Revised Draft 

Air Resources Board’s 

Proposed State Strategy for California’s 

2007 State Implementation Plan 

Release Date: April 26, 2007 

This document has been prepared by the staff of the California Air Resources 

Board. Publication does not signify that the contents reflect the views and 

policies of the Air Resources Board. The Air Resources Board will consider this 

document as a revision to the California State Implementation Plan at a noticed 

public meeting tentatively scheduled for June 21-22, 2007. 

Air Resources Board 

California Environmental Protection Agency 
Electronic copies of this document can be found on ARB’s website at 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/sip.htm. Alternatively, paper copies may be 

obtained from the Public Information Office, Air Resources Board, 1001 I Street, 

Visitors and Environmental Services Center, 1st Floor, Sacramento, California 

95814, (916) 322-2990. 

For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in Braille, 

large print, audiocassette, or computer disk. Please contact ARB’s Disability 

Coordinator at (916) 323-4916 by voice or through the California Relay Services 

at 711, to place your request for disability services. If you are a person with 

limited English and would like to request interpreter services, please contact 

ARB’s Bilingual Manager at (916) 323-7053. 

This document has been prepared by the staff of the California Air Resources 

Board. Publication does not signify that the contents reflect the views and 

policies of the Air Resources Board, nor does trade names or commercial 

products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. 

Please send written comments to:

Mr. Kurt Karperos, P.E., Chief 

Air Quality and Transportation Planning Branch 

California Air Resources Board 

P.O. Box 2815 

Sacramento, California 95812 

Phone: (916) 322-0285 

Fax: (916) 322-3646 

For general questions, contact:

Mr. Ravi Ramalingam, P.E., Manager 

Transportation Strategies Section 

Phone: (916) 322-2085 

Email: rramalin@arb.ca.gov
Air Resources Board’s 

Proposed State Strategy for California’s 

2007 State Implementation Plans 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................1 

1. BACKGROUND.......................................................................................11

• General SIP Requirements 

• National Air Quality Standards 

• Health Effects of Ozone and PM2.5 

• Nonattainment Areas and Air Quality Trends 

• Development of State Strategy 

• Air Pollution Transport 

• Other Programs 

2. TECHNICAL FOUNDATION....................................................................25

• Emissions Inventory Overview 

• Forecasting Future Emissions 

• Top Emission Sources 

• Setting the Emission Reduction Targets 

3. ARB’S 2007 SIP STATE STRATEGY.....................................................35

• Agency Roles in SIP Measure Development 

• Adopted SIP Measures 

• ARB’s Proposed New SIP Measures 

• Need for Technology and Long-Term Measures 

• Process for Identifying Long-Term Emission Reductions 

• State Implementation Plan Commitments 

• Commitments to Reduce Emissions 

• Commitment to Propose Defined New SIP Measures 

• Commitment to Reduce Emissions via Long-Term Strategy 

• Role of Funding and Incentive Programs 

• Federal Actions Needed 

• Ozone Attainment Demonstrations 

• Tracking Progress 

• Contingency Measures Requirement 
4. PM2.5 ATTAINMENT IN THE SOUTH COAST.......................................72

• Nature of PM2.5 Pollution 

• PM2.5 Emission Trends – Steadily Getting Better 

• The PM2.5 Challenge 

• Closing the Gap with Direct PM2.5 Reductions 

• Analysis of South Coast Air District Staff’s Proposed Additional Mobile 

Source Measures 

• How to Advance South Coast PM2.5 Attainment – Recommendations 

for Board Consideration 

5. PROPOSED NEW SIP MEASURES -- DESCRIPTIONS ........................89

APPENDICES (Not included in this draft -- will be available by May 7, 2007.) 

Appendix A: Emission Inventory Output Tables

Appendix B: Infrastructure SIP

Appendix C: Interstate Transport SIP

Appendix D: Reasonable Further Progress and Contingency 

 Calculations

Appendix E: Potential Impacts of State Strategy Proposed 

 New Measures

Appendix F: Emission Inventory SIP

Appendix G: Legal Authority and Other Requirements 
April 26, 2007 1 

Executive Summary 

Introduction

The Air Resources Board’s proposed State Strategy for California’s 2007 State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) is a comprehensive strategy designed to attain federal 

air quality standards through a combination of technologically feasible, costeffective, and far reaching measures. It describes the scope of the State’s ozone 

and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment problems and presents ARB 

staff’s recommendations on how California can comply with federal standards. 

The proposed strategy will be considered for adoption by ARB’s Governing 

Board on June 21-22, 2007. 

Under State law, ARB has the responsibility to develop SIP strategies for mobile 

sources and consumer products, to coordinate SIP strategies with the Bureau of 

Automotive Repair (BAR) and Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR), and to 

oversee local district programs for stationary sources. 

The 2007 SIP is the first plan designed to show how California will meet the 

federal 8-hour ozone standard – it represents a transition from the less stringent 

1-hour standard that was the benchmark for previous SIPs. Since the new 

standard is more stringent, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) 

set presumptive deadlines that allow more time for attainment. Nonetheless, the 

measures California has adopted to meet the 1-hour standard remain in place 

and will deliver substantial new reductions over the next few years. These 

measures have enabled San Diego, Ventura, Santa Barbara, and the San 

Francisco Bay Area to meet the 1-hour ozone standard. 

The benefits of California’s mobile source control program are evident and serve 

as the foundation for this new State Strategy. For example, the mobile source 

regulations already in place will reduce today’s emissions from passenger 

vehicles and heavy-duty trucks another 50 percent by 2015. The ARB staff’s 

proposed State Strategy would further accelerate the reductions. Staff’s 

proposed State Strategy addresses three key mobile source issues: the need to 

clean up the legacy diesel fleets, the national and international nature of many 

diesel fleets, and limitations on SIP credit for unsecured funding. 

The proposed State Strategy, in combination with local actions, would provide 

emission reductions necessary to the meet 8-hour ozone standard in the two 

most challenging regions -- the South Coast Air Basin and the San Joaquin 

Valley. The State Strategy is also necessary, in whole or part, for the 

Sacramento region, Ventura, and several locations downwind of urban areas. 

Ozone SIPs are due to U.S. EPA in June 2007. 

The State Strategy provides reductions needed for PM2.5 attainment in the 

South Coast and expected to be necessary for the San Joaquin Valley. PM2.5 

SIPs for these two regions are due in 2008. 
April 26, 2007 2 

Adoption of the State Strategy by the Board would create an enforceable 

commitment for new emission reductions by the attainment deadline for each 

region. These commitments reflect the proposed attainment deadlines of 2024 

for ozone for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley and a deadline of 2015 for 

PM2.5. As in past SIPs, staff has estimated the expected emission reductions 

from various measures and a schedule for Board consideration. The Board 

retains the ability to modify staff proposals and achieve the necessary reductions 

through other measures or mechanisms. 

This proposal includes aggregate emission reduction commitments for 2014 for 

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley PM2.5, and for 2020 and 2023 for South 

Coast and San Joaquin Valley ozone. The commitments precede the attainment 

deadline by one year in order to comply with federal SIP requirements. Staff may 

propose additional commitments for Board consideration in the future to the 

extent necessary. A PM2.5 SIP is under development by the San Joaquin Valley 

District and on track for adoption in 2008. The South Coast has proposed early 

adoption of a PM2.5 SIP in parallel with the ozone SIP due this year. 

The 2023 commitment for ozone includes the long-term emission reductions 

needed for ozone attainment in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley under 

the “new technology” provisions of the Clean Air Act (section 182(e)(5)). Staff 

proposes that ARB take on the full legal commitment for these reductions with 

the understanding that advances in technology for sources under local air 

districts’ jurisdiction should contribute to future reductions. Until new mobile and 

stationary technologies become available, we propose to defer the issue of how 

to apportion long-term emission reduction obligations among responsible 

agencies. This issue will be revisited in future SIP updates. In the meantime, 

ARB would be responsible for all the long-term reductions upon SIP approval. 

Proposed Mobile Source Strategy 

The mobile source strategy has two distinct components – more stringent 

standards for new engines and cleanup of existing fleets. For passenger 

vehicles, ARB’s Low Emission Vehicle Program ensures that new vehicles 

entering the fleet are exceptionally clean. The challenge is maintaining low 

emission levels over time and getting the oldest, dirtiest remaining vehicles off 

the road as soon as possible. The State Strategy proposes improvements to 

Smog Check and expansion of vehicle scrap programs to achieve these goals. 

The biggest mobile source challenge is cleaning up legacy fleets of diesel 

engines – including trucks, construction and farm equipment, ships and 

locomotives. Emissions of NOx (nitrogen oxides) from diesel engines contribute 

to both ozone and PM2.5 levels. Emissions of SOx (sulfur oxides) from ships are 

a significant contributor to PM2.5 levels. Directly emitted particulate matter from 

diesel engines contributes to PM2.5 levels. ARB has adopted a number of 

measures to reduce emissions from diesel fleets under ARB’s 2000 Diesel Risk 

Reduction Plan and 2006 Goods Movement Emission Reduction Plan. 
April 26, 2007 3 

The proposed State Strategy would incorporate measures from these plans into 

the California SIP. This includes new measures for port trucks, statewide truck 

fleets, ships traveling and in port, locomotives, and harbor craft. These 

measures would accelerate introduction of newer, cleaner engines and, where 

available, require retrofit controls. The cost of these measures will be in the 

billions of dollars but these reductions are necessary to meet air quality 

standards and reduce the health and economic impacts of air pollution in 

California. 

The mobile source reductions rely primarily on regulatory actions by ARB, BAR, 

and U.S. EPA. International actions to require cleaner new ship engines and 

retrofits are also part of the longer-term strategy. Actions by the ports and 

private sector and public funding would complement the regulatory strategies. 

However, the enforceable SIP obligation to achieve the specified emission 

reductions would rest with the Board. 

The Board’s authority to regulate mobile sources varies by category and 

circumstance. Under California law, the Board can set new engine standards for 

mobile sources, but federal preemptions and practical limitations apply to many 

diesel engines categories. For example, under the federal Clean Air Act, only 

U.S. EPA can set new engine standards for locomotives and construction and 

farm equipment equipped with off-road engines less than 175 horsepower. In the 

case of new heavy-duty diesel trucks and other new and in-use off-road engines, 

ARB may establish emission standards, but must obtain a waiver/authorization 

from U.S. EPA before it can enforce such regulations. The interstate nature of 

trucking makes national standards for new trucks a practical necessity. While not 

admitting preemption, we recognize that U.S. EPA has the responsibility to 

represent California’s interests in the international standard setting process for 

ocean-going ships. In short, ARB must rely on the federal action to set the new 

technology standards that form much of the basis for ARB staff’s proposed 

measures to accelerate cleanup of legacy diesel fleets. 

The timing of federal standards is an important part of the picture. California can 

only accelerate the introduction of cleaner technology once cleaner engines are 

available. The cleanest NOx standards phase in for trucks in 2010 and between 

2013-2017 for various types of construction and other off-road equipment. 

U.S. EPA has proposed more stringent NOx standards for new locomotives that 

would begin in 2017. ARB staff continues to make the case that these standards 

need to be implemented prior to 2014. While the interim standards now in place 

are contributing to current progress, the magnitude of the reductions needed in 

the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley will ultimately require the cleanest 

technology in every diesel engine application. 
April 26, 2007 4 

The proposed mobile source strategy and SIP commitments are described in 

Chapter 3. Individual measures are described in more detail in Chapter 5. The 

figure below shows the decrease in emissions for passenger vehicles, heavyduty trucks, and construction equipment between now and 2014 with the 

proposed State Strategy. Due to increasingly more stringent mobile source 

controls, emissions from these categories are all on a downward trend, despite 

growth in population, travel, and the economy. The new measures in the 

proposed State Strategy would accelerate these emissions reductions. ARB staff 

is proposing an aggressive new emission reduction commitment of 122 tons per 

day of NOx reductions in the South Coast by 2014 in order to meet the region’s 

PM2.5 attainment needs. This would bring the total mobile source NOx 

reductions achieved between 2006 and 2014 to about 450 tons per day. 

Impact of State Strategy by 2014

South Coast - NOx

0

50

100

150

200

250

2006 2014

Trucks

2006 2014

Passenger 

Vehicles

2006 2014

Construction 

Equipment

In contrast to passenger vehicles, trucks, and construction equipment that show 

substantial emission decreases with natural fleet turnover, locomotive and ships 

show an increase in emissions without the proposed State Strategy. Locomotive 

emissions have been decreasing in the South Coast due to the accelerated 

introduction of the cleanest current technology (Tier 2). However, as shown 

below, growth overtakes this benefit by 2014. The proposed State Strategy 

includes a measure to accelerate introduction of the next generation of clean 

technology once U.S. EPA adopts its proposed new Tier 4 standards. The 2014 

benefits assume Tier 4 engines becoming available in 2012. The 70 percent 

reduction projected for 2020 is based on the proposed measure to accelerate the 

introduction of Tier 4 locomotives to California. 
April 26, 2007 5 

Locomotives

South Coast-NOx

0

5

10

15

20

25

tons/per day

2014 2020

Without State Strategy

Without State Strategy

With 

State Strategy

With 

State Strategy

Ocean-going ships show an even greater increase in emissions without the State 

Strategy. Ship engines are largely uncontrolled, and growth in goods movement 

through California ports will exacerbate this problem. The figure below shows 

the benefits of the proposed State Strategy in the South Coast. 

Ships

South Coast - NOx

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

tons per day

2014 2020

Without State Strategy

Without State Strategy

With State 

Strategy

With State 

Strategy

Proposed Consumer Products Strategy

Consumer products are expected to become the largest source of reactive 

organic gas (ROG) emissions in the South Coast and the third largest source in 

the San Joaquin Valley by 2020. The magnitude of the emissions indicates that 

additional controls for this sector remain important, even though the average 

photochemical reactivity of the ROG emissions from consumer products is about 

one-third that of motor vehicle exhaust. The proposed State Strategy would 

continue ARB’s commitment to reduce ROG emissions from consumer products. 
April 26, 2007 6 

Two new phases of control are proposed. One is under development for Board 

consideration by 2008 and the other between 2010 and 2012. As part of ARB’s 

longer-term strategy, staff also proposes to explore additional market-based 

mechanisms to encourage the development, distribution, and purchase of 

cleaner, very low, or zero emitting products. 

The table below shows the expected reductions from the proposed State 

Strategy in 2014 for South Coast and San Joaquin Valley. The benefits of the 

State Strategy will increase over time. The expected reductions in 2020 and 

2023, along with the proposed timeframes for staff development, Board 

consideration, and implementation of the these measures is found in Chapter 3. 

Expected Emission Reductions from Proposed New SIP Measures 

(tons per day) 

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley -- 2014 

South Coast San Joaquin 

Valley 

Proposed New SIP Measures NOx ROG NOx ROG

Passenger Vehicles 14.4 17.7 3.8 6.5 

 Smog Check Improvements (BAR) 12.0 10.5 3.3 2.9 

 Expanded Vehicle Retirement 2.4 2.8 0.5 0.7 

 Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program -- 4.4 -- 2.9 

Heavy-Duty Trucks 47.3 5.1 61.4 6.4 

 Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks 47.3 5.1 61.4 6.4 

Goods Movement Sources 49.4 0.7 7.2 0.5 

 Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing & Clean Technology 18.5 -- -- -- 

 Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel 20.0 -- -- -- 

 Port Truck Modernization 2.0 -- -- -- 

 Accelerated Intro. of Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives 4.3 0.7 7.2 0.5 

 Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 4.6 -- -- NYQ 

Off-Road Equipment 10.5 2.7 3.7 0.9 

 Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment (e.g.,Construction) 10.5 2.7 3.7 0.9 

 Cleaner In-Use Agricultural Equipment NYQ NYQ NYQ NYQ 

Other Off-Road Sources 0.4 6.6 0.1 3.5 

 New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 0.4 4.2 0.1 1.3 

 Expanded Off-Road Rec. Vehicle Emission Standards -- 2.4 -- 2.2 

 Additional Evaporative Emission Standards -- NYQ -- NYQ 

 Vapor Recovery for Above Ground Storage Tanks -- NYQ -- NYQ 

Areawide Sources -- 12.9 -- 5.7 

 Consumer Products Program -- 12.9 -- 3.2 

 Pesticides: DPR 2008 Regulation -- NYQ -- 2.5 

Emission Reductions from Proposed New Measures 122 46 76 23 

NYQ = Not Yet Quantified. BAR = Bureau of Automotive Repair. DPR = Dept. of Pesticide Regulation 

Locomotives measure relies on U.S. EPA rulemaking and industry agreement to accelerate fleet turnover. 

Note: Emission reductions reflect the combined impact of regulations and supportive incentive programs. 

Emission reduction estimates for each proposed measure are shown for informational purposes only. Actual 

emission reductions from any particular measure may be greater than or less than the amounts shown. 
April 26, 2007 7 

Major Issues

 Bump Up to “Extreme” for Ozone 

There is concern that the proposed State Strategy does not provide sufficient 

emission reductions to show attainment of the ozone standard earlier than the 

deadlines proposed in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley SIPs. Both 

ozone SIPs propose an “extreme” classification for the 8-hour ozone standard 

which sets an attainment deadline of 2024. Under the federal Clean Air Act, the 

extreme classification carries with it an ability to rely on as yet undefined new 

technologies where necessary (section 182(e)(5)). 

Both regions were previously classified as “extreme” for the 1-hour ozone 

standard based on the severity of their ozone problem. With the transition to the 

more stringent 8-hour standard, these districts were classified as severe-17, with 

an attainment deadline of 2021 (South Coast), and serious, with an attainment 

deadline of 2013 (San Joaquin Valley), based solely on their ambient 

concentrations of ozone. In reality, both districts need more time to accomplish 

the substantial emission reductions required for attainment. 

Air districts have the ability to request a reclassification, and in the case of a 

request to reclassify to “extreme,” U.S. EPA must grant the request. Since such 

a request frames a district’s attainment demonstration, ARB must also accept the 

reclassification request unless the Board rejects a district SIP as inconsistent 

with federal requirements. 

The proposed reclassifications raise the issue of how the 2024 attainment 

deadline will affect air quality progress and the health impacts of air pollution in 

these regions. This is a very real concern. Accordingly, in the SIP development 

process considerable effort was devoted to assessing whether these bump-ups 

could be avoided. 

ARB staff considered whether existing technologies, if applied across the board 

to all mobile and stationary sources, could achieve the necessary emission 

reductions to attain sooner. Unlike rulemaking processes, this analysis was 

performed for SIP development purposes without considering cost as a 

constraint. 

The analysis showed that all diesel fleets would need to turn over to the newest 

engine standards that phase in between 2010 and 2017, all passenger vehicles 

would need to be no older than 10 years, and substantial additional reductions 

would be needed from new technologies for both mobile and stationary sources. 

The only other potential option for fully achieving the remaining reductions would 

be to constrain growth, business operations, and personal travel. Absent policy 

decisions to impose such restrictions, ARB staff believes it is necessary to make 

use of the new technology provision of the Clean Air Act. For the San Joaquin 
April 26, 2007 8 

Valley, about 10 percent of the necessary reductions would fall in this category. 

For the South Coast, it would be about 25 percent of the necessary reductions. 

To address concerns about delays in attainment, ARB staff proposes to continue 

to identify and pursue additional actions that would further accelerate air quality 

progress. While it is unlikely that the entire ozone attainment gap will be filled 

without new technology, staff believes additional progress could be made if, for 

example, more incentive funds became available. Also, as regions move closer 

to attainment, episodic “spare the air” type programs may be able to provide the 

final increment of reductions needed a few days per year. Public education and 

outreach to encourage voluntary actions have historically been key elements of 

these programs. 

South Coast PM2.5 SIP 

How the SIP should address the PM2.5 attainment challenge in the South Coast 

continues to be controversial. The proposed State Strategy along with district 

measures leaves an emission reduction gap in the South Coast’s proposed 

attainment demonstration of about 70 tons per day of NOx in 2014. The South 

Coast air district staff has identified a set of measures -- mobile source NOx 

measures -- for ARB to adopt to close the gap. This would be above and beyond 

the 451 tons per day of NOx reductions in the proposed State Strategy. ARB 

staff believes the District’s suggested mobile source measures are not feasible 

without billions of dollars of unidentified subsidies to expedite the introduction of 

the newer, cleaner diesel vehicles and equipment. 

ARB technical staff has reviewed South Coast’s proposed PM2.5 attainment 

demonstration and identified additional local measures to reduce directly emitted 

particulate matter. ARB staff believes these measures can bridge the gap and 

achieve the standard by 2014. These measures would reduce emissions from 

residential wood smoke, restaurant cooking, and dust-generating activities. 

The ARB staff’s analysis and the peer review of the staff methodology are 

discussed in Chapter 4. 

It is important to recognize that the projected gap in reductions is based on a 

modeling assessment that is more pessimistic than the measured air quality 

trend. Between 2001 and 2006, the measured PM2.5 annual average dropped 

from 30 to just over 20 ug/m3 consistent with the downward emissions trend. If 

that trend continues, the emission reductions in the proposed State Strategy will 

be sufficient for attainment. The South Coast predicts that with ARB staff’s 

proposed State Strategy, the highest remaining concentration in 2014 would 15.7 

ug/m3 -- less than one microgram above the 15 ug/m3 standard. Even if that 

modeling is correct, ARB’s alternative attainment strategy would close that gap. 
April 26, 2007 9 

South Coast PM2.5 

Air Quality and Modeling

(Rubidoux)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2001 2006 2014

Concentrations (ug/m3)

Measured

Measured

Modeled

In light of the measured PM2.5 progress over the past 15 years, and the 

magnitude of the new emission reductions that will occur, ARB staff believes that 

the South Coast will attain the PM2.5 standard by 2015 with the mobile source 

measures in the proposed State Strategy. Nonetheless, to be health protective 

and meet U.S. EPA SIP modeling requirements, staff believes that additional 

feasible measures should be pursued. Using the South Coast model, ARB staff 

found that the proposed local measures for residential wood smoke, restaurant 

cooking, and fugitive dust would close the apparent gap. 

Proposed Action 

Staff is recommending that the Board adopt the proposed State Strategy to meet 

both ozone and PM2.5 attainment needs in the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District at 

ARB’s June 21-22, 2007 public meeting. The State Strategy, in combination with 

near-term local air district measures, must meet the emission reduction target in 

each region’s attainment demonstration. 

The sequence of public meetings to consider the various SIP elements is: 

• April 30, 2007 – San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 

Governing Board consideration of the San Joaquin Valley Ozone Plan. 

• June 1, 2007 (tentative) – South Coast Air Quality Management District 

Governing Board consideration of the South Coast Air Quality 

Management Plan. 

• June 14, 2007 – ARB consideration of San Joaquin Valley Ozone Plan. 

• June 21-22, 2007 – ARB consideration of the proposed State Strategy and 

South Coast District Air Quality Management Plan for ozone and PM2.5. 

• April 2008 – Completion of San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 SIP. 
April 26, 2007 10 

Next Steps

Once local plans and the State Strategy are approved by the local and State 

governing boards, they are submitted to U.S. EPA for approval. 

SIPs are generally updated on a triennial basis for regions with the most 

persistent air quality problems. When U.S. EPA revises national ambient air 

quality standards, new SIP planning processes are triggered. U.S. EPA recently 

tightened its 24-hour PM2.5 standard and is currently reviewing the 8-hour ozone 

standard. Final U.S. EPA action on the 8-hour ozone standard review is 

expected by March 2008. 

Technical Supporting Documents

By May 7, 2007 – 45 days before the June 21-22, 2007 Board hearing — ARB 

staff will release these additional elements as an appendix to this document. 

• Economic analysis; 

• Environmental impacts analysis; 

• Detailed emissions data; 

• Reasonable Further Progress demonstrations; 

• Contingency reductions for progress milestone years; and 

• Legal authority and other federally required submittals. 
April 26, 2007 11 

1. BACKGROUND 

General SIP Requirements

California’s 2007 State Implementation Plans (SIPs) are a combination of State 

and local air quality planning documents that must show how California will meet 

federal the 8-hour ozone standard statewide. The San Joaquin Valley, South 

Coast Air Basin, Sacramento region, San Diego, Ventura, and a number of air 

districts downwind of urban areas are nonattainment for the ozone standard. 

Ozone SIPs must be submitted to U.S. EPA by June 15, 2007. 

This document is the State’s emission reduction strategy for sources of pollution 

under State and federal authority (State Strategy), and, for every local region not 

meeting federal standards, a demonstration of how attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone standard will be achieved. 

In addition to ozone SIPs, the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley must prepare 

PM2.5 SIPs for submittal to U.S. EPA by April 5, 2008. For the South Coast Air 

Basin, the South Coast Air Quality Management District is developing a PM2.5 

SIP in parallel with the ozone SIP. The San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 SIP in on 

track to be submitted in 2008. 

The 2007/2008 ozone and PM2.5 SIPs are another step in the air quality 

planning process that over the years has helped define new actions to improve 

California’s air quality. ARB has adopted a series of regulations over the past 10 

years to implement measures in the 1994 ozone SIP, as well as additional new 

ARB measures identified in the 2003 SIP update. New mobile source 

regulations, reformulated gasoline, and multiple consumer products regulations 

envisioned in these SIPs have been adopted and are being implemented today. 

And, while California has serious air quality challenges ahead, it is important to 

recognize the progress made as a result of California’s landmark air pollution 

control programs. With that experience and history of success, we need to 

continue to do more. ARB staff recognizes the importance of the new State 

measures and are proposing a full slate of new measures for development and 

consideration by the Board. 
April 26, 2007 12 

National Air Quality Standards

The U.S. EPA adopts standards for ambient (outdoor) air pollutants designed to 

protect public health. Extensive studies on the health effects of air pollution 

worldwide have confirmed the importance of continuing to reduce people’s 

exposure to air pollution. U.S. EPA is required to review its air quality standards 

every five years. 

In July 1997, the federal government announced new national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) for the pollutants ozone and particulate matter (PM). The 

new standards provide more protection from the harmful health effects of these 

pollutants. The ozone standard was revised to protect against longer pollutant 

exposure periods by requiring that ozone concentrations not exceed specified 

levels over an 8-hour period instead of a 1-hour period. A new particulate matter 

standard was added to protect against the smaller inhalable particles, less than 

two and a half microns in diameter (PM2.5). Air quality standards have become 

more stringent over time as new studies have shown adverse health effects at 

lower levels. The standards below are the current benchmark for federal SIP 

requirements. U.S. EPA is currently reviewing the adequacy of the current 

8-hour standard. And in December 2006, U.S. EPA adopted a more stringent 

24-hour PM2.5 standard of 35 micrograms per cubic meter. This will likely mean 

that several new areas will be required to prepare a plan to attain the newer 

standard. Initial State recommendations for nonattainment areas are due in late 

2007, with final nonattainment areas determined by U.S. EPA in early 2010. 

Plans for the revised 24-hour standard will be due in 2013, with attainment dates 

to be determined after U.S. EPA issues transition guidance. 

Ozone Standard PM 2.5 Standards 

How much more stringent is the 8-hour ozone standard than the 1-hour ozone 

standard? The two maps on the following page illustrate a dramatic difference in 

exceedance days (number of days that violated the standard) for the 1-hour 

standard versus the 8-hour standard in the South Coast air basin in 2005. While 

many areas of California continue to be in violation of federal air quality 

standards, real air quality progress has been made, as we will illustrate later. 

The clean air bar simply continues to be raised as we learn more about the 

health effects of air pollution. 

0.08 parts per million for 

8 hours, not to be exceeded, 

based on the fourth highest 

concentration averaged over 

three years. 

65 micrograms per cubic meter for 

24 hours, not to be exceeded, based 

on the 98th percentile concentration 

averaged over three years, and 

15 micrograms per cubic meter 

annual average (arithmetic mean) 

averaged over three years. 
April 26, 2007 13 

Comparison of 1-Hr Ozone Standard and 

More Stringent 8-Hr Ozone Standard 

in the South Coast Air Basin 
April 26, 2007 14 

Health Effects of Ozone and PM2.5 

 Ozone 

 

The formation and health impacts of ozone are very well studied. Ozone is a 

highly reactive gas that forms in the atmosphere through complex reactions 

between chemicals directly emitted from motor vehicles, industrial plants, 

consumer products and many other sources. It forms in greater quantities on 

hot, sunny, calm days making the summer season the key exposure period. 

Considerable research over the past 35 years has investigated how people 

respond to inhaling ozone. These studies have consistently shown that 

inhalation of ozone can lead to inflammation and irritation of the tissues lining the 

human airways. This causes the muscle cells in the airways to spasm and 

contract, thus reducing the amount of air that can be inhaled. Symptoms and 

responses to ozone exposure vary widely, even when the amount inhaled and 

length of exposure is the same. Typical symptoms include cough, chest 

tightness, and increased asthma symptoms. Ozone in sufficient doses can also 

increase the permeability (“leakiness”) of lung cells, making them more 

susceptible to damage from environmental toxins and infection. 

Medical studies of large populations have found that ozone exposure is 

associated with an increase in hospital admissions and emergency room visits, 

particularly for lung problems such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary 

disease. Several studies have also associated ozone exposure with increased 

premature mortality in elderly people with chronic diseases of the lungs and 

circulatory system. 

People who exercise or work outdoors are at greater risk of experiencing adverse 

health effects from ozone exposure because they inhale more ozone. Current 

evidence has linked the onset of asthma to exposure to elevated levels of ozone 

in exercising children. Children and adolescents are at increased risk because 

they are more likely to spend time outdoors engaged in vigorous activities than 

adults and because they inhale more ozone per pound of body weight.

PM2.5 

Particulate matter (PM) air pollution is also well studied. Particulate matter 

pollution is a complex mixture that consists of dry solid fragments, solid cores 

with liquid coatings, and small droplets of liquid. PM can be directly emitted into 

the air in forms such as dust and soot. It can also be formed in the atmosphere 

from the reaction of various gases. Particulate matter is less than 10 microns in 

diameter (a micron is one-millionth of a meter) and is called PM10. Even smaller 

particles, those 2.5 microns or less in diameter, are called “fine particles” or 

PM2.5, and are the target of this SIP. PM2.5 is a component of PM10. 
April 26, 2007 15 

Extensive research has shown that PM can be inhaled into the deep portions of 

the lungs. Some inhaled particles are exhaled again, but others deposit in the 

lungs, which can lead to inflammation in both the lungs and the circulatory 

system. PM2.5 poses an increased health risk because it can penetrate deeper 

into the lungs and may also enter the bloodstream. 

Population-based studies in hundreds of cities around the world have 

demonstrated a strong link between elevated particulate matter levels and 

premature death in people with pre-existing heart or lung disease. The two most 

important of these studies were performed in many cities in the United States, 

and have been ongoing for over 15 years. Both of these studies found a strong 

relationship between long-term PM exposure and premature death. 

Scientists have observed higher rates of hospitalization, emergency room visits 

and doctor’s visits for respiratory illnesses or heart disease during times of high 

PM concentrations. During these periods of high PM levels, scientists also 

observed the worsening of both asthma symptoms and acute and chronic 

bronchitis, and reductions in various measures of lung function. 

The elderly and people with heart and/or lung diseases are particularly at risk of 

experiencing adverse effects from PM exposure. Studies have also shown that 

children may be particularly vulnerable to PM effects. There is evidence from the 

10-year Children’s Health Study funded by the ARB that in communities with high 

levels of PM children's lungs develop more slowly and that at maturity they tend 

to have lower lung capacity than children who grow up in communities with lower 

levels of PM. Just as with ozone, children and infants may also be more at risk 

of experiencing adverse effects from PM because they inhale more air per pound 

of body weight than do adults, they breathe faster, and have smaller body sizes. 

In addition, there is some evidence that children's immature immune systems 

may cause them to be more susceptible to PM than adults. 

Nonattainment Areas and Air Quality Trends 

Geographic areas that exceed a federal air quality standard are called 

nonattainment areas. A comprehensive network of monitoring stations 

throughout California measures air quality and provides the data necessary to 

determine whether an area meets or exceeds federal ozone and PM2.5 air 

quality standards.1

Compliance with the federal ozone and PM2.5 standards is based on pollutant 

concentrations, measured at a comprehensive network of monitoring stations 

throughout California, averaged over three years. These three-year averages 

are called design values. Air quality monitoring in the years 2001 through 2003 

 

1

 More about California’s air quality monitoring network can be found on ARB’s website at: 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aaqm/aaqm.htm
April 26, 2007 16 

was used by U.S. EPA to designate 15 areas in California as nonattainment for 

the federal 8-hour ozone standard. The San Joaquin Valley and South Coast Air 

Basin are also nonattainment for PM2.5. 

Federal 8-Hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Areas in California

Sacramento Metro Area

San Francisco 

Bay Area

San Joaquin Valley*

Antelope Valley and

Western Mojave Desert

Imperial

San Diego

South Coast Air Basin*

Ventura

Coachella Valley

Eastern Kern

Western Nevada

Central Mountain Counties

Southern Mountain Counties

Sutter Buttes

Butte County

* Also PM2.5 Nonattainment

A specific year’s design value is averaged over three years. For example, the 

design value for the year 2001 reflects the averages for the years 1999, 2000, 

and 2001. Ozone design values are an average of the fourth highest 

concentrations for each of the last three years. Design values for the PM2.5 

annual average reflect annual average (arithmetic mean) concentrations 

averaged over the last three years. The PM2.5 24-hour design values reflect the 

98th percentile concentrations averaged over the last three years. 

For the ozone standard, areas are classified based on the severity of the 

problem. In descending order in terms of magnitude of the problem, the 

classifications are extreme, severe, serious, moderate, and marginal. The Clean 

Air Act provides more time to meet the standard based on the severity of the 

problem. Based on its classification an area is given an attainment deadline. A 

special designation, called basic, refers to nonattainment areas governed under 

a separate set of requirements in the Clean Air Act. For PM2.5, U.S. EPA simply 

designated the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley as nonattainment without 
April 26, 2007 17 

application of the classification scheme used for PM10. This results in an 

attainment deadline of 2015. 

Ozone Nonattainment 

Area 

Nonattainment 

Designation 

(Current / Anticipated) 

Attainment Year 

(Current / 

Anticipated) 

South Coast Air Basin Severe / Extreme 2021 / 2024 

San Joaquin Valley Serious / Extreme 2013 / 2024 

Coachella Valley Serious / Severe 2013 / 2019 

Sacramento Region Serious / Severe 2013 / 2019 

Antelope Valley and 

Western Mojave Desert 

Moderate / Severe 2010 / 2019 or 2021 

Ventura County Moderate / Serious 2010 / 2013 or 2019 

Imperial County Marginal 2007 

San Francisco Bay Area Marginal 2007 

The above table lists the marginal 

through extreme nonattainment areas 

for the federal 8-hour ozone standard, 

while the table to the right lists the 

areas with the special basic ozone 

nonattainment designation. The Clean 

Air Act allows changing of 

nonattainment designations and the 

extension of the attainment deadline if 

the State believes a change is needed 

after analyzing the nature of the ozone problem and challenges to meet the 

standard. So the above table includes the current attainment designations, as 

well as designation changes that may be needed based on regional analyses. 

For this set of SIPs, U.S. EPA has provided guidance on how to interpret the 

attainment deadline as it relates to attainment demonstrations. The question 

arises because the deadlines are mid-year. The ozone attainment deadline is 

June 15 and the PM2.5 deadline is April 5 of the attainment year. To address the 

issue, U.S. EPA guidance calls for the analysis of attainment to be done for the 

year prior to the actual attainment year. So in this document we will be showing 

emission reduction targets and emissions for the year prior to the attainment 

year. For example, if the attainment year is 2024, we will be showing emission 

reduction targets and emissions for the year 2023. 

Ozone Trends 

A snapshot of four ozone nonattainment areas on the next page shows ozone 

levels (design values) relative to the federal standard and number of days over 

the standard since 1990. The ozone levels chart gives a sense of recent 

progress toward meeting the standard as well as how far we still have to go. The 

San Joaquin Valley and the South Coast have the most days exceeding the 

Basic Ozone Nonattainment Areas 

Attainment Year 2009-2014 

Butte County 

Central Mountain Counties 

Eastern Kern County 

San Diego County 

Southern Mountain Counties 

Sutter Buttes 

Western Nevada County 
April 26, 2007 18 

standard and the South Coast has the highest design values. In general, ozone 

trends show the greatest improvement in coastal areas like San Diego and 

Ventura.

Ozone Levels for 4 Nonattainment Areas

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.20

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Ozone Levels (Design Value) 

(parts per million)

8-Hour Standard

VENTURA

SACRAMENTO

SOUTH COAST

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY 

Days Over Standard: 4 Nonattainment Areas

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Number of Days

VENTURA

SACRAMENTO

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY 

SOUTH COAST

South Coast’s ozone concentrations have been cut by about a third since 1990, 

but the region’s design value is still 50 percent over the level of the standard and 

progress has slowed in recent years. Fifteen years ago, the highest values were 

widespread throughout the basin. Now, the number of communities within the 

basin experiencing the highest values is substantially smaller. The maps below 

show this progression of air quality progress. 
April 26, 2007 19 

Ozone Air Quality Comparison – South Coast 

1995 to 2005 
April 26, 2007 20 

PM2.5 Trends 

Both the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley are showing good progress toward 

PM2.5 attainment. As of 2005, both regions are meeting the 24-hour standard. 

In addition, annual average PM2.5 design values have declined by 25 percent 

since 2001. In terms of the remaining challenge, the South Coast levels are still 

about 50 percent above the standard, and the San Joaquin Valley levels are 

about 25 percent above the standard. 

24-hr Average PM2.5 Levels

South Coast

40

55

70

85

100

115

Design Values (ug/m3)

2001 2005 2001 2005

Federal 

Standard

San Joaquin Valley

Annual Average PM2.5 Levels

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Design Values (ug/m3)

2001 2005 2001 2005

Federal 

Standard

South Coast San Joaquin Valley

Development of State Strategy

In developing our proposed statewide emission reduction strategy, ARB staff 

worked closely with air districts on attainment demonstrations for ozone for each 

area and on a PM2.5 attainment demonstration for the South Coast. In that 

process, emissions inventories are developed and air quality models are used to 

establish a region’s “carrying capacity” and to calculate the additional emission 

reductions needed for attainment. 

The emission reduction targets serve three purposes. First, they provide an 

indication of how far the existing control program will take each region toward 
April 26, 2007 21 

attainment and if additional reductions from new measures are needed. Second, 

they indicate how much time a region may need to reach the standards and if a 

classification change to a later attainment date is likely needed. And third, they 

provide a benchmark for designing new emission reduction measures. 

The magnitude of the attainment challenges in the South Coast and San Joaquin 

Valley, as shown in the next chapter, are the drivers for ARB staff’s proposed 

statewide strategy. The new SIP measures are also needed for the Sacramento 

region, the Coachella Valley, and the Antelope Valley and Western Mojave 

Desert nonattainment area. California’s other ozone nonattainment areas, 

including San Diego and Ventura, are projected to attain by their assigned 

deadline based on the benefits of previously adopted SIP measures. 

Given the severity of the ozone problems in the South Coast and San Joaquin 

Valley, both regions have indicated in their draft air quality plans that they will be 

requesting a reclassification to extreme with attainment deadlines of 2024. The 

2015 PM2.5 deadline and the South Coast PM2.5 carrying capacity framed 

staff’s analysis of new near-term measures. The other key driver for developing 

new SIP strategies is to reach ozone attainment in both regions as quickly as 

possible. 

Chapter 2 will summarize the process of determining the emission reduction 

targets and show those targets for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley. The 

process consists of developing an emissions inventory and performing data 

analyses and air quality modeling based on that inventory to establish the 

emissions limits that ensure air quality standards are met. 

Air Pollution Transport

Air pollution transport, by definition is quite simple – air movements carry 

pollutants from one area to another. In reality, air pollution transport is a very 

complex phenomenon. It is three-dimensional and can occur at ground level or 

aloft in upper air levels. With modeling for the State being split into two modeling 

domains – one for Northern and Central California and one for Southern 

California – transport relationships between air districts within these large 

domains are implicitly captured within the models. This is the mechanism ARB 

uses in its oversight role to ensure transport impacts on downwind areas are 

addressed for purposes of both State and federal air quality standards. In terms 

of attainment demonstrations, inputs to the modeling for a downwind area include 

forecasted emission reductions in upwind areas. This way the attainment 

demonstration takes into account the shared responsibility for reducing 

emissions in regions where air pollution transport can at times be significant. 
April 26, 2007 22 

Other Programs 

In addition to SIPs, ARB has multiple plans and programs to reduce air pollution 

throughout California. Emission reduction strategies from many of these 

programs are taken into account in the ozone and PM2.5 SIPs. 

ARB Goods Movement Plan 

The Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement in California, 

approved by ARB in April 2006, is one of the main contributors of new measures 

necessary to meet federal air quality standards. Most goods that move within 

and through California do so by truck. Ships are the largest source of SOx 

emissions in the State. Heavy-duty trucks are the largest statewide source of 

NOx emissions. These air pollution realities make it impossible to tackle the 

PM2.5 challenge without addressing goods movement emissions. Likewise, 

emission reduction targets for ozone will not be met without reducing emissions 

related to goods movement. 

The strategies included in the goods movement emission reduction plan target 

ships and trucks, as well as the other three main sources of goods movement 

emissions: harbor craft, cargo handling equipment, and locomotives. By 2020, 

these strategies will cut statewide goods movement emissions of NOx by 63 

percent, SOx emissions by 78 percent, and will also reduce the statewide health 

risk from goods movement-related diesel particulate matter 85 percent. 

Work on many of the strategies in the goods movement emission reduction plan 

is underway and serves as the starting point for near-term actions to meet the 

emission reduction targets for the SIPs. These strategies will provide essential 

new emission reductions needed for regional attainment, while they reduce the 

air pollution-related health risk for those who live near our ports, railyards, 

distribution centers, and other goods movement facilities. 

ARB Diesel Risk Reduction Plan 

An important source of directly emitted PM2.5 is diesel exhaust. The particulate 

matter from diesel-fueled engines (diesel PM) has been singled out as a 

particularly harmful pollutant and identified as a toxic air contaminant by the Air 

Resources Board in 1998. Nearly 70 percent of the known cancer risk caused by 

air toxics is attributed to diesel PM. In 2000, ARB adopted a plan to reduce 

diesel PM emissions 85 percent by 2020, and has since adopted a number of 

regulatory measures to reduce diesel PM emissions statewide. Additional 

measures are under development. Diesel PM control measures in the plan are 

reducing both direct diesel PM and NOx emissions through a combination of 

engine retrofits and replacements. Upcoming mobile source fleet measures to 

reduce diesel PM and NOx emissions are a critical part of the new SIP strategy 

as well the Diesel Risk Reduction Plan. 
April 26, 2007 23 

Environmental Justice 

The SIPs consist of strategies designed to bring a region’s air quality into 

compliance with federal standards. SIPs must be designed to ensure air quality 

standards throughout the entire region, so achieving air quality standards 

provides public health benefits to every community. This makes SIP 

implementation important to meeting ARB’s community health and environmental 

justice goals. As part of our environmental justice program, ARB has initiated air 

quality studies in several communities and continues to focus resources on 

mobile source enforcement in environmental justice communities. ARB’s Air 

Quality and Land Use Handbook, approved by ARB in May 2005, provides 

guidance to help improve local land use decisions that can negatively impact 

public health at the community level. 

ARB’s SIP strategies have a significant nexus to community health due to the 

emphasis on cleaning up the legacy fleets of diesel engines. Much of the large 

equipment and vehicles that help construct our buildings and highways and move 

our goods are not well controlled and have very long lives. Adopting rules to 

clean up these fleets will have an immediate and significant effect on the 

communities where these sources are concentrated. 

Regional Haze 

The same particulate air pollutants that affect public health also extinguish and 

scatter light, thereby obscuring visibility. The federal Clean Air Act set the farreaching goal of achieving natural visibility conditions by 2064 in the nation’s 

most treasured parks and wilderness areas. Of the 156 designated areas, 29 are 

in California, managed by the National Park Service and the U.S. Forest Service. 

Therefore California is working in concert with fourteen other western states to 

reduce controllable emissions of particulates so that regional haze is reduced in 

the western region of the country. In 1999, the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency published rules to guide the preparation of Regional Haze State 

Implementation Plans to reduce regional haze. 

ARB is currently preparing the first regional haze plan for the entire State, for 

transmittal to EPA by the December 17, 2007 deadline. General trends in 

California since the 1990s show that emission controls are improving visibility in 

our parks and wilderness areas. The regional haze plan will show how these 

controls constitute reasonable progress along the path to natural visibility. In 

2012, ARB will conduct a mid-course review of measured visibility changes and 

analyze how emission reductions implemented to achieve the 8-hour ozone and 

the PM2.5 standards will move the State further along the path to natural visibility 

in the future. 
April 26, 2007 24 

Climate Change 

ARB’s implementation of the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) is a 

major new effort just underway. These activities, including future rulemaking, will 

occur on a parallel but separate track as we proceed with implementation of our 

SIP strategies. The statutory requirements and timelines are different, so it is not 

appropriate to include potential co-benefits of greenhouse gas strategies in SIP 

documents at this point. However, as greenhouse gas reduction measures are 

developed and adopted, ARB staff will do the necessary technical work to 

determine the impact on ozone and PM2.5 precursor pollutants. 
April 26, 2007 25 

2. TECHNICAL FOUNDATION 

Emissions Inventory Overview

Developing attainment strategies requires an understanding of the sources of 

pollution, the quantities emitted, their geographical distribution, and how air 

pollution controls and growth will impact future emission levels. There are 

multiple types of emission inventories used in air quality programs including 

annual averages, seasonal, and day-specific modeling inventories. SIPs rely on 

region specific inventories that may differ from the statewide picture. In the 

regulatory development process emission inventories are typically refined since 

inventory data is a key input for cost-effectiveness evaluations. This is an 

important inventory improvement mechanism, and ARB staff incorporates these 

updates into the statewide inventory. 

The emissions inventory serves three principal roles in the SIP process: 

• It provides a primary input to the modeling necessary to determine the 

emission reductions needed for attainment; 

• It supplies comprehensive emissions information for the development of 

emission reduction strategies; 

• And after the SIP is approved, it is used to track progress of the emission 

reduction commitments outlined in the plan. 

California is a diverse State with many sources of air pollution. ARB, in 

cooperation with local air districts, maintains a statewide emissions inventory. 

The inventory is constructed based on four major emission categories: 

• Stationary Sources -- generally industrial facilities, which can be 

identified by a name and location. 

• Areawide Sources -- either small individual sources, such as 

residential fireplaces, or widely distributed sources that cannot be tied 

to a single location, such as consumer products and dust from 

unpaved roads. 

• On-Road Mobile Sources -- includes on-road cars, trucks, buses, etc. 

• Off-Road Mobile Sources -- includes off-road vehicles such as boats, 

off-road recreational vehicles, aircraft, trains, ships, industrial and 

construction equipment, farm equipment, and other equipment. 

The statewide emissions inventory developed by ARB and the local air districts 

includes all the main sources of emissions – all of the many on-road and off-road 

mobile sources and all the various stationary and areawide sources. Estimating 

the amount of emissions statewide and in each region is done by summing the 

emissions from each source. The statewide inventory for the 2007 SIP 

development uses ARB’s November 2006 on-road motor vehicle model (EMFAC) 

and ARB’s off-road mobile source model. Stationary source emissions are 
April 26, 2007 26 

provided by local air districts. The regional SIP inventories are discussed in 

Chapter 5, Regional SIP Summaries. 

Precursor Pollutants 

Air pollutants that react to form ozone and PM2.5 in the air are called precursor 

pollutants. For ozone, the main precursor pollutants are nitrogen oxides (NOx) 

and reactive organic gases (ROG). There are four main precursors of PM2.5: 

NOx, ROG, sulfur oxides (SOx) and ammonia (NH3). PM2.5 can also be directly 

emitted into the atmosphere (direct PM2.5) in various forms that include smoke 

from fires, dust from paved and unpaved roads, and particle emissions from the 

burning of fossil fuels. 

PM2.5 pollution is a complex mixture and air quality modeling is used to assess 

the relative effectiveness of reducing each precursor pollutant as well as directly 

emitted PM2.5. Current data analysis and air quality modeling indicates that two 

of the four precursors, NOx and SOx, are significant in reducing PM2.5 

concentrations in the South Coast, and that the PM2.5 emission control strategy 

would be served best by focusing on reducing emissions of these two precursor 

pollutants. There is also a small PM2.5 benefit from ROG emission reductions, 

but benefits from ammonia emission reductions were found to be insignificant. 

Reducing direct PM2.5 is also an effective strategy according to recent modeling. 

NOx. Nitrogen oxide emissions are produced by the combustion of fuels in 

engines, furnaces, or fires. Today mobile sources make up about 85 percent of 

the total statewide NOx emissions. This percentage decreases over time as 

motor vehicle fleets become cleaner. Emissions from less clean sources like 

locomotives, ships, and aircraft continue to grow. Stationary sources of NOx 

include combustion processes in industries such as manufacturing, food 

processing, electric utilities, and petroleum refining. Areawide sources of NOx, 

which include waste burning and residential fuel combustion, contribute a smaller 

portion of total NOx emissions. Air quality science indicates that reductions of 

NOx are more beneficial than reductions of other pollutants to help meet both 

ozone and PM2.5 standards, and therefore NOx is a major focus of the State 

Strategy. 

ROG. Reactive organic gases result primarily from incomplete fuel combustion 

and the evaporation of chemical solvents and fuels. Stationary sources of ROG 

include processes that use solvents such as dry cleaning, degreasing, and 

coating operations. Today mobile sources are the largest ROG emissions 

category. However, other ROG categories become relatively more important 

over time. Areawide ROG sources which grow directly with population begin to 

dominate in the future so that by 2020 consumer products is the largest source 

category. 
April 26, 2007 27 

SOx. Sulfur oxide emissions are dominated by the mobile source category of 

ships and commercial boats. Evaporative losses from petroleum refining (a 

stationary source) are another significant source of SOx. The other sources that 

make up 5 percent or more of the SOx inventory are locomotives and mining and 

cement manufacturing. 

Direct PM2.5. Directly emitted PM2.5 comes mainly in the form of smoke, soot, 

and dust particles. Major sources include managed burning and agricultural 

burning; dust generated by vehicles traveling on paved and unpaved roads, 

residential fireplaces, cooking and fuel combustion; and particle emissions from 

diesel-fueled engines on trucks, ships, and construction equipment. While soot 

from diesel engines is not a major portion of the entire direct PM2.5 emissions 

inventory, it is a major health concern, as it is a toxic air contaminant that can 

cause premature death. 

Forecasting Future Emissions

Estimates of projected future emissions depend on two independent variables: 

growth and control. Different methods are used to estimate the future growth of 

emission sources based on their type. And future emission controls are 

incorporated into the projected emissions for each source category based on 

when the controls are implemented, how much the controls reduce emissions, 

and how many units (vehicles, consumer products, etc.) are affected. 

The charts on the next page show the change in total projected statewide 

emissions for NOx, ROG, and SOx from 2006 to 2023 and the relative emissions 

change in each of these emission source categories. They reflect projected 

growth in each category combined with the benefits of the existing control 

program (those emission controls adopted prior to 2007). For example, SOx 

emissions as a category continue to grow due to ship emission increases. This 

makes ship SOx emissions a high priority for control in the new SIP strategy. 

NOx and ROG emissions are decreasing as a result of existing control programs 

despite substantial growth in population, travel, and the economy. 

ARB uses two computer models to simulate and forecast emissions for on- and 

off-road sources. For cars, sport utility vehicles, minivans, and trucks, ARB used 

EMFAC2007. For off-road vehicles and equipment, ARB used OFFROAD2007. 

Both models were released for public use in November 2006 after a multi-year 

development process. As required by federal guidance, EMFAC2007 uses the 

latest fleet information for vehicles age and population. The data is developed 

from the California Department of Motor Vehicle registration data through 2005. 

For SIP purposes, as required by State law, vehicle activity is based on local 

transportation agency projections, or California Department of Transportation 

data, if local data are not available. 
April 26, 2007 28 

NOx Emission Forecast 2006-2023

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

2006 2014 2023

Statewide tons per day

On-Road

Off-Road

Stationary

Areawide

ROG Emission Forecast 2006-2023

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

2006 2014 2023

Statewide tons per day

On-Road

Off-Road

Stationary

Areawide

 Note: “Off-Road” includes trains, planes, and ships, as well as all other off-road vehicles 

and equipment. 

SOx Emission Forecast 2006-2023

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2006 2014 2023

Statewide tons per day

Ships

Stationary

All Other

Top Emission Sources

While the top emission categories are mobile sources in all California’s 

nonattainment areas, there is variability in the relative contribution of different 

sources by region. This makes the overall statewide emission reduction strategy 

more challenging and will affect the priorities of local control plans. For example, 

controlling the emissions from ocean-going vessels will have a tremendous 

impact on SOx emissions in the South Coast and therefore is essential to that 

region’s PM2.5 control plan. Reducing SOx from ships has much less 

consequence in the San Joaquin Valley, so increased NOx reductions from 

combustion sources will become even more important for the Valley’s PM2.5 

control strategy. The tables on the next two pages show the top emission 

sources of both NOx and ROG in the South Coast and the San Joaquin Valley. 
April 26, 2007 29 

Here are some things we have learned by analyzing the emissions inventory for 

these two areas: 

• South Coast NOx emissions are significantly impacted by goods movement, 

with the ships, trains, trucks, and off-road equipment that move goods 

contributing about 30 percent of all South Coast NOx emissions. Aircraft NOx 

emissions are also increasing. 

• The impact of goods movement in the San Joaquin Valley is felt mostly by the 

emissions contribution of heavy-duty trucks, which are projected to remain the 

largest NOx emitter through 2023. 

• Emissions of NOx from manufacturing and industrial sources in the San 

Joaquin Valley become increasingly significant as emissions from mobile 

sources decline in the future. 

• The large population in the South Coast is the main reason why consumer 

product emissions are projected to become the number one ROG emissions 

source by 2014. 

• San Joaquin Valley ROG emissions are significantly impacted by agricultural 

sources such as livestock waste. 

• The existing emission control program will cut heavy-duty truck NOx 

emissions about 70 percent in the San Joaquin Valley and South Coast by 

2023, but they need to be cut even more by new strategies to attain ozone 

and PM2.5 standards. 

• Mobile sources under federal and international jurisdiction (like ships, 

locomotives, and aircraft) contribute an increasingly greater proportion of total 

emissions, especially NOx, in future years as emission increases due to 

growth overwhelm the existing control program, while emissions of mobile 

sources under State jurisdiction decrease due to stringent controls. 
April 26, 2007 30 

South Coast Air Basin – Top Sources of NOx 

Summer emissions, tons per day 

Source Category 2006 2014 2023 

HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS 259 140 73 

PASSENGER VEHICLES 204 101 53 

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT (CONSTRUCTION AND MINING) 120 81 41 

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT (COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL) 87 53 35 

SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 75 87 116 

GASOLINE-FUELED COMMERCIAL TRUCKS 36 24 17 

LOCOMOTIVES 31 23 28 

RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 18 16 14 

MANUFACTURING & INDUSTRIAL (BOILERS, ENGINES) 17 15 15 

SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL (BOILERS, ENGINES) 16 12 11 

RECREATIONAL BOATS 16 17 18 

AIRCRAFT 16 22 29 

TOTAL OF TOP CATEGORIES 896 589 450 

TOTAL 971 650 505 

TOP CATEGORIES PERCENT OF TOTAL 92% 91% 89% 

San Joaquin Valley – Top Sources of NOx 

Summer emissions, tons per day 

Source Category 2006 2014 2023 

HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS 285 155 75 

FARM EQUIPMENT (COMBINES AND TRACTORS) 60 37 17 

PASSENGER VEHICLES 58 31 16 

MANUFACTURING & INDUSTRIAL (BOILERS, ENGINES) 39 44 48 

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT (CONSTRUCTION AND MINING) 34 22 12 

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT (COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL) 34 23 15 

LOCOMOTIVES 22 21 22 

AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATION PUMPS 16 7 5 

OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COMBUSTION) 11 10 10 

COGENERATION (ELECTRICITY GENERATION AND 

HEAT RECOVERY) 9 7 8 

GASOLINE-FUELED COMMERCIAL TRUCKS 9 7 6 

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE (CROP PROCESSING AND 

WINERIES) 9 9 9 

GLASS AND RELATED PRODUCTS 8 9 11 

TOTAL OF TOP CATEGORIES 595 381 253 

TOTAL 650 425 300 

TOP CATEGORIES PERCENT OF TOTAL 92% 90% 84% 

 Note: Emissions do not include impact of State Strategy proposed new measures. 
April 26, 2007 31 

South Coast Air Basin – Top Sources of ROG 

Summer emissions, tons per day 

Source Category 2006 2014 2023 

PASSENGER VEHICLES 207 112 76 

CONSUMER PRODUCTS 101 103 110 

RECREATIONAL BOATS 64 53 51 

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT (LAWN AND GARDEN) 52 40 38 

ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS (PAINTS AND THINNERS) 31 29 31 

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT (COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL) 28 15 12 

PETROLEUM MARKETING (GASOLINE EVAPORATIVE 

LOSSES) 27 28 31 

COATINGS (PAINTS AND THINNERS - NON 

ARCHITECTURAL) 27 25 28 

GASOLINE-FUELED COMMERCIAL TRUCKS 24 13 8 

GAS CANS 21 10 7 

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT (CONSTRUCTION AND MINING) 20 12 8 

TOTAL OF TOP CATEGORIES 600 441 399 

TOTAL 732 567 534 

TOP CATEGORIES PERCENT OF TOTAL 82% 78% 75% 

San Joaquin Valley – Top Sources of ROG 

Summer emissions, tons per day 

Source Category 2006 2014 2023 

PASSENGER VEHICLES 62 37 24 

WASTE DISPOSAL/COMPOSTING 57 72 80 

LIVESTOCK WASTE (DAIRY CATTLE) 40 33 41 

OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (EVAPORATIVE 

LOSSES/FLARING) 28 26 23 

CONSUMER PRODUCTS 24 26 30 

PESTICIDES 22 20 20 

HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS 20 13 8 

RECREATIONAL BOATS 20 17 17 

FOOD AND AGRICULTURE (CROP PROCESSING AND 

WINERIES) 13 12 13 

ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS (PAINTS AND THINNERS) 11 12 13 

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT (COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL) 10 6 4 

FARM EQUIPMENT (COMBINES AND TRACTORS) 10 5 3 

TOTAL OF TOP CATEGORIES 317 279 277 

TOTAL 452 410 414 

TOP CATEGORIES PERCENT OF TOTAL 70% 68% 67% 

 Note: Emissions do not include impact of State Strategy proposed new measures.
April 26, 2007 32 

Setting the Emission Reduction Targets

U.S. EPA rules require the use of air quality modeling to set emission reduction 

targets. Modeling is also helpful in guiding the selection of the most effective 

pollutants to control. To set ozone emission reduction targets, air quality 

modeling has been conducted separately for two overarching areas. One area is 

Northern and Central California, encompassing the San Joaquin and Sacramento 

Valleys, the Bay Area and the Sierra Nevada Mountains. ARB staff has been 

doing this modeling. The other area is Southern California, including the South 

Coast Air Basin, Ventura County, Imperial County, and the Mojave Desert area. 

The South Coast air district has been doing this modeling. The South Coast air 

district has also been performing the air quality modeling to set its PM2.5 target. 

 Weight of Evidence Analysis 

A Weight of Evidence analysis provides a set of complementary analyses that 

supplements the SIP-required modeling. These analyses can include 

consideration of measured air quality, emissions, and meteorological data, 

evaluation of other air quality indicators, and additional air quality modeling. A 

Weight of Evidence approach looks at the entirety of the information at hand to 

provide a more informed basis for the attainment strategy. While all analysis 

methods have inherent strengths and weaknesses, examining an air quality 

problem in a variety of ways increases the confidence one has in the results. 

This approach also provides a better understanding of the overall problem and 

the level and mix of emissions controls needed for attainment. 

The discussion in Chapter 4 about South Coast PM2.5 pollution is a weight of 

evidence approach. More detailed weight of evidence analysis will be included in 

ARB staff reports on the local air district plans and in the local plans themselves. 

South Coast Ozone Emission Reduction Targets 

Under State law the South Coast air district is responsible for setting carrying 

capacities for the South Coast Air Basin. While the carrying capacities result in 

large emission reduction targets for both NOx and ROG, the South Coast 

modeling indicates that NOx reductions are more effective at reducing ozone in 

the long run, although ROG reductions are still needed to maximize progress. In 

fact, the air district modified the South Coast Air Basin carrying capacity in its 

February 2007 draft air plan, relying even more heavily on NOx reductions than 

in its earlier estimates. 
April 26, 2007 33 

The emission reduction targets based on the February 2007 carrying capacities 

are presented below. 

Draft South Coast Ozone Emission Reduction Targets 

(tons per day) NOx ROG

2006 Emissions Inventory 972 732 

Carrying Capacity 114 420 

Emission Reduction Target 858 312 

It will be important to revisit the relative carrying capacities in subsequent SIPs to 

factor in inventory improvement, updated modeling, and control measure 

development. 

South Coast PM2.5 Emission Reduction Targets 

As discussed previously, unlike ozone, PM2.5 consists of many different 

components. These components can vary by location and season, with both 

local and regional scale contributions. This complexity and variability presents a 

unique challenge in modeling for attaining the annual standard, and introduces a 

higher level of uncertainty in the results. In addition, while there is a long history 

and body of experience for ozone model application, air quality modeling for 

PM2.5 is relatively more recent, and it has not been applied as extensively. ARB 

will continue to work with air districts on efforts to refine PM2.5 modeling 

techniques. 

Draft South Coast PM2.5 Emission Reduction Targets 

(tons per day) NOx ROG SOx Direct 

PM2.5 

2006 Emissions Inventory 972 732 63 101 

Carrying Capacity 443 469 19 88 

Emission Reduction Target 529 263 44 13 

San Joaquin Valley Emission Reduction Targets 

ARB staff has been using photochemical models for Northern and Central 

California developed as part of the multi-million dollar Central California Air 

Quality Study. This modeling continues to confirm that NOx is the key to long 

term attainment in the San Joaquin Valley. (This is also true for the Sacramento 

Valley and the rural regions downwind.) ROG looks beneficial especially in the 

near term for maximum progress and to supplement NOx reductions long term. 
April 26, 2007 34 

The ozone emission reduction targets for San Joaquin Valley are shown in the 

following table. The ROG carrying capacity is implicit, based on the much larger 

benefit of NOx reductions demonstrated by the modeling. 

San Joaquin Valley Ozone Emission Reduction Targets 

(tons per day) NOx ROG

2006 Emissions Inventory 650 454 

Carrying Capacity 160 342 

Emission Reduction Target 490 112 

San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 modeling is underway and carrying capacities and 

emission reduction targets will be developed later in 2007 for a PM2.5 plan that is 

due to U.S. EPA in April 2008. 
April 26, 2007 35 

3. ARB’s 2007 SIP STATE STRATEGY

The State Strategy maps out how to achieve the emission reductions necessary 

to meet federal air quality standards. The two main emission reduction 

components of the State Strategy are the adopted SIP measures and proposed 

new measures. The adopted SIP measures include those adopted through 

2006. Proposed new measures include those to be adopted after 2006. 

Responsibility for implementing emission reduction measures is shared between 

the agencies with primary responsibility for controlling air pollution in California: 

the Air Resources Board, 35 local air pollution control and air quality 

management districts, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. However, 

given the current status of statewide emissions, ARB has the lion’s share of 

responsibility, followed by U.S. EPA. 

Agency Roles in SIP Measure Development

Local Measures 

Local air districts are primarily responsible for controlling emissions from 

stationary and areawide sources (with the exception of consumer products) 

through rules and permitting programs. Examples include industrial sources like 

factories, refineries, and power plants; commercial sources like gas stations, dry 

cleaners, and paint spray booth operations; residential sources like fireplaces, 

water heaters, and house paints; and miscellaneous non-mobile sources like 

emergency generators. Districts also inspect and test fuel vapor recovery 

systems to check that such systems are operating as certified. 

State Measures 

ARB is responsible for controlling emissions from mobile sources (except where 

federal law preempts ARB’s authority) and consumer products, developing fuel 

specifications, establishing gasoline vapor recovery standards and certifying 

vapor recovery systems, providing technical support to the districts, and 

overseeing local district compliance with State and federal law. The Department 

of Pesticide Regulation is responsible for control of agricultural, commercial and 

structural pesticides, while the Bureau of Automotive Repair runs the State’s 

Smog Check programs to identify and repair polluting cars. 

Federal Measures 

U.S. EPA has the authority to control emissions from mobile sources, including 

sources all or partly under exclusive federal jurisdiction (like interstate trucks, 

some farm and construction equipment, aircraft, marine vessels, and locomotives 

based in this country). U.S. EPA also has oversight authority for state air 

programs as they relate to the federal Clean Air Act. International organizations 

develop standards for aircraft and marine vessels that operate outside the U.S. 
April 26, 2007 36 

Federal agencies have the lead role in representing the U.S. in the process of 

developing international standards. 

Adopted SIP Measures

Many measures already adopted by local, State and federal agencies are 

currently reducing emissions. Many will do so at an accelerated rate in the 

future. Some adopted measures are scheduled to go into effect years hence. 

Adopted SIP measures will have a very significant impact on emissions and air 

quality between now and the target dates (attainment years) in the areas of the 

State that do not meet federal ozone and PM2.5 air quality standards. 

Adopted SIP measures have been developed over the years through the 

combined efforts of air pollution regulators – with a foundation of ARB’s mobile 

source and fuels programs, complementary national actions for pollution sources 

under federal authority, and local air district programs for industrial and 

commercial sources -- as well as transportation plans that integrate transit and 

other alternatives to solo vehicle travel. ARB has adopted 46 emission-reducing 

control measures since the approval of the 1994 1-hour ozone SIP. These 

measures, shown on the table on Page 38 entitled “Air Resources Board SIP 

Control Measures (1994-2006),” comprise the bulk of the benefits of the adopted 

measures. 

 Mobile Sources 

Cleaner Engines and Fuels

California has dramatically tightened emission standards for on-road and off-road 

mobile sources and the fuels that power them. The table below shows how 

significantly the adopted measures have controlled emissions from new engines 

for the major categories of mobile sources. 

California’s emission control program for on-road motor vehicles is the strongest 

in the world. New cars are now 99 percent cleaner than their uncontrolled 

counterparts. Trucks are now 90 percent cleaner, and will be 98 percent cleaner 

by 2010. 

Working in concert with the U.S. EPA, standards for goods movement sources 

have also been tightened dramatically. By requiring low-sulfur fuel, SOx 

emissions from ship auxiliary engines will be cut 96 percent by 2010. New 

locomotive engines are now 50-60 percent cleaner. Harbor craft emission 

standards were cut roughly in half. And new cargo handling equipment will be 95 

percent cleaner by 2011. 
April 26, 2007 37 

Impact of Existing Standards and Emission Limits 

Source Controlled

Since Level of Control* 

ON-ROAD 

Passenger Cars 1961 99% in 2006 (ROG + NOx) 

Trucks and Buses 1988 90% by 2007, 98% by 2010 (NOx) 

98% by 2007 (PM) 

Motorcycles 1975 88% by 2008 (ROG + NOx) 

GOODS MOVEMENT 

Ship Auxiliary Engines (fuel) 2000 96% (SOx), 83% (PM) by 2010 

Locomotives 1973 60% in 2005 (ROG+NOx) 

Harbor Craft 2004 50% in 2004 (NOx) 

Cargo Handling Equipment 2005 95% by 2011-2012 (ROG+NOx, PM) 

OFF-ROAD SOURCES 

Large Off-Road Equipment 1996 98% by 2015 (ROG + NOx) 

Personal Water Craft 1990 88% by 2010 (ROG) 

Recreational Boats 1990 89% by 2010 (ROG) 

Lawn & Garden Equipment 1990 82-90% by 2010 (ROG) 

AREAWIDE SOURCES 

Consumer Products 1989 50 categories controlled 50% (ROG)

* Level of emissions control compared to uncontrolled source. 

California has also drastically lowered standards for off-road sources, from lawn 

and garden equipment, to recreational vehicles and boats, to construction 

equipment and other large off-road sources. From 2010 through 2014, these 

new off-road sources will be manufactured with 80-98 percent fewer emissions 

than their uncontrolled counterparts. 

ARB has worked closely with U.S. EPA to regulate large diesel, gasoline and 

liquid petroleum gas equipment – where authority is split between California and 

the federal government – and by 2014, new large off-road equipment will be 98 

percent cleaner. ARB has also made great strides in reducing emissions from 

the smaller engines under State control, like those used in lawn mowers and jet 

skis, recreational vehicles and boats. From 2010 to 2015, these new off-road 

sources will be manufactured with 82-90 percent fewer emissions than their 

uncontrolled counterparts. 
April 26, 2007 38 

Air Resources Board SIP Control Measures (1994-2006) 

Air Resources Board Action Date Air Resources Board Action Date 

In-Use Diesel Agricultural 

Engine Requirements 

2006 California ZEV Requirement 

Update 

2003 

Consumer Product Lower 

Emission Limits 

2006 Heavy-Duty Gas Truck Emission 

Standards 

2002 

Zero Emission Bus Rule 

Amendments 

2006 Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck 

Emission Standards 

2001 

Off-Highway Recreational 

Vehicle Regulation Amendments

2006 Inboard and Sterndrive Marine 

Engine Emission Standards 

2001 

Forklifts and Other SparkIgnition Equipment Regulation 2006 Architectural Coatings Suggested 

Control Measure 

2000 

Border Truck Inspection 

Program Protocol Improvements 

2006 Urban Transit Bus Fleet Rule 2000 

Ship Auxiliary Engine Cleaner 

Fuel Requirements 

2005 Off-Road Diesel Equipment 

Emission Standards 

2000 

Diesel Cargo Handling 

Equipment Rule 

2005 Reformulated Gas MTBE Phase 

Out 

1999 

Public and Utility Diesel Truck 

Fleet Rule 

2005 Consumer Product Emission 

Limits 

1999 

Heavy-Duty Sleeper Truck Idling 

Limits 

2005 Portable Fuel Can Regulation 1999 

Portable Fuel Container 

Requirements 

2005 Marine Pleasurecraft Emission 

Standards 

1998 

Transit Bus Rule Additions Low-Emission Vehicle Program 

(LEV II) Exhaust Standards 

1998 

Off-Road Diesel Engine Tier 4 

Standards 

2004 Large Off-Road Gas/LPG Engine 

Emission Standards 

1998 

Harbor Craft and Locomotive 

Clean Diesel Fuel Requirement 

2004 Cleaner Burning Gasoline Rule 

Improvements 

1998 

Idling Limits for Trucks 2004 On-Road Heavy-Duty Truck 

Exhaust Emission Standards 

1998 

Consumer Products Rule 2004 Light-Duty Vehicle Off-Cycle 

Emission Controls 

1997 

Chip Reflash to Detect Truck 

Emission Control System Failure

2004 Consumer Product Emission 

Limits 

1997 

Transportation Refrigeration Unit 

Rule 

2004 Locomotive Memorandum of 

Agreement for the South Coast 

1997 

Portable Diesel Engine Emission 

Standards 

2004 Medium- and Heavy-Duty Gas 

Truck Emission Standards 

1995 

Stationary Diesel Engine 

Regulation 

2004 Aerosol Coatings Regulation 1995 

Solid Waste Collection Vehicle 

Regulation 

2003 Large Off-Road Diesel Statement 

of Principles 

1996 

Lawn and Garden Equipment 

Emission Standards 

2003 Medium- and Heavy-Duty 

Gasoline Trucks 

1995 

Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel 

Regulation 

2003 Off-Road Recreational Vehicles 

Regulation 

1994 
April 26, 2007 39 

The charts below clearly illustrate the benefits of adopted SIP measures to reduce 

emissions from mobile sources. The downward emission trends are dramatic given 

California’s projected growth in population, vehicle travel, and goods movement 

activities. But because on-road and off-road mobile sources together account for so 

much of the State's inventory of ozone and PM2.5 forming emissions, further 

reductions in mobile source emissions are essential if air quality standards are to be 

realized. 

 Passenger Vehicles 

Statewide

ROG+NOx (tpd)

0

300

600

900

1200

1500

2006 2014 2023

 Trucks

Statewide

 ROG+NOx (tpd)

0

300

600

900

1200

1500

2006 2014 2023

 Off-Road Equipment

Statewide 

 ROG+NOx (tpd)

0

300

600

900

1200

1500

2006 2014 2023

 Cleaning Up the Legacy Fleet

Adopted SIP measures have made significant strides in reducing emissions from 

those mobile sources already in use – the legacy fleet -- by keeping existing 

vehicles cleaner longer, getting cleaner technology on older vehicles and 

equipment, and replacing older dirtier vehicles and equipment with cleaner ones. 

Whereas new engine emissions have been regulated for a long time, most of the 

in-use control programs have just begun to evolve and have an impact. We still 

have a lot of work to do to clean up the legacy fleet. That is why the majority of 

new measures in the State Strategy are in-use measures. 

Many programs and rules are currently in place to reduce emissions from the 

mobile source legacy fleets. The Smog Check Program ensures that passenger 

vehicles stay clean as they age and on-board diagnostic systems identify smog 

control problems. Heavy-duty truck inspection programs help control smoke 

emissions and detect emission control malmaintenance and tampering. 

ARB has adopted 20 in-use regulations in the last five years. In-use regulations 

have required use of cleaner fuels, greatly reducing emissions from ships and 

harbor craft. Excessive truck and bus idling has been restricted. ARB has 

adopted public and private fleet rules that require local governments and private 

companies to incorporate the cleanest vehicles and equipment into their fleets. 

In-use testing procedures and verification requirements for in-use emission 

control technology have been strengthened. And other operational and emission 

control technology requirements that help reduce emissions from existing vehicle 

and equipment have been put into place. 
April 26, 2007 40 

Incentive programs have worked hand-in-hand with in-use regulations, providing 

added emissions benefits. California is currently investing up to $140 million per 

year to clean up older, higher-emitting sources through the Carl Moyer Program. 

The Smog Check Breathe Easier Campaign pays motorists $1,000 to 

permanently retire their high-polluting vehicles. And local governments use 

special vehicle registration fees to fund projects that further reduce emissions 

from motor vehicles. 

Consumer Products 

ARB has adopted standards to limit 

emissions from nearly 50 consumer product 

categories (such as hair sprays, deodorants, 

and cleaning compounds), as well as over 

35 architectural coatings and aerosol paints 

categories. The Board has adopted and 

implemented voluntary provisions to offer 

greater compliance flexibility to consumer 

product manufacturers while retaining the air quality benefits. Without these 

actions, ROG emissions from these products would be roughly 60 percent 

greater in 2010. But, as you can see from the above chart, the impact of 

population growth begins to counter the benefits of adopted measures – more 

controls are needed. 

Local Rules and Programs 

 Stationary and Area Sources

Local air districts are primarily responsible for controlling emissions from 

stationary and areawide sources, with the exception of consumer products, 

through regulations and permits. Stationary sources include industrial sources 

like factories and power plants, commercial sources like gas stations and dry 

cleaners, and residential sources such as fireplaces and water heaters. 

Areawide sources are diffuse sources of emissions that are spread over a wide 

area, such as paints and pesticides. 

Local air districts help reduce emissions through limits on emissions from new 

sources (the New Source Review program) and technology-based requirements 

for existing sources, called Best Available Retrofit Control Technology and 

Reasonably Available Control Technology requirements. Air districts adopt and 

enforce rules governing these sources of emissions. 

Businesses in California are subject to the most stringent air quality rules in the 

country. Local air districts have adopted a number of innovative rules and 

programs over the years to help reduce emissions. For example, South Coast’s 

innovative program, RECLAIM, provides market incentives for companies to use 

the cleanest possible technologies. And the San Joaquin Valley has adopted a 

Without ARB Program 

With ARB Program 

Consumer Product Emissions

200

250

300

350

400

450

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Tons per day ROG

Without ARB Program 

With ARB Program 
April 26, 2007 41 

first-of-its-kind indirect source rule that ensures that new developments bear their 

fair share of the pollution burden. ARB has suggested over 50 control strategies 

for stationary sources that many local air districts have adopted. 

The proposed local air district measures for each nonattainment area are listed, 

described, and quantified in the attainment plans for each area. The local 

measures, coupled with the State Strategy measures, must provide the 

necessary emission reductions to meet the federal standards. 

