for 2003-2005 ........................................................8-25 Table 8-6 Planning Emissions Inventories (summer, tons/day) .................................8-26


SJVUAPCD List of Figures vi

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title Page #Figure 2-1 Counties Comprising the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin ............................ 2-1 Figure 2-2 San Joaquin Valley Wind Patterns During Ozone Season ........................ 2-4 Figure 2-3 Basin 1-Hour Design Value for 1986-2003 ................................................ 2-13 Figure 2-4 Number of Days Over the 1-Hour Federal Ozone Standard...................... 2-14 Figure 2-5 San Joaquin Valley Ozone Exceedances.................................................. 2-15 Figure 2-6 San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Air Quality Monitoring Network ................... 2-17 Figure 4-1 Overview of Local Government Control Measure Process for the

Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan ....................................... 4-49 Figure 5-1 Wind Field for July 30, 2000 at 5:00 AM and 3:00 PM PST....................... 5-4 Figure 5-2 Maximum Ozone Concentration, 2000 CCOS Episode............................. 5-6 Figure 5-3 Change in Maximum Ozone Concentration due to Wildfires ..................... 5-7 Figure 5-4 Maximum Ozone Concentration, 2010, without Additional Controls.......... 5-8 Figure 5-5 Carrying Capacity Diagram for Bakersfield on July 30, 2010 .................... 5-10 Figure 7-1 Graphical Summary of 2008 ROP Demonstration for San Joaquin

Valley Ozone ............................................................................................. 7-8 Figure 7-2 Graphical Summary of 2010 ROP Demonstration for San Joaquin

Valley Ozone ............................................................................................. 7-12 Figure 8-1 Expected Peak Day Concentration at Arvin-Bear Site............................... 8-8 Figure 8-2 Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Bakersfield Golden State

Site ............................................................................................................ 8-9 Figure 8-3 Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Bakersfield 5558

California Ave Site..................................................................................... 8-9 Figure 8-4 Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Clovis N. Villa Ave. Site ........... 8-10 Figure 8-5 Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Fresno 1st Street Site ............... 8-10 Figure 8-6 Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Hanford-Irwin Site .................... 8-11 Figure 8-7 Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Maricopa-Stanislaus

Street Site.................................................................................................. 8-11 Figure 8-8 Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Merced-South Coffee

Ave. Site .................................................................................................... 8-12 Figure 8-9 Area Weighted Exposure per Square Kilometer........................................ 8-12 Figure 8-10 Population Weighted Exposure per Person............................................... 8-13

SJVUAPCD Executive Summary

vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan (OADP) sets forth the emission reductions and timeline for attaining the federal 1-hour ozone ambient air quality standards in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB) by November 15, 2010. The San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (District), in conjunction with the California Air Resources Board (ARB), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the eight regional Transportation Planning Agencies (TPAs) in the Valley, developed this plan to provide healthy air for all of the Valley’s people and to meet federal and state requirements for ozone planning documents. For the purposes of this Extreme OADP, ozone is a colorless, odorless reactive gas found near the earth’s surface. Ozone is formed during summer months when pollutants emitted from society’s activities and natural sources react in the presence of light winds, sunlight and warm temperatures. Principal pollutants involved in these reactions are nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs); NOx and VOCs are termed ozone precursors. Ozone is the prime ingredient of smog, and adversely affects human health and environmental resources. When inhaled, even at very low levels, ozone can cause acute respiratory problems, aggravate asthma, significantly decrease lung capacity in healthy adults, inflame lung tissue, and impair the defenses of the body’s immune system. Ozone also interferes with the ability of plants to make and store food; compromises growth, reproduction and overall plant health; and makes plants more susceptible to diseases, pest and other environmental stressors. In addition, ozone can also damage materials such as rubber, paper, and plastics, thereby generating additional costs to society. Because ozone is an air pollutant that can adversely affect human health, damage vegetation, and degrade materials, EPA has established ambient air quality standards under the authority of the Federal Clean Air Act that identify safe levels for ozone in the atmosphere to prevent and minimize these impacts. Ozone levels measured in the atmosphere at levels lower than the standards are viewed as safe, whereas levels above the standards represent a reasonable danger to public health and welfare (non-health related damages), and thus require action to reduce emissions of ozone precursors. EPA has issued two different standards for ozone: a 1-hour average of 0.12 parts per million and an 8-hour average of 0.08 ppm; each of these is subdivided into primary standards that protect public health and secondary standards that protect public welfare (for each of the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone standards, the numeric value of the standard is the same for primary and secondary standards). This Plan addresses only the 1-hour standards. In 1997, EPA determined that the 1-hour standards were not needed to protect public health given the promulgation of the 8-hour standards. On April 15, 2004 EPA issued a final rule revoking the 1-hour standards, effective June 15, 2005.

EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN


viii

Areas in the United States where ozone levels measured in the ambient air exceed the 1-hour standards of 0.12 ppm are said to be in nonattainment of the standards. An area complies with the federal 1-hour ozone standards when measured 1-hour average ozone levels at any given monitoring station do not exceed 0.12 ppm more than one day per year over any consecutive three-year period (40 CFR 50.9). Thus an area that has a monitoring station with measured 1-hour average ozone levels greater than 0.12 ppm on four or more days over a three-year period has not attained the standards, even if all of the days occurred in only one of the three years. The severity or magnitude of a given area’s ozone nonattainment problem is given by the 1-hour ozone design value, which is based on the fourth highest measured 1-hour ozone level in excess of 0.12 ppm in a three-year period at a given monitoring station. In accordance with the federal Clean Air Act, EPA uses the design value at the time of standard promulgation to assign nonattainment areas to one of several classes that reflect the severity of the nonattainment problem; classifications range from marginal nonattainment to extreme nonattainment. The Federal Clean Air Act contains provisions for changing the classifications using factors such as clean air progress rates and requests from States to move areas to a higher classification. On April 16, 2004 EPA issued a final rule classifying the SJVAB as extreme nonattainment, effective May 17, 2004 (69 FR 20550). Under this rulemaking, the SJVAB’s attainment date is November 15, 2010. This Extreme OADP is a roadmap that identifies emission reductions needed to attain the federal 1-hour ozone standards by November 15, 2010. According to the final rule reclassifying the SJVAB as extreme nonattainment for the federal 1-hour ozone standards, the Extreme OADP is due to the EPA on November 15, 2004. The principal components of an ozone attainment demonstration plan consist of data describing measured ozone levels in the atmosphere for the area in question, baseline and future emissions inventories, descriptions of emissions controls that will reduce future emissions, and a description of results from a photochemical model relating emissions to ambient ozone levels and demonstrating attainment of the appropriate standards at a future date. This Extreme OADP meets federal requirements for extreme 1-hour ozone plans. Ozone levels measured in the SJVAB’s atmosphere in 2003 exceeded the federal 1-hour ozone standards on 37 days, which was a slight increase above 2002 levels. In addition, for the period 2001—2003, eight monitoring sites experienced more than three exceedances of the federal 1-hour ozone standards, with one site (Arvin) experiencing more than 50 exceedances and another site (Parlier) experiencing more than 40 exceedances. The overall 1-hour ozone design value for the SJVAB in 2003 was 0.15 ppm. These data reflect the pervasiveness of the SJVAB’s 1-hour ozone nonattainment problem.



