CHAPTER 1 

INTRODUCTION 

Purpose 

Constraints in Achieving Standards 

Control Efforts 

Progress in Implementing the 1997/1999 SIPs 

2003 AQMP Revision 

Format of This Document 
Chapter 1 Introduction 

1 - 1 

PURPOSE 

The South Coast Air Quality Management District (District) amended the 1997 Air 

Quality Management Plan (AQMP) in 1999 to address the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency’s (U.S. EPA’s) proposed disapproval of the 1997 Ozone SIP revision 

to ensure that the 1997 AQMP complied with or exceeded federal requirements. The 

1999 AQMP amendments to the 1997 AQMP were subsequently approved by the U.S. 

EPA into the State Implementation Plan (SIP) in April 2000. The District updated the 

PM10 portion of the 1997 AQMP for both the South Coast Air Basin and Coachella 

Valley in 2002 as part of the District’s request to extend the PM10 attainment date from 

2001 to 2006 for these areas as allowed under the federal Clean Air Act (CAA). The 

U.S. EPA approved the 2002 update on April 18, 2003. 

The purpose of the 2003 Revision to the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP or Plan) 

for the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) and those portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin 

under District jurisdiction, is to set forth a comprehensive program that will lead these 

areas into compliance with all federal and state air quality planning requirements. 

Specifically, the 2003 AQMP Revision is designed to satisfy the California Clean Air 

Act (CCAA) tri-annual 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. The Plan will be submitted to U.S. EPA as 

a SIP revision once it is approved by the District Governing Board and the California 

Air Resources Board (CARB). The key federal and state planning requirements are 

summarized briefly later in this chapter. 

The 2003 AQMP sets forth programs which require the cooperation of all levels of 

government: local, regional, state, and federal. Each level is represented in the Plan by 

the appropriate agency or jurisdiction that has the authority over specific emissions 

sources. Accordingly, each agency or jurisdiction is associated with specific planning 

and implementation responsibilities. 

At the federal level, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) is charged 

with regulation of 49-state on-road motor vehicle standards; trains, airplanes, and ships; 

and non-road engines less than 175 horsepower. The CARB, representing the state 

level, also oversees on-road vehicle emission standards, fuel specifications, some offroad sources and consumer product standards. At the regional level, the District is 

responsible for stationary sources and some mobile sources. In addition, the District has 

lead responsibility for the development and adoption of the Plan. Lastly, at the local 

level, Associations of Governments have a dual role of leader and coordinator. In their 

leadership role, they, in cooperation with local jurisdictions and subregional 

associations, develop strategies for these jurisdictions to implement; as a coordinator, 

they facilitate the implementation of these strategies. For the South Coast Air Basin, the 
Final 2003 AQMP 

1 - 2 

Southern California Association of Governments is the District’s major partner in the 

preparation of the AQMP. Interagency commitment and cooperation are the keys to 

success of the AQMP. 

Since air pollution physically transcends city and county boundaries, it is a regional 

problem. No one agency can design or implement the Plan alone and the strategies in 

the Plan reflect this fact. 

CONSTRAINTS IN ACHIEVING STANDARDS 

The District is faced with a number of constraints or confounding circumstances to 

achieving clean air. These include the physical and meteorological setting, the large 

pollutant emissions burden of the Basin, and the rapid population growth of the area. 

Setting 

The SCAQMD has jurisdiction over an area of approximately 10,743 square miles, 

consisting of the four-county South Coast Air Basin (Basin) (Orange County and the 

non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino counties), and the 

Riverside County portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) and Mojave Desert Air 

Basin (MDAB). The Basin, which is a subregion of the SCAQMD’s jurisdiction, is 

bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San 

Jacinto mountains to the north and east. It includes all of Orange County and the 

nondesert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. The 

Riverside County portion of the SSAB is bounded by the San Jacinto Mountains in the 

west and spans eastward up to the Palo Verde Valley. The federal nonattainment area 

(known as the Coachella Valley Planning Area) is a subregion of Riverside County and 

the SSAB that is bounded by the San Jacinto Mountains to the west and the eastern 

boundary of the Coachella Valley to the east. The Los Angeles County Portion of the 

MDAB (known as north county or Antelope Valley) is bounded by the San Gabriel 

Mountains to the south and west, the Los Angeles/Kern county border to the north, and 

the Los Angeles/San Bernardino county border to the east. The SSAB and MDAB were 

previously included in a single large Basin called the Southeast Desert Air Basin 

(SEDAB). On May 30, 1996, the California Air Resources Board replaced the SEDAB 

with the SSAB and MDAB. In July 1997, the Antelope Valley area of MDAB was 

separated from the District and incorporated into a new air district under the jurisdiction 

of the newly formed Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD). The 

entire region is shown in Figure 1-1. 
Chapter 1 Introduction 

1 - 3 

South Coast

Air Quality Management District

SCAQMD Jurisdiction

Mojave Desert

Air Basin

Salton Sea

Air Basin

San Diego

Air Basin

South

 Central

 Coast Air Basin

South Coast

 Air Basin

San Diego County Imperial County

Riverside County

Los Angeles

 County

Kern County San Bernardino County

Orange

 County

Santa

 Barbara

 County

Ventura

 County

San Joaquin

 Valley

 Air Basin

FIGURE 1-1 

Boundaries of the South Coast Air Quality Management District 

and Federal Planning Areas 

The topography and climate of Southern California combine to make the Basin an area 

of high air pollution potential, and constrain the District’s efforts to achieve clean air. 

During the summer months, a warm air mass frequently descends over the cool, moist 

marine layer produced by the interaction between the ocean’s surface and the lowest 

layer of the atmosphere. The warm upper layer forms a cap over the cool marine layer 

and inhibits the pollutants in the marine layer from dispersing upward. In addition, light 

winds during the summer further limit ventilation. Furthermore, sunlight triggers the 

photochemical reactions which produce ozone, and this region experiences more days of 

sunlight than any other major urban area in the nation except Phoenix. 