 Transportation and Land Use Planning

In California, local governments are responsible for transportation and land use 

planning, and transportation plans are an important part of the SIP. Federal law 

requires a metropolitan region’s transportation plan to be complementary to and 

conform with the region’s air quality plan. Transportation and land use strategies 

can help to reduce the rate of growth in vehicle travel and traffic congestion, 

which helps reduce the growth in vehicle emissions. All the major metropolitan 

regions in California have approved plans emphasizing land use strategies that 

complement their transit and transportation systems and bring more people 

closer to more destinations. These strategies will help curb emissions by 

reducing trip distances and increasing use of public transit, carpooling, walking, 

and biking. 

ARB’s Proposed New SIP Measures

If emission reductions from the adopted measures are not enough to attain the 

federal standards, sufficient emission reductions from new strategies must be 

achieved in order to meet the emission reduction target. 

ARB staff is proposing a comprehensive and far reaching set of new measures to 

achieve emission reductions needed to address California’s most challenging 

ozone and PM2.5 problems. These measures are designed to make maximum 

progress toward the federal 8-hour ozone standard in the South Coast and the 

San Joaquin Valley. The measures include aggressive near-term NOx and SOx 

emission reduction goals, reflecting the nature and scope of the PM2.5 problem 

in these regions. To achieve the emission reductions needed for both ozone and 

PM2.5, the State Strategy proposes new near-term actions that can be 

completed by 2010 or soon thereafter. 

 Focus of Proposed New Measures 

Mobile sources are the largest contributor to PM2.5 and ozone-forming 

emissions. Air quality science indicates that reductions of NOx are more 

beneficial than reductions of other pollutant precursors to help reduce levels of 

both ozone and PM2.5. The simple conclusion is that mobile source NOx 

reductions must be a main objective of the State Strategy. And since the State 

and federal government have almost exclusive authority over mobile source 
April 26, 2007 42 

emissions, they also have the bulk of the responsibility for implementing the 

State Strategy. 

Mobile sources currently produce about 90 percent of all NOx emissions in the 

South Coast. About 90 percent of mobile source NOx emissions are produced 

by five major sources – passenger vehicles, heavy-duty diesel trucks, large 

off-road equipment, and two goods movement-related sources -- ships, and 

locomotives. Reducing NOx emissions from these five major sources is 

therefore the key to meeting the objective of the State Strategy. 

More than any other pollution control effort, ARB’s mobile source program has 

moved the State’s nonattainment areas closer to meeting federal air quality 

standards. The majority of emission reductions from adopted SIP measures 

comes from emission standards for new on-road and off-road mobile sources 

and fuels. But as new engines have become cleaner and cleaner, the emissions 

contribution from older vehicles has been growing to the extent that it will soon 

make up the majority of mobile source emissions. For example, all on-road 

vehicles 14 years old or older will produce almost 60 percent of total on-road 

NOx emissions by 2014 but just 20 percent of total miles traveled. That is why 

the majority of proposed new measures in the State Strategy are in-use 

measures – programs to help clean up the legacy fleet of older, dirtier vehicles 

and equipment. We simply cannot wait for the natural turnover of older vehicles 

(1-5 percent annual turnover depending on vehicle or equipment type) being 

replaced with newer ones. 

On-Road Vehicles 

14 Years Old or Older 

In 2014 20% of 

Miles Traveled 

60% of 

NOx Emissions 

Passenger Vehicles 

Heavy-Duty Trucks 

Construction Equip 

Ships 

Locomotives 

90% of 

Mobile Sources 

Mobile Sources 90% of 

All NOx Emissions
April 26, 2007 43 

While action on the proposed in-use measures will be completed by 2010, their 

implementation will extend past 2010 and through 2014 to 2020. Longer-term 

actions will center on the final increment needed to attain the standard in the 

areas with the worst ozone pollution. 

Passenger Vehicles and Heavy-Duty Trucks 

Despite statewide growth in vehicle travel of 35 percent over the last 15 years, 

total car and truck emissions (ROG+NOx) have decreased almost 50 percent. 

California has led the way in adopting stringent regulations for passenger 

vehicles. Compared to uncontrolled vehicles, cars are now 99 percent cleaner. 

A new 1965 car produced about 2,000 pounds of ozone-forming ROG emissions 

during 100,000 miles of driving. California's low-emission standards, coupled 

with reformulated gasoline, have cut that to less than 50 pounds for the average 

new car today. By 2010, California's standards will further reduce ROG 

emissions from the average new 2010 car to approximately 10 pounds. 

ARB’s first diesel engine regulations went into effect in 1988. Significant gains 

began with the introduction of California Clean Diesel fuel in 1993. U.S. EPA and 

ARB worked together to develop and adopt the next phases of on-road diesel 

engine control, with cleaner fuel in 2006 and even cleaner engines in 2007 that 

will reduce per-truck particulate matter emissions by another 90 percent. By 

2010, new trucks will be 98 percent cleaner than new pre-1988 models, providing 

needed NOx reductions. 

NOx

ROG

0

1

2

3

4

5

grams/mile

1970 1975 1980 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

As new cars and trucks become cleaner, the emissions contribution from older 

vehicles has been growing to the extent that it will soon make up the majority of 

mobile source emissions. Thus, California’s emission control program has also 

had to focus on cleaning up those vehicles already in use – the “legacy” or 

“in-use” fleet. 

California’s Smog Check Program is the cornerstone of the passenger vehicle 

in-use strategy, currently keeping over 400 tons of smog-forming gases from 

entering the air statewide each day. Passenger vehicles are also required to 

NOx

PM (x 10)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

g/bhp-hr

Pre19881988 1991 1994 1998 2003 2007 2010

Auto Emission Standards Truck Emission Standards 
April 26, 2007 44 

have software incorporated into their on-board computers to detect emission 

control system malfunctions as they occur. ARB’s heavy-duty vehicle inspection 

program and periodic smoke inspection program reduce emissions from the 

legacy truck fleet. Trucks will also be required to have the same emission control 

malfunction detection software as passenger vehicles beginning in 2013. 

Cars and heavy-duty diesel trucks currently produce about 50 percent of the total 

NOx emissions in both the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley. By 2023, that 

percentage will be cut almost in half. But cars and trucks still account for so 

much of the State’s inventory of ozone and PM2.5 emissions, further reductions 

are essential if air quality standards are to be realized. 

Proposed New Passenger Vehicle and Heavy-Duty Truck Measures

 Passenger Vehicles 

Since California’s passenger vehicle emissions standards have done their job to 

cut emissions to near-zero levels, the control focus must shift to keeping vehicles 

clean over their lifetimes. The State Strategy envisions an even stronger Smog 

Check program that would reduce an additional 40 tons per day of emissions 

statewide in 2014. Proposed new Smog Check measures include annual 

inspections for cars with high failure rates, such as vehicles over 15 years old 

and vehicles accumulating high annual miles of travel, and adding inspections of 

motorcycles and smaller diesel vehicles. More attention will be paid to 

evaporative emissions through the addition of a low-pressure evaporative test, 

even as exhaust emission cutpoints are tightened. 

The State Strategy proposes to increase the number of vehicles that are 

voluntarily retired by implementing a scrappage program for vehicles that are off 

cycle from their Smog Check inspections. This strategy will depend upon funding 

and would be targeted primarily in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley. We 

will also continue to ensure that the fuels used in California are the cleanestburning available, and mitigate the additional evaporative emissions resulting 

from the addition of ethanol to gasoline. 

These proposed passenger vehicle measures would reduce total NOx and ROG 

emissions in the South Coast by about 32 tons per day in 2014 and over 22 tons 

in 2020. Likewise, this measure will reduce total NOx and ROG emissions in the 

San Joaquin Valley by over 10 tons in 2014 and about 7 tons in 2020. 

 Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks 

Substantially reducing emissions from existing trucks is key to meeting federal air 

quality standards, as well as achieving diesel risk reduction and goods 

movement clean air goals. The State Strategy foresees an expansive in-use 

diesel truck emission reduction program that would reduce NOx emissions by 47 

tons per day in the South Coast and 61 tons per day in the San Joaquin Valley 
April 26, 2007 45 

by 2014. Direct PM2.5 emissions would also be reduced 2-3 tons per day in both 

the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley during the same time period. 

A comprehensive fleet modernization program beginning in 2010 would replace 

older trucks, repower trucks with cleaner engines, and retrofit trucks with devices 

to reduce both NOx and PM. The proposed modernization program would be 

equivalent to replacing approximately 30 percent of the oldest trucks by 2014 

with 2010 model year or newer trucks, and will be accomplished through private 

truck fleet regulations. It is envisioned that the use of public incentive funds will 

be needed as well to facilitate fleet modernization on the scale necessary to 

attain PM2.5 and ozone standards within SIP deadlines. 

The in-use diesel truck program also proposes to reduce emissions from trucks 

registered outside of California and to lessen the effects of emission control 

deterioration. 

Impact of Car and Truck SIP Measures

Adopted SIP measures would reduce passenger vehicle NOx emissions in the 

South Coast by 67 percent between 2006 and 2020. Proposed new SIP 

measures would reduce that by another 15 percent by 2020. 

South Coast Passenger Vehicle Emissions - NOx

0

50

100

150

200

250

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

NOx Tons per Day

With New SIP Measures

With Adopted SIP Measures

Heavy-duty truck NOx emissions would be reduced by adopted SIP measures 

67 percent between 2006 and 2020. Proposed new SIP measures would reduce 

NOx emissions by another 45 percent by 2020. 
April 26, 2007 46 

South Coast Truck Emissions - NOx

0

50

100

150

200

250

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

NOx Tons per Day

With New SIP Measures

With Adopted SIP Measures

 Good Movement Sources 

The goods movement sector includes the ships, trains, port trucks, and related 

sources that help move materials and goods from the grower or manufacturer to 

the consumer. The air quality impact of the goods movement sector is a major 

issue in areas that host ports, large rail facilities, and major truck routes. Many 

entities have developed or are developing plans to address the impacts of goods 

movement, including the California Environmental Protection Agency and the 

Business, Transportation & Housing Agency, the Air Resources Board, the South 

Coast Air Quality Management District, several California ports, and two major 

railroads. 

Two factors increase the importance of addressing emissions from goods 

movement sources. First, international trade through California’s ports is growing 

rapidly: the volume of goods moving through the Port of Los Angeles and the 

Port of Long Beach – the nation’s busiest port complex – is expected to more 

than double by 2020. Second, the most prominent sources in this sector have 

historically not been regulated as aggressively as stationary sources or other 

mobile sources. Goods movement sources are also powered by diesel engines 

that last longer than their gasoline-powered counterparts, and are often rebuilt 

before being replaced with newer, cleaner equipment. As a result new engine 

standards alone will not provide emission reductions in the timeframe allowed to 

attain the federal PM2.5 and ozone standards. 

New measures in the State Strategy focus on the following goods movement 

sources: ships, locomotives, harbor craft, and port trucks. They closely mirror 

the measures included in Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods 

Movement in California, approved by ARB in April 2006, and summarized briefly 

in Chapter 1. It is estimated that these measures will reduce 20 tons per day of 
April 26, 2007 47 

SOx, 49 tons per day of NOx, and about 4 tons per day of direct PM2.5 in the 

South Coast by 2014. 

 Ships

Emissions from ocean-going vessels, unlike most major pollution sources, are 

not projected to decrease in future years, since ships have little or no emission 

controls and run on high-emitting bunker fuel, and shipments of cargo containers 

are projected to grow significantly over the next two decades. Ships currently 

emit half the statewide SOx emissions, and it is estimated that ships will jump 

from the sixth to the second highest statewide NOx producer by 2023. It is 

essential to reduce ship emissions as they are entering our ports and when they 

are docked through application of demonstrated control technologies, use of 

cleaner fuels, and operational efficiencies. Since ARB does not have authority to 

set ship engine emission standards, we must work with national and international 

authorities, as well as the ports, to implement many of the control measures. 

ARB took a big step in reducing emissions from ships in December 2005 by 

adopting a rule phasing in the use of cleaner low-sulfur fuel in ship auxiliary 

engines that will reduce SOx emissions from auxiliary engines by 96 percent and 

PM2.5 emissions by 83 percent beginning in 2010. 

Proposed New Ship Measures 

In addition to the 2005 auxiliary engine fuel rule, the State Strategy proposes to 

reduce emissions from ship auxiliary engines through cold ironing and other 

clean technology. Cold ironing allows ships to turn off their auxiliary engines and 

instead plug into an electrical system for power when they are docked at a port. 

This measure would phase in the number of ships capable of using cold ironing 

and other at-dock technologies such as the “hood”, which fits onto a ship’s 

exhaust stack and cleans the emissions, and is estimated to reduce NOx 

emissions about 19 tons per day in 2014 and 28 tons per day in 2020. 

The State Strategy proposes to reduce emissions from ship main engines 

through a variety of measures. A main engine fuel rule, patterned after the 

auxiliary engine fuel rule, would help reduce emissions by introducing a cleaner, 

low-sulfur fuel beginning no later than 2010. Increasing the use of cleaner new 

engines or retrofitted engines beginning in 2010 could be implemented via 

regulation, incentives, voluntary agreements, or a combination of these 

approaches. Higher ship speeds cause much higher emissions. So a measure 

is proposed that would strengthen a current voluntary program by requiring ships 

to reduce their speeds to 12 knots within 40 nautical miles of the Ports of Los 

Angeles and Long Beach. The combination of ship main engine measures would 

reduce both NOx and SOx emissions by 20 tons per day and direct PM2.5 

emissions by over 2 tons per day in 2014. These reductions would increase 

substantially through 2023. 
April 26, 2007 48 

 Impact of Ship SIP Measures 

Without new SIP measures, ship NOx emissions are estimated to increase 

almost 90 percent between 2006 and 2020. With proposed new SIP measures, 

NOx emissions from ships would be 67 percent less than the projected 2020 

levels and about 35 percent less than 2006 levels. 

South Coast Ship Emissions - NOx

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

NOx Tons per Day

With New SIP Measures

Without New Measures

It is estimated that SOx emissions from ships will double without the adopted and 

new SIP measures. The adopted SIP measure (auxiliary engine fuel rule) will 

help reduce SOx more than 50 percent from projected 2014 levels, but emissions 

would then begin increasing due to goods movement growth. With proposed 

new SIP measures, SOx emissions would be reduced to only 2 tons per day in 

the South Coast by 2014 and remain at that low level through 2020. 

South Coast Ship Emissions - SOx

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

SOx Tons per Day

With New SIP Measures

Without New Measures

With Adopted ARB Measure
April 26, 2007 49 

 Locomotives

Locomotives pose a difficult challenge due to their long life, interstate operations, 

and California’s reliance on U.S. EPA to adopt new engine standards. A rule 

adopted by ARB in 2004 now requires locomotives operating in California to use 

cleaner, low-sulfur fuel that will reduce SOx emissions 90 percent. Several 

strategies are underway to clean up locally-based switcher engines, reduce idling 

emissions at railyards, and concentrate the cleanest available line haul engines 

in the South Coast. These activities are important for community health and NOx 

emission reductions in the short term. But without the introduction of cleaner 

new locomotive engines into California operation, growth is expected to quickly 

catch up to these current actions and begin to steer the NOx emissions curve 

upward. 

In 1998, ARB reached agreement with the rail industry to accelerate introduction 

of Tier 2 locomotives into the South Coast Air Basin to achieve a 67 percent 

reduction. However, as shown below, emissions are projected to begin 

increasing after 2010 due to growth. A similar agreement is needed to 

accelerate introduction of the next generation of cleaner locomotives once EPA 

adopts new standards. 

 Proposed New SIP Measures 

The State Strategy proposes U.S. EPA adoption of more stringent new engine 

standards and a new industry commitment to accelerate introduction of cleaner 

engines in California to meet the attainment needs of the South Coast and the 

San Joaquin Valley. It is anticipated that the new standards will reduce NOx and 

PM emissions by 90 percent. The proposed measure would call for replacement 

of existing locomotive engines with cleaner engines and rebuilds of older engines 

until 100 percent of the statewide locomotive fleet has been upgraded. ARB is 

pushing U.S. EPA to adopt the standards with earliest possible implementation, 

as this measure can only occur once U.S. EPA adopts new locomotive 

standards. 
April 26, 2007 50 

 Impact of Locomotive SIP Measures 

The proposed new SIP measures would reduce NOx emissions from locomotives 

by 13 tons per day in the South Coast and 16 tons per day by from 2006 to 2020. 

South Coast Locomotive Emissions - NOx

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

NOx Tons per Day

With New SIP Measures

With Existing Controls

 Harbor Craft

Standards adopted by U.S. EPA provide for new harbor craft engines that have 

roughly 50 percent less NOx emissions than uncontrolled engines. The State 

Strategy proposes a new measure requiring harbor craft owners to replace older 

engines with the newer, cleaner engines and/or add control technologies that 

reduce emissions, reducing NOx emissions in the South Coast about 5 tons per 

day by 2014. 

Port trucks

Most port trucks start out as long-haul trucks and then are put into short-haul use 

as they get older and are no longer reliable enough for long-haul service. 

Because port trucks are purchased used, emission standards for new trucks will 

reduce emissions from trucks servicing the ports later than they will impact the 

long-haul fleet. The State Strategy proposes a port truck modernization program 

that would phase in beginning in 2008 and would include replacing older trucks 

with newer, cleaner trucks and retrofitting engines with emission-reducing control 

technology, reducing South Coast NOx emissions 2 tons per day by 2014 and 8 

tons per day by 2020. 
April 26, 2007 51 

 Large Off-Road Equipment 

Emission standards for new off-road diesel engines have become increasingly 

more stringent over the past decade, ensuring that new construction, mining, 

industrial and oil drilling equipment become progressively cleaner. By 2015, new 

large off-road equipment will produce 98 percent less ROG+NOx than their 

uncontrolled counterparts. However, large diesel off-road equipment with more 

than 25 horsepower remain in use for long periods of time, sometimes up to 60 

years. This long life means that new, lower emitting engines are introduced into 

fleets relatively slowly with the result that the emission reductions and associated 

health benefits from these cleaner engines will also be fairly slow to materialize. 

 Proposed New Large Off-Road Equipment Measure

ARB staff is currently in the process of developing a statewide in-use off-road 

equipment regulation which could require initial NOx and PM emissions averages 

to be met, with increasingly lower emissions averages over time. Staff began 

work on the rule in 2004 as part of the Diesel Risk Reduction Program. During 

early SIP development work in 2006, staff identified the necessity for large NOx 

emission reductions from off-road equipment and other diesel sources to meet 

the health-based federal air quality standards. Consequently, staff revised the 

control concept extensively to meet California’s clean air needs relative to diesel 

particulates, ozone, and PM2.5. 

This proposed measure would require owners of equipment larger than 

25 horsepower to meet a stringent average emissions level across all of their 

equipment. The fleet average approach provides equipment owners flexibility in 

how they will comply, including: swapping older, dirtier engines with newer, 

cleaner engines; purchasing newer equipment (with cleaner engines); and, 

adding emission control devices to older engines. Equipment owners could also 

restrict unnecessary equipment idling. 

This measure would reduce 10.5 tons per day of NOx and about 3 tons per day 

of direct PM2.5 in the South Coast and nearly 4 tons per day of NOx and a ton 

per day of direct PM2.5 in the San Joaquin Valley by 2014. It would also cut 

direct PM2.5 emissions by more than half in 2014 and by 70 percent in 2023. 
April 26, 2007 52 

Impact of Large Off-Road Equipment SIP Measures

Adopted SIP measures would reduce large off-road equipment NOx emissions in 

the South Coast by almost 60 percent between 2006 and 2020. Proposed new 

SIP measures would reduce that by another 30 percent by 2020. 

South Coast Construction Equipment 

Emissions - NOx

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

NOx Tons per Day

With New SIP Measures

With Adopted SIP Measures

Agricultural Equipment

The State Strategy will assess an equipment modernization program once 

modeling for the San Joaquin Valley’s PM2.5 SIP shows to what extent 

accelerated fleet modernization may be needed. 

Other Off-Road Sources 

For many gasoline-fueled off-road sources, evaporative emissions are a 

significant portion of total emissions. Leaky hoses, tanks, and other parts of an 

engine’s fuel system and refueling infrastructure release hundreds of tons of 

ROG into the atmosphere a day. Success with low- to no-evaporative emission 

technology in on-road sources supports strategies to reduce evaporative 

emissions to similar low levels in off-road sources. Many newly-regulated 

sources have exhaust standards but do not yet have evaporative standards. The 

State Strategy proposes to set standards where there are none and make 

standards more stringent in sources that are not adequately controlled. 

Off-road sources used mainly for recreational purposes are large emission 

contributors, especially during the summer ozone season. The main focus of the 

State Strategy on this wide array of smaller off-road sources is evaporative 

emissions. Recreational marine boat engines and off-road recreational vehicles 

are the biggest targets, with standards being implemented by 2010 and ROG 

emission reductions growing through 2023 as these newer, cleaner engines 

become a bigger part of the overall recreational fleet. Refueling tanks, portable 
April 26, 2007 53 

fuel tanks, and gas station fueling hoses, where emissions are the result of 

evaporation or permeation of ROG from gasoline, are also targeted. The 

proposed measures covering these off-road sources would reduce a combined 

7 tons per day of ROG in the South Coast and about 4 tons per day in the 

San Joaquin Valley by 2014. 

Areawide Sources 

Consumer Products

Chemically formulated consumer products such as automotive care products, 

household care products, and personal care products have been regulated as a 

source of ROG emissions in five rulemakings since 1989. As a result of these 

measures, statewide emissions from consumer products will be reduced by over 

170 tons per day in 2010, a 40 percent reduction. Despite this progress, 

population growth in the years ahead is expected to reverse the downward trend 

of emissions from consumer products, after the latest standards become 

effective. Therefore, additional controls for this sector will remain important. 

Indeed, consumer products are expected to become the largest source of ROG 

emissions in the South Coast, and the third largest source in the San Joaquin 

Valley by 2020.

The State Strategy will continue ARB’s commitment to reduce ROG emissions 

from consumer products. Rulemakings are expected to be promulgated between 

2007 and 2012, expanding beyond the current category-by-category standards 

and pursuing innovative approaches, reducing ROG emissions about 13 tons in 

the South Coast and almost 4 tons per day in the San Joaquin Valley by 2020.

Pesticides

Pesticide emissions from agricultural and commercial uses fall under the 

Department of Pesticide Regulation’s (DPR) authority. A measure to reduce 

pesticide emissions was included in the SIP adopted in 1994. The State Strategy 

includes an updated version of that measure. It is a strategy to reduce ROG 

emissions from pesticides through regulations that may include limitations on the 

use of products formulated as fumigants, registration standards requiring liquid 

products that contribute less to ozone formation, and incentives promoting pest 

management practices that use less pesticide. 

Local Measures 

The proposed new local air district measures, coupled with the new State 

Strategy measures, must provide the necessary emission reductions to meet the 

federal standards. The new local measures for each nonattainment area are 

listed, described, and quantified in the attainment plans for each area. 
April 26, 2007 54 

Need for Technology Development and Long-term Measures

In developing the proposed State Strategy, ARB staff analyzed whether current 

NOx technologies for mobile sources are clean enough to provide all the 

emission reductions needed for ozone attainment in the South Coast and San 

Joaquin Valley. ARB included in this analysis the phasing in of the cleanest new 

technology standards from 2007-2017 that ARB and U.S. EPA have already 

adopted for diesel engines: 0.2 g/bhp-hr on-road truck standards in 2010, full offroad Tier 4 standards in 2014, and the recent U.S. EPA-proposed low-NOx 

standards for locomotive engines starting in 2017. The table below summarizes 

this analysis. For both areas, the totals of remaining emissions after full clean-up 

of the legacy diesel fleets are still greater than the NOx carrying capacities. 

The clear conclusion is that even cleaner emission standards are needed than 

are in place today. This demonstrates that it necessary for the South Coast and 

San Joaquin Valley SIPs to rely on cleaner – yet to be developed – technologies 

as allowed by federal Clean Air Act section 182(e)(5) for areas with the worst 

pollution. 

All New Fleets Analysis -- Unconstrained by Cost 

Remaining NOx 2020 Emissions 

(tpd) * Source 

South Coast San Joaquin 

Valley 

Passenger vehicles 18 5 

Diesel trucks 37 43 

Construction and other equipment 14 5 

Farm equipment 1 7 

Locomotive 7 5 

Ships and harbor craft 37 1 

Aircraft 27 5 

Stationary/area-wide sources 55 103 

Subtotal of remaining emissions from 

above categories 195 173 

All other NOx sources 52 22 

Total of all remaining emissions 247 195 

Carrying capacity 114 160 

* Numbers may not add exactly due to rounding

For this analysis, ARB staff assumed that in 2020 all passenger cars would be 10 

years old or younger, all diesel trucks would meet the 2010 NOx standards, all 

diesel construction and farm equipment would meet the most stringent tier 4 

standards, all locomotives would meet U.S. EPA’s proposed 2017 NOx 

standards, and the new stationary sources measure in the district SIPs would be 

fully implemented. 
April 26, 2007 55 

The top five rows are italicized to indicate the categories for which we assume 

that all vehicles and equipment meet the cleanest adopted emission standards. 

Included in the category “all other NOx sources” are commercial gas trucks, 

motorcycles, buses, motor homes, off-road recreational vehicles, and gas 

powered off-road equipment. 

ARB staff did the analysis starting with 2020 baseline emissions since that year 

corresponds to the last federal attainment deadline before the 2024 extremeclassification deadline under which the long-term measure provisions of federal 

law apply. The numbers would look nearly identical for an analysis for any year 

between now and 2020 as the starting point. (For example, ARB staff calculated 

the “total of remaining emission” for the San Joaquin Valley using a 2018 starting 

point. The resulting “total of remaining emission” was approximately 195 tons 

per day.) The carrying capacity is independent of the year. Therefore, the 

analysis and conclusion that it is necessary for the South Coast and San Joaquin 

Valley ozone SIPs to rely on cleaner, yet to be developed, technologies is 

general and does not change with year analyzed. 

The results for the San Joaquin Valley demonstrate that the need for cleaner 

technologies includes cleaner technologies for industrial sources, not just 

vehicles. Close to half of the San Joaquin Valley remaining emissions, 103 tons 

per day compared to a carrying capacity of 160 tons per day, are from stationary 

and area-wide sources. Clearly, long-term reductions from new technologies for 

both mobile and stationary sources will be needed. 

Process for Identifying Long-Term Emission Reductions

ARB has a long-standing history of successfully adopting and implementing both 

technology-advancing regulations and innovative emission control techniques. 

By working closely with research scientists and the regulated industry, ARB staff 

have been able to craft regulations that are stringent enough to compel 

technology development, yet flexible enough to encourage industry innovations. 

ARB staff believe a directed process is needed to ensure that future emission 

reduction opportunities are identified that are large enough and arrive in time to 

meet the attainment deadline. 

To accomplish this, ARB staff proposes to take the lead in a coordinated 

government, private, and public effort to establish emission goals for critical 

emission source categories. Each category’s goal will serve as a general target 

for how much cleaner that emission source category will need to be for 

attainment purposes. The setting of the source category emission goals must be 

science-based in two ways. First, the goals must be tied to the State’s overall 

emission reduction needs. Although, estimated emission reduction needs will 

change as modeling and emission inventories are updated, a working estimate of 

how far technology needs to be pushed is critical to a successful outcome. 

Second, the goals must reflect a reasonable assessment of how far technology 

can progress over the time available for attainment. 
April 26, 2007 56 

This process of goal setting will give direction and distance to ARB and air district 

regulatory efforts to set the next generation of emission standards. As ARB and 

air districts identify future feasible emission reduction measures toward the goals, 

those measures will be incorporated into future SIPs. However, to keep nearterm focus on the need to find more emission reductions, ARB staff proposes to 

periodically brief the Board on emerging emission reduction opportunities and 

promising technologies. 

Potential Long-Term Concepts 

Although the identification of long-term emission reductions will begin with the 

emission goal setting for critical emission source categories, specific approaches 

that ARB will evaluate for possible inclusion in the next SIP update include the 

following: 

Passenger vehicles: look for further reductions from reduced deterioration of 

emission reduction components. While new cars are very clean, it may be 

possible to improve the on-board diagnostic capability of passenger vehicles and 

heavy-duty trucks to better target sources of emissions and to improve and 

encourage higher rates of repair. 

Tighten emission standards wherever possible: review all categories of engines 

and vehicles to ensure that the cleanest cost-effective technologies are in place. 

For example: 

• Exhaust and evaporative standards for on-road motorcycles. 

• Second generation catalyst-based emission standards for inboard/stern 

drive marine engines. 

• Tighter exhaust emission limits for small off-road engines. 

Cleaner ground support equipment: push for increased electrification. Captured 

vehicle and equipment fleets used at airports are cleaner today through natural 

turnover and accelerated turnover spurred through cooperative State and local 

government and air company efforts. However, additional opportunities for 

increased electrification remain. 

Air quality priority for federal transportation funding: work with local governments 

to prioritize federal transportation funding uses to better support air quality goals. 

The federal Congestion and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program annually 

provides to county transportation agencies more than $200 million in the South 

Coast and about $50 million in the San Joaquin Valley through 2009. The 

purpose of the CMAQ Program, according to Federal Highway Administration 

2006 guidance, is to fund transportation projects that will contribute to attainment 

of national ambient air quality standards. 
April 26, 2007 57 

Ideas Requiring Further Exploration 

Air quality control is an ever emerging field. At ARB, new ways to control air 

pollutants and improve public health are continually developed through research 

and other staff work. At any one time, there are always emission reduction ideas 

on the horizon that we have not fully explored or developed. Some of these 

approaches that are in various stages of development could turn out to be 

effective strategies at some point in the future. 

The following approaches show promise as potential emission reduction 

strategies. However, because of technological constraints and uncertain 

authority, they are less defined and will require significant exploration prior to 

becoming concepts. 

Explore opportunities for cleaner fuels. The near-term focus for fuels-related 

efforts in California will be to develop low carbon fuels in response to the 

Governor’s 2007 Executive Order. Separate from that effort, ARB will continue to 

evaluate the opportunities for cost-effective reformulations to reduce criteria 

pollutant emissions. 

Pursue additional emission reductions from consumer products. Despite the 

actions to date and the new measures proposed in this plan, consumer products 

continue to be an ever larger percentage of ROG emissions because of 

population growth. ARB will continue to look for even cleaner consumer product 

technologies and innovative approaches to reduce emissions such as reactivitybased and market-based strategies. This would continue the search for new 

approaches to achieve emission reductions initiated within the near-term 

consumer product measure. 

Explore approaches to further reduce volatile emissions from pesticides. With 

the Department of Pesticide Regulation as the lead, work with interested 

stakeholders to determine how pesticide emissions could be further reduced. 

Continue and enhance current public education and outreach programs. Public 

and private energy conservation and efficiency programs would continue and 

expand. The establishment of a statewide public education campaign to reduce 

air pollution could be considered, and might include ideas to engage the public 

through: (1) public education that more clearly connects voluntary clean air 

actions with public health benefits, and (2) increasing awareness of available 

low-emitting consumer products, paints, vehicles, lawn equipment, and 

recreational vehicles licensed to use clean air “green” labels. 

Advocate for efficient regional land use and transportation strategies. In 

California, local governments have the authority over most transportation funding 

and land use decisions. The most effective way for regions to curb long-term 

growth of vehicle travel and lessen auto emissions is to build on and enhance 

current efforts to implement transportation and land use strategies proven to 

reduce vehicle trips and decrease average trip lengths. 
April 26, 2007 58 

State Implementation Plan Commitments

This section sets forth the State’s SIP commitments for the 2007 State Strategy 

for two of the areas that need the emission benefits from the proposed, new 

State measures to demonstrate attainment – South Coast and San Joaquin 

Valley. Specific commitments for emission reductions as needed for attainment 

in other nonattainment areas, such as the Antelope Valley and Western Mojave 

Desert, Sacramento, and Ventura County, will be developed later and brought for 

Board consideration with SIPs for these regions.

The State’s SIP commitments consist of three components: 

1. Commitment to achieve emission reductions by specific dates; 

2. Commitment to propose defined new SIP measures; and 

3. A long-term strategy commitment. 

The total emission reductions and the obligation to propose specific measures for 

Board consideration would become enforceable upon approval by U.S. EPA of 

the State Strategy and each district’s attainment plan. The commitments for 

emission reductions are calculated using the planning inventory described in 

Appendix A; progress will be tracked in the same inventory currency to assess 

compliance. 

The total emission reductions from the new measures necessary to attain the 

federal standards are an enforceable State commitment in the SIP. While the 

proposed State Strategy includes estimates of the emission reductions from each 

of the individual new measures, it is important to note that the commitment of the 

State Strategy is to achieve the total emission reductions necessary to attain the 

federal standards, which would be the aggregate of all existing and proposed 

new measures combined. Therefore, if a particular measure does not get its 

expected emission reductions, the State still commits to achieving the total 

aggregate emission reductions, whether this is realized through additional 

reductions from the new measures, or from alternative control measures or 

incentive programs. 

For informational purposes, the tables below show the expected emission 

reductions from the proposed new SIP measures in the South Coast and 

San Joaquin Valley in 2014, 2020, and 2023. The first table shows the expected 

NOx and ROG emission reductions for South Coast and San Joaquin Valley for 

2023, the year in which the emission reduction target must be met for the 

expected ozone attainment date of 2024 for these areas. The second table 

shows the expected NOx and ROG emission reductions for the two areas for 

2020 to help illustrate the progress that will be made prior to the proposed 2024 

attainment deadlines for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley. The third and 

fourth tables show the expected emissions reductions from NOx, ROG, SOx, and 

direct PM2.5 in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley in 2014, the year in 

which emission reduction targets must be met for the federal PM2.5 standard. 
April 26, 2007 59 

Expected Emission Reductions from Proposed New SIP Measures 

(tons per day) 

 

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley -- 2023 

South Coast San Joaquin 

Valley 

Proposed New SIP Measures NOx ROG NOx ROG

Passenger Vehicles 7.1 10.5 2.1 3.3 

 Smog Check Improvements (BAR) 6.9 7.5 2.1 1.9 

 Expanded Vehicle Retirement 0.2 0.5 0.04 0.1 

 Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program -- 2.5 -- 1.3 

Heavy-Duty Trucks 18.3 1.7 21.2 2.3 

 Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks 18.3 1.7 21.2 2.3 

Goods Movement Sources 99.2 1.9 16.4 1.3 

 Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing & Clean Technology 30.8 -- -- -- 

 Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel 39.9 -- -- -- 

 Port Truck Modernization 7.0 -- -- -- 

 Accelerated Intro. of Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives 15.6 1.9 16.4 1.3 

 Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 5.9 NYQ -- NYQ

Off-Road Equipment 13.9 1.9 5.4 0.6 

 Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment (over 25hp) 13.9 1.9 5.4 0.6 

 Cleaner In-Use Agricultural Equipment NYQ NYQ NYQ NYQ

Other Off-Road Sources 2.4 24.0 0.6 11.4 

 New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 2.4 17.6 0.6 5.3 

 Expanded Off-Road Rec. Vehicle Emission Standards -- 6.4 -- 6.1 

 Additional Evaporative Emission Standards -- NYQ -- NYQ

 Vapor Recovery for Above Ground Storage Tanks -- NYQ -- NYQ

Areawide Sources -- 13.7 -- 6.3 

 Consumer Products Program -- 13.7 -- 3.8 

 Pesticides: DPR Regulation -- NYQ -- 2.5 

Emission Reductions from Proposed New Measures 141 54 46 25 

 

NYQ = Not Yet Quantified. BAR = Bureau of Automotive Repair. DPR = Dept. of Pesticide Regulation. 

Locomotives measure relies on U.S. EPA rulemaking and industry agreement to accelerate fleet turnover. 

Note: Emission reductions reflect the combined impact of regulations and supportive incentive programs. 

Emission reduction estimates for each proposed measure are shown for informational purposes only. Actual 

emission reductions from any particular measure may be greater than or less than the amounts shown. 
April 26, 2007 60 

Expected Emission Reductions from Proposed New SIP Measures 

(tons per day) 

 

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley -- 2020 

South Coast San Joaquin 

Valley 

Proposed New SIP Measures NOx ROG NOx ROG

Passenger Vehicles 9.6 12.9 2.7 4.1 

 Smog Check Improvements (BAR) 8.3 8.7 2.4 2.2 

 Expanded Vehicle Retirement 1.3 1.2 0.3 0.3 

 Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program -- 3.0 -- 1.6 

Heavy-Duty Trucks 26.9 2.6 30.2 3.3 

 Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks 26.9 2.6 30.2 3.3 

Goods Movement Sources 87.1 1.8 15.6 1.2 

 Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing & Clean Technology 28.3 -- -- -- 

 Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel 32.3 -- -- -- 

 Port Truck Modernization 8.0 -- -- -- 

 Accelerated Intro. of Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives 13.4 1.8 15.6 1.2 

 Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 5.1 NYQ -- NYQ

Off-Road Equipment 18.7 2.9 7.0 1.0 

 Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment (over 25hp) 18.7 2.9 7.0 1.0 

 Cleaner In-Use Agricultural Equipment NYQ NYQ NYQ NYQ

Other Off-Road Sources 1.6 17.9 0.4 8.7 

 New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 1.6 12.8 0.4 3.8 

 Expanded Off-Road Rec. Vehicle Emission Standards -- 5.1 -- 4.9 

 Additional Evaporative Emission Standards -- NYQ -- NYQ

 Vapor Recovery for Above Ground Storage Tanks -- NYQ -- NYQ

Areawide Sources -- 13.5 -- 6.1 

 Consumer Products Program -- 13.5 -- 3.6 

 Pesticides: DPR Regulation -- NYQ -- 2.5 

Emission Reductions from Proposed New Measures 144 52 56 24 

 

NYQ = Not Yet Quantified. BAR = Bureau of Automotive Repair. DPR = Dept. of Pesticide Regulation. 

Locomotives measure relies on U.S. EPA rulemaking and industry agreement to accelerate fleet turnover. 

Note: Emission reductions reflect the combined impact of regulations and supportive incentive programs. 

Emission reduction estimates for each proposed measure are shown for informational purposes only. Actual 

emission reductions from any particular measure may be greater than or less than the amounts shown. 
April 26, 2007 61 

Expected Emission Reductions from Proposed New SIP Measures 

(tons per day) 

 

South Coast -- 2014 

 

Direct Proposed New SIP Measures NOx ROG PM2.5 SOx 

Passenger Vehicles 14.4 17.7 0.3 -- 

 Smog Check Improvements (BAR) 12.0 10.5 0.2 -- 

 Expanded Vehicle Retirement 2.4 2.8 0.05 -- 

 Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program -- 4.4 -- -- 

Heavy-Duty Trucks 47.3 5.1 3.0 -- 

 Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks 47.3 5.1 3.0 -- 

Goods Movement Sources 49.4 0.7 3.6 20.1 

 Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing & Clean Technology 18.5 -- 0.3 0.4 

 Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel 20.0 -- 2.4 19.7 

 Port Truck Modernization 2.0 -- 0.5 -- 

 Accelerated Intro. of Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives 4.3 0.7 0.2 -- 

 Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 4.6 -- 0.2 -- 

Off-Road Equipment 10.5 2.7 2.6 -- 

 Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment (over 25hp) 10.5 2.7 2.6 -- 

 Cleaner In-Use Agricultural Equipment NYQ NYQ NYQ -- 

Other Off-Road Sources 0.4 6.6 -- -- 

 New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 0.4 4.2 -- -- 

 Expanded Off-Road Rec. Vehicle Emission Standards -- 2.4 -- -- 

 Additional Evaporative Emission Standards -- NYQ -- NYQ

 Vapor Recovery for Above Ground Storage Tanks -- NYQ -- NYQ

Areawide Sources -- 12.9 -- -- 

 Consumer Products Program -- 12.9 -- -- 

 Pesticides: DPR Regulation -- NYQ -- -- 

Emission Reductions from Proposed New Measures 122 46 9 20 

 

NYQ = Not Yet Quantified. BAR = Bureau of Automotive Repair. DPR = Dept. of Pesticide Regulation. 

Locomotives measure relies on U.S. EPA rulemaking and industry agreement to accelerate fleet turnover. 

Note: Emission reductions reflect the combined impact of regulations and supportive incentive programs. 

Emission reduction estimates for each proposed measure are shown for informational purposes only. 

Actual emission reductions from any particular measure may be greater than or less than the amounts 

shown. 
April 26, 2007 62 

Expected Emission Reductions from Proposed New SIP Measures 

(tons per day) 

 

San Joaquin Valley -- 2014 

 

Direct Proposed New SIP Measures NOx ROG PM2.5 SOx 

Passenger Vehicles 3.8 6.5 0.1 -- 

 Smog Check Improvements (BAR) 3.3 2.9 0.05 -- 

 Expanded Vehicle Retirement 0.5 0.7 0.01 -- 

 Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program -- 2.9 -- -- 

Heavy-Duty Trucks 61.4 6.4 3.6 -- 

 Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks 61.4 6.4 3.6 -- 

Goods Movement Sources 7.2 0.5 0.2 -- 

 Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing & Clean Technology -- -- -- -- 

 Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel -- -- -- -- 

 Port Truck Modernization -- -- -- -- 

 Accelerated Intro. of Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives 7.2 0.5 0.2 -- 

 Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft -- NYQ -- -- 

Off-Road Equipment 3.7 0.9 0.8 -- 

 Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment (over 25hp) 3.7 0.9 0.8 -- 

 Cleaner In-Use Agricultural Equipment NYQ NYQ NYQ -- 

Other Off-Road Sources 0.1 3.5 -- -- 

 New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 0.1 1.3 -- -- 

 Expanded Off-Road Rec. Vehicle Emission Standards -- 2.2 -- -- 

 Additional Evaporative Emission Standards -- NYQ -- NYQ

 Vapor Recovery for Above Ground Storage Tanks -- NYQ -- NYQ

Areawide Sources -- 5.7 -- -- 

 Consumer Products Program -- 3.2 -- -- 

 Pesticides: DPR Regulation -- 2.5 -- -- 

Emission Reductions from Proposed New Measures 76 23 5 0 

 

NYQ = Not Yet Quantified. BAR = Bureau of Automotive Repair. DPR = Dept. of Pesticide Regulation. 

Locomotives measure relies on U.S. EPA rulemaking and industry agreement to accelerate fleet turnover. 

Note: Emission reductions reflect the combined impact of regulations and supportive incentive programs. 

Emission reduction estimates for each proposed measure are shown for informational purposes only. 

Actual emission reductions from any particular measure may be greater than or less than the amounts 

shown. 
April 26, 2007 63 

Commitments to Reduce Emissions 

The tables below describe the emission reduction commitment proposal for 

Board approval. ARB staff proposes to commit to achieve the emission 

reductions set forth in these tables, by the dates indicated in the table on Page 

65 entitled, “Schedule for Board Consideration of Proposed ARB Rulemaking.” 

The reductions may be achieved through a combination of actions, including 

regulations, incentives, and other enforceable mechanisms. 

Summary of Emission Reduction Commitments – South Coast 

Year NOx ROG Direct 

PM2.5 SOx 

2014 122 46 9 20 

2020 1 144 52 -- -- 

2023 141 54 -- -- 

2023 CAA 182(e)(5) measures 241 2 40 2 -- -- 

1 The 2020 commitment in the South Coast is necessary to provide for attainment in the downwind 

nonattainment areas. 2 The reductions of NOx and ROG from 182(e)(5) measures will be reassessed as new SIPs are developed 

and revised. 

Summary of Emission Reduction Commitments – San Joaquin Valley 

Year NOx ROG Direct 

PM2.5 SOx 

2014 76 23 5 0 

2020 56 24 -- -- 

2023 46 25 -- -- 

2023 CAA 182(e)(5) measures 81 1 -- 1 -- -- 

1 The reductions of NOx and ROG from 182(e)(5) measures will be reassessed as new SIPs are developed 

and revised. 

Summary of Emission Reduction Commitments – Coachella Valley 

Year NOx ROG 

2018 7 2 
April 26, 2007 64 

Commitment to Propose Defined New SIP Measures

In addition to the commitment to reduce emissions by 2014, 2020 and 2023, ARB 

staff also proposes to commit to submit to the Board and propose for adoption 

the list of proposed new ARB control measures shown in the table below. The 

Board shall take action on or before the dates set forth in the following table. 

Such action by the Board may include any action within its discretion. 

Schedule for Board Consideration of Proposed ARB Rulemaking 

Proposed New SIP Measures Year 

Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment 

Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program 

Cleaner Main Ship Fuel 

Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 

Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above Ground Storage Tanks 

2007 

Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks 

Port Truck Modernization 

Ship Auxiliary Engines 

Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives (Enforceable Agreement) 

Consumer Products Program I 

2008 

Cleaner In-Use Agricultural Equipment 

New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 

Expanded Off-Road Recreational Vehicle Emission Standards 

Additional Evaporative Emission Standards 

2009-2010 

Consumer Products Program II 2010-2012 
April 26, 2007 65 

State Strategy 

Proposed New SIP Measures 

Implementing Agency – Expected Action – Expected Implementation 

Proposed New SIP Measures Implementing

Agency 

Expected 

Action 

Expected 

Implementation 

Passenger Vehicles 

 Smog Check Improvements BAR 2007-2008 By 2010 

 Expanded Vehicle Retirement ARB/BAR 2008-2014 2008-2014 

 Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline 

Program ARB 2007 Phase-in 

starting 2010 

Trucks 

 Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks ARB 2008 2010-2015 

Goods Movement Sources 

 Auxiliary Ship Engine Cold Ironing and 

Other Clean Technology 

EPA/ARB/ 

Local 2007-2008 Phase-in 

starting 2010 

Fuel: 2007 2007-2010 

 Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel EPA/ARB 

Local Engines: 

2009 

Phase-in 

starting 2010 

 Port Truck Modernization ARB/Local 2007-2008 2008-2020 

 Accelerated Introduction of Cleaner 

Line-Haul Locomotives EPA/ARB 2007-2008 Starting in 2012 

 Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft ARB 2007 2009-2018 

Off-Road Equipment 

 Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment ARB 2007 Phase-in 

starting 2008 

 Cleaner In-Use Agricultural Equipment ARB 2009-2010 TBD 

Other Off-Road Sources 

 New Emission Standards for 

Recreational Boats ARB 2009-2010 2012-2013 

 Expanded Off-Road Recreational 

Vehicle Emission Standards ARB By 2010 2012-2015 

 Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above 

Ground Storage Tanks ARB 2007 Phase-in 

starting 2008 

 Additional Evaporative Emission 

Standards ARB By 2010 2010-2012 

AREAWIDE SOURCES 

2007-2008 By 2010 Consumer Products Program ARB 2010-2012 By 2012-2014 

 DPR Pesticide Regulation DPR 2008 2008 

DPR = Department of Pesticide Regulation. BAR = Bureau of Automotive Repair 

TBD = To Be Determined 
April 26, 2007 66 

Commitment to Reduce Emissions via Long-Term Strategy

Consistent with section 182(e)(5) of the federal Clean Air Act, this SIP includes 

long-term commitments to achieve the last increment of emission reductions 

necessary to meet attainment goals in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley. 

As the State agency charged with ensuring California’s SIP compliance, ARB is 

ultimately responsible for ensuring the necessary measures are identified no later 

than 2020 (three years prior to the attainment year) and the emission reductions 

achieved by 2023. 

After adoption of the State Strategy, ARB staff proposes to initiate a coordinated 

government, private, and public effort to establish emission goals for critical 

mobile and stationary emission source categories. Following the setting of 

emission goals, ARB will start an ongoing public process to assess technology 

advancement opportunities for the critical categories. ARB staff will periodically 

brief the Board at public meetings on emerging emission reduction opportunities, 

promising technologies, and the progress made in developing long-term emission 

reduction measures. As ARB staff identifies feasible technology-forcing emission 

reduction measures, staff will propose those measures to the Board for inclusion 

into the SIP. 

No later than 2020, ARB and the two air districts will prepare a revision to the 

8-hour Ozone SIP that (1) reflects any modifications to the 2023 emission 

reduction target based on updated science, and (2) identifies any additional 

strategies, including the implementing agencies, needed to achieve the 

necessary emissions reductions by 2023. If the specific measures developed to 

satisfy the long-term obligation affect on-road motor vehicle emissions, we will 

work with the air districts and transportation planning agencies to revise the 

transportation conformity budgets accordingly. 

South Coast: After accounting for the anticipated benefits of both adopted and 

new defined State and local measures, the 2003 SIP demonstrates a need for 

another 281 tpd ROG and NOx reductions from long-term measures. This 

represents 24 percent of the total reductions needed by 2023. We believe that 

this gap can be bridged through a cooperative effort by the local, State and 

federal agencies responsible for specific emission sources. This effort should 

focus on how to most effectively achieve the additional reductions, considering 

the availability and cost of potential controls. 

San Joaquin Valley: After accounting for the anticipated benefits of both 

adopted and new defined State and local measures, the State Strategy 

demonstrates a need for another 81 tpd NOx reductions from long-term 

measures. This represents 13 percent of the total NOx and ROG reductions 

needed by 2023. We believe that this gap can be bridged through a cooperative 

effort by the local, State and federal agencies responsible for specific emission 

sources. This effort should focus on how to most effectively achieve the 

additional reductions, considering the availability and cost of potential controls. 
April 26, 2007 67 

Role of Funding and Incentive Programs

Over the past 40 years, California has steadily improved air quality in the face of 

tremendous economic and population growth. The vast majority of that progress 

has come from effective regulations. Accordingly, ARB staff expects State and 

federal regulations to play the primary role in implementing the State Strategy. In 

the regulatory paradigm, polluting sources pay for the necessary emission 

controls as part of doing business. Regulated industries may pass these costs 

on to consumers in the form of higher prices, although competition and other 

factors may prevent some companies from recouping all of their control costs. 

Low-interest loans with extended payment periods are available to aid smaller 

businesses that need upfront capital to comply. 

In recent years, regulatory programs have been supplemented with financial 

incentives to accelerate voluntary actions, such as replacing older equipment. 

Incentive programs like the Carl Moyer Program are both popular and effective. 

They also help to demonstrate emerging technologies that then can be used to 

set a tougher emissions benchmark for regulatory requirements. Most of the 

existing incentive programs are designed to pay for the incremental cost between 

what is required by regulation and advanced technology that exceeds that level. 

The incentive programs are publicly funded through fees paid by California 

vehicle owners as part of their annual registrations, smog inspections or new tire 

purchases. California is currently investing up to $140 million per year to clean 

up older, higher emission sources. 

The support for clean air incentive funding from Governor Schwarzenegger, the 

Legislature, and California’s voting public is reflected in the passage on 

November 7, 2006, of the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and 

Port Security Bond Act of 2006. The Bond Act includes $1 billion to accelerate 

the cleanup of air pollution caused by goods movement activities in California. 

With appropriation by the Legislature, and subject to such conditions and criteria 

contained in a statute that it will enact, ARB will appropriate this money to fund 

emission reductions from activities related to the movement of freight along 

California’s trade corridors. 

Federal Actions Needed

Measures in the State Strategy to reduce emissions from interstate and 

international sources rely on the federal government to develop more stringent 

emission standards and to ensure these standards go into effect as soon as 

possible. Emission reductions from locomotives, off-road equipment, marine 

auxiliary engines, and harbor craft are a significant part of the State Strategy. 

Proposed State measures would accelerate the introduction of cleaner engines 

and equipment, but the emission reductions rely on the availability of cleaner new 

engines. 

ARB is proposing several measures to reduce ship emissions through a 

combination of regulations, incentives, and actions by ports and the private 
April 26, 2007 68 

sector. However, national and international action to clean up shipping fleets is 

also needed to fully realize our clean air goals. And aircraft emissions, which will 

become one of the South Coast’s top five NOx sources by 2020, are 

unaddressed in the State Strategy due to the lack of effective international 

standards. 

California must rely on U.S. EPA to represent its interests before foreign or 

international regulatory bodies that have the ability to reduce emissions from 

international goods movement sources. In this role, U.S. EPA should advocate 

for the adoption of cleaner ship emission standards and less polluting practices 

by the International Maritime Organization. 

Possible Federal Actions 

Adopt more stringent standards for sources under federal control. U.S. EPA 

should move as fast as possible to lower standards for sources under its control, 

keeping in mind California’s air quality challenge and attainment deadlines. 

There are categories of emission sources that we do not have the authority to 

regulate at the State level. We also do not have the ability to regulate sources in 

markets outside of California that then operate within California. Not only would 

federal action lower emissions for new sources, but it would allow State and local 

actions to lower emissions from existing sources by setting in-use rules that 

speed up the integration of the cleaner engines and technology into California 

fleets. These sources include: ships, locomotives, harbor craft, aircraft, and 

off-road equipment and vehicles. 

Federal incentives for cleaner technology. Federal funding sources for clean air 

projects, as well as federal tax incentives promoting the manufacture, sale, and 

purchase of cleaner vehicles, equipment, and technology, could enhance 

California’s aggressive incentive programs. 
April 26, 2007 69 

Ozone Attainment Demonstrations

The table on the following page illustrates how the State Strategy will meet the 

emission reduction targets for ozone in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley. 

This document has presented ARB staff’s assessment of the State Strategy for 

the San Joaquin Valley and the South Coast in detail. ARB staff has also 

evaluated the impact of the proposed State Strategy on all 15 ozone 

nonattainment areas. For the remaining areas, modeling results and air quality 

data analyses show that, with the continued reductions in emissions on track to 

occur in each area, all will be able to show attainment by 2021 or earlier with 

identified measures. 

ARB staff expects the districts within the Sacramento nonattainment area will 

request a reclassification from serious to severe and will need additional 

reductions from ARB’s proposed new measures to attain by 2019. San Diego is 

projected to attain by its deadline, while Ventura may consider a reclassification 

to either Serious or Severe. Transport impacted areas, especially downwind of 

the South Coast—the Antelope Valley, the Mojave Desert, and the Coachella 

Valley—will need to rely on new reductions that will occur upwind. We expect 

the local districts to request reclassification to get the needed time. Areas 

downwind of the Central Valley—Western Nevada, Amador, Calaveras, 

Tuolumne, Mariposa, and Kern Counties—are projected to attain by their 2014 

deadline with already adopted measures. Air quality modeling for these areas is 

new and ARB staff is continuing to evaluate the results. Finally, three areas—the 

Bay Area, Butte County, and the Sutter Buttes—now attain the ozone standard. 

Attainment demonstrations for these areas will be included in the individual ARB 

staff reports for each area. 
April 26, 2007 70 

Setting the Ozone Emission Reduction Target (tons per day)

Nonattainment Area 

South Coast 

(2023) 

San Joaquin 

Valley (2023) 

NOx ROG NOx ROG 

2006 Emissions Inventory 972 732 650 454 

Carrying Capacity 114 420 160 342 

Emission Reduction 

Target 858 312 490 112 

(2006 Emissions Inventory) – (Carrying Capacity) = (Emission Reduction Target) 

2006 Emissions Inventory = Amount of ozone-forming emissions. 

Carrying Capacity = Pollutant emissions limit that ensures air quality standards are met. 

Emission Reduction Target = Amount of emissions that must be reduced to meet the standard. 

Meeting the Ozone Emission Reduction Target (tons per day)

Nonattainment Area 

South Coast 

(2023) 

San Joaquin 

Valley (2023) 

NOx ROG NOx ROG 

Emission Reduction 

Target 858 312 490 112 

Emission Reductions from 

Adopted SIP Measures 467 199 355 43 

Emission Reductions from 

New Local Measures 

9 19 8 47 

Emission Reductions from 

New State Measures 

141 54 46 25 

Long-Term Measures 241 40 81 -- 

Total Reductions 858 312 490 115 

Emission Reductions from Adopted SIP Measures = Emissions reduced from measures adopted 

through 2006. 

Emission Reductions from New Measures = Emissions reduced from measures in the State 

Strategy or new local measures adopted after 2006. 

Long-Term Measures = Emissions reduced from measures adopted after 2020 that rely on new or 

evolving technology, as allowed in section 182(e)(5) of the Clean Air Act. 
April 26, 2007 71 

Tracking Progress

The Clean Air Act requires that SIPs show there will be steady progress in reducing 

emissions during the years leading to the attainment date, called reasonable further 

progress, equal to about 3 percent per year. (Each nonattainment area’s 

reasonable further progress is illustrated in the local plans and in Appendix D.) 

Along with tracking progress to meet the SIP requirements, ARB will have a 

stringent tracking process for strategies under its jurisdiction. There will be periodic 

updates to ARB’s governing board on the SIP’s New Strategies. In addition, other 

ARB programs vital to the SIP have their own deadlines and tracking schedules. 

The goal of ARB’s Diesel Risk Reduction Plan is to reduce the health risk from 

diesel emissions 75 percent by 2010 and 85 percent by 2020. The Emission 

Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement in California has specific emission 

reduction milestones in 2010, 2015 and 2020. ARB is committed to achieving all of 

its goals in these plans and the SIP and will be tracking progress on each. 

Contingency Measures Requirement

The federal Clean Air Act requires attainment plans to identify “contingency 

measures” to be implemented if nonattainment areas (except those designated 

“marginal”) fail to meet reasonable further progress requirements or to attain the 

federal air quality standards on time. These contingency measures are to take 

effect without further ARB or air district action, and thus must be measures that 

have already been adopted when the SIP is submitted to U.S. EPA. 

The bulk of emission reductions needed to attain the federal standards are 

achieved through the mobile source measures in the State Strategy’s existing 

program. As we have noted previously, California’s mobile source program has 

been very successful in reducing emissions in California and represents the 

foundation supporting attainment of the federal standards. ARB has a well 

established history of adopting and implementing mobile source control regulations 

on-time or early. As a result, we expect to achieve and even exceed reasonable 

further progress goals without the need for contingency measures. However, the 

Clean Air Act requirements necessitate that we provide contingency measures 

regardless of our expected progress in reducing emissions toward the attainment 

goals. 

For areas designed basic, moderate, and serious, reasonable further progress can 

be demonstrated with already adopted measures and therefore contingency 

measures are not necessary. For areas designated severe and extreme, the 

emission reductions from adopted measures that go beyond the reasonable further 

progress requirements will constitute California’s contingency measure commitment 

implemented in the unlikely event that the State does not meet the reasonable 

further progress goals. 

A more detailed analysis of the contingency measure commitment is included in 

Appendix D. 
April 26, 2007 72 

4. PM2.5 Attainment in the South Coast 

South Coast air district modeling conducted in early 2007 indicated that the 

adopted and new SIP measures in the Proposed State Strategy would bring 

South Coast PM2.5 levels down to 15.7 ug/m3 by 2014. While this is tremendous 

progress, it is still 0.7 ug/m3 above the standard. The South Coast air district also 

used air quality modeling to identify additional reductions the district believes are 

needed beyond those in the State Strategy. The South Coast air district’s 

emission reduction targets and the additional reductions needed to meet the 

district’s targets are shown in the table below. 

South Coast Air District Proposed Attainment Demonstration 

NOx ROG SOx 

Direct 

PM2.5 

Emission Reductions 

Needed 203 59 24 14 

Reductions from New 

Measures 129 52 23 11 

Additional Reductions 

Needed to Meet South 

Coast Targets 

74 7 1 3

However, the additional large NOx reductions called for by the South Coast air 

district is just one potential way to close the 0.7 ug/ m3 gap. This chapter 

explores alternatives for attaining the federal PM2.5 standard by the 2015 

deadline. It starts by characterizing the PM2.5 problem to give context to the 

complexities of PM2.5 sources, formation, and control. It looks at closing the gap 

through aggressive direct particulate matter reductions: local measures to 

decrease emissions from residential wood burning, restaurant cooking, and 

fugitive dust. It analyzes the South Coast air district staff’s ideas for mobile 

source measures to see if it is feasible to get the additional NOx emission 

reductions called for by the South Coast air district. Finally, it makes 

recommendations for Board consideration regarding actions to meet the South 

Coast PM2.5 challenge. 

Nature of PM2.5 Pollution

Assessing how emissions affect the air we breathe is more complicated for 

PM2.5 than it is for ozone. While ozone has just two key precursors, PM2.5 is a 

complex mix of particles, some formed in the air and some emitted directly. 

PM2.5 can be formed in the air from the reaction of the precursor gases – 

primarily NOx, SOx, ROG, and ammonia. The resulting particles are referred to 

as secondary PM2.5. The two main components of secondary PM2.5 in the 

South Coast are ammonium nitrate and ammonium sulfate, which are formed 

when NOx and SOx interact with ammonia. PM2.5 can also be directly emitted 
April 26, 2007 73 

into the air in forms such as smoke, dust, and soot. The main contributors of 

directly emitted PM2.5 are organic and elemental carbon, emitted from sources 

like residential wood burning, commercial cooking, gas and diesel engines, and 

airborne soil (dust). 

Special monitoring and analytical tools are used to determine which sources 

contribute to PM2.5 levels in a specific area and how much. Because the PM2.5 

problem can have localized as well as regional components, strategies that focus 

on the major contributors of PM2.5 in specific areas can be critical to meeting air 

quality standards. 

Secondary 

PM2.5

Direct PM 

2.5

Aug. 2003 - Dec. 2005 

Average Source Contribution in LA-North Main

Aug. 2003-Dec. 2005 

Average Source Contribution in Rubidoux

Direct 

PM2.5 

Secondary 

PM2.5

The figure above shows the results of an ARB staff source attribution analysis of 

data from PM2.5 captured on filters at two monitoring sites in the South Coast: 

the Los Angeles-North Main (LA-North Main) site, located in an industrial area 

1.5 miles northeast of downtown Los Angeles, and the Riverside-Rubidoux 

(Rubidoux) monitoring site in western Riverside County. The analysis shows that 

secondary PM2.5 caused primarily by NOx and SOx emissions contributes over 

half of the PM2.5 pollution in both areas. This highlights the need for substantial 

emission reductions from mobile sources, which are the main sources of NOx 

and SOx. But directly emitted particles also contribute a very large portion of 

PM2.5 pollution. A good portion of directly emitted particles are from sources 

other than motor vehicles. 

PM2.5 Emission Trends – Steadily Getting Better

Emission control measures adopted to date, especially mobile source controls, 

have resulted in tremendous progress in reducing PM2.5 in the South Coast. Air 

quality data collected since initial PM2.5 monitoring began in 1990 show that 

between 1990 and 1998, PM2.5 annual average concentrations dropped by 30 to 

40 percent throughout the air basin. PM2.5 annual average concentrations have 

dropped a further 20 to 30 percent since the official regulatory monitoring 

program for the federal PM2.5 standard began in 1999. 
April 26, 2007 74 

The figure below shows that all monitors in the South Coast Air Basin have 

recorded a significant decrease in annual average design values.1 The peak 

annual average design value of 30 ug/m3 in 2001, twice the level of the federal 

standard, dropped to 20.8 ug/m3

 in 2006. The South Coast now attains the 

federal 24-hour standard of 65 ug/ m3, further demonstrating the progress made 

in reducing particulate pollution in the region. 

Three Year Annual Average PM2.5 Design Values

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year

Concentrations (ug/m3)

Fontana-Arrow Highw ay

Los Angeles-North Main

Street

Lynw ood

North Long Beach

Ontario-1408 Francis Street

Riverside-Magnolia

Riverside-Rubidoux

San Bernardino-4th Street

The graph below shows that the primary reason for the improvement is the drop 

in NOx levels. The graph shows the large drop in NOx concentrations measured 

in the air, and the strong relationship between that drop and the reduction in the 

measured secondary ammonium nitrate component of PM2.5. The basin’s 

measured ambient NOx average has decreased 25 percent since 2001, while 

PM2.5 ammonium nitrate concentrations decreased by 40 percent. 

PM2.5 Ammonium Nitrate at Rubidoux

Compared to Basin Average NOx

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Ammonium Nitrate (ug/m 3

)

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

NOx (pphm)

Ammonium Nitrate

NOx

 

1

 Design values are based on the arithmetic mean of measured levels averaged over three years. 

So 2001 values are based on average levels from 1999, 2000, and 2001. 
April 26, 2007 75 

The PM2.5 Challenge

PM2.5 progress over the last 15 years shows a trend suggesting that attainment 

of the standard by 2015 with the proposed State Strategy is possible. The chart 

below illustrates that progress from 2001 to 2006 gets PM2.5 levels almost twothirds of the way to meeting the 15 ug/m3 standard, from 30 ug/m3

 to 20.8 ug/m3. 

South Coast PM2.5 Air Quality and Modeling 

(Rubidoux)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Concentrations (ug/m3)

PM2.5 Target

Measured

Measured

Modeled

0.7ug/m3 gap

However, South Coast air district modeling shows a less positive picture. The 

South Coast air district’s most recent modeling, released in February 2007, 

predicts that although we will get 95 percent of the way to the 15.0 ug/m3

 target 

by 2014 with adopted and proposed new SIP measures, we will fall just short, 

reaching only15.7 ug/m3. The model’s prediction that PM2.5 progress will slow 

down, as indicated by the trend line in the chart above, is somewhat surprising 

considering that emissions, specifically NOx emissions, are projected to drop by 

about 6 percent per year from 2006 to 2014 – about twice as fast as they fell 

between 2001 and 2006. 

Even more surprising were the South Coast air district modeling results indicating 

that it would take over 70 tons per day of additional NOx reductions to bridge the 

0.7 ug/m3 gap. Although measured data show a much greater response to past 

emission reductions than the model shows with the future reductions, federal 

rules require the use of models in SIPs. If a NOx-focused approach is used to 

close the 0.7 ug/m3

 gap, as the South Coast district advocates, much larger NOx 

reductions than those proposed in the State Strategy will be needed. 
April 26, 2007 76 

Closing the Gap with Direct PM2.5 Reductions

The previous figure shows the magnitude of the 0.7 ug/m3

 gap identified by 

South Coast air district modeling in relation to the progress we expect with the 

proposed State Strategy. The progress projected in PM2.5 levels from 2006 to 

2014 is largely the result of ARB’s existing mobile source control program plus 

the new measures in the proposed State Strategy. Emissions from mobile 

sources of NOx and SOx, the two key precursor pollutants of secondary PM2.5, 

are projected to drop by roughly 55 percent and 75 percent, respectively, 

between 2001 and 2014. Directly emitted particles from mobile sources are 

projected to drop 35 percent during this same time. 

A look at the South Coast air district’s emissions inventory shows that directly 

emitted PM2.5 from sources under district control are projected to increase – not 

decrease – by about 5 percent between now and 2014. Since the district’s 

modeling indicates that a ton of directly emitted particles has a greater impact on 

PM2.5 levels than a ton of NOx emissions, the District should explore additional 

measures to reduce emissions from these sources as a way to cut PM2.5 levels 

and close the 0.7 ug/m3 gap. 

South Coast PM2.5 Source Contributions 

Numerous source apportionment studies have been conducted in the South 

Coast reflecting snapshots of different sites and time. While the precise 

contribution varies, these studies have all identified diesel and gasoline vehicle 

exhaust, smoke from wood burning and cooking, and fugitive dust as important 

contributors to measured particulate matter concentrations. For this SIP, ARB 

staff conducted new source apportionment analysis (Positive Matrix 

Factorization) using monitoring data from 2003 through 2005 at Los Angeles and 

Riverside. This analysis, in conjunction with the results from past studies and 

assessment of the current emissions inventory, served as a screening tool to 

identify potential sources of primary PM2.5 that could provide opportunities for 

further control. 

ARB staff analyzed data from the LA-North Main and Rubidoux monitoring sites 

using the Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF) analysis method to identify the 

sources that contributed to PM2.5 captured on filters at those sites. The results 

of this analysis, illustrated in the pie charts below, indicate that sources of directly 

emitted particles are significant contributors to PM2.5 concentrations. Two key 

categories are smoke and airborne soil, which each contribute 6-10 percent to 

observed annual average concentrations in Los Angeles and Riverside. The 

smoke category reflects contributions from residential wood burning as well as 

managed and wildland fires; smoke from commercial cooking is also in this 

category. The airborne soil category reflects dust kicked up by vehicles traveling 

on paved and unpaved roads, and dust from construction and agricultural 

activities. 
April 26, 2007 77 

 

ARB staff solicited peer review of the recent source apportionment modeling, 

which concurred that the source contribution estimates were in the ballpark of 

expected values and suggested improvements for several technical aspects of 

the source apportionment modeling. Therefore, the body of evidence continues 

to suggest the significance of sources such as wood burning, cooking, and 

fugitive dust as opportunities for further targeted control efforts. 

Due to the significant population growth in the basin, emissions from residential 

wood burning, commercial cooking and fugitive dust will continue to increase. 

Stricter controls are needed to mitigate the emissions growth and provide 

emission reductions needed for PM2.5 attainment by the 2015 deadline. 

Measures for Residential Wood Burning 

ARB staff estimates that wood smoke contributes about 1.5 ug/m3

 to measured 

annual average PM2.5 levels at Rubidoux, based on staff’s PMF source 

attribution analysis. Wood smoke concentrations are higher during the winter 

months of November through February, when residential wood burning is the 

most likely source. The analysis also shows that wood smoke levels are higher 

on weekends and holidays, indicating that much of this residential wood burning 

s done for ambience and not for home heating purposes. Because the source 

attribution analysis suggested that residential wood burning was likely a 

significant part of PM2.5, ARB staff next used the South Coast air district’s air 

quality model to evaluate the potential for reductions. 

Residential wood burning rules are feasible. A number of air districts in the State 

have already adopted comprehensive residential wood burning programs, 

including the San Joaquin Valley and Great Basin Valley air districts. An 

important component of these residential wood burning programs is the 

mandatory curtailment of the use of fireplaces and woodstoves on days with 

expected high levels of particulate matter. These programs, particularly the San 

Joaquin Valley’s, demonstrate both their feasibility and their cost-effectiveness. 

Aug. 2003 - Dec. 2005 Average Source

Contribution in LA-North Main

Secondary 

nitrate

30%

Airborne 

soil

10%

Sea salt

9%

Gasoline 

vehicle

7%

Diesel

11%

Smoke

10%

Secondary 

Sulfate

23%

Aug. 2003 - Dec. 2005 Average Source 

Contribution in Rubidoux

Secondary 

nitrate

49%

Airborne 

soil

7%

Industrial

2%

Sea salt

11%

Gasoline 

vehicle

10%

Smoke

6%

Diesel

6%

Secondary 

Sulfate

9%
April 26, 2007 78 

Experience in the San Joaquin Valley has shown that public education about the 

health impact of wood smoke and the importance of curtailing wood burning is 

critical. Therefore, a phased approach in the South Coast has the best chance of 

success. For example, the program could begin as a voluntary program with an 

aggressive public education and information campaign. This could be followed 

by a mandatory program to restrict residential burning on selected days from 

November through February (with exemptions where no alternative heat source 

or natural gas service is available). Over the course of the program, analysis of 

measured air quality data would show its effectiveness and allow the district to 

optimize the program to get the needed reductions by 2014. 

ARB staff analyzed the impact of a full moratorium on residential wood burning 

from November through February using the South Coast district’s air quality 

model. The air quality modeling analysis showed that annual average PM2.5 

levels at Rubidoux would drop by 0.9 ug/m3 with a full moratorium between 

November and February. ARB staff also did a separate source attribution data 

analysis to assess the potential impact of a wood burning moratorium. The data 

analysis corroborated the modeling analysis. 

Although assuming a moratorium would be 100 percent effective is not realistic, 

the potential reductions from a complete moratorium are greater than needed to 

close the 0.7 ug/m3 gap. A residential wood burning program would only need to 

be 80 percent effective to fully close the 0.7 ug/m3 attainment gap (0.9 ug/m3 X 

0.80 = 0.72 ug/m3.) 

The South Coast air district is currently developing a residential wood burning 

program, but the staff’s most recent draft rule falls short of what is needed for 

PM2.5 attainment. The South Coast should include a comprehensive suite of 

requirements in the rule to both minimize the current level of burning, and to 

prevent further growth in this category. Feasible measures in rules adopted by 

other California air districts include a mandatory curtailment program, limits on 

the installation of wood burning devices in new homes and commercial facilities, 

and the required replacement of non-EPA compliant wood burning stoves. 

If measured air quality in 2014 indicates the need, a temporary moratorium in 

residential wood burning could be implemented. The South Coast’s modeling 

projects that the measures identified in ARB staff’s proposed State Strategy will 

reduce NOx emissions sufficiently to bring the Air Basin into attainment by about 

2017, indicating that the district would at some time have the option of lifting the 

most stringent elements of its localized controls for directly emitted PM2.5. 

Enhance Control of Smoke from Commercial Cooking 

As discussed previously, some of the smoke particles in the air come from 

restaurant cooking. By looking at the seasonal profile of the wood smoke levels 

as well as weekend versus weekday patterns, ARB staff estimated that cooking 

operations could comprise about one third of the wood combustion contribution 
April 26, 2007 79 

and therefore contribute approximately 0.5 ug/m3 to annual average PM2.5 at 

Rubidoux. 

The South Coast currently has a rule that applies to chain-driven charbroilers. 

However, a 1997South Coast survey found that only four percent of restaurant 

cooking operations operate chain-driven broilers, with the rest operating underfire broilers, griddles, or deep fat fryers. The Bay Area air district is in the 

process of developing a new rule that would require the installation of highefficiency filters on all types of cooking operations. 

Therefore, as a further means to reduce direct PM2.5 emissions, the South 

Coast air district could potentially strengthen its rule along the lines the Bay Area 

air district is exploring. This would require the installation of high-efficiency filters 

in both existing and new restaurants for under-fried broilers, griddles, and deep 

fat fryers, in addition to the existing provisions for chain-driven broilers. If a 

strengthened rule could get 20 percent reductions from these currently 

uncontrolled sources, it could reduce Rubidoux PM2.5 levels by another 

0.1 ug/m3. 

Strengthen Fugitive Dust Control 

Airborne soil is a third category of directly emitted PM2.5 that can provide an 

additional opportunity for further emission reductions. The estimated annual 

average contribution from airborne soil at Rubidoux is approximately 1.6 ug/m3. 

Sources of this soil include dust that is generated from travel on paved and 

unpaved roads, construction and agricultural activities, and dust that is kicked up 

by high winds. 

The South Coast has a comprehensive fugitive dust rule to reduce emissions 

from these activities. Required mitigation measures include application of water 

or other chemical stabilizers, paving and landscaping, minimization of dust trackout, and street-sweeping. However, the South Coast air district has adopted 

more focused dust controls for the Coachella Valley. Applying the focused 

Coachella Valley dust rules basin-wide may provide additional reductions. 

Likewise, increased fugitive dust enforcement activities or other targeted 

measures could be implemented to further reduce this source of PM2.5. 

Estimated Impact of Local Direct PM2.5 Measures 

These measures – residential wood burning, commercial cooking, and dust -- are 

reasonable, feasible, and cost-effective. The recommended temporary 

mandatory wood burning curtailment could be implemented with minor direct cost 

to the public. Other air districts have already adopted or are pursuing rules 

implementing these measures. Of course, given the magnitude of the South 

Coast PM2.5 challenge, the South Coast air district may need to do more. 
April 26, 2007 80 

Using both modeling and PMF analysis, ARB staff quantified potential benefits of 

the measures. The figure below illustrates how these measures could close the 

0.7 ug/m3 gap to reach attainment by 2015. 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1 2

Concentrations ug/m3

2014

0.7 ug/m3 gap

Progress from

ARB's

 Mobile Source 

Program

Up to 0.9 ug/m3

Residential 

Wood Burning

Up to 0.1 ug/m3 

Smoke Controls 

for Commercial 

Cooking

Additional Dust 

Controls

Filling the Gap

Standard
April 26, 2007 81 

Analysis of South Coast Air District Staff’s Proposed Additional Mobile 

Source Measures

As part of its draft plan, the South Coast AQMD has proposed several measures 

for reducing emissions from on-road and off-road mobile sources that the district 

staff believes will achieve 70+ additional tons per day of NOx reductions – the 

additional NOx reductions that the South Coast modeling indicates are needed to 

meet the PM2.5 standard. ARB staff have reviewed and assessed the proposed 

measures. 

 Summary Analysis of South Coast Proposed Mobile Source Measures 

(NOx emissions, summer planning average tpd) 

Measure 

AQMD 

proposed 

reductions

ARB Staff 

Assessment ARB Staff Comments 

ATPZEV 

Penetration 1 0 – 0.1 Penetration of 100,000 vehicles not practical by 2014. 

Light-Duty OnBoard Diagnostics 3 -- State law currently prohibits 

used car retrofit requirements. 

Heavy-Duty Trucks 21 0-12 Only feasible if subsidized. 

Funding not secured. 

Port Trucks 6 0-6 Only feasible if subsidized. 

Funding not secured. 

Construction 

Equipment 16 0-16 Only feasible if subsidized. Funding not secured. 

Cargo Handling 

Equipment 1 0-1 Less practical for industry than lease agreements with ports. 

Locomotives 16 -- Requires early U.S. EPA 

standards; ARB is preempted. 

Ground Support 

Equipment 1 0-0.2 

LAX settlement agreement 

covers 70% of GSE NOx 

emissions. 

Transport Refrigeration Units 1 -- Not technically feasible. 

Recreational Boats 1 0-1 Not practical on this scale. 