ix

The Extreme OADP presents an emissions inventory developed under the Central California Ozone Study that describes the baseline (2000) and future (2008 and 2010) emissions rates for VOC and NOx, the pollutants that combine in the atmosphere to form ozone. The Plan includes transportation conformity emissions budgets for the years 2008 and 2010, which affect the planning activities of the Valley TPAs. Information provided by the TPAs, the mobile source emissions model EMFAC2002 (Version 2.2), and emission reductions calculated by ARB and the District form the basis of the conformity budgets. The Extreme OADP presents emissions reductions sufficient to demonstrate attainment of the federal 1-hour standards by November 15, 2010 and to meet federal rate of progress emission reduction milestones for the years 2008 and 2010. The District and ARB will implement the control measures achieving these reductions. Many of the District measures used in the Extreme OADP were presented in the 2003 PM10 Plan that EPA approved effective June 25, 2004. In addition, the District developed other emission control measures to meet federal and state requirements outside of this Extreme OADP, and identified them in the January 2004 Extreme OADP Status Report. Many of the ARB emission control measures also stem from the 2003 PM10 Plan. Additional ARB measures for this Extreme OADP were first described in the January 2004 Extreme OADP Status Report, and before that in the State and Federal Strategy for the California State Implementation Plan (SIP), adopted by ARB on October 23, 2003. The District and ARB evaluated the potential for these reductions to reduce 1-hour ozone levels in the SJVAB by using a gridded photochemical model in accordance with EPA-approved procedures. This model uses a series of computer programs to relate VOC and NOx emissions to ozone levels. All of the reductions described in the previous paragraph, combined with minor reductions from incentive programs and other state mobile source emission control programs, were almost sufficient to demonstrate attainment of the federal 1-hour ozone standards in the SJVAB by November 15, 2010. To provide the needed additional reductions, the District, in accordance with federal Clean Air Act provisions for extreme nonattainment areas, identified additional emission reductions to be provided by long-term measures that will be identified no later than spring of 2007. The total reductions identified as being needed to demonstrate attainment in the SJVAB represent about 14.5% of 2010 VOC emissions and about 14.5% of 2010 NOx emissions, beyond those reductions planned or committed to as of 2002. These percent reductions translate to about 53 tons/day of VOC emissions and about 58 tons/day of NOx emissions that must be reduced using future emission reduction control measures (including 5 tons per day each of VOC and NOx emissions reductions to be achieved by the long-term measures). Emission reductions implemented by ARB and EPA are critical to the SJVAB’s demonstration of attainment of the federal 1-hour ozone standard by November 15, 2010. The resulting 2010 emissions inventory that



x

demonstrates attainment of the federal 1-hour ozone standards in the SJVAB is about 314 tons per day of VOC and about 344 tons per day of NOx. An additional important function of this Extreme OADP is to is to determine if planned emissions reductions meet federal requirements for rate of progress in reducing emissions of ozone precursors for the specified years of 2008 and 2010. The emission reductions identified in this Extreme OADP as needed to demonstrate attainment of the federal 1-hour ozone standards, exclusive of the long-term measures, were more than sufficient to meet federal rate of progress emission reduction milestones for 2008 (a 51% reduction compared to 1990 emissions) and 2010 (a 57% reduction compared to 1990 emissions). A combination of VOC and NOx emission controls were needed to meet the milestones. In addition, the District used the emissions inventory in the Extreme OADP to show that the most recent prior rate of progress evaluations for the SJVAB (2002 and 2005) are still valid. In addition, this plan fulfills requirements of the California Clean Air Act regarding the development of a triennial progress report and California Air Quality Attainment Plan revision that examines air pollutant exposure data, control measure implementation, and other air quality information with emphasis on meeting California ambient air quality standards. The California Clean Air documents in this Extreme OADP focus on the historical time period of 2000-2002, and project, where recommended by ARB guidance, into the next three-year planning period (2003-2005). The California Clean Air Act components of this plan meet state requirements for triennial progress reports and plan revisions. For state requirements, the Extreme OADP presents trends in ozone air quality indicators developed by ARB for reporting progress towards attaining the California 1-hour ozone standard and discusses the implementation of all feasible emission control measures. The information presented in this part of the plan shows that the SJVAB trends for most of the ARB-mandated ozone air quality indicators showed either a downward trend (improvement) or little movement up or down for the period of interest (2000—2002), although the overall long-term trend for most of the indicators in the SJVAB is one of improving air quality. The District continues to be actively involved in determining and implementing all feasible control measures, and works closely with downwind adjacent districts to evaluate control measures implemented and planned.