The Basin’s economic base is diverse. Historically, the four counties of the Basin have 

collectively comprised one of the fastest-growing local economies in the United States. 

Significant changes have occurred in the composition of the industrial base of the region 

in the past twenty years. As in many areas of the country, a large segment of heavy 

manufacturing, including steel and tire manufacturing and automobile assembly, has 

been phased down. Small service industries and businesses resulting from growth in 

shipping and trade have replaced much of the heavy industry. 
Final 2003 AQMP 

1 - 4 

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 are specifically addressed 

in Chapter 8 and Appendix V. 

In summary, the diverse geographical characteristics of the Southern California region 

place a significant constraint on achieving air quality standards. 

Emission Sources 

The pollution burden of the Basin is substantial. In spite of substantial reductions 

already achieved, additional significant reductions of volatile organic compounds and 

oxides of nitrogen in the South Coast Air Basin are needed to attain the federal 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 may also result from combustion, as in automobile engines; from evaporation 

of organic liquids, such as those used in coating and cleaning processes; or through 

abrasion, such as from tires on roadways. The air pollution control strategy in the 

AQMP is directed almost entirely at controlling man-made sources. Natural emissions 

are accounted for in the background and initial conditions for the air quality modeling 

analysis described in Chapters 5 and 8 and Appendix V. 

Population 

Since the end of World War II, the Basin has experienced faster population growth than 

the rest of the nation. Although growth has slowed somewhat, the region’s population is 

expected to increase significantly through 2020. Table 1-1 shows the projected growth 

based on SCAG’s regional growth forecast. 

Although per-capita emissions have been brought down substantially in the Basin 

through 50 years of implementing pollution controls, increases in the population over 

that time have made overall emission reductions more difficult. Many sources, such as 

automobiles, have been significantly controlled. However, increases in the number of 

sources, particularly those growing proportionally to population, reduce the potential air 

quality benefits of new controls. The net result is that unless significant steps are taken 

to further control air pollution, growth will overwhelm much of the improvements 

expected from the existing control program. 
Chapter 1 Introduction 

1 - 5 

TABLE 1-1 

Population Growth 

Year Population Average Percent 

Increase Per Year Over 

the Period 

1950 4.8 million -- 

1980 10.5 million 4.0 

1990 13.0 million 2.4 

2000 14.8 million 1.4 

2010 16.6 million 1.2 

2020 18.2 million 1.0 

2025 19.2 million 1.0 

CONTROL EFFORTS 

History 

The seriousness of the local air pollution problem was recognized in the early 1940s. In 

1946, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors established the first air pollution 

control district in the nation to address the problems of industrial air pollution. In the 

mid-1950s, California established the first state agency to control motor vehicle 

emissions. Countywide or regional air pollution districts were required throughout the 

state by 1970. Many of the controls, originating in California, became the basis for the 

federal control program which began in the 1960s. 

Nearly all control programs developed to date have relied on the development and 

application of cleaner technologies and add-on emission control devices. Industrial and 

vehicular sources have been significantly affected by these technologies. Only recently 

have preventive efforts come to the forefront of the air pollution control program, (e.g., 

alternative materials, waste minimization, and maintenance procedures for industrial 

sources). 

In the 1970s, it became apparent at both the state and federal levels that local programs 

were not enough to solve a problem that was regional in nature and did not stay within 

jurisdictional boundaries. Instead, air basins, defined by geographical boundaries, 

became the basis for regulatory programs. 
Final 2003 AQMP 

1 - 6 

In 1976, the California Legislature adopted the Lewis Air Quality Management Act 

which created the South Coast Air Quality Management District from a voluntary 

association of air pollution control districts in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San 

Bernardino counties. The new agency was charged with developing uniform plans and 

programs for the region to attain federal standards by the dates specified in federal law. 

The agency was also mandated to meet state standards by the earliest date achievable, 

using reasonably available control measures. 

Rule development in the 1970s through 1990s resulted in dramatic improvement in 

Basin air quality (see Appendix II). However, the effort to impose incremental rule 

changes on the thousands of stationary sources through the command-and-control 

regulatory process had its limitations in economic efficiency. The 1991 AQMP 

introduced the concept of a Marketable Permits Program and outlined the framework of 

an idea that was forerunner to what is now known as the Regional Clean Air Incentives 

Market (RECLAIM). 

A historical milestone occurred with the adoption of RECLAIM on October 15, 1993. 

RECLAIM is an alternative means of achieving further emission reductions from 

stationary sources, different from the traditional source-specific regulatory program. 

RECLAIM, a cap and trade program, calls for declining mass emission limits on the total 

emissions from all sources within a facility. The facility can choose from a selection of 

methods for achieving the prescribed emission reductions: add-on controls, use of 

reformulated products, changes in production, purchase of excess emission reductions 

from other sources, and/or any other methods that would be enforceable and 

quantifiable. 

Since the introduction of the RECLAIM program, the District has committed to provide 

compliance flexibility and has developed various economic incentive programs to 

ensure maximum feasible reductions while reducing compliance costs. For example, in 

2001, the AQMD Governing Board adopted six mobile and area source pilot credit 

generation rules. NOx emission reductions generated from these pilot credit generation 

rules can be used in the RECLAIM program. 

In summary, while the District’s effort to achieve applicable ambient air quality 

standards continues to rely on the successful command-and-control regulatory structure, 

the strategy is supplemented where appropriate with market incentive and compliance 

flexibility strategies. 

Impact of Control 

Past air quality programs have been effective in improving the Basin’s air quality. 

Ozone levels have been reduced by half over the past 30 years, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur 

dioxide, and lead standards have been met, and other criteria pollutant concentrations 
Chapter 1 Introduction 

1 - 7 

have significantly declined. The federal and state CO standards were also met as of the 

end of 2002. However, the Basin still experiences exceedances of health-based 

standards for ozone and particulate matter under ten microns in size (PM10). Air quality 

summaries and health effects in the Basin are briefly discussed in Chapter 2; Appendix 

II provides an in-depth analysis of air quality as measured within the District’s 

jurisdiction. The new federal 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 air quality standards and the state 

annual PM2.5 standards, although not yet applicable for the purpose of the AQMP, are 

discussed in Chapter 10. 

PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTING THE 1997/1999 SIPs 

Progress in implementing the 1997/1999 SIPs 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 1997 SIP. Since October 1999, sixteen control 

measures or rules have been adopted or amended by the District through October 2002. 

Table 1-2 lists the District’s 1997/1999 SIP commitment and the control measures or 

rules that were adopted through October 2002. 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, the District has achieved 

158 tons per day VOC reductions, exceeding its 1997/1999 SIP commitment by 

approximately 44.5 tons per day. 

Table 1-3 lists the control measures committed to in the 1997/1999 SIPs that have been 

adopted by the U.S. EPA or CARB since 1995. To date, CARB committed to VOC and 

NOx emission reductions of approximately 90 and 106 tons per day, respectively, and 

achieved 67 and 140 tons per day, respectively. While exceeding its NOx target by 34 

tons per day, CARB fell short of the VOC target by 21 tons per day using the 1997 SIP 

currency. U.S. EPA was obligated to VOC and NOx emission reductions of 

approximately 35 and 75 tons per day, respectively, and achieved 38 and 63 tons per 

day, respectively. 
Final 2003 AQMP 

1 - 8 

TABLE 1-2 

Rules and Regulations Adopted by District Since Adoption of 1997/1999 SIPs 

(October 1996 through October 2002a

) 

Control 

Measure 

(Rule) 

Title 

SIP 

Commitment

(tons/day) 

Emission 

Reductions 

Achieved 

Through Rule 

Implementation 

(tons/day) 

Adoption

Date 

CTS-02C(P2) 

(Rule 1171) 

Solvent Cleaning Operations 

(VOC) 

11.0 11.0b 1999 

WST-04 (Rule 

1150.1)g

Disposal of VOC-Containing 

Materials (VOC) 

0.8 0.8 2000 

PRC-3(P2) 

(Rule 1138) g

Restaurant Operations (VOC) 0.9 c c 

CTS-020 

(Rule 442) g

Solvent Usage (VOC) 1.0 1.9 2000 

CTS-02E 

(Rule 1168) g

Adhesives (VOC) 1.3 8.3 2000 

RFL-02(P2) 

(Rule 461) g

Gasoline Service Stations 

(VOC) 

2.0 6.2 2000 

CTS-09(P1) 

(Rule 1132) g

Large Coating & Solvent 

Sources – High Emitting Spray 

Booth Facilities (VOC) 

4.0 5.4 2000 

FUG-06 (Rule 

1189) g

Hydrogen Plants (VOC) 0.8 1.6 2000 

FUG-05(P1) 

(Rule 1178) 

Large Fugitive Emissions 

Sources (VOC) 

1.0 1.7 2001 

PRC-06 (Rule 

1131) g

Industrial Processes - Food 

Flavoring (VOC) 

3.0 3.0 2001 

CTS-08(P1) 

(Rule 1130) g

Industrial Coatings and 

Solvents (VOC) 

2.0 1.9 2002 
Chapter 1 Introduction 

1 - 9 

TABLE 1-2 

(continued) 

Rules and Regulations Adopted by District Since Adoption of 1997/1999 SIPs 

(October 1996 through October 2002a

) 

Control 

Measure 

(Rule) 

Title 

SIP 

Commitment

(tons/day) 

Emission 

Reductions 

Achieved 

Through Rule 

Implementation 

(tons/day) 

Adoption 

Date 

CTS-08(P2) 

(Rule 1122) 

Solvent Degreasing (VOC) 3.0 6.2 2001 

CTS-09(P2) 

(Rule 1162) 

Polyester Resins (VOC) 3.0 1.6 2002 

Rule 1102 g Dry Cleaners Using Solvent 

Other than Perchloroethylene 

(VOC) 

N/A 0.3 2000 

Rule 1104 g Wood Flat Stock Coating 

Operations (VOC) 

N/A 0.1 1999 

Rules adopted from October 1996 to September 

1999 d, h 

79.8 108.1 11/96 – 9/99 

Total VOC 113.6 158.1 

CMB-06 

(Rule 1121) g

Control of Nitrogen Oxides 

from Residential-Type Natural 

Gas Fired Water Heaters (NOx) 

7.6 7.6 1999 

Rule 1146 g Emissions of Oxides of 

Nitrogen from Industrial, 

Institutional, and Commercial 

Boilers, Steam Generators, and 

Process Heaters (NOx) 

N/A 0.2 2000 

Rules adopted from October 1996 to September 

1999 d, h 

2.4 4.2 11/96 – 9/99 

Total NOx 10 12 
Final 2003 AQMP 

1 - 10 

TABLE 1-2 

(continued) 

Rules and Regulations Adopted by District Since Adoption of 1997/1999 SIPs 

(October 1996 through October 2002a

) 

Control 

Measure 

(Rule) 

Title 

SIP 

Commitment

(tons/day) 

Emission 

Reductions 

Achieved 

Through Rule 

Implementation 

(tons/day) 

Adoption 

Date 

Rule 1158 Storage, Handling, and 

Transport of Petroleum Coke 

(PM10) 

N/A 1 1999 

Rule 431.2 Sulfur Content of Liquid Fuels 

(PM10) 

(SOx) 

N/A 

0.1 e

0.4 e

2000 

PRC-3(P1) 

(Rule 1138) 

Control of Emissions from 

Restaurant Operations (PM10) 

7.8 1 1997 

PRC-01 (Rule 

1137) 

PM10 Emission Reductions 

from Woodworking 

Operations (PM10) 

7.5f

 7.5 f 2002 

 PM10 

 SOx 

15.3 9.6 

0.4 

a

 SCAQMD summer planning emission in 2010 (rounded to the nearest whole number), based on 1997 SIP inventory. 