Funding not secured. 

Lower sulfur 

gasoline 5 -- Not necessary. Reductions already accounted for. 

Further reductions 

from diesel fuel 4 -- Not cost-effective. High total cost. 

Total 71 0-36 

About half of the tons are 

technically feasible, but only if 

subsidized at a cost in the 

billions of dollars. 
April 26, 2007 82 

The bulk of the additional NOx reductions from the South Coast staff’s proposed 

measures are from sources already identified for aggressive new controls in the 

State Strategy: heavy-duty trucks, port trucks, large off-road equipment, and 

locomotives. The State Strategy is estimated to achieve 322 tons per day of 

NOx reductions from already-adopted measures and 122 tons per day of NOx 

reductions from proposed new measures in the South Coast Air Basin by 2014. 

The State Strategy includes proposed measures to turn over and clean up the 

existing fleet of diesel vehicles and equipment at a scale that far exceeds 

anything attempted in the regulatory landscape to date. 

The South Coast air district staff’s proposal looks to reduce 71 additional tons per 

day of NOx through public funding assistance that would be used to increase the 

rate of turnover and clean up of the legacy fleet beyond that of the State 

Strategy. It estimates the public funding need at $600 million per year from 2009 

through 2014, for a total of $3 billion. 

ARB staff agrees with the South Coast air district staff’s assessment that the 

district’s suggested measures will cost billions of dollars, but ARB staff believes 

that only about 50 percent of the reductions, at most, are technically feasible 

even if subsidized. ARB staff believes that the turnover necessary to get 

reductions of this magnitude in this short time frame would not be possible. 

Furthermore, the funding for the scale of the measures envisioned by the South 

Coast air district staff is not currently available, so the measures cannot be 

included as approvable measures in the SIP. 

The following is a brief assessment of each of South Coast air district staff’s 

proposed measures: 

Accelerated Penetration of ATPZEVs (SCONRD-01)

Measure summary: 

This measure proposes that ARB use a combination of mandates and incentives 

to increase sales of advanced technology partial zero emission vehicles 

(ATPZEVs) that have an all-electric drive range (i.e. plug-in hybrid vehicles) to 

100,000 vehicles in the South Coast by 2014, and 1,000,000 vehicles by in the 

South Coast by 2020. The district estimated reductions of 1.0 tpd NOx and 

0.5 tpd VOC in 2014. The AQMD did not conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis. 

ARB staff assessment: 

Availability of an almost all-electric drive range ATPZEV is unrealistic based on 

available technology. Most optimistic projections indicate that 10,000 plug-in 

hybrids with a 10 mile drive range could be on the road in California by 2014 if 

three to four automobile manufacturers commit to producing them. The cost of 

plug-in hybrid vehicles could be approximately $2,000-5,000 more than hybrid 

vehicles on the market today. The uncertainty surrounding plug-in hybrids stems 

from the higher cost of larger batteries and commitment from automobile 

manufacturers to produce these vehicles. 
April 26, 2007 83 

Conversion of current ATPZEVs to plug-in hybrids is technologically possible, but 

not feasible on this scale under the South Coast proposed timeframe. 

Conversion packs used to enhance current hybrid technology have not been 

certified to meet safety or emission standards. 

OBD III for Light and Medium-Duty Vehicles (SCONRD-02)

Measure summary: 

This measure would require a higher level of on-board diagnostics (OBD III) on 

all new vehicles starting in 2012, and would require that existing 1996-2012 

vehicles be retrofitted with OBD III by 2020. It would achieve about 0.5 tpd NOx 

in 2014 at a total retrofit cost of $746 million, plus additional costs for new 

vehicles built in 2013 and later. 

ARB staff assessment: 

State law (Health & Safety Code section 43600) prohibits ARB from requiring the 

installation of control devices on used motor vehicles except when required or 

authorized by statute. Statutes enacted since have given ARB authority to 

require retrofit controls on heavy-duty vehicles. But no such statute has been 

enacted for light-duty vehicles, so ARB’s authority to mandate the installation of 

OBD retrofit kits on used light-duty vehicles is unclear. Consumer acceptance is 

also an issue. 

Further Emission Reductions from On-Road Heavy-Duty Vehicles (SCONRD-03)

Measure summary: 

This proposed measure calls for the reduction of 21 tons per day of NOx in 2014 

beyond the State Strategy’s proposed fleet modernization measure. The State 

Strategy’s proposed measure would achieve reductions equivalent to replacing 

30 percent of the heavy-duty fleet by 2014. The district’s proposal would retrofit 

or replace an additional pre-2010 or trucks at the rate of 15 percent per year 

above the proposed ARB program.. 

ARB staff assessment: 

To achieve the 21 tons per day of NOx reduction estimated, ARB staff estimated 

that more trucks would need to be replaced or retrofited in the 2011-2014 

timeframe than suggested in the district’s proposal, and that NOx retrofit 

efficiencies would need to be significantly higher than today’s technology. 

Currently, only one low-NOx catalyst device is verified for a 30 percent NOx 

reduction, and no devices are verified for on-road use that have a higher NOx 

removal efficiency. 

Using South Coast’s proposed strategy, ARB staff has estimated a 12 tons per 

day NOx reduction at an estimated cost of $812 million. This strategy could be 

implemented using available technology; however, it would add almost $1 billion 

to the cost of the very aggressive fleet modernization proposed by ARB. 
April 26, 2007 84 

Further Emission Reductions from Heavy-Duty Trucks providing Freight Drayage 

Services (SCONRD-04)

Measure summary: 

This proposed measure would retrofit and replace port trucks so that much of the 

port truck fleet would meet 2007-2010 standards by 2012, and the remainder 

would be equipped with PM and NOx retrofit devices. The district’s proposal 

would achieve approximately an additional 6 tons per day NOx reduction in 2014 

for an investment of over $1.8 billion. About half the replacement engines would 

use alternative fuels. 

ARB staff assessment: 

The technology for this proposed measure should be available; however, it is 

unknown how many alternative fuel engines will be certified to the 2007 and 2010 

standards. This measure is dependent on securing sufficient incentive funding 

and is only feasible if subsidized. 

Construction/Industrial Equipment Fleet Modernization (SCOFFRD-01) 

Measure summary: 

This measure proposes to reduce an additional 16 tons per day of NOx in 2014 

from large off-road equipment by achieving a 2018 fleet average in 2014 

(equivalent of ~Tier 3) with emission reductions equivalent to repowering all 

Tier 0 and Tier 1 equipment with Tier 3 or better engines (i.e., 2010 on-road 

engines). In 2020, the measure proposes to get reductions equivalent to 

repowering all Tier 2 equipment with Tier 4 or better engines and retrofitting all 

Tier 3 engines with selective catalytic reduction (SCR). 

ARB staff assessment: 

It is not technologically feasible to repower all Tier 0 and Tier 1 equipment with 

Tier 3 engines due to space constraints and other considerations. Repowers 

with Tier 4 engines will be even more challenging, if possible at all. Because of 

these technological constraints, a significant portion of the off-road equipment 

would have to be replaced to achieve the projected reductions. Equipment 

replacement is more expensive than repowering, and would substantially 

increase the cost of this measure and the magnitude of subsidies needed. 

This measure is feasible only if subsidized. The increased costs of replacing 

equipment makes the proposed measure much less feasible from a costeffectiveness standpoint. 

Further Reductions from Cargo Handling Equipment (SCOFFRD-02)

Measure summary: 

This measure would require the repowering of non-yard trucks (i.e., container 

cranes and loaders, front-end loaders, bulldozers, etc.) with Tier-4 offroad 

engines or the retrofitting of these engines with SCR. This measure is designed 
April 26, 2007 85 

to be phased in and to reduce NOx emissions from such equipment by 30%, and 

a total of 1 ton per day of NOx, by 2014. 

ARB staff assessment: 

The repowering of non-yard trucks with Tier-4 engines will be difficult due to the 

larger engine compartments required for these advanced emission control power 

systems in comparison to in-use engine compartments. As a result, many 

vehicles would probably be retrofitted with SCR systems in order to comply. 

While there are no technological barriers to SCR retrofits on these vehicles, the 

cost of these modifications will increase the capital investment requirements for 

terminal operators. Lease provisions requiring the same improvements will allow 

terminal operators to be eligible for subsidies from the Ports of Los Angeles and 

Long Beach. 

Further Reductions from Locomotives (SCOFFRD-03)

Measure summary: 

This measure recommends retrofitting remaining Tier 2 locomotive engines with 

DPF and SCR technology to achieve Tier 4 emission levels, which the district 

projects would reduce NOx emissions by an additional 11 tons per day of NOx in 

2014. 

ARB staff assessment: 

The State Strategy proposes an aggressive penetration rate to introduce Tier 4 

engines and retrofits for Tier 2 engines that depends on U.S. EPA adopting strict 

standards that go into effect before 2014. (U.S. EPA has proposed standards for 

new engines that go into effect by 2017; however, ARB staff continues to make 

the case that California needs earlier implementation.) The retrofit technology 

needed to bring locomotives up to Tier 4 standards has not been tested on 

locomotives as large as the long-haul locomotives used in the U.S. The 

availability of proven and tested technology at the scale envisioned is unsure. 

Since there is uncertainty about the introduction of the new standards prior to 

2014, staff believes that the 4 tons per day of NOx emission reductions from 

locomotives in the South Coast proposed in the State Strategy is the maximum 

commitment that should be made by the Board given the federal preemption. 

Emission Reductions from Airport Ground Support Equipment (SCOFFRD-04)

Measure summary: 

This measure proposes to reduce NOx emissions from ground support 

equipment by an additional 0.8 tons per day in 2014 through increased 

electrification and a lower fleet average. 

ARB staff assessment: 

A Stipulated Agreement settling litigation between the owners of Los Angeles 

International Airport (LAX) and neighboring cities over environmental impacts 

resulting from airport expansion requires LAX to implement a phased program to 

convert all ground support equipment to “extremely low emission technology 
April 26, 2007 86 

(such as electric power, fuel cells, or other future technological developments)” 

by 2015. This agreement will cover 70 percent of all ground support equipment 

in the air basin. If subsidized, this proposed measure could possibly achieve 0.2 

tons per day of NOx from the remaining ground support equipment at the other 

airports in the air basin. 

Further Emissions Reductions from Transport Refrigeration Units (SCOFFRD-05)

Measure summary: 

This measure proposes to retrofit in-use transport refrigeration units (TRUs) with 

SCR systems to reduce NOx emissions by 80 percent, reducing NOx by 1.1 

additional tons per day by 2014. 

ARB staff assessment: 

This measure has not been demonstrated to be technologically feasible due to 

the lack of SCR system testing on engines as small as those powering TRU 

systems. SCR is most effective when used in systems that can maintain a high, 

constant exhaust temperature to support the reaction that occurs on the 

catalyst’s surfaces. In general, SCR is not viable for engines of less than 150 

horsepower as they do not usually reach or maintain the needed exhaust 

temperatures. 

Accelerated Turnover and Catalyst Based Standards for Pleasure Craft 

(SCOFFRD-06)

Measure summary: 

This proposed measure calls for providing $52 million in incentives in 2014 for 

Southern Californians to purchase new recreational boats and jet skis sooner 

than they would have without the incentives. It is estimated to achieve 1 ton per 

day of additional NOx reductions in 2014. 

ARB staff assessment: 

While technically feasible if subsidized, it is not practical to assume that 50,000 

recreational boats and jet skis could be replaced in a very short period of time. 

No pilot projects have been conducted to test the feasibility and/or success of 

incentive-based replacement programs for pleasure craft. 

Further Emission Reductions from Gasoline Fuels (SCFUEL-01)

Measure summary: 

This measure calls for ARB to adopt a sulfur content limit of 10 ppm for future 

gasoline fuels, reducing NOx an estimated 5 tons per day by 2014. 

ARB staff assessment: 

This measure is not necessary. The South Coast air district analyzed the 

potential emissions reductions using the sulfur cap limits specified in the 

California reformulated gasoline (CaRFG) regulations. However, while the cap 

limit for sulfur is 30 parts per million by weight (ppmw), the average sulfur content 
April 26, 2007 87 

in gasoline marketed in California is 10ppmw. The emission benefits from this 

low sulfur gasoline have been used to allow other CaRFG limits to increase while 

minimizing costs and maximizing production. 

The Board is tentatively scheduled to consider amendments to the CaRFG 

regulation in June that would offset the increase in hydrocarbon evaporative 

permeation emissions resulting from the use of ethanol. The only practical path 

to offset this increase in hydrocarbon emissions is to use more ethanol, going 

from an average of 5.7% to 10% ethanol content. While this decreases 

hydrocarbon emissions, it increases emissions of NOx. , Refiners are expected 

to decrease sulfur levels even further to avoid this NOx increase, and as a result 

future CaRFG-compliant gasolines are expected to have an average of 5 to 

7ppmw sulfur. This is approximately the sulfur content that refiners would aim for 

to ensure continued compliance with a 10ppmw cap. This means that there are 

no emission benefits to be gained from adopting a 10ppmw sulfur limit. 

Further Emission Reductions from Diesel Fuels (SCFUEL-02)

Measure summary: 

This measure calls for ARB to adopt new regulations requiring the use of diesel 

fuel alternatives to replace 10 percent of conventional diesel fuel, reducing NOx 

emissions by an additional 4 tons per day by 2014. 

ARB staff assessment: 

South Coast staff expects the largest portion of the diesel fuel alternatives to be 

met through the use of gas to liquid (GTL) diesel, which has zero sulfur. They 

project that GTL diesel will cost 15 cents more per gallon than conventional 

diesel. ARB staff believes that the South Coast staff estimated cost for the GTL 

is low by a factor of 2 to 5. The cost to produce GTL is about $0.15 per gallon 

higer than the cost production cost of diesel, but this is based on the natural gas 

feedstock being virtually free. The cost of transporting the fuel to California, 

would add approximately another $0.15 per gallon. In addition, California would 

have to compete with the rest of the world to obtain GTL diesel, which means we 

would have to pay an “incentive cost” – we would have to pay more than other 

countries that also prize GTL for its ability to improve the overall quality of diesel. 

These factors make the proposed measure not feasible due to total cost and 

emission reduction cost-effectiveness. 
April 26, 2007 88 

How to Advance South Coast PM2.5 Attainment – Recommendations for 

Board Consideration

ARB staff has assessed the PM2.5 challenge in the South Coast starting with the 

premise that, as shown by South Coast air district modeling, additional measures 

are needed to reduce PM2.5 levels by 0.7 ug/m3

. ARB staff has concluded the 

following: 

• Given the PM2.5 progress measured over the last 15 years, and the new 

emission reductions that will occur, the South Coast may attain the 

standard by 2015 with the mobile source measures in the proposed State 

Strategy. Nevertheless, U.S. EPA requires the use of models in SIPs to 

demonstrate attainment; therefore, additional emission reductions should 

be identified. 

• The large new NOx and SOx reductions from mobile sources identified in 

the proposed State Strategy will provide the vast majority of the emission 

reductions that will occur by 2015. 

• Reversing the trend of rising PM2.5 emissions from sources under air 

district control through aggressive local measures to reduce directly 

emitted PM2.5 is critical to attainment. 

• Closing the 0.7 ug/m3 attainment gap by 2015 with additional NOx 

reductions is not realistic. The South Coast air district’s suggested mobile 

source measures are not feasible without billions of dollars of unsecured 

subsidies. 

• Feasible local air district measures for residential wood burning, 

commercial cooking, and dust exist to close the 0.7 ug/m3 gap and reach 

attainment by 2015. 
April 26, 2007 89 

5. PROPOSED NEW SIP MEASURES – Descriptions 

Introduction

ARB staff is proposing a comprehensive and far reaching set of new measures to 

achieve emission reductions needed to address California’s most challenging 

ozone and PM2.5 problems. These measures are designed to make maximum 

progress toward the federal 8-hour ozone standard in the South Coast and the 

San Joaquin Valley. The measures include aggressive near-term NOx and SOx 

emission reduction goals, reflecting the nature and scope of the PM2.5 problem 

in these regions. To achieve the emission reductions needed for both ozone and 

PM2.5, the State Strategy proposes new near-term actions that can be 

completed by 2010 or soon thereafter. 

Need for Fleet Modernization 

More than any other air pollution control effort, ARB’s mobile source program has 

moved the State’s nonattainment areas closer to meeting federal air quality 

standards. California has dramatically tightened emission standards for new onroad and off-road mobile sources and fuels. As new engines have become 

cleaner and cleaner, the emissions contribution from older vehicles has been 

growing to the extent that it will soon make up the majority of mobile source 

emissions. For example, by 2014, heavy-duty trucks 14 years or older will 

produce 51 percent of total heavy-duty truck NOx emissions while only traveling 

20 percent of total truck miles. The same holds true for all on-road vehicles 

combined, where vehicles over 14 years old will produce almost 60 percent of 

total NOx emissions by 2014 but just 20 percent of total miles traveled. 

The benefits of in-use control programs are limited by the underlying engine 

technology and controls. As a result, the majority of new measures in the State 

Strategy are “in-use” measures – programs to help clean up or replace older, 

dirtier vehicles and equipment. We simply cannot wait for the natural turnover of 

older vehicles and equipment (1-5 percent annual turnover depending on vehicle 

or equipment type) being replaced with newer, cleaner vehicles. The challenge 

is that these measures have a much more direct impact on businesses and 

individuals in California than do new engine standards that must be met by 

manufacturers. ARB’s fleet rules will affect owners of public and private vehicles 

and equipment that operate in nonattainment areas throughout the State. 

Compliance flexibility has historically been included in ARB regulations – allowing 

the most cost-effective methods to be used by those who must meet emission 

requirements. And while lower-cost add-on control devices can play a role in 

lowering emissions from mobile fleets, more costly engine and vehicle 

replacements will be needed in many cases. This will place a substantial 

financial burden on owners of vehicles and equipment but is necessary in order 

to achieve air quality standards. Increased incentive funds can supplement 

ARB’s regulatory actions and further accelerate air quality progress. It is 

important to recognize that at current funding levels, incentive funds can pay for 
April 26, 2007 90 

only a relatively small portion of the cost for necessary modernization of 

California’s diesel engine fleets. 

The nature of the proposed new measures (enforceable rules) and California’s 

history of supportive financial incentives provide a sound basis for reductions 

from incentive programs to meet federal requirements for SIP approval. 

Accountability for Emission Reductions 

California’s SIP must outline the plan for meeting air quality standards in all of its 

nonattainment areas. ARB staff’s SIP State Strategy proposal for Board 

approval includes an enforceable commitment to achieve the overall goals set. 

The details of each new measure are publicly considered during separate formal 

rulemaking processes. If a particular measure does not ultimately achieve the 

emission reductions estimated in the SIP, the State is still bound to achieve the 

total aggregate emission reduction commitment, whether this is realized through 

additional reductions from other new measures, or from alternative control 

measures or incentive programs. 

Summary of Proposed New SIP Measures

ON-ROAD SOURCES 

Passenger Vehicles 

Improvements and Enhancements to California’s Smog Check Program 

 Low Pressure Evaporative Test. Require low pressure evaporative system 

testing and repair of evaporative system leaks for all vehicles subject to 

Smog Check inspection. 

 More Stringent Cutpoints. Set more stringent pass/fail cutpoints to ensure 

more cars would have more complete and durable repairs. 

 Annual Inspections for Older Vehicles. Inspect older vehicles annually 

rather than every two years. Older vehicles tend to have greater 

deterioration of emission controls, and consequently, higher emissions. 

 Annual Inspections for High Annual Mileage Vehicles. Inspect annually, 

rather than every two years, vehicles that accrue very high mileage on an 

annual basis. High mileage vehicles tend to have greater deterioration of 

emission controls and, consequently, higher emissions. 

 Add Visible Smoke Test. As part of the Smog Check test, include a check 

for visible smoke to identify vehicles with excess particulate matter 

emissions. 
April 26, 2007 91 

 Inspection of Light- and Medium-Duty Diesels. Include light- and 

medium-duty diesel vehicles in the Smog Check program to provide for 

improved maintenance and reduced emissions for this part of the fleet, and 

require the repair of poorly maintained or old emission systems. 

 Inspection of Motorcycles. Include motorcycle inspections as part of Smog 

Check. Studies indicate that motorcycles are subject to high rates of exhaust 

system tampering. 

Expanded Passenger Vehicle Retirement. Increase the number of vehicles 

that are voluntarily retired by implementing a scrappage program for vehicles that 

are off-cycle from their Smog Check inspections. 

Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program. Modify California’s 

Reformulated Gasoline Program to offset ROG emissions due to the increased 

use of ethanol. This rulemaking activity is currently underway and is intended to 

fully mitigate the emission increase, which has been incorporated in the current 

emissions inventory. 

Trucks

Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks. This proposed measure is a 

comprehensive in-use diesel truck emissions reduction program that includes a 

fleet modernization rule and an excess emissions program. Fleet modernization 

would focus on overcoming the typically slow rate of heavy-duty truck turnover by 

requiring truck owners to meet specified emission levels through replacing or 

cleaning up the oldest trucks in their fleets, and would also include a program for 

out-of-state trucks. The excess emissions program would target deterioration 

emissions to keep ultra-clean trucks running cleaner longer. 

GOODS MOVEMENT SOURCES 

Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing and Other Clean Technology. Reduce 

emissions from ships at berth with at-dock technologies such as cold ironing 

(electrical power) and other clean technologies. 

Cleaner Ship Main Engines and Fuel. Further reduce emissions from main 

engines through added retrofits such as selective catalytic reduction. Support 

efforts by ports and appropriate local entities to accelerate use of cleaner ships 

and rebuilt engines through other tools such as lease restrictions. Require ships 

to use low sulfur diesel fuel in main engines when operating within 24 nautical 

miles of shore. 

Port Truck Modernization. Retrofit or replace older heavy-duty diesel trucks 

that service ports. Work with port authorities to prevent adding older trucks to the 

fleet. ARB rulemaking process for this proposed measure has begun in parallel 

with development proposals by the Ports of Los Angles and Long Beach. 
April 26, 2007 92 

Accelerated Introduction of Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives. Replace 

existing locomotive engines with cleaner Tier 4 engines beginning in 2012 and 

conduct concurrent rebuilds of older engines to Tier 2.5 standards. This 

measure requires early introduction of U.S. EPA Tier 4 standards. 

Clean Up Existing Commercial Harbor Craft. Require owners of existing 

commercial harbor craft to replace old engines (both propulsion and auxiliary) 

with newer cleaner engines and/or add emission control technologies that clean 

up engine exhaust. ARB rulemaking for this proposed measure is underway. 

OFF-ROAD SOURCES 

Construction and Other Equipment

Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment. Establish fleet average emission limits 

for off-road equipment (over 25 horsepower) that would require older, dirtier 

engines to be replaced with engines reflecting current technologies or retrofitted 

with emission control devices. ARB rulemaking for this proposed measure is in 

process. 

Agricultural Equipment

Agricultural Equipment Fleet Modernization. Accelerate the modernization of 

the fleet of agricultural equipment used in California, removing older, dirtier 

equipment from service to be replaced with engines reflecting cleaner 

technologies. 

Evaporative and Exhaust Strategies

New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats. Adopt catalyst-based 

standards (5 g/kW-hr) for new outboard and personal water craft (jet ski) engines 

and evaporative emission standards to address all sources of recreational boat 

evaporative emissions. 

Off-Road Recreational Vehicle Expanded Emission Standards. Adopt 

exhaust and evaporative emission standards to reduce the amount of ROG from 

off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles. 

Additional Evaporative Standards Portable Outboard Marine Tank 

Evaporative Standards. Set evaporative standards for removable fuel tanks used 

on outboard recreational boats. Refueling Gasoline Tank Evaporative 

Standards. Set evaporative standards for refueling gasoline tanks typically 

mounted on pickups and large recreational vehicles and used to refuel 

equipment and other smaller vehicles. Gas Station Refueling Hose Evaporative 

Standards. Set evaporative standards for gas station pump hoses. 
April 26, 2007 93 

Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above Ground Storage Tanks. Implement an 

enhanced vapor recovery certification process and new performance standards 

and specifications for large fuel tanks used extensively in agricultural operations. 

AREAWIDE SOURCES 

Consumer Products

Tighten Standards. Tighten standards or require product reformulation for 

consumer products categories through several rulemakings through 2012. 

Pesticides

New Pesticide Strategies. The California Department of Pesticide Regulation 

will reduce emissions from commercial and agricultural pesticide use in California 

through reformulation, reduced usage, and innovative technologies and 

practices. 
April 26, 2007 94 

Improvements and Enhancements to California’s Smog Check Program 

California’s passenger vehicle emissions standards have been extremely 

effective -- a new 2005 car was 97 percent cleaner than a new 1980 car. In 

order to reduce the emissions necessary to reach air quality goals, however, the 

focus must shift to keeping vehicles clean over their lifetimes. The Smog Check 

program is the cornerstone of this effort, keeping over 400 tons of smog-forming 

emissions from entering the air each day. 

The State Strategy envisions an even stronger Smog Check program, adding 

tests that will reduce excess emissions and including vehicle types that are now 

exempt to better ensure that all passenger vehicles in California keep running 

clean. Staff has estimated that adding the following tests to Smog Check will 

reduce ROG and NOx emissions from passenger vehicles another 10 percent in 

2014. This equates to reducing about 11 tons per day of ROG and 12 tons per 

day of NOx in the South Coast in 2014. 

Low Pressure Evaporative Test 

Over half of smog-forming emissions from 1976 through 1995 cars comes from 

fuel evaporating from leaks in the fuel system. A functional check of the gas cap 

is currently included in Smog Check, but not a check of the vehicle’s fuel tank 

and vapor lines, which play an important part in controlling evaporative 

emissions. This measure would add a low pressure evaporative test to Smog 

Check to examine for leaks in the fuel tank and vapor lines. 

More Stringent Cutpoints 

One approach to getting more complete repairs and lower emissions is to 

increase the stringency of the inspection standards (cutpoints) used to determine 

if the vehicle initially passes or fails. This measure would set more stringent 

cutpoints, ensuring that more cars would have more complete and durable 

repairs. 

Annual Inspections for Older Vehicles 

Vehicles 15 years or older have a failure rate more than twice the average. This 

measure would require older vehicles to be tested annually, shortening the time 

they are emitting excess emissions prior to being repaired. 

Annual Inspections for High Annual Mileage Vehicles 

About 3 percent of cars are driven over 25,000 miles per year. These vehicles 

fail Smog Check at about twice the average rate. This measure would require 

high-mileage vehicles to be tested annually which would shorten the time they 

are emitting excess emissions prior to being repaired. 
April 26, 2007 95 

Add Visible Smoke Test. 

Excess soot from smoking passenger vehicles is estimated at about one and a 

half tons per day statewide and is a public health concern. An inspection for 

excessive smoke is currently not part of the Smog Check program, but soon will 

be due to newly enacted legislation (AB 1870, Lieber, Chapter 761 of 2006) that 

establishes visible smoke as a cause for Smog Check failure. 

Inspection of Light- and Medium-Duty Diesels. 

There are over 200,000 diesel passenger cars and trucks operating in California. 

While diesel vehicles have low ROG emissions, older diesels tend to emit higher 

levels of NOx and particulate matter than gasoline vehicles. Diesel vehicles, 

however, are not currently required to take part in the Smog Check program. 

This measure would develop a Smog Check inspection program for diesel 

passenger cars and trucks that would allow identification and repair of highemitting diesel vehicles. 

Inspection of Motorcycles. 

There are about 400,000 motorcycles registered in California. They are currently 

exempt from Smog Check. While motorcycles do not have a high rate of 

emission control deterioration, surveys indicate a high level of exhaust system 

tampering. This measure would require some form of motorcycle Smog Check 

inspections to help reduce excess motorcycle emissions. 
April 26, 2007 96 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

South Coast 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 245 138 109 98 

Emission reductions: 

Low Pressure 

Evaporative Test 

 4.1 3.2 2.2 

More Stringent 

Cutpoints 

 0.8 0.6 0.6 

Annual Inspect Older 

Vehicles 

 3.1 2.5 2.3 

Annual Inspection for 

High Annual Mileage 

Vehicles 

 0.5 0.4 0.4 

Inspection of 

Motorcycles 

 2.0 2.0 2.0 

ROG 

Total potential 

reductions 10.5 8.7 7.5 

Baseline emissions 243 128 88 74 

More Stringent 

Cutpoints 

 2.0 1.4 1.1 

Annual Inspect Older 

Vehicles 

 7.2 4.9 4.2 

Annual Inspection for 

High Annual Mileage 

Vehicles 

 1.6 1.1 0.9 

Inspection of Lightand Medium-Duty 

Diesels 

 0.6 0.3 0.1 

Inspection of 

Motorcycles 

 0.6 0.6 0.6 

NOx 

Total potential 

reductions 12.0 8.3 6.9 

Baseline emissions 6.2 7.8 9.0 9.4 

Add Visible Smoke 

Test 

 0.2 0.2 0.2 

Inspection of Lightand Medium-Duty 

Diesels 

PM2.5 0.02 0.01 < 0.01 

Total potential 

reductions 0.2 0.2 0.2 

San Joaquin Valley 
April 26, 2007 97 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 77 48 36 34 

Low Pressure 

Evaporative Test 

 0.8 0.6 0.4 

More Stringent 

Cutpoints 

 0.2 0.2 0.2 

Annual Inspect Older 

Vehicles 

 0.7 0.5 0.5 

Annual Inspection for 

High Annual Mileage 

Vehicles 

 0.2 0.1 0.1 

Inspection of 

Motorcycles 

 1.0 1.0 1.0 

ROG 

Total potential 

reductions 2.9 2.2 1.9 

Baseline emissions 68 40 28 24 

More Stringent 

Cutpoints 

 0.4 0.3 0.2 

Annual Inspect Older 

Vehicles 

 1.5 1.1 0.9 

Annual Inspection for 

High Annual Mileage 

Vehicles 

 0.8 0.5 0.5 

Inspection of Lightand Medium-Duty 

Diesels 

 0.3 0.2 0.2 

Inspection of 

Motorcycles 

 0.3 0.3 0.3 

NOx 

Total potential 

reductions 3.3 2.4 2.1 

Baseline emissions 1.4 1.8 2.1 2.4 

Add Visible Smoke 

Test 

 0.05 0.05 0.05 

Inspection of Lightand Medium-Duty 

Diesels 

PM2.5 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 

Total potential 

reductions 0.05 0.05 0.05 

Baseline emissions reflect adjustments not included in the SIP Emission 

Inventory Projections on ARB’s website. The adjustments include criteria 

pollutant benefits from the greenhouse gas limits for motor vehicles adopted in 

2004 and emission reductions from the Carl Moyer Program. 

Baseline emissions are for all light- and medium-duty passenger cars, SUVs and 

trucks, and all gasoline heavy-duty trucks. Reductions have been estimated in 

the following manner: 
April 26, 2007 98 

Low Pressure Evaporative Test—ARB staff has estimated the percent reduction 

in emissions from the low pressure test using before and after repair data 

collected in two studies done by ARB and one U.S. EPA study. The percent 

reduction was estimated separately for hot soak, diurnal, and running loss 

evaporative emissions. The percent reductions were then applied to EMFAC 

baseline evaporative emissions for the light duty fleet in order to calculate 

evaporative emissions benefits in tons per day. 

More Stringent Cutpoints—The reductions are based on more stringent initial 

inspection standards (cutpoints) taken from a study by Sierra Research using 

failure rate data collected from the California, Arizona, and Wisconsin inspection 

programs. Sierra Research identified model year groups of vehicles for which 

cutpoints could be lowered and estimated the impact on emission rates for each 

group. The fractional changes in emission rates were then applied to EMFAC 

baseline emissions to calculate emissions benefits in tons per day. 

Annual Inspections for Older Vehicles—Staff used the EMFAC emissions model 

to estimate the emissions reductions of an annual inspection compared to 

biennial inspection. EMFAC allows the user to choose either an annual or 

biennial program. Emission reductions were estimated by comparing the 

emissions with an annual program to those with a biennial program for vehicles 

over 15 years old. 15 years of age was selected because this is the point at 

which vehicles start failing at twice the fleet average yet account for less than 25 

percent of Smog Check tests. 

Annual Inspections for High Annual Mileage Vehicles—ARB conducted a 

voluntary inspection program on high mileage taxi cab fleets in the San Francisco 

and Los Angeles areas. Smog Check data suggest that up to 3 percent of the 

fleet accumulates high annual mileage. The estimated reductions from 20,000 

taxicabs were ratioed to the assumed 3 percent of the enhanced program area 

fleet driven high mileage. We assumed that one-half of the 3 percent of the fleet 

that are high annual mileage vehicles would be identified as accruing high annual 

mileage, tested annually, and repaired, resulting in emission reductions. 

Visible Smoke Test—Based on data from a survey done for South Coast AQMD, 

Sierra Research has estimated that approximately 200,000 smoking gasoline 

vehicles are driven daily statewide. Based on data from the South Coast survey 

and data from Southwest Research Institute testing, the benefits of repairing a 

smoking vehicle average 0.25 gram/mile. We are assuming that half of the 

200,000 smoking vehicles would fail the current tailpipe test in Smog Check. We 

have estimated benefits for the visible smoke test by assuming it would fail the 

other half (100,000) of the smoking vehicles per biennial cycle, which equals 

50,000 failures per year. Reductions statewide are based on repairing 50,000 

vehicles driving 30 miles per day with a 0.25 gram/mile total PM reduction. 

Inspection of Light and Medium Duty Diesels- Benefits are based on an 

inspection program as stringent as the current program for gasoline cars and 

trucks. We are assuming a diesel inspection program would get the same 
April 26, 2007 99 

percent reduction in emissions that the current enhanced Smog Check program 

is achieving. 

Inspection of Motorcycles—Benefits are based on assuming a motorcycle 

inspection program would get half of the percent reduction in emissions that the 

current enhanced Smog Check program is achieving. 

Timing 

Action: 2007-2008 

Expected Implementation: By 2010 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to work with BAR to begin to implement the measure in 

2010. ARB and BAR staff will initiate an effort to develop program improvements 

to achieve the reductions shown for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley 

nonattainment areas in 2014, 2020, and 2023. The measure as implemented 

may provide more or less than the amount shown. 
April 26, 2007 100 

Expanded Passenger Vehicle Retirement 

The bulk of emissions from passenger vehicles comes from older vehicles. The 

Smog Check program helps older California cars run cleaner. To meet clean air 

goals, however, we need to reduce emissions from these older vehicles even 

more. Owners of vehicles that fail Smog Check inspections are currently given 

the option of fixing their vehicles or receiving a monetary incentive for voluntarily 

retiring them. This measure would expand the Smog Check vehicle retirement 

program to vehicles that are off-cycle from their Smog Check inspections. 

It is estimated that the vehicle retirement program could increase its scope from 

the current 18,000 vehicles per year statewide to approximately 50,000 per year 

in the South Coast and 10,000 per year in the San Joaquin Valley, which reflects 

retiring about half of one percent of vehicles subject to Smog Check in each 

region. The annual retirement of these vehicles in the South Coast and 

San Joaquin Valley would result in combined ROG and NOx emissions benefits 

of 2 percent of passenger vehicle emissions in 2014. 

Funding for vehicle retirement at both State and local program levels comes from 

fees on newer cars exempt from Smog Check. Increasing the scope of the 

program post 2010 would require additional State or local funding. 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

South Coast 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 206 112 86 76 ROG 

Potential reductions 2.8 1.2 0.5 

Baseline emissions 204 101 65 53 NOx 

Potential reductions 2.4 1.3 0.2 

Baseline emissions 9.4 7.7 8.6 9.0 PM2.5 

Potential reductions 0.05 0.06 0.06 

San Joaquin Valley 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 62 37 27 24 ROG 

Potential reductions 0.7 0.3 0.1 

Baseline emissions 58 31 19 16 NOx 

Potential reductions 0.5 0.3 0.04 

Baseline emissions 2.1 1.8 2.0 2.2 PM2.5 

Potential reductions 0.01 0.01 0.01 

Baseline emissions include emissions from light- and medium-duty passenger 

cars, trucks and sport utility vehicles. Baseline emissions reflect adjustments not 

included in the SIP Emission Inventory Projections on ARB’s website. The 

adjustments include emission reductions from the Carl Moyer Program and 
April 26, 2007 101 

criteria pollutant benefits from the greenhouse gas limits for motor vehicles 

adopted in 2004. 

Emission reductions were estimated assuming a 3-year credit life and that, on 

average, 16-year-old vehicles will be replaced with 8-year-old vehicles. These 

assumptions are based on data collected in ARB’s Voluntary Accelerated LightDuty Vehicle Retirement Program. 

Timing 

Action: 2008 - 2014 

Expected Implementation: 2008 - 2014 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to work with BAR to begin implementing the measure by 

2008. ARB and BAR staff will initiate an effort to expand the existing program to 

achieve the reductions shown for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley 

nonattainment areas in 2014, 2020, and 2023. The measure as implemented 

may provide more or less than the amount shown. 
April 26, 2007 102 

Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program 

Gasoline fuel combustion is the major source of energy for passenger 

transportation. Since 1992, ARB has worked to ensure the use of cleaner 

burning gasoline to improve air quality throughout the state. One of the many 

components of the most recent gasoline reformulation program, CaRFG3, was 

the removal of the oxygenate MTBE due to concerns with groundwater 

contamination. However, the substitute oxygenate, ethanol, has resulted in 

greatly increased evaporative emissions due to fuel system permeation. 

This proposed measure would make modifications to the CaRFG3 program to 

eliminate or offset all ethanol permeation effects. The effects on ROG emissions 

from all gasoline-fueled on-road vehicles have been estimated to be a 3 percent 

increase in the South Coast and a 6 percent increase in the San Joaquin Valley. 

The effects are greater in the San Joaquin Valley due to much higher overall 

temperatures that affect permeation. 

ARB is scheduled to consider modifications to the CaRFG3 program in 2007. 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

South Coast

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 245 138 109 97 ROG 

Potential reductions 4.4 3.0 2.5 

San Joaquin Valley

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 77 48 36 34 ROG 

Potential reductions 2.9 1.6 1.3 

Baseline emissions are the emissions from all gasoline-fueled on-road vehicles. 

The estimated reductions are equal to the incremental ROG emissions resulting 

from ethanol permeation which will be offset by this measure. 

Timing 

Action: 2007 

Expected Implementation: Phase in starting 2010 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to commit to bring this measure to the Board by 2007. ARB 

staff will initiate a rule development process designed to achieve the reductions 

shown for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment areas in 2014, 
April 26, 2007 103 

2020, and 2023. The measure as proposed by staff to the Board or adopted by 

the Board may provide more or less than the amount shown. 
April 26, 2007 104 

Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks 

Federal and State engine standards will ensure that by 2010 all new diesel 

heavy-duty trucks are 90 percent cleaner than new 2006 trucks. This 

tremendous progress is on top of a 65 percent reduction in NOx and an 

85 percent reduction in particulate matter since 1990. Since trucks last a long 

time, we must bring newer trucks into the fleet at a faster pace, clean up older 

dirtier trucks, and keep the clean trucks clean longer to help meet air quality 

goals. 

Between now and 2014 existing programs reduce heavy duty truck emissions by 

50 percent. This proposed measure would reduce 2014 emissions another 

30 percent. The measure would accomplish these new reductions through a 

program to reduce emissions from the legacy fleet involving accelerating the 

turnover to new truck engines and retrofitting the remaining trucks with emission 

reduction devices, and through an excess emissions program. 

Legacy Fleet Emission Reduction Program

Newer heavy-duty trucks are typically used in long-haul service. After seven or 

eight years, they are often sold and their service is typically shifted to shorterhaul work. These trucks may remain in service within a given region for another 

twenty years or more. 

An in-use truck program would focus on overcoming the slower rate of heavyduty truck turnover to cleaner engines and retrofitting the remaining trucks with 

emission control devices such as particulate matter filters. The most 

comprehensive way to accomplish this would be through an “in-use” fleet rule 

that would require truck owners to meet specified emission levels. The proposed 

measure would address fleets operating in California regardless whether they are 

registered out of state. The emission reduction impact of the proposed in-use 

fleet program would be equivalent to replacing by 2014 approximately 30 percent 

of the oldest trucks with 2010 models year or newer trucks. The proposed 

measure would generate additional emission reductions beyond 2014, achieving 

reductions needed to meet the ozone air quality standard. 

ARB staff has recently begun informational workshops on a heavy-duty truck inuse fleet rule, and has started to identify and explore the many emissions 

inventory, technology, financial, and logistical issues involved in crafting the most 

effective rule possible. ARB staff will be studying and requesting feedback from 

stakeholders on many issues, including: the characteristics of trucks registered 

outside of California; cost implications, especially to truck owner-operators, and 

ways to avoid any competitive disadvantage for various categories of truck 

owners; and the most efficient use of limited public incentive funds to achieve 

maximum emission benefits and lessen financial burden on truck owners. 
April 26, 2007 105 

Excess Emissions Program

An estimate of deterioration of emission controls has historically been built into 

ARB’s projections of future emissions. As new engine technologies are 

introduced over the next few years, we need to ensure that the complex engine 

electronics and control devices used to make trucks so much cleaner are not 

more prone to failure, tampering or malmaintenance, and that deterioration does 

not reduce the benefits of the new standards. As the 2010 new engine standards 

are implemented, we will evaluate the in-use emissions and develop approaches 

to reduce excess emissions from trucks. 

Under an existing program, heavy-duty trucks are inspected at random roadside 

locations for excessive smoke, and are inspected for tampered emission control 

systems. Owners of vehicles that do not pass these inspections are issued 

citations that require prompt repairs and carry civil penalties. This measure could 

include an expansion of this program. 

While the design and evaluation of the specific program features has yet to be 

determined, ARB staff estimates that this concept has the potential to reduce 

NOx deterioration emissions by approximately 50 percent. 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

South Coast 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 16 10 7 6 ROG 

Potential reductions 5.1 2.6 1.7 

Baseline emissions 238 131 79 65 NOx 

Potential reductions 47.3 26.9 18.3 

Baseline emissions 10.2 5.3 3.3 2.8 PM2.5 

Potential reductions 3.0 1.5 1.0 

San Joaquin Valley 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 20 13 9 8 ROG 

Potential reductions 6.4 3.3 2.3 

Baseline emissions 277 150 88 72 NOx 

Potential reductions 61.4 30.2 21.2 

Baseline emissions 11.4 5.5 3.2 2.6 PM2.5 

Potential reductions 3.6 1.6 1.2 

Baseline emissions represent emissions from diesel-fueled medium- and heavy 

heavy-duty trucks. (Note: Baseline emissions reflect adjustments not included in 

the SIP Emission Inventory Projections on ARB’s website. The adjustments 
April 26, 2007 106 

include sleeper truck idling restrictions, diesel engine software upgrade, and 

emission reductions from the Carl Moyer Program.) 

Timing 

Action: 2008 

Expected Implementation: 2010-2015 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to commit to bring this measure to the Board by 2008. ARB 

staff will initiate a rule development process designed to achieve the reductions 

shown for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment areas in 2014, 

2020, and 2023. The measure as proposed by staff to the Board or adopted by 

the Board may provide more or less than the amount shown. 
April 26, 2007 107 

Ships 

Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing and Other Clean Technology 

Cleaner Main Engines and Fuel 

Ships bring the majority of internationally traded goods to California. Due to the 

international nature of goods movement, marine vessels are subject to 

international and national standards set by the International Maritime 

Organization and U.S. EPA. However, ships are historically a largely 

unregulated sector. In 2006, ship emissions ranked as the largest contributor to 

SOx emissions, fifth largest contributor to NOx emissions, and seventh largest 

contributor to directly emitted PM2.5 in the South Coast. With the predicted 

growth in goods movement through California by 2020 (especially through the 

Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach), emissions from ships are expected to 

increase significantly. 

In April 2006, ARB adopted the Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods 

Movement in California, which calls for aggressive measures for ships and other 

port-related sources. The proposed emission reduction targets in these 

measures are the same goals set in that plan. Even before the adoption of the 

plan, work had begun to help meet its goals. In December 2005, ARB approved 

an Auxiliary Engine Fuel Rule that will phase in cleaner low-sulfur fuel from 2007 

to 2010. This rule will reduce SOx emissions from auxiliary engines by 96 

percent, PM emissions by 83 percent, and NOx emissions by 6 percent 

beginning in 2010. 

The proposed measures outlined below will continue to work toward the goals 

outlined in the goods movement plan to considerably reduce ship emissions. 

Marine fuel standards, cold ironing (port electrification), vessel speed reduction, 

and retrofitted diesel engines will ensure cleaner air around ports and reduced 

regional emissions. These measures are split by the type of engine used on a 

ship. Typically, ships use auxiliary engines while they are docked at the port or 

to run lights and other amenities while they are transiting. Main engines and 

boilers are used when ships are maneuvering within port waters or transiting 

throughout open waters. 

Auxiliary Engine Measures 

In addition to the Auxiliary Engine Fuel Rule, a new proposed measure for 

reducing auxiliary engine emissions is at-dock modifications including cold 

ironing and other advanced pollution reduction systems such as the “hood”. Cold 

ironing allows ships to turn off their auxiliary engines and instead plug into an 

electrical system for power when they are docked at the port. This is extremely 

beneficial to surrounding communities as it reduces exposure to multiple 

pollutants. The “hood” is a device that fits onto a ship’s exhaust stack and cleans 

the emissions. This measure would phase in the number of ships that will be 

capable of using cold ironing and technologies such as the “hood”. A 

combination of cold ironing and other at-dock technologies would reduce SOx 
April 26, 2007 108 

emissions by 54 percent in 2014 and 72 percent in 2023 and both NOx and PM 

emissions by 65 percent in 2014 and 82 percent in 2023. 

Main Engine and Boilers 

A Main Engine Fuel Rule, patterned after the Auxiliary Engine Fuel Rule, would 

help reduce emissions by introducing a cleaner, low-sulfur fuel beginning no later 

than 2010. This proposed rule would apply to ships using their main engine 

while maneuvering and transiting near the California coast and would reduce 

SOx emissions by 96 percent, PM emissions by 83 percent, and NOx emissions 

by 6 percent no later than 2010. 

A highly effective measure to reduce main engine emissions would be to 

increase the use of cleaner new engines or retrofitted engines. The measure 

could be implemented via regulation, incentives, voluntary agreements, or a 

combination of these approaches. By 2014, ships visiting California ports would 

have either new engines or a mix of retrofit technology (e.g., technology similar to 

a catalytic converter on a passenger car) that would achieve an overall reduction 

of NOx and PM of 30 percent. In 2023, ships visiting California would be 

equipped with an even cleaner technology mix, resulting in a 70 percent 

reduction of NOx, 50 percent reduction of PM, and 40 percent reduction of SOx. 

Vessel Speed Reduction (VSR) is an additional measure that would reduce main 

engine ship emissions. Presently, ships entering the Ports of Los Angeles and 

Long Beach have voluntarily agreed to reduce their speed to 12 knots within 

24 nautical miles of the ports. It is estimated that there is a 48 percent 

compliance rate associated with this voluntary measure. In order to further 

reduce main engine emissions, ARB would require ships to reduce their speeds 

to 12 knots within 40 nautical miles of the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. 

The efficacy of the VSR program in reducing emissions changes over time as the 

vessel speeds are a function of the vessel type. It is estimated that ships will get 

larger and, therefore, their speeds will change. VSR is 30-35 percent effective in 

reducing SOx emissions, 40-50 percent effective in reducing PM2.5 emissions, 

and 35-50 percent effective in reducing NOx emissions over time. 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

(tons per day ship emissions 0-100 nautical miles from the California coast)
April 26, 2007 109 

South Coast (Auxiliary Engines)* 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 17.2 1.1 1.5 1.8 SOx 

Potential reductions 0.0 0.4 0.7 0.7 

Baseline emissions 26.6 37.2 48.7 56.3 NOx 

Potential reductions 0.0 18.5 28.3 30.8 

Baseline emissions 2.2 0.6 0.8 0.9 PM2.5 

Potential reductions 0.0 0.3 0.4 0.5 

* ARB 2005 Auxiliary Engine Fuel Rule emission reductions are accounted for in the baseline. 

South Coast (Main Engines and Boilers) 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 14.7 20.7 26.3 29.7 SOx 

Potential reductions 0.0 19.7 25.4 28.8 

Baseline emissions 24.4 33.4 41.4 46.3 NOx 

Potential reductions 0.0 20.0 32.3 39.9 

Baseline emissions 1.8 2.6 3.3 3.7 PM2.5 

Potential reductions 0.0 2.4 3.1 3.6 

Since the control measures apply to the same source, the control percentages 

were applied sequentially to calculate total reductions. 

Timing 

Main Engine Fuel ATCM 

Action: 2007 

Expected Implementation: 2007-2010. 

Cold Ironing 

Action: 2007-2008 

Expected Implementation: Starting in 2010 – 10 percent by 2010, 60 percent by 

2014, and 80 percent by 2020. 

Cleaner Engines (New and Retrofits) 

Action: 2009 

Expected Implementation: Phase-in starting in 2010. 

Vessel Speed Reduction 

Action: 2007 

Expected Implementation: 2008. 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to commit to bring this measure to the Board beginning 2007. 

ARB staff will initiate a rule development process designed to achieve the 
April 26, 2007 110 

reductions shown for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment 

areas in 2014, 2020, and 2023. The measure as proposed by staff to the Board 

or adopted by the Board may provide more or less than the amount shown. 
April 26, 2007 111 

Port Truck Modernization 

Trucks serving California ports are a vital part of the goods movement system. 

Trucks transfer incoming cargo containers from the ports to intermodal 

distribution centers for transport via long-haul rail or truck to their ultimate 

destination in California or throughout the U.S. Trucks also carry agricultural 

products from the Central Valley and other farming regions, and exports, to the 

ports for shipment overseas. Port-related truck activity is growing. The number 

of containers carried by truck to and from the Ports of Los Angeles and 

Long Beach, for example, is expected to grow by a factor of 2.5 within twenty 

years. Because trucks in port service tend to be older and dirtier than the truck 

fleet as a whole, it is important that the impact of these vehicles be mitigated 

more quickly to address community health issues and to meet air quality goals. 

This proposed measure would reduce NOx and diesel PM2.5 emissions from the 

existing port truck fleet, as well as additional trucks entering port service. The 

basis for this strategy closely follows the goals outlined in the Emission 

Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement in California (April 2006). 

Rulemaking is currently in progress for the port truck modernization rule, which 

would take place in two phases. The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are 

also developing approaches to reduce port truck emissions on a parallel track. A 

mix of regulatory and other actions may be used to achieve the emission 

reduction target. 

With the current ARB concept, trucks in regular port service that are model year 

1993 and older would be replaced with 1998 and newer trucks by 2011. In 

addition, all trucks in regular port service would be retrofitted with verified devices 

that reduce diesel PM by 85 percent or more. Retrofits that also provide NOx 

reductions would be used to the greatest extent feasible. The second phase 

would require pre-2003 trucks in regular port service to meet or exceed 2010 

federal engine standards by the end of 2017, and pre-2007 trucks in regular port 

service to meet or exceed 2010 federal engine standards by the end of 2019. 

Additionally, the proposal would require trucks entering port service for the first 

time between 2008 and 2011 to meet or exceed 2003 federal engine standards 

and be equipped with diesel particulate filters. Trucks entering port service 

between 2012 and 2014 would need to meet or exceed 2007 federal engine 

standards, and trucks entering port service in 2015 and later would need to meet 

or exceed 2010 federal engine standards. 

This proposed measure would reduce port truck NOx emissions in the 

South Coast Air Basin by about 10 percent in 2014 and 50 percent in 2023. 

Also, diesel PM emissions from port trucks in the South Coast Air Basin would be 

reduced by more than 50 percent in 2014. 

The reductions from this measure would complement the reductions achieved by 

the proposed cleaner in-use heavy-duty truck measure. The regulation currently 

being developed for port trucks would apply only to those heavy heavy-duty 

trucks in primary port service. The private fleet rule currently under development 
April 26, 2007 112 

would provide the reductions cited for the in-use heavy-duty truck measure by 

including trucks not in port service as well as trucks in the medium heavy-duty 

category. 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

South Coast 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 22 18 15 15 NOx 

Potential reductions 2 8 7 

Baseline emissions 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.6 PM2.5 

Potential reductions 0.5 0.3 0.3 

Baseline emissions are for port trucks, based on inventories developed for the 

Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement. Emission reduction 

estimates are based on the assumption that port trucks are older, on average, 

than the fleet as a whole (age distribution was based on a 2002 study by 

Starcrest International). The number of trucks in regular port service is projected 

to grow from approximately 12,000 in 2005 to 15,000 in 2010, 18,000 in 2015 

and 21,000 in 2020. Staff assumed that port trucks make trips of lower average 

speed (35 mph), owing to short hauls to distribution centers and congested 

conditions near the ports. 

Port truck emissions are small for the San Joaquin Valley so reductions for this 

measure are not significant. Goods movement-related emissions from trucks in 

the San Joaquin Valley are generated primarily by line-haul trucks and not port 

trucks. Line-haul truck emissions are significantly reduced in the proposed 

cleaner in-use heavy-duty truck measure. 

Timing 

Action: 2007-2008 

Expected Implementation: 2008-2020 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to commit to bring this measure to the Board by 2008. ARB 

staff will initiate a rule development process designed to achieve the reductions 

shown for the South Coast nonattainment area in 2014, 2020, and 2023. The 

measure as proposed by staff to the Board or adopted by the Board may provide 

more or less than the amount shown. 
April 26, 2007 113 

Accelerated Introduction of Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives 

Line-haul locomotives used to pull rail cars long distances account for about 

95 percent of total train emissions. U.S. EPA proposed new Tier 4 standards to 

reduce NOx and PM emissions by 90 percent. These emission standards would 

build on existing federal requirements for using low sulfur diesel fuel. They 

include new engine standards and rebuild standards, and require aftertreatment 

technology. Since the useful life of a locomotive can exceed 30 years, the 

accelerated use of Tier 4 or equivalent technology is necessary to provide diesel 

PM and NOx reductions needed to meet attainment deadlines. ARB is pushing 

U.S. EPA to accelerate introduction of Tier 4 standards on an earlier timeframe, 

beginning in 2012. 

The proposed measure calls for replacing existing locomotive engines with Tier 4 

engines beginning in 2012 and conducting concurrent rebuilds of older engines 

to Tier 2.5 standards. This can only occur once U.S. EPA accelerates 

implementation of the Tier 4 engine standards for locomotives. It is estimated 

that by 2023, this measure would reduce NOx by 70 percent and direct PM2.5 by 

about 75 percent. 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

South Coast 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 2.3 2.3 2.4 2.5 ROG 

Potential reductions 0.7 1.8 1.9 

Baseline emissions 26.7 18.3 21.0 22.6 NOx 

Potential reductions 4.3 13.4 15.6 

Baseline emissions 0.78 0.71 0.75 0.77 PM 

Potential reductions 0.20 0.56 0.59 

San Joaquin Valley 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.6 ROG 

Potential reductions 0.5 1.2 1.3 

Baseline emissions 21.5 19.9 20.6 21.1 NOx 

Potential reductions 7.2 15.6 16.4 

Baseline emissions 0.58 0.53 0.53 0.54 PM 

Potential reductions 0.18 0.42 0.46 

Baseline emissions represent line-haul and switcher locomotives. 

Emission reduction estimates are based on, beginning in 2012, 10 percent of the 

existing engines being replaced by Tier 4 engines and 5 percent upgraded to Tier 

2.5 standards until 100 percent of the statewide fleet has been upgraded. 
April 26, 2007 114 

Timing 

Action: U.S. EPA adopts Tier 4 standards in 2007. Voluntary agreement to 

accelerate implementation – 2008. 

Expected Implementation: Introduction of 10 percent Tier 4 and upgrades to 

Tier 2.5 at 5 percent are expected to begin 2012. 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff will continue to encourage U.S. EPA to accelerate implementation of 

the Tier 4 engine standards. Once the new standards are in place, ARB staff 

commits to work with the railroads to bring the cleanest locomotives in to 

California service. 
April 26, 2007 115 

Clean Up Existing Commercial Harbor Craft 

Commercial harbor craft are marine vessels that operate primarily along 

California’s coastline and inland waterways. They include tugboats, work boats, 

crew/supply boats, ferries, excursion boats, commercial and sport fishing boats, 

and other harbor vessels. The diesel propulsion and auxiliary engines used on 

these vessels were built for long life and have essentially uncontrolled emissions. 

U.S. EPA adopted harbor craft engine standards that apply to new engines 

beginning in 2004. The engines meeting the new U.S. EPA standards have 

roughly 50 percent less NOx than uncontrolled engines. Since the useful life of 

harbor craft vessels is so long, the benefits of new engine standards accrue 

slowly over time. However, to accelerate emission reductions, many of these 

vessels can be repowered with newer, cleaner engines. 

There are also emission control technologies, called “add-on” controls or retrofits, 

that can reduce both NOx and diesel particulate matter. Retrofit control 

technologies have been shown to dramatically reduce emissions when used with 

heavy-duty diesel engines in land-based operations and can be adapted to 

marine applications. 

ARB is in the process of developing a regulation that would require owners of 

existing commercial harbor craft to replace old engines with newer cleaner 

engines and/or to add retrofit emission control technologies. It would address 

both propulsion and auxiliary engines. The regulation would take into account 

the fact that harbor craft vessel types are diverse and may require various 

combinations of emission reducing strategies and that some vessel 

configurations may not accommodate retrofits. Fishing boats in particular will be 

difficult to retrofit and may face difficult unique economic constraints. 

The proposed regulation is one of the measures in ARB’s Goods Movement Plan 

and is scheduled for adoption in 2007. ARB staff estimates that the harborcraft 

regulations will reduce NOx and PM emissions 30 percent by 2014, and 40 

percent by 2020,based on the capabilities of existing control technologies. 
April 26, 2007 116 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

South Coast 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 23.1 15.7 12.7 12.7 NOx 

Potential reductions 4.6 5.1 5.9 

Baseline emissions 1.1 0.7 0.6 0.6 

PM2.5 Potential reductions 0.2 0.2 0.3 

The baseline harbor craft inventory is taken from the Emission Reduction Plan for 

Ports and Goods Movement, April 2006. Direct PM2.5 numbers reflect diesel 

PM. Emission reduction estimates assume the regulation will reduce emissions 

30 percent by 2014, and 40 percent by 2020. (Emission reductions were 

estimated for the San Joaquin Valley but found to be insignificant.) 

Timing 

Action: 2007 

Expected Implementation: 2009-2018 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to commit to bring this measure to the Board by 2007. ARB 

staff will initiate a rule development process designed to achieve the reductions 

shown for the South Coast nonattainment area in 2014, 2020, and 2023. The 

measure as proposed by staff to the Board or adopted by the Board may provide 

more or less than the amount shown. 
April 26, 2007 117 

Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment 

Adopted emission standards for new off-road diesel engines are becoming 

increasingly more stringent, ensuring that new construction, mining, industrial, oil 

drilling and airport ground support equipment become progressively cleaner. 

The cleanest standards for NOx emissions in these categories will phase in from 

2013-2015. However, large diesel off-road equipment with more than 25 

horsepower remain in use for long periods of time, often 25 years or more. This 

long life means that new, lower emitting engines are introduced into fleets 

relatively slowly with the result that the emission reductions and associated 

health benefits from these cleaner engines will also be slow to materialize. 

Accelerating the introduction of cleaner engines and emissions control 

technologies into the statewide fleet is necessary to meet air quality standards. 

This proposed measure would require owners of equipment larger than 

25 horsepower to meet a stringent average emissions level across all of their 

equipment. The fleet average approach provides equipment owners flexibility in 

how they will comply, including: swapping older, dirtier engines with newer, 

cleaner engines; purchasing newer equipment (with cleaner engines); and, 

adding emission control devices to older engines. It also allows fleet owners to 

maintain a fleet with some engines which are cleaner than the fleet average and 

others which are dirtier, so that, on average, the fleet meets the target. ARB staff 

is also proposing idling limits similar to those the Board has adopted for heavy 

duty trucks. 

ARB staff has proposed a statewide in-use off-road diesel equipment regulation 

which could require initial NOx and PM emissions averages to be met, with 

increasingly lower emissions averages over time. Staff began work on the rule 

in 2004 as part of the Diesel Risk Reduction Program. During early SIP 

development work in 2006, staff identified the necessity for large NOx emission 

reductions from off-road equipment and other diesel sources to meet the healthbased federal air quality standards. Consequently, staff revised the control 

concept extensively to meet California’s clean air needs relative to diesel 

particulates, ozone, and PM2.5. 

This measure would reduce NOx emissions from large diesel off-road equipment 

in the South Coast Air Basin by approximately 10 percent in 2014 and by about 

30 percent in 2023. 
April 26, 2007 118 

Estimated Emission Reductions

South Coast 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline Emissions 20.2 13.3 9.3 8.1 ROG 

Potential Reductions 2.7 2.9 1.9 

Baseline Emissions 143.2 96.1 59.0 46.5 NOx 

Potential Reductions 10.5 18.7 13.9 

Baseline Emissions 8.1 4.9 2.6 1.8 PM2.5

Potential Reductions 2.6 1.8 1.3 

San Joaquin Valley 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline Emissions 6.1 4.2 3.1 2.7 ROG 

Potential Reductions 0.9 1.0 0.6 

Baseline Emissions 47.6 32.8 21.6 17.7 NOx 

Potential Reductions 3.7 7.0 5.4 

Baseline Emissions 2.3 1.5 0.8 0.6 PM2.5

Potential Reductions 0.8 0.6 0.4 

Baseline emissions are from the OffRoad2007 model. 

Emission reduction estimates are based on expected emission reductions from 

ARB’s proposed In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle rule currently under 

development. Because the proposed rule is under development, the estimated 

reductions are subject to change. 

The rule proposal applies declining fleet averages for large fleets beginning in 

2010. For NOx, the fleet averages for 2014 for most engine sizes are more 

stringent than Tier 1 emission levels. The corresponding PM fleet averages for 

2014 are cleaner than Tier 2 emission levels. In 2020, fleet averages for NOx 

and PM are more stringent than Tier 3 emission levels. The means to reach 

these fleet averages are left to the equipment owners to decide. However, if a 

fleet cannot meet the NOx averages, it must turnover 8 percent of its total 

horsepower per year to cleaner engines (minimum Tier 2 engine) in the initial 

years and 10 percent per year in years after 2015. A fleet must retrofit 20 

percent of its total horsepower with diesel particulate filters if it cannot meet the 

PM average. The rule would also restrict unnecessary idling. 

Timing 

Action: 2007 

Expected Implementation: Phase-in starting 2008 
April 26, 2007 119 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to commit to bring this measure to the Board by 2007. ARB 

staff will initiate a rule development process designed to achieve the reductions 

shown for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment areas in 2014, 

2020, and 2023. The measure as proposed by staff to the Board or adopted by 

the Board may provide more or less than the amount shown. 
April 26, 2007 120 

Cleaner In-Use Agricultural Equipment 

New engines used in agricultural operations must meet the same standards as 

other off-road engines, ensuring that new equipment become progressively 

cleaner. Just as in other off-road applications, diesel agricultural equipment can 

remain in use for long periods of time. This long life means that new, lower 

emitting engines are introduced into fleets relatively slowly with a direct impact on 

the pace that emission reductions materialize. 

The cleanup of agricultural in-use equipment is primarily an issue in the 

San Joaquin Valley with its large agricultural economy. Natural turnover of the 

agricultural fleet will reduce emission significantly by the Valley’s expected 2024 

ozone attainment deadline. Modeling for the Valley’s PM2.5 SIP due in 2008 will 

show what accelerated fleet modernization may be needed. Once that 

information is available, ARB staff will quantify reductions from this measure. 

ARB staff is also supporting efforts to obtain additional incentive funding to 

accelerate progress. 

 San Joaquin Valley 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline Emissions 13 7 4 3 ROG 

Potential Reductions NYQ NYQ NYQ 

Baseline Emissions 62 38 23 18 NOx 

Potential Reductions NYQ NYQ NYQ 

Baseline Emissions 3.5 2.0 1.1 0.7 PM2.5

Potential Reductions NYQ NYQ NYQ 

Timing 

Action: 2009-2010 

Expected Implementation: To Be Determined 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to commit to bring this measure to the Board by 2010. ARB 

staff will initiate a rule development process designed to achieve emission 

reductions for the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area in 2014, 2020, and 

2023. The estimated emission reductions have yet to be quantified. 
April 26, 2007 121 

New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 

Recreational boat engines are broadly divided into two categories: outboard 

boats/personal water craft (PWC) and inboard/sterndrive. Outboard and PWC 

motors until recently were predominantly 2-stroke engines. Inboard/sterndrive 

engines are typically automotive spark-ignition engines adapted for boats that 

must now comply with a 5.0 g/kW-hr exhaust standard by 2009, which can be 

achieved with three-way catalytic converters and oxygen sensor feedback 

controls. Although ARB previously adopted exhaust emission standards for 

outboard/PWC engines, lower exhaust standards to further reduce emissions are 

possible by adapting the emission control technology used for inboard/sterndrive 

engines. This measure calls for the implementation of a tighter, catalyst-based 

exhaust standard of 5.0 g/kW-hr for outboard/PWC engines to be phased-in by 

2013. Only 4-stroke engines are expected to be able to comply with this tighter 

standard. 

Evaporative emissions represent about one fourth of the total ROG emissions 

from recreational boat engines. There are no state or federal evaporative 

emission standards for any type of recreational boats. This measure calls for an 

evaporative emission standard that will address all sources of boat evaporative 

emissions (tank, carbon canisters, fuel lines, etc.). The technology needed to 

achieve evaporative standards for boats is readily adaptable from that used in 

automobiles and small off-road equipment. 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

South Coast 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline Emissions 64.1 52.8 50.3 50.8 ROG 

Potential Reductions 0.0 4.2 12.8 17.6 

Baseline Emissions 16.1 17.1 18.0 18.3 NOx 

Potential Reductions 0.0 0.4 1.6 2.4 

San Joaquin Valley 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline Emissions 20.1 17.1 16.6 16.8 ROG 

Potential Reductions 0.0 1.3 3.8 5.3 

Baseline Emissions 5.3 5.6 5.7 5.8 NOx 

Potential Reductions 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.6 

The baseline estimates are comprised of summer average exhaust and 

evaporative emissions for all types of recreational boats. 

Exhaust emission reduction estimates for outboard and PWC are based on the 

percent reduction estimates from ARB’s 2001 regulation for inboard/sterndrive 
April 26, 2007 122 

engines, which reduced the exhaust standards by the same increment (from 16 

to 5 g/kW-hr). 

Evaporative emission reductions are based on an estimated 70 percent control of 

evaporative emissions for all recreational boats of model year 2012 and newer. 

The 70 percent control is a composite that accounts for the cumulative reductions 

from all sources of boat evaporative emissions (tank, carbon canisters, fuel lines, 

etc.). 

Timing 

Action: Exhaust standard by 2010; evaporative standard by 2009. 

Expected Implementation: Exhaust standard by 2013; evaporative standard by 

2012. 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to commit to bring this measure to the Board by 2010. ARB 

staff will initiate a rule development process designed to achieve the reductions 

shown for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment areas in 2014, 

2020, and 2023. The measure as proposed by staff to the Board or adopted by 

the Board may provide more or less than the amount shown. 
April 26, 2007 123 

Off-Road Recreational Vehicle Expanded Emission Standards 

Exhaust Standards

Exhaust emissions from off-road recreational vehicles are controlled to a much 

lesser extent than on-road motorcycles or on-road cars and trucks with the result 

that this category of vehicles is showing an increase in emissions into the future. 

In 1994, ARB approved exhaust emission standards and test procedures for 

off-road recreational vehicles, including off-highway motorcycles and all terrain 

vehicles (ATVs). In 1998, ARB revised the rules to allow non-compliant vehicles 

to be sold and operated outside the summer season or in locations where ozone 

levels are lower. 

Off-road recreational vehicles lag in emission reductions for a number of reasons 

including technical limitations, cost, and tampering. Another concern is that the 

California market is not large enough for off-road recreational vehicle 

manufacturers to produce vehicles that would comply with more stringent 

California exhaust standards. This could lead to compliance problems if 

consumers either purchase off-road recreational vehicles out-of-state or falsely 

certify that the vehicles they purchase are intended for use in competition. The 

most effective strategy would be for U.S. EPA to establish tighter exhaust 

standards for all off-road recreational vehicles, thereby precluding the potential 

for California consumers to purchase and operate non-complying (and higher 

emitting) vehicles. 

This measure calls for reducing exhaust emissions by 50 percent from new offhighway motorcycles and ATVs beginning in 2012 using proven automotive and 

on-road motorcycle exhaust emission reduction technologies. Due to the high 

fleet turnover and overall growth of the fleet, ARB staff estimates that the 

measure would reduce ROG exhaust emissions from off-road recreational 

vehicles 25 percent by 2014 and 50 percent by 2023. 

Evaporative Standards

In 2002, U.S. EPA approved a rule that required all off-road recreational vehicles 

to comply with evaporative standards beginning with 2008 vehicles. However, 

the standards only control permeation from the fuel tank and hoses. In July 

2006, ARB approved evaporative emission standards that harmonized with 

existing U.S. EPA regulations. 

This measure would reduce ROG evaporative emissions by 50 percent from 

off-highway motorcycles and ATVs beginning in 2012 using proven automotive 

and on-road motorcycle evaporative emission reduction technologies. Due to the 

high fleet turnover and overall growth of the fleet, ARB staff estimates that the 

measure would reduce ROG evaporative emissions from off-road recreational 

vehicles 25 percent by 2014 and 50 percent by 2023. 
April 26, 2007 124 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

South Coast 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 8 9 11 13 ROG 

Potential reductions 2.4 5.1 6.4 

San Joaquin Valley 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 7 9 11 12 ROG 

Potential reductions 2.2 4.9 6.1 

Baseline ROG emissions (exhaust + evaporative) are for all off-road motorcycle 

and ATVs in each region. Emission reduction estimates are from ARB’s off-road 

motor vehicle emissions model programmed to calculate the potential impact of 

reducing new engine exhaust and evaporative emissions by 50 percent 

beginning in 2012. 

Timing 

Action: By 2010 

Expected Implementation: 2012-2015 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to commit to bring this measure to the Board by 2010. ARB 

staff will initiate a rule development process designed to achieve the reductions 

shown for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment areas in 2014, 

2020, and 2023. The measure as proposed by staff to the Board or adopted by 

the Board may provide more or less than the amount shown. 
April 26, 2007 125 

Additional Evaporative Emission Standards 

Portable Outboard Marine Tank Evaporative Standards

Portable outboard marine tanks (OMT) are small-capacity tanks (usually less 

than 12 gallons) that supply fuel to marine outboard engines. Unlike larger 

vessels with permanently mounted fuel tanks, many small and medium size 

outboard boats use removable tanks to allow both the engine and fuel tank to be 

removed for transport or storage. OMTs are not subject to any emission 

standards and as a result have relatively high evaporative emissions. DMV and 

other data indicate that there were approximately 200,000 registered outboard 

vessel owners in California in 2005. If we assume one tank per outboard, the 

statewide inventory would be 200,000 OMTs with statewide emissions of 

approximately six tons per day. Baseline emissions for future years and regions 

of the state were scaled from this estimate on the basis of emission inventories of 

evaporative emissions from outboard boat engines smaller than 15 horsepower. 

Diurnal and permeation standards for OMTs and associated equipment are 

expected to have the same emission reduction efficiencies as controls required 

by ARB’s 2005 regulation for portable fuel containers, and would reduce 

emissions by 50 percent in 2014 and 75 percent in 2023. This measure would 

be applied to new tanks, resulting in a phase-in over the useful lives of existing 

tanks.

Refueling Gasoline Tank Evaporative Standards

Refueling gasoline tanks (from 30 to 100 gallons) are usually mounted on a 

vehicle and used to refuel other motor vehicles. Some examples include tanks 

on recreational vehicles, like toy haulers, for fueling off-highway recreational 

vehicles or tanks on pickup trucks for fueling off-road or agricultural equipment. 

There are an estimated 150,000 refueling tanks in California 

ARB staff are currently conducting surveys to determine accurate populations as 

well as testing to calculate more accurate emissions. Rough preliminary 

statewide estimates of evaporative emissions from refueling gasoline tanks are 

approximately six tons per day. Future year and regional baseline estimates are 

scaled from this statewide estimate on the basis of recreational offroad vehicle 

evaporative emissions. 

Setting evaporative standards for refueling tanks would reduce ROG emissions 

by 60-70 percent, depending on which technology is utilized. Control 

technologies being considered include passive purge carbon canisters and 

insulation. These technologies would be applied to new tanks and would be 

phased-in over the useful lives of existing tanks. 
April 26, 2007 126 

Gas Station Refueling Hose Evaporative Standards

Gas station refueling hoses are co-axial hoses that transfer fuel from the filling 

station pump to a vehicle’s fuel tank and return displaced gasoline vapors from 

the vehicle fuel tank to the gasoline storage tank. Evaporative emissions occur 

through the hose material. There are an estimated 120,000 gas station refueling 

hoses statewide with estimated emissions of three tons per day. 

Setting evaporative standards for gas station refueling hoses would reduce ROG 

emissions by 70-98 percent, depending on which technology is utilized. These 

estimates are based on previous standards for low permeation vehicle fuel hose 

and initial ARB and industry testing results. 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

Emission inventories are being reassessed for these evaporative source 

categories. For SIP purposes, emission reductions are not quantified for these 

measures so no benefits are included in the proposed SIP. 

The measures are described here for informational purposes only. Reductions 

from these measures will be accounted for in future SIP updates. For information 

purposes only, reductions from the three measures combined are expected to be 

about 3 tons per day in the South Coast in 2020. 
April 26, 2007 127 

Enhanced Vapor Recovery for 

Above Ground Storage Tanks 

Above ground storage tanks are large gasoline storage tanks used extensively in 

agricultural operations. Typical tanks have capacities ranging from 250 to 

12,000 gallons. Above ground storage tanks are becoming increasingly popular 

due to their superior leak detection capabilities. Because these tanks are 

exposed to ambient air temperatures, emissions are greater than from 

underground tanks. Annual statewide ROG emissions from all tanks in 2004 

totaled 3.1 tons per day. Emission reductions are possible and feasible with an 

enhanced vapor recovery certification process and new performance standards 

and specifications. 

This proposed measure calls for reducing emissions by 90 percent from new 

above ground storage tanks, by 76 percent from retrofitting existing nonagricultural tanks, and by 60 percent from retrofitting existing agricultural tanks. 

This measure would be implemented beginning in 2007, and by 2011 would 

reduce statewide ROG emissions from tanks by two tons per day. The estimated 

control efficiencies are based on field testing of proposed controls. The 

retrofitting of existing tanks would be phased in between 2007 and 2011 with 

25 percent of tanks being converted each year. ARB staff is currently analyzing 

what the emission reductions would be for each region. 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

Statewide 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 3.2 3.5 3.8 3.9 ROG 

Potential reductions -- 2.3 2.4 2.5 

The statewide emissions for above ground storage tanks have not been 

apportioned by region, and therefore are not included in the baseline inventory. 

Since the emissions are not in the inventory, the potential reductions listed here 

are not included as an emission reduction commitment in the proposed State 

Strategy. 

Timing 

Action: 2007 

Implementation: Phase-in starting 2008 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to commit to bring this measure to the Board by 2007. ARB 

staff will initiate a rule development process designed to achieve the reductions 

shown for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment areas in 2014, 
April 26, 2007 128 

2020, and 2023. The measure as proposed by staff to the Board or adopted by 

the Board may provide more or less than the amount shown. 
April 26, 2007 129 

Consumer Products Program 

Chemically formulated consumer products such as automotive care products, 

household care products, and personal care products have been regulated as a 

source of ROG emissions in five rulemakings since 1989. As a result of these 

measures, statewide emissions from consumer products in 2010 will be reduced 

40 percent from uncontrolled levels. Despite this progress, population growth in 

the years ahead is expected to reverse the downward trend of emissions from 

consumer products as early as 2008, after the latest standards become effective. 

The magnitude of emissions from this sector indicates that additional controls for 

this sector remain important, even though the average photochemical reactivity 

of the ROG emissions from the consumer product sector is approximately onethird that of motor vehicle exhaust. Consumer products are expected to become 

the largest source of ROG emissions in the South Coast Air Basin, and the third 

largest source in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin by 2020. 

This proposed measure would continue ARB’s commitment to reduce ROG 

emissions from consumer products. The current program uses industry surveys 

to gather information about sales trends and product formulations. Staff uses 

survey data along with trade journals, patents, and other technical information to 

propose mass-based ROG limits. Staff will continue to investigate any and all 

opportunities for emission reductions from mass-based limits by taking 

advantage of emerging low-emitting technologies. However, the ability to 

achieve significant reduction from mass-based standards is waning, so staff will 

likely be shifting the focus to other potential emission reduction opportunities. 