Chapter 1 - Introduction


SJVUAPCD Chapter 1 - Introduction

1-1

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE OF THIS PLAN The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB) does not currently meet the federal primary (health-based) and secondary (welfare-based) one-hour national ambient air quality standards (standards or NAAQS) of 0.12 parts per million (ppm) by volume for the air pollutant ozone. At levels above the federal standards, ozone adversely affects public health, diminishes the production and quality of many agricultural crops, reduces visibility, degrades man-made materials, and damages native and ornamental vegetation. The San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (District), which is responsible for air quality management in the SJVAB, has been implementing emissions control measures to reduce 1-hour ozone levels, and has shown demonstrable progress over the past fifteen years. However, additional emission reductions are needed to bring the SJVAB into attainment with the federal 1-hour ozone standards. Because the District has authority over only a portion of the variety of air pollution sources in the SJVAB, it does not have the ability to put in place all of the emissions controls needed to bring the SJVAB into attainment. Additional emission reductions to be implemented by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are needed to achieve attainment. The federal Clean Air Act requires that the SJVAB attain the standard by November 15, 2010.1 This plan was prepared to fulfill the requirements of the federal Clean Air Act for demonstrating attainment of the federal 1-hour ozone standard by November 15, 2010. As such, it describes the factors contributing to the SJVAB’s persistent ozone air quality problem, quantifies air pollutant emissions that cause ozone to form in the SJVAB, identifies control measures (past, present and future) needed to reduce these emissions, and projects future air quality based on implementation of these controls. In addition, this plan meets other requirements of the federal Clean Air Act that address the rate of progress (ROP) in reducing emissions of ozone precursor emissions by specified milestone years, which are 2008 and 2010 for extreme nonattainment areas. Lastly, this plan fulfills California Health and Safety Code requirements for the California Clean Air Act Plan Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision, both of which address progress towards meeting the state 1-hour ozone ambient air quality standard.

1 On April 30, 2004 EPA issued a final rule revoking the federal 1-hour ozone standard, effective June 15, 2005 (69 FR 23858). Effective June 15, 2005 the SJVAB would no longer be nonattainment for the federal 1-hour standard and the November 15, 2010 date for attainment would be eliminated. Focus would then shift to the attainment of the 8-hour standard, and District and state emission control measures committed to in this Extreme OADP would be implemented for their contribution toward reducing 8-hour ozone levels.



1-2

1.2 REGULATORY ASPECTS 1.2.1 Attainment classification Measured levels of pollutants in the atmosphere determine whether or not a given area is classified as attaining the standards (measured levels are lower than the standards) or nonattainment (measured levels are greater than the standards). For attainment of the federal 1-hour ozone standard, the principal statistic of interest is the number of times measured pollutant levels exceed the ozone NAAQS (also termed the number of exceedances). An area is in compliance with the primary and secondary federal 1-hour ozone NAAQS when measured 1-hour ozone levels at any given station do not exceed on average 0.12 parts per million by volume more than one day per year over any three year period (40 CFR 50.9). Thus an area with four or more exceedances at a given monitor over a three-year period has not attained the standard. Numerous sites in the SJVAB typically experience four or more exceedances, over any given three-year period (see section 2 for details). For the SJVAB to be classified as attainment for the federal 1-hour ozone standard, it would have to have no sites with four or more exceedances over a three-year period. Once an area is designated as nonattainment for the federal 1-hour ozone standard, an air quality statistic termed the “design value” helps determine the magnitude of the nonattainment problem, as indicated below in Table 1-1 (Section 181(a) of the Federal Clean Air Act):2

Table 1-1 Nonattainment Classification and Design Value Assignment

Nonattainment classification Design Value (ppm) Marginal 0.121 up to 0.138

Moderate 0.138 up to 0.160

Serious 0.160 up to 0.180

Severe 0.180 up to 0.280

Extreme 0.280 and above As can be seen, the extreme areas on the bottom have the worst ozone air pollution problem and the highest design value. The “design value” can be thought of as the pollutant concentration in the atmosphere at which we have healthy air for that pollutant. It is the concentration for which we design our air pollution control programs. A design value is calculated for each monitor

2 Typically, nonattainment area classification based on design value is done in conjunction with implementing a new standard, such as EPA did in 2004 with the 8-hour ozone standard.



1-3

measuring the pollutant in a given air basin. For the overall basin, the design value is defined as the highest for that basin. For the federal 1-hour ozone standard, the design value is based on the fourth highest exceedance in a 3-year period at a given monitoring station. Two principal events that have triggered nonattainment area classification based on design value are the passage of the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendments (at which time the above table was created) and in conjunction with implementing a new standard, such as EPA did in 2004 with the new 8-hour ozone standard. An air basin’s nonattainment classification is not always based only on design value. If an area fails to attain the standard by the date given for the classification, EPA can bump up an area to the next highest nonattainment category, if it fails to attain the standard by the date specified in the Federal Clean Air Act, even though the design value may not have changed or may have changed only marginally. An air basin’s nonattainment classification can also change by state request in accordance with Section 181(b)(3) of the Federal Clean Air Act. Factors driving such requests include the severity and complexity of a nonattainment problem, the need for emissions controls beyond the authority of the entity responsible for clean air planning, and the types of sources playing key roles in creating high pollutant levels. 1.2.2 Agency responsibilities The reduction of ozone precursor emissions in the SJVAB requires the cooperation of local, regional, state, and federal governments. At the federal level, the EPA is responsible for setting the NAAQS and establishing federal motor vehicle emission standards. The EPA is also responsible for reducing emissions from locomotives, aircraft, heavy duty vehicles used in interstate commerce, and other sources such as off-road engines that are either preempted from state control or best regulated at the national level. The EPA also has the authority under the FCAA to require preparation of state plans for air quality and may approve or disapprove state air quality plans. The ARB is the lead state agency for air quality. It is responsible for preparing and submitting a state air quality plan to the EPA. In preparing a state plan, the ARB reviews and approves regional air quality plans and incorporates them into a SIP. Under state authority, ARB also establishes emission standards for on-road motor vehicles and some off-road sources; it also establishes fuel specifications and develops “consumer product” standards for meeting air quality goals in California. Other state agencies such as the Department of Pesticides and the Bureau of Automotive Repair also have responsibility for certain emission sources. The air pollution control districts and air quality management districts are responsible for developing the portion of the SIP that deals with stationary and area source controls in their respective geographic areas; they also cooperate with Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs) to develop local government control measures.