b

 An additional 16 tons of VOC emission reductions associated with implementation of Rule 1171 – Solvent Cleaning 

Operations are subject to technology assessments in 2003 and 2004 prior to implementation in 2005 and are not included 

in this value, but are included in the 2010 baseline. 

c

 Board approved infeasibility findings in October 2000 and used excess reductions from RFL-02(P2) to meet the SIP 

commitment. 

d

 Reference: Table 1-1 of the 1999 Amendment to the 1997 Ozone SIP for the South Coast Air Basin (SCAQMD, 

1999). 

e

 Emission reductions listed include only those from stationary sources. 

f SIP commitment and emission reduction achieved are based on 1997 AQMP inventory methodology. 

g

 Rules which have been approved by U.S. EPA. (Limited disapproval for portions of Rules 1168, 1132, and 1131 are 

being addressed in 2003/2004.) 

h

 Rules from Table 1-1 of the 1999 Amendment to the 1997 Ozone SIP for the South Coast Air Basin (SCAQMD, 

1999) which have been approved by U.S. EPA include: Rule 1107 (CTS-02H), Rule 1145 (CTS-02M), Rule 1122 (CTS02N), Rule 1113(P1) (CTS-07), Rule 1146.2 (CMB-02B), Rule 1138 (PRC-03), and Rule 1104. 
Chapter 1 Introduction 

1 - 11 

TABLE 1-3 

State and Federal Measures Adopted Since 1994 SIP 

ROG (tpd) NOx (tpd) 

Near-Term Measures Agency Adopted Commitment Achieved 

in 2010 

Commitment Achieved 

in 2010 

 

M1: Light-duty vehicle scrappage CARB 1998 0 0 

M2: Low Emission Vehicle II program CARB 1998 

19 

4 

17 

43 

M3: Medium-duty vehicles CARB 1995 Baseline1 -- Baseline1 - 

M4: Incentives for clean engines (Moyer 

 Program) 

CARB 1999 0 3 

M5: California heavy-duty diesel vehicle 

 standards 

CARB 1998 5 44 

M6: National heavy-duty diesel vehicle 

 standards 

USEPA 1998 1 11 

M7: Heavy-duty vehicle scrappage CARB Withdrawn NA NA 

M17: In-use reductions from heavy-duty 

 vehicles 

CARB No 

9 

0 

62 

0 

M8: Heavy-duty gasoline vehicle 

 standards 

CARB 1995 Baseline1 - Baseline1 - 

M9: CA heavy-duty off-road diesel 

 engine standards 

CARB 2000 4 18 

M10: National heavy-duty off-road diesel 

 engine stds 

USEPA 1998 

4 

6 

47 

25 

M11: CA large off-road gas/LPG engine 

 standards 

CARB 1998 16 5 

M12: National large off-road gas/LPG 

 engine stds 

USEPA 2002 

32 

14 

17 

5 

M13: Marine vessel standards USEPA 1999 0 0 15 2 

M14: Locomotive engine standards4 USEPA 1997 0 0 17 17 

M15: Aircraft standards USEPA No 3 0 6 0 

M16: Marine pleasurecraft standards USEPA 1996 21 17 0 0 

CP2: Consumer products mid-term 

 measures 

CARB 1997/1999 34 15 0 0 

CP3: Aerosol paint standards CARB 1995/1998 Baseline1 -- -- -- 

Enhanced I/M (Smog Check II) BAR 1995 Baseline1 (6) Baseline1 - 

DPR-1: Emission reductions from 

 pesticides 

DPR Voluntary 1 1 0 0 
Final 2003 AQMP 

1 - 12 

TABLE 1-3 (CONTINUED) 

State and Federal Measures Adopted Since 1994 SIP 

ROG (tpd) NOx (tpd) 

 Agency Adopted Commitment Achieved 

in 2010 

Commit

-ment 

Achieved 

in 2010 

Adopted measures not originally 

included in SIP 

 

Clean fuels measures CARB Multiple 13 12 

Marine pleasurecraft (reductions beyond 

M16) 

CARB 1998/2001 7 0 

Motorcycle Standards CARB 1998 1 0 

Urban transit buses CARB 2000 0 1 

Enhanced vapor recovery program5 CARB 2000 6 0 

Medium/heavy-duty gasoline standards 

(beyond M8) 

CARB 2000 0 1 

2007 heavy-duty diesel truck standards 

(beyond M5/M6) 

CARB/ 

USEPA

2001 1 16 

Small off-road engine standard revisions CARB 1998 (1) 0 

Gas can requirements2 CARB 1999 302 0 

NEAR-TERM TOTAL (excluding gas 

cans) 

 125 105 181 203 

Long-Term Measures (Section 182(e)(5)) 

Advanced technology on-road mobile 

"Black Box" 

CARB No 37 0 6 -3

Advanced technology off-road mobile 

"Black Box" 

CARB No 18 0 3 -3

CP4: Long-term measure for consumer 

 products 

CARB No 43 0 0 0 

LONG-TERM TOTAL 98 0 9 -

3

GRAND TOTAL (near-term + longterm)  223 105 190 203 

Remaining State and Federal Obligations under 1999 SIP 118 0 

2010 summer planning based on 1997 AQMP inventory. Emission reductions from individual measure may not add to 

total due to rounding. ( ) = Emission increase relative to baseline. BAR = Bureau of Automotive Repair; DPR = 

Department of Pesticide Regulation 

1

 Measures M3, M8, CP3, and the Smog Check II program from the 1994 SIP had already been adopted when the SIP 

was revised in 1997. The reductions from these measures are included in the 1997 SIP baseline. Although the Smog 

Check II program is achieving significant benefits, the emission reductions are less than anticipated in the 1997 SIP as 

indicated by the negative number under reductions achieved. 

2

 Emissions from gas cans were not included in the 1997/1999 SIP baseline; reductions from this source are real, but not 

creditable until the SIP is revised to reflect these emissions. 