One such measure would include investigating emission reduction opportunities 

through reactivity-based standards in most categories. A reactivity-based 

approach relies on the scientific principle that different chemical compounds form 

different amounts of ozone in the atmosphere, rather than the mass-based 

approach that reduces ozone formation by reducing all reactive organic gases. 

In the future, it is likely that further emission reductions from the consumer 

products source category will not be feasible using conventional approaches. 

Staff will work with stakeholders to explore alternative market-based mechanisms 

that would encourage the development, distribution, and purchase of cleaner, 

very low, or zero emitting products. Examples of mechanisms to explore are a 

multi-media labeling program, programs where companies set their own 

emissions reduction goals, and the use of the media for public education. If 

these mechanisms cannot produce meaningful emission reductions from the 

consumer products source category, then other approaches would be evaluated. 

Examples of alternative approaches are the purchase of ROG credits and the 

funding of special projects to reduce emissions or accelerate reductions from 

pollution sources outside of the consumer products industry. 

The above approaches could be implemented through several rulemakings and 

would achieve approximately 30-40 tons per day ROG reductions statewide, 

equivalent to 13-17 tons per day in the South Coast, in the 2008 to 2014 

timeframe. The 2006 measure was adopted by the ARB Board in 
April 26, 2007 130 

November 2006 with phase-in implementation from 2008 to 2010. 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

South Coast 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 103 103 107 110 ROG 

Potential reductions -- 12.9 13.5 13.7 

San Joaquin Valley 

(tons per day) 2006 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 24 26 28 30 ROG 

Potential reductions -- 3.2 3.6 3.8 

Timing 

Consumer Products Regulations 

Action: 2007-2008 

Expected Implementation: By 2010 

Action: Between 2010 and 2012 

Expected Implementation: By 2012-2014 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

ARB staff proposes to commit to bring this measure to the Board by 2008. ARB 

staff will initiate a rule development process designed to achieve the reductions 

shown for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley nonattainment areas in 2014, 

2020, and 2023. The measure as proposed by staff to the Board or adopted by 

the Board may provide more or less than the amount shown. 
April 26, 2007 131 

 Department of Pesticide Regulation’s 

Proposed SIP Commitment

The Department of Pesticide Regulation’s (DPR) proposed 2008 Pesticide Plan 

includes strategies to reduce ROG emission from pesticides through regulation of 

fumigant pesticide use, regulatory standards for registration of liquid pesticides, 

and strategic partnership agreements implementing pest management practices 

and technologies that use less pesticide product. This DPR Plan goes beyond 

reducing ozone precursor emissions by also addressing air toxic exposures 

associated with pesticide use. This proposed SIP commitment reflects only nearterm actions. Future DPR actions will be included in SIP updates after DPR 

takes regulatory action. 

Near-term Measures - Fumigant Regulations

DPR would implement regulations in 2008 that set a limit on the aggregate ROGs 

that may be emitted from field fumigation during the ozone season in the certain 

areas. In addition, the 2008 regulations would specify the allowable application 

methods that may be used in field fumigation statewide. Certain high-emission 

application methods would be excluded from that list. In 2008, emission 

reductions of 2.5 tons per day (tpd) would be achieved in the San Joaquin Valley. 

The commitment for near-term emission reductions from the 2008 regulations 

would implement the commitment for pesticide emission reductions detailed in 

the 1994 SIP in the San Joaquin Valley. 

Estimated Emission Reductions 

San Joaquin Valley 

(tons per day) 2006 2008 2014 2020 2023 

Baseline emissions 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 ROG Potential reductions -- 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 

Timing 

Action: 2008 

Expected Implementation: By 2008 

Staff Proposed SIP Commitment 

DPR staff proposes to promulgate a regulation for implementation by 2008 to 

achieve ROG emission reductions in the San Joaquin Valley in 2008 of 2.5 tpd, 

based on an inventory of 17.9 tpd. 
Appendix A 

Emissions Inventory Output Tables
(This page intentionally left blank.) 
May 7, 2007 Appendix A 1 

Emissions Inventory Output Tables 

Appendix A includes the emissions inventory output tables for all nonattainment areas 

for the 2007 SIP. The inventories shown are the baseline summer season planning 

inventories on which the State Strategy is based. 

For each precursor pollutant, the inventory tables provide emissions for stationary, 

areawide, and mobile sources broken down by source subcategory. 

The summer planning inventories reflect adjustments for regulations adopted through 

2006 and minor technical improvements not yet included in the California Emissions 

Forecasting System (CEFS) inventories on the ARB web site (and described in 

Appendix F). These adjustments are specified in a separate table for each precursor 

pollutant in each nonattainment area. The adjustment categories are summarized 

below. ARB web site addresses are also listed for further information on related 

rulemakings. 

Baseline Adjustments – Category Descriptions

Public Fleet: 

Rule to reduce diesel truck emissions in government and private utility fleets (adopted 

December 2005). 

For more information: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/publicfleets/publicfleets.htm. 

Idling: 

Rule to limit general truck idling to five minutes (adopted July 2004) and rule to limit 

sleeper cab trucks to five minutes of idling or use of an auxiliary power unit (adopted 

October 2005). 

For more information: 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/idling/idling.htm 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-idling/truck-idling.htm. 

AB 1493: 

Criteria pollutant benefits from greenhouse gas limits for motor vehicles (adopted 

September 2004). 

For more information: http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccms/ccms.htm 

Moyer: 

Emission reductions from the Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment 

Program ($81 million in incentive funds from 2007 through 2015). The Carl Moyer 

Program provides incentive grants for cleaner-than-required 
May 7, 2007 Appendix A 2 

engines, equipment and other sources of pollution providing early or extra emission 

reductions. 

For more information: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/moyer/moyer.htm. 

HHDD Trucks: 

Estimates for heavy-heavy-duty truck (HHDT) vehicles miles traveled for year 2005 

were adjusted to match transportation agency estimates. (Further explanation below.) 

Reflash: 

Diesel engine software rule (adopted March 2004) and related actions to reduce heavyduty truck NOx emissions. (Further explanation below.) 

For more information: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/hdsoftware/hdsoftware.htm 

Off-road: 

- Rule to reduce emissions from new truck refrigeration units (adopted 

February 2004). 

For more information: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/tru.htm. 

- Rule to reduce emissions from new portable construction, mining, and industrial 

equipment (adopted February 2004). 

For more information: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/statport.htm 

- Rule to reduce emissions from forklifts, generators, and pumps (adopted May 2006). 

For more information: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad/orspark/orspark.htm 

Ships: 

Rule to require ships to use cleaner low-sulfur fuel to power auxiliary engines within 24 

nautical miles of the California coast (adopted December 2005). 

For more information: 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad/marinevess/marinevess.htm 

Consumer Products: 

Most recent regulatory action to reduce ROG emissions from consumer products 

(adopted November 2006). 

For more information: http://www.arb.ca.gov/consprod/consprod.htm 

Pesticides/Fertilizers: 

Updated pesticide emissions inventory data provided by the Department of Pesticide 

Regulation. (Further explanation below.) 

San Joaquin Valley Inventory Adjustments: 

As part of the San Joaquin Valley 2007 Ozone Plan development, the San Joaquin 

Valley air district made several adjustments to the emission inventories. (Further 

explanation below.) 
May 7, 2007 Appendix A 3 

Further Baseline Adjustment Explanations

HHDD Trucks. Adjustment for 2005 Heavy-Duty Truck VMT 

ARB’s on-road motor vehicle emissions model (EMFAC2007) estimates for heavy 

heavy-duty truck vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for year 2005 were adjusted to match 

transportation agency VMT estimates. 

To calculate VMT for years 2000 through 2005, ARB staff used population data from the 

Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) together with mileage accrual rates from the 

Bureau of Automotive Repair. As result, default EMFAC2007 VMT for 2000 through 

2005 can differ from transportation agency estimates, which are transportation model 

outputs. This was the case for the 2005 heavy heavy-duty VMT estimate. For SIP 

purposes, State law directs ARB to use transportation agency VMT data when it is 

available. Ozone and PM2.5 air quality modeling was done for 2005, making it a critical 

year for the SIP. Therefore, ARB staff applied an external factor to heavy heavy-duty 

truck emissions for 2005 that matched EMFAC2007 VMT to transportation planning 

agency VMT. 

Reflash. Heavy-Duty Diesel engine Software Upgrade 

ARB staff estimates that overall benefits of the software upgrade regulation plus related 

actions provided approximately 38 tons per day of NOx emission reductions statewide 

in 2007. This is within the range of the original staff estimate of 30 to 40 tons per day. 

Reductions included in the adjustment beyond those required by the now invalidated 

regulation come from voluntary upgrade programs, ongoing engine rebuilds, engines 

upgrades by manufacturers exempt from the regulation, and interstate trucks. 

 Pesticides/Fertilizers. Pesticide ROG Inventory Adjustments 

The California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) is the lead agency for tracking 

pesticide usage. DPR provided two sets of pesticide emissions inventory updates for 

ozone nonattainment areas. These data are in the attached tables. 

• In October 2006, DPR provided pesticide emissions based on the latest pesticide 

use (2004 Pesticide Use Report) data. 

• Subsequently, DPR provided updated pesticide emissions estimates for five 

areas based on a review of recently published literature, including monitoring 

studies demonstrating lower emissions when fumigant applications are tarped, 

irrigated after application, or applied through drip irrigation systems. The five 

areas are: 

- Sacramento 

- San Joaquin Valley 

- Southeast Desert (Antelope Valley, Western Mojave Desert, and 

Coachella Valley 8-hour nonattainment areas) 
May 7, 2007 Appendix A 4 

- Ventura 

- South Coast 

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Emissions Inventory 

Adjustments 

As part of the San Joaquin Valley 2007 Ozone Plan development, the San Joaquin 

Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) made several adjustments to the 

emission inventories. The inventory adjustments include two types of refinements: 

• To account for recent district rulemaking activities, such as District rule 4570 – 

Confined Animal Facilities. 

• To provide an initial accounting of previously un-inventoried source categories, 

such as emissions from green waste composting and biosolid management. 

These adjustments are described in greater detail in Appendix B of the San Joaquin 

Valley 2007 Ozone Plan, as adopted by the SJVAPCD Governing Board on April 30, 

2007. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix A 5 

Antelope Valley 
May 7, 2007 Appendix A 6 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Antelope Valley - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH 31 DEC 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 

StationaryMANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 1.13 1.18 1.20 1.22 1.23 1.24 1.26 1.28 1.30 1.32 1.35 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.37 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.41 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 LANDFILLS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM REFINING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND MARKETING) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHEMICAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 METAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 WOOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.19 0.20 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.23 

Stationary Subtotal 2.03 2.11 2.12 2.14 2.16 2.16 2.19 2.22 2.25 2.28 2.31 

Area-Wide

CONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 

FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 COOKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Area-Wide Subtotal 0.37 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.41 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road Mobile

LIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 2.64 1.95 1.74 1.46 1.36 1.26 1.14 1.03 0.93 0.85 0.78 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 0.78 0.64 0.57 0.47 0.43 0.40 0.36 0.33 0.30 0.28 0.25 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 1.95 1.64 1.47 1.25 1.18 1.11 1.04 0.97 0.91 0.85 0.80 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 1.22 1.09 0.98 0.82 0.78 0.74 0.70 0.66 0.62 0.58 0.55 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.81 0.71 0.53 0.38 0.36 0.35 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.07 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.10 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.13 0.16 0.13 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.02 0.55 0.42 0.28 0.27 0.25 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.19 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.24 0.41 0.31 0.21 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.14 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.72 1.05 0.81 0.58 0.55 0.51 0.46 0.43 0.39 0.37 0.35 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 6.37 6.85 6.87 4.99 4.73 4.35 3.95 3.58 3.24 3.00 2.75 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.07 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.21 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.22 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.10 

On-Road Subtotal 15.62 15.91 14.64 11.32 10.72 9.97 9.20 8.50 7.85 7.35 6.87 

Other Mobile

AIRCRAFT 0.60 0.66 0.68 0.72 0.74 0.76 0.79 0.82 0.86 0.88 0.91 TRAINS 2.34 1.95 1.84 1.78 1.78 1.33 1.36 1.39 1.42 1.45 1.49 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 12.18 11.55 11.18 10.40 10.01 9.62 9.12 8.65 8.20 7.69 7.21 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 15.21 14.26 13.80 13.00 12.64 11.81 11.37 10.96 10.57 10.12 9.69 

Grand Total 33.23 32.65 30.94 26.83 25.90 24.33 23.16 22.08 21.07 20.16 19.28 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Antelope ValleyChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -2.03 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.02 -0.28 -0.31 -0.17 -0.15 -0.13 -0.12 -0.10 -0.09 -0.08 -0.07 -0.04 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 -0.05 -0.12 -0.24 -0.25 -0.25 -0.26 -0.26 -0.27 -0.28 -0.29 -0.30 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer -0.04 -0.05 -0.04 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.03 Off-road 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.07 -0.07 -0.07 -0.08 -0.07 -0.07 -0.07 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summary -0.06 -2.41 -0.48 -0.45 -0.46 -0.49 -0.49 -0.48 -0.48 -0.47 -0.47 -0.44 * These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - Antelope Valley - SUMM ER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH 31 DEC SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 

StationaryM ANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 SERVICE AND COM M ERCIAL 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 OTHER (FUEL COM BUSTION) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 LANDFILLS 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 OTHER (W ASTE DISPOSAL) 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 2.28 2.34 2.36 2.38 2.41 2.44 2.46 2.49 2.51 2.54 2.56 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.80 0.82 0.81 0.86 0.88 0.91 0.93 0.96 0.98 1.00 1.03 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM REFINING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM M ARKETING 2.58 2.75 2.80 2.84 2.88 2.92 2.96 3.01 3.05 3.10 3.15 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND M ARKET 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CHEM ICAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M INERAL PROCESSES 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 M ETAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W OOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 

Stationary Subtotal 6.04 6.30 6.37 6.49 6.57 6.67 6.76 6.86 6.96 7.06 7.16 

Area-W ide

CONSUM ER PRODUCTS 2.31 2.17 2.21 2.31 2.38 2.45 2.54 2.63 2.72 2.80 2.89 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PRO

C 1.26 1.08 1.09 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.20 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COM BUSTION 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 FARM ING OPERATIONS 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 CONSTRUCTION AND DEM OLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE W INDBLOW N DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M ANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.31 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.35 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.38 0.39 COOKING 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 

Area-W ide Subtotal 4.38 4.19 4.24 4.38 4.46 4.54 4.65 4.76 4.87 4.97 5.07 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road Mobile

LIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 4.01 3.31 2.97 2.52 2.36 2.19 2.01 1.84 1.69 1.56 1.45 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.02 0.89 0.79 0.66 0.60 0.55 0.51 0.47 0.43 0.40 0.37 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 1.54 1.49 1.38 1.23 1.20 1.16 1.12 1.08 1.04 1.01 0.97 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.89 0.83 0.75 0.67 0.66 0.64 0.63 0.61 0.60 0.59 0.57 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.54 0.49 0.36 0.23 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.17 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.13 0.11 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 

HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.44 0.49 0.49 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.30 0.27 0.25 0.24 0.23 

MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.49 0.79 0.73 0.65 0.64 0.63 0.61 0.62 0.62 0.64 0.65 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 

On-Road Subtotal 9.26 8.62 7.73 6.52 6.19 5.85 5.54 5.23 4.96 4.75 4.55 

Other Mobile

AIRCRAFT 0.71 0.78 0.80 0.85 0.88 0.91 0.94 0.98 1.02 1.05 1.08 TRAINS 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.35 0.45 0.47 0.50 0.52 0.53 0.55 0.57 0.58 0.60 0.63 

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 2.13 2.09 1.99 1.85 1.78 1.72 1.67 1.62 1.57 1.53 1.49 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.48 0.45 0.43 0.31 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.18 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 4.09 4.18 4.11 3.90 3.84 3.80 3.78 3.76 3.75 3.75 3.75 

Grand Total 23.77 23.29 22.45 21.29 21.07 20.86 20.73 20.62 20.55 20.53 20.53 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - Antelope ValleyChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.12 -0.09 -0.11 -0.15 -0.17 -0.20 -0.22 -0.25 -0.28 -0.31 -0.34 -0.4Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Consumer Products -0.10 -0.10 -0.10 -0.10 -0.10 -0.11 -0.11 -0.11 -0.12 -0.12 -0.13 -0.13 

Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summary -0.23 -0.33 -0.21 -0.26 -0.28 -0.31 -0.35 -0.39 -0.42 -0.46 -0.50 -0.58 * These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 13 

Butte County 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 14 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Butte County - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH 31 DEC 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.60 0.63 0.63 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 COGENERATION 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.31 0.34 0.35 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.41 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.19 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.24 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.23 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INCINERATORS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND MARKETING) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CHEMICAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 METAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 WOOD AND PAPER 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Stationary Subtotal 1.66 1.71 1.72 1.72 1.72 1.72 1.71 1.71 1.71 1.71 1.71 

Area-WideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.68 0.66 0.66 0.65 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.63 0.63 0.62 0.62 COOKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Area-Wide Subtotal 0.97 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.92 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 2.21 1.62 1.53 1.35 1.24 1.14 1.03 0.93 0.84 0.75 0.68 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.86 1.40 1.33 1.19 1.11 1.03 0.95 0.88 0.81 0.73 0.67 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 1.56 1.38 1.31 1.17 1.09 1.02 0.94 0.87 0.81 0.75 0.69 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.61 0.64 0.61 0.56 0.53 0.50 0.47 0.45 0.42 0.39 0.36 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.07 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.02 0.46 0.41 0.32 0.29 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.20 0.19 0.17 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.15 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.69 0.79 0.78 0.73 0.70 0.66 0.61 0.56 0.51 0.47 0.42 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 5.12 5.50 7.04 6.53 6.34 6.01 5.47 4.95 4.47 4.03 3.64 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.04 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 

On-Road Subtotal 13.11 12.91 14.12 12.91 12.36 11.64 10.71 9.81 8.96 8.19 7.49 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.22 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.30 TRAINS 3.19 2.60 2.43 2.32 2.31 2.21 2.23 2.25 2.27 2.28 2.30 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.26 0.35 0.38 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.41 0.41 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 3.21 3.02 2.93 2.66 2.54 2.40 2.29 2.19 2.07 1.96 1.84 FARM EQUIPMENT 3.94 3.57 3.45 3.12 2.99 2.88 2.74 2.55 2.37 2.22 2.06 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 10.83 9.79 9.44 8.78 8.51 8.17 7.95 7.68 7.41 7.18 6.93 

Grand Total 26.57 25.38 26.24 24.35 23.54 22.46 21.30 20.14 19.02 18.00 17.04 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Butte Count

y

Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -1.63 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.01 -0.22 -0.20 -0.22 -0.20 -0.18 -0.16 -0.14 -0.12 -0.10 -0.09 -0.06 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 -0.04 -0.13 -0.31 -0.33 -0.35 -0.35 -0.36 -0.37 -0.37 -0.38 -0.41 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer -0.05 -0.06 -0.05 -0.04 -0.04 -0.05 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.04 Off-road 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 -0.05 -0.09 -0.09 -0.09 -0.10 -0.09 -0.09 -0.07 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y -0.06 -1.96 -0.39 -0.60 -0.63 -0.68 -0.67 -0.66 -0.65 -0.63 -0.61 -0.59 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - Butte County - SUM M ER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR M EASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 COGENERATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M ANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 SERVICE AND COM M ERCIAL 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OTHER (FUEL COM BUSTION) 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 SEW AGE TREATM ENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INCINERATORS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (W ASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.47 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.47 0.47 0.48 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.28 0.30 0.30 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.37 PRINTING 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 PETROLEUM M ARKETING 0.64 0.66 0.66 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.66 0.67 0.68 0.68 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND M ARKETIN 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 CHEM ICAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M INERAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M ETAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W OOD AND PAPER 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Stationary Subtotal 1.96 1.99 1.99 2.00 2.02 2.03 2.05 2.08 2.10 2.12 2.14 

Area-W ideCONSUM ER PRODUCTS 1.53 1.36 1.36 1.37 1.39 1.40 1.42 1.44 1.45 1.47 1.49 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCES 0.85 0.72 0.73 0.73 0.74 0.74 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.76 0.76 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 1.38 1.02 1.01 0.99 0.98 0.97 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.94 0.93 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 3.53 3.60 3.63 3.61 3.60 3.60 3.60 3.61 3.61 3.61 3.61 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COM BUSTION 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 FARM ING OPERATIONS 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 CONSTRUCTION AND DEM OLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE W INDBLOW N DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M ANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 1.02 1.01 1.00 0.99 0.98 0.98 0.97 0.97 0.96 0.96 0.95 COOKING 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 

Area-W ide Subtotal 8.99 8.38 8.39 8.36 8.36 8.36 8.37 8.38 8.40 8.41 8.42 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 3.43 2.66 2.51 2.19 2.02 1.84 1.67 1.50 1.36 1.22 1.12 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 2.23 1.80 1.73 1.57 1.47 1.38 1.29 1.20 1.11 1.02 0.95 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 1.36 1.28 1.23 1.12 1.07 1.02 0.96 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.46 0.47 0.46 0.43 0.42 0.40 0.39 0.37 0.35 0.34 0.32 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.27 0.26 0.22 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.32 0.26 0.24 0.21 0.19 0.17 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.10 0.09 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.36 0.37 0.48 0.46 0.45 0.43 0.40 0.38 0.35 0.33 0.30 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.31 0.44 0.42 0.39 0.38 0.37 0.36 0.35 0.34 0.34 0.34 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 

On-Road Subtotal 9.0

8 7.87 7.60 6.81 6.40 5.9

8 5.56 5.1

6 4.79 4.43 4.13 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.44 0.48 0.49 0.51 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.59 TRAINS 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 RECREATIONAL BOATS 2.58 2.57 2.51 2.39 2.32 2.25 2.20 2.16 2.13 2.10 2.07 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.24 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.31 0.32 0.33 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 1.64 1.63 1.54 1.39 1.33 1.26 1.20 1.15 1.09 1.05 1.00 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.81 0.74 0.71 0.63 0.60 0.58 0.55 0.50 0.46 0.42 0.39 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.32 0.30 0.29 0.21 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.14 

OFF-ROAD SUB-TOTAL 6.19 6.18 5.98 5.5

8 5.41 5.2

6 5.12 4.99 4.87 4.76 4.67 

TOTAL INVENTORY 26.21 24.42 23.9

6 22.75 22.19 21.64 21.11 20.61 20.15 19.73 19.37 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - Butte Count

y

Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. 0.08 -0.25 -0.24 -0.24 -0.23 -0.23 -0.23 -0.22 -0.22 -0.22 -0.22 -0.22 

Reflash 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Consumer Products -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.07 

Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y 0.02 -0.44 -0.32 -0.32 -0.32 -0.32 -0.32 -0.33 -0.32 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 21 

Central Mountain Counties 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 22 

(This page intentionally left blank.) 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Central Mountain Counties - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGSUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 20

Stationary

ELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.48 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.4COGENERATION 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 1.61 1.67 1.68 1.74 1.76 1.79 1.83 1.86 1.90 1.93 1.9SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0INCINERATORS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PRINTING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0MINERAL PROCESSES 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.0WOOD AND PAPER 0.20 0.21 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.2

Stationary Subtotal 2.45 2.52 2.53 2.61 2.64 2.68 2.72 2.76 2.81 2.85 2.9

Area-WideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVEN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.0FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0COOKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Area-Wide Subtotal 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.1
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 0.94 0.73 0.69 0.62 0.57 0.53 0.48 0.44 0.40 0.36 0.LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.29 0.99 0.96 0.91 0.88 0.85 0.82 0.78 0.75 0.72 0.LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.68 0.66 0.63 0.58 0.55 0.51 0.48 0.45 0.42 0.39 0.MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.30 0.39 0.38 0.36 0.35 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.29 0.27 0.LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.07 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.02 0.35 0.30 0.24 0.22 0.19 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.11 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.30 0.39 0.39 0.36 0.35 0.33 0.31 0.29 0.27 0.25 0.HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.53 0.72 0.71 0.63 0.59 0.55 0.51 0.47 0.43 0.39 0.MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.03 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.

On-Road Subtotal 4.77 5.06 4.89 4.49 4.29 4.06 3.84 3.62 3.42 3.22 3.

Other Mobile

AIRCRAFT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.TRAINS 0.33 0.27 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.54 0.76 0.83 0.90 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 1.56 1.48 1.44 1.32 1.27 1.20 1.15 1.10 1.04 0.99 0.FARM EQUIPMENT 1.00 0.90 0.87 0.79 0.75 0.72 0.69 0.64 0.59 0.56 0.FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

OFF-ROAD SUB-TOTAL 3.45 3.44 3.41 3.28 3.19 3.11 3.03 2.95 2.86 2.78 2.

TOTAL INVENTORY 10.80 11.15 10.97 10.51 10.26 9.97 9.72 9.46 9.21 8.98 8.
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Central Mountain CountiesChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash 0.00 -0.03 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y -0.01 -0.26 -0.04 -0.07 -0.07 -0.08 -0.08 -0.08 -0.08 -0.08 -0.08 -0.07 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categori
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - Central Mountain Counties - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROSUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 

Stationary

ELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 COGENERATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INCINERATORS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 WOOD AND PAPER 1.10 1.13 1.10 1.17 1.20 1.24 1.27 1.31 1.34 1.38 1.39 

Stationary Subtotal 1.73 1.77 1.74 1.81 1.85 1.88 1.93 1.96 2.00 2.03 2.05 

Area-WideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.59 0.54 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.56 0.57 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLV 0.32 0.34 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.38 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.89 0.92 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.97 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 FARMING OPERATIONS 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.89 0.86 0.85 0.83 0.82 0.81 0.80 0.79 0.77 0.76 0.75 COOKING 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 

Area-Wide Subtotal 4.19 4.16 4.17 4.15 4.16 4.16 4.17 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.19 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 1.48 1.20 1.13 0.98 0.90 0.82 0.74 0.67 0.61 0.55 0.5LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.57 1.30 1.29 1.25 1.23 1.21 1.18 1.16 1.13 1.10 1.07 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.63 0.62 0.60 0.55 0.52 0.50 0.48 0.45 0.43 0.41 0.39 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.20 0.28 0.27 0.26 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.22 0.2LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.14 0.17 0.15 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.18 0.15 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.19 0.31 0.30 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.2HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 

On-Road Subtotal 4.77 4.39 4.21 3.8

6 3.68 3.50 3.34 3.18 3.03 2.88 2.76 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0TRAINS 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 RECREATIONAL BOATS 7.07 6.36 6.14 5.67 5.41 5.18 4.98 4.82 4.67 4.54 4.42 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.70 0.87 0.90 0.95 0.98 1.01 1.04 1.07 1.10 1.14 1.1OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 0.60 0.59 0.56 0.51 0.49 0.47 0.45 0.43 0.41 0.39 0.3FARM EQUIPMENT 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.10 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 

OFF-ROAD SUB-TOTAL 8.72 8.14 7.92 7.39 7.12 6.89 6.70 6.53 6.38 6.26 6.16 

TOTAL INVENTORY 19.41 18.4

6 18.04 17.21 16.81 16.44 16.13 15.84 15.59 15.37 15.16 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - Central Mountain CountiesChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y 0.00 -0.02 0.00 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.05 -0.05 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 29 

Coachella Valley 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 30 

(This page intentionally left blank.) 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Coachella - SUM M ER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR M EASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGSUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTRIC U TILITIES 0.063 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 CO GEN ERA TIO N 0.001 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M A N UFA CTU RIN G A N D IND U STRIA L 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 SERVICE AND COM M ERCIAL 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.31 0.31 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.26 0.25 0.24 OTHER (FUEL COM BUSTION) 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 INCINERATORS 0.03 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.17 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM M ARKETING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND M ARKE

T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHEM ICAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M INERAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M ETAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W OOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ELECTRONICS 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Stationary Subtotal 0.915 0.987 0.956 0.964 0.956 0.932 0.925 0.918 0.912 0.905 0.906 

Area-W ideCONSUM ER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PRO

C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

PESTICID ES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ASPH A LT PA VIN G / ROO FIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COM BUSTION 0.47 0.44 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.39 0.40 0.36 FARM ING OPERATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CONSTRUCTION AND DEM OLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D BLOW N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M ANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 COOKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Area-W ide Subtotal 0.490 0.466 0.433 0.446 0.456 0.390 0.398 0.405 0.413 0.422 0.380 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 3.08 2.21 1.99 1.69 1.55 1.41 1.29 1.18 1.09 0.99 0.91 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 0.78 0.61 0.55 0.48 0.44 0.41 0.38 0.35 0.32 0.30 0.27 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 2.11 1.75 1.59 1.39 1.31 1.24 1.16 1.09 1.02 0.96 0.90 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 1.17 1.10 1.00 0.87 0.83 0.79 0.75 0.72 0.68 0.64 0.60 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.56 0.50 0.40 0.31 0.30 0.30 0.28 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.25 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.08 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.23 0.25 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.11 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.32 0.35 0.29 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.19 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.01 0.60 0.47 0.33 0.32 0.29 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.20 0.18 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.25 0.41 0.34 0.26 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.16 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 1.89 2.30 1.94 1.54 1.50 1.40 1.23 1.11 1.01 0.89 0.81 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 29.80 31.86 34.02 25.90 24.74 23.06 21.14 19.28 17.45 15.72 14.23 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.04 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.11 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 

On-Road Subtotal 40.92 42.7

6 43.61 33.93 32.40 30.26 27.79 25.49 23.2

6 21.11 19.29 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.14 0.81 1.03 1.47 1.69 1.91 2.00 2.09 2.18 2.27 2.36 TRAINS 3.43 2.86 2.69 2.60 2.60 1.93 1.98 2.02 2.07 2.12 2.16 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.23 0.30 0.32 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 4.39 4.15 4.04 3.73 3.57 3.40 3.26 3.12 2.98 2.83 2.67 FARM EQUIPMENT 1.12 1.01 0.97 0.87 0.83 0.80 0.76 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.56 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 9.34 9.13 9.06 9.01 9.04 8.38 8.34 8.28 8.22 8.17 8.10 

Grand Total 51.66 53.34 54.06 44.35 42.85 39.96 37.45 35.09 32.81 30.60 28.68 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - CoachellaChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -9.43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.06 -1.28 -0.93 -0.85 -0.78 -0.70 -0.62 -0.54 -0.47 -0.40 -0.33 -0.22 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 Idling 0.00 -0.25 -0.64 -1.24 -1.28 -1.33 -1.37 -1.40 -1.43 -1.46 -1.49 -1.55 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer -0.05 -0.07 -0.06 -0.03 -0.04 -0.05 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.06 -0.05 -0.04 Off-road 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.04 -0.08 -0.08 -0.08 -0.09 -0.08 -0.08 -0.07 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y -0.12 -11.03 -1.64 -2.16 -2.16 -2.18 -2.14 -2.10 -2.06 -2.01 -1.97 -1.90 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

RO G - Coachella - SUM M ER PLANN IN G INVENTO RY -- ADJUSTED FO R M EASURES AN D CATEG O RIES THR O UG H 31 DEC 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2

Stationary

ELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CO G ENERATIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M AN UFAC TUR IN G AN D IND USTRIAL 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 FO O D AND AG RICULTURAL PRO CESSING 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 SERVIC E AND C O M M ER CIAL 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 O THER (FUEL CO M BUSTIO N) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 IN CINERATO R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEG REASING 0.24 0.13 0.14 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.21 CO ATING S AND RELATED PRO CESS SO LVENTS 0.46 0.75 0.77 0.72 0.76 0.78 0.81 0.84 0.86 0.89 0.91 PRINTING 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 O THER (CLEANING AND SURFACE CO ATING S) 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 PETRO LEUM M ARKETING 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.59 0.60 0.61 O THER (PETRO LEUM PRO DUCTIO N AND M ARKET 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CHEM ICAL 0.06 0.23 0.25 0.30 0.32 0.34 0.36 0.37 0.39 0.40 0.42 FO O D AND AG RICULTURE 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 M INERAL PRO CESSES 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 METAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W OOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ELECTRO NICS 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 O THER (INDUSTRIAL PRO CESSES) 0.15 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.23 

Stationary Subtotal 1.74 2.20 2.28 2.35 2.44 2.54 2.61 2.68 2.76 2.83 2.91 

Area-W ideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 2.48 2.49 2.57 2.60 2.66 2.73 2.79 2.86 2.93 3.00 3.07 ARC HITECTU RAL C O ATIN G S AND RELATED PR O C 1.30 1.14 0.79 0.72 0.74 0.76 0.79 0.81 0.83 0.86 0.88 PESTIC ID ES/FERTILIZER S 0.62 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 ASPH ALT PAVING / R O O FIN G 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 RESIDENTIAL FUEL CO M BU STIO N 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 FARM ING O PERATIO NS 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.17 CO NSTRUCTIO N AND DEM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUG ITIVE W IN DBLO W N DU ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M ANAG ED BURNING AND DISPO SAL 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 CO O KING 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 

Area-W ide Subtotal 4.70 4.60 4.33 4.29 4.38 4.46 4.56 4.65 4.75 4.84 4.94 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 4.09 3.29 2.98 2.52 2.33 2.15 1.99 1.85 1.72 1.61 1.51 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 0.84 0.73 0.67 0.58 0.55 0.51 0.49 0.46 0.43 0.41 0.39 0LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 1.43 1.35 1.26 1.16 1.13 1.11 1.08 1.05 1.03 1.00 0.98 0MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.75 0.74 0.69 0.64 0.63 0.62 0.62 0.61 0.60 0.59 0.58 0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.38 0.36 0.27 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.12 0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.22 0.20 0.16 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.09 0.11 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 2.25 2.50 2.65 2.07 1.97 1.85 1.71 1.58 1.45 1.31 1.20 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.26 0.54 0.53 0.51 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.51 0.51 0.52 0HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0

On-Road Subtotal 10.48 9.99 9.44 7.98 7.59 7.19 6.79 6.43 6.11 5.77 5.51 5

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.25 0.30 0.31 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.38 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0TRAINS 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.28 0RECREATIONAL BOATS 1.21 1.29 1.27 1.24 1.21 1.20 1.18 1.18 1.17 1.17 1.17 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.46 0.52 0.50 0.49 0.50 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.54 0.55 0.56 0OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 2.38 2.57 2.40 2.18 2.10 2.02 1.98 1.95 1.93 1.91 1.90 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.23 0.21 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.54 0.56 0.54 0.40 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.30 0.29 0.28 0

Other Mobile Subtotal 5.33 5.72 5.50 5.11 4.99 4.89 4.83 4.78 4.75 4.73 4.73 4

Grand Total 22.25 22.51 21.55 19.73 19.40 19.08 18.79 18.55 18.37 18.18 18.08 17
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - CoachellaChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.34 -0.18 -0.15 -0.09 -0.07 -0.04 -0.03 -0.01 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.0Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.0Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.11 -0.12 -0.12 -0.12 -0.12 -0.13 -0.13 -0.13 -0.1Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Summar

y -0.34 -0.88 -0.15 -0.22 -0.21 -0.20 -0.19 -0.19 -0.17 -0.17 -0.16 -0.1

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categor
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 37 

Eastern Kern County 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 38 

(This page intentionally left blank.) 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Eastern Kern - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH 31 DEC 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryMANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.85 0.92 0.95 0.99 1.00 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.10 1.12 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.40 0.41 0.42 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.58 0.60 0.61 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.67 0.68 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LANDFILLS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM REFINING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND MARKETING) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CHEMICAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MINERAL PROCESSES 12.60 13.58 13.96 14.35 14.50 14.74 14.96 15.17 15.38 15.59 15.80 METAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 WOOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 3.75 4.05 4.17 4.28 4.32 4.39 4.47 4.50 4.58 4.65 4.69 

Stationary Subtotal 18.16 19.54 20.07 20.64 20.87 21.23 21.56 21.85 22.18 22.51 22.80 

Area-WideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 COOKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Area-Wide Subtotal 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 1.17 0.89 0.85 0.71 0.63 0.57 0.51 0.47 0.42 0.39 0.35 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.00 0.73 0.72 0.65 0.60 0.57 0.54 0.51 0.48 0.45 0.42 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.85 0.78 0.77 0.68 0.62 0.58 0.54 0.50 0.47 0.43 0.40 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.35 0.41 0.40 0.37 0.34 0.32 0.30 0.29 0.27 0.25 0.24 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.21 0.22 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.01 0.28 0.25 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.14 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.12 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.40 0.51 0.51 0.49 0.49 0.47 0.45 0.42 0.39 0.37 0.34 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 12.03 10.13 16.00 13.70 12.81 11.69 10.88 10.05 9.22 8.42 7.68 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.07 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 

On-Road Subtotal 16.69 14.78 20.54 17.82 16.68 15.36 14.35 13.34 12.34 11.37 10.47 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 1.43 1.43 1.43 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 TRAINS 8.33 6.96 6.56 6.34 6.36 4.74 4.85 4.95 5.06 5.18 5.30 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.10 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 3.25 3.08 2.98 2.77 2.66 2.55 2.43 2.31 2.18 2.05 1.92 FARM EQUIPMENT 1.03 0.92 0.88 0.79 0.76 0.73 0.69 0.64 0.59 0.55 0.50 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

OFF-ROAD SUB-TOTAL 14.13 12.51 11.99 11.47 11.35 9.59 9.53 9.47 9.41 9.36 9.30 

TOTAL INVENTORY 49.13 46.98 52.75 50.08 49.05 46.33 45.59 44.81 44.08 43.38 42.72 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Eastern KernChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201

HHDD Trucks 0 -3.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.03 -0.41 -0.44 -0.45 -0.40 -0.35 -0.32 -0.28 -0.25 -0.21 -0.18 -0.1Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Idling 0.00 -0.08 -0.30 -0.65 -0.67 -0.68 -0.70 -0.73 -0.76 -0.78 -0.80 -0.8AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Moyer -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.0Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.03 -0.03 -0.0Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Summary -0.05 -3.51 -0.77 -1.14 -1.12 -1.10 -1.10 -1.09 -1.08 -1.07 -1.05 -1.0

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categor
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - Eastern Kern - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGSUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 201StationaryMANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.0OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0LANDFILLS 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.0OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0DEGREASING 0.44 0.42 0.41 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.4COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.1PRINTING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.0OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PETROLEUM REFINING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.2OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND MARKETING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0CHEMICAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0MINERAL PROCESSES 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.1METAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0WOOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0

Stationary Subtotal 1.00 0.98 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.99 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.0

Area-WideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.69 0.65 0.65 0.62 0.62 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.66 0.67 0.6ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.4

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.0ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.0FARMING OPERATIONS 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.1CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.0COOKING 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0

Area-Wide Subtotal 1.47 1.45 1.45 1.42 1.43 1.43 1.44 1.45 1.46 1.47 1.4
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 1.33 1.08 1.03 0.85 0.74 0.66 0.59 0.53 0.48 0.44 0.4LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 0.93 0.72 0.73 0.66 0.60 0.56 0.54 0.50 0.47 0.44 0.4LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.55 0.53 0.53 0.48 0.44 0.41 0.39 0.37 0.35 0.33 0.3MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.19 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.1LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.0MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.0HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.09 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.93 0.80 1.25 1.11 1.03 0.96 0.91 0.86 0.81 0.76 0.7MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.33 0.54 0.59 0.59 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.5HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0

On-Road Subtotal 4.74 4.40 4.82 4.2

8 3.91 3.67 3.47 3.2

8 3.12 2.95 2.8

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 2.43 2.45 2.46 2.47 2.47 2.47 2.48 2.48 2.49 2.49 2.4TRAINS 0.63 0.65 0.65 0.64 0.64 0.65 0.66 0.66 0.67 0.68 0.6RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.45 0.48 0.47 0.45 0.45 0.44 0.43 0.43 0.42 0.42 0.4OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.0OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 0.77 0.77 0.72 0.66 0.63 0.60 0.57 0.55 0.52 0.50 0.4FARM EQUIPMENT 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.0

OFF-ROAD SUB-TOTAL 4.6

9 4.75 4.6

8 4.54 4.5

0 4.4

6 4.42 4.3

9 4.35 4.33 4.3

TOTAL INVENTORY 11.89 11.58 11.92 11.22 10.81 10.54 10.34 10.13 9.95 9.7

8 9.6
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - Eastern KernChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 200

6 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 20

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. 0.00 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 0.Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.Summary 0.00 -0.24 -0.02 -0.07 -0.07 -0.0

8 -0.0

8 -0.09 -0.09 -0.09 -0.09 -0.10 -0.

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 45 

Imperial County
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 46 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Imperial County - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH 31 DEC SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 5.92 6.11 6.17 6.22 6.28 6.34 6.42 6.50 6.57 6.65 6.73 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.71 0.70 0.69 0.67 0.67 0.66 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.64 0.64 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.29 0.30 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.19 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM REFINING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND MARKETING) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 METAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 

Stationary Subtotal 8.52 8.73 8.79 8.84 8.89 8.95 9.02 9.11 9.18 9.25 9.33 

Area-WideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.85 0.84 0.83 0.82 0.82 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.80 0.80 0.79 COOKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Area-Wide Subtotal 0.92 0.90 0.90 0.89 0.89 0.88 0.88 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.86 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 2.57 2.13 2.05 1.88 1.79 1.72 1.66 1.61 1.57 1.53 1.50 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.29 0.91 0.88 0.82 0.78 0.75 0.71 0.67 0.64 0.60 0.56 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 1.14 1.13 1.08 0.99 0.95 0.91 0.86 0.81 0.76 0.72 0.67 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.28 0.42 0.38 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.29 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.26 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.09 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.13 0.15 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.01 0.21 0.18 0.14 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.07 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.56 0.64 0.63 0.60 0.58 0.55 0.52 0.49 0.45 0.42 0.38 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 12.91 13.35 16.55 14.40 13.54 12.39 11.81 11.16 10.47 9.78 9.09 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 

On-Road Subtotal 19.49 19.59 22.56 19.95 18.86 17.49 16.69 15.84 14.97 14.09 13.23 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 TRAINS 6.98 5.82 5.47 5.28 5.30 3.92 4.02 4.11 4.20 4.30 4.40 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.32 0.40 0.42 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.11 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 1.72 1.63 1.59 1.48 1.42 1.36 1.30 1.25 1.19 1.13 1.06 FARM EQUIPMENT 2.78 2.52 2.44 2.21 2.11 2.04 1.94 1.81 1.68 1.57 1.46 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

OFF-ROAD SUB-TOTAL 12.64 11.23 10.78 10.27 10.14 8.63 8.56 8.47 8.38 8.31 8.24 

TOTAL INVENTORY 41.58 40.45 43.03 39.95 38.77 35.95 35.15 34.30 33.40 32.52 31.67 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Imperial Count

y

Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -3.95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.03 -0.53 -0.45 -0.47 -0.42 -0.37 -0.34 -0.31 -0.28 -0.25 -0.21 -0.15 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 Idling 0.00 -0.10 -0.31 -0.69 -0.70 -0.72 -0.76 -0.81 -0.86 -0.91 -0.95 -1.03 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.03 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.03 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y -0.05 -4.62 -0.80 -1.20 -1.18 -1.17 -1.20 -1.22 -1.23 -1.25 -1.25 -1.26 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - IMPERIAL - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH 31 DEC 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 LAUNDERING 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 DEGREASING 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 PETROLEUM REFINING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.64 0.68 0.69 0.70 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.73 0.73 0.74 0.75 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND MARKETING) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 METAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 

Stationary Subtotal 1.32 1.35 1.36 1.38 1.39 1.40 1.40 1.42 1.43 1.45 1.46 

Area-Wide

CONSUMER PRODUCTS 1.16 1.10 1.10 1.08 1.09 1.11 1.13 1.15 1.17 1.19 1.21 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS S 0.62 0.65 0.66 0.68 0.69 0.70 0.71 0.72 0.73 0.74 0.75 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 5.26 4.97 4.96 4.94 4.93 4.92 4.91 4.91 4.90 4.89 4.88 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 1.96 2.05 2.08 2.12 2.13 2.15 2.16 2.17 2.17 2.18 2.19 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 FARMING OPERATIONS 9.47 9.47 9.47 9.47 9.47 9.47 9.47 9.47 9.47 9.47 9.47 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 2.32 2.28 2.26 2.24 2.23 2.22 2.20 2.19 2.18 2.17 2.16 COOKING 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 

Area-Wide Subtotal 20.82 20.54 20.57 20.56 20.58 20.60 20.62 20.64 20.66 20.68 20.70 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 3.59 3.05 2.88 2.51 2.36 2.23 2.12 2.01 1.93 1.85 1.80 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.51 1.18 1.15 1.10 1.07 1.03 0.99 0.96 0.92 0.88 0.83 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.88 0.85 0.82 0.79 0.76 0.72 0.69 0.67 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.19 0.29 0.26 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.06 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.28 0.25 0.24 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.15 0.14 0.12 0.11 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.00 1.01 1.24 1.10 1.03 0.95 0.93 0.89 0.86 0.82 0.79 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.09 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.22 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 

On-Road Subtotal 8.12 7.46 7.36 6.61 6.27 5.96 5.71 5.46 5.25 5.04 4.86 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 TRAINS 0.53 0.55 0.55 0.54 0.54 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.56 0.57 0.58 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.79 0.84 0.83 0.80 0.79 0.77 0.76 0.75 0.75 0.74 0.74 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 2.65 3.42 3.62 3.86 3.98 4.10 4.24 4.38 4.52 4.68 4.84 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 0.76 0.80 0.75 0.69 0.66 0.63 0.61 0.58 0.56 0.53 0.51 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.58 0.54 0.52 0.46 0.44 0.43 0.40 0.37 0.34 0.31 0.29 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.11 

OFF-ROAD SUB-TOTAL 6.44 7.29 7.39 7.43 7.47 7.53 7.60 7.67 7.75 7.85 7.97 

TOTAL INVENTORY 36.70 36.65 36.69 35.98 35.72 35.48 35.33 35.19 35.09 35.02 34.98 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - Imperial Count

y

Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.14 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 -0.3Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.0Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.0Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.0Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Summar

y -0.14 -0.62 -0.33 -0.39 -0.39 -0.39 -0.40 -0.41 -0.41 -0.41 -0.42 -0.4

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 53 

Sacramento Non-Attainment Area
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 54 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - SACNAA - SUM M ER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR M EASURES AND CATEGORIES THRO UGH 31 DEC 200SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTRIC U TILITIES 1.12 1.12 1.15 1.14 1.15 1.21 1.27 1.33 1.39 1.45 1.51 CO G EN ERA TIO N 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 O IL A N D G A S PRO D U CTIO N (CO M BU STIO N ) 0.25 0.31 0.32 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 M A N U FA CTU RIN G A N D IN D U STRIA L 2.61 2.67 2.69 2.76 2.80 2.85 2.90 2.95 3.00 3.05 3.09 FO O D A N D A G R ICU LTU R A L PRO C ESSIN G 8.09 7.22 7.03 6.65 6.47 6.29 6.08 5.87 5.65 5.43 5.21 SERVICE AND COM M ERCIA L 2.29 2.37 2.39 2.41 2.42 2.43 2.45 2.46 2.48 2.49 2.52 O TH ER (FU EL CO M BU STIO N ) 1.05 1.02 0.98 0.90 0.86 0.82 0.79 0.76 0.73 0.70 0.67 SEW A G E TREA TM EN T 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 LA N D FILLS 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 IN CIN ERA TO RS 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 SO IL REM ED IA TIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (W A STE D ISPO SA L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA U N D ERIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D EG REA SIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CO A TIN G S A N D RELA TED PRO CESS SO LV EN TS 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 PRIN TIN G 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 A D H ESIV ES A N D SEA LA N TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (CLEA N IN G A N D SU RFA CE CO A TIN G S) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O IL A N D G A S PRO D U CTIO N 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 PETRO LEU M M A RK ETIN G 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 O TH ER (PETR O LEU M PRO D U CTIO N A N D M A R K ETI

N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CH EM ICA L 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 FO O D A N D A G R ICU LTU R E 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 M IN ERA L PRO CESSES 0.43 0.46 0.47 0.49 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.56 M ETA L PRO CESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W O O D A N D PA PER 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 ELECTRO N ICS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (IN D U STRIA L PRO CESSES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Stationary Subtotal 16.21 15.53 15.38 15.04 14.90 14.81 14.71 14.61 14.50 14.40 14.28 

Area-W ideCO N SU M ER PRO D U C TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A R CH ITECTU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PRO C E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PESTICID ES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / RO O FIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 RESID EN TIA L FU EL CO M BU STIO N 2.85 2.90 2.92 2.96 2.98 3.00 3.02 3.03 3.05 3.07 3.09 FA RM IN G O PERA TIO N S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CO N STRU CTIO N A N D D EM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V ED RO A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V ED RO A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D BLO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M A N A G ED BU R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.42 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.38 CO O K IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 3.28 3.32 3.34 3.38 3.39 3.41 3.42 3.44 3.46 3.47 3.49 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 18.84 13.17 11.39 9.81 8.99 8.19 7.40 6.70 6.07 5.51 5.01 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 6.90 5.27 4.53 3.97 3.70 3.42 3.15 2.91 2.68 2.47 2.26 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 14.14 10.80 9.30 8.20 7.64 7.14 6.66 6.20 5.76 5.36 4.98 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 7.77 6.58 5.66 4.99 4.70 4.44 4.18 3.93 3.69 3.47 3.25 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 2.85 2.55 2.29 2.29 2.26 2.24 2.22 2.21 2.20 2.18 2.18 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.63 0.61 0.57 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.57 0.57 0.56 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 1.36 1.31 1.19 1.13 1.08 1.04 0.99 0.93 0.87 0.82 0.77 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.84 1.48 1.26 1.11 1.04 0.96 0.89 0.81 0.74 0.67 0.61 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.12 3.35 2.77 2.31 2.18 2.01 1.86 1.74 1.64 1.56 1.49 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 1.48 2.04 1.83 1.69 1.63 1.53 1.44 1.35 1.27 1.19 1.12 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 11.49 11.84 10.74 9.87 9.45 8.83 8.16 7.50 6.88 6.30 5.76 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 34.19 36.92 41.39 37.05 35.48 33.16 30.57 28.02 25.57 23.26 21.16 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.44 0.80 0.75 0.79 0.80 0.80 0.81 0.82 0.82 0.83 0.85 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.76 0.71 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.63 0.63 0.61 0.56 0.54 0.54 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.68 0.73 0.68 0.70 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.70 0.70 0.69 0.69 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.54 0.61 0.57 0.55 0.54 0.51 0.48 0.45 0.43 0.40 0.37 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.76 0.68 0.61 0.58 0.57 0.55 0.53 0.50 0.48 0.45 0.42 

On-Road Subtotal 104.87 99.52 96.24 86.32 82.07 76.83 71.32 66.03 61.02 56.3

6 52.09 

Other Mobile

AIRCRAFT 1.64 1.83 1.88 1.98 2.04 2.14 2.21 2.28 2.36 2.43 2.61 TRAINS 12.18 10.16 9.56 9.03 8.90 8.51 8.83 8.96 9.02 9.08 9.15 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 2.01 1.88 1.82 1.69 1.63 1.57 1.50 1.44 1.37 1.31 1.24 RECREATIONAL BOATS 4.16 5.33 5.65 5.91 5.87 5.83 5.82 5.81 5.81 5.82 5.84 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 28.27 26.58 25.88 23.79 22.72 21.56 20.61 19.68 18.67 17.71 16.65 FARM EQUIPMENT 12.99 11.77 11.37 10.31 9.86 9.51 9.03 8.43 7.84 7.34 6.82 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 61.33 57.64 56.25 52.81 51.13 49.23 48.12 46.71 45.19 43.81 42.44 

Grand Total 185.69 176.01 171.21 157.55 151.50 144.28 137.57 130.80 124.18 118.04 112.30 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - SACNAAChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201

HHDD Trucks 0 -10.92 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.08 -1.54 -1.18 -1.27 -1.16 -1.04 -0.93 -0.82 -0.72 -0.61 -0.52 -0.3Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 -0.02 -0.0Idling 0.00 -0.29 -0.78 -1.77 -1.84 -1.92 -1.98 -2.04 -2.09 -2.15 -2.21 -2.3AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.0Moyer -0.19 -0.27 -0.21 -0.14 -0.17 -0.21 -0.24 -0.24 -0.24 -0.24 -0.22 -0.1Off-road 0.00 -0.04 -0.07 -0.26 -0.43 -0.77 -0.78 -0.81 -0.83 -0.78 -0.73 -0.6Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Summary -0.26 -13.06 -2.24 -3.46 -3.64 -3.99 -3.97 -3.94 -3.92 -3.83 -3.72 -3.4* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - SACNAA - SUM M ER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR M EASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH 31 DEC 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.21 0.23 0.24 0.26 COGENERATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COM BUSTION) 0.15 0.19 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 M ANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 FOO D AN D A GRICULTU RA L PROCESSIN G 0.78 0.76 0.75 0.74 0.73 0.73 0.72 0.72 0.71 0.71 0.70 SERVICE AND COM M ERCIAL 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.25 OTHER (FUEL COM BUSTION) 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 SEW AGE TREATM ENT 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 LANDFILLS 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.40 INCINERATORS 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 SOIL REM EDIATION 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 OTHER (W ASTE DISPOSAL) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 LAUNDERING 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 DEGREASING 2.47 1.86 1.86 1.87 1.89 1.92 1.94 1.96 1.98 2.00 2.03 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 3.17 3.20 3.26 3.40 3.48 3.56 3.63 3.70 3.77 3.86 3.94 PRINTING 1.14 1.16 1.17 1.22 1.24 1.27 1.30 1.32 1.34 1.37 1.39 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.86 0.83 0.82 0.81 0.80 0.79 0.79 0.78 0.78 0.77 0.77 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 1.01 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 PETROLEUM M ARKETING 4.18 4.30 4.37 4.39 4.43 4.49 4.57 4.66 4.74 4.82 4.91 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND M ARKETIN

G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHEM ICAL 2.09 1.98 2.06 2.16 2.20 2.26 2.32 2.37 2.42 2.48 2.52 FOO D AN D A GRICULTU RE 0.48 0.51 0.52 0.55 0.57 0.58 0.60 0.62 0.64 0.66 0.68 M INERAL PROCESSES 0.25 0.28 0.28 0.30 0.30 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.33 M ETAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W OOD AND PAPER 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.78 0.79 0.81 0.83 0.85 0.86 0.88 0.89 ELECTRONICS 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 O TH ER (IN D U STRIA L PROCESSES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Stationary Subtotal 18.47 17.99 18.23 18.58 18.82 19.09 19.42 19.73 20.03 20.36 20.68 

Area-W ideCONSUM ER PRODUCTS 14.76 13.57 13.62 13.26 13.43 13.59 13.77 13.94 14.12 14.29 14.47 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS 8.02 6.82 6.90 7.04 7.11 7.18 7.30 7.42 7.53 7.65 7.77 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 1.80 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.82 0.83 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.86 0.86 0.86 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COM BUSTION 1.18 1.21 1.21 1.23 1.23 1.24 1.25 1.26 1.27 1.27 1.28 FARM ING OPERATIONS 2.82 2.82 2.82 2.82 2.82 2.82 2.82 2.82 2.82 2.82 2.82 CONSTRUCTION AND DEM OLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE W INDBLOW N DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 M ANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 1.30 1.29 1.28 1.27 1.27 1.27 1.26 1.26 1.25 1.25 1.24 COOKING 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 

Area-W ide Subtotal 30.84 27.99 28.12 27.92 28.17 28.41 28.71 29.01 29.31 29.61 29.91 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 25.31 19.59 17.03 14.72 13.54 12.38 11.28 10.30 9.46 8.73 8.10 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 7.62 6.40 5.63 5.03 4.67 4.35 4.08 3.83 3.61 3.39 3.19 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 10.09 8.68 7.71 7.22 6.95 6.75 6.52 6.30 6.09 5.89 5.69 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 4.95 4.32 3.80 3.52 3.39 3.30 3.22 3.13 3.05 2.98 2.91 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 2.94 2.55 2.12 1.85 1.74 1.67 1.60 1.55 1.51 1.48 1.45 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.73 0.68 0.60 0.54 0.52 0.50 0.47 0.45 0.43 0.41 0.39 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 1.82 1.58 1.36 1.16 1.08 0.99 0.90 0.83 0.75 0.67 0.60 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.09 0.92 0.78 0.66 0.61 0.57 0.52 0.46 0.41 0.35 0.31 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.01 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.06 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.21 0.24 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.18 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 2.71 2.98 3.33 3.08 2.95 2.81 2.65 2.48 2.33 2.17 2.02 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 2.59 4.00 3.53 3.41 3.39 3.36 3.32 3.31 3.31 3.31 3.34 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.15 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.28 0.21 0.18 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 

On-Road Subtotal 60.73 52.62 46.71 41.97 39.61 37.40 35.28 33.33 31.60 30.00 28.61 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.53 0.59 0.60 0.63 0.64 0.59 0.60 0.61 0.63 0.64 0.59 TRAINS 0.63 0.64 0.63 0.61 0.61 0.60 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 0.23 0.21 0.21 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 RECREATIONAL BOATS 19.05 19.52 19.20 18.40 17.94 17.54 17.22 16.97 16.77 16.60 16.47 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 3.57 4.50 4.65 4.87 4.99 5.12 5.26 5.42 5.59 5.77 5.96 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 13.11 13.52 12.75 11.62 11.11 10.59 10.10 9.65 9.23 8.84 8.51 FARM EQUIPMENT 2.67 2.46 2.35 2.10 2.00 1.92 1.81 1.67 1.53 1.41 1.29 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 3.08 2.97 2.86 2.16 2.01 1.90 1.80 1.71 1.63 1.56 1.50 

Other Mobile Subtotal 42.87 44.41 43.24 40.58 39.48 38.44 37.58 36.81 36.14 35.59 35.08 

Grand Total 152.91 143.00 136.30 129.06 126.08 123.34 121.00 118.88 117.09 115.56 114.29 1
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - SACNAAChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -2.45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.08 -0.79 -0.77 -0.72 -0.69 -0.67 -0.66 -0.64 -0.63 -0.62 -0.61 -0.58 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.07 -0.07 -0.09 -0.12 -0.17 Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.04 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 

Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.58 -0.58 -0.59 -0.60 -0.61 -0.61 -0.62 -0.63 -0.64 

Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.03 -0.04 -0.05 -0.06 -0.07 -0.08 -0.09 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summary -0.08 -3.24 -0.78 -1.32 -1.32 -1.35 -1.39 -1.45 -1.44 -1.46 -1.49 -1.53 * These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 61 

San Diego County
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 62 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - San Diego - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH 31 DEC 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 2.42 2.11 2.26 3.58 3.72 4.09 4.09 4.09 4.09 4.09 4.09 COGENERATION 2.70 2.76 2.78 2.83 2.86 2.89 2.91 2.94 2.97 2.99 3.02 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 1.05 1.06 1.06 1.11 1.14 1.16 1.19 1.22 1.24 1.27 1.30 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.99 0.98 0.98 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 1.44 1.36 1.31 1.25 1.22 1.18 1.16 1.13 1.10 1.08 1.05 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 LANDFILLS 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.22 INCINERATORS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SOIL REMEDIATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND MARKETIN

G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHEMICAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 METAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 ELECTRONICS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 

Stationary Subtotal 9.19 8.85 8.97 10.38 10.55 10.96 11.00 11.05 11.09 11.13 11.18 

Area-WideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 1.64 1.67 1.68 1.70 1.71 1.72 1.73 1.74 1.75 1.76 1.77 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 COOKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Area-Wide Subtotal 1.75 1.77 1.78 1.80 1.81 1.82 1.83 1.84 1.85 1.86 1.87 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 33.41 22.82 21.12 18.17 16.73 15.38 14.21 13.16 12.22 11.39 10.69 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 7.15 5.25 4.86 4.14 3.78 3.44 3.16 2.90 2.65 2.43 2.22 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 24.44 18.16 16.79 14.45 13.43 12.53 11.72 10.92 10.17 9.45 8.78 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 10.91 9.23 8.58 7.35 6.81 6.33 5.96 5.61 5.26 4.93 4.61 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 4.14 3.66 3.46 3.20 3.07 2.94 2.86 2.80 2.75 2.70 2.65 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.56 0.55 0.54 0.54 0.53 0.52 0.52 0.51 0.50 0.49 0.49 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 1.37 1.28 1.23 1.12 1.07 1.01 0.96 0.90 0.84 0.78 0.73 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.62 1.53 1.42 1.19 1.09 0.99 0.91 0.83 0.75 0.67 0.61 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.11 3.24 3.01 2.54 2.39 2.18 2.02 1.90 1.80 1.72 1.64 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 1.27 1.87 1.80 1.62 1.56 1.46 1.37 1.28 1.21 1.13 1.06 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 11.58 12.63 12.17 10.92 10.33 9.57 8.84 8.12 7.44 6.79 6.18 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 27.45 26.47 26.36 25.01 24.81 24.38 22.84 21.25 19.69 18.28 16.97 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.61 1.16 1.18 1.16 1.15 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 2.31 2.13 2.12 2.09 2.08 2.07 2.07 2.03 1.96 1.96 1.95 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 1.16 1.24 1.24 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.21 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.95 0.93 0.91 0.85 0.82 0.77 0.72 0.68 0.63 0.59 0.54 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 1.49 1.31 1.25 1.10 1.04 0.97 0.90 0.84 0.79 0.73 0.68 

On-Road Subtotal 130.60 113.51 108.10 96.77 91.98 86.97 81.49 76.15 71.08 66.47 62.23 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 5.01 5.31 5.39 5.54 5.62 5.70 5.77 5.84 5.90 5.97 6.04 TRAINS 1.38 1.36 1.35 1.26 1.20 1.12 1.46 1.58 1.61 1.64 1.67 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 29.34 30.31 30.71 31.52 32.11 32.81 33.60 34.55 35.64 36.93 38.04 RECREATIONAL BOATS 4.80 6.13 6.49 6.79 6.75 6.72 6.71 6.71 6.72 6.74 6.77 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 44.51 41.37 40.21 36.64 34.77 32.64 31.12 29.56 27.94 26.44 24.76 FARM EQUIPMENT 5.32 4.68 4.47 3.98 3.78 3.61 3.39 3.12 2.86 2.64 2.42 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 90.44 89.24 88.69 85.81 84.30 82.68 82.12 81.43 80.76 80.44 79.78 

Grand Total 231.96 213.37 207.54 194.76 188.63 182.43 176.43 170.46 164.78 159.91 155.06 1
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - San Die

g

o

Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -7.83 -6.48 -3.34 -1.72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.06 -1.13 -0.78 -0.88 -0.83 -0.79 -0.71 -0.63 -0.56 -0.49 -0.43 -0.30 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.0Idling 0.00 -0.21 -0.50 -1.19 -1.29 -1.41 -1.48 -1.54 -1.61 -1.69 -1.77 -1.95 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Moyer -0.25 -0.39 -0.28 -0.18 -0.23 -0.28 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 -0.33 -0.30 -0.24 Off-road 0.00 -0.09 -0.14 -0.50 -0.83 -1.56 -1.56 -1.62 -1.66 -1.56 -1.46 -1.27 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.18 -0.20 -0.22 -0.25 -0.28 -0.31 -0.34 -0.38 -0.48 Summar

y -0.32 -9.65 -8.17 -6.30 -5.12 -4.28 -4.35 -4.43 -4.50 -4.45 -4.37 -4.26 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categorie
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - San Diego - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH 31 DEC 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.43 0.36 0.40 0.70 0.74 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 COGENERATION 1.75 1.79 1.81 1.84 1.86 1.88 1.89 1.91 1.93 1.94 1.96 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 LANDFILLS 1.66 1.73 1.76 1.83 1.86 1.89 1.93 1.96 1.99 2.03 2.06 INCINERATORS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SOIL REMEDIATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.27 LAUNDERING 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 DEGREASING 1.64 1.68 1.69 1.72 1.74 1.77 1.80 1.82 1.85 1.88 1.90 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 6.20 6.51 6.60 6.97 7.15 7.33 7.51 7.68 7.86 8.03 8.21 PRINTING 3.76 3.89 3.91 4.08 4.16 4.25 4.34 4.42 4.51 4.60 4.68 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 3.06 2.85 2.78 2.64 2.57 2.49 2.44 2.38 2.33 2.27 2.21 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 PETROLEUM MARKETING 8.07 8.28 8.30 8.50 8.60 8.78 8.95 9.13 9.30 9.48 9.65 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND MARKETI 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CHEMICAL 1.32 1.48 1.53 1.61 1.66 1.70 1.74 1.78 1.83 1.87 1.91 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.14 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.19 METAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ELECTRONICS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.56 0.61 0.63 0.66 0.68 0.70 0.72 0.74 0.75 0.77 0.79 

Stationary Subtotal 29.56 30.31 30.53 31.70 32.18 32.80 33.33 33.86 34.39 34.91 35.44 3

Area-WideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 21.94 19.69 19.71 19.12 19.33 19.52 19.73 19.94 20.15 20.35 20.56 2ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PRO

C 11.98 10.26 10.37 10.54 10.63 10.72 10.82 10.91 11.01 11.10 11.20 1

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 1.18 1.04 0.98 0.87 0.82 0.77 0.76 0.75 0.74 0.72 0.71 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 1.78 1.79 1.80 1.81 1.81 1.82 1.83 1.83 1.84 1.85 1.85 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 0.32 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.35 FARMING OPERATIONS 1.37 1.37 1.37 1.37 1.37 1.37 1.37 1.37 1.37 1.37 1.37 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 COOKING 1.82 1.92 1.94 2.00 2.03 2.06 2.10 2.13 2.16 2.20 2.23 

Area-Wide Subtotal 40.72 36.72 36.82 36.36 36.65 36.92 37.25 37.58 37.91 38.24 38.57 3
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 37.93 27.69 25.36 21.43 19.68 17.99 16.59 15.31 14.27 13.36 12.60 1LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 6.70 5.30 4.89 4.18 3.82 3.48 3.23 3.01 2.81 2.61 2.43 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 13.81 11.14 10.49 9.54 9.20 8.93 8.67 8.38 8.12 7.85 7.59 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 5.86 5.00 4.69 4.19 4.00 3.84 3.74 3.64 3.54 3.44 3.34 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 4.03 3.33 3.00 2.50 2.31 2.15 2.04 1.95 1.88 1.82 1.77 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.60 0.56 0.52 0.45 0.42 0.39 0.37 0.35 0.33 0.31 0.29 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 1.38 1.13 1.02 0.85 0.78 0.71 0.65 0.59 0.53 0.47 0.42 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.66 0.62 0.56 0.46 0.42 0.38 0.35 0.31 0.28 0.25 0.23 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.22 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.21 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 2.15 2.08 2.04 1.96 1.93 1.90 1.80 1.69 1.59 1.49 1.40 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 2.97 4.78 4.67 4.41 4.26 4.14 4.08 4.02 3.98 3.95 3.94 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.18 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.56 0.43 0.39 0.31 0.27 0.25 0.22 0.19 0.17 0.15 0.13 

On-Road Subtotal 77.35 62.92 58.48 51.10 47.89 44.94 42.51 40.19 38.22 36.40 34.82 3

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 3.19 3.22 3.23 3.24 3.25 3.25 3.26 3.27 3.27 3.28 3.28 TRAINS 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 1.94 1.89 1.87 1.82 1.81 1.79 1.77 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.72 RECREATIONAL BOATS 19.16 19.11 18.76 17.89 17.38 16.95 16.60 16.31 16.08 15.89 15.74 1OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 2.45 2.99 2.97 3.02 3.06 3.12 3.19 3.27 3.36 3.46 3.57 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 21.09 21.59 20.39 18.65 17.87 17.12 16.37 15.68 15.04 14.44 13.92 1FARM EQUIPMENT 1.09 0.98 0.93 0.83 0.79 0.75 0.70 0.64 0.58 0.53 0.48 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 4.52 4.24 4.05 2.96 2.73 2.55 2.39 2.25 2.12 2.01 1.91 

Other Mobile Subtotal 53.51 54.11 52.26 48.50 46.96 45.61 44.36 43.27 42.30 41.45 40.71 3

Grand Total 201.14 184.06 178.10 167.65 163.69 160.28 157.45 154.89 152.81 151.00 149.54 14
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - San DiegoChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.59 -0.48 -0.24 -0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.03 -0.10 -0.09 -0.12 -0.15 -0.22 Moyer 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.05 -0.06 -0.05 -0.05 -0.04 -0.03 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.83 -0.84 -0.85 -0.86 -0.87 -0.88 -0.89 -0.90 -0.91 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.03 -0.05 -0.07 -0.09 -0.10 -0.13 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summary 0.01 -0.56 -0.46 -1.09 -0.99 -0.89 -0.96 -1.07 -1.08 -1.14 -1.19 -1.29 * These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 69 

South Coast Air Basin
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 70 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

N O X - SC - SUM M ER PLAN NING IN VEN TO R Y -- AD JU STED FO R M EASUR ES AND C ATEG O R IES TH R O UG H 31 D EC 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 

StationaryELEC TR IC U TILITIES 5.12 8.64 8.68 7.83 7.51 6.92 6.56 6.57 6.58 6.59 6.59 C O G EN ER A TIO N 0.58 0.59 0.56 0.48 0.47 0.45 0.47 0.47 0.48 0.48 0.48 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N (C O M BU STIO N ) 1.23 0.90 0.88 0.79 0.77 0.68 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G (C O M BU STIO N ) 7.07 7.09 7.07 6.11 5.89 5.78 5.73 5.73 5.73 5.73 5.73 M A N U FA C TU R IN G A N D IN D U STR IA L 17.39 17.64 17.04 16.07 15.84 15.40 15.12 15.04 14.95 14.87 14.85 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R A L PR O C ESSIN G 2.14 1.88 1.20 1.15 1.11 1.08 1.05 1.03 1.01 0.99 0.97 SER V IC E A N D C O M M ER C IA L 17.32 17.16 16.49 15.34 14.88 13.66 13.21 12.65 12.12 11.61 11.32 O TH ER (FU EL C O M BU STIO N ) 8.02 7.23 6.95 6.36 6.09 5.75 5.57 5.38 5.20 5.01 4.83 SEW A G E TR EA TM EN T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA N D FILLS 0.63 0.65 0.65 0.67 0.68 0.69 0.70 0.71 0.71 0.72 0.73 IN C IN ER A TO R S 1.53 1.62 1.64 1.63 1.63 1.63 1.60 1.60 1.61 1.61 1.62 O TH ER (W A STE D ISPO SA L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA U N D ER IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D EG R EA SIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS SO LV EN TS 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 PR IN TIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A D H ESIV ES A N D SEA LA N TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (C LEA N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A TIN G S) 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.19 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N 0.05 0.25 0.37 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G 4.86 4.98 5.11 4.52 4.37 4.36 4.38 4.19 4.19 4.19 4.19 PETR O LEU M M A R K ETIN G 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 O TH ER (PETRO LEU M PRO D U CTIO N A N D M A RK E T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C H EM IC A L 0.09 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R E 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M IN ER A L PR O C ESSES 1.21 0.91 0.82 0.79 0.78 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.80 0.80 M ETA L PR O C ESSES 0.36 0.36 0.28 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 W O O D A N D PA PER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 G LA SS A N D R ELA TED PR O D U C TS 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 ELEC TR O N IC S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (IN D U STR IA L PR O C ESSES) 0.71 0.75 0.86 0.85 0.83 0.82 0.81 0.81 0.82 0.82 0.82 

Stationary Subtotal 68.61 71.02 68.97 63.47 61.73 58.87 57.45 56.44 55.65 54.88 54.39 

Area-W ide

C O N SU M ER PR O D U C TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A R C H ITEC TU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

PESTIC ID ES/FER TILIZER S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 R ESID EN TIA L FU EL C O M BU STIO N 20.47 19.39 17.92 18.02 18.16 15.18 15.29 15.40 15.51 15.62 13.81 FA R M IN G O PER A TIO N S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O N STR U C TIO N A N D D EM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D BLO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR ES 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 M A N A G ED BU R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 C O O K IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Area-W ide Subtotal 20.65 19.58 18.10 18.20 18.34 15.36 15.47 15.58 15.69 15.80 14.00 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road Mobile

LIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 140.22 96.65 83.47 65.85 59.61 53.85 48.75 44.22 40.15 36.50 33.30 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 27.64 20.45 17.94 14.50 13.26 12.07 11.08 10.19 9.35 8.57 7.83 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 93.68 74.40 64.98 52.52 48.60 45.11 42.28 39.64 37.12 34.73 32.46 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 49.31 42.58 37.81 31.02 28.88 27.01 25.53 24.05 22.61 21.22 19.89 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 25.82 22.58 18.78 15.40 14.97 14.59 14.23 13.95 13.68 13.43 13.21 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 3.86 3.88 3.38 2.95 2.91 2.86 2.80 2.76 2.71 2.66 2.61 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 7.61 7.38 6.24 5.05 4.85 4.62 4.38 4.14 3.89 3.66 3.43 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 9.09 8.91 7.56 6.10 5.78 5.42 5.04 4.65 4.25 3.90 3.56 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.64 13.80 11.69 9.17 9.00 8.40 7.85 7.44 7.12 6.83 6.56 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 8.39 10.90 9.39 7.62 7.43 6.96 6.50 6.11 5.77 5.42 5.11 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 70.86 76.44 64.84 51.89 49.52 46.03 42.19 38.87 35.72 32.63 29.89 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 147.23 158.52 173.47 139.38 134.71 127.08 119.10 110.89 102.55 94.81 87.37 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 1.65 3.14 3.12 3.06 3.04 3.02 3.03 3.06 3.09 3.12 3.15 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 12.83 11.53 11.23 11.01 10.89 10.80 10.74 10.62 10.28 10.15 10.00 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.89 0.74 0.76 0.77 0.77 0.78 0.78 0.79 0.81 0.83 0.84 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 4.22 4.08 4.10 4.11 4.13 4.14 4.14 4.14 4.14 4.14 4.15 OTHER BUSES (OB) 3.55 3.86 3.74 3.31 3.11 2.82 2.57 2.36 2.17 2.00 1.86 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 3.80 3.36 3.20 2.88 2.73 2.55 2.36 2.21 2.06 1.91 1.78 

On-Road Subtotal 611.29 563.20 525.72 426.62 404.19 378.12 353.37 330.09 307.50 286.50 266.99 2

Other Mobile

AIRCRAFT 13.28 15.37 16.08 17.48 18.18 18.97 19.74 20.53 21.30 22.09 22.86 TRAINS 37.91 32.26 30.60 28.95 28.43 19.69 21.13 21.87 22.30 22.75 23.22 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 63.77 72.65 74.46 76.52 78.39 80.31 81.55 82.93 84.73 86.69 88.78 RECREATIONAL BOATS 11.61 15.11 16.09 16.96 16.91 16.89 16.90 16.95 17.02 17.13 17.26 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.22 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.19 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 240.90 220.12 213.18 193.26 183.93 173.23 164.79 156.16 147.24 138.56 129.17 1FARM EQUIPMENT 10.44 9.36 9.01 8.11 7.74 7.24 6.84 6.34 5.85 5.44 5.03 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 378.12 365.05 359.60 341.45 333.74 316.49 311.11 304.94 298.63 292.85 286.52 2

Grand Total 1078.68 1018.85 972.39 849.74 818.00 768.83 737.40 707.04 677.46 650.03 621.89 5
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - SCChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -46.94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.54 -6.88 -8.46 -7.99 -7.36 -6.72 -6.06 -5.42 -4.80 -4.18 -3.59 -2.43 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.10 -0.14 -0.18 -0.17 -0.16 -0.15 -0.13 -0.12 -0.10 Idling 0.00 -1.05 -2.84 -5.83 -6.12 -6.42 -6.73 -7.04 -7.38 -7.72 -8.08 -8.49 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 0.00 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.05 Moyer -2.30 -3.06 -2.59 -1.65 -2.09 -2.52 -2.94 -2.94 -2.94 -2.94 -2.63 -2.01 Off-road 0.00 -0.09 -0.14 -0.59 -0.94 -3.98 -3.98 -4.04 -4.07 -3.99 -3.92 -3.82 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.79 -1.88 -2.01 -2.08 -2.16 -2.26 -2.37 -2.48 -2.71 Summar

y -2.84 -58.03 -14.04 -17.94 -18.54 -21.83 -21.99 -21.76 -21.63 -21.37 -20.85 -19.60 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