1-4

1.2.3 Sanctions, FIP and penalties The FCAA [Title I, Part D, Section 179(b)] directs the EPA to impose sanctions on any area that fails to comply with the requirements of the law. The two mandatory sanctions consist of the following: (1) increased emissions offsets for major stationary sources, and (2) a prohibition on the use of federal highway funds. The offset sanction applies to major stationary sources. In a severe non-attainment area, a major source is defined as any source that emits, or has the potential to emit, 25 tons per year or more of VOC or NOx. Under the FCAA [Title I, Part D, Section 173(a)], the owner/operator of a major source must obtain construction and operation permits from the District for constructing a new major source or for making a major modification to an existing source. To obtain these permits, the source must reduce emissions within the District by more than the emissions created by the new or modified source on a 1.5 to 1 ratio for extreme areas. If the mandatory offset sanction is imposed, the offset ratio will become 2 to 1, which means that for every one ton of emissions produced, two tons must be reduced from an applicable source in the SJVAB. The highway construction sanction, when implemented, prohibits the federal Secretary of Transportation from approving or awarding transportation projects or grants, except for projects designed to improve a demonstrated safety problem or intended to minimize air pollution. Air quality exceptions to this sanction include the following types of programs: (1) programs for public transit, (2) bus and high-occupancy lanes, (3) employer trip reduction programs, (4) ramp metering and signalization, (5) parking facilities for multiple occupancy vehicles, (6) road use charges, (7) programs for breakdown and accident scene management, and (8) other programs improving air quality. In the event that a state is unable to enact emission controls sufficient to attain a federal standard, EPA can promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) until such time that state and local planning actions are back on track to achieve attainment. FIPs are not common and are developed on a case-by-case basis as needed. FIPs are not required to meet the same planning deadlines as the SIPs they are temporarily replacing. 1.2.4 Conformity Conformity requirements date back to the 1977 amendments to the FCAA, but the 1990 FCAA Amendments substantially broadened their coverage and made them more specific. Under the conformity requirements, the Valley RTPAs cannot approve any activity unless it conforms to the SIP’s purpose of eliminating the severity and number of violations of the federal standards and achieving expeditious attainment of these standards. Transportation plans refer to Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs) prepared and adopted by Transportation Planning Agencies. A RTP is normally a 20-year master plan for each county that provides policies, actions, and financial



1-5

projections to guide investment decisions. Transportation programs refer to Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs). A TIP is a financially constrained set of highway and transit projects to be funded over a multi-year period. It includes all projects requiring federal funding, permits, or other approvals, as well as regionally significant, non-federally funded projects. A transportation project is any highway or transit project that is included in the RTP and TIP, requires federal funding or action, or is regionally significant, and is submitted to the RTPAs for project review and fund application approval. 1.3 SJVAB PLANNING HISTORY After passage of the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendments, EPA classified the SJVAB as “serious” nonattainment for the federal 1-hour ozone standards, based on the SJVAB’s design value for the 1987—1989 time period of data collection used for the original classification (56 FR 56694). As such, the SJVAB was required to attain the standard by November 15, 1999. In accordance with the Federal Clean Air Act, the District prepared and submitted in 1994 a plan demonstrating attainment by the required date. The SJVAB failed to attain the federal 1-hour ozone standard by November 15, 1999 as required in the Federal Clean Air Act.3 Consequently, in November 2001 EPA reclassified the SJVAB from “serious” to “severe” nonattainment (66 FR 56476); at the same time, EPA also changed the boundary of the SJVAB by removing a portion of eastern Kern County, required implementation of six emission control measures from the 1994 Plan, and required submittal by May 31, 2002 of a severe area ozone nonattainment plan meeting the specific provisions of Section 182 (d) of the federal Clean Air Act. In 2002, the District and ARB provided all required items to EPA except for a plan demonstrating attainment of the federal 1-hour ozone standard by November 15, 2005 (rules were submitted in late 2001/early 2002, and a 2002 and 2005 Rate of Progress Plan was adopted by the District on May 16, 2002 and transmitted by ARB to EPA on September 6, 2002)4. On October 2, 2002, EPA issued a final rule specifying “severe” area requirements that had not yet been met for the SJVAB (67 FR 61784). These items, which included a plan demonstrating attainment of the federal 1-hour ozone standard by November 15, 2005, were required to be submitted to EPA no 3 The SJVAB’s failure to reach attainment by 1999 is due to a number of factors, including: (1) the emission inventory was not fully developed and understood in 1994, and as a result the attainment strategy did not adequately account for all emissions in the inventory; and (2) emissions from sources outside the District that are transported into the air basin and contribute to exceedances of the ozone standard were not adequately addressed. 4 ARB transmitted the 2002 and 2005 Rate of Progress Plan to EPA on September 6, 2002 primarily to incorporate specific enforceable District control measures into the SIP. The motor vehicle emissions inventories in this plan were not used to set conformity budgets because they were based on dated modeling techniques and vehicle activity data not suited for budgets.



1-6

later than March 18, 2004. This EPA action [which was effective on September 18, 2002] triggered an 18-month clock for imposing emissions offset sanctions, a 24-month clock for imposing highway funding sanctions, and a 24-month clock for preparing a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for the SJVAB.5 Failure to submit the required items by March 18, 2004 would trigger the offset sanctions; failure to submit the required items by September 18, 2004 would trigger the highway fund sanctions and EPA promulgation of the FIP. Stopping the clocks required submittal of the necessary revisions by the dates specified; these revisions are (1) a demonstration of attainment of the 1-hr ozone standard by no later than November 15, 2005 [an ozone attainment demonstration plan (OADP)]; (2) a demonstration of creditable emission reductions of ozone precursors at a rate of at least 3%/yr until November 2005; (3) a rule addressing Reasonably Available Control Technology for lime kilns; (4) an inventory; and (5) contingency measures. In 2003, the District and ARB provided all of the required items to EPA except for the plan demonstrating attainment of the federal 1-hour ozone standard by November 15, 2005.6 The District and ARB began work on a severe ozone attainment demonstration plan in late 2001, which included photochemical modeling to determine the magnitude of emissions reductions needed to attain the standard in the SJVAB by November 15, 2005. This modeling indicated that the emissions reductions needed for attainment were beyond what the District, ARB, or EPA could accomplish individually; consequently, attainment depended upon the District’s continued control of sources within its authority, in addition to ARB’s implementation of their own emission control measures on sources outside the authority of the District to regulate (primarily mobile sources). Most of ARB’s rules were scheduled to go into effect in the post-2007 time frame7, which did not help the District demonstrate attainment for the SJVAB by 2005. In addition, EPA was developing regulations to reduce emissions from sources under their control (e.g., locomotives, aircraft, diesel engines, etc.), but the federal implementation schedule for these rules was in the post-2005 time frame also.