3

 The NOx reductions anticipated from the long-term mobile source "Black Box" commitment have already been 

achieved from adopted measures. 

4

 Emission reductions from locomotives represent the national emission standards for locomotive engines as well as the 

MOU for the South Coast Air Basin. U.S. EPA has committed to adopt a backstop commitment to ensure that the 

emission reductions associated with the MOU are achieved. The MOU is hereby included as part of the 2003 AQMP 

SIP submittal. A copy of the MOU is available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad/loc/loco.htm. 5

 CARB's rule complements District Rule 461. An overall reduction of 6 tons per day of VOC reductions from this 

category is included in the AQMP baseline. 
Chapter 1 Introduction 

1 - 13 

2003 AQMP REVISION 

As mentioned earlier in this chapter, this 2003 revision to the AQMP is designed to 

satisfy the planning requirements of the California Clean Air Act and to develop 

transportation emission budgets using the latest approved motor vehicle emissions model 

and planning assumptions. Once approved by the District Governing Board and CARB, 

the 2003 AQMP will be submitted to U.S. EPA as a SIP revision. The District 

component of the 2003 AQMP contains the remaining measures from the 1997/1999 SIP 

along with new measures based on current technology assessments. The emission 

reduction commitment takes into account technical feasibility, cost effectiveness, and 

current emission estimates. 

Federal Clean Air Act Planning Requirements 

In November 1990, Congress enacted a series of amendments to the Clean Air Act 

intended to intensify air pollution control efforts across the nation. One of the primary 

goals of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments was an overhaul of the planning 

provisions for those areas not currently meeting National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS). The CAA identifies specific emission reduction goals, requires both a 

demonstration of reasonable further progress and an attainment demonstration, and 

incorporates more stringent sanctions for failure to attain or to meet interim milestones. 

The discussion that follows briefly presents the general planning requirements of the 

CAA, lists previous State Implementation Plan (SIP) submittals, and introduces CAA 

provisions that are addressed in the 2003 AQMP. 

General Requirements 

The CAA requires plans to provide for the implementation of all reasonably available 

control measures “as expeditiously as practicable,” including the adoption of reasonably 

available control technology for reducing emissions from existing sources. Emission 

control innovations in the form of market-based approaches are explicitly encouraged by 

the CAA. As mentioned earlier, the District is the first local agency in the country to 

adopt a market-based approach for controlling stationary source emissions of oxides of 

nitrogen and sulfur. The CAA also requires plans to include standards for reasonable 

further progress, which is defined as annual incremental reductions in emissions of 

relevant air pollutants needed to ensure attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) by the applicable date. A similar demonstration of progress was 

instituted in California with the passage of the California Clean Air Act in 1988. This is 

discussed further later in this chapter. 

There are several sets of general planning requirements, both for nonattainment areas 

[Section 172(c)] and for implementation plans in general [Section 110(a) (2)]. These 
Final 2003 AQMP 

1 - 14 

requirements are listed and very briefly described in Tables 1-4 and 1-5, respectively. 

The general provisions apply to all applicable pollutants unless superseded by pollutantspecific requirements. 

TABLE 1-4 

Nonattainment Plan Provisions 

[CAA Section 172(c)] 

Requirement Description 

Reasonably available 

control measures 

Implementation of all reasonably available control measures as 

expeditiously as practicable. 

Reasonable further 

progress 

Provision for reasonable further progress which is defined as “such 

annual incremental reductions in emissions of the relevant air 

pollutant as are required for the purpose of ensuring attainment of the 

applicable national ambient air quality standard by the applicable 

date.” 

Inventory Development and periodic revision of a comprehensive, accurate, 

current inventory of actual emissions from all sources. 

Allowable emission levels Identification and quantification of allowable emission levels for 

major new or modified stationary sources. 

Permits for new and 

modified stationary sources 

Permit requirements for the construction and operation of new or 

modified major stationary sources.

Other measures Inclusion of all enforceable emission limitations and control measures 

as may be necessary to attain the standard by the applicable attainment 

deadline. 

Contingency measures Implementation of contingency measures to be undertaken in the event 

of failure to make reasonable further progress or to attain the NAAQS. 
Chapter 1 Introduction 

1 - 15 

TABLE 1-5 

General CAA Requirements for Implementation Plans 

Requirement Description 

Ambient monitoring An ambient air quality monitoring program. [Section 110(a)(2)(B)] 

Enforcement and 

regulation 

A program for the enforcement of adopted control measures and 

emission limitations and regulation of the modification and construction 

of any stationary source to assure that the NAAQS are achieved. 

[Section 110(a)(2)(C)] 

Interstate transport Adequate provisions to inhibit emissions that will contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of NAAQS or interfere 

with measures required to prevent significant deterioration of air quality 

or to protect visibility in any other state. [Section 110(a)(2)(D)] 

Adequate resources Assurances that adequate personnel, funding, and authority are 

available to carry out the plan. [Section 110(a)(2)(E)] 

Source testing 

Monitoring 

Requirements for emission monitoring and reporting by the source 

operators. [Section 110(a)(2)(F)] 

Plan revisions Provisions for revising the air quality plan to incorporate changes in the 

standards or in the availability of improved control methods. [Section 

110(a)(2)(H)] 

Other CAA requirements Adequate provisions to meet applicable requirements relating to 

consultation, notification, and prevention of significant deterioration 

and visibility protection contained in other sections of the CAA. 