RO G - SC - SUM M ER PLANNING INVENTO RY -- ADJUSTED FO R M EASURES AND CATEG O RIES TH RO UG H 31 DEC 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2StationaryELEC TR IC U TILITIES 1.75 1.36 1.50 1.71 1.48 1.34 1.35 1.37 1.38 1.39 1.41 C O G EN ER A TIO N 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N (C O M BU STIO N ) 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G (C O M BU STIO N ) 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 M A N U FA C TU R IN G A N D IN D U STR IA L 1.70 1.76 1.82 1.89 1.93 1.97 1.98 2.00 2.02 2.04 2.06 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R A L PR O C ESSIN G 0.17 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 SER V IC E A N D C O M M ER C IA L 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.41 1.42 1.43 1.44 1.45 1.46 1.48 1.49 O TH ER (FU EL C O M BU STIO N ) 0.88 0.79 0.76 0.68 0.64 0.61 0.58 0.55 0.52 0.49 0.47 SEW A G E TR EA TM EN T 0.30 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.36 LA N D FILLS 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 IN C IN ER A TO R S 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 O TH ER (W A STE D ISPO SA L) 7.15 7.63 7.76 7.11 6.76 6.86 6.94 7.03 7.11 7.19 7.27 LA U N D ER IN G 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.21 D EG R EA SIN G 19.54 8.45 8.58 9.00 9.25 9.50 9.58 9.66 9.74 9.83 9.91 1C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS SO LV EN TS 28.83 27.25 26.50 23.20 23.72 24.09 24.42 24.75 25.08 25.41 25.74 2PR IN TIN G 6.29 6.28 4.46 4.57 4.62 4.67 4.71 4.74 4.78 4.81 4.85 A D H ESIV ES A N D SEA LA N TS 3.44 3.18 3.33 3.62 3.76 3.91 3.97 4.04 4.11 4.18 4.24 O TH ER (C LEA N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A TIN G S) 1.39 0.63 0.64 0.68 0.70 0.71 0.72 0.73 0.74 0.75 0.75 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N 2.50 1.35 1.14 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G 4.69 3.81 3.81 3.75 3.73 3.73 3.73 3.58 3.58 3.58 3.58 PETR O LEU M M A R K ETIN G 27.81 27.33 27.34 27.05 26.97 27.19 27.41 27.64 27.87 28.10 28.33 2O TH ER (PETR O LEU M PR O D U C TIO N A N D M A R K ET 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 C H EM IC A L 12.43 10.34 10.72 10.83 11.05 11.44 11.66 11.87 12.09 12.30 12.52 1FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R E 2.77 2.76 2.78 2.82 2.84 2.86 2.88 2.90 2.92 2.94 2.97 M IN ER A L PR O C ESSES 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 M ETA L PR O C ESSES 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 W O O D A N D PA PER 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 G LA SS A N D R ELA TED PR O D U C TS 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 ELEC TR O N IC S 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 O TH ER (IN D U STR IA L PR O C ESSES) 7.82 8.22 8.32 8.03 8.09 8.18 8.26 8.33 8.40 8.48 8.55 

Stationary Subtotal 133.40 115.61 113.96 110.33 110.99 112.53 113.63 114.66 115.82 117.00 118.18 12

A rea-W ideC O N SU M ER PR O D U C TS 110.40 100.70 100.78 97.55 98.50 99.32 100.14 100.97 101.79 102.63 103.46 10A R C H ITEC TU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C 57.30 45.74 30.70 26.70 27.00 27.29 27.60 27.91 28.23 28.54 28.85 2

PESTIC ID ES/FER TILIZER S 1.93 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.90 1.00 1.03 1.09 1.12 1.14 1.17 1.20 1.23 1.26 1.29 R ESID EN TIA L FU EL C O M BU STIO N 1.47 1.43 1.50 1.51 1.52 1.53 1.54 1.56 1.57 1.58 1.59 FA R M IN G O PER A TIO N S 9.87 7.55 6.39 5.65 5.46 4.75 4.58 4.43 4.30 4.18 4.06 C O N STR U C TIO N A N D D EM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D BLO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR ES 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 M A N A G ED BU R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 C O O K IN G 1.80 1.85 1.88 1.94 1.97 1.99 2.02 2.05 2.07 2.10 2.12 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 184.15 160.66 144.67 136.82 137.94 138.40 139.44 140.50 141.57 142.66 143.76 14
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 178.75 132.83 114.21 89.26 81.04 73.37 67.03 61.52 56.61 52.40 48.79 4LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 30.28 24.64 21.56 17.31 15.75 14.28 13.30 12.40 11.51 10.69 9.96 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 60.44 52.48 46.60 39.25 37.38 35.85 34.74 33.77 32.73 31.77 30.88 2MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 30.86 27.20 24.41 20.86 19.97 19.25 18.85 18.40 17.89 17.46 17.01 1LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 18.48 16.22 13.07 9.87 9.35 8.95 8.65 8.35 8.06 7.82 7.59 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 2.89 2.85 2.35 1.82 1.73 1.64 1.56 1.49 1.43 1.36 1.30 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 7.53 6.38 5.09 3.69 3.38 3.10 2.84 2.60 2.38 2.17 1.99 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 4.34 4.18 3.49 2.74 2.60 2.40 2.20 1.96 1.72 1.57 1.40 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.02 0.25 0.23 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.20 0.26 0.23 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.18 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 1.12 1.36 1.19 1.01 0.99 0.97 0.95 0.93 0.90 0.87 0.85 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 12.56 13.83 15.23 12.60 12.11 11.55 11.03 10.41 9.76 9.15 8.54 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 9.60 14.99 14.10 12.87 12.49 12.19 11.98 11.92 11.92 11.88 11.92 1HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.44 0.41 0.40 0.39 0.39 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.37 0.37 0.36 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.55 0.50 0.52 0.50 0.48 0.49 0.50 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.53 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.34 0.31 0.30 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.28 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.64 0.62 0.56 0.48 0.44 0.41 0.39 0.37 0.35 0.33 0.31 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 1.26 0.97 0.88 0.69 0.61 0.54 0.49 0.44 0.38 0.34 0.30 

On-Road Subtotal 360.29 300.29 264.42 214.02 199.41 186.08 175.59 166.11 157.20 149.36 142.39 13

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 6.41 7.29 7.59 8.17 8.46 8.77 9.09 9.41 9.73 10.05 10.38 1TRAINS 2.51 2.55 2.52 2.47 2.45 2.45 2.47 2.48 2.49 2.50 2.51 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 3.60 3.67 3.64 3.59 3.57 3.54 3.50 3.47 3.45 3.43 3.43 RECREATIONAL BOATS 67.89 65.56 64.08 60.62 58.66 56.99 55.61 54.48 53.55 52.78 52.13 5OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 7.38 9.08 8.90 8.96 9.03 9.16 9.33 9.54 9.76 10.03 10.31 1OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 105.99 104.94 98.57 89.04 84.74 80.64 76.87 73.39 70.23 67.31 64.80 6FARM EQUIPMENT 2.16 1.99 1.90 1.69 1.61 1.54 1.45 1.34 1.22 1.12 1.02 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 23.43 22.21 21.13 15.33 14.08 13.09 12.21 11.42 10.74 10.15 9.62 

Other Mobile Subtotal 219.38 217.30 208.31 189.88 182.60 176.19 170.52 165.52 161.17 157.37 154.21 14

Grand Total 897.22 793.86 731.36 651.05 630.94 613.19 599.18 586.79 575.76 566.38 558.53 54
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - SCChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201

HHDD Trucks 0 -3.90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.07 -0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.00 -0.05 -0.10 -0.15 -0.20 -0.3Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.08 -0.11 -0.14 -0.13 -0.12 -0.11 -0.11 -0.10 -0.0Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.11 0.00 -0.34 -0.45 -0.56 -0.7Moyer 0.00 0.00 -0.04 -0.13 -0.20 -0.25 -0.31 -0.31 -0.31 -0.31 -0.28 -0.2Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -4.25 -4.29 -4.32 -4.36 -4.40 -4.43 -4.47 -4.50 -4.5Off-Road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.07 -0.15 -0.23 -0.30 -0.37 -0.43 -0.5Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Summar

y -0.07 -3.91 -0.06 -4.43 -4.56 -4.74 -5.07 -5.11 -5.60 -5.85 -6.07 -6.4

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categor
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

P M 2.5 - S C - S U M M E R P L A N N IN G IN V E N T O R Y -- A D JU S T E D F O R M E A S U R E S A N D C A T E G O R IE S T H R O U G H 31 D E C SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2StationaryE L E C T R IC U T ILIT IE S 1.41 1.09 1.20 1.37 1.18 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10 1.11 1.12 1C O G E N E R A T IO N 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0O IL A N D G A S P R O D U C T IO N (C O M B U S T IO N ) 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0P E T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G (C O M B U S T IO N ) 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.66 1M A N U FA C T U R IN G A N D IN D U S T R IA L 1.21 1.28 1.33 1.27 1.31 1.34 1.35 1.37 1.39 1.41 1.42 1F O O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R A L P R O C E S S IN G 0.18 0.16 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0S E R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 1.48 1.49 1.54 1.54 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.54 1.54 1O T H E R (FU E L C O M B U S T IO N ) 0.34 0.31 0.29 0.27 0.26 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.21 0S E W A G E T R E A T M E N T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0LA N D FILLS 0.35 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.39 0.39 0IN C IN E R A T O R S 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0O T H E R (W A S T E D IS P O S A L) 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0LA U N D E R IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0D E G R E A S IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D P R O C E S S S O LV E N T S 0.70 0.79 0.83 0.90 0.94 0.97 0.99 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1P R IN T IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0A D H E S IV E S A N D S E A LA N T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0O T H E R (C LE A N IN G A N D S U R F A C E C O A T IN G S ) 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0O IL A N D G A S P R O D U C T IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0P E T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G 0.87 0.81 0.76 0.70 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0P E T R O LE U M M A R K E T IN G 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0O T H E R (P E T R O LE U M P R O D U C T IO N A N D M A R K E T I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

C H E M IC A L 0.53 0.57 0.59 0.63 0.64 0.66 0.67 0.68 0.68 0.69 0.70 0F O O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R E 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0M IN E R A L P R O C E S S E S 1.97 2.13 1.26 1.31 1.34 1.38 1.40 1.42 1.44 1.46 1.48 1M E T A L P R O C E S S E S 0.39 0.42 0.44 0.47 0.48 0.50 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.53 0.53 0W O O D A N D P A P E R 2.18 2.19 2.25 2.37 2.44 2.50 2.54 2.58 2.62 2.66 2.69 2G LA S S A N D R E LA T E D P R O D U C T S 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0E L E C T R O N IC S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0O T H E R (IN D U S T R IA L P R O C E S S E S ) 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0

S tation ary S u b total 14.31 14.29 13.66 13.97 13.93 14.02 14.11 14.17 14.29 14.41 14.54 14

A rea-W ideC O N S U M E R P R O D U C T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0A R C H IT E C T U R A L C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D P R O C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0P E S T IC ID E S /F E R T ILIZ E R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0A S P H A LT P A V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0R E S ID E N T IA L F U E L C O M B U S T IO N 2.67 2.62 2.73 2.76 2.78 2.80 2.82 2.85 2.87 2.89 2.91 2F A R M IN G O P E R A T IO N S 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0C O N S T R U C T IO N A N D D E M O LIT IO N 6.22 7.06 7.29 7.75 7.98 8.21 8.18 8.41 8.64 8.86 9.09 9P A V E D R O A D D U S T 19.27 19.06 18.62 18.79 18.88 18.97 19.06 19.14 19.24 19.33 19.42 19U N P A V E D R O A D D U S T 1.38 1.23 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.04 1.04 1F U G IT IV E W IN D B LO W N D U S T 0.59 0.52 0.51 0.48 0.47 0.46 0.45 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.41 0F IR E S 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D IS P O S A L 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0C O O K IN G 13.00 13.39 13.60 14.00 14.20 14.40 14.59 14.77 14.96 15.14 15.33 15

A rea-W id e S u b total 44.03 44.77 44.68 45.72 46.25 46.76 47.02 47.53 48.04 48.56 49.07 49
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 4.03 4.07 3.97 3.92 4.00 4.08 4.18 4.26 4.30 4.37 4.42 4LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 0.69 0.70 0.68 0.67 0.68 0.70 0.71 0.73 0.74 0.75 0.76 0LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 2.50 3.08 3.03 3.07 3.17 3.27 3.43 3.56 3.66 3.78 3.88 4MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 1.01 1.37 1.36 1.39 1.43 1.49 1.56 1.63 1.68 1.74 1.78 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.14 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.01 0.09 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.06 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 1.41 1.64 1.45 1.16 1.14 1.10 1.07 1.04 1.00 0.97 0.94 0HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 7.72 7.95 8.77 6.75 6.39 6.01 5.65 5.28 4.91 4.54 4.20 3MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.06 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.21 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.16 0HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0

On-Road Subtotal 18.11 19.72 20.11 17.73 17.59 17.42 17.37 17.26 17.04 16.91 16.75 16

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.75 0.82 0.85 0.90 0.92 0.93 0.95 0.97 0.98 1.00 1.01 TRAINS 0.84 0.86 0.85 0.78 0.77 0.77 0.76 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.78 0SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 4.28 5.15 5.34 3.87 3.98 3.85 3.91 3.97 4.05 4.13 4.22 4RECREATIONAL BOATS 2.68 2.97 3.11 3.46 3.65 3.85 4.07 4.29 4.52 4.76 5.02 5OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 12.93 12.10 11.78 10.54 10.02 9.52 9.01 8.41 7.76 7.15 6.58 5FARM EQUIPMENT 0.59 0.53 0.51 0.44 0.43 0.41 0.39 0.36 0.32 0.29 0.27 0FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

Other Mobile Subtotal 22.13 22.47 22.48 20.03 19.81 19.39 19.14 18.80 18.45 18.1

6 17.93 17

Grand Total 98.57 101.25 100.93 97.44 97.58 97.59 97.64 97.76 97.82 98.04 98.28 98
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

PM2.5 - SCChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -2.26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.08 -0.11 -0.14 -0.13 -0.12 -0.11 -0.10 -0.08 -0.0Idling 0.00 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 -0.01 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.03 0.00 -0.08 -0.11 -0.13 -0.19 Moyer 0.00 -0.16 -0.13 -0.13 -0.13 -0.13 -0.14 -0.16 -0.15 -0.15 -0.14 -0.09 Off-road 0.00 -0.02 -0.02 -0.15 -0.24 -0.33 -0.35 -0.38 -0.39 -0.39 -0.38 -0.39 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.86 -1.96 -2.31 -2.41 -2.50 -2.62 -2.74 -2.88 -3.16 Summar

y 0.00 -2.46 -0.20 -2.25 -2.47 -2.94 -3.09 -3.18 -3.37 -3.50 -3.62 -3.89 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2005 and recently identified previously uninventoried categ
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

SO X - SC - SU M M E R PL A N N IN G IN V E N T O R Y -- A D JU ST E D FO R M E A SU R E S A N D C A T E G O R IE S T H R O U G H 31 D E SUBCATEGO RY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 S tationaryE L E C T R IC U T IL IT IE S 0.47 0.36 0.39 0.44 0.38 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.37 C O G E N E R A T IO N 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 O IL A N D G A S P R O D U C T IO N (C O M B U S T IO N ) 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 P E T R O L E U M R E F IN IN G (C O M B U S T IO N ) 3.13 2.89 2.87 2.87 2.87 2.85 2.88 2.88 2.88 2.88 2.88 M A N U F A C T U R IN G A N D IN D U S T R IA L 2.16 2.71 3.08 3.11 3.15 3.21 3.26 3.28 3.30 3.31 3.33 F O O D A N D A G R IC U L T U R A L P R O C E S S IN G 0.04 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 S E R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 0.64 0.62 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.66 0.67 0.68 0.68 0.69 0.69 O T H E R (F U E L C O M B U S T IO N ) 0.44 0.46 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 S E W A G E T R E A T M E N T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L A N D F IL L S 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.40 0.41 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.43 IN C IN E R A T O R S 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 O T H E R (W A S T E D IS P O S A L ) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L A U N D E R IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D E G R E A S IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O A T IN G S A N D R E L A T E D P R O C E S S S O L V E N T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 P R IN T IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A D H E S IV E S A N D S E A L A N T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (C L E A N IN G A N D S U R F A C E C O A T IN G S ) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 O IL A N D G A S P R O D U C T IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 P E T R O L E U M R E F IN IN G 12.03 11.59 11.34 11.34 11.34 11.30 11.21 6.38 6.38 6.38 6.38 P E T R O L E U M M A R K E T IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (P E T R O L E U M P R O D U C T IO N A N D M A R K E T I

N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C H E M IC A L 0.74 1.09 0.98 1.05 1.05 1.06 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 F O O D A N D A G R IC U L T U R E 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 M IN E R A L P R O C E S S E S 0.91 0.67 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 0.69 M E T A L P R O C E S S E S 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 W O O D A N D P A P E R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 G L A S S A N D R E L A T E D P R O D U C T S 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 E L E C T R O N IC S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (IN D U S T R IA L P R O C E S S E S ) 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 

S tation ary S u b total 21.52 21.51 21.61 21.78 21.77 21.79 21.81 17.01 17.04 17.07 17.10 

A rea-W id eC O N S U M E R P R O D U C T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A R C H IT E C T U R A L C O A T IN G S A N D R E L A T E D P R O C E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 P E S T IC ID E S /F E R T IL IZ E R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A S P H A L T P A V IN G / R O O F IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 R E S ID E N T IA L F U E L C O M B U S T IO N 0.29 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 F A R M IN G O P E R A T IO N S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O N S T R U C T IO N A N D D E M O L IT IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 P A V E D R O A D D U S T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N P A V E D R O A D D U S T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 F U G IT IV E W IN D B L O W N D U S T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR E S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D IS P O S A L 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 C O O K IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

A rea-W id e S u b total 0.30 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.32 0.32 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 1.25 0.96 0.92 0.88 0.89 0.89 0.90 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.93 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 0.28 0.21 0.20 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.57 0.53 0.51 0.49 0.49 0.50 0.50 0.51 0.51 0.52 0.53 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.35 0.35 0.33 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.33 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.09 0.08 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.57 0.74 0.67 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.01 1.20 1.38 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.20 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 

On-Road Subtotal 4.37 4.43 4.43 2.18 2.20 2.22 2.25 2.28 2.30 2.33 2.36 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 1.30 1.50 1.57 1.70 1.77 1.83 1.90 1.97 2.03 2.10 2.16 TRAINS 1.24 1.33 1.37 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 23.44 30.96 32.74 20.93 22.09 19.58 20.36 21.16 22.06 22.99 23.96 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 1.24 1.29 1.31 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 27.37 35.23 37.13 23.04 24.27 21.84 22.56 23.43 24.41 25.41 26.45 

Grand Total 53.57 61.46 63.47 47.30 48.54 46.15 46.93 43.03 44.06 45.12 46.22 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

SOX - SCChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -15.46 -16.32 -20.88 -21.72 -22.57 -23.65 -24.78 -25.96 -28.50 Summar

y 0.00 -0.34 0.00 -15.46 -16.32 -20.88 -21.72 -22.57 -23.65 -24.78 -25.96 -28.50 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 83 

San Francisco Bay Area
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 84 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NO X - San Francisco Bay Area - SUM M ER PLAN NING INVENTO RY -- AD JU STED FO R M EASUR ES AN D CATEG O RIES TH RO UG H 31 DEC SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELEC TR IC U TILITIES 5.19 3.12 2.72 2.57 2.59 2.61 2.63 2.66 2.68 2.71 2.75 C O G EN ER A TIO N 3.70 3.88 3.97 4.09 4.13 4.18 4.22 4.27 4.31 4.36 4.41 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N (C O M BU STIO N ) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G (C O M B U STIO N ) 21.64 17.09 17.28 17.62 17.80 17.99 18.18 18.37 18.55 18.74 18.93 M A N U FA C TU R IN G A N D IN D U STR IA L 10.14 10.51 10.62 10.85 10.97 11.09 11.20 11.33 11.45 11.57 11.70 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R A L PR O C ESSIN G 0.72 0.72 0.71 0.70 0.69 0.69 0.68 0.68 0.67 0.66 0.66 SER V IC E A N D C O M M ER C IA L 8.17 8.43 8.54 8.75 8.85 8.96 9.07 9.18 9.29 9.41 9.52 O TH ER (FU EL C O M BU STIO N ) 5.05 3.82 3.70 3.45 3.33 3.20 3.11 3.01 2.91 2.81 2.71 SEW A G E TR EA TM EN T 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 LA N D FILLS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 IN C IN ER A TO R S 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 SO IL R EM ED IA TIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (W A STE D ISPO SA L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 LA U N D ER IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D EG R EA SIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS SO LV EN TS 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 PR IN TIN G 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 A D H ESIV ES A N D SEA LA N TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (C LEA N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A TIN G S) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G 2.30 2.37 2.40 2.45 2.48 2.50 2.53 2.55 2.58 2.61 2.63 PETR O LEU M M A R K ETIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (PETR O LEU M PR O D U C TIO N A N D M A R K ETIN G ) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C H EM IC A L 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R E 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 M IN ER A L PR O C ESSES 2.89 3.00 3.05 3.14 3.19 3.23 3.28 3.33 3.38 3.43 3.48 M ETA L PR O C ESSES 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.29 W O O D A N D PA PER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 G LA SS A N D R ELA TED PR O D U C TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ELEC TR O N IC S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (IN D U STR IA L PR O C ESSES) 0.82 0.64 0.65 0.66 0.67 0.67 0.68 0.69 0.70 0.70 0.71 

Stationary Subtotal 61.21 54.14 54.22 54.94 55.36 55.77 56.22 56.70 57.17 57.66 58.18 

Area-W ideC O N SU M ER PR O D U C TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A R C H ITEC TU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PESTIC ID ES/FER TILIZER S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 R ESID EN TIA L FU EL C O M BU STIO N 9.91 9.63 9.70 9.84 9.91 9.98 10.03 10.08 10.13 10.19 10.23 FA R M IN G O PER A TIO N S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O N STR U C TIO N A N D D EM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D BLO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR ES 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 M A N A G ED BU R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.22 C O O K IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (M ISC ELLA N EO U S PR O C ESSES) 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 10.25 9.98 10.06 10.20 10.27 10.35 10.40 10.45 10.51 10.56 10.61 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 77.96 49.85 44.74 37.10 33.58 30.21 27.19 24.51 22.15 20.03 18.20 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 32.12 19.43 17.85 15.49 14.34 13.23 12.24 11.30 10.42 9.60 8.83 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 38.17 28.71 25.82 22.30 20.87 19.57 18.32 17.13 16.01 14.94 13.94 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 12.81 11.21 10.23 8.88 8.32 7.83 7.40 7.00 6.60 6.21 5.84 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 2.12 2.43 2.39 2.44 2.42 2.39 2.38 2.37 2.36 2.35 2.34 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 2.30 1.90 1.86 1.82 1.78 1.73 1.68 1.63 1.58 1.53 1.48 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 3.75 3.36 3.19 2.93 2.77 2.61 2.46 2.30 2.14 1.99 1.85 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 4.47 3.89 3.65 3.11 2.84 2.58 2.34 2.12 1.91 1.71 1.53 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.29 4.13 3.67 2.95 2.73 2.44 2.22 2.04 1.90 1.78 1.68 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 3.12 3.40 3.33 3.16 3.09 2.92 2.76 2.60 2.46 2.30 2.16 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 29.39 28.29 27.22 24.77 23.54 21.81 20.10 18.45 16.87 15.39 14.01 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 47.00 50.49 63.73 54.89 51.52 47.12 42.73 38.64 34.83 31.35 28.23 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 1.37 1.74 1.78 1.85 1.86 1.87 1.89 1.91 1.92 1.94 1.96 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 13.11 11.68 11.42 11.50 11.52 11.56 11.61 11.67 11.70 11.06 11.09 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.32 0.36 0.37 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 2.52 2.45 2.41 2.37 2.36 2.34 2.33 2.31 2.29 2.27 2.26 OTHER BUSES (OB) 2.17 2.10 2.06 1.98 1.92 1.84 1.75 1.66 1.57 1.47 1.38 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 1.66 1.26 1.22 1.15 1.11 1.06 1.01 0.95 0.90 0.84 0.79 

On-Road Subtotal 274.62 226.61 226.85 198.98 186.89 173.42 160.70 148.88 137.92 127.14 117.94 1

Other Mobile

AIRCRAFT 18.07 21.21 22.36 24.47 25.48 26.52 27.01 27.50 28.02 28.47 29.11 TRAINS 15.12 13.03 12.41 11.54 11.19 10.68 11.69 12.06 12.15 12.24 12.35 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 62.66 66.45 67.71 69.93 71.32 72.75 74.20 75.79 77.46 79.27 81.15 RECREATIONAL BOATS 4.36 5.69 6.07 6.41 6.38 6.36 6.36 6.37 6.40 6.43 6.48 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 125.23 115.45 111.92 101.92 96.97 91.18 87.02 82.70 78.22 73.90 69.20 FARM EQUIPMENT 10.10 9.06 8.71 7.85 7.49 7.19 6.80 6.32 5.85 5.44 5.04 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 235.64 230.96 229.26 222.17 218.87 214.73 213.14 210.80 208.15 205.81 203.37 2

Grand Total 581.72 521.70 520.39 486.29 471.38 454.27 440.46 426.83 413.74 401.18 390.11 3
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - San Francisco Ba

y Area

Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -14.94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Reflash -0.11 -2.17 -1.87 -1.95 -1.74 -1.54 -1.35 -1.17 -1.02 -0.87 -0.73 -0.49 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.03 -0.04 -0.05 -0.05 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.03 -0.03 Idling 0.00 -0.39 -1.20 -2.62 -2.68 -2.72 -2.76 -2.81 -2.85 -2.90 -2.95 -3.05 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 Moyer -0.72 -1.08 -0.79 -0.50 -0.63 -0.75 -0.87 -0.87 -0.86 -0.86 -0.76 -0.58 Off-road 0.00 -0.15 -0.22 -0.84 -1.39 -3.21 -3.25 -3.35 -3.44 -3.30 -3.15 -2.91 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.47 -0.49 -0.52 -0.56 -0.59 -0.62 -0.66 -0.70 -0.79 Summar

y -0.83 -18.72 -4.09 -6.40 -6.97 -8.80 -8.84 -8.84 -8.85 -8.63 -8.35 -7.86 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

R O G - San Francisco Bay A rea - SU M M ER PLA NN ING INV EN TO R Y -- AD JU STED FO R M EA SUR ES AN D C A TEG O R IES TH R O U G H 31 D ESUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELEC TR IC U TILITIES 0.35 0.29 0.23 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 C O G EN ER A TIO N 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N (C O M B U STIO N ) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G (C O M BU STIO N ) 0.62 0.48 0.48 0.49 0.49 0.50 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.52 0.53 M A N U FA C TU R IN G A N D IN D U STR IA L 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R A L PR O C ESSIN G 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 SER V IC E A N D C O M M ER C IA L 0.92 0.95 0.96 0.99 1.00 1.01 1.03 1.04 1.06 1.07 1.09 O TH ER (FU EL C O M B U STIO N ) 0.57 0.40 0.38 0.34 0.32 0.30 0.29 0.27 0.26 0.24 0.23 SEW A G E TR EA TM EN T 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 LA N D FILLS 2.35 2.44 2.45 2.47 2.47 2.48 2.49 2.50 2.50 2.51 2.51 IN C IN ER A TO R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO IL R EM ED IA TIO N 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 O TH ER (W A STE D ISPO SA L) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 LA U N D ER IN G 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 D EG R EA SIN G 6.62 4.89 4.96 5.08 5.15 5.21 5.27 5.34 5.40 5.46 5.52 C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS SO LV EN TS 16.52 16.36 16.58 17.02 17.24 17.45 17.66 17.86 18.05 18.26 18.45 PR IN TIN G 3.65 3.74 3.76 3.82 3.85 3.88 3.91 3.94 3.96 3.99 4.02 A D H ESIV ES A N D SEA LA N TS 8.50 8.79 8.85 8.99 9.05 9.12 9.14 9.15 9.16 9.16 9.17 O TH ER (C LEA N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A TIN G S) 0.52 0.53 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.57 0.57 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.31 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.33 PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G 13.58 13.60 11.72 12.03 12.19 12.34 12.50 12.66 12.83 12.99 13.16 PETR O LEU M M A R K ETIN G 18.55 15.10 14.33 13.82 13.62 13.67 13.75 13.83 13.91 13.99 14.07 O TH ER (PETR O LEU M PR O D U C TIO N A N D M A R K ETIN G 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 

C H EM IC A L 3.82 3.91 3.95 4.05 4.10 4.15 4.20 4.25 4.30 4.35 4.40 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R E 2.17 2.25 2.30 2.39 2.44 2.48 2.54 2.59 2.64 2.70 2.75 M IN ER A L PR O C ESSES 0.66 0.68 0.68 0.70 0.71 0.72 0.73 0.74 0.75 0.76 0.76 M ETA L PR O C ESSES 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 W O O D A N D PA PER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 G LA SS A N D R ELA TED PR O D U C TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ELEC TR O N IC S 0.71 0.72 0.73 0.76 0.77 0.78 0.79 0.80 0.81 0.82 0.83 O TH ER (IN D U STR IA L PR O C ESSES) 4.87 4.74 4.73 4.80 4.84 4.88 4.91 4.94 4.98 5.01 5.05 

Stationary Subtotal 86.09 80.98 78.79 79.68 80.18 80.93 81.67 82.41 83.13 83.86 84.58 

A rea-W ideC O N SU M ER PR O D U C TS 50.60 45.03 44.87 43.16 43.44 43.71 43.94 44.17 44.45 44.67 44.95 A R C H ITEC TU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ES 24.05 24.07 24.28 24.70 24.91 25.10 25.26 25.42 25.59 25.75 25.91 PESTIC ID ES/FER TILIZER S 1.05 1.06 1.05 1.04 1.04 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.08 1.09 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 1.92 1.98 2.01 2.07 2.10 2.13 2.15 2.18 2.21 2.23 2.26 R ESID EN TIA L FU EL C O M B U STIO N 2.48 2.53 2.54 2.56 2.59 2.58 2.60 2.62 2.63 2.65 2.67 FA R M IN G O PER A TIO N S 5.44 5.67 5.75 5.90 5.98 6.05 6.13 6.21 6.28 6.36 6.43 C O N STR U C TIO N A N D D EM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D BLO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR ES 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 M A N A G ED B U R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 C O O K IN G 1.05 1.08 1.09 1.13 1.15 1.16 1.18 1.19 1.21 1.23 1.24 O TH ER (M ISC ELLA N EO U S PR O C ESSES) 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 87.02 81.86 82.04 81.01 81.65 82.22 82.77 83.31 83.90 84.44 85.03 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 100.94 71.53 64.67 54.34 49.55 44.78 40.63 36.93 33.88 31.12 28.85 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 31.29 22.56 21.37 19.62 18.58 17.48 16.57 15.67 14.79 13.92 13.10 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 25.27 20.96 19.37 17.76 17.18 16.69 16.15 15.64 15.16 14.67 14.23 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 6.65 6.13 5.70 5.27 5.13 5.03 4.96 4.89 4.84 4.77 4.70 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 2.57 2.43 2.11 1.72 1.58 1.47 1.39 1.34 1.29 1.26 1.24 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 2.52 2.16 2.08 1.94 1.87 1.78 1.70 1.61 1.52 1.41 1.32 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 4.01 3.24 2.95 2.47 2.22 2.01 1.83 1.65 1.50 1.35 1.23 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.81 1.56 1.43 1.21 1.11 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.75 0.67 0.60 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.01 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.53 0.58 0.57 0.57 0.56 0.54 0.52 0.50 0.48 0.47 0.45 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 3.28 3.57 4.47 3.99 3.75 3.49 3.25 3.01 2.80 2.59 2.40 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 7.45 8.76 8.48 8.07 7.84 7.67 7.54 7.44 7.38 7.35 7.35 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.45 0.43 0.42 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.44 0.43 0.43 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.26 0.31 0.32 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.30 0.28 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.22 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.63 0.43 0.39 0.33 0.31 0.28 0.25 0.23 0.20 0.18 0.16 

On-Road Subtotal 188.26 145.30 134.97 118.65 111.02 103.57 97.04 91.05 85.90 81.11 76.97 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 6.08 6.56 6.78 7.07 7.20 7.37 7.55 7.74 7.92 8.10 8.36 TRAINS 0.91 0.91 0.90 0.88 0.87 0.86 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.88 0.88 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 3.90 3.95 3.94 3.93 3.92 3.92 3.90 3.89 3.88 3.87 3.86 RECREATIONAL BOATS 28.40 28.30 27.75 26.45 25.71 25.09 24.58 24.17 23.84 23.57 23.35 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 1.98 1.90 1.72 1.58 1.56 1.56 1.58 1.61 1.63 1.67 1.71 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 50.98 50.35 47.24 42.54 40.43 38.23 36.46 34.75 33.19 31.76 30.49 FARM EQUIPMENT 2.06 1.89 1.79 1.60 1.52 1.46 1.37 1.26 1.15 1.06 0.97 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 10.40 9.59 9.14 6.69 6.16 5.75 5.38 5.05 4.77 4.52 4.30 

Other Mobile Subtotal 104.70 103.45 99.26 90.75 87.39 84.24 81.70 79.34 77.26 75.42 73.92 

Grand Total 466.07 411.58 395.05 370.09 360.23 350.97 343.18 336.12 330.20 324.82 320.51 3
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - San Francisco Ba

y Area

Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.05 -0.10 -0.08 -0.05 -0.04 -0.02 -0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.05 

Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.07 -0.22 -0.22 -0.29 -0.36 -0.50 

Moyer 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.05 -0.07 -0.10 -0.12 -0.13 -0.11 -0.11 -0.10 -0.08 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.88 -1.89 -1.90 -1.91 -1.92 -1.94 -1.94 -1.96 -1.98 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.22 -0.26 -0.29 -0.33 -0.36 -0.39 -0.44 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Summar

y -0.05 -1.11 -0.11 -2.01 -2.04 -2.28 -2.41 -2.61 -2.62 -2.71 -2.80 -2.96 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 91 

San Joaquin Valley
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 92 

(This page intentionally left blank.) 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

N O X - SJV - SU M M E R PL A N N IN G IN V E N T O R Y -- A D JU ST E D FO R M E A SU R E S A N D C A T E G O R IE S T H R O U G H 31 D EC 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryE LE C T R IC U T ILIT IE S 3.13 3.32 3.27 3.00 3.07 3.15 3.17 3.18 3.19 3.21 3.22 C O G E N E R A T IO N 10.57 10.04 9.36 7.11 7.27 7.28 7.33 7.39 7.44 7.48 7.54 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N (C O M B U ST IO N ) 15.52 11.19 11.06 10.20 10.09 9.99 9.94 9.88 9.83 9.77 9.72 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G (C O M B U ST IO N ) 0.23 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 M A N U FA C T U R IN G A N D IN D U ST R IA L 36.62 37.72 38.45 39.42 39.92 40.55 41.29 42.02 42.76 43.51 44.25 4FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R A L PR O C E SSIN G 30.49 30.50 28.51 19.74 17.24 14.75 12.93 11.19 9.44 7.71 6.00 SE R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 4.65 4.41 4.43 4.45 4.47 4.50 4.51 4.53 4.56 4.58 4.61 O T H E R (FU E L C O M B U ST IO N ) 1.92 1.59 1.53 1.42 1.37 1.32 1.28 1.24 1.20 1.15 1.11 SE W A G E T R E A T M E N T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA N D FILLS 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 IN C IN E R A T O R S 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 SO IL R E M E D IA T IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (W A ST E D ISPO SA L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA U N D E R IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D E G R E A SIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O C E SS SO LV E N T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PR IN T IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A D H E SIV E S A N D SE A LA N T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (C LE A N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A T IN G S) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N 0.09 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 PE T R O LE U M M A R K E T IN G 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 O T H E R (PE T R O LE U M PR O D U C T IO N A N D M A R K E T I

N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C H E M IC A L 0.28 0.30 0.31 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.38 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R E 9.28 9.15 9.10 9.06 9.02 8.98 8.93 8.91 8.88 8.86 8.85 M IN E R A L PR O C E SSE S 2.28 2.36 2.37 2.47 2.54 2.58 2.64 2.68 2.74 2.81 2.84 M E T A L PR O C E SSE S 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 W O O D A N D P A P E R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 G LA SS A N D R E LA T E D PR O D U C T S 9.60 9.38 7.64 8.02 8.16 8.37 8.56 8.73 8.94 9.08 9.32 O T H E R (IN D U ST R IA L PR O C E SSE S) 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 E xtra-inventory R eductions (D istrict R ules) 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.81 -1.01 -1.22 -1.43 -1.59 -1.72 -1.85 -1.96 

Stationary Subtotal 125.21 120.80 116.86 105.21 103.27 101.39 100.30 99.33 98.43 97.51 96.70 9

A rea-W ideC O N SU M E R PR O D U C T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A R C H IT E C T U R A L C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O C E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PE ST IC ID E S/FE R T ILIZE R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A SP H A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 R E SID E N T IA L FU E L C O M B U ST IO N 3.24 3.08 3.03 2.96 2.96 2.96 2.97 2.97 2.98 2.98 2.99 FA R M IN G O PE R A T IO N S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O N ST R U C T IO N A N D D E M O LIT IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G IT IV E W IN D B LO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR E S 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 8.28 8.16 8.14 8.10 8.08 8.06 8.04 8.02 8.00 7.98 7.96 C O O K IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (M ISC E LLA N E O U S PR O C E SSE S) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 11.54 11.27 11.20 11.09 11.07 11.05 11.04 11.02 11.01 10.99 10.98 1
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 31.07 21.58 19.78 16.51 15.33 14.13 12.79 11.57 10.45 9.42 8.54 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 13.15 9.70 8.88 7.44 6.95 6.47 5.93 5.45 5.00 4.57 4.17 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 24.37 19.23 17.70 15.06 14.22 13.41 12.45 11.53 10.66 9.85 9.11 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 14.71 13.08 12.07 10.27 9.74 9.20 8.64 8.10 7.58 7.09 6.63 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 4.90 4.45 4.17 3.83 3.80 3.77 3.71 3.67 3.64 3.61 3.59 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 1.01 0.97 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.90 0.89 0.88 0.87 0.85 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 2.31 2.05 1.95 1.74 1.69 1.63 1.54 1.44 1.35 1.25 1.16 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 2.69 2.41 2.24 1.96 1.89 1.82 1.76 1.69 1.64 1.59 1.53 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.36 5.43 4.87 3.87 3.71 3.45 3.19 2.98 2.82 2.68 2.55 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 2.33 3.35 3.21 2.87 2.82 2.68 2.52 2.36 2.22 2.08 1.95 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 19.84 21.33 20.48 18.24 17.72 16.81 15.61 14.42 13.24 12.11 11.03 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 198.24 213.30 256.26 215.35 205.92 192.43 178.47 164.60 150.90 137.81 125.60 1MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.66 1.34 1.36 1.35 1.36 1.39 1.38 1.39 1.40 1.41 1.43 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 2.11 2.24 2.22 2.18 2.26 2.33 2.36 2.38 2.41 2.38 2.40 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.30 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.34 0.35 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 2.22 2.39 2.38 2.25 2.20 2.25 2.14 2.12 2.00 1.88 1.75 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.92 1.07 1.05 0.99 0.99 0.96 0.92 0.87 0.83 0.78 0.73 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 1.26 1.10 1.06 0.97 0.96 0.94 0.90 0.86 0.82 0.77 0.73 Extra-inventory Reductions (District Rules) 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.80 -4.50 -5.20 -5.90 -6.30 -5.25 -4.20 -3.50 

On-Road Subtotal 322.40 325.26 360.90 302.28 288.24 269.66 249.61 230.35 212.90 196.30 180.61 1

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 2.94 3.05 3.16 4.07 4.16 4.34 4.53 4.61 4.68 4.76 4.84 TRAINS 28.46 23.64 22.24 21.10 20.87 20.04 20.36 20.50 20.58 20.67 20.78 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 1.06 1.02 1.06 1.11 1.08 1.05 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.09 RECREATIONAL BOATS 3.89 5.02 5.33 5.59 5.56 5.54 5.52 5.52 5.53 5.55 5.58 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.20 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 75.42 70.16 67.79 61.66 58.62 55.46 52.52 49.65 46.77 44.14 41.43 FARM EQUIPMENT 71.22 63.95 61.53 55.41 52.85 50.77 48.03 44.60 41.25 38.38 35.50 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 183.15 166.99 161.26 149.09 143.30 137.36 132.16 126.09 120.04 114.75 109.42 1

Grand Total 642.30 624.32 650.23 567.67 545.88 519.46 493.11 466.79 442.38 419.55 397.70 3
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - SJVChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 200

6 200

8 200

9 201

0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 

HHDD Trucks 0 -63.22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Reflash -0.69 -8.75 -11.44 -11.94 -10.95 -9.96 -8.95 -7.96 -7.04 -6.12 -5.25 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.03 -0.04 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.04 -0.04 -0.03 Idling 0.00 -2.02 -4.68 -9.99 -10.36 -10.73 -11.09 -11.45 -11.80 -12.15 -12.49 -1AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 Moyer -0.82 -1.09 -0.92 -0.59 -0.74 -0.90 -1.05 -1.05 -1.05 -1.05 -0.94 Off-road 0.00 -0.15 -0.23 -0.81 -1.34 -2.28 -2.27 -2.34 -2.40 -2.22 -2.03 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.05 Rule 4702 5.53 6.45 5.40 -1.93 -3.92 -5.89 -7.11 -8.24 -9.34 -10.39 -11.43 -1Rule 4103 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 Rule 9310 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.22 0.22 0.33 0.33 0.44 0.54 0.65 Other District Rules (4207, 4308, 4309, & 9510) 0 0 0 4.61 5.51 6.42 7.328 7.886 6.969 6.052 5.46 4Summary 4.02 -68.73 -11.82 -20.5

6 -21.61 -23.1

6 -22.84 -22.85 -24.25 -25.37 -26.07 -2

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

R O G - SJV - SU M M E R PL A N N IN G IN V E N T O R Y -- A D JU ST E D FO R M E A SU R E S A N D C A T E G O R IE S T H R O U G H 31 D E C 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryE LE C T R IC U T ILIT IE S 0.50 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.57 0.57 C O G E N E R A T IO N 0.39 0.43 0.45 0.45 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 O IL A N D G A S P R O D U C T IO N (C O M B U ST IO N ) 3.06 3.29 3.41 3.28 3.26 3.24 3.24 3.24 3.23 3.23 3.23 P E T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G (C O M B U S T IO N ) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 M A N U FA C T U R IN G A N D IN D U S T R IA L 0.36 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.43 0.44 0.45 0.45 0.46 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R A L P R O C E S S IN G 2.53 2.50 2.49 2.47 2.46 2.45 2.44 2.43 2.42 2.41 2.40 S E R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 O T H E R (FU E L C O M B U S T IO N ) 0.21 0.16 0.16 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.10 S E W A G E T R E A T M E N T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA N D FILLS 1.49 1.59 1.62 1.68 1.71 1.74 1.76 1.79 1.82 1.85 1.88 IN C IN E R A T O R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 S O IL R E M E D IA T IO N 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 O T H E R (W A S T E D ISP O S A L) 56.67 57.44 59.42 63.36 64.10 64.81 65.49 66.00 69.33 72.73 73.41 LA U N D E R IN G 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 D E G R E A S IN G 8.74 1.47 1.46 1.46 1.47 1.49 1.50 1.51 1.53 1.54 1.55 C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D P R O C E S S S O LV E N T S 7.80 7.66 7.77 8.17 7.55 7.79 7.98 8.17 8.37 8.61 8.80 P R IN T IN G 1.60 1.66 1.67 1.74 1.78 1.81 1.85 1.88 1.92 1.96 1.99 A D H E S IV E S A N D S E A LA N T S 2.99 3.19 3.19 3.32 3.38 3.45 3.52 3.59 3.66 3.73 3.80 O T H E R (C LE A N IN G A N D S U R FA C E C O A T IN G S ) 3.01 3.38 3.52 3.74 3.85 3.97 4.08 4.19 4.30 4.41 4.51 O IL A N D G A S P R O D U C T IO N 29.77 27.92 28.35 27.54 27.15 26.77 26.46 26.14 25.83 25.51 25.20 P E T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G 0.72 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.67 0.67 0.67 P E T R O LE U M M A R K E T IN G 7.19 7.55 7.68 7.91 8.06 8.20 8.33 8.45 8.58 8.71 8.83 O T H E R (PE T R O LE U M PR O D U C T IO N A N D M A R K E T I 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 

C H E M IC A L 2.18 2.35 2.42 2.50 2.56 2.60 2.65 2.69 2.75 2.79 2.85 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R E 12.78 12.72 12.80 11.77 11.86 11.95 12.05 12.16 12.26 12.36 12.46 M IN E R A L P R O C E S S E S 0.38 0.39 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.44 0.45 0.45 0.47 0.48 0.48 M E T A L P R O C E S S E S 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.44 0.45 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.49 0.50 W O O D A N D P A PE R 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 G LA SS A N D R E LA T E D P R O D U C T S 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.43 0.44 0.45 O T H E R (IN D U S T R IA L P R O C E S S E S ) 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 

E xtra-inventory A djustm ent 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.13 -1.11 -1.10 -1.08 -1.07 -1.06 -1.04 -1.03 

Stationary S ub total 143.78 136.75 139.87 141.95 142.25 143.39 144.51 145.46 149.26 153.18 154.31 1

A rea-W ideC O N S U M E R PR O D U C T S 25.13 23.48 23.58 23.00 23.32 23.61 24.09 24.56 25.04 25.52 25.99 A R C H IT E C T U R A L C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D P R O C 13.63 11.09 11.20 11.39 11.49 11.58 11.68 11.79 11.89 11.99 12.09 P E S T IC ID E S /FE R T ILIZ E R S 15.58 17.91 17.91 17.91 17.91 17.91 17.91 17.91 17.91 17.91 17.91 A S P H A LT P A V IN G / R O O FIN G 2.93 2.97 2.99 3.01 3.02 3.03 3.04 3.04 3.05 3.06 3.06 R E S ID E N T IA L FU E L C O M B U ST IO N 0.49 0.47 0.45 0.44 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.40 0.39 0.39 0.39 FA R M IN G O P E R A T IO N S 62.03 65.38 66.50 59.86 51.71 52.42 53.37 54.33 55.28 56.23 57.18 C O N S T R U C T IO N A N D D E M O LIT IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 P A V E D R O A D D U S T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N P A V E D R O A D D U S T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G IT IV E W IN D B LO W N D U S T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR E S 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D IS P O S A L 13.73 13.64 13.60 12.32 12.28 12.24 12.20 12.16 12.12 12.08 12.04 C O O K IN G 0.45 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.48 0.49 0.50 0.51 0.51 O T H E R (M IS C E LLA N E O U S P R O C E S SE S ) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

A rea-W id e S ub total 134.06 135.47 136.77 128.47 120.70 121.78 122.20 124.79 126.28 127.78 129.29 1
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 39.99 31.12 28.59 23.93 22.43 20.79 19.08 17.44 15.95 14.60 13.45 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 14.19 11.60 10.72 9.07 8.50 7.92 7.43 6.94 6.46 6.00 5.59 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 17.71 15.76 14.82 13.24 12.90 12.55 12.02 11.47 10.92 10.38 9.92 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 9.50 8.64 8.11 7.24 7.08 6.90 6.72 6.52 6.31 6.12 5.94 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 6.05 5.12 4.42 3.43 3.19 3.01 2.84 2.71 2.59 2.51 2.44 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 1.32 1.19 1.10 0.94 0.89 0.85 0.79 0.74 0.70 0.65 0.60 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 3.63 2.91 2.66 2.18 2.03 1.88 1.69 1.50 1.34 1.18 1.03 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.48 1.25 1.13 0.90 0.84 0.78 0.73 0.67 0.62 0.57 0.51 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.02 0.19 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.14 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.10 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.12 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.45 0.53 0.53 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.49 0.47 0.45 0.43 0.42 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 14.63 16.01 19.40 17.07 16.37 15.59 14.78 13.95 13.10 12.27 11.47 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 3.59 6.13 5.92 5.50 5.44 5.43 5.30 5.27 5.26 5.28 5.31 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.12 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.29 0.23 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.49 0.36 0.33 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.20 0.18 0.16 0.15 

On-Road Subtotal 113.88 101.65 98.71 85.21 81.37 77.38 73.03 68.80 64.80 61.05 57.70 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 6.57 6.78 6.98 8.66 8.83 9.16 9.51 9.65 9.79 9.93 10.08 TRAINS 1.63 1.64 1.61 1.57 1.55 1.54 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.56 1.56 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 RECREATIONAL BOATS 20.27 20.45 20.08 19.18 18.66 18.22 17.86 17.57 17.33 17.14 16.99 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 5.78 7.23 7.43 7.76 7.94 8.15 8.38 8.64 8.90 9.19 9.48 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 22.12 22.05 20.80 18.84 17.97 17.07 16.23 15.45 14.72 14.04 13.44 FARM EQUIPMENT 14.60 13.28 12.60 11.19 10.61 10.14 9.52 8.70 7.89 7.20 6.58 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 5.18 5.08 4.83 3.59 3.33 3.13 2.96 2.80 2.66 2.54 2.44 

Other Mobile Subtotal 76.28 76.62 74.45 70.89 68.99 67.51 66.10 64.44 62.93 61.67 60.64 

Grand Total 468.01 450.49 449.80 426.52 413.32 410.06 405.84 403.49 403.27 403.68 401.94 4
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - SJ

V

Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -4.52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -7.73 -4.98 -4.75 -4.28 -4.05 -3.83 -3.75 -3.68 -3.60 -3.52 -3.45 -3.30 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 Moyer 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.05 -0.07 -0.09 -0.11 -0.11 -0.11 -0.11 -0.10 -0.08 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.07 -0.10 -0.13 -0.16 -0.19 -0.21 -0.25 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Composting Green Waste 46.60 47.20 49.13 53.00 53.67 54.33 55.00 55.40 58.70 62.00 62.67 64.00 

Composting Biosolids 9.58 9.70 9.74 9.80 9.86 9.90 9.90 10.00 10.02 10.10 10.10 10.20 Rule 4602-4612 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.82 -0.83 -0.83 -0.84 -0.84 -0.85 -0.85 -0.86 Rule 4694 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.23 -1.24 -1.25 -1.26 -1.27 -1.28 -1.29 -1.30 -1.32 Rule 4570 0.00 0.00 0.00 -8.88 -18.16 -18.56 -19.09 -19.63 -20.17 -20.70 -21.24 -22.31 

Rule 4301 0.00 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 Rule 4401 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.13 -1.11 -1.10 -1.08 -1.07 -1.06 -1.04 -1.03 -1.00 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.00 -1.02 -1.03 -1.05 -1.07 -1.09 -1.11 -1.13 -1.17 Summar

y 48.44 47.35 54.06 46.18 37.00 37.43 37.57 37.55 40.36 43.24 43.41 43.84 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

P M 2.5 - S JV - S U M M E R P L A N N IN G IN V E N T O R Y -- A D JU S T E D F O R M E A S U R E S A N D C A T E G O R IE S T H R O U G H 31 SUBCATEGO RY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 S tation ar yE L E C T R IC U T IL IT IE S 0.5 6 0 .60 0.61 0.60 0.61 0.62 0.62 0.6 2 0 .62 0.62 0.62 C O G E N E R A T IO N 1.0 8 1 .16 1.21 1.22 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.2 6 1 .27 1.28 1.29 O IL A N D G A S P R O D U C T IO N (C O M B U S T IO N ) 0.9 6 1 .05 1.09 1.05 1.05 1.04 1.04 1.0 5 1 .05 1.05 1.05 P E T R O L E U M R E F IN IN G (C O M B U S T IO N ) 0.0 4 0 .04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.0 4 0 .04 0.04 0.04 M A N U F A C T U R IN G A N D IN D U S T R IA L 0.7 4 0 .79 0.81 0.83 0.84 0.86 0.87 0.8 9 0 .91 0.92 0.94 F O O D A N D A G R IC U L T U R A L P R O C E S S IN G 1.8 5 1 .79 1.74 1.65 1.61 1.57 1.52 1.4 8 1 .44 1.40 1.36 S E R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 0.4 1 0 .42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.43 0.43 0.4 3 0 .43 0.44 0.44 O T H E R (F U E L C O M B U S T IO N ) 0.0 8 0 .07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.0 6 0 .06 0.05 0.05 S E W A G E T R E A T M E N T 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 L A N D F IL L S 0.0 3 0 .03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.0 4 0 .04 0.04 0.04 IN C IN E R A T O R S 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 S O IL R E M E D IA T IO N 0.0 6 0 .06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.0 7 0 .07 0.07 0.07 O T H E R (W A S T E D IS P O S A L ) 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 L A U N D E R IN G 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 D E G R E A S IN G 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 C O A T IN G S A N D R E L A T E D P R O C E S S S O L V E N T S 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 P R IN T IN G 0.0 5 0 .05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0 5 0 .05 0.05 0.06 A D H E S IV E S A N D S E A L A N T S 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (C L E A N IN G A N D S U R F A C E C O A T IN G S ) 0.0 0 0 .01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0 1 0 .01 0.01 0.01 O IL A N D G A S P R O D U C T IO N 0.0 1 0 .01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0 1 0 .01 0.01 0.01 P E T R O L E U M R E F IN IN G 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 P E T R O L E U M M A R K E T IN G 0.0 3 0 .03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.0 3 0 .03 0.03 0.03 O T H E R (P E T R O L E U M P R O D U C T IO N A N D M A R K E T I 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 C H E M IC A L 2.0 1 2 .25 2.36 2.49 2.54 2.62 2.67 2.7 3 2 .80 2.86 2.93 F O O D A N D A G R IC U L T U R E 4.8 0 4 .78 4.76 4.75 4.71 4.70 4.71 4.7 1 4 .72 4.72 4.71 M IN E R A L P R O C E S S E S 1.9 2 1 .98 2.01 2.07 2.12 2.15 2.17 2.2 0 2 .23 2.26 2.32 M E T A L P R O C E S S E S 0.1 3 0 .14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.1 6 0 .16 0.17 0.18 W O O D A N D P A P E R 0.4 2 0 .41 0.42 0.44 0.45 0.47 0.47 0.4 8 0 .48 0.49 0.49 G L A S S A N D R E L A T E D P R O D U C T S 1.0 0 1 .03 1.03 1.08 1.10 1.12 1.15 1.1 7 1 .20 1.22 1.25 O T H E R (IN D U S T R IA L P R O C E S S E S ) 0.1 1 0 .12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.1 4 0 .14 0.14 0.15 

S tation ar y S u b total 16.2 8 16 .83 17.0 2 17 .18 1 7.29 17.4 1 17 .52 17.6 3 17 .76 17.8 9 18 .04 

A rea-W id eC O N S U M E R P R O D U C T S 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 A R C H IT E C T U R A L C O A T IN G S A N D R E L A T E D P R O C E 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 

P E S T IC ID E S /F E R T IL IZ E R S 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 A S P H A L T P A V IN G / R O O F IN G 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0 .00 0.00 0.00 R E S ID E N T IA L F U E L C O M B U S T IO N 0.8 5 0 .82 0.80 0.77 0.75 0.74 0.73 0.7 2 0 .70 0.69 0.70 F A R M IN G O P E R A T IO N S 27.5 2 24 .16 22.8 0 22 .93 2 2.99 20.9 9 21 .09 21.2 0 21 .30 21.4 0 21 .51 C O N S T R U C T IO N A N D D E M O L IT IO N 2.7 3 2 .45 2.68 2.44 2.67 2.69 2.47 2.4 9 2 .51 2.53 2.55 P A V E D R O A D D U S T 7.8 5 7 .95 8.13 7.82 8.09 8.35 8.56 8.7 6 8 .97 9.17 9.38 U N P A V E D R O A D D U S T 11.3 7 10 .82 10.6 9 10 .41 1 0.44 10.2 4 10 .28 10.3 2 10 .35 10.3 9 10 .42 F U G IT IV E W IN D B L O W N D U S T 15.2 4 13 .96 13.4 5 13 .22 1 3.18 12.4 7 12 .43 12.3 9 12 .35 12.3 1 12 .27 F IR E S 0.1 5 0 .16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.1 8 0 .18 0.18 0.18 M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D IS P O S A L 16.6 0 16 .48 16.4 4 16 .37 1 6.33 16.3 0 16 .26 16.2 3 16 .19 16.1 5 16 .11 C O O K IN G 1.2 2 1 .24 1.25 1.29 1.31 1.33 1.35 1.3 7 1 .39 1.41 1.43 O T H E R (M IS C E L L A N E O U S P R O C E S S E S ) 0.0 2 0 .02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0 2 0 .02 0.02 0.02 

A rea-W id e S u b total 83.5 5 78 .04 76.4 4 75 .44 7 5.94 73.3 0 73 .36 73.6 6 73 .96 74.2 6 74 .58 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 0.77 0.77 0.78 0.80 0.83 0.86 0.89 0.90 0.92 0.93 0.95 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.31 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.54 0.65 0.66 0.68 0.71 0.74 0.77 0.79 0.81 0.82 0.84 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.24 0.35 0.35 0.37 0.39 0.41 0.43 0.44 0.46 0.47 0.48 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.56 0.63 0.62 0.56 0.56 0.55 0.53 0.51 0.49 0.47 0.45 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 8.92 9.01 10.81 8.69 8.13 7.56 7.01 6.48 5.96 5.47 5.00 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 

On-Road Subtotal 11.56 12.05 13.86 11.70 11.23 10.74 10.27 9.77 9.28 8.81 8.38 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 1.33 1.36 1.43 2.02 2.08 2.19 2.31 2.35 2.39 2.44 2.48 TRAINS 0.60 0.60 0.59 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.71 0.79 0.83 0.92 0.97 1.02 1.08 1.14 1.20 1.27 1.33 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 3.81 3.52 3.41 2.99 2.81 2.64 2.46 2.26 2.07 1.89 1.73 FARM EQUIPMENT 4.03 3.63 3.48 3.03 2.89 2.79 2.64 2.42 2.19 1.99 1.82 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 10.60 10.02 9.85 9.60 9.38 9.27 9.11 8.79 8.47 8.21 7.99 

Grand Total 94.16 88.01 86.22 84.95 85.23 82.46 82.37 82.36 82.34 82.38 82.48 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

PM2.5 - SJVChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -2.55 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 -0.02 Idling 0.00 -0.03 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 Moyer 0.00 -0.06 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.06 -0.06 -0.05 -0.05 -0.03 Off-road 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.08 -0.13 -0.18 -0.21 -0.23 -0.23 -0.23 -0.23 -0.21 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.03 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.06 Summar

y 0.00 -2.65 -0.11 -0.23 -0.29 -0.36 -0.38 -0.41 -0.41 -0.41 -0.40 -0.37 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried ca
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

SO X - SJV - SU M M E R PL A N N IN G IN V E N T O R Y -- A D JU ST E D FO R M E A SU R E S A N D C A T E G O R IE S T H R O U G H 31 D SUBCATEG O RY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 S tation ar yE L E C T R IC U T IL IT IE S 0 .89 0 .9 0 0.9 0 0 .90 0 .9 0 0.9 1 0 .91 0 .9 1 0.9 2 0 .92 0 .9 2 C O G E N E R A T IO N 0 .71 0 .7 5 0.7 8 0 .77 0 .7 7 0.7 7 0 .77 0 .7 7 0.7 7 0 .77 0 .7 7 O IL A N D G A S P R O D U C T IO N (C O M B U S T IO N ) 2 .05 2 .2 5 2.3 5 2 .26 2 .2 5 2.2 4 2 .25 2 .2 5 2.2 6 2 .27 2 .2 8 P E T R O L E U M R E F IN IN G (C O M B U S T IO N ) 0 .07 0 .0 7 0.0 7 0 .07 0 .0 7 0.0 7 0 .07 0 .0 7 0.0 7 0 .07 0 .0 7 M A N U F A C T U R IN G A N D IN D U S T R IA L 6 .27 6 .8 2 6.8 9 7 .06 7 .1 4 7.2 9 7 .44 7 .5 8 7.7 3 7 .88 8 .0 2 F O O D A N D A G R IC U L T U R A L P R O C E S S IN G 2 .55 2 .5 3 2.5 2 2 .50 2 .4 9 2.4 8 2 .47 2 .4 7 2.4 6 2 .45 2 .4 4 S E R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 0 .87 0 .9 0 0.9 1 0 .91 0 .9 1 0.9 1 0 .91 0 .9 1 0.9 1 0 .92 0 .9 2 O T H E R (F U E L C O M B U S T IO N ) 0 .03 0 .0 4 0.0 4 0 .04 0 .0 4 0.0 4 0 .04 0 .0 4 0.0 4 0 .04 0 .0 4 S E W A G E T R E A T M E N T 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 L A N D F IL L S 0 .06 0 .0 6 0.0 6 0 .06 0 .0 6 0.0 6 0 .06 0 .0 6 0.0 6 0 .06 0 .0 7 IN C IN E R A T O R S 0 .01 0 .0 1 0.0 1 0 .01 0 .0 1 0.0 1 0 .01 0 .0 1 0.0 1 0 .01 0 .0 1 S O IL R E M E D IA T IO N 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 O T H E R (W A S T E D IS P O S A L ) 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 L A U N D E R IN G 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 D E G R E A S IN G 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 C O A T IN G S A N D R E L A T E D P R O C E S S S O L V E N T S 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 P R IN T IN G 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 A D H E S IV E S A N D S E A L A N T S 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 O T H E R (C L E A N IN G A N D S U R F A C E C O A T IN G S ) 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 O IL A N D G A S P R O D U C T IO N 0 .19 0 .2 2 0.2 4 0 .24 0 .2 4 0.2 4 0 .24 0 .2 4 0.2 5 0 .25 0 .2 5 P E T R O L E U M R E F IN IN G 0 .33 0 .3 3 0.3 3 0 .33 0 .3 3 0.3 3 0 .33 0 .3 3 0.3 3 0 .33 0 .3 3 P E T R O L E U M M A R K E T IN G 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 O T H E R (P E T R O L E U M P R O D U C T IO N A N D M A R K E T I 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 C H E M IC A L 0 .93 0 .9 7 0.9 9 1 .02 1 .0 4 1.0 6 1 .08 1 .0 9 1.1 1 1 .13 1 .1 4 F O O D A N D A G R IC U L T U R E 0 .79 0 .7 9 0.7 9 0 .79 0 .8 0 0.8 0 0 .80 0 .8 0 0.8 0 0 .81 0 .8 1 M IN E R A L P R O C E S S E S 1 .47 1 .5 3 1.5 5 1 .61 1 .6 4 1.6 7 1 .70 1 .7 4 1.7 7 1 .80 1 .8 3 M E T A L P R O C E S S E S 0 .01 0 .0 1 0.0 1 0 .01 0 .0 1 0.0 1 0 .01 0 .0 2 0.0 2 0 .02 0 .0 2 W O O D A N D P A P E R 0 .02 0 .0 2 0.0 2 0 .02 0 .0 2 0.0 2 0 .02 0 .0 2 0.0 2 0 .02 0 .0 2 G L A S S A N D R E L A T E D P R O D U C T S 3 .70 3 .7 9 3.8 1 3 .99 4 .0 7 4.1 7 4 .26 4 .3 4 4.4 4 4 .52 4 .6 3 O T H E R (IN D U S T R IA L P R O C E S S E S ) 0 .22 0 .2 3 0.2 3 0 .24 0 .2 4 0.2 4 0 .25 0 .2 5 0.2 6 0 .26 0 .2 6 

S tation ar y S u b to tal 21 .15 2 2 .2 0 2 2.4 6 22 .81 2 3 .0 2 2 3.3 2 23 .62 2 3 .9 1 2 4.2 1 24 .51 2 4 .8 2 

A rea-W id eC O N S U M E R P R O D U C T S 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 A R C H IT E C T U R A L C O A T IN G S A N D R E L A T E D P R O C E 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 

P E S T IC ID E S /F E R T IL IZ E R S 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 A S P H A L T P A V IN G / R O O F IN G 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 R E S ID E N T IA L F U E L C O M B U S T IO N 0 .06 0 .0 6 0.0 6 0 .06 0 .0 6 0.0 6 0 .05 0 .0 6 0.0 5 0 .05 0 .0 5 F A R M IN G O P E R A T IO N S 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 C O N S T R U C T IO N A N D D E M O L IT IO N 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 P A V E D R O A D D U S T 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 U N P A V E D R O A D D U S T 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 F U G IT IV E W IN D B L O W N D U S T 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 F IR E S 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D IS P O S A L 1 .15 1 .1 5 1.1 5 1 .14 1 .1 4 1.1 4 1 .14 1 .1 4 1.1 4 1 .14 1 .1 4 C O O K IN G 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 O T H E R (M IS C E L L A N E O U S P R O C E S S E S ) 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 0.0 0 0 .00 0 .0 0 

A rea -W id e S u b to tal 1 .21 1 .2 0 1.2 0 1 .20 1 .2 0 1.2 0 1 .20 1 .2 0 1.1 9 1 .19 1 .1 9 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 0.26 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.21 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.05 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.18 0.23 0.23 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.47 1.76 2.20 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.27 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

On-Road Subtotal 2.36 2.62 3.04 0.71 0.73 0.75 0.77 0.78 0.80 0.82 0.84 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.42 0.45 0.45 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.54 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.57 TRAINS 0.68 0.71 0.73 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 0.25 0.31 0.33 0.12 0.13 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 0.46 0.48 0.49 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 2.41 2.53 2.58 0.87 0.89 0.86 0.83 0.84 0.86 0.88 0.90 

Grand Total 3.63 3.74 3.79 2.07 2.10 2.06 2.03 2.04 2.06 2.07 2.09 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

SOX - SJVChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.25 -0.27 -0.34 -0.37 -0.39 -0.41 -0.44 -0.47 -0.53 Summar

y 0.00 -0.50 0.00 -0.25 -0.27 -0.34 -0.37 -0.39 -0.41 -0.44 -0.47 -0.53 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried cate
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 105 

Southern Mountain Counties
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 106 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Southern Mountain Counties - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THSUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 

StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 COGENERATION 0.32 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.32 0.32 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 WOOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Stationary Subtotal 1.09 1.08 1.09 1.10 1.13 1.13 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.15 

Area-WideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCES

S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 3.09 3.09 3.09 3.09 3.09 3.09 3.09 3.09 3.09 3.09 3.09 COOKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Area-Wide Subtotal 3.17 3.17 3.17 3.16 3.1

6 3.1

6 3.1

6 3.1

6 3.1

6 3.1

6 3.16 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 0.86 0.64 0.61 0.55 0.51 0.48 0.44 0.40 0.37 0.34 0.30 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.21 0.92 0.90 0.84 0.81 0.78 0.75 0.72 0.68 0.65 0.62 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.60 0.59 0.56 0.51 0.48 0.45 0.42 0.39 0.37 0.34 0.31 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.26 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.29 0.28 0.27 0.26 0.24 0.23 0.22 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.02 0.27 0.23 0.17 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.09 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.09 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.08 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.05 0.07 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 

On-Road Subtotal 3.79 3.67 3.57 3.30 3.1

6 3.01 2.8

6 2.72 2.58 2.44 2.30 

Other Mobile

AIRCRAFT 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 TRAINS 0.47 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.35 RECREATIONAL BOATS 1.69 2.18 2.32 2.44 2.43 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.43 2.45 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 2.30 2.17 2.10 1.92 1.83 1.74 1.66 1.57 1.49 1.40 1.30 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.53 0.48 0.46 0.42 0.40 0.39 0.37 0.34 0.32 0.30 0.28 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

OFF-ROAD SUB-TOTAL 5.04 5.29 5.33 5.21 5.09 4.97 4.87 4.77 4.67 4.58 4.48 

TOTAL INVENTORY 13.10 13.22 13.15 12.77 12.55 12.28 12.03 11.79 11.55 11.32 11.10 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - Southern Mountain CountiesChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y -0.01 -0.04 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.04 -0.04 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried cate
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - Southern Mountain Counties - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUSUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 201

Stationary

ELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0COGENERATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0DEGREASING 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.1COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.1ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.16 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.1FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0MINERAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0WOOD AND PAPER 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0

Stationary Subtotal 0.51 0.51 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.52 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.54 0.5

Area-WideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.56 0.50 0.50 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.49 0.49 0.50 0.5ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENT 0.30 0.30 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.3

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 1.09 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.13 1.14 1.14 1.15 1.15 1.16 1.1RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.2FARMING OPERATIONS 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.2CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 8.30 8.30 8.30 8.30 8.30 8.30 8.30 8.30 8.30 8.30 8.3COOKING 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0

Area-Wide Subtotal 11.77 11.74 11.75 11.73 11.74 11.75 11.76 11.77 11.78 11.80 11.8
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 1.32 1.00 0.94 0.83 0.77 0.70 0.64 0.59 0.54 0.49 0.4LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.44 1.18 1.17 1.12 1.09 1.06 1.03 1.01 0.98 0.94 0.9LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.55 0.54 0.52 0.47 0.45 0.43 0.40 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.3MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.18 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.1LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.10 0.11 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.0MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.13 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.0HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.0HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.15 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.2HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0

On-Road Subtotal 4.14 3.63 3.49 3.20 3.05 2.90 2.76 2.63 2.50 2.37 2.2

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.0TRAINS 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.0RECREATIONAL BOATS 8.34 7.76 7.54 7.05 6.77 6.52 6.32 6.14 5.99 5.86 5.7OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 2.31 2.86 3.02 3.22 3.32 3.42 3.54 3.66 3.78 3.91 4.0OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 0.75 0.69 0.65 0.59 0.57 0.54 0.52 0.49 0.48 0.46 0.4FARM EQUIPMENT 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.0FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0

OFF-ROAD SUB-TOTAL 11.71 11.60 11.50 11.10 10.88 10.71 10.59 10.50 10.44 10.42 10.4

TOTAL INVENTORY 28.12 27.48 27.24 26.55 26.20 25.89 25.63 25.43 25.26 25.12 25.0
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - Southern Mountain CountiesChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 

Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 113 

Statewide
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 114 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

N O X - ST W D - SU M M E R PL A N N IN G IN V E N T O R Y -- A D JU ST E D FO R M E A SU R E S A N D C A T E G O R IE S T H R O U G H 31 D E C 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryE LE C T R IC U T ILIT IE S 33.64 37.38 37.54 37.75 38.07 38.52 38.33 38.51 38.69 38.88 39.07 C O G E N E R A T IO N 27.76 27.63 27.23 25.01 25.41 25.77 25.93 26.07 26.20 26.33 26.47 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N (C O M B U ST IO N ) 29.44 25.37 25.47 24.96 25.40 25.41 25.56 25.74 25.93 26.08 26.26 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G (C O M B U ST IO N ) 29.17 24.60 24.72 24.05 24.02 24.09 24.23 24.42 24.61 24.79 24.98 M A N U FA C T U R IN G A N D IN D U ST R IA L 102.72 106.06 106.80 108.03 108.94 109.82 111.08 112.55 114.01 115.51 117.06 1FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R A L PR O C E SSIN G 52.48 50.48 48.35 38.92 36.09 33.28 31.08 28.96 26.80 24.64 22.51 SE R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 51.30 51.48 51.05 50.14 49.83 48.75 48.44 48.04 47.67 47.33 47.21 O T H E R (FU E L C O M B U ST IO N ) 22.11 19.49 18.91 17.74 17.18 16.54 16.13 15.72 15.32 14.91 14.49 SE W A G E T R E A T M E N T 0.36 0.37 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.40 0.41 0.41 0.42 0.42 LA N D FILLS 0.98 1.01 1.03 1.07 1.08 1.10 1.12 1.13 1.15 1.17 1.19 IN C IN E R A T O R S 1.70 1.87 1.90 1.90 1.92 1.92 1.90 1.91 1.93 1.94 1.95 SO IL R E M E D IA T IO N 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 O T H E R (W A ST E D ISPO SA L) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 LA U N D E R IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D E G R E A SIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O C E SS SO LV E N T S 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 PR IN T IN G 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 A D H E SIV E S A N D SE A LA N T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (C LE A N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A T IN G S) 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.19 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N 2.56 2.77 2.89 2.85 2.84 2.81 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.76 2.76 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G 7.61 7.80 7.98 7.44 7.32 7.34 7.40 7.24 7.26 7.29 7.33 PE T R O LE U M M A R K E T IN G 0.18 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 O TH ER (PETR O LEU M PR O D U C TIO N A N D M A R K ET I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C H E M IC A L 1.75 1.85 1.86 1.94 1.97 2.01 2.04 2.08 2.11 2.15 2.19 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R E 8.93 8.66 8.71 8.84 8.72 8.60 8.48 8.45 8.43 8.41 8.45 M IN E R A L PR O C E SSE S 55.52 58.13 58.94 60.78 61.73 62.68 63.72 64.72 65.81 66.84 67.92 M E T A L PR O C E SSE S 1.22 1.21 1.12 1.05 1.06 1.08 1.09 1.11 1.13 1.14 1.16 W O O D A N D PA PE R 2.06 2.10 2.09 2.21 2.25 2.32 2.37 2.40 2.47 2.49 2.55 G LA SS A N D R E LA T E D PR O D U C T S 11.20 11.04 9.30 9.76 9.97 10.22 10.47 10.68 10.96 11.18 11.45 E LE C T R O N IC S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 O T H E R (IN D U ST R IA L PR O C E SSE S) 6.64 6.83 7.05 7.21 7.26 7.36 7.45 7.51 7.62 7.72 7.83 

Stationary Subtotal 449.67 446.68 443.87 432.60 432.03 430.61 430.59 431.04 431.88 432.61 433.90 4

A rea-W ideC O N SU M E R PR O D U C T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A R C H IT E C T U R A L C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PE ST IC ID E S/FE R T ILIZE R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 R E SID E N T IA L FU E L C O M B U ST IO N 44.68 43.27 41.84 42.11 42.37 39.45 39.67 39.89 40.12 40.35 38.62 FA R M IN G O PE R A T IO N S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O N ST R U C T IO N A N D D E M O LIT IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G IT IV E W IN D B LO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR E S 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 22.74 23.78 24.12 24.81 25.16 25.51 25.48 25.46 25.43 25.41 25.38 C O O K IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (M ISC E LLA N E O U S PR O C E SSE S) 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 67.71 67.36 66.27 67.24 67.85 65.28 65.48 65.68 65.88 66.09 64.34 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 357.60 245.60 219.12 180.95 165.22 150.20 136.32 123.86 112.70 102.63 93.88 79.3LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 126.28 89.11 81.82 70.91 66.20 61.59 57.33 53.34 49.57 45.93 42.46 36.0LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 232.82 184.89 166.15 140.57 131.20 122.65 114.71 107.17 100.00 93.22 86.84 75.5MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 111.32 99.39 90.05 76.53 71.79 67.52 63.78 60.11 56.54 53.10 49.79 43.6LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS 45.49 41.73 36.39 31.99 31.30 30.69 30.13 29.72 29.35 29.03 28.77 28.1LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS 11.01 10.25 9.50 8.87 8.75 8.59 8.40 8.25 8.09 7.93 7.76 7.4MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUC

K 20.05 18.87 17.01 14.83 14.21 13.53 12.78 12.02 11.27 10.53 9.83 8.5

HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS 25.42 23.65 20.96 17.46 16.34 15.19 14.16 13.10 12.09 11.17 10.32 8.8LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUC

K 1.97 40.90 35.20 27.78 26.46 24.28 22.43 20.98 19.86 18.90 18.03 16.2

LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUC

K 21.24 28.38 25.84 22.45 21.87 20.56 19.28 18.12 17.08 16.04 15.08 13.2

MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRU 164.39 175.35 158.38 135.99 130.20 121.52 112.07 103.30 94.91 86.86 79.48 66.5

HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUC 675.46 723.78 835.33 691.21 658.69 613.13 569.47 525.79 482.56 441.70 403.55 337.0MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 6.06 10.70 10.78 10.87 10.88 10.92 10.95 11.04 11.15 11.25 11.38 11.5HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUS

E 33.00 30.12 29.44 29.19 29.15 29.15 29.14 29.03 28.61 27.76 27.65 26.9

HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES ( 1.94 1.78 1.81 1.84 1.85 1.88 1.90 1.92 1.97 2.05 2.08 2.1

SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 13.71 13.81 13.78 13.80 13.91 14.05 14.03 13.99 13.94 13.90 13.83 13.6OTHER BUSES (OB) 9.78 10.41 10.19 9.47 9.14 8.59 8.06 7.55 7.07 6.60 6.16 5.3MOTOR HOMES (MH) 12.05 10.50 10.08 9.32 8.96 8.55 8.10 7.67 7.23 6.78 6.37 5.5

On-Road Subtotal 1869.57 1759.21 1771.83 1494.04 1416.1

2 1322.58 1233.04 1146.98 1063.97 985.37 913.25 785.7

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 46.85 53.63 56.03 61.29 63.52 65.99 67.76 69.40 71.07 72.68 74.56 77.7TRAINS 188.16 157.56 148.57 141.32 139.95 116.36 120.88 123.28 124.87 126.54 128.32 132.1SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 291.10 318.42 326.72 342.22 351.72 361.75 371.56 382.35 394.16 406.90 420.16 453.0RECREATIONAL BOATS 40.29 52.35 55.76 58.71 58.46 58.33 58.30 58.39 58.59 58.90 59.31 60.3OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICL 1.71 1.94 2.04 2.14 2.15 2.20 2.26 2.32 2.38 2.45 2.53 2.6

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 611.98 565.16 547.42 497.28 472.49 444.67 423.08 401.17 378.60 357.17 334.04 294.1FARM EQUIPMENT 162.41 146.23 140.84 127.10 121.37 116.70 110.55 102.85 95.31 88.84 82.31 70.0FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Other Mobile Subtotal 1342.5

0 1295.29 1277.38 1230.05 1209.67 1166.01 1154.39 1139.76 1124.98 1113.48 1101.22 1090.2

Grand Total 3729.45 3568.54 3559.34 3223.93 3125.67 2984.48 2883.50 2783.46 2686.71 2597.55 2512.71 2380.9
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - STWDChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -214.17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -2.37 -30.06 -38.31 -38.46 -35.06 -31.65 -28.38 -25.18 -22.21 -19.23 -16.44 -11.13 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.05 -0.29 -0.41 -0.53 -0.49 -0.45 -0.42 -0.38 -0.34 -0.28 Idling 0.00 -5.31 -14.28 -32.21 -33.32 -34.43 -35.72 -37.00 -38.27 -39.54 -40.80 -42.86 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.04 -0.06 -0.08 -0.10 -0.14 Moyer -5.15 -6.85 -5.80 -3.70 -4.69 -5.65 -6.60 -6.60 -6.60 -6.60 -5.90 -4.50 Off-road 0.00 -0.83 -1.27 -4.66 -7.72 -16.20 -16.25 -16.73 -17.12 -16.22 -15.30 -13.69 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.03 -3.21 -3.45 -3.65 -3.86 -4.10 -4.37 -4.65 -5.28 SJV Adjustments 5.53 5.53 5.40 -1.93 -3.92 -5.89 -7.11 -8.24 -9.34 -10.39 -11.43 -10.02 Summary -2.00 -251.69 -54.31 -84.29 -88.33 -97.81 -98.21 -98.10 -98.11 -96.80 -94.96 -87.90 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

R O G - STW D - SU M M E R PLA N N IN G IN V E N T O R Y -- A D JU ST E D FO R M E A SU R E S A N D C A T E G O R IE S TH R O U G H 31 D E C 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryE LE C T R IC U T ILIT IE S 4.91 4.69 4.84 5.32 5.17 5.18 5.20 5.26 5.30 5.35 5.39 C O G E N E R A T IO N 3.36 3.46 3.51 3.54 3.56 3.59 3.57 3.60 3.62 3.64 3.66 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N (C O M B U ST IO N ) 4.45 4.70 4.82 4.68 4.69 4.66 4.65 4.65 4.64 4.64 4.63 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G (C O M B U ST IO N ) 1.98 1.83 1.84 1.85 1.85 1.86 1.86 1.87 1.87 1.88 1.88 M A N U FA C T U R IN G A N D IN D U ST R IA L 3.69 3.81 3.89 4.00 4.07 4.12 4.17 4.22 4.27 4.32 4.38 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R A L PR O C E SSIN G 4.47 4.41 4.35 4.32 4.31 4.30 4.29 4.28 4.27 4.26 4.25 SE R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 3.92 4.03 4.08 4.15 4.19 4.23 4.26 4.29 4.33 4.36 4.40 O TH E R (FU E L C O M B U STIO N ) 2.36 2.02 1.93 1.75 1.67 1.58 1.52 1.46 1.39 1.33 1.27 SE W A G E T R E A TM E N T 0.62 0.65 0.66 0.68 0.69 0.70 0.70 0.71 0.72 0.73 0.73 LA N D FILLS 8.05 8.43 8.54 8.76 8.88 8.99 9.10 9.22 9.33 9.44 9.55 IN C IN E R A T O R S 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 SO IL R E M ED IA T IO N 0.30 0.31 0.31 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.37 O TH E R (W A ST E D ISPO SA L) 64.29 65.56 67.67 70.99 71.39 72.22 72.98 73.58 77.00 80.49 81.26 8LA U N D E R IN G 0.63 0.67 0.68 0.71 0.72 0.73 0.74 0.75 0.76 0.77 0.78 D EG R EA SIN G 53.30 31.69 31.93 32.63 33.17 33.60 33.95 34.31 34.66 35.01 35.36 3C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T ED PR O C E SS SO LV E N T S 72.80 72.09 72.01 70.47 71.93 73.26 74.48 75.69 76.90 78.28 79.55 8PR IN T IN G 17.21 17.48 15.74 16.23 16.47 16.72 16.94 17.17 17.39 17.62 17.84 A D H E SIV E S A N D SE A LA N T S 22.46 22.30 22.39 22.71 22.86 23.03 23.09 23.15 23.21 23.26 23.32 2O TH E R (C LE A N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A T IN G S) 5.68 5.31 5.49 5.79 5.94 6.09 6.22 6.36 6.50 6.64 6.77 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N 42.49 39.71 40.03 38.85 38.48 38.09 37.79 37.48 37.17 36.87 36.57 3PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G 19.29 18.36 16.48 16.73 16.88 17.03 17.19 17.19 17.36 17.52 17.68 PE T R O LE U M M A R K E T IN G 81.89 79.17 78.79 78.44 78.56 79.36 80.25 81.15 82.05 82.99 83.88 8O TH E R (PE T R O LE U M PR O D U C T IO N A N D M A R K E T 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 

C H E M IC A L 22.82 21.44 22.12 22.77 23.25 23.89 24.34 24.79 25.25 25.69 26.15 2FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R E 20.06 20.30 20.50 20.99 21.24 21.50 21.77 22.05 22.33 22.61 22.92 2M IN E R A L PR O C E SSE S 4.09 4.26 4.34 4.49 4.55 4.62 4.69 4.75 4.83 4.90 4.98 M E T A L PR O C E SSE S 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.62 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.66 0.67 0.69 0.70 W O O D A N D PA PE R 3.05 3.09 3.07 3.23 3.30 3.37 3.45 3.52 3.59 3.67 3.72 G LA SS A N D R E LA T ED PR O D U C T S 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.47 E LE C T R O N IC S 0.82 0.87 0.89 0.93 0.95 0.97 0.98 1.00 1.01 1.03 1.04 O TH E R (IN D U ST R IA L PR O C E SSE S) 14.24 14.62 14.77 14.61 14.76 14.93 15.08 15.22 15.36 15.51 15.66 

Stationary Subtotal 484.40 456.45 456.88 461.19 465.12 470.21 474.92 479.39 486.80 494.55 499.39 50

A rea-W ideC O N SU M E R PR O D U C T S 260.06 236.70 236.98 229.70 232.10 234.24 236.68 239.11 241.60 244.03 246.51 25A R C H IT EC T U R A L C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O C135.24 116.08 101.32 98.47 99.38 100.28 101.26 102.23 103.20 104.17 105.16 10

PE ST IC ID E S/FE R T ILIZE R S 67.16 64.07 62.78 60.26 58.98 57.74 57.83 57.92 58.01 58.10 58.19 5A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 37.18 37.93 38.24 38.58 38.76 38.96 39.14 39.32 39.50 39.68 39.86 4R E SID E N T IA L FU EL C O M B U ST IO N 11.69 11.71 11.78 11.82 11.84 11.85 11.89 11.93 11.97 12.02 12.07 FA R M IN G O PER A T IO N S 115.33 116.58 116.60 118.24 119.26 119.73 121.13 122.55 123.97 125.41 126.87 12C O N ST R U C T IO N A N D D E M O LIT IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G IT IV E W IN D B LO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR E S 0.69 0.70 0.71 0.72 0.72 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.74 0.74 0.75 M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 58.55 60.00 60.49 61.47 61.96 62.46 62.41 62.36 62.31 62.26 62.21 6C O O K IN G 6.46 6.72 6.80 7.01 7.12 7.23 7.34 7.45 7.55 7.66 7.77 O TH E R (M ISC E LLA N E O U S PR O C E SSE S) 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 692.42 650.57 635.79 626.33 630.20 633.30 638.49 643.69 648.94 654.17 659.47 67
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 455.40 338.94 301.92 248.27 227.36 206.87 188.87 172.68 158.73 146.37 135.98 119LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 129.52 101.96 94.58 83.49 78.45 73.45 69.53 65.73 62.02 58.33 54.95 48LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 154.51 134.23 122.94 108.89 104.65 101.00 97.40 93.94 90.56 87.27 84.29 79MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 67.59 61.67 56.54 50.12 48.34 46.86 45.80 44.63 43.47 42.38 41.28 39LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHD 39.70 35.23 29.22 22.68 21.19 20.05 19.18 18.42 17.77 17.26 16.83 16

LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHD 11.24 10.28 9.26 7.95 7.55 7.14 6.74 6.38 6.01 5.63 5.29 4MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MH 24.21 20.05 17.46 14.07 12.92 11.86 10.81 9.80 8.89 7.97 7.18 5HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHD 12.27 11.23 9.79 7.91 7.33 6.72 6.19 5.55 4.95 4.45 3.97 3LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 ( 0.08 1.13 1.03 0.92 0.91 0.88 0.86 0.84 0.83 0.82 0.81 0

LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 ( 0.70 0.96 0.92 0.88 0.88 0.86 0.84 0.82 0.80 0.78 0.75 0MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (

M 2.93 3.47 3.27 3.03 3.00 2.93 2.86 2.77 2.68 2.60 2.52 2

HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HH 51.38 56.10 65.08 55.87 53.23 50.33 47.73 44.96 42.14 39.40 36.79 32

MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 33.52 50.25 48.00 44.96 43.83 43.01 42.34 42.05 41.95 41.88 42.02 42HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 1.15 1.11 1.09 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.07 1.06 1.06 1

HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 1.20 1.14 1.15 1.13 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.14 1.17 1.24 1.26 1SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 1.29 1.16 1.09 1.05 1.05 1.06 1.06 1.05 1.02 0.99 0.98 0OTHER BUSES (OB) 2.04 1.82 1.71 1.55 1.49 1.43 1.38 1.32 1.26 1.20 1.14 1MOTOR HOMES (MH) 4.33 3.25 2.99 2.47 2.26 2.06 1.87 1.69 1.51 1.34 1.20 0

On-Road Subtotal 993.06 833.99 768.06 656.32 616.65 578.75 545.70 514.88 486.84 460.97 438.29 399.