5 Under the Federal Clean Air Act, EPA may develop and implement its own federal emission control measures if it finds that state and local measures do not meet requirements. This Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) is thus a temporary activity that supersedes the State Implementation Plan; it remains in effect until such time as EPA turns the attainment demonstration program back to state and local agencies. 6 On April 10, 2003, California submitted to EPA the District’s Amended 2002/2005 Rate of Progress (ROP) Plan for San Joaquin Valley Ozone, which provides all of the severe area SIP revisions required by EPA in the October 2002 Federal Register notice, except for the OADP. This Amended ROP Plan is based on ARB’s updated motor vehicle emissions model and updated activity data, and thus could be used to set conformity budgets. On July 10, 2003 EPA found the conformity budgets to be adequate. On September 4, 2003, EPA found the Amended ROP Plan to be complete, and it is under review at EPA. 7 ARB’s rulemaking activities are heavily influenced by the attainment planning schedule for the South Coast Air Basin, which as an extreme ozone nonattainment area must attain the federal 1-hour ozone standard by November 15, 2010.



1-7

The District and the California Air Resources Board (ARB) have acknowledged that emission reductions stemming from new state and federal controls (which are outside of the District’s authority to implement) are needed to demonstrate attainment of the 1-hr ozone standards in the SJVAB, and that these controls will not go into effect until after 2005. The District needed a mechanism to allow time for state and federal measures to come into effect in order to attain the standard. Since the District could not accelerate implementation of state and federal measures, other options were explored. Section 181(b)(3) of the Federal Clean Air Act allows states to request EPA to reclassify an area to a higher classification. Higher classes reflect a more substantial nonattainment problem that in turn requires more time to solve. The District’s only option for pursuing a higher classification, with a later attainment date, was to request classification as extreme nonattainment.8 The District held numerous workshops and other public discussions (e.g., staff reports at Governing Board meetings) during the period 2001—2003 on the subject of requesting EPA to reclassify the SJVAB as extreme nonattainment for the federal 1-hour ozone standards. Consequently, on December 18, 2003, after extensive public debate and stakeholder discussion, the District’s Governing Board voted unanimously to request EPA through ARB to classify the SJVAB as extreme nonattainment for the federal 1-hour ozone standards. ARB forwarded this request to EPA on January 9, 2004. On February 23, 2004 EPA proposed approval of the request (69 FR 8126) and on April 18, 2004, EPA signed the final rule approving the request. The classification as extreme nonattainment became final on May 17, 2004 (69 FR 20550). This classification changes the SJVAB’s attainment date for the federal 1-hour ozone standard to November 15, 2010, thereby providing time for critical state and federal emissions controls to come into effect in the post-2005 time frame. The classification to extreme also removes all prior “severe” area requirements and associated sanctions and FIP clock because once a nonattainment area is reclassified, the Federal Clean Air Act requirements of the new classification supersede those of the previous classification, and the previous attainment requirements (and any associated deficiencies) are moot (69 FR 8127). No sanctions or FIP clock for planning deficiencies for the Federal 1-hour ozone standard apply to the SJVAB as of May 17, 2004.9

8 In May 2001, The District requested EPA to designate the SJVAB as “Severe-17”, which would have extended the attainment date to November 15, 2007. In November 2001, EPA denied the request because the “Severe-17” category can be assigned based only on design value, and the SJVAB’s 1-hour design value at the time of the request was not high enough for classification as “severe-17.” (66 FR 56476) 9 EPA has an obligation to issue a FIP if they do not approve the Amended 2002 and 2005 Rate of Progress Plan for San Joaquin Valley Ozone that was submitted to them in April 2003. The District owes this Plan to EPA whether the District’s classification is extreme or severe.



1-8

1.4 EXTREME AREA REQUIREMENTS Extreme nonattainment areas must meet all requirements specified in Section 182(d) of the FCAA for a “severe” area plus the requirements for extreme areas specified in Section 182(e). Table 1-2 compares key federal Clean Air Act provisions for severe and extreme nonattainment areas. When it transitioned from severe to extreme nonattainment, the District’s attainment date changed to November 15, 2010, and it also picked up two additional ROP milestone years of 2008 and 2010 for which it must demonstrate that SJVAB emissions reductions are meeting the targets established by the federal Clean Air Act for these years. In addition to these general planning requirements, the District must begin to implement the other extreme area requirements shown in Table 1-2. The federal Clean Air Act requires extreme nonattainment areas to define a major source as one whose emissions of ozone precursors meet or exceed 10 tons per year. The lower major source definition also affects implementation of two other programs: New Source Review (NSR) and Title V permitting. For the SJVAB, the lower major source threshold under extreme would require an estimated 150 more sources to obtain Title V permits10 (exclusive of agricultural sources). For NSR, the lower major source threshold is expected to have a minimal effect on SJVAB sources because the District’s NSR program requirements already meet “extreme” levels (10 tons per year) due to California Clean Air Act requirements. The offset ratio would change to the higher level of 1.5:1, with the option of a 1.2:1 ratio if the District is able to demonstrate use of best available control technology on all major sources. The District is committed to submitting revised NSR and Title V rules reflecting “extreme” classification to EPA by May 16, 2005, as required by the Final Rule reclassifying the SJVAB to extreme nonattainment (69 FR 20552).11 The District already complies with the “clean fuels” part of the extreme area requirements (Section 4.2). The traffic control measures are optional, as is the new technologies provision that is used in Chapter 5 of this plan. Lastly, the District adopted a rule on May 16, 2002 implementing a nonattainment fee of $5000 per ton of emissions, and submitted the rule through ARB to EPA for approval. EPA has not yet taken final action on the rule, which was written to apply to either a severe or extreme nonattainment area. 12 This Extreme OADP meets all federal requirements for extreme area plans, as is shown in Appendix G.

10 The District issues permits to about 7000 facilities, exclusive of agricultural operations. 11 The District could revisit the NSR rule again after EPA revokes the federal 1-hour ozone standard on June 15, 2005, due to the effects of revocation on new source review as specified in Phase I of the final rule implementing the federal 8-hour ozone standard (40 CFR 51.905(e)(4)) [NSR thresholds are growth measures that change with an area’s classification]. 12 This rule, if trigged by nonattainment, would generate an estimated $4 million to $ 36 million per year in the SJVAB, but federal law does not mandate how the funds should be spent.