[Section 110(a)(2)(J)] 

Impact assessment Appropriate air quality modeling to predict the effect of new source 

emissions on ambient air quality. [Section 110(a)(2)(K)] 

Permit fees Provisions requiring major stationary sources to pay fees to cover 

reasonable costs for reviewing and acting on permit applications and for 

implementing and enforcing the permit conditions. [Section 

110(a)(2)(L)] 

Local government 

participation 

Provisions for consultation and participation by local political 

subdivisions affected by the plan. [Section 121] 

Transportation control 

measures 

Provisions requiring that serious and above nonattainment areas submit 

an implementation plan that includes transportation control measures 

considering at least the measures listed in Section 108(f). [Section 

182(c)(5)] 
Final 2003 AQMP 

1 - 16 

U.S. EPA guidance3 states that regulatory programs tend to be less than 100 percent 

effective for many source categories. Rule effectiveness reflects the ability of a 

regulatory program to achieve all the emission reductions that could be achieved by full 

compliance with the applicable regulations at all sources at all times. An effectiveness 

factor of 80 percent is required by EPA for all stationary source and non-tailpipe mobile 

source control measures for the future controlled scenarios. EPA, however, does allow 

exceptions to this rule if data exists to adequately demonstrate that the “real world” 

control percentage is higher. The District has an aggressive field enforcement program 

and periodic rule effectiveness studies have assisted the District in strategic deployment 

of inspection resources to minimize emission-related non-compliance. In addition, the 

District conducts workshops and compliance education programs for facility operators. 

Consequently, historical emissions inventory reporting has demonstrated sufficient 

compliance margin by the regulated sources that would ensure nearly 100 percent rule 

effectiveness. As a result, the control measures proposed in the 2003 AQMP with 

quantifiable emission reductions are based on a rule effectiveness of 100 percent. 

The CAA requires that most submitted plans include information on tracking plan 

implementation and milestone compliance. Requirements for these elements are 

described in Section 182(g) and Section 187(d) for ozone and carbon monoxide, 

respectively. Chapter 7 addresses these issues. 

EPA also requires a public hearing on many of the required elements in SIP submittals 

before considering them officially submitted. The District’s AQMP adoption process 

includes a public hearing on all of the required elements prior to submittal. 

CAA Planning Requirements Addressed by the 2003 AQMP

Table 1-6 lists the CAA planning requirements addressed by the 2003 AQMP. The table 

lists the relevant CAA section and submittal deadline 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. 

Besides the CAA requirements due prior to this plan revision (i.e., attainment 

demonstration plans for ozone, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide; 1996 Rate-ofProgress and Post-1996 Rate-of-Progress for ozone; and Best Available Control 

Measures (BACM) for PM10), the District is updating its 1997 PM10 attainment 

demonstration, which was required by Section 189. 

 

3 Emission Inventory Requirements for Carbon Monoxide State Implementation Plans; U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency; OAQPS, Research Triangle Park, NC, March 1991.
Chapter 1 Introduction 

1 - 17 

TABLE 1-6 

CAA SIP Revisions and Submittals in the 2003 AQMP 

Submittal CAA Section 2003 AQMP 

Reference 

PM10 Attainment Demonstration Revision (Basin) 189(b)(1)(A) Chapter 5 

Appendix V 

PM10 Attainment Demonstration Revision 

(Coachella Valley) 

189(b)(1)(A) Separate Cover 

PM10 Reasonable Further Progress Milestones 189(c)(1) Chapter 6 

Appendix V 

PM10 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget 176(c)(2)(A) Chapter 6 

Maintenance Plan for Nitrogen Dioxide 175A(a) and (d) Chapter 5 and 6 

Appendix V 

Revision to the Ozone Attainment Demonstration 

(Basin) 

182(c)(2)(A) Chapter 5 

Appendix V 

Revision to the Ozone Attainment Demonstration 

for Salton Sea Air Basin (under District jurisdiction) 

182(c)(2)(A) Chapter 8 

Appendix V 

Revision to the Post-1996 Rate-of-Progress 

Demonstration 

182(c)(2)(B) Chapter 6 

Appendix V 

Revision to the Carbon Monoxide Attainment 

Demonstration 

187(b)(1) Chapter 5 

Appendix V 

Growth Factors -- Appendix III 

Control Measure Documentation -- Appendix IV 

As specified in Section 189(b)(1)(A) of the Act, the PM10 attainment demonstration is 

due no later than four years after reclassification of an area to “serious.” The South 

Coast Air Basin and the Coachella Valley were reclassified from “moderate” to 

“serious” on February 8, 1993. The 1997 AQMP and the 1994 Coachella Valley SIP 

satisfied the attainment demonstration requirements for the Basin and Coachella Valley, 

respectively. Prior to 1997, the Coachella Valley achieved federal PM10 standards and, 

accordingly, the District prepared a redesignation request and maintenance plan in 1996. 

During 1999 – 2001, however, Coachella Valley exceeded the annual average PM10 
Final 2003 AQMP 

1 - 18 

standard. Accordingly, the District revised the PM10 Coachella Valley SIP in 2002 to 

request a 5-year extension for PM10 attainment. The U.S. EPA approved the 2002 

update on April 18, 2003. 

Also in 2002, the District submitted a PM10 SIP update for the South Coast Air Basin 

and requested U.S. EPA to expedite its approval process and grant the Basin a 5-year 

extension for PM10 attainment demonstration. As part of this update, the District 

committed to provide a SIP update in 2003 using the latest emissions data and planning 

assumptions. The 1997 PM10 SIP as updated in 2002 was deemed complete by U.S. 

EPA in November 2002 and approved on April 18, 2003. The 2003 AQMP serves to 

provide an update to the 1997 PM10 SIP (and subsequent 2002 update) and it 

incorporates the most current emissions data, including the latest available motor 

vehicles emissions budgets based on EMFAC2002 and latest planning assumptions. 

As part of the PM10 attainment demonstration, the plan must also contain emission 

reduction milestones to be achieved every three years until the area is redesignated 

attainment and the emission reductions must demonstrate reasonable further progress as 

defined under Section 171(l) of the Act. 

The U.S. EPA released a natural events policy in 1996 which exempts certain high wind 

events causing PM10 air quality exceedances as being counted as a violation. The 

District will be applying this policy to the Coachella Valley in designing the attainment 

demonstration for that area. The 2003 Coachella Valley plan is released under a separate 

cover and is discussed in Chapter 8 of this document. 