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 32.78 34.93 35.81 38.67 39.41 40.29 41.29 42.07 42.84 43.60 44.40 45TRAINS 11.90 12.15 12.00 11.80 11.73 11.73 11.84 11.90 11.96 12.02 12.10 12SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 15.05 15.47 15.52 15.65 15.72 15.81 15.85 15.96 16.09 16.26 16.41 17RECREATIONAL BOATS 231.28 225.30 220.30 208.64 202.02 196.37 191.67 187.81 184.61 181.93 179.65 176OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 54.06 66.57 68.42 71.31 72.91 74.78 76.83 79.08 81.46 84.05 86.79 92OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 250.62 248.70 233.92 211.77 201.80 191.49 182.68 174.47 166.97 159.99 153.92 143FARM EQUIPMENT 33.19 30.34 28.85 25.71 24.44 23.39 22.01 20.19 18.38 16.83 15.43 12FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 54.28 51.37 48.97 35.81 32.99 30.79 28.82 27.06 25.53 24.20 23.03 21

Other Mobile Subtotal 683.15 684.85 663.80 619.36 601.03 584.64 570.99 558.53 547.84 538.89 531.72 522.

Grand Total 2853.03 2625.85 2524.53 2363.20 2312.99 2266.90 2230.09 2196.50 2170.42 2148.58 2128.87 2100.
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - STWDChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -15.82 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizes Corr. -2.40 -1.54 -1.40 -1.11 -0.97 -0.82 -0.81 -0.80 -0.78 -0.77 -0.76 -0.71 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.06 -0.23 -0.32 -0.40 -0.38 -0.35 -0.33 -0.30 -0.28 -0.21 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.32 -0.64 -0.96 -1.28 -1.60 -2.24 Moyer 0.00 0.00 -0.10 -0.29 -0.44 -0.57 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.70 -0.63 -0.50 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -10.00 -10.10 -10.20 -10.30 -10.41 -10.52 -10.62 -10.73 -10.94 Off-Road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.94 -1.14 -1.33 -1.50 -1.66 -1.80 -2.06 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SJV Adjustments 56.18 56.90 58.87 62.80 63.53 64.23 64.90 65.40 68.72 72.10 72.77 74.20 Summary 53.78 39.54 57.32 51.16 51.70 51.30 51.24 51.17 53.93 56.77 56.97 57.54 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

PM 2.5 - ST W D - SU M M E R PL A N N IN G IN V E N T O R Y -- A D JU ST E D FO R M E A SU R E S A N D C A T E G O R IE S T H R O U G H 31 D E C 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryE LE C T R IC U T ILIT IE S 16.74 17.84 23.10 20.30 24.94 33.95 34.05 34.16 34.26 34.37 34.48 3C O G E N E R A T IO N 3.44 3.58 3.67 3.71 3.78 3.82 3.81 3.83 3.85 3.87 3.89 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N (C O M B U ST IO N ) 1.27 1.36 1.40 1.36 1.36 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.36 1.36 1.36 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G (C O M B U ST IO N ) 3.28 2.95 2.96 2.98 3.00 3.01 3.02 3.04 3.05 3.06 3.08 M A N U FA C T U R IN G A N D IN D U ST R IA L 5.61 5.81 5.89 5.95 6.03 6.13 6.21 6.30 6.40 6.49 6.58 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R A L PR O C E SSIN G 3.42 3.31 3.19 3.02 2.95 2.87 2.80 2.72 2.65 2.58 2.50 SE R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 4.39 4.44 4.52 4.57 4.61 4.65 4.68 4.71 4.73 4.77 4.78 O T H E R (FU E L C O M B U ST IO N ) 5.83 5.42 5.30 5.45 5.53 5.60 5.67 5.75 5.83 5.90 5.97 SE W A G E T R E A T M E N T 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 LA N D FILLS 0.51 0.52 0.53 0.55 0.56 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.59 0.59 0.60 IN C IN E R A T O R S 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 SO IL R E M E D IA T IO N 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 O T H E R (W A ST E D ISPO SA L) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 LA U N D E R IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D E G R E A SIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O C E SS SO LV E N T S 0.78 0.88 0.92 1.00 1.03 1.07 1.10 1.12 1.14 1.17 1.19 PR IN T IN G 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 A D H E SIV E S A N D SE A LA N T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (C LE A N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A T IN G S) 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G 1.73 1.71 1.66 1.63 1.59 1.60 1.62 1.56 1.57 1.58 1.60 PE T R O LE U M M A R K E T IN G 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 O T H E R (P E T R O LE U M P R O D U C T IO N A N D M A R K E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C H E M IC A L 3.86 4.22 4.37 4.58 4.68 4.79 4.88 4.97 5.08 5.17 5.28 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R E 7.45 7.42 7.41 7.41 7.38 7.38 7.40 7.41 7.42 7.43 7.43 M IN E R A L P R O C E S S E S 23.86 24.91 24.43 25.23 25.63 26.06 26.44 26.79 27.15 27.56 28.02 2M E T A L PR O C E SSE S 0.76 0.79 0.81 0.85 0.87 0.90 0.91 0.92 0.93 0.96 0.97 W O O D A N D P A P E R 8.05 8.15 8.19 8.61 8.81 9.03 9.20 9.38 9.56 9.76 9.90 1G LA SS A N D R E LA T E D PR O D U C T S 1.55 1.60 1.60 1.67 1.70 1.74 1.78 1.81 1.85 1.88 1.93 E LE C T R O N IC S 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 O T H E R (IN D U ST R IA L PR O C E SSE S) 4.89 5.01 5.04 5.19 5.27 5.35 5.42 5.50 5.57 5.64 5.72 

Stationary Subtotal 98.08 100.58 105.68 104.71 110.38 120.53 121.59 122.59 123.68 124.83 125.99 12

A rea-W ideC O N SU M E R PR O D U C T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A R C H IT E C T U R A L C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PE S T IC ID E S/FE R T ILIZE R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A S P H A LT P A V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 R E S ID E N T IA L FU E L C O M B U S T IO N 23.39 23.45 23.55 23.62 23.66 23.68 23.76 23.85 23.94 24.03 24.14 2FA R M IN G O P E R A T IO N S 58.56 55.84 54.71 55.28 55.56 53.79 54.13 54.47 54.81 55.15 55.48 5C O N S T R U C T IO N A N D D E M O LIT IO N 40.19 41.40 42.25 43.12 43.92 44.54 44.62 45.20 45.77 46.34 46.92 4P A V E D R O A D D U S T 64.39 66.65 67.18 68.60 69.74 70.88 71.94 73.01 74.10 75.18 76.26 7UNPAVED ROAD DUST 143.52 144.18 144.31 144.93 145.44 145.77 146.49 147.21 147.93 148.65 149.37 15FU G IT IV E W IN D B LO W N D U ST 125.28 118.47 117.91 101.46 101.37 100.61 100.53 100.45 100.38 100.30 100.23 10FIR E S 1.06 1.09 1.10 1.12 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.15 1.16 1.17 M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D IS P O S A L 88.50 92.05 93.23 95.60 96.79 97.98 97.91 97.84 97.77 97.70 97.63 9C O O K IN G 22.21 23.01 23.35 24.09 24.45 24.83 25.18 25.52 25.87 26.22 26.57 2O T H E R (M ISC E LLA N E O U S PR O C E SSE S) 0.59 0.62 0.63 0.65 0.66 0.67 0.69 0.70 0.71 0.72 0.73 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 567.72 566.80 568.25 558.51 562.78 563.92 566.43 569.43 572.47 575.49 578.53 58
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 9.25 9.18 9.12 9.26 9.44 9.65 9.85 9.99 10.13 10.29 10.44 1LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 2.58 2.45 2.44 2.48 2.52 2.57 2.62 2.65 2.68 2.71 2.74 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 5.64 6.88 6.91 7.19 7.43 7.69 7.99 8.23 8.46 8.70 8.90 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 2.14 2.98 3.00 3.15 3.27 3.41 3.56 3.69 3.81 3.94 4.05 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.28 0.33 0.31 0.30 0.30 0.31 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.35 0.36 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.04 0.38 0.34 0.27 0.27 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.22 

LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.23 0.28 0.27 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 3.69 4.22 3.96 3.46 3.41 3.30 3.19 3.07 2.96 2.85 2.76 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 31.66 32.21 37.16 29.34 27.38 25.40 23.68 21.96 20.28 18.64 17.14 1MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.19 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.29 0.27 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.24 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.54 0.49 0.48 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.45 0.44 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.42 0.45 0.46 0.46 0.48 0.49 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.52 0.53 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.16 0.19 0.19 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.14 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 

On-Road Subtotal 57.08 60.67 65.25 57.37 55.93 54.48 53.33 52.03 50.75 49.5

6 48.46 4

Other Mobile

AIRCRAFT 8.30 8.51 8.64 9.33 9.44 9.58 9.75 9.83 9.91 9.99 10.07 1TRAINS 4.23 4.33 4.27 3.92 3.89 3.88 3.86 3.87 3.89 3.91 3.93 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 20.64 23.51 24.39 23.05 23.87 24.27 25.03 25.84 26.71 27.64 28.63 3RECREATIONAL BOATS 8.91 9.87 10.36 11.50 12.14 12.83 13.53 14.27 15.04 15.85 16.71 1OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.49 0.47 0.48 0.51 0.53 0.55 0.57 0.59 0.61 0.63 0.65 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 32.93 30.93 30.08 26.67 25.38 24.10 22.80 21.25 19.59 18.00 16.48 1FARM EQUIPMENT 9.18 8.29 7.96 6.95 6.65 6.42 6.09 5.59 5.06 4.62 4.23 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 84.68 85.91 86.17 81.92 81.88 81.63 81.62 81.23 80.80 80.64 80.69 8

Grand Total 807.56 813.95 825.36 802.50 810.97 820.56 822.97 825.28 827.71 830.53 833.68 84
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

PM2.5 - STWDChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -9.13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.06 -0.24 -0.33 -0.41 -0.38 -0.34 -0.31 -0.28 -0.24 -0.18 Idling 0.00 -0.11 -0.16 -0.16 -0.15 -0.15 -0.12 -0.10 -0.08 -0.06 -0.03 -0.01 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.06 -0.13 -0.19 -0.25 -0.31 -0.44 Moyer 0.00 -0.36 -0.30 -0.30 -0.30 -0.30 -0.32 -0.35 -0.35 -0.34 -0.30 -0.21 Off-road 0.00 -0.05 -0.04 -0.62 -0.82 -1.03 -1.10 -1.18 -1.23 -1.26 -1.29 -1.41 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.21 -3.41 -4.08 -4.32 -4.58 -4.89 -5.21 -5.57 -6.39 Summar

y 0.00 -9.65 -0.56 -4.52 -5.01 -5.97 -6.31 -6.68 -7.03 -7.40 -7.76 -8.63 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categor
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

SO X - ST W D - SU M M E R PL A N N IN G IN V E N T O R Y -- A D JU ST E D FO R M E A SU R E S A N D C A T E G O R IE S T H R O U G H 31 D E C 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2StationaryE LE C T R IC U T ILIT IE S 3.63 3.59 3.62 3.72 3.68 3.69 3.70 3.72 3.74 3.75 3.77 C O G E N E R A T IO N 1.58 1.65 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.68 1.69 1.69 1.69 1.69 1.69 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N (C O M B U ST IO N ) 2.26 2.51 2.60 2.51 2.50 2.49 2.50 2.50 2.51 2.52 2.52 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G (C O M B U ST IO N ) 10.86 8.78 8.82 8.93 8.99 9.03 9.12 9.18 9.24 9.30 9.36 M A N U FA C T U R IN G A N D IN D U ST R IA L 13.19 14.49 14.97 15.29 15.45 15.74 16.01 16.24 16.47 16.70 16.92 1FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R A L PR O C E SSIN G 2.90 2.91 2.90 2.88 2.87 2.87 2.86 2.86 2.85 2.85 2.84 SE R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 2.70 2.67 2.68 2.69 2.70 2.71 2.72 2.73 2.74 2.76 2.76 O T H E R (FU E L C O M B U ST IO N ) 0.64 0.65 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.72 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.75 SE W A G E T R E A T M E N T 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 LA N D FILLS 0.49 0.50 0.51 0.53 0.53 0.54 0.54 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.57 IN C IN E R A T O R S 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 SO IL R E M E D IA T IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 O T H E R (W A ST E D ISPO S A L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA U N D E R IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D E G R E A SIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O C E S S SO LV E N T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PR IN T IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A D H E SIV E S A N D SE A LA N T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (C LE A N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A T IN G S) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N 0.48 0.51 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.51 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G 58.77 60.24 60.92 62.38 62.90 63.82 64.70 60.41 60.95 61.50 62.48 6PE T R O LE U M M A R K E T IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (PE T R O LE U M P R O D U C T IO N A N D M A R K E T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C H E M IC A L 3.93 4.42 4.36 4.53 4.59 4.66 4.73 4.78 4.84 4.90 4.95 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R E 0.99 1.04 1.05 1.05 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.08 M IN E R A L P R O C E SSE S 19.31 19.88 20.26 20.92 21.26 21.62 22.00 22.35 22.71 23.09 23.46 2M E T A L PR O C E SSE S 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 W O O D A N D PA PE R 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 G LA S S A N D R E LA T E D PR O D U C T S 3.84 3.93 3.94 4.13 4.21 4.32 4.41 4.49 4.60 4.68 4.79 E LE C T R O N IC S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (IN D U ST R IA L PR O C E SSE S) 1.07 1.04 1.05 1.07 1.08 1.08 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10 

Stationary Subtotal 127.02 129.19 130.96 133.92 135.15 136.97 138.79 135.33 136.75 138.16 140.02 14

A rea-W ideC O N S U M E R PR O D U C T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A R C H IT E C T U R A L C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

PE ST IC ID E S /FE R T ILIZE R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 R E SID E N T IA L FU E L C O M B U ST IO N 1.20 1.16 1.16 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 FA R M IN G O PE R A T IO N S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O N S T R U C T IO N A N D D E M O LIT IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G IT IV E W IN D B LO W N D U S T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR E S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 2.55 2.54 2.54 2.54 2.54 2.54 2.54 2.54 2.54 2.54 2.54 C O O K IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (M ISC E LLA N E O U S PR O C E S SE S) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 3.74 3.70 3.70 3.69 3.69 3.69 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 3.04 2.16 2.11 2.05 2.08 2.10 2.13 2.16 2.19 2.21 2.24 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.08 0.75 0.72 0.55 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.59 0.60 0.61 0.62 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 1.38 1.21 1.18 1.15 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.20 1.22 1.23 1.25 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.79 0.77 0.75 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.73 0.74 0.75 0.75 0.76 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.02 0.32 0.28 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.03 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.13 0.19 0.17 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 1.45 1.83 1.74 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 4.88 5.80 7.00 0.72 0.73 0.75 0.77 0.79 0.82 0.85 0.89 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 

On-Road Subtotal 13.60 13.84 14.79 5.72 5.78 5.86 5.95 6.04 6.14 6.24 6.35 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 3.39 3.77 3.89 4.18 4.30 4.43 4.54 4.65 4.76 4.87 4.97 TRAINS 7.02 7.53 7.72 0.80 0.82 0.85 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 122.85 146.12 153.61 142.91 149.96 150.69 157.60 164.86 172.59 180.72 189.29 20RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.73 0.61 0.65 0.70 0.73 0.76 0.78 0.82 0.85 0.88 0.91 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 3.44 3.60 3.66 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.44 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.47 FARM EQUIPMENT 1.16 1.15 1.15 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 138.72 162.88 170.78 149.21 156.45 157.38 163.70 171.10 178.99 187.27 195.99 21

Grand Total 283.08 309.61 320.23 292.54 301.06 303.89 312.12 316.15 325.55 335.35 346.04 36
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

SOX - STWDChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -1.64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -26.77 -28.43 -36.83 -39.05 -41.41 -44.17 -47.15 -50.38 -57.77 Summar

y 0.00 -1.64 0.00 -26.77 -28.43 -36.83 -39.05 -41.41 -44.17 -47.15 -50.38 -57.77 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 127 

Ventura County
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 128 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

N O X - V entura - SU M M E R PL A N N IN G IN V E N T O R Y -- A D JU ST E D FO R M E A SU R E S A N D C A T E G O R IE S T H R O U G H 31 D E SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryE LE C T R IC U T ILIT IE S 1.36 1.53 1.56 1.62 1.65 1.67 1.68 1.69 1.70 1.71 1.72 C O G E N E R A T IO N 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 O IL A N D G A S P R O D U C T IO N (C O M B U S T IO N ) 0.38 0.38 0.37 0.36 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.33 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G (C O M B U ST IO N ) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M A N U FA C T U R IN G A N D IN D U ST R IA L 0.85 0.85 0.87 0.89 0.91 0.92 0.93 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.98 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R A L PR O C E SSIN G 2.54 2.49 2.44 2.34 2.28 2.23 2.17 2.11 2.04 1.97 1.89 SE R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 0.60 0.58 0.58 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.61 0.62 O T H E R (FU E L C O M B U ST IO N ) 0.52 0.38 0.37 0.34 0.32 0.31 0.30 0.29 0.27 0.26 0.25 SE W A G E T R E A T M E N T 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 LA N D FILLS 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 IN C IN E R A T O R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO IL R E M E D IA T IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (W A ST E D ISPO SA L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA U N D E R IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D E G R E A SIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O C E SS SO LV E N T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PR IN T IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A D H E SIV E S A N D SE A LA N T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (C LE A N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A T IN G S) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O IL A N D G A S P R O D U C T IO N 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PE T R O LE U M M A R K E T IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C H E M IC A L 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M IN E R A L PR O C E SSE S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M E T A L P R O C E S SE S 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 W O O D A N D PA PE R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 E LE C T R O N IC S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (IN D U S T R IA L PR O C E S SE S) 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 

S tationary S ubtotal 6.47 6.45 6.42 6.37 6.35 6.33 6.28 6.23 6.18 6.12 6.07 

A rea-W ideC O N SU M E R PR O D U C T S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A R C H IT E C T U R A L C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O C E S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PE ST IC ID E S/FE R T ILIZE R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A S PH A LT P A V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 R E SID E N T IA L FU E L C O M B U ST IO N 1.12 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.16 1.17 1.17 1.18 1.18 1.19 1.21 FA R M IN G O PE R A T IO N S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O N ST R U C T IO N A N D D E M O LIT IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G IT IV E W IN D B LO W N D U S T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR E S 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 C O O K IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

A rea-W ide S ubtotal 1.27 1.30 1.30 1.32 1.32 1.33 1.34 1.35 1.35 1.36 0.00 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 6.25 4.28 3.87 3.24 2.95 2.65 2.38 2.14 1.93 1.74 1.57 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.62 1.22 1.10 0.92 0.84 0.76 0.70 0.64 0.59 0.53 0.49 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 5.02 3.73 3.38 2.90 2.73 2.56 2.40 2.24 2.09 1.94 1.81 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 2.88 2.33 2.14 1.86 1.76 1.67 1.58 1.49 1.40 1.31 1.22 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 1.94 1.67 1.30 0.98 0.93 0.89 0.87 0.85 0.84 0.85 0.85 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.26 0.25 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.43 0.48 0.39 0.29 0.28 0.27 0.25 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.20 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.46 0.47 0.38 0.28 0.26 0.23 0.21 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.14 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.04 1.34 1.08 0.77 0.73 0.66 0.61 0.58 0.55 0.53 0.51 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.73 0.97 0.80 0.60 0.57 0.53 0.50 0.47 0.44 0.43 0.41 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 3.07 3.27 2.69 2.08 1.99 1.84 1.70 1.56 1.44 1.34 1.25 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 4.70 5.09 5.41 4.05 3.84 3.53 3.24 2.96 2.71 2.53 2.37 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.13 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.24 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.17 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.43 0.38 0.37 0.33 0.31 0.29 0.27 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.21 

On-Road Subtotal 28.31 26.02 23.64 18.99 17.90 16.60 15.40 14.31 13.30 12.48 13.11 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.38 0.46 0.48 0.51 0.52 0.52 0.54 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 TRAINS 2.46 1.98 1.84 1.72 1.70 1.27 1.30 1.32 1.33 1.35 1.36 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 14.27 15.75 16.27 17.28 17.80 18.35 18.94 19.56 20.21 20.91 21.65 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.89 1.13 1.20 1.26 1.25 1.25 1.24 1.24 1.25 1.25 1.26 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 15.61 14.45 14.02 12.73 12.11 11.46 10.88 10.30 9.70 9.14 8.54 FARM EQUIPMENT 3.81 3.42 3.29 2.97 2.83 2.72 2.58 2.40 2.22 2.07 1.91 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 37.45 37.25 37.16 36.53 36.28 35.64 35.55 35.44 35.34 35.34 35.36 

Grand Total 73.50 71.01 68.53 63.22 61.85 59.91 58.57 57.33 56.17 55.31 54.54 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - VenturaChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -1.51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.01 -0.22 -0.16 -0.15 -0.13 -0.12 -0.10 -0.09 -0.08 -0.07 -0.06 -0.04 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 -0.04 -0.10 -0.19 -0.20 -0.21 -0.21 -0.22 -0.22 -0.24 -0.25 -0.27 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer -0.15 -0.20 -0.17 -0.11 -0.14 -0.17 -0.19 -0.19 -0.19 -0.19 -0.17 -0.13 Off-road 0.00 -0.02 -0.03 -0.12 -0.20 -0.38 -0.38 -0.39 -0.40 -0.37 -0.34 -0.29 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.08 -0.09 -0.09 -0.10 -0.10 -0.11 -0.12 -0.13 -0.14 Summar

y -0.16 -2.00 -0.47 -0.66 -0.76 -0.96 -0.99 -1.00 -1.01 -0.99 -0.96 -0.88 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categorie
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

R O G - V entura - SU M M E R PL A N N IN G IN V E N T O R Y -- A D JU ST E D FO R M E A SU R E S A N D C A T E G O R IE S T H R O U G H 31 D E SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryE LE C T R IC U T ILIT IE S 0.24 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.31 C O G E N E R A T IO N 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N (C O M B U S T IO N ) 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G (C O M B U S T IO N ) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M A N U FA C T U R IN G A N D IN D U S T R IA L 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R A L PR O C E S SIN G 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 SE R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 O T H E R (FU E L C O M B U ST IO N ) 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 SE W A G E T R E A T M E N T 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 LA N D FILLS 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 IN C IN E R A T O R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO IL R E M E D IA T IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (W A ST E D ISPO SA L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA U N D E R IN G 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 D E G R E A SIN G 3.17 2.17 2.20 2.27 2.31 2.34 2.38 2.41 2.44 2.47 2.50 C O A T IN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O C E SS SO LV E N T S 2.09 2.10 2.13 2.19 2.22 2.25 2.28 2.31 2.34 2.37 2.40 PR IN T IN G 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.30 A D H E SIV E S A N D SE A LA N T S 0.40 0.38 0.38 0.39 0.40 0.40 0.41 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.43 O T H E R (C LE A N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A T IN G S) 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.43 0.43 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N 2.07 2.06 2.04 2.01 2.00 1.98 1.97 1.96 1.95 1.94 1.92 PE T R O LE U M R E FIN IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PE T R O LE U M M A R K E T IN G 1.07 1.04 1.04 1.03 1.02 1.04 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.06 1.07 C H E M IC A L 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LT U R E 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M IN E R A L PR O C E SSE S 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 M E T A L PR O C E SSE S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W O O D A N D PA PE R 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 E LE C T R O N IC S 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 O T H E R (IN D U ST R IA L PR O C E SSE S) 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 

Stationary Subtotal 10.71 9.68 9.74 9.89 9.97 10.06 10.14 10.22 10.30 10.38 10.45 

A rea-W ideC O N SU M E R PR O D U C T S 5.77 5.24 5.24 5.06 5.11 5.15 5.21 5.26 5.31 5.36 5.41 A R C H ITE C T U R A L C O A T IN G S A N D R ELA T ED PR O C E S 3.21 2.78 2.81 2.87 2.91 2.94 2.97 3.01 3.04 3.08 3.11 

PE S T IC ID E S /FE R T ILIZE R S 3.99 4.82 4.82 4.82 4.82 4.82 4.82 4.82 4.82 4.82 4.82 A S PH A LT P A V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.56 0.58 0.59 0.60 0.61 0.62 0.62 0.63 0.64 0.64 0.65 R E SID E N T IA L FU E L C O M B U ST IO N 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.23 FA R M IN G O PE R A T IO N S 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 C O N ST R U C T IO N A N D D E M O LIT IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G IT IV E W IN D B LO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR E S 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.22 C O O K IN G 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 14.12 14.03 14.06 13.97 14.06 14.15 14.25 14.34 14.44 14.54 14.63 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 8.88 6.59 5.98 5.01 4.60 4.18 3.81 3.47 3.20 2.95 2.74 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.80 1.46 1.33 1.12 1.03 0.94 0.88 0.83 0.78 0.73 0.69 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 3.53 2.93 2.74 2.50 2.44 2.38 2.31 2.24 2.18 2.11 2.05 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 1.82 1.53 1.43 1.31 1.28 1.26 1.24 1.21 1.18 1.15 1.13 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 1.22 1.05 0.78 0.52 0.48 0.44 0.43 0.41 0.40 0.39 0.39 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.19 0.18 0.14 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.43 0.41 0.31 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.18 0.18 0.14 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.36 0.40 0.42 0.32 0.30 0.28 0.26 0.25 0.23 0.22 0.21 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.87 1.20 1.15 1.08 1.05 1.02 1.00 0.99 0.98 0.97 0.96 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.11 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 

On-Road Subtotal 19.51 16.17 14.63 12.44 11.73 11.02 10.40 9.84 9.36 8.91 8.53 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.58 0.68 0.72 0.76 0.77 0.77 0.80 0.80 0.81 0.81 0.81 TRAINS 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 0.79 0.85 0.87 0.90 0.91 0.92 0.94 0.95 0.97 0.98 1.00 RECREATIONAL BOATS 3.85 3.87 3.81 3.65 3.55 3.48 3.42 3.37 3.33 3.30 3.28 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 1.99 2.42 2.52 2.65 2.72 2.80 2.89 2.98 3.08 3.18 3.29 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 5.89 5.71 5.39 4.90 4.67 4.45 4.24 4.05 3.88 3.72 3.57 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.77 0.69 0.66 0.59 0.56 0.54 0.50 0.46 0.42 0.39 0.36 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 1.21 1.13 1.08 0.79 0.72 0.67 0.62 0.58 0.55 0.52 0.49 

Other Mobile Subtotal 15.21 15.49 15.16 14.34 14.02 13.74 13.52 13.31 13.14 13.00 12.91 

Grand Total 59.56 55.35 53.59 50.64 49.78 48.96 48.30 47.71 47.23 46.83 46.53 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - VenturaChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -3.02 -1.14 -0.80 -0.14 0.20 0.53 0.53 0.54 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.57 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.0Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.22 -0.22 -0.22 -0.23 -0.23 -0.23 -0.23 -0.24 -0.24 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y -3.02 -1.26 -0.80 -0.36 -0.03 0.27 0.26 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.22 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 135 

Western Mojave Desert
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 136 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - W MOJAVE - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH 31 DEC 2006SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 

StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 4.65 6.40 6.52 6.75 6.87 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 COGENERATION 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 2.49 2.65 2.69 2.76 2.79 2.83 2.88 2.94 2.99 3.03 3.08 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 2.56 2.59 2.60 2.59 2.59 2.59 2.58 2.58 2.57 2.57 2.57 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LANDFILLS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INCINERATORS 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 CHEMICAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MINERAL PROCESSES 29.95 31.35 31.69 32.74 33.26 33.78 34.35 34.91 35.55 36.11 36.74 3METAL PROCESSES 0.50 0.48 0.47 0.49 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.56 WOOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GLASS AND RELATED PRODUCTS 1.58 1.65 1.65 1.72 1.79 1.83 1.90 1.94 2.01 2.08 2.12 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 

Stationary Subtotal 42.18 45.58 46.09 47.53 48.29 49.03 49.72 50.38 51.15 51.84 52.57 5

Area-Wide

CONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROC

E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.48 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.50 0.50 0.51 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.13 COOKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Area-Wide Subtotal 0.62 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road Mobile

LIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 6.40 4.95 4.45 3.73 3.45 3.17 2.87 2.61 2.37 2.15 1.97 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 4.14 3.00 2.70 2.29 2.15 2.00 1.89 1.77 1.65 1.51 1.38 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 4.28 4.16 3.70 3.07 2.89 2.71 2.54 2.38 2.22 2.07 1.93 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 1.63 2.13 1.90 1.55 1.45 1.36 1.30 1.23 1.17 1.11 1.04 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.39 0.56 0.45 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.24 0.20 0.17 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.23 0.22 0.18 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.60 0.53 0.44 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.36 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.02 1.18 0.88 0.58 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.41 0.39 0.36 0.35 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.50 0.88 0.72 0.55 0.54 0.51 0.48 0.45 0.43 0.40 0.38 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 1.73 2.72 2.32 1.90 1.88 1.79 1.67 1.55 1.44 1.33 1.24 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 61.79 66.14 70.14 53.31 51.23 48.05 44.76 41.32 37.88 34.40 31.13 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.19 0.49 0.48 0.47 0.46 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.49 0.49 0.50 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.41 0.41 0.42 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.47 0.48 0.49 0.49 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.12 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.10 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.29 0.30 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.26 0.25 0.23 0.22 0.21 

On-Road Subtotal 83.07 88.12 89.49 69.42 66.55 62.49 58.36 54.10 49.90 45.69 41.76 

Other Mobile

AIRCRAFT 0.16 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.24 TRAINS 29.20 24.46 23.05 22.25 22.26 16.72 17.07 17.42 17.79 18.16 18.56 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.07 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.23 0.28 0.30 0.33 0.34 0.35 0.37 0.38 0.40 0.41 0.43 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 5.02 4.74 4.62 4.27 4.10 3.91 3.73 3.55 3.37 3.18 2.98 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.48 0.43 0.41 0.37 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.30 0.28 0.26 0.24 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 35.15 30.18 28.66 27.52 27.36 21.64 21.81 21.98 22.16 22.35 22.55 

Grand Total 161.02 164.51 164.87 145.10 142.84 133.78 130.53 127.10 123.85 120.52 117.52 1
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - W MOJAVEChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -19.57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.13 -2.65 -1.92 -1.75 -1.60 -1.45 -1.30 -1.15 -1.01 -0.86 -0.73 -0.49 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 Idling 0.00 -0.52 -1.32 -2.55 -2.66 -2.78 -2.89 -3.00 -3.10 -3.18 -3.26 -3.39 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer -0.10 -0.13 -0.11 -0.07 -0.08 -0.10 -0.12 -0.12 -0.12 -0.12 -0.11 -0.08 Off-road 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.04 -0.07 -0.07 -0.07 -0.08 -0.07 -0.07 -0.06 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y -0.23 -22.87 -3.36 -4.41 -4.42 -4.44 -4.42 -4.38 -4.34 -4.27 -4.19 -4.04 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categor
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - W esterm M ojave - SUM M ER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR M EASURES AND CATEGORIES THRSUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTR IC U TILITIES 0.14 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 COGENERATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M ANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 SERVICE AND COM M ERCIAL 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 O THER (FUEL CO M BU STIO N) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 SEW AGE TREATM ENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LAN DFILLS 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 INCINERATORS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O THER (W ASTE D ISPOSA L) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.08 1.09 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.57 0.59 0.60 0.62 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.67 0.68 0.69 0.70 PRINTIN G 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 A DH ESIV ES AN D SEA LA NTS 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM M ARKETING 2.34 2.48 2.53 2.59 2.63 2.67 2.72 2.76 2.81 2.85 2.90 CHEM ICAL 0.21 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.29 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M INERAL PROCESSES 0.95 0.99 1.01 1.05 1.07 1.09 1.11 1.13 1.15 1.17 1.19 M ETAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W OOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GLASS AND RELATED PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.26 

Stationary Subtotal 5.97 6.28 6.37 6.53 6.63 6.75 6.85 6.96 7.07 7.18 7.28 

Area-W ideCONSUM ER PRODUCTS 2.78 2.72 2.79 2.80 2.88 2.95 3.01 3.08 3.15 3.22 3.29 A RCH ITECTUR AL COA TING S AN D RELA TED PRO C

E 1.53 1.32 1.34 1.37 1.38 1.40 1.41 1.43 1.44 1.46 1.47 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 A SPH ALT PAV ING / RO OFIN G 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COM BUSTION 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 FARM ING OPERATIONS 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 CONSTRUCTION AND DEM OLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE W INDBLOW N DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M ANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.42 0.39 0.39 0.37 0.37 0.36 0.35 0.34 0.34 0.33 0.32 COOKING 0.61 0.65 0.66 0.68 0.69 0.71 0.72 0.73 0.74 0.75 0.76 

Area-W ide Subtotal 6.55 6.31 6.40 6.46 6.55 6.64 6.74 6.83 6.92 7.01 7.11 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 6.48 5.28 4.68 3.79 3.47 3.13 2.80 2.50 2.25 2.03 1.85 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 3.51 2.78 2.50 2.09 1.93 1.77 1.66 1.54 1.43 1.30 1.18 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 2.51 2.45 2.17 1.80 1.70 1.61 1.52 1.43 1.35 1.27 1.20 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.86 1.09 0.96 0.79 0.75 0.71 0.69 0.66 0.64 0.62 0.61 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.30 0.41 0.30 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.19 0.17 0.14 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.27 0.23 0.18 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.18 0.17 0.14 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 4.40 4.91 5.20 4.07 3.90 3.70 3.54 3.31 3.09 2.85 2.62 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.90 2.01 1.90 1.73 1.69 1.67 1.69 1.71 1.73 1.74 1.76 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 

On-Road Subtotal 19.78 19.71 18.33 14.97 14.10 13.20 12.49 11.72 11.02 10.32 9.70 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.19 TRAINS 2.19 2.28 2.26 2.24 2.24 2.25 2.29 2.31 2.33 2.35 2.38 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.46 0.43 0.42 0.39 0.38 0.36 0.35 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.32 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 10.61 13.48 14.30 15.28 15.77 16.28 16.82 17.39 17.99 18.61 19.26 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 1.90 1.92 1.82 1.67 1.61 1.54 1.48 1.42 1.37 1.32 1.28 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.58 0.57 0.55 0.40 0.37 0.35 0.33 0.31 0.29 0.28 0.26 

Other Mobile Subtotal 15.98 18.92 19.58 20.23 20.60 21.03 21.50 22.01 22.55 23.12 23.74 

Grand Total 48.27 51.21 50.69 48.1

8 47.89 47.62 47.58 47.51 47.5

6 47.64 47.83 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - Western Mojave

Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -1.39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.01 -0.02 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.13 -0.13 -0.14 -0.14 -0.14 -0.15 -0.15 -0.15 -0.16 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 

Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Summar

y -0.01 -1.40 -0.02 -0.17 -0.19 -0.21 -0.22 -0.24 -0.23 -0.24 -0.24 -0.25 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categori
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 143 

Western Nevada County
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 144 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - W Nevada - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROSUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0M ANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SERVICE AND COM M ERCIAL 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 OTHER (FUEL COM BUSTION) 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SEW AGE TREATM ENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LANDFILLS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INCINERATORS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM M ARKETING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CHEM ICAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M INERAL PROCESSES 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 M ETAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W OOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Stationary Subtotal 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 

Area-W ideCONSUM ER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROC

E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COM BUSTION 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 FARM ING OPERATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CONSTRUCTION AND DEM OLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE W INDBLOW N DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M ANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 COOKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (M ISCELLANEOUS PROCESSES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Area-W ide Subtotal 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 1.18 0.81 0.77 0.67 0.62 0.56 0.51 0.45 0.40 0.36 0.33 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.41 0.97 0.95 0.88 0.84 0.80 0.76 0.72 0.68 0.65 0.61 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.99 0.84 0.80 0.71 0.67 0.62 0.58 0.53 0.49 0.45 0.42 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.45 0.43 0.42 0.39 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.31 0.29 0.28 0.26 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.07 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.02 0.36 0.31 0.24 0.22 0.19 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.16 0.21 0.21 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.41 0.44 0.44 0.40 0.39 0.36 0.33 0.31 0.28 0.25 0.23 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 5.83 6.06 7.41 6.46 6.00 5.45 5.07 4.67 4.27 3.92 3.59 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.04 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 

On-Road Subtotal 10.98 10.65 11.83 10.46 9.80 9.01 8.39 7.77 7.15 6.62 6.12 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 TRAINS 0.19 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.22 0.29 0.32 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.36 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 1.33 1.26 1.23 1.13 1.07 1.02 0.97 0.93 0.88 0.83 0.78 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.37 0.33 0.32 0.29 0.28 0.27 0.25 0.24 0.22 0.20 0.19 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 2.13 2.07 2.04 1.93 1.86 1.80 1.74 1.69 1.63 1.57 1.51 

Grand Total 13.44 13.05 14.21 12.73 12.00 11.14 10.47 9.79 9.11 8.53 7.97 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - W. NevadaChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -1.71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash 0.00 -0.02 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 0.00 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.04 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y 0.00 -1.74 -0.03 -0.05 -0.05 -0.07 -0.07 -0.07 -0.07 -0.07 -0.06 -0.06 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried cate
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - W Nevada - SUMM ER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROSUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M ANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SERVICE AND COM M ERCIAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (FUEL COM BUSTION) 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SEW AGE TREATM ENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LANDFILLS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 INCINERATORS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.23 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 PRINTING 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM M ARKETING 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 CHEM ICAL 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M INERAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M ETAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W OOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Stationary Subtotal 0.72 0.73 0.73 0.75 0.76 0.77 0.78 0.79 0.80 0.81 0.82 

Area-W ideCONSUM ER PRODUCTS 0.62 0.56 0.56 0.54 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.59 0.60 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROC

E 0.33 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.37 0.37 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COM BUSTION 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 FARM ING OPERATIONS 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 CONSTRUCTION AND DEM OLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE W INDBLOW N DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M ANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 COOKING 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 OTHER (M ISCELLANEOUS PROCESSES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Area-W ide Subtotal 2.08 2.04 2.04 2.03 2.04 2.06 2.07 2.09 2.11 2.13 2.15 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 1.46 1.11 1.04 0.89 0.82 0.73 0.66 0.58 0.52 0.47 0.43 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 1.24 0.96 0.95 0.90 0.88 0.85 0.83 0.80 0.78 0.75 0.73 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.62 0.57 0.56 0.52 0.50 0.48 0.45 0.43 0.41 0.39 0.37 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.18 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.11 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.40 0.41 0.50 0.43 0.40 0.37 0.35 0.33 0.31 0.29 0.27 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.24 0.31 0.31 0.30 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 

On-Road Subtotal 4.57 3.95 3.90 3.54 3.35 3.16 2.99 2.82 2.67 2.53 2.42 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 TRAINS 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 RECREATIONAL BOATS 2.32 2.17 2.11 1.97 1.90 1.83 1.77 1.73 1.69 1.65 1.62 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.84 1.04 1.09 1.16 1.19 1.23 1.27 1.31 1.35 1.40 1.45 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 0.58 0.57 0.53 0.49 0.46 0.44 0.42 0.40 0.38 0.36 0.35 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 

Other Mobile Subtotal 3.99 4.02 3.97 3.81 3.73 3.67 3.63 3.60 3.57 3.56 3.56 

Grand Total 11.37 10.73 10.64 10.12 9.89 9.66 9.47 9.30 9.15 9.04 8.95 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - W. NevadaChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.0Off-Road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Summar

y 0.00 -0.12 0.00 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.04 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.0

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categori
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 151 

Fresno County
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 152 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NO X - FRESNO - SUM M ER PLANNING INVENTO RY -- ADJUSTED FO R M EASURES AND CATEG O RIES TH RO UG H 31 DSUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELEC TR IC U TILITIES 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 C O G EN ER A TIO N 0.81 0.78 0.74 0.53 0.52 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.51 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N (C O M B U STIO N ) 2.72 1.76 1.85 1.86 1.83 1.81 1.79 1.77 1.76 1.74 1.72 M A N U FA C TU R IN G A N D IN D U STR IA L 3.22 3.51 3.57 3.66 3.71 3.79 3.87 3.95 4.04 4.12 4.20 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R A L PR O C ESSIN G 8.73 8.69 8.14 5.63 4.90 4.18 3.65 3.15 2.64 2.15 1.67 SER V IC E A N D C O M M ER C IA L 0.73 0.68 0.69 0.71 0.71 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.73 0.74 0.75 O TH ER (FU EL C O M B U STIO N ) 0.56 0.46 0.44 0.41 0.39 0.38 0.36 0.35 0.34 0.33 0.32 LA N D FILLS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 IN C IN ER A TO R S 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 O TH ER (W A STE D ISPO SA L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA U N D ER IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D EG R EA SIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS SO LV EN TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PR IN TIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A D H ESIV ES A N D SEA LA N TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (C LEA N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A TIN G S) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETR O LEU M M A R K ETIN G 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 O TH ER (PETR O LEU M PR O D U C TIO N A N D M A R K ETI

N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C H EM IC A L 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R E 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 M IN ER A L PR O C ESSES 0.85 0.89 0.90 0.94 0.96 0.97 1.00 1.02 1.03 1.06 1.07 M ETA L PR O C ESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 W O O D A N D PA PER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 G LA SS A N D R ELA TED PR O D U C TS 3.60 3.72 2.25 2.37 2.42 2.49 2.54 2.59 2.66 2.71 2.78 O TH ER (IN D U STR IA L PR O C ESSES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Extra-inventory R eductions (D istrict R ules) 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.13 -0.16 -0.19 -0.22 -0.24 -0.26 -0.28 -0.30 

Stationary Subtotal 21.66 20.93 19.02 16.44 15.76 15.15 14.72 14.32 13.94 13.56 13.20 

Area-W ideC O N SU M ER PR O D U C TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A R C H ITEC TU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PESTIC ID ES/FER TILIZER S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 R ESID EN TIA L FU EL C O M B U STIO N 0.89 0.85 0.84 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.83 0.83 0.83 FA R M IN G O PER A TIO N S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O N STR U C TIO N A N D D EM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D B LO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR ES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M A N A G ED B U R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 3.89 3.84 3.83 3.81 3.80 3.80 3.79 3.78 3.77 3.76 3.75 C O O K IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 4.79 4.70 4.68 4.64 4.63 4.63 4.62 4.62 4.61 4.60 4.60 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 7.34 5.05 4.63 3.85 3.51 3.17 2.84 2.55 2.30 2.07 1.88 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 2.42 1.86 1.70 1.41 1.28 1.16 1.05 0.96 0.88 0.80 0.73 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 5.66 4.43 4.14 3.61 3.38 3.15 2.92 2.70 2.50 2.31 2.13 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 3.49 2.98 2.78 2.42 2.28 2.15 2.02 1.89 1.76 1.64 1.53 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 1.13 0.98 0.93 0.86 0.83 0.82 0.80 0.79 0.78 0.77 0.76 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.49 0.44 0.42 0.37 0.35 0.33 0.31 0.29 0.27 0.25 0.23 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.46 0.41 0.39 0.35 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.29 0.28 0.27 0.26 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.07 0.84 0.79 0.67 0.64 0.60 0.56 0.53 0.51 0.49 0.46 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.53 0.69 0.67 0.61 0.60 0.56 0.53 0.50 0.47 0.44 0.4MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 4.51 4.69 4.52 4.04 3.86 3.56 3.28 3.01 2.75 2.52 2.30 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 35.05 37.70 45.88 39.23 37.02 33.92 30.96 28.22 25.67 23.34 21.27 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.11 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.27 0.27 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.49 0.50 0.49 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.43 0.42 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.49 0.50 0.50 0.48 0.47 0.47 0.45 0.45 0.43 0.40 0.38 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.22 0.26 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.16 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.23 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.14 

On-Road Subtotal 62.92 62.03 68.8

0 58.5

8 55.1

0 50.63 46.31 42.37 38.95 35.79 32.94 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.40 0.42 0.42 0.43 0.44 0.44 0.45 0.45 0.46 0.46 0.47 TRAINS 4.55 3.80 3.58 3.40 3.36 3.23 3.27 3.29 3.30 3.31 3.33 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.40 0.53 0.57 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.62 0.63 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 10.87 10.22 9.95 9.13 8.70 8.25 7.88 7.52 7.14 6.77 6.36 FARM EQUIPMENT 18.96 16.96 16.29 14.63 13.94 13.37 12.63 11.71 10.81 10.03 9.27 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 35.22 31.9

8 30.87 28.27 27.11 25.97 24.91 23.6

6 22.3

9 21.27 20.12 

Grand Total 124.60 119.64 123.37 107.93 102.61 96.3

8 90.5

6 84.9

6 79.8

9 75.22 70.8

6 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - FRESNOChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -11.17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.12 -1.55 -2.05 -2.18 -1.97 -1.76 -1.56 -1.37 -1.20 -1.04 -0.89 -0.61 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 0.00 Idling 0.00 -0.36 -0.84 -1.82 -1.86 -1.89 -1.92 -1.96 -2.01 -2.06 -2.12 -2.24 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer -0.11 -0.14 -0.12 -0.08 -0.10 -0.11 -0.13 -0.13 -0.13 -0.13 -0.12 -0.09 Off-road 0.00 -0.02 -0.03 -0.12 -0.20 -0.35 -0.35 -0.36 -0.38 -0.35 -0.32 -0.27 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rule 4702 1.58 1.84 1.54 -0.55 -1.11 -1.67 -2.01 -2.32 -2.61 -2.90 -3.17 -2.76 Summar

y 1.36 -11.41 -1.50 -4.76 -5.25 -5.80 -5.98 -6.15 -6.34 -6.49 -6.63 -5.98 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categ
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

R O G - FRESNO - SU M M ER PLA NN IN G IN V ENTO RY -- A DJU STED FO R M EA SUR ES A N D CA TEG O R IES TH R O U G H 31 SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryE LEC T R IC U T ILIT IE S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O G EN E R A T IO N 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N (C O M B U ST IO N ) 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 M A N U FA C TU R IN G A N D IN D U ST R IA L 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R A L PR O C ESSIN G 0.60 0.59 0.59 0.58 0.58 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.56 0.56 0.56 SE R V IC E A N D C O M M E R C IA L 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 O T H E R (FU E L C O M B U ST IO N ) 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 LA N D FILLS 1.15 1.22 1.24 1.29 1.31 1.33 1.35 1.38 1.40 1.42 1.44 IN C IN E R A T O R S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O T H E R (W A ST E D ISPO SA L) 16.05 16.04 16.56 17.55 17.71 17.85 17.98 18.05 18.90 19.76 19.88 LA U N D E R IN G 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 D E G R E A SIN G 1.73 0.32 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.36 C O A TIN G S A N D R E LA T E D PR O C E SS SO LV EN T S 1.63 1.52 1.54 1.64 1.52 1.57 1.61 1.66 1.71 1.76 1.80 PR IN T IN G 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.50 0.51 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.57 A D H E SIV ES A N D SE A LA N T S 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.12 O T H E R (C LE A N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A T IN G S) 2.78 3.13 3.26 3.46 3.56 3.67 3.77 3.87 3.97 4.07 4.17 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C T IO N 1.46 1.40 1.40 1.37 1.35 1.33 1.31 1.30 1.28 1.27 1.25 PE T R O LE U M M A R K E T IN G 1.88 2.01 2.04 2.10 2.14 2.18 2.21 2.25 2.28 2.32 2.36 O TH ER (PETR O LEU M PR O D U C TIO N A N D M A R K ETI

N 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 

C H E M IC A L 0.50 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.58 0.59 0.60 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R E 3.73 3.58 3.58 3.27 3.28 3.29 3.30 3.31 3.32 3.33 3.35 M IN E R A L PR O C ESSES 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 M E T A L PR O C E SSE S 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 W O O D A N D PA PE R 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 G LA SS A N D R E LA TE D PR O D U C T S 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 O T H E R (IN D U STR IA L PR O C ESSES) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 E xtra-inventory R eductions (D istrict R ules) -0.22 -0.22 -0.22 -0.22 -0.22 -0.22 -0.22 -0.22 

Stationary Subtotal 32.56 31.38 32.15 32.99 33.20 33.58 33.92 34.21 35.28 36.37 36.71 

A rea-W ideC O N SU M ER PR O D U C T S 6.24 5.75 5.75 5.82 5.88 5.94 6.04 6.13 6.23 6.32 6.42 A R C H ITEC TU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C E 3.42 2.79 2.82 2.87 2.90 2.93 2.96 2.98 3.02 3.05 3.07 PE ST IC ID E S/FE R TILIZE R S 5.07 5.24 5.19 5.08 5.03 4.98 4.94 4.91 4.88 4.85 4.82 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.54 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.57 0.57 0.57 R E SID E N T IA L FU E L C O M B U ST IO N 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 FA R M IN G O PE R A T IO N S 11.25 11.70 11.85 10.59 9.11 9.20 9.32 9.45 9.57 9.69 9.82 C O N ST R U C T IO N A N D D E M O LIT IO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V E D R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D B LO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR ES 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 M A N A G E D B U R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 7.13 7.10 7.09 6.42 6.41 6.39 6.38 6.36 6.34 6.33 6.31 C O O K IN G 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 33.94 33.40 33.52 31.61 30.16 30.27 30.47 30.68 30.88 31.08 31.29 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 9.50 7.35 6.76 5.65 5.21 4.74 4.31 3.92 3.58 3.27 3.02 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 2.83 2.36 2.16 1.79 1.63 1.46 1.35 1.26 1.16 1.08 1.00 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 4.16 3.72 3.54 3.25 3.14 3.02 2.89 2.75 2.62 2.49 2.38 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 2.32 2.05 1.95 1.78 1.73 1.68 1.63 1.57 1.52 1.47 1.42 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 1.41 1.17 1.04 0.85 0.79 0.75 0.71 0.68 0.66 0.63 0.61 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.76 0.61 0.56 0.46 0.41 0.37 0.33 0.29 0.26 0.23 0.20 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.24 0.19 0.17 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 2.55 2.78 3.41 3.04 2.87 2.68 2.51 2.35 2.20 2.06 1.93 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.69 1.22 1.18 1.11 1.08 1.06 1.04 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.04 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.09 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 

On-Road Subtotal 25.11 22.0

9 21.3

8 18.61 17.52 16.41 15.3

8 14.43 13.5

6 12.77 12.0

8 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 1.06 1.11 1.11 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.15 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.19 TRAINS 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 RECREATIONAL BOATS 3.45 3.40 3.32 3.15 3.05 2.97 2.90 2.85 2.80 2.76 2.73 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 2.14 2.68 2.80 2.96 3.04 3.14 3.23 3.34 3.45 3.56 3.68 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 4.91 5.00 4.72 4.30 4.11 3.91 3.73 3.56 3.40 3.24 3.11 FARM EQUIPMENT 3.87 3.49 3.31 2.94 2.78 2.65 2.49 2.27 2.05 1.87 1.71 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 1.28 1.24 1.18 0.87 0.80 0.75 0.71 0.67 0.63 0.60 0.57 

Other Mobile Subtotal 16.9

8 17.17 16.70 15.5

9 15.1

8 14.82 14.4

6 14.09 13.75 13.47 13.24 

Grand Total 108.5

9 104.05 103.75 98.81 96.05 95.07 94.23 93.40 93.47 93.70 93.31 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - FRESNOChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 20

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.78 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.37 -0.29 -0.28 -0.26 -0.25 -0.24 -0.24 -0.24 -0.24 -0.23 -0.23 -0.2Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.0Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.04 -0.05 -0.0Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0SJV Composting Green Waste 13.20 13.18 13.69 14.68 14.83 14.97 15.10 15.15 16.00 16.85 16.97 17.2SJV Composting Biosolids 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.72 2.73 2.72 2.73 2.73 2.74 2.73 2.7SJV Rule 4602-4612 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.17 -0.17 -0.17 -0.17 -0.17 -0.17 -0.17 -0.SJV Rule 4694 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.34 -0.34 -0.34 -0.34 -0.35 -0.35 -0.35 -0.35 -0.SJV Rule 4570 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.57 -3.20 -3.26 -3.34 -3.41 -3.49 -3.57 -3.65 -3.Summar

y 15.54 14.82 16.12 15.21 13.58 13.65 13.69 13.66 14.43 15.20 15.23 15.3

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 159 

Kings County
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 160 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - KINGS - SUM M ER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH 31 SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryCOGENERATION 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COM BUSTION) 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M ANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 2.60 1.82 1.93 2.06 2.08 2.10 2.13 2.16 2.19 2.22 2.25 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 3.28 3.32 3.13 2.19 1.92 1.64 1.44 1.25 1.06 0.86 0.67 SERVICE AND COM M ERCIAL 0.62 0.59 0.58 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 OTHER (FUEL COM BUSTION) 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 LANDFILLS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SOIL REM EDIATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (W ASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETROLEUM M ARKETING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CHEM ICAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M INERAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W OOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Extra-inventory Reductions (District Rules) 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.04 -0.05 -0.06 -0.07 -0.07 -0.08 -0.08 -0.09 

Stationary Subtotal 6.66 5.89 5.79 4.92 4.65 4.39 4.21 4.04 3.87 3.70 3.54 

Area-W ideCONSUM ER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COM BUSTION 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 FARM ING OPERATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CONSTRUCTION AND DEM OLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE W INDBLOW N DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M ANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 COOKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Area-W ide Subtotal 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 1.31 0.98 0.90 0.76 0.71 0.66 0.60 0.54 0.49 0.44 0.40 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 0.70 0.53 0.49 0.41 0.39 0.37 0.34 0.32 0.29 0.27 0.24 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.99 0.87 0.80 0.68 0.66 0.63 0.59 0.55 0.51 0.47 0.44 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.52 0.51 0.47 0.39 0.37 0.36 0.33 0.31 0.30 0.28 0.26 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.02 0.23 0.19 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.08 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.71 0.75 0.71 0.62 0.61 0.59 0.55 0.51 0.47 0.44 0.40 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 13.36 14.39 17.28 14.48 14.13 13.47 12.45 11.44 10.43 9.46 8.55 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.03 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.09 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 

On-Road Subtotal 18.38 19.21 21.7

8 18.14 17.61 16.7

6 15.47 14.21 13.0

6 11.9

6 10.92 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 1.68 1.72 1.82 2.70 2.79 2.95 3.13 3.19 3.25 3.32 3.38 TRAINS 1.31 1.09 1.02 0.96 0.95 0.91 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.97 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 0.78 0.73 0.71 0.66 0.63 0.60 0.58 0.56 0.54 0.51 0.49 FARM EQUIPMENT 3.68 3.32 3.20 2.89 2.76 2.65 2.52 2.34 2.17 2.02 1.88 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 7.45 6.87 6.7

6 7.22 7.14 7.13 7.17 7.05 6.92 6.83 6.73 

Grand Total 32.70 32.17 34.52 30.47 29.5

9 28.4

6 27.04 25.50 24.05 22.6

9 21.38 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - KINGSChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -4.26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.05 -0.59 -0.77 -0.80 -0.75 -0.69 -0.62 -0.55 -0.48 -0.42 -0.35 -0.24 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Idling 0.00 -0.14 -0.32 -0.67 -0.71 -0.75 -0.77 -0.80 -0.82 -0.83 -0.85 -0.89 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moyer -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rule 4702 0.60 0.70 0.59 -0.21 -0.44 -0.66 -0.79 -0.92 -1.05 -1.17 -1.28 -1.13 Summar

y 0.53 -4.32 -0.52 -1.71 -1.93 -2.16 -2.25 -2.33 -2.41 -2.48 -2.54 -2.30 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried cate
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - KINGS - SUMM ER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR M EASURES AND CATEGORIES THROUGH 31 SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryCOGENERATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COM BUSTION) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 M ANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 SERVICE AND COM M ERCIAL 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 OTHER (FUEL COM BUSTION) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LANDFILLS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SOIL REM EDIATION 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 OTHER (W ASTE DISPOSAL) 8.68 8.82 9.10 9.66 9.75 9.83 9.91 9.96 10.44 10.92 10.99 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DEGREASING 0.21 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.25 PRINTING 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 PETROLEUM M ARKETING 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.28 CHEM ICAL 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.98 0.99 0.99 1.00 M INERAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W OOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Extra-inventory Reductions (District Rules) 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 

Stationary Subtotal 10.97 10.94 11.23 11.79 11.88 11.98 12.07 12.14 12.63 13.12 13.23 

Area-W ideCONSUM ER PRODUCTS 1.01 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.98 1.00 1.01 1.03 1.05 1.06 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCES 0.55 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 1.50 1.51 1.50 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COM BUSTION 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 FARM ING OPERATIONS 4.02 4.32 4.42 4.02 3.49 3.55 3.64 3.72 3.81 3.89 3.98 CONSTRUCTION AND DEM OLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FUGITIVE W INDBLOW N DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M ANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 COOKING 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 

Area-W ide Subtotal 7.43 7.56 7.65 7.24 6.72 6.80 6.90 7.00 7.11 7.21 7.31 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 1.51 1.22 1.12 0.93 0.88 0.82 0.74 0.67 0.61 0.56 0.51 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 0.67 0.55 0.51 0.43 0.41 0.39 0.36 0.33 0.31 0.29 0.26 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 0.67 0.62 0.58 0.51 0.50 0.49 0.46 0.44 0.41 0.39 0.37 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.32 0.31 0.28 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.19 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.00 1.10 1.33 1.17 1.14 1.11 1.05 0.99 0.92 0.86 0.79 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.14 0.27 0.26 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 

On-Road Subtotal 4.74 4.4

9 4.4

6 3.83 3.71 3.5

6 3.34 3.13 2.94 2.75 2.58 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 3.15 3.24 3.41 5.04 5.19 5.49 5.82 5.94 6.05 6.17 6.29 TRAINS 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.14 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.06 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 0.49 0.52 0.49 0.45 0.43 0.40 0.38 0.36 0.35 0.33 0.32 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.76 0.70 0.66 0.59 0.56 0.54 0.51 0.46 0.42 0.38 0.35 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 

Other Mobile Subtotal 4.8

8 4.9

8 5.07 6.53 6.62 6.8

6 7.13 7.1

8 7.24 7.3

0 7.38 

Grand Total 28.02 27.9

6 28.42 29.3

9 28.92 29.2

0 29.44 29.45 29.9

0 30.3

8 30.50 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - KINGSChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.20 -0.25 -0.25 -0.25 -0.24 -0.24 -0.24 -0.24 -0.24 -0.24 -0.24 -0.2Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

SJV Composting Green Waste 7.14 7.25 7.53 8.08 8.16 8.24 8.32 8.36 8.84 9.31 9.38 9.5SJV Composting Biosolids 1.47 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.51 1.51 1.52 1.51 1.5

SJV Rule 4602-4612 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.0SJV Rule 4694 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

SJV Rule 4570 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.60 -1.22 -1.26 -1.30 -1.35 -1.39 -1.43 -1.48 -1.5

Summar

y 8.41 8.18 8.77 8.73 8.17 8.22 8.25 8.25 8.68 9.11 9.14 9.2

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 167 

Coachella Valley Upwind Areas
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 168 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 169 

Orange County
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 170 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

N O X - O RANG E CO UNTY - SU M M ER PLANN ING INVEN TO R Y -- ADJU STED FO R M EASURES AND CATEG O RIES TH RO U G H SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 201Stationar yELEC TR IC U TILITIES 0.33 0.47 0.46 0.42 0.39 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.3C O G EN ER A T IO N 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N (C O M B U STIO N ) 0.60 0.42 0.40 0.36 0.35 0.32 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.2M A N U FA C TU R IN G A N D IN D U ST R IA L 2.27 2.17 2.06 2.07 2.07 2.04 2.00 1.98 1.96 1.95 1.9FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R A L PR O C ESSIN G 0.26 0.22 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.1SER V IC E A N D C O M M ER C IA L 3.56 3.33 3.20 2.96 2.86 2.52 2.42 2.31 2.20 2.10 2.0O TH ER (FU EL C O M B U STIO N ) 1.25 1.16 1.11 1.02 0.98 0.93 0.89 0.86 0.82 0.79 0.7SEW A G E TR EA TM EN T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0LA N D FILLS 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.2IN C IN ER A TO R S 0.12 0.21 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.2O TH ER (W A ST E D ISPO SA L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0LA U N D ER IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0D EG R EA SIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS SO LV EN TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PR IN T IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0A D H ESIV ES A N D SE A LA N TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0O TH ER (C LEA N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A TIN G S) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N 0.02 0.20 0.28 0.25 0.24 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.2PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PETR O LEU M M A R K ETIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0O TH ER (PETR O LEU M PR O D U C TIO N A N D M A R K ETI

N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

C H EM IC A L 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0M IN ER A L PR O C ESSES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0M ETA L PR O C ESSES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0W O O D A N D PA PER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0G LA SS A N D R ELA TED PR O D U C TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0ELEC TR O N IC S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0O TH ER (IN D U STR IA L PR O C ESSES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Stationar y Subtotal 8.64 8.41 8.14 7.71 7.52 7.02 6.79 6.62 6.47 6.31 6.2

A rea-W ideC O N SU M ER PR O D U C TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0A R C H ITEC TU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PESTIC ID ES/FER T ILIZER S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0R ESID EN TIA L FU EL C O M B U STIO N 4.06 3.84 3.54 3.58 3.62 3.02 3.05 3.07 3.09 3.12 2.7FA R M IN G O PER A TIO N S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0C O N STR U C TIO N A N D D EM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0U N PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FU G ITIV E W IN D B LO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FIR ES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0M A N A G ED B U R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0C O O K IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

A rea-W ide Subtotal 4.07 3.85 3.55 3.60 3.64 3.04 3.06 3.08 3.10 3.13 2.7
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 25.55 17.36 15.75 13.20 12.02 10.88 9.87 8.95 8.13 7.37 6.7LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 4.40 3.22 2.92 2.46 2.26 2.08 1.92 1.77 1.63 1.50 1.3LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 18.05 13.64 12.42 10.64 9.97 9.38 8.83 8.27 7.74 7.23 6.7MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 9.83 8.04 7.40 6.38 5.99 5.65 5.37 5.08 4.79 4.51 4.2LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 4.67 3.93 3.34 2.83 2.77 2.72 2.67 2.64 2.62 2.59 2.5LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.68 0.67 0.60 0.55 0.54 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.5MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 1.41 1.50 1.26 1.00 0.95 0.91 0.86 0.81 0.76 0.71 0.6HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.60 1.46 1.26 1.04 0.99 0.93 0.86 0.79 0.72 0.65 0.5LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.12 2.78 2.45 1.97 1.93 1.80 1.69 1.61 1.54 1.48 1.4LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 1.71 1.94 1.74 1.46 1.43 1.34 1.26 1.18 1.11 1.04 0.9MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 13.43 13.92 12.10 9.75 9.32 8.69 8.02 7.41 6.82 6.23 5.7HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 13.36 14.39 16.17 13.33 12.92 12.23 11.40 10.56 9.71 8.91 8.MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.38 0.64 0.65 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.67 0.67 0.68 0.6HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 1.79 1.70 1.71 1.73 1.74 1.74 1.73 1.72 1.72 1.69 1.6HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.18 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.70 0.72 0.74 0.77 0.78 0.80 0.82 0.83 0.85 0.86 0.8OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.65 0.64 0.64 0.60 0.58 0.54 0.51 0.47 0.44 0.40 0.3MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.80 0.70 0.67 0.61 0.58 0.54 0.51 0.48 0.45 0.42 0.3

On-Road Subtotal 99.32 87.41 81.99 69.15 65.61 61.60 57.66 53.94 50.39 46.97 43.8

Other MobileSHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 3.86 4.47 4.71 5.26 5.56 5.90 6.28 6.69 7.14 7.64 8.AIRCRAFT 1.36 1.47 1.51 1.59 1.63 1.67 1.68 1.69 1.70 1.71 1.7TRAINS 5.06 4.30 4.08 3.84 3.77 2.69 2.98 3.11 3.18 3.25 3.3SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.RECREATIONAL BOATS 3.60 4.59 4.85 5.07 5.04 5.01 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.02 5.0OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 57.49 53.34 51.69 47.34 45.22 42.62 40.59 38.62 36.62 34.60 32.3FARM EQUIPMENT 1.23 1.10 1.06 0.96 0.91 0.85 0.81 0.75 0.69 0.64 0.5FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Other Mobile Subtotal 72.77 69.45 68.07 64.20 62.29 58.90 57.49 56.01 54.48 52.99 51.3

Grand Total 184.80 169.12 161.75 144.65 139.05 130.5

6 125.00 119.65 114.43 109.40 104.1
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - ORANGE COUNTYChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -4.26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.05 -0.67 -0.83 -0.80 -0.74 -0.68 -0.61 -0.54 -0.48 -0.42 -0.36 -0.24 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 -0.01 Idling 0.00 -0.10 -0.26 -0.56 -0.59 -0.62 -0.64 -0.67 -0.70 -0.73 -0.75 -0.79 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 Moyer -0.29 -0.38 -0.32 -0.21 -0.27 -0.33 -0.38 -0.38 -0.38 -0.38 -0.34 -0.26 Off-road 0.00 -0.02 -0.03 -0.14 -0.23 -0.95 -0.96 -0.97 -0.99 -0.97 -0.96 -0.93 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y -0.34 -5.43 -1.46 -1.73 -1.85 -2.60 -2.62 -2.59 -2.57 -2.52 -2.43 -2.25 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried cate
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - ORANGE COUNTY - SUM M ER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR M EASURES AND CATEGO RIES TH ROUGH 31 SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELECTRIC U TILITIES 0.08 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 CO G EN ERA TIO N 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 O IL A N D G A S PRO D U CTIO N (CO M BU STIO N ) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 M A N U FA CTU RIN G A N D IN D U STRIA L 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.23 FO O D A N D A G RICU LTU RA L PRO CESSIN G 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 SERV ICE A N D CO M M ERCIA L 0.37 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.43 0.43 O TH ER (FU EL CO M BU STIO N ) 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 SEW AGE TREATM ENT 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 LA N D FILLS 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 IN CIN ERA TO RS 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 O TH ER (W A STE D ISPO SA L) 2.45 2.57 2.60 2.35 2.23 2.26 2.28 2.30 2.32 2.35 2.37 LA U N D ERIN G 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 D EG REA SIN G 4.86 2.15 2.21 2.36 2.45 2.53 2.55 2.57 2.60 2.62 2.64 CO A TIN G S A N D RELA TED PRO CESS SO LV EN TS 5.37 5.22 5.09 4.39 4.50 4.57 4.62 4.67 4.72 4.77 4.81 PRIN TIN G 1.46 1.43 0.91 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 A D H ESIV ES A N D SEA LA N TS 1.04 0.96 1.00 1.08 1.12 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.20 O TH ER (CLEA N IN G A N D SU RFA CE CO A TIN G S) 0.23 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 O IL A N D G A S PRO D U CTIO N 0.68 0.33 0.28 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 PETRO LEU M REFIN IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETRO LEU M M A RK ETIN G 5.53 5.39 5.37 5.30 5.26 5.28 5.35 5.42 5.48 5.55 5.62 O TH ER (PETRO LEU M PRO D U CTIO N A N D M A RK ETI