1-9

TABLE 1-2 Provisions for Severe vs. Extreme Nonattainment Areas

[FCAA Sections 182(d) and (e) and section 185]

Category Severe Area Provisions

Extreme Area Provisions

Major Stationary Source

Includes any stationary source or group of sources located within a contiguous area and under common control that emits, or has the potential to emit, at least 25 tons per year of VOCs or NOx.

Includes any stationary source or group of sources located within a continuous area and under common control that emits, or has the potential to emit, at least 10 tons per year of VOCs or NOx.

Modifications to Sources

Not applicable Any change at a major stationary source that results in any increase in emissions from any discrete operation, unit, or other pollutant-emitting activity at the source shall be considered a modification from the standpoint of permit requirements unless the increase is offset by reductions in the same pollutant from other discrete operations within the same source at an offset ratio of at least 1.3 to 1.

Clean Fuels/Advanced Control Technologies for Boilers

Not applicable Extreme areas shall submit plan revisions that require each new, modified, and existing electric utility and industrial/commercial boiler emitting >25 tons per year of NOx to burn as its primary fuel, natural gas, methanol, or ethanol or use advanced technology for reducing NOx emissions.

Traffic Control Measures

Not applicable Extreme plans may contain provisions establishing traffic control measures applicable during heavy traffic hours to reduce the use of heavy-duty or high-polluting vehicles.

New Technologies

Not applicable EPA may approve extreme area SIP provisions that anticipate development of new control techniques or improvement of existing control technologies, and attainment based on these provisions, if the state can demonstrate that such provisions are not needed to achieve the emission reductions in the 1990—2000 time frame and if the state has submitted enforceable commitments to develop and adopt contingency measures to be implemented if the new technologies do not produce the intended emission reductions.

Offset Requirement

Emission offset requirement is at least 1.3 to 1 for new or modified sources as the ratio of total emission reductions of VOCs to total increase emissions of such air pollutants, except if all existing major sources in the nonattainment area use best available control technology for the control of VOCs and NOx, the ratio remains at least 1.2 to 1.

The ratio of total emission reductions of VOCs to total increased emissions of such air pollutant shall be at least 1.5 to 1, except that if the State plan requires all existing major sources in the nonattainment area to use best available control technology for the control of volatile organic compounds, the ratio shall be at least 1.2 to 1.

Failure to attain fee

If area fails to attain the standard by November 15, 2005, major stationary source of VOCs in the area shall pay a fee to the state of $5000/ton of VOC emissions per calendar year in excess of 80% of a baseline defined as the actual or allowable emissions.

Same requirements except for attainment date of November 15, 2010.



1-10

1.5 PLAN DEVELOPMENT 1.5.1 Process In June 2002, recognizing the likelihood of eventually requesting classification to extreme nonattainment, the District Governing Board directed staff to begin preparation of a plan that demonstrates attainment of the federal one-hour ozone standard by November 15, 2010. Work on the Extreme OADP has been ongoing since June 2002; most of the initial effort was directed at preparing the Amended 2002 and 2005 Rate of Progress Plan for San Joaquin Valley Ozone. Consequently work focused on updating emissions inventories and control measures, and examining emissions trends over time. Independent of the Ozone Rate of Progress Plan, work was also ongoing in this time frame on analysis of meteorological and atmospheric chemistry data collected during the summer 2000 Central California Ozone Study (CCOS). This data analysis supported selection of ozone episodes from the summer of 2000, and the simulation of ozone levels for the episodes as the basis for attainment demonstrations in the Extreme OADP. The District and ARB developed this Extreme OADP with the best CCOS information available through March 2004. As CCOS work continues and new information becomes available, it will be incorporated into future revisions of the Extreme OADP or in future plans for attaining the federal 8-hour ozone standard. At a minimum, the District is committed to revising the Extreme OADP in 2007 (assuming EPA is still requiring states to conduct planning activities for the federal 1-hour ozone standard, which they plan to revoke in June 2005); this revision would include updated ozone air quality information, updated or new control measures as appropriate, updated emissions inventories, and revised modeling as appropriate. If EPA does not require the Extreme OADP to be revised in 2007, any updated analyses and control measure evaluations would be presented in the 8-hour ozone attainment demonstration plan that is due to EPA by June 15, 2007. Section 6 provides more information on the public process used to develop this Extreme OADP. The District conducted public workshops on the Extreme OADP in July 2003, January 2004, and in August 2004. Monthly coordination meetings among District staff, ARB, and the transportation planning agencies helped guide the plan development over the 2003—2004 time period. Many regularly scheduled technical meetings among staff from ARB and other districts addressed emissions inventory and photochemical modeling issues (see Section 5 and Appendix D for more information).



1-11

1.5.2 Schedule In its final rule reclassifying the SJVAB to extreme nonattainment, EPA specified a due date of November 15, 2004 for the SJVAB Extreme OADP (69 FR 20550). This rule became effective on May 17, 200413. The Draft Extreme OADP was released to the public for review on July 30, 2004; the public comment period closed on August 27, 2004. The District Governing Board is scheduled to consider the Extreme OADP for adoption on October 8, 2004. Following adoption, the Extreme OADP would be sent to ARB for approval on October 28, 2004, and then on to EPA by November 15, 2004. 1.5.3 Content This Extreme OADP is organized into the following chapters. Chapter 2 presents an overview of SJVAB ozone air quality, including air quality monitoring data, air quality determinants, ozone effects, and trends in ozone air quality. Chapter 3 presents the planning emissions inventories used as the foundation for this plan. Current and future emission control measures are discussed in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 is the heart of this Extreme OADP, and uses emissions and air quality data to project future air quality and provide the basis for projecting future attainment of the federal 1-hour ozone standard. Chapter 6 summarizes public outreach conducted during plan development, while Chapter 7 fulfills Rate of Progress requirements in the federal Clean Air Act. Chapter 8 is included to meet separate State of California requirements for a triennial progress report and California Air Quality Attainment Plan revision, and Chapter 9 defines acronyms and other terms used throughout the document. Lastly, a series of appendices performs two important functions: presenting detailed and technical information that supports the plan, and allowing the main body of the plan to be shorter and easier to understand for the lay audience. As shown in Appendix G, the federal elements in the Extreme OADP meet all federal requirements for extreme nonattainment area plans. Also as shown in Appendix G, the state elements in the Extreme OADP (principally Chapter 8) meet all state requirements for air quality attainment plans.