With new technical information on emissions estimates, the future-year baseline 

emissions projections changed, thereby requiring updates to previous SIP submittals. In 

particular, the emission budgets currently approved for federal conformity purposes must 

be updated and the California Ozone SIP for the South Coast Air Basin must be updated 

to reflect the best available technical information. 

Monitoring data for the past several years have shown that the nitrogen dioxide 

concentrations were below the federal air quality standard. Accordingly, the 2003 

AQMP will serve as the maintenance plan for nitrogen dioxide. As required under 

Section 175A(a), the plan must provide for maintenance of the air quality standard for at 

least 10 years after the area is redesignated to attainment (which occurred in 1998). In 

addition, the plan must contain contingency measures to assure that any violations will 

be promptly corrected. Similarly, the South Coast Air Basin met the carbon monoxide 

standard by December 2002. As such, the 2003 revision to the carbon monoxide plan 

serves a dual purpose: it replaces the 1997 attainment demonstration that lapsed at the 

end of 2000, and it provides the basis for a carbon monoxide maintenance plan in the 

future. 
Chapter 1 Introduction 

1 - 19 

Section 181(a)(1) classifies the Basin as an extreme nonattainment area for ozone and 

states that the Basin must achieve the federal ozone standard by November 15, 2010. As 

such, an attainment demonstration for ozone was provided as part of the ozone portion 

of the 1997/1999 SIP. The ozone attainment demonstration followed U.S. EPA and 

CARB modeling guidelines and was based on the photochemical grid model called the 

Urban Airshed Model (UAM). Based on new technical information, the 1997/1999 

AQMP ozone attainment demonstration is revised as part of the 2003 AQMP revision 

and the attainment demonstration is summarized in Chapters 5 and 6 and Appendix V. 

According to Section 182(c)(2)(B), the District must demonstrate how the Basin will 

achieve actual volatile organic compound emission reductions of at least three percent 

per year averaged over each consecutive three-year period beginning from November 

15, 1996 and ending November 15, 2010 (i.e., the Basin’s attainment date). The rate-ofprogress milestone years in the 2003 AQMP for the Basin are 2005, 2008, and 2010. 

Section 182(c)(9) requires that the post-1996 rate-of-progress demonstration must 

contain a set of contingency measures, that is, additional control measures which would 

be implemented in the event of a milestone or attainment failure. Chapter 6 contains the 

detailed calculations of the post-1996 rate-of-progress demonstration. Chapter 6 also 

provides an estimation of the emission levels at each of the milestone years compared to 

the CAA target levels. Contingency measures are listed in Chapter 9. 

The South Coast Air Basin both transports to and receives air pollutants from the coastal 

portions of Ventura and Santa Barbara counties in the South Central Coast Air Basin. 

The South Coast Air Basin also receives air pollutants from oil and gas development 

operations on the outer continental shelf. The 2003 AQMP does not specifically address 

the control requirements for these adjacent areas. However, the control measures in this 

Plan meet the CAA transport requirements and will assist downwind areas in complying 

with the federal ozone air quality standard. 

The Coachella Valley is classified as a “severe-17” ozone nonattainment area under the 

CAA and must comply with the federal ozone air quality standard by 2007. The CAA 

requires separate attainment and post-1996 rate-of-progress demonstrations for each 

severe air basin under the District’s jurisdiction. Such demonstrations were provided in 

Chapter 8 and Appendix V of the 1997 AQMP. Revisions to the PM10 attainment 

demonstration for the Coachella Valley area are provided under a separate cover and 

Appendix V of the 2003 AQMP. 

State Law Requirements 

The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) was signed into law on September 30, 1988, 

became effective on January 1, 1989, and was amended in 1992. Also known as the 

Sher Bill (AB 2595), the CCAA established a legal mandate to achieve health-based 
Final 2003 AQMP 

1 - 20 

state air quality standards at the earliest practicable date. The Lewis Presley Act 

provides that the plan must also contain deadlines for compliance with all state ambient 

air quality standards and the federally mandated primary ambient air quality standards 

[Health and Safety Code (H&SC) 40462(a)]. In September 1996, AB 3048 (Olberg) 

amended Sections 40716, 40717.5, 40914, 40916, 40918, 40919, 40920, 40920.5, and 

44241, and repealed Sections 40457, 40717.1, 40925, and 44246 of the Health and 

Safety Code relating to air pollution. The amendments to the Health and Safety Code 

became effective January 1, 1997. This plan revision reflects state planning 

requirements as they pertain to the South Coast Air Quality Management District. 

Through its many requirements, the CCAA serves as the centerpiece of the Basin’s 

attainment planning efforts since it is generally more stringent than the federal Clean Air 

Act. 

Based on pollutant levels, the CCAA divides nonattainment areas into categories with 

progressively more stringent requirements (H&SC 40918 - 40920.5). The categories are 

outlined in Table 1-7. The state nonattainment designations are on a county basis. The 

entire Basin is an extreme nonattainment area for ozone. Los Angeles County is the 

only county classified as a serious nonattainment area for carbon monoxide. However, 

in 2001 the carbon monoxide standards were not exceeded anywhere in the Basin. 

Although PM10 is not explicitly addressed in the CCAA, it is governed by the Lewis 

Presley Act. The plan therefore provides achieving all federal ambient air quality 

standards by their applicable date and state ambient air quality standards as early as 

possible. 

TABLE 1-7 

California Clean Air Act Nonattainment Area Classifications (H&SC 40921.5) 

 Concentration Level (ppm) 

Category Ozone Carbon Monoxide 

Moderate 0.09 to 0.12* 9.0 to 12.7*

Serious 0.13 to 0.15* > 12.7 

Severe 0.16 to 0.20* -- 

Extreme > 0.20 -- 

* Inclusive range. 

Serious and above nonattainment areas are required to revise their air quality 

management plan to include specified emission reduction strategies, and to meet 

milestones in implementing emission controls and achieving more healthful air quality. 