N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

CH EM ICAL 2.81 2.21 2.29 2.44 2.52 2.60 2.63 2.66 2.69 2.72 2.75 FO O D A N D A G RICU LTU RE 0.47 0.49 0.50 0.52 0.52 0.53 0.53 0.54 0.54 0.55 0.55 M IN ERA L PRO CESSES 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 M ETA L PRO CESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W O O D A N D PA PER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 G LASS AND RELATED PRODU CTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ELECTRO N ICS 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 O TH ER (IN D U STRIA L PRO CESSES) 1.36 1.42 1.44 1.48 1.50 1.52 1.53 1.55 1.56 1.57 1.59 

Stationary Subtotal 27.31 23.34 22.85 22.25 22.44 22.82 23.03 23.25 23.47 23.69 23.91 2

Area-W ideCO NSUM ER PRODU CTS 21.59 19.57 19.58 18.99 19.23 19.44 19.61 19.78 19.96 20.13 20.30 2A R C H ITECTU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PRO C E 11.16 8.88 5.94 5.14 5.18 5.21 5.24 5.28 5.31 5.34 5.38 

PESTICID ES/FERTILIZERS 1.18 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 RESID EN TIA L FU EL CO M BU STIO N 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 FA RM IN G O PERA TIO N S 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 CO N STRU CTIO N A N D D EM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAV ED RO AD DU ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U NPAV ED RO AD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D BLO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIRES 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 M A N A G ED BU RN IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CO O K IN G 0.35 0.37 0.38 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.43 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 34.79 30.34 27.44 26.07 26.36 26.62 26.83 27.04 27.26 27.47 27.68 2
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 32.11 23.54 21.30 17.78 16.29 14.85 13.64 12.57 11.62 10.78 10.07 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 4.45 3.59 3.25 2.76 2.55 2.36 2.23 2.11 1.99 1.87 1.77 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 10.81 8.88 8.26 7.49 7.31 7.17 7.04 6.91 6.75 6.60 6.46 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 5.50 4.66 4.34 3.92 3.81 3.73 3.69 3.63 3.56 3.49 3.42 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 3.14 2.76 2.28 1.78 1.71 1.65 1.62 1.58 1.55 1.53 1.51 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.49 0.48 0.41 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.31 0.31 0.29 0.28 0.27 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 1.29 1.16 0.94 0.69 0.64 0.59 0.55 0.51 0.47 0.44 0.41 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.58 0.56 0.48 0.40 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.31 0.29 0.26 0.23 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.19 0.23 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.15 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.05 1.16 1.31 1.10 1.06 1.02 0.97 0.91 0.86 0.80 0.74 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 2.11 3.00 2.92 2.76 2.68 2.62 2.58 2.56 2.55 2.54 2.54 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.22 0.16 0.15 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 

On-Road Subtotal 62.33 50.60 46.25 39.71 37.44 35.34 33.61 32.02 30.53 29.18 28.00 

Other MobileSHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 AIRCRAFT 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 TRAINS 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 RECREATIONAL BOATS 13.73 13.73 13.73 13.73 13.73 13.73 13.73 13.73 13.73 13.73 13.73 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 27.25 27.25 27.25 27.24 27.24 27.21 27.17 27.14 27.11 27.07 27.05 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 

Other Mobile Subtotal 47.91 47.42 45.33 41.27 39.63 38.14 36.79 35.58 34.5

0 33.53 32.69 

Grand Total 172.33 151.70 141.87 129.3

0 125.87 122.91 120.26 117.9

0 115.76 113.87 112.28 1
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - ORANGE COUNTYChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.56 -0.21 -0.12 0.04 0.11 0.18 0.21 0.24 0.26 0.29 0.32 0.3Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 0.00 -0.07 -0.09 -0.11 -0.1Moyer 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.0Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.83 -0.84 -0.85 -0.85 -0.86 -0.87 -0.88 -0.88 -0.9Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.05 -0.09 -0.12 -0.15 -0.18 -0.2Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Summar

y -0.56 -0.54 -0.13 -0.81 -0.76 -0.74 -0.78 -0.77 -0.85 -0.88 -0.91 -0.9

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categori
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 177 

San Bernardino County
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 178 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NO X - SBO (SCAB PO RTIO N) - SU M M ER PLAN NIN G IN VEN TO RY -- A DJUSTED FO R M EA SU RES AN D CA TEG O R IES TH SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELEC TR IC U TILITIES 0.34 0.93 1.00 0.88 0.85 0.83 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 C O G EN ER A TIO N 0.19 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.1O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N (C O M BU STIO N ) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M A N U FA C TU R IN G A N D IN D U STR IA L 4.71 4.88 4.99 4.46 4.36 4.27 4.19 4.21 4.22 4.23 4.25 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R A L PR O C ESSIN G 0.29 0.28 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.15 SER V IC E A N D C O M M ER C IA L 1.81 1.83 1.80 1.71 1.68 1.51 1.47 1.43 1.39 1.36 1.34 O TH ER (FU EL C O M BU STIO N ) 0.47 0.42 0.40 0.37 0.36 0.32 0.31 0.30 0.29 0.28 0.27 SEW A G E TR EA TM EN T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA N D FILLS 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 IN C IN ER A TO R S 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 O TH ER (W A STE D ISPO SA L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA U N D ER IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D EG R EA SIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS SO LV EN TS 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 PR IN TIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A D H ESIV ES A N D SEA LA N TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (C LEA N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A TIN G S) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETR O LEU M M A R K ETIN G 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0O TH ER (PETR O LEU M PR O D U C TIO N A N D M A R K ETIN G ) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C H EM IC A L 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M IN ER A L PR O C ESSES 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 M ETA L PR O C ESSES 0.32 0.33 0.25 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 W O O D A N D PA PER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ELEC TR O N IC S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (IN D U STR IA L PR O C ESSES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Stationary Subtotal 8.36 9.03 9.00 8.12 7.93 7.60 7.46 7.42 7.39 7.36 7.36 

Area-W ideC O N SU M ER PR O D U C TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A R C H ITEC TU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

PESTIC ID ES/FER TILIZER S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 R ESID EN TIA L FU EL C O M B U STIO N 2.02 1.91 1.77 1.80 1.83 1.54 1.56 1.59 1.61 1.63 1.45 FA R M IN G O PER A TIO N S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O N STR U C TIO N A N D D EM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D B LO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR ES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0M A N A G ED BU R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 C O O K IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 2.08 1.98 1.84 1.87 1.89 1.61 1.63 1.65 1.67 1.69 1.52 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 12.17 8.71 7.66 6.25 5.70 5.15 4.64 4.20 3.81 3.46 3.15 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 3.18 2.41 2.08 1.66 1.52 1.38 1.26 1.16 1.06 0.97 0.89 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 9.22 7.30 6.41 5.28 4.95 4.64 4.35 4.06 3.79 3.53 3.29 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 5.03 4.48 3.96 3.26 3.07 2.90 2.75 2.59 2.44 2.29 2.15 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 2.73 2.49 2.00 1.62 1.60 1.59 1.56 1.55 1.55 1.54 1.54 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.40 0.39 0.34 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.63 0.63 0.52 0.41 0.40 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.30 0.29 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.94 0.87 0.70 0.53 0.50 0.47 0.44 0.42 0.40 0.37 0.35 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.10 2.42 1.96 1.47 1.44 1.35 1.24 1.18 1.13 1.08 1.04 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 1.06 1.55 1.30 1.03 1.01 0.95 0.88 0.83 0.79 0.74 0.70 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 8.11 9.44 7.79 6.18 5.97 5.57 5.02 4.62 4.26 3.89 3.57 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 22.63 24.28 25.64 19.72 18.90 17.66 16.75 16.78 14.77 13.87 12.98 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.18 0.40 0.39 0.37 0.37 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.38 0.38 0.39 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.41 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.27 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.52 0.55 0.56 0.59 0.61 0.62 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.66 0.67 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.24 0.23 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.15 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.48 0.45 0.43 0.40 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.31 0.29 0.27 0.26 

On-Road Subtotal 68.10 66.95 62.31 49.67 47.29 44.26 41.44 39.89 36.45 34.15 32.04 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 1.25 1.90 2.12 2.55 2.77 2.98 3.59 4.20 4.81 5.42 6.04 TRAINS 7.59 6.47 6.14 5.82 5.71 3.91 4.15 4.28 4.36 4.44 4.53 RECREATIONAL BOATS 2.04 2.70 2.89 3.00 2.99 2.99 2.99 3.01 3.03 3.05 3.08 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 20.69 19.41 18.86 17.41 16.72 16.09 15.39 14.71 13.99 13.27 12.45 FARM EQUIPMENT 2.20 1.97 1.90 1.71 1.62 1.53 1.45 1.34 1.24 1.15 1.07 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 33.81 32.48 31.94 30.52 29.85 27.54 27.61 27.58 27.48 27.38 27.21 

Grand Total 112.34 110.44 105.09 90.17 86.97 81.01 78.14 76.55 72.99 70.59 68.14 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - SAN BERNARDINO (SCAB PORTION)Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -7.19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.08 -1.04 -1.24 -1.12 -1.02 -0.93 -0.85 -0.76 -0.68 -0.61 -0.53 -0.36 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 Idling 0.00 -0.16 -0.42 -0.82 -0.86 -0.89 -0.95 0.00 -1.06 -1.13 -1.20 -1.26 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 Moyer -0.14 -0.19 -0.16 -0.10 -0.13 -0.16 -0.19 -0.19 -0.19 -0.19 -0.17 -0.13 Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 -0.03 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.07 -0.07 -0.07 -0.08 -0.08 -0.08 -0.08 -0.09 -0.09 Summar

y -0.22 -8.59 -1.83 -2.14 -2.12 -2.11 -2.11 -1.08 -2.07 -2.06 -2.03 -1.89 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried cate
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

RO G - SBO (SCAB PO RTIO N) - SUM M ER PLANNING INVENTO RY -- ADJUSTED FO R M EASURES AND CATEG O RIES TH SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELEC TR IC U TILITIES 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 C O G EN ER A TIO N 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N (C O M BU STIO N ) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M A N U FA C TU R IN G A N D IN D U STR IA L 0.44 0.49 0.52 0.56 0.59 0.61 0.63 0.64 0.66 0.68 0.69 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R A L PR O C ESSIN G 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 SER V IC E A N D C O M M ER C IA L 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 O TH ER (FU EL C O M B U STIO N ) 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 SEW A G E TR EA TM EN T 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 LA N D FILLS 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 IN C IN E R A T O R S 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 O TH ER (W A STE D ISPO SA L) 3.72 4.04 4.13 3.78 3.59 3.64 3.69 3.74 3.79 3.84 3.89 LA U N D ER IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D EG R EA SIN G 1.17 0.57 0.61 0.69 0.73 0.77 0.80 0.82 0.85 0.88 0.90 C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS SO LV EN TS 3.27 3.43 3.44 3.18 3.32 3.45 3.56 3.66 3.77 3.87 3.98 PR IN TIN G 0.37 0.39 0.31 0.34 0.36 0.37 0.38 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.43 A D H ESIV ES A N D SEA LA N TS 0.68 0.67 0.73 0.83 0.88 0.93 0.97 1.00 1.03 1.06 1.09 O TH ER (C LEA N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A TIN G S) 0.12 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PETR O LEU M M A R K ETIN G 2.53 2.60 2.64 2.65 2.67 2.72 2.77 2.82 2.86 2.91 2.95 O TH ER (PETR O LEU M PR O D U C TIO N A N D M A R K ETIN G ) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C H EM IC A L 1.28 1.31 1.43 1.62 1.73 1.85 1.92 2.00 2.07 2.15 2.22 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R E 0.19 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.27 0.28 M IN ER A L PR O C ESSES 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 M ETA L PR O C ESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 W O O D A N D PA PER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ELEC TR O N IC S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (IN D U STR IA L PR O C ESSES) 0.73 0.80 0.82 0.83 0.84 0.85 0.87 0.88 0.90 0.91 0.93 

Stationary Subtotal 14.98 15.04 15.36 15.26 15.49 16.01 16.38 16.77 17.16 17.55 17.94 

A rea-W ideC O N SU M ER PR O D U C TS 10.29 9.64 9.72 9.53 9.67 9.79 9.92 10.04 10.16 10.29 10.41 A R C H ITEC TU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS S 5.29 4.31 2.91 2.57 2.61 2.66 2.71 2.77 2.82 2.87 2.93 PEST IC ID ES/FER TILIZER S 0.09 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.18 0.22 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.30 0.31 0.32 R ESID EN TIA L FU EL C O M B U STIO N 0.27 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.31 0.31 FA R M IN G O PER A TIO N S 4.55 3.30 2.68 2.27 2.17 1.79 1.70 1.62 1.55 1.48 1.42 C O N STR U C TIO N A N D D EM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D B LO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR ES 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 M A N A G ED BU R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 C O O K IN G 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.23 0.24 0.25 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 21.00 18.21 16.29 15.39 15.49 15.30 15.41 15.52 15.65 15.78 15.91 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 15.50 12.25 10.78 8.75 8.02 7.26 6.61 6.06 5.56 5.13 4.77 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 3.53 2.91 2.52 2.00 1.81 1.64 1.53 1.43 1.33 1.24 1.16 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 6.16 5.51 4.95 4.29 4.16 4.04 3.92 3.80 3.67 3.55 3.44 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 3.24 3.03 2.72 2.36 2.29 2.24 2.20 2.16 2.11 2.07 2.02 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 1.71 1.59 1.23 0.88 0.84 0.81 0.79 0.77 0.75 0.75 0.74 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.29 0.28 0.22 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.13 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.72 0.61 0.48 0.33 0.30 0.28 0.25 0.23 0.21 0.19 0.17 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.40 0.38 0.30 0.21 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.10 0.13 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.73 2.44 2.03 1.61 1.54 1.45 1.41 1.35 1.28 1.22 1.16 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 1.09 1.95 1.79 1.63 1.59 1.55 1.54 1.55 1.57 1.57 1.59 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 

On-Road Subtotal 34.74 31.39 27.42 22.57 21.25 19.95 18.90 17.97 17.08 16.3

0 15.61 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 1.01 1.51 1.67 2.00 2.16 2.33 2.57 2.82 3.07 3.32 3.57 TRAINS 0.51 0.51 0.50 0.50 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.50 0.50 0.50 RECREATIONAL BOATS 14.43 13.66 13.27 12.38 11.87 11.44 11.07 10.80 10.57 10.37 10.22 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 1.71 2.41 2.42 2.50 2.54 2.58 2.63 2.70 2.76 2.84 2.93 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 9.38 9.95 9.36 8.54 8.17 7.82 7.49 7.18 6.89 6.63 6.40 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.46 0.43 0.41 0.37 0.35 0.33 0.31 0.29 0.26 0.24 0.22 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 2.17 2.14 2.06 1.51 1.40 1.30 1.22 1.15 1.09 1.03 0.98 

Other Mobile Subtotal 29.67 30.60 29.69 27.79 26.9

8 26.29 25.80 25.43 25.14 24.93 24.82 

Grand Total 100.3

9 95.25 88.77 81.02 79.21 77.55 76.49 75.69 75.03 74.5

6 74.28 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - SAN BERNARDINO (SCAB PORTION)Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.03 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 0.00 -0.04 -0.05 -0.06 -0.0Moyer 0.00 0.00 -0.04 -0.10 -0.15 -0.19 -0.23 -0.23 -0.22 -0.22 -0.20 -0.1Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.41 -0.42 -0.43 -0.43 -0.44 -0.44 -0.45 -0.45 -0.4Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Summar

y -0.03 -0.71 -0.06 -0.54 -0.59 -0.64 -0.69 -0.68 -0.72 -0.73 -0.72 -0.7

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categorie
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 185 

Riverside County
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 186 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - RIVERSIDE (SCAB PORTION) - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES THSUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 201StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.58 0.47 0.51 0.57 0.49 0.45 0.45 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.4COGENERATION 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.0MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 1.33 1.47 1.50 1.48 1.48 1.46 1.44 1.45 1.46 1.48 1.5FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.84 0.70 0.37 0.34 0.32 0.31 0.30 0.29 0.28 0.27 0.2SERVICE AND COM MERCIAL 1.26 1.36 1.32 1.24 1.21 1.14 1.10 1.06 1.02 0.98 0.9OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.70 0.65 0.63 0.58 0.55 0.52 0.50 0.48 0.47 0.45 0.4SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0LANDFILLS 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.0INCINERATORS 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.0OTHER (W ASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.0PRINTING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PETROLEUM REFINING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND M ARKETING) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0CHEMICAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0MINERAL PROCESSES 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.0METAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0WOOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Stationary Subtotal 4.89 4.85 4.55 4.41 4.27 4.09 4.00 3.95 3.90 3.86 3.8

Area-WideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENT 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 1.76 1.68 1.55 1.61 1.64 1.40 1.43 1.46 1.49 1.52 1.3FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FUGITIVE W INDBLOW N DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FIRES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.0COOKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Area-W ide Subtotal 1.80 1.72 1.59 1.65 1.68 1.43 1.47 1.49 1.53 1.56 1.4
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 13.28 9.83 8.85 7.43 6.82 6.21 5.61 5.10 4.63 4.22 3.8LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 4.46 3.45 3.09 2.57 2.35 2.15 1.97 1.81 1.67 1.53 1.4LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 11.10 9.18 8.23 6.93 6.51 6.11 5.73 5.37 5.02 4.70 4.4MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 5.78 5.57 5.01 4.18 3.94 3.72 3.53 3.34 3.15 2.98 2.8LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 2.53 2.38 1.84 1.44 1.41 1.39 1.36 1.34 1.33 1.33 1.3LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.32 0.35 0.29 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.2MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.67 0.59 0.48 0.37 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.30 0.29 0.27 0.2HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.05 1.06 0.84 0.63 0.60 0.56 0.53 0.51 0.48 0.45 0.4LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.09 3.37 2.54 1.66 1.58 1.41 1.25 1.15 1.07 1.01 0.9LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 1.31 2.11 1.67 1.19 1.15 1.07 0.98 0.92 0.87 0.81 0.7MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 6.64 8.01 6.47 4.89 4.71 4.40 3.92 3.62 3.33 3.05 2.8HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 24.75 26.46 27.32 20.57 19.78 18.54 17.59 17.68 15.61 14.64 13.6MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.31 0.79 0.79 0.77 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.77 0.79 0.80 0.8HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.25 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.59 0.57 0.57 0.54 0.54 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.5OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.33 0.31 0.30 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.26 0.25 0.24 0.22 0.2MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.68 0.66 0.64 0.58 0.55 0.52 0.48 0.45 0.43 0.40 0.3

On-Road Subtotal 74.23 75.00 69.23 54.59 51.89 48.55 45.38 43.67 39.96 37.47 35.1

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.34 0.38 0.43 0.48 0.53 0.5TRAINS 4.77 4.01 3.79 3.59 3.54 2.46 2.64 2.74 2.80 2.86 2.9RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.94 1.20 1.27 1.34 1.33 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.33 1.33 1.3OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.0OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 17.55 16.62 16.22 15.03 14.43 13.68 13.09 12.51 11.91 11.29 10.5FARM EQUIPMENT 4.53 4.06 3.91 3.52 3.36 3.14 2.97 2.75 2.54 2.36 2.FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Other Mobile Subtotal 23.09 21.94 21.45 19.93 19.16 18.18 17.42 16.63 15.82 15.03 14.1

Grand Total 104.01 103.50 96.82 80.58 77.01 72.25 68.26 65.75 61.22 57.92 54.5
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - RIVERSIDE (SCAB PORTION)Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -7.84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.09 -1.12 -1.31 -1.16 -1.06 -0.96 -0.88 -0.79 -0.71 -0.63 -0.55 -0.37 Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 Idling 0.00 -0.18 -0.45 -0.86 -0.90 -0.94 -0.99 0.00 -1.12 -1.19 -1.26 -1.34 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 Moyer -0.16 -0.23 -0.19 -0.12 -0.16 -0.19 -0.22 -0.22 -0.22 -0.23 -0.20 -0.16 Off-road 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.05 -0.07 -0.39 -0.39 -0.40 -0.40 -0.39 -0.38 -0.36 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Summar

y -0.25 -9.36 -1.96 -2.20 -2.21 -2.50 -2.51 -1.44 -2.49 -2.47 -2.42 -2.25 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried cate
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - RIVERSIDE (SCAB PORTION) - SUMMER PLANNING INVENTORY -- ADJUSTED FOR MEASURES AND CATEGORIES TSUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 201StationaryELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.0COGENERATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0M ANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.2FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0SERVICE AND COM M ERCIAL 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.1OTHER (FUEL COM BUSTION) 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.0SEW AGE TREATMENT 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.0LANDFILLS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0INCINERATORS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.0OTHER (W ASTE DISPOSAL) 0.28 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.35 0.3LAUNDERING 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0DEGREASING 0.84 0.41 0.43 0.50 0.53 0.56 0.58 0.60 0.63 0.65 0.6COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 2.75 2.87 2.84 2.72 2.86 2.98 3.10 3.22 3.34 3.46 3.5PRINTING 0.36 0.47 0.41 0.44 0.46 0.48 0.50 0.52 0.54 0.55 0.5ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.43 0.44 0.48 0.54 0.58 0.61 0.64 0.66 0.69 0.71 0.7OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.10 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.0PETROLEUM REFINING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PETROLEUM M ARKETING 2.10 2.21 2.24 2.32 2.35 2.41 2.45 2.50 2.54 2.58 2.6OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND M ARKETING) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0CHEMICAL 1.26 1.29 1.41 1.64 1.76 1.88 1.97 2.06 2.15 2.24 2.3FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.35 0.37 0.38 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.44 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.4M INERAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0METAL PROCESSES 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0W OOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.56 0.65 0.67 0.72 0.74 0.76 0.78 0.79 0.81 0.83 0.8

Stationary Subtotal 9.56 9.60 9.77 10.22 10.63 11.06 11.43 11.80 12.17 12.53 12.9

Area-W ideCONSUMER PRODUCTS 9.38 9.24 9.47 9.52 9.77 10.00 10.23 10.46 10.69 10.91 11.1ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 4.89 4.27 2.94 2.67 2.75 2.82 2.91 3.00 3.09 3.18 3.2

PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.15 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.2ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.15 0.19 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.28 0.29 0.30 0.3RESIDENTIAL FUEL COM BUSTION 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.1FARMING OPERATIONS 5.06 3.99 3.46 3.11 3.03 2.70 2.62 2.55 2.49 2.44 2.3CONSTRUCTION AND DEM OLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FUGITIVE W INDBLOW N DUST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0FIRES 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0M ANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.0COOKING 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.2

Area-W ide Subtotal 20.03 18.29 16.69 16.18 16.44 16.44 16.71 16.98 17.26 17.55 17.8
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 14.99 12.09 10.77 8.94 8.23 7.50 6.82 6.25 5.73 5.29 4.LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 4.06 3.37 3.00 2.48 2.25 2.04 1.89 1.76 1.64 1.52 1.LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 6.38 5.71 5.17 4.52 4.37 4.24 4.10 3.97 3.83 3.71 3.MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 3.23 3.12 2.83 2.47 2.40 2.34 2.31 2.27 2.22 2.18 2.LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 1.74 1.71 1.24 0.80 0.74 0.70 0.66 0.63 0.61 0.60 0.LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.26 0.28 0.22 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.68 0.56 0.44 0.31 0.28 0.26 0.23 0.21 0.19 0.17 0.HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.41 0.38 0.30 0.23 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.00 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.08 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 1.81 1.99 2.07 1.61 1.54 1.46 1.40 1.35 1.29 1.24 1.MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 1.61 3.36 3.19 2.94 2.89 2.85 2.81 2.83 2.86 2.89 2.HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.15 0.12 0.11 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.

On-Road Subtotal 35.57 33.07 29.65 24.83 23.43 22.09 20.92 19.92 18.98 18.20 17.

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 0.54 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.58 0.59 0.61 0.62 0.TRAINS 0.32 0.33 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.RECREATIONAL BOATS 5.02 5.46 5.40 5.27 5.18 5.12 5.07 5.05 5.04 5.04 5.OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 1.88 2.24 2.14 2.10 2.10 2.13 2.16 2.21 2.26 2.32 2.OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 8.45 9.25 8.77 8.17 7.89 7.61 7.36 7.12 6.89 6.68 6.FARM EQUIPMENT 0.95 0.88 0.84 0.75 0.72 0.69 0.65 0.59 0.54 0.49 0.FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 2.00 2.08 1.98 1.49 1.39 1.31 1.24 1.18 1.12 1.08 1.

Other Mobile Subtotal 19.17 20.77 20.01 18.64 18.14 17.73 17.38 17.06 16.78 16.56 16.

Grand Total 84.33 81.74 76.11 69.86 68.64 67.33 66.44 65.77 65.20 64.84 64.
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - RIVERSIDE (SCAB PORTION)Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201

HHDD Trucks 0 -0.56 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.10 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.0Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.0Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 0.00 -0.04 -0.05 -0.06 -0.0Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.0Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.41 -0.43 -0.44 -0.45 -0.46 -0.47 -0.48 -0.49 -0.5Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Summar

y -0.10 -0.55 0.01 -0.41 -0.42 -0.44 -0.46 -0.45 -0.50 -0.52 -0.53 -0.5

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categori
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 193 

Los Angeles County
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 194 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NO X - LA W H O LE CO UNTY - SUM M ER PLANNING INVENTO RY -- ADJUSTED FO R M EASURES AND CATEGO RIES TH RO UGH SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELEC TR IC U TILITIES 3.87 6.78 6.70 5.96 5.77 5.29 4.95 4.95 4.95 4.96 4.96 C O G EN ER A TIO N 0.36 0.41 0.35 0.30 0.29 0.29 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N (C O M BU STIO N ) 0.63 0.48 0.48 0.43 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G (C O M BU STIO N ) 7.07 7.09 7.07 6.11 5.89 5.78 5.73 5.73 5.73 5.73 5.73 M A N U FA C TU R IN G A N D IN D U STR IA L 10.22 10.30 9.69 9.27 9.15 8.87 8.75 8.68 8.61 8.54 8.51 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R A L PR O C ESSIN G 0.75 0.68 0.52 0.51 0.50 0.48 0.47 0.47 0.46 0.46 0.45 SER V IC E A N D C O M M ER C IA L 11.06 11.03 10.57 9.83 9.53 8.89 8.61 8.24 7.90 7.57 7.38 O TH ER (FU EL C O M BU STIO N ) 5.80 5.20 5.00 4.57 4.38 4.15 4.03 3.91 3.78 3.66 3.54 SEW A G E TR EA TM EN T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA N D FILLS 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 IN C IN ER A TO R S 1.28 1.29 1.28 1.26 1.25 1.25 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 O TH ER (W A STE D ISPO SA L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LA U N D ER IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 D EG R EA SIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS SO LV EN TS 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 PR IN TIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A D H ESIV ES A N D SEA LA N TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (C LEA N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A TIN G S) 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G 4.86 4.98 5.11 4.52 4.37 4.36 4.38 4.19 4.19 4.19 4.19 PETR O LEU M M A R K ETIN G 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 O TH ER (PETRO LEU M PRO D U CTIO N A N D M A RK ETI

N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

C H EM IC A L 0.09 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M IN ER A L PR O C ESSES 1.25 0.94 0.84 0.82 0.82 0.83 0.83 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.85 M ETA L PR O C ESSES 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 W O O D A N D PA PER 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 G LA SS A N D R ELA TED PR O D U C TS 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 ELEC TR O N IC S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O TH ER (IN D U STR IA L PR O C ESSES) 0.90 0.95 1.04 1.04 1.03 1.03 1.02 1.03 1.03 1.04 1.04 

Stationary Subtotal 48.75 50.84 49.40 45.37 44.16 42.32 41.41 40.66 40.13 39.63 39.28 3

A rea-W ideC O N SU M ER PR O D U C TS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A R C H ITEC TU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C E 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PESTIC ID ES/FER TILIZER S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 R ESID EN TIA L FU EL C O M BU STIO N 12.88 12.21 11.31 11.28 11.32 9.47 9.50 9.54 9.57 9.61 8.51 FA R M IN G O PER A TIO N S 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C O N STR U C TIO N A N D D EM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D BLO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR ES 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 M A N A G ED BU R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 C O O K IN G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 13.07 12.40 11.50 11.48 11.52 9.67 9.71 9.75 9.79 9.82 8.73 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 91.91 62.77 53.03 40.49 36.51 32.95 29.88 27.10 24.63 22.41 20.45 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 16.39 12.01 10.41 8.28 7.55 6.86 6.30 5.78 5.30 4.84 4.41 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 57.27 45.91 39.39 30.93 28.34 26.09 24.41 22.91 21.48 20.12 18.81 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 29.88 25.58 22.42 18.03 16.67 15.47 14.58 13.69 12.84 12.03 11.25 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 16.69 14.50 12.13 9.90 9.55 9.24 8.97 8.74 8.51 8.30 8.10 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 2.52 2.54 2.21 1.90 1.86 1.81 1.76 1.72 1.68 1.64 1.60 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 5.01 4.78 4.07 3.33 3.19 3.04 2.89 2.73 2.57 2.41 2.26 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 5.64 5.70 4.88 3.99 3.78 3.54 3.27 3.00 2.72 2.48 2.25 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.35 5.78 5.17 4.35 4.32 4.08 3.89 3.72 3.58 3.45 3.33 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 4.54 5.71 5.00 4.15 4.04 3.78 3.55 3.34 3.15 2.97 2.80 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 43.48 46.24 39.39 31.70 30.14 27.96 25.78 23.73 21.78 19.91 18.22 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 92.95 100.36 111.21 90.26 87.33 82.51 76.83 71.00 65.19 59.87 54.80 4MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.86 1.45 1.44 1.40 1.39 1.38 1.38 1.39 1.40 1.41 1.42 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 10.45 9.40 9.10 8.87 8.74 8.65 8.60 8.51 8.18 8.07 7.94 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.55 0.42 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.44 0.46 0.47 0.47 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 2.63 2.47 2.47 2.45 2.44 2.42 2.41 2.39 2.36 2.34 2.31 OTHER BUSES (OB) 2.38 2.73 2.64 2.26 2.10 1.87 1.68 1.53 1.40 1.28 1.19 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 1.99 1.70 1.62 1.44 1.36 1.26 1.17 1.09 1.01 0.93 0.86 

On-Road Subtotal 385.50 350.05 327.00 264.15 249.75 233.35 217.79 202.81 188.23 174.93 162.47 14

Other Mobile

AIRCRAFT 11.03 12.41 12.88 13.81 14.27 14.74 14.88 15.03 15.16 15.31 15.44 TRAINS 22.83 19.43 18.43 17.48 17.19 11.96 12.72 13.14 13.39 13.66 13.94 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 60.15 68.53 70.03 72.85 74.57 76.31 77.29 78.32 79.75 81.28 82.84 RECREATIONAL BOATS 5.05 6.64 7.10 7.52 7.51 7.52 7.53 7.57 7.61 7.68 7.75 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 157.48 142.23 137.38 122.75 115.62 108.21 102.61 96.62 90.49 84.98 79.13 FARM EQUIPMENT 2.52 2.26 2.17 1.96 1.87 1.79 1.70 1.58 1.46 1.36 1.25 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Other Mobile Subtotal 259.14 251.59 248.08 236.45 231.11 220.60 216.81 212.33 207.95 204.34 200.45 19

Grand Total 706.46 664.89 635.98 557.45 536.54 505.95 485.71 465.55 446.10 428.72 410.92 38
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

NOX - LA WHOLE COUNT

Y

Changes to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2017 

HHDD Trucks 0 -29.68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reflash -0.33 -4.25 -5.19 -5.08 -4.70 -4.29 -3.86 -3.42 -3.02 -2.61 -2.24 -1.51 

Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.05 -0.07 -0.09 -0.08 -0.08 -0.07 -0.06 -0.06 -0.05 

Idling 0.00 -0.77 -2.13 -4.40 -4.62 -4.86 -5.06 -5.25 -5.43 -5.63 -5.82 -6.09 AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.03 Moyer -0.81 -1.04 -0.88 -0.53 -0.67 -0.81 -0.94 -0.93 -0.93 -0.92 -0.82 -0.62 Off-road 0.00 -0.31 -0.46 -1.65 -2.74 -5.03 -5.03 -5.17 -5.27 -4.92 -4.57 -4.00 Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.33 -0.35 -0.38 -0.41 -0.43 -0.46 -0.50 -0.53 -0.62 Summar

y -1.15 -36.05 -8.67 -12.05 -13.15 -15.46 -15.37 -15.30 -15.19 -14.67 -14.05 -12.91 

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categories
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

RO G - LA W H O LE C O UN TY - SUM M ER PLAN NING INVENTO R Y -- A DJUSTED FO R M EA SURES AN D C ATEG O RIES TH RO UG H SUBCATEGORY 2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 StationaryELEC TR IC U TILITIES 1.59 1.24 1.36 1.55 1.34 1.22 1.22 1.24 1.25 1.26 1.28 C O G EN ER A TIO N 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N (C O M BU STIO N ) 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G (C O M BU STIO N ) 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.31 M A N U FA C TU R IN G A N D IN D U STR IA L 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R A L PR O C ESSIN G 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 SER V IC E A N D C O M M ER C IA L 0.77 0.78 0.79 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.81 0.81 O TH ER (FU EL C O M B U STIO N ) 0.58 0.52 0.50 0.45 0.42 0.40 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.30 SEW A G E TR EA TM EN T 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 LA N D FILLS 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 IN C IN ER A TO R S 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 O TH ER (W A STE D ISPO SA L) 0.72 0.73 0.73 0.69 0.66 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.68 0.68 0.68 LA U N D ER IN G 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 D EG R EA SIN G 14.94 7.66 7.69 7.84 7.96 8.07 8.11 8.14 8.18 8.22 8.25 C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C ESS SO LV EN TS 18.24 16.54 15.95 13.76 13.92 13.99 14.07 14.16 14.24 14.32 14.40 PR IN TIN G 4.09 3.98 2.83 2.85 2.86 2.87 2.87 2.88 2.88 2.89 2.89 A D H ESIV ES A N D SEA LA N TS 1.36 1.17 1.18 1.22 1.24 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.26 1.26 O TH ER (C LEA N IN G A N D SU R FA C E C O A TIN G S) 0.94 0.45 0.46 0.48 0.49 0.49 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.51 O IL A N D G A S PR O D U C TIO N 1.82 1.02 0.87 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 PETR O LEU M R EFIN IN G 4.69 3.81 3.81 3.75 3.73 3.73 3.73 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 PETR O LEU M M A R K ETIN G 20.23 19.88 19.89 19.63 19.55 19.68 19.80 19.93 20.05 20.17 20.29 O TH ER (PETR O LEU M PR O D U C TIO N A N D M A R K ETI

N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 

C H EM IC A L 7.08 5.52 5.59 5.13 5.04 5.11 5.13 5.15 5.18 5.20 5.22 FO O D A N D A G R IC U LTU R E 1.77 1.70 1.70 1.69 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 M IN ER A L PR O C ESSES 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 M ETA L PR O C ESSES 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 W O O D A N D PA PER 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 G LA SS A N D R ELA TED PR O D U C TS 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 ELEC TR O N IC S 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 O TH ER (IN D U STR IA L PR O C ESSES) 5.26 5.44 5.48 5.10 5.11 5.15 5.18 5.20 5.23 5.26 5.29 

Stationary Subtotal 87.58 73.92 72.35 69.10 69.01 69.33 69.57 69.72 70.01 70.31 70.61 

A rea-W ideC O N SU M ER PR O D U C TS 71.55 64.52 64.32 61.82 62.21 62.53 62.92 63.32 63.71 64.10 64.49 A R C H ITEC TU R A L C O A TIN G S A N D R ELA TED PR O C E 37.22 29.36 20.00 17.44 17.57 17.71 17.85 18.00 18.14 18.29 18.44 PESTIC ID ES/FER TILIZER S 1.04 1.18 1.19 1.23 1.26 1.28 1.32 1.36 1.40 1.44 1.48 A SPH A LT PA V IN G / R O O FIN G 0.50 0.51 0.51 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.53 0.53 0.54 0.54 0.54 R ESID EN TIA L FU EL C O M BU STIO N 0.84 0.81 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.87 FA R M IN G O PER A TIO N S 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 C O N STR U C TIO N A N D D EM O LITIO N 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 U N PA V ED R O A D D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FU G ITIV E W IN D B LO W N D U ST 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 FIR ES 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 M A N A G ED BU R N IN G A N D D ISPO SA L 0.36 0.37 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.43 0.44 C O O K IN G 1.18 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.21 1.22 1.23 1.24 1.25 1.26 1.27 

A rea-W ide Subtotal 113.15 98.39 88.90 83.90 84.48 84.98 85.58 86.17 86.78 87.38 87.98 
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

On-Road MobileLIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 120.17 88.26 74.34 56.31 50.86 45.95 41.97 38.37 35.39 32.75 30.49 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 1 (LDT1) 19.26 15.66 13.58 10.73 9.74 8.79 8.16 7.55 6.99 6.45 5.97 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS - 2 (LDT2) 38.63 33.87 29.60 24.19 22.74 21.56 20.79 20.12 19.52 18.91 18.36 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 19.78 17.22 15.27 12.78 12.13 11.58 11.28 10.92 10.61 10.31 10.00 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 12.44 10.65 8.68 6.63 6.28 5.99 5.78 5.55 5.33 5.12 4.92 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 1.92 1.87 1.54 1.18 1.10 1.04 0.98 0.93 0.88 0.83 0.79 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 4.96 4.15 3.32 2.42 2.21 2.02 1.86 1.69 1.54 1.40 1.28 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 2.99 2.91 2.44 1.93 1.83 1.68 1.51 1.32 1.14 1.02 0.91 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.01 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.12 0.15 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.76 0.89 0.78 0.66 0.65 0.63 0.62 0.60 0.58 0.57 0.55 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 8.42 9.27 10.31 8.64 8.32 7.95 7.56 7.08 6.60 6.14 5.69 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 5.28 7.47 6.92 6.20 5.97 5.79 5.66 5.60 5.55 5.51 5.49 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.35 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.29 0.29 0.28 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.38 0.34 0.35 0.34 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.35 0.36 0.36 SCHOOL BUSES (SB) 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 OTHER BUSES (OB) 0.44 0.42 0.37 0.29 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.18 0.17 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.82 0.63 0.56 0.43 0.38 0.34 0.30 0.27 0.23 0.20 0.18 

On-Road Subtotal 236.92 194.39 168.83 133.43 123.49 114.57 107.71 101.21 95.57 90.42 85.82 

Other MobileAIRCRAFT 4.63 5.07 5.22 5.51 5.66 5.81 5.90 5.99 6.08 6.17 6.26 TRAINS 1.53 1.56 1.54 1.51 1.50 1.50 1.51 1.52 1.52 1.53 1.54 SHIPS AND COMMERCIAL BOATS 3.46 3.51 3.48 3.43 3.41 3.38 3.34 3.30 3.27 3.24 3.21 RECREATIONAL BOATS 34.94 32.94 32.10 30.16 29.08 28.15 27.38 26.73 26.19 25.72 25.32 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 3.32 3.96 3.96 4.05 4.10 4.18 4.27 4.37 4.49 4.62 4.76 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 63.04 60.86 57.07 51.15 48.48 45.63 43.35 41.26 39.39 37.67 36.18 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.51 0.46 0.44 0.39 0.37 0.36 0.34 0.31 0.28 0.26 0.24 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 15.20 14.19 13.44 9.67 8.84 8.19 7.61 7.10 6.65 6.26 5.91 

Other Mobile Subtotal 126.63 122.56 117.24 105.88 101.44 97.20 93.70 90.58 87.87 85.47 83.42 

Grand Total 564.28 489.27 447.32 392.31 378.42 366.07 356.55 347.69 340.23 333.58 327.83 3
 May 7, 2007 Appendix A 

ROG - LA WHOLE COUNTYChanges to Baseline*

2002 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201

HHDD Trucks 0 -2.61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pesticides/Fertilizers Corr. -0.07 -0.04 -0.06 -0.07 -0.07 -0.07 -0.08 -0.10 -0.12 -0.14 -0.16 -0.1Reflash 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Public Fleet 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.05 -0.07 -0.09 -0.09 -0.08 -0.07 -0.07 -0.06 -0.0Idling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0AB 1493 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.07 -0.22 -0.21 -0.28 -0.35 -0.5Moyer 0.00 0.00 -0.02 -0.06 -0.09 -0.11 -0.14 -0.16 -0.14 -0.14 -0.12 -0.1Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.69 -2.71 -2.72 -2.74 -2.76 -2.77 -2.79 -2.81 -2.8Off-road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.38 -0.42 -0.45 -0.48 -0.51 -0.54 -0.6Ships 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0Summar

y -0.07 -2.66 -0.09 -2.87 -2.94 -3.37 -3.54 -3.77 -3.80 -3.93 -4.05 -4.2

* These are already included in "Adjusted Baseline" sheetsand include Rules adopted through Dec. 31, 2006 and recently identified previously uninventoried categorie
 

Appendix B 

110(a)(2) Infrastructure SIP 
 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
May 7, 2007 Appendix B 1 

Introduction and Background 

Section 110 (a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to submit an implementation 

plan to the U.S. EPA Administrator that provides for implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of national ambient air quality standards. Section 110(a)(2) lists the 

elements that are to comprise the implementation plan. Several of the elements in 

§110(a)(2) specifically address the need for states to demonstrate the ability to 

implement, maintain, and enforce the air quality standards. These elements are 

sometimes compiled and submitted separately in what is referred to as an 

“infrastructure” SIP. This document is the infrastructure SIP for the new 8-hour ozone 

and PM2.5 air quality standards. 

The elements of §110(a)(2) are listed below. Two elements that are not part of an 

infrastructure SIP but addressed separately elsewhere are underlined. 

• Enforceable Emission Limitations and Other Control Measures (§110(a)(2)A)) 

(see Appendix G) 

• Air Quality Monitoring, Compilation, Data Analysis, and Reporting 

(§110(a)(2)(B)) 

• Enforcement and Stationary Source Permitting (§110(a)(2)(C) 

• Interstate Transport (§110(a)(2)(D)) (see Appendix C) 

• Resources, Conflict of Interest, and Emergency Backstop (§110(a)(2)(E)) 

• Stationary Source Emissions Monitoring and Reporting (§110(a)(2)(F)) 

• Emergency Powers and Contingency Plans (§110(a)(2)(G)) 

• SIP Revision For Revised Air Quality Standards or New Attainment Methods 

(§110(a)(2)(H)) 

• SIP Revisions for New Nonattainment Areas (§110(a)(2)(I)) 

• Consultation and Public Notification (§110(a)(2)(J)) 

• Air Quality Modeling and Reporting (§110(a)(2)(K)) 

• Major Stationary Source Permitting Fees (§110(a)(2)(L)) 

• Consultation with Local Entities (§110(a)(2)(M)) 

Most of these elements are addressed in the comprehensive §110(a)(2) SIP submitted 

in response to the CAA of 1970 and approved by U.S. EPA in 1979 in 40 CFR 52.220. 

This submittal continues to affirm ARB’s commitment to comply with §110(a)(2) 

requirements and is incorporated by reference into this submittal. 

The following discussions respond to the new elements required by the 1990 CAA 

Amendments and commitments required by the adoption of new ozone and PM2.5 air 

quality standards. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix B 2 

§110(a)(2)(B) Air Quality Monitoring, Compilation, Data Analysis, and Reporting 

States are to establish and operate devices, methods, systems, and procedures to 

monitor, compile, and analyze ambient air quality data and to provide the data to 

U.S. EPA. 

California has an extensive air quality monitoring network operated by ARB and local air 

quality districts that collects air quality data that are compiled, analyzed, and reported to 

U.S. EPA. ARB’s website contains up-to-date information about air quality monitoring, 

including a description of the network and information about monitoring of ozone, 

PM2.5, and meteorology. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/aaqm/aaqm.htm with links to all 

elements of the program, and the recent report on ARB’s PM2.5 monitoring program at 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/pm/pm25_monitor_2005.pdf. 

In addition to the network of federally-approved reference monitors that measure PM2.5 

mass, ARB operates continuous PM2.5 mass monitors. For PM2.5 speciation, ARB 

analyzes filters collected by a network of reference monitors located throughout 

California with concentrations in PM2.5 nonattainment areas. The PM2.5 data can be 

accessed from two interactive databases: Aerometric Data Analysis and Management 

(ADAM), that provides historical data, and the Air Quality and Meteorological 

Information System (AQMIS), that provides real-time data. More details about ARB’s 

Air Monitoring Program, including monitoring provided by local air districts, can be found 

at http://www.arb.ca.gov/aaqm/mldaqsb/amn.htm. 

The 2006 California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality includes a five-year summary 

of PM2.5 air quality data. This report can be found at 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanac06/almanac06iu.htm. 

ARB commits to continue to operate an air quality monitoring network that complies with 

U.S. EPA requirements and to provide quarterly reports of compiled and analyzed air 

quality monitoring data to U.S. EPA. 

§110(a)(2)(C) Enforcement and Stationary Source Permits 

States are to implement a program for the enforcement of control measures associated 

with the “attainment SIP” and a permit program for stationary sources. 

ARB’s Enforcement Program covers mobile and stationary sources, consumer products, 

and fuels. Details about the program can be found at 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/enf/enf.htm. 

ARB reviews and audits the programs of the local air pollution control and air quality 

management districts (districts) as a part of its oversight role with respect to districts in 

California and in accordance with Section 41500 of the Health and Safety Code. In 

addition, ARB reviews district rules at the draft, proposed, and adopted stages of their 

development to ensure that the rules meet all applicable state and federal requirements. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix B 3 

ARB maintains a rule review database accessible to the public to make comments and 

rules easily accessible. 

ARB does not have authority to issue permits to stationary sources of air pollution. The 

responsibility for permitting such sources rests with the local air districts. This includes 

prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and new source review (NSR) 

preconstruction permitting programs for attainment and nonattainment pollutants, 

respectively. California Health and Safety Code Section 39002 grants to ARB the ability 

to undertake control activities in any area where it determines that districts have failed 

to meet the responsibilities given to it for the control of air pollution from stationary 

sources. District permitting regulations are federally enforceable because all have been 

approved by U.S. EPA as part of the state SIP. Local air district permit programs are 

discussed at http://www.arb.ca.gov/permits/permits.htm. 

ARB commits to the continued enforcement of control measures for which it has 

jurisdiction and the continued oversight of local district permitting and enforcement 

programs with respect to measures required by the CAA. 

§110(a)(2)(E) Resources, Conflict of Interest, and Emergency Backstop 

States are to provide assurances that (i) adequate personnel, funding, and legal 

authority will be available to carry out the SIP; (ii) a majority of its state board members 

represent the public interest and do not derive a significant portion of their income from 

entities that are subject to permits, and that conflicts of interest of members be 

adequately disclosed; and (iii) the State has responsibility for ensuring adequate 

implementation of plan provisions to be carried out by local districts. 

The California Legislature annually approves ARB’s funding and personnel resources 

for carrying out the programs of the SIP to demonstrate attainment of the PM2.5 and 8-

hour ozone standards. Districts’ budgets are approved annually by each district’s 

governing board. The annual budget process provides a periodic update that enables 

ARB and districts to adjust funding and personnel needs. While it is not legally possible 

for ARB and districts to provide specific commitments about future year budgets 

(funding and staff resources), the annual budget appropriations process undertaken by 

the California State Legislature enables ARB to present a request for resources 

required to meet the mandates of the federal Clean Air Act. Since ARB’s Clean Air 

Act-mandated programs have received State funding for more than 30 years, and since 

there is consistently strong public support in California for providing clean air, it is 

reasonable to assume that implementation of the Clean Air Act mandates in California 

will continue to obtain the necessary funding. 

Through fiscal year 2006-2007, about 90 percent of ARB’s funding is devoted to 

meeting the Clean Air Act mandates. The majority of ARB’s budget currently consists of 

dedicated funds that are collected from regulated emission sources and can only be 

used for air pollution control. These dedicated fees are periodically adjusted in order to 

provide necessary funding for the ARB’s programs. Air districts receive funding from 
May 7, 2007 Appendix B 4 

fees paid by regulated businesses, motor vehicle registration fees, state and federal 

grants, and other local sources. Collectively, the 2006-2007 ARB and local air districts’ 

budgets total about $685 million with about 3,100 full-time equivalent staff positions. 

California Government Code Sections 87100-87105 specify conflict of interest 

requirements for members of ARB and local district boards. These requirements 

specifically prohibit all state and local public officials from participating in governmental 

decisions for which they have a financial interest and also require ARB and local 

districts to develop conflict of interest policies to meet these legal requirements. 

California Health and Safety Code Section 39002 grants to ARB overall regulatory 

authority for local districts’ programs and power to undertake a district’s air pollution 

control programs if the ARB determines that a district has failed to meet the 

responsibilities given to it by this section or by any other provision in State law. 

ARB commits to actively maintain programs for the enforcement of control measures 

included in the approved SIP and measures required by the CAA. 

§110(a)(2)(F) Stationary Source Emissions Monitoring and Reporting 

States are to require the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment to 

monitor stationary sources of emissions by the owners or operators of these sources 

and the provision of periodic reports on these emissions. 

40CFR51.214 requires every SIP to include requirements for the monitoring of 

emissions from major stationary sources as specified in 40CFR51 Appendix P. Every 

air district in California has adopted regulations to implement the requirements of 

40CFR51.214, and all of these district regulations have been approved by U.S. EPA as 

part of the state SIP. California Health & Safety Code Section 42700 et seq encourages 

districts to require emission monitoring devices on major stationary sources, and many 

districts have adopted stationary source monitoring regulations in response. 

ARB maintains a database with emissions data for more than 10,000 stationary source 

facilities in California at http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/disclaim.htm. In addition, ARB 

maintains the latest reports of emissions from stationary sources at 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/emissiondata.htm where these emissions can be viewed from 

a statewide, air basin, or county level, by source category. The local air districts are 

responsible for providing these data to ARB. 

ARB commits to continue its oversight of air district stationary source monitoring 

requirements and to the reporting of data collected by such monitoring activities. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix B 5 

§110(a)(2)(G) Emergency Powers and Contingency Plans 

States are to provide for authority comparable to that in Section 303, which provides 

legal authority to the U.S. EPA to halt the emission of air pollutants causing or 

contributing to injury to public or welfare. U.S. EPA is authorized to either bring a 

lawsuit in federal court or, if such civil action cannot assure prompt protection of public 

health or welfare, to issue such orders as may be necessary to protect public health or 

welfare or the environment. In addition, states are to provide for adequate contingency 

plans to implement such authority. 

The authority granted to the U.S. EPA Administrator is vested in ARB and the air 

pollution control/air quality management districts in California under California Health & 

Safety Code Section 42400 et seq. These sections apply to a range of emission 

violations and impose penalties that are equivalent to or exceed comparable federal 

penalties for the same violations. 

The requirement for states to provide for adequate contingency plans to implement such 

authority is intended to establish emergency episode plans for responding to elevated 

pollutant levels in urban areas. Emergency episode plans are required in areas that 

record pollutant concentrations in excess of threshold levels specified in 40CFR51.150. 

U.S. EPA is proposing to amend this regulation to address new ozone and PM2.5

standards. 

ARB commits to submit any necessary revisions to its Air Pollution Emergency Plan 

upon adoption of amended guidance by U.S. EPA. 

§110(a)(2)(H) SIP Revisions For Revised Air Quality Standards Or New Attainment 

Methods 

States are to provide for revision of SIPs from time to time when air quality standards 

are revised or new attainment methods become available or when U.S. EPA informs 

states that current SIPs are inadequate to attain standards or to comply with additional 

requirements under the Clean Air Act. 

ARB is submitting a revised SIP that responds to revised and new air quality standards 

for both 8-hour ozone and PM2.5. 

ARB commits to submit SIP revisions whenever revised air quality standards are 

promulgated by U.S. EPA. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix B 6 

§110(a)(2)(I) SIP Revisions for New Nonattainment Areas 

States are to submit SIP revisions for newly designated nonattainment areas to meet 

the requirements of Part D - Plan Requirements for Nonattainment Areas under Clean 

Air Act Title I - Air Pollution Prevention and Control. Part D of the Clean Air Act 

specifies both general requirements for all SIPs and specific requirements for different 

criteria pollutants. ARB maintains all SIP documents at: 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/sip.htm. 

ARB commits to submit SIP revisions whenever areas of the state are newly designated 

nonattainment for any federal ambient air quality standard. 

§110(a)(2)(J) Consultation and Public Notification 

States are to meet the applicable requirements of CAA Section 121 (relating to 

consultation), Section 127 (relating to public notification), and Part C (relating to 

prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) of air quality and visibility protection). 

Section 121 requires that states provide a satisfactory process of consultation with 

general purpose local governments, designated organizations of elected officials of local 

governments, and any affected federal land manager in carrying out CAA requirements. 

California Health and Safety Code Section 41650 et seq requires ARB to conduct public 

hearings and to solicit testimony from air districts, air quality planning agencies, and the 

public when adopting local nonattainment plans for inclusion in the SIP. Additionally, 

the California Administrative Procedures Act, Government Code Section 11340 et seq, 

requires notification and provision of comment opportunities to all parties affected by 

proposed regulations. 

ARB commits to maintaining a process of consultation with parties designated under 

Section 121. 

Section 127 requires the states to provide measures which will be effective to notify the 

public on a regular basis of instances or areas in which any air quality standard is 

exceeded during the preceding calendar year, to advise the public of the health hazards 

associated with such pollution, and to enhance public awareness of measures that can 

be taken to prevent such standards from being exceeded. 

California Health and Safety Code Section 39607 requires ARB to implement a program 

for securing air quality data in each air basin and reporting these data to the public. 

ARB maintains these air quality data and the other information required by Section 127 

on its website, which is continuously available to the public.1

 

 

1

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/aqinfo.htm, http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/health/health.htm, 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/cando.htm, viewed on February 1, 2007. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix B 7 

ARB commits to maintaining a public information and education program that satisfies 

the requirements of Section 127. 

Many air districts in California have adopted regulations for the prevention of significant 

deterioration (PSD) that have been approved by U.S. EPA. In those areas where 

approvable regulations have not been adopted, U.S. EPA enforces PSD requirements 

through a federal stationary source permitting program under enabling authority 

prescribed by 40CFR52.21. 

ARB commits to ensuring that PSD regulations are implemented in California. 

§110(a)(2)(K) Air Quality Modeling and Reporting 

States are to provide for the use of air quality modeling to predict the effect of emissions 

on ambient air quality and to submit data related to such modeling when requested by 

U.S. EPA. 

ARB’s air quality modeling work complies with U.S. EPA’s final guidance on the use of 

models in attainment demonstrations for the 8-hour ozone standard and uses 

U.S. EPA’s latest draft final guidance for modeling PM2.5. This is a rapidly-evolving 

field in which ARB endeavors to use the latest methodology and techniques, and 

documents information that its staff uses when conducting modeling or when evaluating 

the performance of air quality models used for this purpose. ARB consults and works 

closely with local districts that conduct their own regional air quality modeling. 

ARB provides air quality modeling software and documentation with links to databases 

and search engines at http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/soft.htm#modeling. 

ARB commits to continue to use air quality models in accordance with both U.S. EPA 

and ARB’s currently approved modeling guidance and protocols and the continued 

submittal of data and modeling results to U.S. EPA. 

§110(a)(2)(L) Major Stationary Source Permitting Fees 

States are required to assess the owner or operator of each major stationary source 

with fees sufficient to cover the reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon any 

application for such a permit, and if a permit is granted, the reasonable costs of 

implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of the permit. Owners or 

operators are also required to comply with the fee provisions of Title V Sections 501 – 

507 of the Clean Air Act. Such fees are required to be payable to the permitting 

authority. 

As noted above, responsibility to issue permits for stationary sources of air pollution is 

vested with the local air districts, and each air district in California has adopted 

regulations that require an additional fee for facilities subject to Title V requirements. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix B 8 

Information concerning these permits issued by local air districts is found at 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/permits/airdisop.htm and 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/permits/permits.htm. 

ARB commits to continue to implement district-adopted major stationary source permit 

fee regulations. 

§110(a)(2)(M) Consultation with Local Entities 

States are to provide for consultation and participation by local political subdivisions 

affected by the plan. 

California is divided into local air districts, which are county or regional local government 

authorities that have responsibility for controlling air pollution from stationary sources. A 

map of the local air districts showing boundaries for each district is found at 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/capcoa/dismap.htm. Links to the local air districts’ web sites can 

be found at http://www.arb.ca.gov/capcoa/roster.htm. 

ARB consults with and provides liaison with all local air districts and provides frequent 

and regular communication and consultation with management and staff of local air 

districts. Since local air district boards are composed of local elected officials, this 

provides for the regular consultation and participation with local government entities 

(cities and counties) affected by the SIPs. California Health and Safety Code Section 

41650 et seq requires the ARB to conduct public hearings and to solicit testimony from 

air districts, air quality planning agencies, and the public when adopting local 

nonattainment plans for inclusion in the SIP. 

ARB commits to maintaining a consultation process with local political subdivisions 

affected by the SIP. 
 

Appendix C 

Interstate Transport State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

 for 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 

to satisfy the Requirements of Clean Air Act section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

for the 

State of California 
(This page intentionally left blank.)
May 7, 2007 Appendix C 1 

Introduction 

Sections 110 (a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act require states to submit SIPs that 

implement, maintain, and enforce a new or revised national ambient air quality 

standard within 3 years following promulgation of the standard. Among the SIP 

elements identified in Section 110(a)(2) is the requirement to address the 

transport of pollutants between states. This section also requires states to 

ensure that their SIP does not interfere with another state’s program to prevent 

significant deterioration of its air quality or interfere with visibility in another state. 

In April 2005, the U.S. EPA notified states of their failure to make the required 

SIP submission addressing interstate transport of pollutants related to ozone and 

PM2.5. This “failure to submit” finding for the required interstate transport SIPs 

started a 24-month clock for U.S. EPA to issue a final Federal Implementation 

Plan (FIP) for any state that does not submit a plan within that time period. 

On August 15, 2006, U.S. EPA issued guidance for submitting interstate 

transport or “Good Neighbor” SIPs. In accordance with that guidance, this 

document contains documents the findings that California meets the 

requirements of sections 110 (a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act for both the 

federal 8-hour ozone standard and the federal PM2.5 standard. 

Closest Nonattainment Areas to California 

Ozone: The closest 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are Las Vegas, Nevada, 

and Phoenix-Mesa, Arizona. 

PM2.5: The closest PM2.5 nonattainment area is Libby, Montana. Libby is more 

than 900 miles away from the San Joaquin Valley, the nearest PM2.5 

nonattainment area in California. 

Evaluation of significant contribution to nonattainment or interference with 

maintenance of attainment standards in another state 

U.S. EPA did an analysis for its Clean Air Interstate Rule or CAIR to identify 

states that were contributing significantly to nonattainment of PM2.5 and ozone in 

adjacent states. In the preamble to that rule, U.S. EPA stated that: 

“In analyzing significant contribution to nonattainment, we 

determined it was reasonable to exclude the Western U.S., 

including the States of Washington, Idaho, Oregon, California, 

Nevada, Utah and Arizona from further analysis due to geography, 

meteorology, and topography. Based on these factors, we 

concluded that the PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

problems are not likely to be affected significantly by pollution 

transported across these States’ boundaries. Therefore, for the 
May 7, 2007 Appendix C 2

purpose of assessing State’s contributions to nonattainment in 

other States, we have only analyzed the nonattainment counties 

located in the rest of the U.S.”1 (emphasis added) 

The meteorological discussions below provide more detail. 

Ozone: Ozone episodes over the Southwestern United States are normally 

associated with strong high pressure systems centered over the Southwest 

Desert. These meteorological patterns are characterized by clear skies, warm 

temperatures, and light winds and result in very stagnant conditions over the 

region. Ozone is not transported over long distances under these conditions. On 

occasion, the strong high pressure is weakly impacted by migrating low pressure 

systems over the Pacific Ocean. This has the dual effect of maintaining stagnant 

conditions over most of the region while allowing weak pressure systems to push 

air that is high above the surface eastward and to transport ozone trapped in this 

layer over long distances. 

PM2.5: The technical support document for the PM2.5 designation of Lincoln 

County, Montana (containing Libby, Montana) found that the nonattainment area 

is “localized within and around the vicinity of the town of Libby due to 

topographical features and meteorology in the area impacted by emissions.” 

Therefore, Libby, Montana’s nonattainment status is not affected by emissions 

produced in other areas and transported to the Libby area. 

U.S. EPA’s conclusion in CAIR preamble plus the above meteorological 

summary support the finding that California does not significantly affect 

nonattainment areas in other states. 

California’s existing stringent motor vehicle control program, consumer product 

regulations, stationary source permitting, new source review programs, and new 

commitments outlined in the California SIP further strengthened by the 8-hour 

ozone and PM2.5 SIPs will result in steadily decreasing emissions. This greatly 

reduces the likelihood that emissions from California will contribute significantly 

to nonattainment in any downwind state. 

 

1 Rule to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Interstate Air Quality 

Rule Preamble), 69 FR at 4581, January 30, 2004. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix C 3

Evaluation of interference with Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Measures of any other State 

U.S. EPA guidance2 for interstate transport SIPs advises states to make a SIP 

submission to confirm that major sources in the State are currently subject to 

prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and nonattainment new source 

review (NNSR) preconstruction permitting programs that apply to the 8-hour 

ozone standard. 

For the PM2.5 standard, the guidance advises states to provide a SIP 

submission to confirm that major sources in the State are subject to PSD and 

NNSR permitting programs implemented in accordance with U.S. EPA’s interim 

guidance calling for use of PM10 as a surrogate for PM2.5 in the PSD and NNSR 

programs. 

In California, all areas are subject to some form of preconstruction program for 

ozone and PM2.5. These rules are as stringent, or more stringent, than the 

federal preconstruction programs (PSD and NNSR). For ozone, California is on 

track to submit SIPs per the Phase II 8-hour Ozone Implementation Rule. For 

PM 2.5, California’s preconstruction programs are being implemented in 

accordance with EPA’s interim guidance calling for the use of PM10 as a 

surrogate for PM2.5 emissions. 

The following air districts are in attainment of the federal 8-hour ozone and 

PM2.5 standards and have a SIP approved PSD rule. 

• Mendocino County Air Pollution Control District 

• Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District 

• Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District 

• North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District 

• Sacramento Metro Air Quality Management District (PM2.5) 

On a case-by-case basis, U.S. EPA has delegated partial PSD permitting 

authority to the following air districts that are in attainment of the federal 8-hour 

ozone and PM2.5 standards. 

• Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District 

• Bay Area Air Quality Management District 

• San Diego Air Pollution Control District 

For all other areas that are in attainment of federal standards, U.S. EPA retains 

federal PSD permitting authority. 

 

2 Guidance for State Implementation Plan (SIP) Submissions to Meet Current Outstanding 

Obligations Under Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards, memo from William T. Harnett to Regional Air Division Directors dated August 

15, 2006, Page 8. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix C 4

The following air districts are nonattainment of the federal 8-hour ozone standard 

and have new source review rules or are on track to submit an NSR rules as part 

of their 8-hour ozone SIP development process. These rules are or will be 

equivalent to or more stringent than the federal requirements. 

• Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (Antelope Valley and 

Western Mojave Desert Nonattainment Area) 

• Amador County Air Pollution Control District (Central Mountain 

Counties Nonattainment Area) 

• Bay Area Air Quality Management District 

• Butte County Air Quality Management District 

• Calaveras County Air Pollution Control District (Central Mountain 

Counties Nonattainment Area) 

• El Dorado County Air Pollution Control District (Sacramento Federal 

Nonattainment Area) 

• Feather River Air Quality Management District (Sacramento Federal 

Nonattainment Area) 

• Imperial Air Pollution Control District 

• Kern County Air Pollution Control District (Easter Kern Nonattainment 

Area) 

• Mariposa County Air Pollution Control District (Southern Mountain 

Counties Nonattainment Area) 

• Mojave Desert Air Pollution Control District (Antelope Valley and 

Western Mojave Desert Nonattainment Area) 

• Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District (Western Nevada 

County Nonattainment Area) 

• Placer County Air Pollution Control District (Sacramento Federal 

Nonattainment Area) 

• Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District 

(Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area) 

• San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 

• South Coast Air Quality Management District 

• Tuolumne County Air Pollution Control District (Southern Mountain 

Counties Nonattainment Area) 

• Ventura County Air Pollution Control District 

• Yolo Solano Air Quality Management District (Sacramento Federal 

Nonattainment Area) 

The following air districts are nonattainment of the federal PM2.5 standard and 

already have NSR rules in place for PM10. These rules are equivalent to or 

more stringent than the federal requirements. 

• South Coast Air Quality Management District 

• San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 
May 7, 2007 Appendix C 5

Evaluation of interference with other states’ measures required to meet 

Regional Haze and Visibility SIP requirements 

U.S. EPA’s guidance3

 states that states and regional planning organizations are 

currently engaged in the task of identifying Class I areas impacted by each 

state’s emissions and developing strategies for addressing regional haze to be 

included in the States’ regional haze SIPs. Since these regional haze SIPs are 

not due until December 17, 2007, states will not be required to address this 

requirement until the Regional Haze SIPs are submitted. 

California is on track to submit its Regional Haze SIP by December 17, 2007. 

The Regional Haze SIP will address interstate regional haze impacts. 

 

3 Guidance for State Implementation Plan (SIP) Submissions to Meet Current Outstanding 

Obligations Under Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards, memo from William T. Harnett to Regional Air Division Directors dated August 

15, 2006, Page 9. 
Appendix D 

Reasonable Further Progress and Contingency Reductions 
(This page intentionally left blank.) 
May 7, 2007 Appendix D 1 

Introduction

Reasonable further progress (RFP) refers to the annual emission reductions required to 

demonstrate continued and steady progress toward attaining air quality standards. A 

SIP must demonstrate both RFP and attainment to be approvable. It must also include 

contingency emission reductions that must be achieved if a nonattainment area fails to 

meet certain milestones. The RFP requirements for the 8-hour ozone standard are 

described in the “Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard,” and build upon the requirements specified in Clean Air Act sections 

172(c)(2), 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2)(b). 

This appendix will summarize how California meets its RFP and contingency reduction 

requirements. It is important to note that the requirements are met in every 

nonattainment area with already-adopted measures. No new emission reduction 

commitments are required and no reductions from the State Strategy’s proposed new 

measures are needed to meet the requirements. 

RFP Requirements

RFP requirements vary by nonattainment classification. The following is a discussion 

about RFP requirements for California nonattainment areas as initially designated by 

U.S. EPA. 

Areas with a basic classification that can attain the standard within the first five years 

after the designations become effective (2004-2009) do not have to demonstrate RFP. 

Three basic areas, Sutter Buttes, Butte County and San Diego County will meet the 

federal standard by 2009. Areas with a marginal classification – Imperial County and 

San Francisco Bay Area – are not subject to RFP requirements. 

Moderate and basic areas that require more than five years to attain must demonstrate 

RFP. Their RFP demonstrations include an initial 15 percent reduction in ROG and/or 

NOx emissions from the 2002 baseline ROG inventory by 2008. They then must 

achieve additional reductions per year, averaged across each consecutive 3-year period 

or part thereof until their attainment year. Basic areas needing additional time to attain 

include: Eastern Kern, Southern Mountain Counties, Central Mountain Counties, and 

Western Nevada County. Moderate areas include: Ventura, Antelope Valley and 

Western Mojave Desert. 

Areas whose 1-hour ozone rate of progress plans were not approved by the U.S. EPA 

are subject to different RFP requirements. These areas still must meet the initial RFP 

target of 15 percent ROG reductions for the first six years (2002-2008), as set forth in 

Clean Air Act section 182(b)(1). They cannot use NOx emission reductions to satisfy 

the initial target when ROG emissions are not sufficient. The areas subject to this 

restriction are Coachella Valley, Antelope Valley, and Western Mojave Desert, which 

comprise the former Southeast Desert 1-hour ozone nonattainment area. This presents 

a challenge for the former Southeast Desert areas because their nonattainment status 

is due in part to pollution transported from the South Coast. In such situations, 
May 7, 2007 Appendix D 2 

U.S. EPA allows the nonattainment area to account for emissions occurring, and 

emission reductions achieved, in upwind areas to be credited towards rate of progress. 

With transport included in the calculation, the Coachella Valley meets rate of progress 

requirements. 

For RFP, nonattainment areas classified serious and above must demonstrate an 

18 percent reduction in ROG and/or NOx emissions from the 2002 baseline ROG 

inventory by 2008. In the years that follow, they must demonstrate, on average, an 

additional 3 percent per year reduction in ROG and/or NOx emissions until their 

attainment year. Serious areas are: San Joaquin Valley, Coachella Valley and 

Sacramento. Note that for the reasons given above, Coachella Valley is subject to a 

15 percent ROG-only reduction requirement from 2002 to 2008. The South Coast Air 

Basin is classified as severe. 

For moderate and above 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas, a limited amount of NOx 

reductions may also be used, to a point, as a substitution for ROG reductions for RFP. 

NOx emission reductions creditable toward the RFP requirement cannot be greater than 

the cumulative NOx reductions that are necessary to demonstrate attainment. This 

attainment consistency requirement is meant to prevent the substitution of NOx 

reductions for progress purposes that would not lead toward attaining the ozone 

standard. 

U.S. EPA has taken the position in guidance, and not in regulation, that for 

nonattainment areas classified under Subpart 2, reductions needed for progress in the 

attainment year should equate to those needed for attainment. ARB staff disagrees. 

We believe a plain reading of the Act indicates that a 3 percent reduction per year is 

needed between the next-to-last milestone year and the attainment year. For example, 

in a severe-15 area, the next-to-last milestone year is 2017 and the attainment year is 

2018. A 45 percent reduction is needed in 2017 for RFP. Therefore, the RFP 

requirement for the next year (2018) is three percent more, or 48 percent – and not the 

reductions needed for attainment. 

Upwind Emissions in RFP Demonstrations

Ozone levels are influenced by ROG and NOx emitted both within a nonattainment area 

and transported from upwind locations. U.S. EPA acknowledges this relationship by 

allowing emission reductions from upwind locations outside the nonattainment area to 

be included for RFP, up to 100 kilometers for ROG and 200 kilometers for NOx. 

The inclusion of transport contributions of ROG and NOx provides key emission 

reductions in RFP analyses for the following nonattainment areas: Antelope Valley and 

Western Mojave Desert, Central Mountain Counties, Coachella Valley, Eastern Kern, 

Southern Mountain Counties and Western Nevada. Their emission inventories for RFP 

purposes include ROG and NOx emissions from counties that are (1) entirely within the 

designated 100km and 200km distances, and (2) part of the area’s established 

federally-approved transport couples. 

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program Adjustments 
May 7, 2007 Appendix D 3 

Section 182(b)(1)(D) of the Clean Air Act stipulates that emission reductions stemming 

from the federal on-road motor vehicle control program as it existed in 1990 may not be 

used to help meet minimum emission reduction requirements for RFP purposes. This 

precludes states from securing the emission reductions required to demonstrate 

satisfactory progress for ozone simply on the merit of the federal motor vehicle control 

program as it existed in 1990. The Clean Air Act also prohibits states from taking credit 

for emission reductions resulting from using gasoline with a Reid vapor pressure limit 

specified by 1990. States are required to adjust for the benefits of these federal 

programs in RFP calculations. ARB staff has considered the combined benefits of the 

federal motor vehicle and fuel volatility programs for purposes of this discussion, and 

will reference them below as the “federal program” and “federal program adjustments”. 

California’s pioneering efforts to set emission standards from motor vehicles resulted in 

nationwide emission standards adopted by U.S EPA. In general, California’s auto 

emission standards have been, and are, more stringent than federal standards, 

particularly for passenger vehicles. 

In analyzing what federal program adjustments should be made to California 

nonattainment area RFP reductions, ARB staff analysis concluded that the federal 

program did not provide any additional benefits beyond California’s program and that 

the federal program adjustment in all nonattainment areas should be zero. This is a bit 

different than the rate of progress reductions for the last 1-hour ozone SIP, where some 

federal program adjustments were made. ARB staff’s methodology for calculating the 

federal program benefits remains unchanged, except to reflect a change in the baseline 

year from 1990 (for 1-hour ozone plans) to 2002. 

California’s on-road control program has continued to advance since 1990, so 

emissions from motor vehicles in 2002 are much lower than they were in 1990. 

Additionally, large increases in vehicle miles traveled from 1990 to 2002 result in a 

higher-emitting federal fleet for 8-hour ozone RFP than for the 1-hour ozone rate of 

progress. Combined, these factors lead to the conclusion that the pre-1990 federal 

program provides no benefits to California in 8-hour ozone RFP plans. 

Contingency Requirements

Contingency reductions are to take effect without further ARB or air district action if the 

nonattainment area does not achieve an RFP milestone, or if the area does not attain 

the federal 8-hour ozone or PM2.5 standard at the end of their identified attainment 

year. This requirement does not apply to marginal nonattainment areas, only to basic, 

moderate, serious, severe and extreme areas (for RFP only). Since these contingency 

reductions must be achieved without further action, U.S. EPA has interpreted this to 

mean that the contingency reductions must be from measures that have already been 

adopted when the submittal is made (or possibly prior to U.S. EPA taking action). 

The bulk of emission reductions needed to attain the federal standards in this submittal 

are achieved through regulations that make up California’s mobile source emission 

control program, which has been very successful in reducing emissions within California 
May 7, 2007 Appendix D 4 

and represents the foundation supporting attainment of both federal and State ambient 

air quality standards. ARB has a well established history of adopting and implementing 

mobile source control regulations on time or earlier than it has committed to do so. As a 

result, we expect to achieve, and even exceed, our RFP goals without the need for 

contingency reductions. 

For all nonattainment areas, already-adopted measures provide more emission 

reductions than are needed to meet RFP requirements in every milestone year. 

Therefore, the emission reductions from adopted measures that go beyond the RFP 

requirements will constitute the contingency reductions in the unlikely event that the 

State does not meet the RFP goals. 

Failure to meet federal air quality standards is determined by monitored air quality 

values in the attainment year, and is therefore determined after the end of the 

attainment year. California's motor vehicle emission control program allows ARB to 

provide additional emission reductions each year, based on the increasing benefits of 

measures that are already being implemented. Therefore, ARB proposes to include the 

benefits of one additional year of its ongoing motor vehicle program, including vehicle 

fleet turnover, and light-duty vehicle inspection and maintenance in the year following 

each area’s attainment year. 

Contingencies for new technologies 

In terms of contingency for attainment, additional provisions apply to extreme areas that 

include new technologies in their attainment plans. These attainment demonstration 

plans can rely on future advances in emission reduction technologies (referred to as 

new technologies) if the State, among other things, submits enforceable commitments 

to develop and adopt contingency measures if the anticipated technologies do not 

achieve the planned reductions, and if the State demonstrates that the contingency 

reductions shall be adequate to achieve attainment and reasonable further progress. 

These contingency reductions to back-up the new technology provisions are not due 

until three years before implementation of these new technology provisions. The need 

for technology development and long-term measures, as well the process for identifying 

long-term emission reductions is discussed in Chapter 3. 

Reasonable Further Progress and Contingency Demonstrations

The following descriptions for each nonattainment area outline California’s RFP and 

related contingency reductions demonstrations. Since already-adopted measures 

provide all contingency reductions needed for RFP and attainment, the requirement that 

reductions will occur without any further action by ARB or local air districts is fully met. 

ARB staff reports for each nonattainment area will include demonstration of RFP and 

contingency reductions. Detailed charts providing the background for RFP and 

contingency reductions for South Coast, San Joaquin Valley, and Coachella Valley, can 

be found on pages 6-8 of this appendix. All three of these areas are expected to 

request a change in their nonattainment classifications – extreme for both South Coast 
May 7, 2007 Appendix D 5 

and San Joaquin Valley and severe-15 for Coachella Valley. The charts reflect the 

anticipated nonattainment classifications. 

South Coast 

The South Coast meets its RFP targets through 2014 purely on the basis of ROG 

reductions from the existing control program. From 2017 forward, the South Coast will 

need to use both ROG and NOx reductions from the existing control program. 