13 In its Final Phase I Rule implementing the federal 8-hour ozone standard, EPA specified that unmet obligations for 1-hour attainment plans could be met using one of three options, any of which would be due on June 15, 2005 (69 FR 23998). One of the options is to prepare a 1-hour ozone attainment demonstration plan. The Final Phase I Rule for 8-hour ozone became effective on June 15, 2004. As of the date of this document, this apparent discrepancy in due dates for the SJVAB’s 1-hour ozone attainment demonstration plan has not been clarified.

Chapter 2 – San Joaquin Valley Air Quality


SJVUAPCD Chapter 2 - San Joaquin Valley Air Quality

2-1

2 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR QUALITY 2.1 INTRODUCTION The SJVAB consists of eight counties: Fresno, Kern (western and central), Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare (see Figure 2-1). Cumulatively, these counties represent approximately 16 percent of California’s geographic area, making the SJVAB the second largest air quality basin (based on area) as delineated by ARB. The current population within the SJVAB is approximately 3.4 million people. Based on California State Department of Finance projections, the population in the SJVAB is expected to grow to 3.6 million by 2005, to 4 million by 2010 and to 4.9 million by 2020. FIGURE 2-1

Counties Comprising the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin

SSaann JJooaaqquuiinn

Stanislaus Merced Madera

Fresno

Tulare Kings

Kern



2-2

2.2 AIR QUALITY DETERMINANTS IN SJVAB 2.2.1 General Air pollution in the SJVAB can be attributed to human-related (anthropogenic) activities that produce emissions. Air pollution from significant anthropogenic activities in the SJVAB includes a variety of industrial-based sources as well as on- and off-road mobile sources. Activities that tend to increase mobile activity include increases in population, increases in general traffic activity (including automobiles, trucks, aircraft, and rail), urban sprawl (which will increase commuter driving distances), and general local land management practices as they pertain to modes of commuter transportation. These sources, coupled with geographical and meteorological conditions unique to the area, stimulate the formation of unhealthy air. The geography of mountainous areas to the east, west and south, in combination with long summers and relatively short winters, contributes to local climate episodes that prevent the dispersion of pollutants. Transport, as affected by wind flows and inversions, also plays a role in the creation of air pollution. These conditions are described in the following sections. 2.2.2 Geography and Topography California is divided into regional air basins according to topographic air drainage features. The SJVAB consists of a continuous intermountain valley approximately 250 miles long and averaging 80 miles wide (Figure 2-1). On the western edge of the Valley is the Coast Mountain range, with peaks reaching 5,020 feet, and on the east side is the Sierra Nevada range with some peaks exceeding 14,000 feet. The Tehachapi Mountains form the southern boundary of the Valley. This mountain range includes peaks over 6,000 feet, and contains mountain passes to the Los Angeles basin and the Mojave Desert. The SJVAB floor is only open to the north. Although marine air generally flows into the basin from the San Joaquin River Delta, the region’s topographic features restrict air movement through and out of the basin. The Coastal Range hinders wind access into the valley from the west, the Tehachapi Mountains prevent southerly passage of airflow, and the high Sierra Nevada range forms a significant barrier to the east. Additionally, most of the surrounding mountains are above the normal height of summer inversion layers (1,500-3,000 feet). These topographic features result in weak airflow. The wind pattern produces conditions that result in poor horizontal dispersion of pollutants. During high-pressure events over the SJVAB, pollutant dispersal is also limited vertically by inversions, as explained in 2.2.3. As a result, the SJVAB is highly susceptible to pollutant accumulation over time.



2-3

2.2.3 Climate Warm, dry summers and cool winters characterize the SJVAB floor. The average mean temperature over a thirty-year period is 65°F. High daily temperature readings in summer average around 95°F. The SJVAB also experiences mild winters, where the average daily low temperature is 45°F. In general, the SJVAB averages 106 days a year with 90°F or hotter, and 40 days a year with 100°F or hotter. The daily summer temperature variation can be as high as 30°F. The SJVAB has an “inland Mediterranean” climate that averages over 260 sunny days per year, primarily because semi-permanent high pressure systems establish themselves over the SJVAB and deflect low-pressure systems that might otherwise bring rain and winds. Precipitation in the SJVAB is confined primarily to the winter months with some usually occurring in late summer and fall. Average annual rainfall for the valley floor of the SJVAB is 9.25 inches, but varies from over 20 inches in the north part of the Valley to less than 5 inches in the south. For the purposes of transport, wind flows and inversion layers will be discussed. Wind speed and direction play an important role in the dispersion and transport of air pollutants. Wind moves ozone precursors and ozone downwind from source areas of emissions or areas where ozone is formed. Figure 2-2 depicts typical wind flow patterns for day and night during the ozone season in the SJVAB. As can be seen, the dominant wind flow pattern (day or night) in the SJVAB is from the northwest to the southeast, along the axis of the Valley. During the daytime, surface winds enter the SJVAB primarily from the north through the San Francisco Bay area; they also enter at other locations through passes in the coastal range. The air picks up ozone precursors emitted in the Bay Area and transports them down the valley where they eventually form ozone in the SJVAB. Precursor emissions from SJVAB source areas (Stockton, Modesto, Merced, etc.) are also transported down the valley where they are converted to ozone. This general transport moves air near the surface south from Stockton to Bakersfield. The effect of the transport is seen to the southeast of Fresno and Bakersfield. The city of Parlier (near the city of Fresno), and the communities of Edison and Arvin near Bakersfield, often experience the highest ozone levels in the SJVAB. Air leaves the southern end of the Valley during the day by flowing over the Tehachapi Mountains (southeast of Bakersfield) into the Mojave Desert, thereby transporting ozone and other pollutants out of the SJVAB. Also during the daytime, heated air rises into the mountains and transports ozone and other pollutants up the Sierra Nevada and coastal mountains.