The key planning requirements are provided in Table 1-8. Some of these requirements 
Chapter 1 Introduction 

1 - 21 

are discussed in further detail in the next section. Chapter 6 addresses how these 

requirements are met in the Basin. The CCAA also includes some additional 

requirements that can significantly affect control strategy selection. These requirements 

are provided in Table 1-9. All of these mandates have either already been met through 

District regulations or are included/considered in the preparation of the 2003 AQMP. 

Plan Effectiveness

The CCAA requires, beginning on December 31, 1994 and every three years thereafter, 

that each district demonstrate the overall effectiveness of its air quality program. For 

those areas that do not attain state air quality standards by 2000, a comprehensive plan 

update was required to be submitted by December 31, 1997. In addition, Section 40925 

of the Health and Safety Code requires that the plan incorporate new data or projections 

including, but not limited to, the quantity of emission reductions actually achieved in the 

preceding three-year period and the rates of population-related, industry-related, and 

vehicle-related emissions growth actually experienced in the district and projected for 

the future. The 2003 AQMP serves as the comprehensive plan update for the South 

Coast Air Basin. 

TABLE 1-8 

California Clean Air Act Planning Requirements 

Requirement Description 

Indirect and area source controls An indirect and area source control program 

[H&SC 40918(a)(4)], 

Best available retrofit control 

technology 

Best available retrofit control technology (BARCT) for 

existing sources of specified sizes [H&SC 40918(a)(2))], 

New source review A program to mitigate all emissions from new and modified 

permitted sources [H&SC 40918(a)(1)) and 40920.5(b)], 

Transportation control measures Transportation control measures as needed to meet plan 

requirements [H&SC 40918(a)(3)], and 

Clean fleet vehicle programs Significant use of low-emission vehicles by fleet operators 

[H&SC 40919(a)(4)]. 

The CCAA suggests a number of air quality indicators to show Plan effectiveness, 

including actual emission reductions, ozone and carbon monoxide design value 
Final 2003 AQMP 

1 - 22 

improvements, population exposure reductions, and pollutant concentration hours. In 

Chapter 6, plan effectiveness is illustrated by trends in the following indicators: 

• volatile organic compound, oxides of nitrogen, and carbon monoxide emissions, 

• ozone and carbon monoxide air quality (i.e., exceedance days), and 

• ozone and carbon monoxide population exposure above air quality standards. 

TABLE 1-9 

California Clean Air Act Requirements for Control Strategy Development 

Requirement Description 

Rate-of-progress Reducing pollutants contributing to nonattainment by five percent 

per year or all feasible control measures and an expeditious 

adoption schedule(H&SC 40914), 

Public education programs Public education programs [H&SC 40918(a)(6)],

Per-capita exposure Reducing per-capita population exposure to severe nonattainment 

pollutants according to a prescribed schedule [H&SC 40920(c)], 

Any other feasible controls Any of the feasible controls that can be implemented or for which 

implementation can begin, within 10 years of adoption date of the 

most recent air quality plan [H&SC 40920.5(c)], and 

Control measure ranking Ranking control measures by cost-effectiveness and 

implementation priority (H&SC 40922). 

Emission Reductions

According to the CCAA, districts must design their air quality management plan to 

achieve a reduction in basinwide emissions of five percent or more per year (or 15 

percent or more in a three-year period) for each nonattainment pollutant or its precursors 

(H&SC 40914). However, an air basin may use an alternative emission reduction 

strategy which achieves a reduction of less than five percent per year if it can be 

demonstrated that either of the following applies: 

• The alternative emission reduction strategy is equal to or more effective than the 

five percent per year control approach in improving air quality; or 
Chapter 1 Introduction 

1 - 23 

• That despite the inclusion of every feasible measure, and an expeditious 

adoption schedule, the air basin is unable to achieve the five percent per year 

reduction in emissions. 

For emission reduction accounting purposes, the CARB established a seven-year initial 

reporting period from January 1, 1988, to December 31, 1994 (Section 70701 of the 

California Code of Regulations). The reporting intervals after this initial period occur 

every three years (i.e., 1997, 2000, etc.). Therefore, the 2003 AQMP must seek to 

achieve a 15 percent additional reduction for every subsequent interval using 1990 as the 

base year, or demonstrate implementation of all feasible measures. 

Population Exposure

The CCAA also requires that exposure to severe nonattainment pollutants above 

standards must be reduced from 1986 through 1988 levels by at least 25 percent by 

December 31, 1994; 40 percent by December 31, 1997; and 50 percent by December 31, 

2000. Reductions are to be calculated based on per-capita exposure and the severity of 

exceedances. This provision is applicable to ozone, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen 

dioxide in the Basin [H&SC 40920(c)]. The definition of exposure is the number of 

persons exposed to a specific pollutant concentration level above the state standard times 

the number of hours. The per-capita exposure is the population exposure (units of 

pphm-persons-hours) divided by the total population. The 2003 AQMP will 

demonstrate that this requirement has already been met through implementation of 

previous SIP commitments. 

Control Measure Ranking

The CCAA requires the District Governing Board to determine that the AQMP is a costeffective 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 have also been included in the 2003 AQMP for 

prioritization purposes because of their importance. The results of the prioritization are 

given in Chapter 6. 
Final 2003 AQMP 

1 - 24 

FORMAT OF THIS DOCUMENT 

This document is organized into ten chapters, each addressing a specific topic. Each of 

the remaining chapters are 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 controls. 

Chapter 4, “AQMP Control Strategy,” presents the attainment strategies. 

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 1997 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. 

Chapter 9, “Contingency Measures,” presents contingency measures as required by the 

federal CAA . 

Chapter 10, “Looking Beyond Current Requirements”, examines the planning and 

control implications of federal standards for 8-hour ozone and PM2.5; and provides a 

first look at an ozone air quality analysis for the year 2020. This chapter also presents a 

discussion on uncertainties associated with the technical analysis used to develop the 

2003 AQMP, including selection of air quality episodes and models. 

For convenience, a “Glossary” is provided at the end of the document, presenting 

definitions of commonly used terms found in the 2003 AQMP.