2-4

FIGURE 2-2

San Joaquin Valley Wind Patterns During Ozone Season

Source: SJVAQSPC 1996 At night, the same general wind flow pattern continues, with some important exceptions. First, the air is no longer able to exit the southern end of the SJVAB because it encounters cooler drainage winds from the surrounding mountains. Consequently, it is forced back north to set up a circular flow pattern (Figure 2-2) known as the Fresno eddy. The eddy circulates pollutants in a counterclockwise pattern, and returns polluted air to urban areas where more precursors are added the next day. Another important difference about the nighttime winds in the SJVAB is that they typically are caused by a jet stream of fast moving air at an



2-5

altitude of about 1000 ft and a speed of up to 30 mph. Lastly, some of the pollutants transported to higher altitudes from daytime heating return to the valley at night because of drainage winds from the mountains. Inversions affect air pollutant transport by limiting vertical dispersion of pollutants. An inversion occurs in the atmosphere when air temperature increases with height rather than decreases. Pollutants emitted to the atmosphere will rise and disperse as long as they are warmer than the surrounding air. When pollutants encounter air that is the same temperature or that is warmer, they are no longer able to rise and thus they remain at the elevation of the warmed air. Inversions limit vertical movement of air because displacement of air up or down in an inversion results in the air returning to its original level. This is called a stable atmosphere and results in little vertical air movement and therefore poor vertical pollutant dispersion. The inversion thus acts like a lid on the atmosphere. The SJVAB experiences two common types of inversions: radiation and subsidence inversions. Nocturnal cooling of an air layer near the earth’s surface is the principal cause of radiation inversions. The radiation inversion extends upward several hundred feet from the ground and occurs during the evening and early morning hours. During a radiation inversion, little vertical mixing occurs, which minimizes pollutant dispersal. At daybreak, the sun begins to heat the ground, which in turn heats the lower layers of air and eventually lifts and breaks the inversion, thereby facilitating pollutant dispersal. During summer months, daytime heat from the sun lifts the inversion to heights anywhere from 2,000 to over 5,000 feet (even higher over mountain ranges due to heating of the slopes), which helps disperse pollutants and lowers their concentrations. However, these same summer daytime conditions also increase ozone production, which can neutralize or offset the effects of enhanced vertical dispersion. Studies have shown that radiation inversions tend to persist longer into daylight hours in the southern part of the SJVAB due to a lack of marine air intrusion and associated atmospheric mixing. On the worst dispersion days the inversion may remain only a few hundred feet above the surface of the SJVAB. Subsidence inversions are caused by downward motion (subsidence) high in the atmosphere, typically in association with a high-pressure area positioned along the coast of California. As air descends under the influence of the high pressure system, it compresses and heats up, and as a result becomes warmer than the air beneath it. This limits vertical mixing, as the warm air aloft restricts air movement from below. During inversion events, air pollutant emissions build up in the atmosphere below the inversion; ozone precursors then react to form ozone, and levels increase from day to day. One-hour concentrations of ozone that exceed federal standards generally occur in the SJVAB during strong inversions. During many high ozone level events, the SJVAB is likely experiencing a combination of radiation and subsidence inversions.



2-6

2.2.4 Ozone Transport Ozone transport refers to the movement of ozone and ozone precursors from other basins to the SJVAB, from the SJVAB to other air basins, and within the SJVAB. Transport can occur at ground level and also at higher altitudes (e.g., movement of polluted air up mountain slopes during the day). Although improvements have been made in the SJVAB’s ozone air quality over the last decade, the basin continues to violate the federal 1-hour ozone standard on numerous days. Furthermore, in recent years, the location of the highest measured ozone levels has changed from northern Kern County to southeastern Fresno County. ARB’s 2001 assessment of ozone transport found that pollutants transported from other air basins affect the SJVAB’s ozone air quality, but the magnitude of the effect declines from north to south (ARB 2001). Local emissions are thought to be primarily responsible for the SJVAB’s worst ozone air quality. Attaining the federal 1-hour ozone standard by 2010 will require implementation of emission control measures in other basins, as governed by ARB’s Ozone Transport Mitigation Regulations, as well as reductions in the SJVAB’s precursor emissions. Transport of pollutants within the SJVAB plays a significant role in violations of the federal 1-hour ozone standard in the SJVAB. As discussed above, prevailing winds blow from the northern part of the SJVAB to the south, and can carry pollutants from San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Merced counties to the Fresno area. Pollutants transported from the San Francisco Bay Area south to Fresno and Bakersfield must pass through the northern SJVAB, so transport from the San Francisco Bay Area to Fresno is combined with a northern SJVAB contribution. Further south, eddy currents can carry pollutants along the east side of the SJVAB from Tulare County and northern Kern County to the Fresno area. Ozone and precursors are transported from other basins to the SJVAB. On some days, according to the ARB study referenced above, pollutants transported from the San Francisco Bay Area affect ozone air quality in the northern SJVAB, mixing with local emissions to contribute to violations of the federal 1-hour ozone standard. On other days, violations of the standard are due entirely to local emissions. The effect of Bay Area transport diminishes with distance so that the ozone air quality in Fresno and Bakersfield is affected less. Overall, ARB rates the Bay Area’s impact on SJVAB ozone air quality as ranging from inconsequential to overwhelming (by itself can cause violations of the state standard) depending on meteorological conditions occurring at the time of transport evaluation and in the receptor area. ARB also identifies the broader Sacramento area as a source of ozone and precursor transport to the SJVAB, but the effect only ranges from significant (contributes to a violation of the standard when combined with local emissions) to inconsequential.



2-7

The SJVAB is also a source area for pollutants transported to other air basins. According to the ARB, the SJVAB can be a source area affecting ozone air quality in the broader Sacramento area, the Great Basin valleys, the mountain counties, the Mojave Desert, and the north central and south central coasts, depending on meteorological conditions. ARB rates the SJVAB’s contributions as ranging from inconsequential to overwhelming, depending on the receptor area. The above discussion is based upon a somewhat dated transport assessment that was limited in scope and limited by information on ozone behavior in the atmosphere. Work continues under CCOS to update our understanding of transport using improved emissions inventories, improved databases on meteorological behavior and atmospheric chemistry, and improved grid-based photochemical models. Consequently, findings and conclusions regarding transport may change from those presented above. Future development of CCOS episodes and modeling tools will provide updated and improved information to evaluate transport. Future plans addressing state or federal ozone standard attainment will incorporate significant advances in knowledge regarding transport. 2.2.5 Population The SJVAB

Documents

Extreme Ozone Attainment Attainment ......Extreme Ozone Attainment Attainment DemonstrationDemonstration PlanPlan OcOctober 8, 2004tober 8tober 8, 2004 , 2004 San Joaquin Valley Unified