Reductions from proposed new measures are not needed to achieve the progress 

targets. 

Adopted measures in the South Coast Air Basin are expected to yield enough 

reductions to meet the RFP goals and will also yield a surplus that will meet the 

contingency reduction requirements for the area. 

San Joaquin Valley 

The San Joaquin Valley meets its RFP targets through both ROG and NOx reductions 

from the existing control program. Reductions from proposed new measures are not 

needed to achieve the progress targets. 

Adopted measures in the San Joaquin Valley are expected to yield enough reductions 

to meet the RFP goals and will also yield a surplus that will meet the contingency 

reduction requirements for the area. 

Coachella Valley 

Because the Southeast Desert 1-hour ozone nonattainment area did not have a 

federally-approved progress plan, the Coachella Valley’s 8-hour RFP plan must 

demonstrate a 15 percent emission reduction from 2002 to 2008 by relying only on 

ROG reductions. The area meets this requirement. Expecting the South Coast District 

to request a bump up to the severe -15 classification for the Coachella Valley, progress 

is calculated through 2018. Upwind emissions of ROG have been used from Orange 

County, the portion of San Bernardino County within the South Coast Air Basin, and the 

portion of Riverside County within South Coast Air Basin. Upwind emissions of NOx 

from these counties and Los Angeles County have also been included. 

Adopted measures in the Coachella Valley are expected to yield enough reductions to 

meet the RFP goals and will also yield a surplus that will meet the contingency 

reduction requirements for the area. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix D 6 

Detailed Analysis of South Coast 

Reasonable Further Progress and Contingency 

(summer planning, tons per day) 

2002 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023

Baseline ROG 897.2 651.0 599.2 566.4 546.4 536.4 533.6

FMVCP/RVP Adjustment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

RACT Corrections 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Adjusted Baseline ROG 897.2 651.0 599.2 566.4 546.4 536.4 533.6

RFP commitment for ROG reductions 

 from new measures 0 0 0 0 0 0

Required % change since previous 

 milestone year (ROG or NOx) 

 compared to 2002 

18% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9%

Required % change since 2002 

(ROG or NOx) 18% 27% 36% 45% 54% 63%

Target ROG levels 735.7 655.0 574.2 493.5 412.7 332.0

Apparent shortfall in ROG -84.7 -55.8 -7.8 53.0 123.6 201.7

Apparent shortfall in ROG, % -9.4% -6.2% -0.9% 5.9% 13.8% 22.5%

ROG shortfall previously provided by 

 NOx substitution, % 0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.9% 13.8%

Actual ROG shortfall, % -9.4% -6.2% -0.9% 5.9% 7.9% 8.7%

 

Baseline NOx 1078.4 849.6 737.1 649.7 578.0 530.2 505.1 

FMVCP Adjustment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Adjusted Baseline NOx 1078.4 849.6 737.1 649.7 578.0 530.2 505.1 

RFP commitment for NOx reductions 

 from new measures 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Change in NOx since 2002 228.9 341.3 428.7 500.5 548.2 573.3 

Change in NOx since 2002, % 21.2% 31.7% 39.8% 46.4% 50.8% 53.2%

NOx reductions since 2002 already 

 used for RFP substitution and 

 contingency through last milestone 

 year, % 

0.0% 3.0% 6.0% 9.0% 17.9% 28.7%

NOx reductions since 2002 available 

 for RFP substitution and contingency 

 in this milestone year, % 

21.2% 28.7% 33.8% 37.4% 33.0% 24.4%

Change in NOx since 2002 used for 

 ROG substitution in this milestone 

 year, % 

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.9% 7.9% 8.7% 

Change in NOx since 2002 used for 

 contingency in this milestone year, % 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 

Change in NOx since 2002 surplus 

 after meeting substitution and 

 contingency needs in this milestone 

 year, % 

18.2% 25.7% 30.8% 28.5% 22.1% 12.7%

Are RFP Requirements Met? yes yes yes yes yes yes 

Are Contingency Reduction 

Requirements Met? yes yes yes yes yes yes 
May 7, 2007 Appendix D 7 

Detailed Analysis of San Joaquin Valley 

Reasonable Further Progress and Contingency 

(summer planning, tons per day) 

2002 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023

Baseline ROG 468.0 426.5 405.8 403.7 400.3 402.3 408.8

FMVCP/RVP Adjustment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

RACT Corrections 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Adjusted Baseline ROG 468.0 426.5 405.8 403.7 400.3 402.3 408.8

RFP commitment for ROG reductions 

 from new measures 0 0 0 0 0 0

Required % change since previous 

 milestone year (ROG or NOx) 

 compared to 2002 

18% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9%

Required % change since 2002 

 (ROG or NOx) 18% 27% 36% 45% 54% 63%

Target ROG levels 383.8 341.6 299.5 257.4 215.3 173.2

Apparent shortfall in ROG 42.8 64.2 104.2 142.9 187.0 235.6

Apparent shortfall in ROG, % 9.1% 13.7% 22.3% 30.5% 40.0% 50.3%

ROG shortfall previously provided by 

 NOx substitution, % 0 9.1% 13.7% 22.3% 30.5% 40.0%

Actual ROG shortfall, % 9.1% 4.6% 8.5% 8.3% 9.4% 10.4%

 

Baseline NOx 642.30 567.67 493.11 419.55 362.24 321.68 295.14

FMVCP Adjustment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Adjusted Baseline NOx 642.30 567.7 493.1 419.5 362.2 321.7 295.1

RFP commitment for NOx reductions 

 from new measures 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Change in NOx since 2002 74.6 149.2 222.8 280.1 320.6 347.2

Change in NOx since 2002, % 11.6% 23.2% 34.7% 43.6% 49.9% 54.0%

NOx reductions since 2002 already 

 used for RFP substitution and 

 contingency through last milestone 

 year, % 

0.0% 11.6% 16.7% 25.3% 33.5% 43.0%

NOx reductions since 2002 available 

 for RFP substitution and 

 contingency in this milestone year, % 

11.6% 11.6% 18.0% 18.3% 16.4% 11.1%

Change in NOx since 2002 used for 

 ROG substitution in this milestone 

 year, % 

9.1% 4.6% 8.5% 8.3% 9.4% 10.4%

Change in NOx since 2002 used for 

 contingency in this milestone year, % 2.5% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%*

Change in NOx since 2002 surplus 

 after meeting substitution and 

 contingency needs in this milestone 

 year, % 

0.0% 6.5% 9.4% 10.1% 7.0% 0.7%

Are RFP Requirements Met? yes yes yes yes yes yes 

Are Contingency Reduction 

Requirements Met? yes yes yes yes yes yes** 

* 2024 mobile source program reductions are relied upon to meet 2023 contingency requirements. 

** Contingency requirements met in 2023 through reductions from already-adopted mobile source 

measures. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix D 8 

Detailed Analysis of Coachella Valley 

Reasonable Further Progress and Contingency 

(summer planning, tons per day) 

2002 2008 2011 2014 2017 2018

Baseline ROG 379.3 299.9 282.0 271.4 265.9 265.0

FMVCP/RVP Adjustment 0 0 0 0 0 0

RACT Corrections 0 0 0 0 0 0

Adjusted Baseline ROG 379.3 299.9 282.0 271.4 265.9 265.0

RFP commitment for ROG reductions from 

 new measures 

0 0 0 0 0

Required % change since previous milestone 

year (ROG or NOx) compared to 2002 15% 9% 9% 9% 3%

Required % change since 2002 

(ROG or NOx) 15% 24% 33% 42% 45%

Target ROG levels 322.4 288.3 254.1 220.0 208.6

Apparent shortfall in ROG -22.50 -6.29 17.32 45.92 56.39

Apparent shortfall in ROG, % -5.9% -1.7% 4.6% 12.1% 14.9%

ROG shortfall previously provided by NOx 

 substitution, % 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.6% 12.1%

Actual ROG shortfall, % -5.9% -1.7% 4.6% 7.5% 2.8%

 

Baseline NOx 1159.3 917.2 794.6 697.2 618.1 597.4 

FMVCP Adjustment 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Adjusted Baseline NOx 1159.3 917.2 794.6 697.2 618.1 597.4 

RFP commitment for NOx reductions 

 from new measures 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Change in NOx since 2002 242.1 364.7 462.0 541.2 561.9 

Change in NOx since 2002, % 20.9% 31.5% 39.9% 46.7% 48.5% 

NOx reductions since 2002 already used 

 for RFP substitution and contingency 

 through last milestone year, % 

 0.0% 3.0% 6.0% 13.3% 23.8% 

NOx reductions since 2002 available for 

 RFP substitution and contingency in 

 this milestone year, % 

 20.9% 28.5% 33.9% 33.4% 24.6% 

Change in NOx since 2002 used for 

 ROG substitution in this milestone 

 year, % 

 0.0% 0.0% 4.3% 7.5% 2.8% 

Change in NOx since 2002 used for 

 contingency in this milestone year, % 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 

Change in NOx since 2002 surplus after 

 meeting substitution and contingency 

 needs in this milestone year, % 

 17.9% 25.5% 26.5% 22.9% 18.9% 

Are RFP Requirements Met? yes yes yes yes yes 

Are Contingency Reduction 

Requirements Met? yes yes yes yes yes 
 

Appendix E 

Potential Impacts of State Strategy Proposed New Measures 
 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 1 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 

Introduction

The control measures proposed in the State Strategy were developed for the 

purpose of improving air quality in California. However, as these measures are 

developed into rules and regulations and subsequently implemented, there is 

potential for them to have an adverse environmental impact on other natural 

resources. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and ARB policy 

requires an analysis to determine any potentially adverse environmental impacts 

that may result from adoption of these measures. This appendix presents an 

analysis of potential impacts and also identifies mitigation measures that can be 

implemented to offset any potentially significant impacts. The appendix contains 

three parts: an environmental review checklist, descriptions of cumulative 

impacts of the State Strategy, and a description of each measure’s potential 

adverse environmental impacts. 

California Environmental Quality Act

The California Secretary for Resources has determined that ARB meets the 

criteria for a Certified State Regulatory Program (Public Resources Code Section 

21080.5). This certification allows ARB to adopt rules, regulations, standards 

and plans but exempts it from the requirement to prepare Initial Studies, Notices 

of Preparation, Negative Declarations or Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs). 

As a certified agency, however, ARB is required to prepare a substitute 

document which is subject to other provisions of CEQA such as avoiding 

significant adverse effects on the environment where feasible. This appendix 

considers cumulative impacts and addresses adverse activities and impacts 

associated with the proposed measures. As required by CEQA, there will be a 

45-day public comment period at which time the public can review and comment 

on this analysis. ARB will respond in writing to all significant environmental 

concerns raised by the public during this comment period and also at the Board 

Hearing. 

Scope of Analysis

The scope of the analysis is intended to help focus public review and to assure 

that any questions and comments are appropriate and meaningful. This 

appendix specifically focuses on potential adverse environmental impacts. The 

remainder of the report emphasizes positive environmental benefits that the 

proposed strategies will have on air quality which is the purpose and goal of the 

State Strategy. 

This appendix cannot and does not contain a detailed, quantitative impact 

analysis for each of the control measures in the State Strategy. Because the 

State Strategy identifies proposed future actions to adopt and implement 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 2 

emission reduction regulations for which specific regulatory language has not yet 

been developed, the analysis is necessarily general and qualitative. When a 

proposed measure is developed and proposed in regulatory format, it will be a 

process with full public participation. Proposed regulations will undergo a 

detailed environmental analysis as required by CEQA, will be discussed at public 

workshops, and will go through the public hearing process as required by law 

(see the Administrative Procedure Act, Gov. Code section 11340 et seq.). When 

specific regulatory language is developed, it will be possible to analyze potential 

environmental impacts in detail. For example, the scope of the impacted 

population of any given controlled emission source will become further refined 

during regulatory development. Additionally, cumulative impacts were 

considered for the State Strategy, recognizing these measures are likely to have 

various phase-in dates. In this appendix, potential environmental impacts are 

identified to the extent currently feasible. 

Environmental Checklist

An environmental checklist was used to identify and evaluate potential 

cumulative impacts of the measures proposed in the State Strategy. The 

environmental effects checked below indicate those that may be affected by the 

proposed measures. Further discussion will follow regarding the impacts that 

strategies may have and potential mitigation strategies that can be implemented 

to lessen the impacts. 

 Aesthetics Air Quality Agricultural 

 Resources 

 Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy Demand 

 Geology and Soils Hazards/ 

 Hazardous Material Land Use/Planning 

 Mineral Resources Noise Population and 

 Housing 

 Public Services Recreation Solid/Hazardous 

 Waste 

 Transportation/Traffic Water Quality Mandatory Findings 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 3 

Evaluation of Cumulative Environmental Impacts

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impact

I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: 

a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a 

scenic vista? 

b) Substantially damage scenic resources, 

including, but not limited to, trees, rock 

outcroppings, and historic buildings within a 

state scenic highway? 

c) Substantially degrade the existing visual 

character or quality of the site and its 

surroundings? 

d) Create a new source of substantial light 

or glare which would adversely affect day 

or nighttime views in the area? 

II. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: 

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation 

of the applicable air quality plan? 

b) Violate any air quality standard or 

contribute substantially to an existing or 

projected air quality violation? 

c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net 

increase of any criteria pollutant for which 

the project region is non-attainment under 

an applicable federal or state ambient air 

quality standard (including releasing 

emissions which exceed quantitative 

thresholds for ozone precursors)? 

d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial 

pollutant concentrations? 

e) Create objectionable odors affecting a 

substantial number of people? 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 4 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impact

III. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would 

the project: 

a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique 

Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide 

Importance (Farmland), as shown on the 

maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland 

Mapping and Monitoring Program of the 

California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? 

b) Conflict with existing zoning for 

agricultural use, or a Williamson Act 

contract? 

c) Involve other changes in the existing 

environment which, due to their location or 

nature, could result in conversion of 

Farmland, to non-agricultural use? 

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would 

the project: 

a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either 

directly or through habitat modifications, on 

any species identified as a candidate, 

sensitive, or special status species in local 

or regional plans, policies, or regulations, 

or by the California Department of Fish and 

Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any 

riparian habitat or other sensitive natural 

community identified in local or regional 

plans, policies, regulations or by the 

California Department of Fish and Game or 

US Fish and Wildlife Service? 

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on 

federally protected wetlands as defined by 

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act 

(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal 

pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 5 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impact

filling, hydrological interruption, or other 

means? 

d) Interfere substantially with the 

movement of any native resident or 

migratory fish or wildlife species or with 

established native resident or migratory 

wildlife corridors, or impede the use of 

native wildlife nursery sites? 

e) Conflict with any local policies or 

ordinances protecting biological resources, 

such as a tree preservation policy or 

ordinance? 

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted 

Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural 

Community Conservation Plan, or other 

approved local, regional, or state habitat 

conservation plan? 

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the 

project: 

a) Cause a substantial adverse change in 

the significance of a historical resource as 

defined in '15064.5? 

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in 

the significance of an archaeological 

resource pursuant to '15064.5? 

c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique 

paleontological resource or site or unique 

geologic feature? 

d) Disturb any human remains, including 

those interred outside of formal 

cemeteries? 

VI. ENERGY DEMAND. Would the project:

a) Conflict with adopted energy 

conservation plans? 

b) Result in the need for new or 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 6 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impact

substantially altered power or natural gas 

utility systems? 

c) Create any significant effects on peak 

and base period demands for electricity 

and other forms of energy? 

d) Comply with existing energy standards? 

VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the 

project: 

a) Expose people or structures to potential 

substantial adverse effects, including the 

risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 

 

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as 

delineated on the most recent AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued 

by the State Geologist for the area or 

based on other substantial evidence of a 

known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and 

Geology Special Publication 42. 

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 

iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including 

liquefaction? 

iv) Landslides? 

b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the 

loss of topsoil? 

c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that 

is unstable, or that would become unstable 

as a result of the project, and potentially 

result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral 

spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or 

collapse? 

d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined 

in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building 

Code (1994), creating substantial risks to 

life or property? 

 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 7 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impact

e) Have soils incapable of adequately 

supporting the use of septic tanks or 

alternative waste water disposal systems 

where sewers are not available for the 

disposal of waste water? 

VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS 

MATERIALS. Would the project: 

a) Create a significant hazard to the public 

or the environment through the routine 

transport, use, or disposal of hazardous 

materials? 

b) Create a significant hazard to the public 

or the environment through reasonably 

foreseeable upset and accident conditions 

involving the release of hazardous 

materials into the environment? 

c) Be located on a site which is included on 

a list of hazardous materials sites compiled 

pursuant to Government Code Section 

65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a 

significant hazard to the public or the 

environment? 

d) For a project located within an airport 

land use plan or, where such a plan has 

not been adopted, within two miles of a 

public airport or public use airport, would 

the project result in a safety hazard for 

people residing or working in the project 

area? 

e) For a project within the vicinity of a 

private airstrip, would the project result in a 

safety hazard for people residing or 

working in the project area? 

f) Impair implementation of or physically 

interfere with an adopted emergency 

response plan or emergency evacuation 

plan? 

 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 8 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impact

g) Expose people or structures to a 

significant risk of loss, injury or death 

involving wildland fires, including where 

wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas 

or where residences are intermixed with 

wildlands? 

IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would 

the project: 

a) Physically divide an established 

community? 

b) Conflict with any applicable land use 

plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with 

jurisdiction over the project (including, but 

not limited to the general plan, specific 

plan, local coastal program, or zoning 

ordinance) adopted for the purpose of 

avoiding or mitigating an environmental 

effect? 

c) Conflict with any applicable habitat 

conservation plan or natural community 

conservation plan? 

X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the 

project: 

a) Result in the loss of availability of a 

known mineral resource that would be of 

value to the region and the residents of the 

state? 

b) Result in the loss of availability of a 

locally-important mineral resource recovery 

site delineated on a local general plan, 

specific plan or other land use plan? 

XI. NOISE. Would the project result in: 

a) Exposure of persons to or generation of 

noise levels in excess of standards 

established in the local general plan or 

noise ordinance, or applicable standards of 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 9 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impact

other agencies? 

b) Exposure of persons to or generation of 

excessive groundborne vibration or 

groundborne noise levels? 

c) A substantial permanent increase in 

ambient noise levels in the project vicinity 

above levels existing without the project? 

d) A substantial temporary or periodic 

increase in ambient noise levels in the 

project vicinity above levels existing without 

the project? 

e) For a project located within an airport 

land use plan or, where such a plan has 

not been adopted, within two miles of a 

public airport or public use airport, would 

the project expose people residing or 

working in the project area to excessive 

noise levels? 

f) For a project within the vicinity of a 

private airstrip, would the project expose 

people residing or working in the project 

area to excessive noise levels? 

XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. 

Would the project: 

 

a) Induce substantial population growth in 

an area, either directly (for example, by 

proposing new homes and businesses) or 

indirectly (for example, through extension 

of roads or other infrastructure)? 

b) Displace substantial numbers of existing 

housing, necessitating the construction of 

replacement housing elsewhere? 

c) Displace substantial numbers of people, 

necessitating the construction of 

replacement housing elsewhere? 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 10 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impact

XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. 

a) Would the project result in substantial 

adverse physical impacts associated with 

the provision of new or physically altered 

governmental facilities, need for new or 

physically altered governmental facilities, 

the construction of which could cause 

significant environmental impacts, in order 

to maintain acceptable service ratios, 

response times or other performance 

objectives for any of the public services: 

Fire protection? 

Police protection? 

Schools? 

Parks? 

Other public facilities? 

XIV. RECREATION 

a) Would the project increase the use of 

existing neighborhood and regional parks 

or other recreational facilities such that 

substantial physical deterioration of the 

facility would occur or be accelerated? 

b) Does the project include recreational 

facilities or require the construction or 

expansion of recreational facilities which 

might have an adverse physical effect on 

the environment? 

XV. SOLID/HAZARDOUS WASTE. Would 

the project: 

 

a) Be served by a landfill with sufficient 

permitted capacity to accommodate the 

project’s solid waste disposal needs? 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 11 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impact

b) Comply with federal, state, and local 

statutes and regulations related to solid 

and hazardous waste? 

XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. 

Would the project: 

a) Cause an increase in traffic which is 

substantial in relation to the existing traffic 

load and capacity of the street system (i.e., 

result in a substantial increase in either the 

number of vehicle trips, the volume to 

capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at 

intersections)? 

b) Exceed, either individually or 

cumulatively, a level of service standard 

established by the county congestion 

management agency for designated roads 

or highways? 

c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, 

including either an increase in traffic levels 

or a change in location that results in 

substantial safety risks? 

d) Substantially increase hazards due to a 

design feature (e.g., sharp curves or 

dangerous intersections) or incompatible 

uses (e.g., farm equipment)? 

e) Result in inadequate emergency 

access? 

f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 

g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or 

programs supporting alternative 

transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle 

racks)? 

 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 12 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impact

XVII. WATER QUALITY. Would the 

project: 

 

a) Violate any water quality standards or 

waste discharge requirements? 

b) Substantially deplete groundwater 

supplies or interfere substantially with 

groundwater recharge such that there 

would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a 

lowering of the local groundwater table 

level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level 

which would not support existing land uses 

or planned uses for which permits have 

been granted)? 

c) Substantially alter the existing drainage 

pattern of the site or area, including 

through the alteration of the course of a 

stream or river, in a manner which would 

result in substantial erosion or siltation onor off-site? 

d) Substantially alter the existing drainage 

pattern of the site or area, including 

through the alteration of the course of a 

stream or river, or substantially increase 

the rate or amount of surface runoff in a 

manner which would result in flooding onor off-site? 

e) Create or contribute runoff water which 

would exceed the capacity of existing or 

planned stormwater drainage systems or 

provide substantial additional sources of 

polluted runoff? 

f) Otherwise substantially degrade water 

quality? 

g) Place housing within a 100-year flood 

hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood 

Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 13 

Potentially 

Significant 

Impact 

Less Than 

Significant 

Impact 

No 

Impact

Map or other flood hazard delineation 

map? 

h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard 

area structures which would impede or 

redirect flood flows? 

i) Expose people or structures to a 

significant risk of loss, injury or death 

involving flooding, including flooding as a 

result of the failure of a levee or dam? 

j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or 

mudflow? 

XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF 

SIGNIFICANCE 

a) Does the project have the potential to 

degrade the quality of the environment, 

substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or 

wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife 

population to drop below self-sustaining 

levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or 

animal community, reduce the number or 

restrict the range of a rare or endangered 

plant or animal or eliminate important 

examples of the major periods of California 

history or prehistory? 

b) Does the project have impacts that are 

individually limited, but cumulatively 

considerable? ("Cumulatively 

considerable" means that the incremental 

effects of a project are considerable when 

viewed in connection with the effects of 

past projects, the effects of other current 

projects, and the effects of probable future 

projects)? 

c) Does the project have environmental 

effects which will cause substantial adverse 

effects on human beings, either directly or 

indirectly? 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 14 

Cumulative Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts

Each environmental effect outlined in the environmental checklist is further 

described below. A detailed reference table at the end of this section identifies 

each measure in the State Strategy, any potential adverse environmental 

impacts, and potential mitigation measures. 

Several proposed measures are currently in the process of rule development and 

may have a more detailed assessment of potential significant impacts. However, 

for the less developed strategies, we have attempted to include any potential 

impact that reasonably could occur given current knowledge. 

I. Aesthetics 

Cumulative Impact: No element of the State Strategy is expected to degrade the 

natural beauty of California. Instead, the State Strategy will have significant 

positive impacts on aesthetics. Regional haze is expected to be reduced by 

State Strategy elements that reduce hydrocarbon, nitrogen oxide, and particulate 

matter emissions. 

II. Air Quality 

Cumulative Impact: ARB staff believes the cumulative impact of the State 

Strategy is to substantially improve air quality, however there are potentially 

significant impacts to air quality. Some strategies may involve trade-offs, where 

emissions of one pollutant may increase slightly in order to more effectively 

reduce overall emissions and protect public health. 

The four major types of impacts that were considered are related to criteria 

pollutants, air toxics, greenhouse gases, and stratospheric ozone depleting 

pollutants. 

 Criteria Pollutants 

Potentially significant impacts on criteria pollutant emissions may occur due to: 

selective catalytic reduction processes, use of diesel particulate filters, and 

production and consumption of low-sulfur diesel fuel. However, the cumulative 

impact of the State Strategy is to reduce emissions of major criteria pollutants 

(ROG, NOx, SOx, and PM2.5). 

Selective Catalytic Reduction — Measures in the State Strategy to reduce NOx 

from diesel-fueled engines may necessitate use of Selective Catalytic Reduction 

(SCR). For on-road heavy-duty diesel vehicles in particular, SCR is the preferred 

emission control strategy for meeting the NOx emission requirements for the 

2010 model year. The use of SCR in light-duty diesel vehicles is also being 

considered by auto manufacturers. SCR reduces NOx into molecular nitrogen 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 15 

and water by injecting urea into the exhaust upstream of a catalyst. SCR 

catalysts function well only within a narrow temperature window, and control 

systems must be in place to keep the exhaust temperature within an optimum 

range. If exhaust temperatures are too high, the SCR catalyst can be 

deactivated or fail. If exhaust temperatures are too low, or too much reductant 

(usually urea) is used, ammonia can become an exhaust byproduct (called 

“ammonia slip”) and can be emitted to the atmosphere. Ammonia slip can 

worsen as the catalyst ages and becomes less effective. 

Diesel Particulate Filters — A number of measures in the State Strategy would 

require the use of diesel particulate filters, add-on devices that are mounted on 

the exhaust pipe. Certain types of these diesel particulate filters, referred to as 

passive filters, accelerate the conversion of nitric oxide (NO) to nitrogen dioxide 

(NO2). As such, there is a potential for an adverse effect on the concentration 

and location of peak ozone levels in the State, especially near centers of diesel 

activity. 

Catalyst manufacturers are aware of the issue, and preliminary analysis suggests 

that the impacts may be mitigated by designing the system to limit the NO to NO2

conversion rates. In the near term, the advantages of putting diesel particulate 

filters into operation to reduce risk from diesel PM and allowing the technology to 

develop and mature should offset any limited adverse impacts. 

Reformulated Gasoline — The purpose of this strategy is to offset or eliminate 

excess evaporative emissions caused by ethanol permeation through fuel lines 

and tanks. Reformulating gasoline may require more feedstock and/or more 

processing which means that impacts associated with this measure could come 

from an increased demand on refineries. However, air district permitting 

programs will evaluate and mitigate the air quality and environmental impacts to 

the extent feasible. 

Cold Ironing (Shore-side Power) — This process allows ships to run heating, 

air conditioning, lights and other operations by plugging into shore-side electrical 

power. This reduces emissions by allowing ships to shut down the uncontrolled 

auxiliary engines which traditionally have powered these electric-based activities. 

There are criteria pollutant emissions associated with the incremental electricity 

generation from power plants, but they are significantly less than emissions 

generated by ship engines. 

Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel — Low sulfur diesel fuel requires increased 

hydrotreating of fuel to remove sulfur, which requires increased hydrogen 

production. Hydrogen production, from petroleum feedstock, has the potential to 

increase criteria pollutants (particularly NOx) and CO2 emissions. The most 

acute impact of any emissions increase could be in the communities near 

refineries, however, air district permitting programs will evaluate and mitigate the 

air quality and environmental impacts to the extent feasible. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 16 

Electrification of Equipment — Electric forklifts, dockside electrical hookups for 

larger marine vessels, and other strategies may incrementally increase electricity 

demand from power plants. The increase in power production will have an 

incidental increase in emissions (primarily NOx) from power plants. Air district 

permitting programs are in place to limit these emission increases. Overall, 

emissions should decrease significantly as fuels such as diesel and propane are 

replaced by the much cleaner natural gas burned at well-controlled power plants. 

Locomotives — Diesel oxidation catalysts (DOCs) operating under high loads 

and temperatures can increase SO2 to SO4 formation. Locomotives fueled out 

of state will use non-road diesel fuel with sulfur levels lowered from 5,000 to 500 

ppmw on June 1, 2007. However, since most refueling for interstate locomotives 

occurs in-state, and locomotives in California typically use ultra low sulfur diesel 

(<15 ppmw), this is not a significant source of SOx. SOx is emitted in direct 

proportion to the diesel fuel sulfur content. 

Vehicle Retirement Program — Scrapping retired vehicles involves the use of 

heavy-duty equipment to crush vehicles and then transport the recyclable 

materials to markets which often times are located overseas. The increased 

processing and transport of the scrapped materials could create additional 

emissions, however, the State Strategy also includes measures to reduce 

emissions from ships and heavy-duty off-road equipment. The benefit of retiring 

high-polluting vehicles greatly outweighs the emissions from processing. 

 Air Toxics 

Potentially significant air toxics impacts could occur due to reformulation of 

consumer products and the use of alternative fuels, alternative fuel additives and 

alternative aftertreatment systems. However, any new formulations of these 

products and additives would be closely scrutinized to prevent the addition of 

toxic compounds. These potential impacts will be greatly offset by the 

substantial reductions in toxics from diesel engines required by the State 

Strategy. The cumulative impact of the State Strategy is to greatly reduce 

emissions of toxic compounds. A brief description of potential impacts of the 

strategies is provided below. 

Selective Catalytic Reduction — Since SCR technology represents a 

significant departure from conventional emission controls deployed on motor 

vehicles, there is the potential for these systems to emit new toxic substances 

that have not been readily observed in previous studies, and/or exhibit an 

increase in some currently emitted toxic substances due to urea-related 

chemistry. Such secondary emissions are likely to include organonitrogen 

compounds, many of which are listed as toxic air contaminants (TAC) and are 

carcinogenic. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 17 

Vehicle Retirement Program — High-mileage and older vehicles are likely 

candidates for scrappage. Their deterioration leads to increased emissions. 

Once vehicles are scrapped, they can no longer pollute. However, vehicles 

commonly contain lead, chromium and mercury which may be released during 

the scrapping process. These toxic air pollutants have potential to have an 

adverse impact on air and water quality if not properly handled. For example, 

mercury switches used in hood and trunk lighting can be recovered rather than 

being crushed. Auto dismantlers are regulated by the Department of Toxic 

Substance Control (CCR, Title 22). 

Cold Ironing (Shore-side Power) — This process allows ships to run heating, 

air conditioning, lights and other operations by plugging into shore-side electrical 

power. This reduces emissions by allowing ships to shut down the uncontrolled 

auxiliary engines which traditionally have powered these electric-based activities. 

There are toxic air contaminants associated with incremental electricity 

generation at power plants, but they are significantly less than emissions 

generated by ship engines. 

Consumer Products — The consumer products measures require reformulation 

to reduce VOC content. A number of VOCs currently used in consumer product 

formulations, such as ethylene-based glycol ethers, trichloroethylene (TCE), and 

toluene, have also been identified as toxic air contaminants. When a product is 

reformulated to meet new VOC limits, however, a manufacturer could use small 

amounts of a chemical, not used before, that may be a toxic air pollutant. This 

potential impact will need to be evaluated and mitigated as reformulation options 

are reviewed during the development of new VOC limits, as staff has done in 

previous rulemakings. 

Two particular toxic air contaminants (TAC) used in some consumer products, 

methylene chloride (MeCl) and perchloroethylene (Perc), are specifically 

exempted from the VOC definition because of their very low ozone-forming 

capabilities. As a result, some manufacturers may choose to use MeCl or Perc 

in their reformulations to reduce the VOC content in meeting future limits. 

However, when setting new VOC limits, staff analyzes the potential use of nonVOC TACs as reformulation options to ensure protection of public health. To 

avoid increased use of non-VOC TACs, staff sets emissions standards that are 

commercially and technologically feasible without use of TACs or bans TACs in 

the category at hand. Staff has prohibited three TACs—MeCl, Perc, and TCE—

in approximately 56 categories to date, and will consider prohibiting their use in 

other categories, if feasible. 

Cleaner Main Ship Engines — Various technologies can be used to reduce 

NOx emissions from main ship engines such as low-NOx fuel injectors, delayed 

injection timing and technologies that add water vapor to the combustion 

chamber. Impacts associated with technologies include slight increases in PM, 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 18 

hydrocarbons and CO2. Additionally, there may be increased PM levels 

associated with selective catalytic reduction. 

Fuel Additives — Fuel additives or reformulation of fuels may provide possible 

emission reduction benefits. However, fuel additives or fuel reformulation may 

also create adverse emissions and environmental impacts. Before a fuel additive 

or fuel reformulation is implemented as an emission reduction strategy, a 

multimedia evaluation must be conducted under California Health and Safety 

Code Section 43830.8. This evaluation will assess the potential emission impact 

associated with any additive or fuel reformulation to the environment and public 

health. 

 Greenhouse Gases 

Potentially significant greenhouse gas emissions could result from measures that 

may reduce fuel efficiency or increase energy use, and consumer product rules. 

Diesel-Fueled Engines — Proposed measures to reduce emissions from dieselfueled engines could require the use of new diesel engines, engine modifications, 

add-on control devices such as diesel particulate filters, oxidation catalysts and 

selective catalytic reduction (SCR) systems, low-sulfur diesel fuel, alternative fuel 

formulations, or other strategies. These strategies have the potential to slightly 

reduce fuel economy and increase greenhouse gas emissions. These impacts 

may be mitigated as other engine features become more efficient to meet air 

pollution emission standards and by reducing idling times for trucks and other 

mobile equipment. 

Diesel Particulate Filters — A number of measures in the State Strategy would 

require the use of diesel particulate filters. These particulate filters must be 

periodically regenerated by burning off the accumulated carbon and associated 

hydrocarbons trapped on the filter. Active regeneration methods use external 

fuel or energy to heat the filter and regenerate it. 

Cleaner Main Ship Engines — Various technologies can be used to retrofit 

main ship engines such as low-NOx fuel injectors, delayed injection timing and 

technologies that add water vapor to the combustion chamber. Impacts 

associated with technologies include slight increases in PM, hydrocarbons and 

CO2. Additionally, there may be increased PM levels associated with selective 

catalytic reduction. 

Consumer Products — Alternative compounds used to meet lower VOC limits 

in the State Strategy’s consumer products measures could be greenhouse 

gases. For aerosol products to meet the VOC limits in the proposed regulations, 

manufacturers may choose to replace some or all of the typical hydrocarbon 

propellants, such as propane and butane, with the hydrofluorocarbons HFC-152a 

or HFC-134a, or carbon dioxide (CO2), which are greenhouse gases. HFC-152a 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 19 

and HFC-134a have no ozone depletion potential, do not contribute to the 

formation of ground-level ozone, are low in toxicity, and are less flammable. In 

addition, HFC-152a has the lowest global warming potential of all the HFCs and 

an atmospheric lifetime of only 1.5 years. While HFC-134a has significantly 

higher global warming potential than HFC-152a, its use is quite limited. Because 

HFC-134a has such low flammability, it is typically only used in consumer 

product applications where flammability is a significant concern. Due to the high 

cost of HFC-152a and HFC-134a (as much as five to seven times greater than 

other hydrocarbon propellants, such as propane and butance), it is anticipated 

that manufacturers will use as little HFC-152a or HFC-134a as possible when 

reformulating their aerosol products. Consequently, because these measures 

would not cause a significant increase in the use of HFC-152a or HFC-134a, 

there would be a negligible global warming impact. However, further analysis of 

the properties and effects of these HFCs is needed. If the analysis reveals 

significant impacts, ARB staff would reassess the control strategy. CO2 used as 

a replacement for hydrocarbon propellants would be a recycled byproduct from 

existing processes and would not create an increase in global warming gases. 

Stratospheric Ozone Depleting Pollutants 

Consumer Products — Some hydrochlorofluorocarbons are still used in a very 

small number of consumer products as solvent. HCFC-22 is also used as a 

blowing agent in some foam insulation sealant products because of its low 

flammability. HCFCs are exempt VOCs under the existing and proposed 

regulations. It is unknown if there will be an increased use of these compounds 

in meeting lower VOC limits. However, all HCFCs are classified as group II 

ozone-depleting compounds by U.S. EPA and are scheduled for phase out by 

2030. Because of the phase out, manufacturers are very likely to use blowing 

agents and solvents other than HCFCs. We therefore anticipate that the impact 

on ozone depletion due to HCFCs will be negligible. 

Vehicle Retirement Program — Auto dismantlers that receive end-of-life 

vehicles with air conditioning systems must remove any refrigerant contained in 

these systems. During the removal of the refrigerant, there is potential for an 

incidental amount of refrigerant to escape into the atmosphere. Once the 

refrigerant is removed, it must be taken to a registered facility for proper 

handling. 

III. Agricultural Resources 

Cumulative Impact: The State Strategy is not expected to cause any adverse 

impacts on the agricultural resources of California. Ozone pollution causes 

significant crop yield loss in California. The State Strategy will help reduce ozone 

levels and consequently reduce crop loss resulting from ozone damage. 

A discussion of potential environmental impacts associated Department of 

Pesticide Regulation’s 2008 Pesticide Element is at the end of this section. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 20 

IV. Biological Resources 

Cumulative Impact: The State Strategy is not expected to cause any adverse 

impacts on the biological resources of California. We believe that the proposed 

measures will improve air quality and consequently, will improve the habitat of 

our biological resources. 

V. Cultural Resources 

Cumulative Impact: The State Strategy is not expected to cause any adverse 

impacts on the cultural resources of California. We believe that the proposed 

measures will reduce ozone and acidic compounds in the air. Ozone, which 

causes oxidation, and airborne acids are both known to cause deterioration of 

archaeological, paleontological, and geological features. 

VI. Energy Demand 

Cumulative Impact: As energy demand increases as a result of the State 

Strategy, there is a potential for significant adverse environmental impacts. 

These impacts can be mitigated through energy conservation programs, using 

renewable energy sources, and designing engine control systems to maximize 

fuel efficiencies. 

Several State Strategies involve electrification of equipment that could result in 

an increased demand for electricity most likely generated at power plants. In 

2005, California produced 78 percent of its own electricity with the remainder 

imported. The total amount generated in-state came from natural gas (37.7%), 

coal (20%), large hydro-electric (17%), nuclear (14.4%) and renewable energy 

sources (10.7%). In addition to increased electricity usage, some measures 

would require engine control devices that can reduce fuel efficiencies resulting in 

more fuel being used.

Reformulated Gasoline — Ethanol has about 30 percent less energy by volume 

than gasoline, therefore increased ethanol in gasoline will decrease fuel economy 

by about 0.3 percent for each 1 percent of ethanol. Staff is investigating a 

change in the procedure for certifying alternate formulations of reformulated 

gasoline that will lead to an increase in the use of ethanol.

Cold Ironing (Shore-side Power) — This process allows ships to run heating, 

air conditioning, lights and other operations by plugging into shore-side electrical 

power. This reduces emissions by allowing ships to shut down the uncontrolled 

auxiliary engines which traditionally have powered these electric-based activities. 

This technology can significantly reduce emissions from ship engines, however, 

the trade off is an incremental increase in energy demand. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 21 

Electrification of Equipment — Electric forklifts, dockside electrical hookups for 

larger marine vessels, and other strategies may increase electricity demand from 

power plants. The increase in power production will have an incidental increase 

in emissions (primarily NOx) from power plants. Air district permitting programs 

are in place to limit these emission increases. Overall, emissions should 

decrease significantly as fuels such as diesel and propane are replaced by the 

much cleaner natural gas burned at power plants as well as including more 

renewable energy sources to the power mix. 

Diesel Fueled Engines — Proposed measures to reduce emissions from dieselfueled engines could require the use of new diesel engines, engine modifications, 

alternatively fueled engines, add-on control devices such as particulate filters and 

catalysts, low sulfur diesel fuel, alternative fuel formulations, or other strategies. 

These strategies have the potential to cause a small decrease in fuel economy. 

Fuel economy impacts may be mitigated as engine design improves and engines 

operate more efficiently. 

Diesel Particulate Filters — A number of measures in the State Strategy would 

require the use of diesel particulate filters. These particulate filters must be 

periodically regenerated by burning off the accumulated carbon and associated 

hydrocarbons trapped on the filter. Active regeneration methods use external 

fuel or energy to heat the filter and regenerate it. 

Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel — Low sulfur diesel fuel requires increased 

hydrotreating of crude oil to remove sulfur, which would require additional energy 

consumption. 

VII. Geology/Soils 

Cumulative Impact: The State Strategy is not expected to cause any adverse 

impacts on geology or soils. 

VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 

Cumulative Impact: The purpose of the State Strategy is to help California attain 

the federal 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 standards. ARB’s goal is to ensure that all 

individuals in California, especially children and the elderly, can live, work, and 

play in a healthy environment. Each of the measures in the State Strategy is 

intended to reduce the health risks from air pollution. The measures would 

reduce the pollutants that contribute to adverse health impacts, including: ozone, 

inhalable particles (including soot and dust), carbon monoxide, and toxic 

emissions (like particles emitted from diesel engines and benzene). There is a 

less than significant cumulative impact that would result from proposed 

measures. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 22 

Several State and federal agencies currently regulate hazardous and hazardous 

materials. A discussion of these regulations will follow State Strategy potential 

impacts. 

Consumer Products — In meeting lower VOC limits, there is a slight potential 

that products may become more flammable if reformulation increases the use of 

highly flammable, exempt VOC solvents such as acetone and methyl acetate. 

This could be of concern in the manufacture, storage, shipping and end use of 

the reformulated products. In many instances, however, manufacturers can use 

other, less flammable, exempt solvents and/or water borne formulations. It 

should be noted that the VOCs that acetone often replaces are generally highly 

flammable as well. In addition, acetone is currently used in many consumer 

products without significant safety concerns. Further, the U.S. Department of 

Transportation requires that consumer products meet specific criteria to ensure 

that there are no significant safety concerns with transport and storage of the 

products. 

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) — Selective catalytic reduction is likely to 

be used on heavy-duty diesel engines to reduce NOx in the exhaust. Urea is the 

preferred reductant used to react with the NOx, in the presence of a catalyst, to 

form nitrogen gas and water. The use of ammonia as a reductant in motor 

vehicle-based SCR systems is very unlikely. 

Fuel Additives and Reformulation — Before proposing rules requiring fuel 

reformulations, staff must conduct a multimedia evaluation as required under 

California Health and Safety Code Section 43830.8. This evaluation will assess 

the potential impact associated with any fuel reformulation to the environment 

and public health including worker exposure. 

Diesel Particulate Filters — A number of measures in the State Strategy would 

require the use of diesel particulate filters. Some safety concerns include 

reduced visibility from the driver’s seat due to new equipment mounted near eye 

level, particularly on off-road equipment such as bulldozers, backhoes, and 

tractors. ARB staff believes that proper engineering design can mitigate or 

eliminate these potential problems. 

Diesel particulate filters must be regenerated by burning off the accumulated 

carbon and associated hydrocarbons trapped on the filter. Active regeneration 

methods use external fuel or energy to heat the filter and regenerate it. A slight 

potential exists for a runaway regeneration that could pose a fire hazard. Proper 

engineering design should mitigate or eliminate these potential risks. Diesel 

particulate filter measures will be written to assure that the design is proven 

effective. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 23 

Idling Inspections — Increased idling at inspection stops for heavy-duty diesel 

will expose people involved with or performing the inspections to toxic diesel PM 

emissions. Diesel engines emit a complex mix of pollutants, the most visible of 

which are very small carbon particles, or ‘soot’ known as diesel PM. 

Power Plants — Increased energy required from power plants may be a source 

of localized releases of toxic air contaminants causing exposure to workers and 

nearby residents. 

Hazardous Materials 

Hazards are related to the risks of fire, explosions, or releases of hazardous 

substances in the event of accident or upset conditions. Hazards are thus 

related to the production, use, storage, and transport of hazardous materials. 

Industrial production and processing facilities are potential sites for hazardous 

materials. Examples of hazardous materials used by consumers include fuels, 

paints, paint thinner, nail polish, and solvents. Hazardous materials may be 

stored at facilities producing such materials and at facilities where hazardous 

materials are part of the production processes. Storage refers to the bulk 

handling of hazardous materials before and after they are transported to the 

general geographical area of use. Currently, hazardous materials are 

transported throughout California via all modes of transportation including rail, 

highway, water, air, and pipeline. 

State law requires detailed planning to ensure that hazardous materials are 

properly handled, used, stored, and disposed of to prevent or mitigate injury to 

health or the environment in the event that such materials are accidentally 

released. The Office of Emergency Services (OES) enforces these 

requirements. Federal laws, such as the Emergency Planning and CommunityRight-to-Know Act of 1986 (also known as Title III of the Superfund Amendments 

and Reauthorization Act or SARA) impose similar requirements. 

The U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) has regulatory responsibility 

for the safe transport of hazardous materials between states and to foreign 

countries. U.S. DOT regulations govern all means of transportation, except for 

those packages shipped by mail. Hazardous materials sent by U.S. mail are 

covered by U.S. Postal Service (USPS) regulations. Common carriers are 

licensed by the California Highway Patrol (CHP), pursuant to the California 

Vehicle Code, §32000. This section requires licensing of every motor (common) 

carrier who transports, for a fee, in excess of 500 pounds of hazardous materials 

at one time and every carrier, if not for hire, who carries more than 1,000 pounds 

of hazardous material of the type requiring placards. 

The CHP and Caltrans have primary responsibility for enforcing federal and State 

regulations and responding to hazardous materials transportation emergencies. 

The CHP enforces hazardous materials and hazardous waste labeling and 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 24 

packaging regulations that prevent leakage and spills of material in transit and 

provide detailed information to cleanup crews in the event of an accident. 

Vehicle and equipment inspection, shipment preparation, container identification, 

and shipping documentation are all part of the responsibility of the CHP. The 

CHP also conducts regular inspections of licensed transporters to assure 

regulatory compliance. 

Pursuant to the Emergency Services Act, California has developed an 

Emergency Response Plan to coordinate emergency services provided by 

federal, State, and local government agencies and private persons. Response to 

hazardous materials incidents is one part of this plan. The plan is administered 

by OES, which coordinates the responses of other agencies including U.S. EPA, 

CHP, Department of Fish and Game, the applicable regional water quality control 

board, and local fire departments (see California Government Code, §8550). 

In addition, pursuant to the Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and 

Inventory Law of 1985 (the Business Plan Law), local agencies are required to 

develop area plans for response to releases of hazardous materials and wastes. 

These emergency response plans depend to a large extent on the business 

plans submitted by persons who handle hazardous materials. An area plan must 

include pre-emergency planning of procedures for emergency response, 

notification and coordination of affected government agencies and responsible 

parties, training, and follow-up. Hazardous materials incidents are reported to 

OES, which compiles and archives the information. 

Public Health 

The Toxic Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act (Health and Safety 

Code §§ 39650 et seq., Food and Agriculture Code Sections 14021 et seq.) 

established California’s two-phased program to identify and control air toxics. In 

the first phase (risk assessment), ARB selects substances for review, 

considering criteria relating to “the risk of harm to public health, amount or 

potential amount of emissions, manner of, and exposure to, usage of the 

substance in California, persistence in the atmosphere, and ambient 

concentrations in the community” (Health and Safety Code § 39666(f)). One 

example of an identified TAC is particulate matter from diesel-fueled engines. 

In the risk management phase of the program, ARB reviews the emission 

sources of an identified TAC to determine if any regulatory action is necessary to 

reduce the risk. The analysis includes a review of controls already in place, the 

available technologies and associated costs for reducing emissions, and the 

associated risk. 

Also in the risk management phase, ARB, working closely with the air districts, is 

responsible for developing control measures for all identified TACs except those 

used as pesticides. Pesticides are evaluated in a similar process by the 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 25 

Department of Pesticide Regulation. Following ARB adoption of measures to 

control a specific toxic compound, the districts must adopt equal or more 

stringent regulations for the stationary sources in their jurisdiction. Regulations 

to control airborne toxic emissions from mobile sources are the responsibility of 

ARB. 

The Air Toxics Hot Spots Program (Health and Safety Code §§ 44300-44384) 

requires facilities to report their toxic air emissions, ascertain health risks, and to 

notify nearby residents of significant risks. Facilities that pose a significant health 

risk to the community are required to reduce their risk through a risk 

management plan. 

 Worker Safety Requirements 

The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) and 

the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) are the 

agencies responsible for assuring worker safety in the handling and use of 

chemicals in the workplace. In California, Cal/OSHA assumes primary 

responsibility for developing and enforcing workplace safety regulations. Under 

the authority of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, OSHA has 

adopted numerous regulations pertaining to worker safety (contained in 29 CFR). 

These regulations set standards for safe workplaces and work practices, 

including the reporting of accidents and occupational injuries. Some OSHA 

regulations contain standards relating to hazardous materials handling, including 

workplace conditions, employee protection requirements, first aid, and fire 

protection, as well as material handling and storage. Because California has a 

federally-approved OSHA program, it is required to adopt regulations that are at 

least as stringent as those found in 29 CFR. 

Cal/OSHA regulations concerning the use of hazardous materials in the 

workplace (detailed in CCR, Title 8) include requirements for employee safety 

training, availability of safety equipment, accident and illness prevention 

programs, hazardous substance exposure warnings, and emergency action and 

fire prevention plan preparation. Cal/OSHA enforces hazard communication 

program regulations containing training and information requirements, including 

procedures for identifying and labeling hazardous substances. The hazard 

communication program also requires that Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) 

be available to employees and that employee information and training programs 

be documented. These regulations also require preparation of emergency action 

plans (escape and evacuation procedures, rescue and medical duties, alarm 

systems, and emergency evacuation training). 

Both federal and State laws include special provisions for hazard communication 

to employees in research laboratories, including training in chemical work 

practices. The training must include instruction in methods for the safe handling 

of hazardous materials, an explanation of MSDSs, use of emergency response 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 26 

equipment and supplies, and an explanation of the building emergency response 

plan and procedures. Chemical safety information must also be available at the 

workplace. More detailed training and monitoring is required for the use of 

carcinogens, ethylene oxide, lead, asbestos, and certain other chemicals listed in 

29 CFR. Emergency equipment and supplies, such as fire extinguishers, safety 

showers, and eye washes, must also be kept in accessible places. Compliance 

with these regulations reduces the risk of accidents and adverse worker health 

effects. 

The National Fire Code (NFC), Standard 45 (published by the National Fire 

Protection Association) contains standards for laboratories using chemicals that 

are not requirements but are generally employed by organizations in order to 

protect workers. These standards provide basic protection of life and property in 

laboratory work areas through prevention and control of fires and explosions, and 

also serve to protect personnel from exposure to non-fire health hazards. While 

NFC Standard 45 is regarded as a nationally recognized standard, the California 

Fire Code (24 CCR) contains State standards for the use and storage of 

hazardous materials and special standards for buildings where hazardous 

materials are found. Some of these regulations consist of amendments to NFC 

Standard 45. California Fire Code regulations require emergency pre-fire plans 

to include training programs in first aid, the use of fire equipment, and methods of 

evacuation. 

IX. Land Use/Planning 

Cumulative Impact: The State Strategy is not expected to cause any adverse 

impacts on land use and planning. 

X. Mineral Resources 

Cumulative Impact: The State Strategy is not expected to cause any adverse 

impacts on mineral resources. 

XI. Noise 

Cumulative Impact: The cumulative effect of the State Strategy will not have a 

potentially significant impact on noise, although an increase of the number of 

trucks idling at inspection stops may result in increased noise. 

Diesel-Fueled Engines — The recommended measures to reduce emissions 

from diesel-fueled engines could require the use of add-on control devices such 

as particulate filters, oxidation catalysts and engine modifications. This could 

result in a potential increase in noise levels due to exhaust system changes to 

accommodate add-on controls. However, testing of current add-on controls has 

shown no increase in noise, and ARB staff does not expect future adverse noise 

impacts. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 27 

XII. Population and Housing 

Cumulative Impact: The State Strategy is not expected to cause any adverse 

impacts on population and housing. 

XIII. Public Services 

Cumulative Impact: The State Strategy is not expected to cause any adverse 

impacts on public services. 

XIV. Recreation 

Cumulative Impact: The State Strategy is not expected to cause any adverse 

impacts on recreation. By reducing the number of days with unhealthy air 

quality, ARB expects that our parks and outdoor recreational facilities could see 

increased usage by children, the elderly, asthmatics, and others with sensitive 

airways or chronic breathing problems.

XV. Solid/Hazardous Waste 

Cumulative Impact: The cumulative impact of all strategies in the State Strategy 

would be a small, but potentially significant, increase of both solid and hazardous 

wastes. To mitigate these impacts, ARB will work with the California Department 

of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and the California Integrated Waste 

Management Board (CIWMB) to reduce waste production in these and other 

areas. 

State and local agencies currently regulate solid and hazardous waste. A 

discussion of these regulations will follow the proposed strategies below. 

Vehicle Retirement Program — High-mileage and older vehicles are likely 

candidates for scrappage rendering them inoperable to pollute. There are many 

non-hazardous materials in a vehicle that could be discarded in landfills. Such 

materials include iron and aluminum engine blocks, steel and plastic from 

chasses and interiors, glass, chromium-containing bumpers, and rubber hoses. 

Mitigation for the expansion of this program would involve reusing or recycling 

the above mentioned materials. According to the Bureau of Automotive Repair, 

on average 90 percent of a scrapped vehicle is recycled with the remaining 10 

percent considered fluff which is typically landfilled. A significant amount of scrap 

and recycled materials are shipped to foreign markets. 

Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles — The proposed measures to reduce 

emissions from diesel-fueled engines and vehicles could require the use of new 

diesel engines or add-on control devices such as particulate filters and oxidation 

catalysts. Potential adverse impacts include increased scrapping of diesel 

engines and vehicles, and impacts due to handling and disposal of collected 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 28 

particulate matter. Also, diesel oxidation catalysts are considered hazardous at 

the end of life. The impact of accelerated vehicle scrapping can be largely 

mitigated by recycling and reclamation of hazardous materials. 

Diesel Particulate Filters — A number of measures in the State Strategy would 

require use of diesel particulate filters. Diesel particulate filters will probably 

produce a small amount of waste ash for disposal. This waste is estimated at 

about 10 to 150 grams of ash per vehicle per year and is projected to be 

considered a hazardous material due to zinc content. While most larger 

maintenance facilities can be expected to handle, collect, and dispose of this 

material properly, it is less certain how smaller facilities will handle waste ash. 

The filters themselves will eventually also be retired. Some filters contain a 

precious metal catalyst that is valuable for recycling and reclaiming. Other spent 

filters may not be worth recycling and may be disposed of at a proper landfill. 

We do not expect that the spent filters themselves will be considered a 

hazardous material. 

Electrification of Equipment — Electrification equipment can provide significant 

reductions of air pollutant emissions. However, electrification strategies may 

result in the production and use of a significant number of batteries. These 

batteries are normally recycled, and the recycle rate for lead-acid batteries is 

currently more than 95 percent. However, the increase in the number of spent 

batteries to be processed would potentially have significant impacts on the 

recycling industry and on the disposal system for non-recyclable materials. 

Leasing, deposit, or rebate programs for electric batteries could be required to 

increase recycling. A spent battery exchange for battery replacement could also 

reduce waste impacts. With these mitigation measures in place, battery disposal 

impacts should not be significant. 

 Solid Waste Regulations 

Solid waste consists of residential wastes (garbage and rubbish produced by 

households), construction wastes, commercial and industrial wastes, home 

appliances and abandoned vehicles, and sludge residues (waste remaining at 

the end of the sewage treatment process). CCR Title 14, Division 7, provides the 

State standards for the management of facilities that handle and/or dispose of 

solid waste. CCR Title 14, Division 7, is administered by the CIWMB and the 

designated Local Enforcement Agency (LEA). The designated LEA for each 

county is the County Department of Environmental Health. 

CCR Title 14, Division 7, establishes general standards to provide required levels 

of performance for facilities that handle and/or dispose of solid waste. Other 

Title 14 requirements include operational plans, closure plans, and post-closure 

monitoring and maintenance plans. Title 14 covers various solid waste facilities 

including, but not limited to landfills, material recovery facilities (MRF), transfer 

stations, and composting facilities. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 29 

 Hazardous Waste Regulations 

Hazardous materials are substances with certain physical properties that could 

pose a substantial present or future hazard to human health or the environment 

when improperly handled, disposed, or otherwise managed. As defined in 

CCR Title 22, Division 4.5, Chapter 11, Article 3, hazardous materials are 

grouped into the following four categories based on their properties: toxic 

(causes human health effects), ignitable (has the ability to burn), corrosive 

(causes severe burns or damage to materials) and reactive (causes explosions 

or generates toxic gases). A hazardous waste is any hazardous material that is 

discarded, abandoned, or otherwise is not recycled. If improperly handled, 

hazardous materials and wastes can result in public health hazards if released to 

the soil or groundwater or through airborne releases in vapors, fumes, or dust. 

Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), U.S. EPA 

regulates the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of 

hazardous waste. RCRA was amended in 1984 by the Hazardous and Solid 

Waste Act (HSWA), which affirmed and extended the concept of regulating 

hazardous wastes from generation through disposal. HSWA specifically prohibits 

the use of certain techniques for the disposal of some types of hazardous 

wastes. Under RCRA, individual states may implement their own hazardous 

waste programs in lieu of RCRA as long as the state program is at least as 

stringent as the federal RCRA requirements. U.S. EPA approved California’s 

program to implement federal regulations as of August 1, 1992. 

DTSC administers the Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL). Under HWCL, 

DTSC has adopted extensive regulations governing the generation, 

transportation, and disposal of hazardous wastes. HWCL differs little from 

RCRA; both laws impose “cradle to grave” regulatory systems for handling 

hazardous wastes in a manner that protects human health and the environment. 

Regulations implementing HWCL are generally more stringent than regulations 

implementing RCRA. HWCL regulations list more than 780 hazardous 

chemicals, as well as nearly 30 more common materials that may be hazardous, 

and establish criteria for identifying, packaging, and labeling hazardous wastes. 

They prescribe management practices for hazardous wastes; establish permit 

requirements for hazardous waste treatment, storage, disposal, and 

transportation; and identify hazardous wastes that cannot be disposed of in 

landfills. 

Under both RCRA and HWCL, hazardous waste manifests must be retained by 

the generator for a minimum of three years. Hazardous waste manifests list a 

description of the waste, its intended destination, and regulatory information 

about the waste. A copy of each manifest must be filed with DTSC. The 

generator must match copies of hazardous waste manifests with certification 

notices from the treatment, disposal, or recycling facility. Hazardous waste as 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 30 

defined in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40 (40 CFR) 261.20 and 

CCR Title 22, Article 9 (including listed substances, 40 CFR 261.30) is disposed 

of in Class I landfills. California has enacted strict legislation for regulating 

Class I landfills (Health and Safety Code, §§25209 - 25209.7). For example, the 

treatment zone of a Class I landfill must not extend more than five feet below the 

initial surface and the base of the zone must be a minimum of five feet above the 

highest anticipated elevation of underlying groundwater (Health and Safety 

Code, §25209.1(h)). The Health and Safety Code also requires Class I landfills 

to be equipped with liners, a leachate collection and removal system, and a 

groundwater monitoring system (Health and Safety Code, §25209.2(a)). Such 

systems must meet the requirements of DTSC and the SWRCB (Health and 

Safety Code, §25209.5). 

XVI. Transportation and Traffic 

Cumulative Impact: Modernization of motor vehicle fleets has the potential to 

generate increased travel. Because newer vehicles tend to be driven more 

frequently and make longer trips, this could increase the number of vehicles on 

the roads. Although modernization and turnover of fleets is intended to decrease 

the emissions from these vehicles, more vehicles on the roads could result in 

increased congestion. 

XVII. Water Resources 

Cumulative Impact: The State Strategy would significantly reduce a number of 

air pollutants and the reductions in deposition will improve overall water quality in 

California. Also, accelerated retirement of older equipment with potentially leaky 

gasoline or diesel engines will reduce fluid (oil and grease) drips, resulting in 

cleaner storm water runoff. Several potentially significant adverse water quality 

impacts are identified, including impacts from reformulated gasoline and 

reformulated low-VOC consumer products. 

Although rain can effectively scrub the air clean, air pollutants absorbed by 

rainwater can have an adverse impact when deposited into surface waters. NOx 

and SOx emissions can form acids that can lower the pH of sensitive mountain 

lakes and streams and adversely affect the flora and fauna. NOx emissions can 

oxidize to nitrate, a powerful fertilizer, and can spur algae growth contributing to 

lake water turbidity and algae blooms. Organic molecules can be deposited in 

surface waters and affect the aquatic plants and animals. Toxic air contaminants 

(TACs) can dissolve in rain and eventually stress or kill organisms. 

This environmental analysis of water resources is divided into two major 

categories—water quality and water demand. However, no significant negative 

impacts on water demand were identified. Several State and federal agencies 

regulate water resources and water quality. A discussion of these agencies’ 

regulations will follow the State Strategy potential impacts. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 31 

Reformulated Gasoline — Ethanol in Gasoline 

Since the phase out of MTBE from California gasoline formulations and federal 

denial of a request for a waiver from the oxygenate requirement, California has 

reformulated its gasoline with ethanol. As modifications to the rule are 

developed, there may be an increase of the amount of ethanol used as an 

oxygenate. There is potential for biological effects from this formulation in the 

event there is discharge to groundwater or surface waters. Ethanol may have an 

impact on the biodegradation of hydrocarbons which can worsen the effects of a 

gasoline spill. Ethanol may inhibit biological degradation of Benzene, Toluene, 

EthylBenzene and Xylene (BTEX) due to bacterial preference for ethanol 

resulting in longer groundwater plumes of BTEX. 

Diesel-Fueled Engines — The State Strategy to reduce emissions from onroad, off-road, and stationary diesel-fueled engines could require or encourage 

the use of alternatively fueled engines and alternative fuel formulations. Because 

some alternative diesel fuel formulations and additives could more readily 

dissolve in water, these control measures have the potential to adversely impact 

local ground and surface waters. 

The use of these alternative fuels is not expected to result in significantly greater 

adverse water quality impacts than the use of regular diesel fuels. A number of 

rules and regulations are currently in place to minimize the potential impacts from 

underground leaking storage tanks and spills from fueling activities. These 

include requirements for the construction of the storage tanks, requirements for 

double containment, and installation of leak detection systems. These 

regulations minimize the potential for additional leaks from the use of diesel fuels 

or alternative fuels. 

Consumer Products — Two toxic air contaminants (TAC) used in some 

consumer products, methylene chloride (MeCl) and perchloroethylene (Perc), are 

specifically exempted from the VOC definition in recognition of their very low 

ozone-forming capabilities. Some manufacturers could use MeCl or Perc in their 

formulations to reduce the VOC content to meet future limits, creating potential 

adverse environmental impacts for primarily air, and possibly, though much less 

likely, soil and water. 

ARB staff has recognized the potential for increased use of TACs in consumer 

products and has taken steps to mitigate and limit the use of these compounds in 

recent Board actions. These actions include: the toxics control measure for 

automotive maintenance and repair activities; aerosol adhesives limits in the 

consumer products regulation; the prohibition of para-dichlorobenzene in solid air 

fresheners and toilet/urinal care products; and reactivity limits in the aerosol 

coating regulations. ARB periodically surveys all categories for their chemical 

composition including TACs and also tracks the use of MeCl and Perc in 

regulated consumer products through yearly manufacturer reporting 

requirements. Further, ARB staff has proposed VOC limits in the past that were 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 32 

achievable without the increased use of TACs. Furthermore, Proposition 65 

labeling requirements discourage manufacturers from reformulating consumer 

products with TACs. 

ARB staff actively seeks to prevent increased use of TACs when setting new 

VOC limits. In the future, if new products contain Perc and MeCl, ARB staff will 

monitor their use and limit or prohibit their use in additional consumer products, 

when applicable. Mitigation measures will be implemented if a significant 

presence of consumer product-related Perc is anticipated in wastewater. 

Vehicle Retirement Program — High-mileage and older vehicles are likely 

candidates for scrappage. Their deterioration leads to increased emissions. 

Once scrapped, they can no longer pollute. Scrapped vehicles commonly 

contain residual fuels, such as gasoline, lubricating oils and other fluids that may 

potentially harm water quality if not properly handled. There are regulations and 

rules to properly manage these programs, however, there is a potential for 

adverse environmental impacts if these pollutants are leaked to surface and 

groundwater. 

 State and Regional Water Boards 

California has an extensive regulatory program to control water pollution. The 

most important statute governing water quality is the Porter-Cologne Act, which 

gives the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the nine regional 

water quality control boards (RWQCB) broad powers to protect surface and 

groundwater supplies in California, regulate waste disposal, and require cleanup 

of hazardous conditions (California Water Code §§3000-13999.16). In particular, 

the SWRCB establishes water-related policies and approves water quality control 

plans, which are implemented and enforced by the RWQCBs. The nine regional 

boards include: North Coast, San Francisco Bay, Central Coast, Los Angeles, 

Central Valley, Lahontan, Colorado River Basin, Santa Ana, and San Diego. 

It is the responsibility of each regional board to prepare water quality control 

plans to protect surface and groundwater supplies within its region. These plans 

must: identify important regional water resources and their beneficial uses, such 

as domestic, navigational, agricultural, industrial, and recreational; establish 

water quality objectives, limits, or levels of water constituents or characteristics 

established for beneficial uses and to prevent nuisances; and present an 

implementation program necessary to achieve those water quality objectives. 

These plans also contain technical information for determining waste water 

discharge requirements and taking enforcement actions. The plans are typically 

reviewed and updated every three years (California Water Code §13241). 

California dischargers of waste that “could affect the quality of the waters of the 

State” are required to file a report of waste discharge with the appropriate 

regional water board (California Water Code §13260). The report is essentially a 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 33 

permit application and must contain information required by the regional board. 

After receipt of a discharge report, the regional board will issue “waste discharge 

requirements” analogous to a permit with conditions prescribing the allowable 

nature of the proposed discharge (California Water Code §§3263, 13377, and 

13378). 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Requirements 

Most discharges into California’s waters are regulated by the National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), a regulatory program under the federal 

Clean Water Act. The NPDES is supervised by U.S. EPA, but administered by 

the SWRCB. NPDES requirements apply to discharges of pollutants into 

navigable waters from a point source, discharges of dredged or fill material into 

navigable waters, and the disposal of sewage sludge that could result in 

pollutants entering navigable waters. California has received U.S. EPA approval 

of its NPDES program. Pursuant to California’s NPDES program, any waste 

discharger subject to the NPDES program must obtain an NPDES permit from 

the appropriate RWQCB. The permits typically include criteria and water quality 

objectives for a wide range of constituents. The NPDES program is selfmonitoring, requiring periodic effluent sampling. Permit compliance is assessed 

monthly by the local RWQCB. Any NPDES violations are then categorized and 

reported to U.S. EPA on a quarterly basis. 

U.S. EPA has also published regulations that require certain industries, cities and 

counties to obtain NPDES permits for stormwater discharges [55 CFR (1990)]. 

The regulations set permit application requirements for classes of stormwater 

discharges specifically identified in the federal Clean Water Act. The regulated 

stormwater discharges include those associated with industrial activity and from 

municipal storm sewer systems serving a population of 100,000 or more. 

Discharges to Publicly-Owned Treatment Works (POTWs)

Water discharges to a public sewage system (referred to generically as a 

POTW), rather than directly to the environment, are not subject to the NPDES 

discharge requirements. Instead, such discharges are subject to federal 

pretreatment requirements under §§307(b) and (c) of the Clean Water Act 

[33 USC §1317(b)-(c)]. Although these pretreatment standards are enforced 

directly by U.S. EPA, they are implemented by local sanitation districts (Monahan 

et al., 1993). The discharger, however, has the responsibility to ensure that the 

waste stream complies with the pretreatment requirements of the local system. 

Any facility using air pollution control equipment affecting water quality must 

receive a permit to operate from the local sanitation district. In cases where 

facilities modify their equipment or install air pollution controls that generate or 

alter existing wastewater streams, owner/operators must notify the local 

sanitation district and request that their existing permit be reviewed and modified. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 34 

To ensure compliance with wastewater pretreatment regulations, local sanitation 

districts sample and analyze the wastewater streams from facilities 

approximately two to four times per year. Persons who violate California’s water 

quality laws are subject to a wide array of enforcement provisions. In 1990, 

U.S. EPA revised and extended existing regulations to further regulate 

hazardous waste dischargers and require effluent testing by POTWs. To comply 

with revised permit limits, POTWs may alter their operations or impose more 

stringent local limits on industrial user discharges of hazardous wastes (Monahan 

et al., 1993). POTWs in California are operated by sanitation districts that adopt 

ordinances establishing permit systems and fee structures. 

Department of Pesticide Regulation’s 2008 Pesticide Element

The pesticide element requires the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) to 

implement regulations that restrict the amount of VOCs that may be emitted from 

field fumigation. The 2008 element updates the current pesticide element of the 

ozone SIP, which provides for percentage reductions in emissions from 1990 

levels. 

An analysis of potentially significant environmental effects will occur before final 

implementation of the specific field fumigant regulations. The fumigant 

regulations have been developed enough to assess the potential environmental 

impacts at this point. 

Cumulative Impact of 2008 Pesticide Element: Adoption of this element into 

the SIP would not have significant or potentially significant adverse effects on the 

environment. 

Potential Environmental Impacts of 2008 Fumigant Regulations 

The fumigant regulations to be implemented in 2008 will establish limits on the 

amount of VOCs that may be emitted from field fumigation in certain areas and 

will prescribe allowable application methods statewide. Pesticide applicators are 

expected to take one or more of the following actions to comply with the 

regulations: Use lower emission application methods, reduce application rates, 

reduce the acres fumigated, and shift fumigant applications outside the peak 

ozone season. DPR expects most of the required emission reductions to come 

through use of lower emission application methods, generally tarping, postfumigation water treatments, and drip chemigation. The regulations will give 

applicators a choice of application methods, but in general the impacts will be 

negligible regardless of which options are selected. 

DPR's review of the proposed action showed that no significant adverse 

environmental impact to California's environment can reasonably be expected to 

occur from implementing its commitment to promulgate fumigation regulations. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 35 

In reaching this conclusion, DPR considered the possible impacts discussed 

below. 

Air Quality 

Shifting fumigations outside the peak ozone season could cause current 

particulate emissions from tractors and other application equipment to shift from 

summer to late fall or early spring. However, increased fumigations and 

associated particulate emissions during the winter peak particulate season are 

unlikely due to wet fields and other constraints. 

Since the 2008 fumigant regulation would establish application limits during May 

through October only, there is a potential for an increased use of fumigants in the 

months preceding or following the peak ozone season. However, current DPR 

regulations and U.S. EPA label restrictions are designed to prevent acute or 

chronic toxic exposure and are sufficient to avoid any adverse effects of toxic 

emissions from any increased use of fumigants. 

In addition, the restriction of allowable application methods in the proposed 

regulations will reduce air emissions of the fumigants. Emissions of fumigants 

included in the proposed regulation have little or no contribution to particulate 

matter pollution, acid rain, climate change, or other air quality impacts. 

Agricultural Resources

Reducing the acreage fumigated would cause the previously fumigated fields to 

be converted to crops that do not use fumigants or to non-agricultural uses. The 

most likely conversions in specific areas are unknown at this time. DPR expects 

that growers in all areas can, and will, meet the emission limits primarily through 

changing application methods, and thus the regulations will not cause a 

significant reduction in the number of acres fumigated or conversion of 

agricultural land to other uses. 

Resource/Energy Use

Post-fumigation water treatments and drip chemigation (pesticide application via 

an irrigation system rather than by tractor application) will require greater 

quantities of water, with associated energy use and other effects. Less diesel 

fuel and other desirable effects associated with decreased tractor use will offset 

any potential impacts. However, the relative increase from current water use is 

expected to be negligible. 

Solid Waste

The disposal of solid waste may increase slightly due to use of plastic tarpaulins 

under the proposed regulations, but the increase is not expected to be significant 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 36 

since a great majority of the fumigations already use tarpaulins when it is a 

feasible mitigation measure. 

Water Quality

DPR’s evaluation of the post-fumigation water treatments and drip chemigation 

applications show virtually no potential for ground water contamination by the 

fumigants with the estimated irrigation increases. 

Other

Fumigation is primarily used to control diseases and nematodes. If fumigant 

application rates are reduced as a result of the regulations, use of non-fumigant 

pesticides, such as fungicides and nematicides could be increased. Increasing 

the use of such non-fumigant pesticides may result in potential adverse 

environmental impacts to soil, air or water. 

Environmental Analysis for the Proposed Revision to the Pesticide 

Commitment in the 1994 Ozone SIP 

Aside from the Ventura area, the 2008 pesticide element requires the same or 

more VOC reductions than the current pesticide element (1994 Plan). The 2008 

pesticide element does, however, allow less VOC reductions for pesticide use in 

the Ventura area only. Either plan would provide for significant reductions from 

actual, current levels. For Ventura County to meet the targets of the 1994 Plan, 

2.2 tons per day reductions are required. The 2008 pesticide element would 

require a 1.2 ton per day reduction that would result from the 2008 fumigation 

regulations. The additional ton of VOC reductions needed to satisfy the 1994 

SIP commitment will instead come from other sources of VOCs in the Ventura 

area. A more detailed discussion of this allowance and emission reduction 

offsets is included in the Appendix H. 

Potential environmental impacts resulting from the proposed revision to the 1994 

Plan may come from the use of methyl bromide and methyl isothiocyanategenerating fumigants. These fumigants comprise approximately 50 percent of 

the pesticide VOC inventory in Ventura. These two fumigants have very low 

reactivity, indicating that they do not appreciably contribute to ozone formation. 

Methyl bromide is an ozone depleting substance, and its production and 

importation are regulated under the Clean Air Act. Ozone depletion is not a 

localized effect, and the amount of methyl bromide emitted due to this Plan is 

negligible. It is estimated that 0.5 tons per day more methyl bromide will be 

emitted from field fumigation under the 2008 pesticide element target than would 

be allowed under the 1994 Plan. This is approximately 0.0002 percent of the 

worldwide methyl bromide emissions. No other adverse effects should occur 

because the fumigants included in the proposed regulation have little or no 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 37 

contribution to particulate matter pollution, acid rain, climate change, or other air 

quality impacts. 

DPR regulations and U.S. EPA label restrictions currently in place are designed 

to prevent acute or chronic toxic exposure. They are sufficient to avoid adverse 

effects of toxic emissions from any additional use of these fumigants that would 

result if the VOC reduction targets in the pesticide element of the SIP were one 

ton per day higher in Ventura in 2008. 

Cumulative Impact of Proposed Revision to the 1994 Plan: The change to 

the 2008 pesticide element targets will not have a significant adverse 

environmental impact on air quality.

Cumulative Impacts of State Measures and Local District Measures 

The cumulative impacts of the State Strategy within each impact area have been 

discussed in the previous sections. This analysis does not set forth the 

environmental impacts of measures contained in district plans, as districts are 

required to perform their own environmental analysis of their stationary source 

control measures. The 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 SIP, however, will incorporate 

both state and local measures. Local measures from the non-attainment areas 

may also have adverse environmental impacts. Interested parties that want to 

review and assess impacts associated with each district should do so at the 

district level. ARB, as the state agency responsible for preparing the SIP, 

coordinating district efforts to comply with federal SIP requirements and 

forwarding the SIP components to U.S. EPA, will collect and compile the each 

district’s plan, along with their environmental documentation, and send the entire 

SIP package to U.S. EPA. 

At this time, the air districts with the most serious air quality problems in the 

State, South Coast Air Basin and the San Joaquin Valley, both have performed 

environmental analyses for their plans. All other non-attainment districts are 

expected to perform environmental analyses prior to adoption by their respective 

district boards. 

The cumulative impacts discussion contained in the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District’s Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the 2007 Air 

Quality Management Plan, is hereby incorporated by reference. The San 

Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Initial Study/Proposed 

Negative Declaration is also hereby incorporated by reference. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 38 

Project Alternatives

As discussed at the beginning of this appendix, ARB meets the criteria for a 

Certified State Regulatory Program. This certification requires ARB to present a 

range of reasonable alternatives for any project under consideration. CEQA 

requires a certified agency to include one of the following in the document: 

1) Alternatives to the activity and mitigation measures to avoid or reduce any 

significant or potentially significant effects that the project might have on the 

environment; or 2) A statement that the agency’s review of the project showed 

that the project would not have any significant or potentially significant effects on 

the environment, and therefore no alternatives or mitigation measures are 

proposed to avoid or reduce any significant effects on the environment. The 

statement shall be supported by a checklist or other documentation to show the 

possible effects that the agency examined in reaching this conclusion. (CEQA 

Guidelines Section 15252). 

The alternatives presented in this appendix were evaluated for their comparative 

merits to the proposed project. Under CEQA, the alternatives are required to 

feasibly obtain the objectives of the proposed project. For this reason, it is 

important to note the State of California is under legal obligation to prepare a 

State Implementation Plan which demonstrates it will reach attainment for the 

8-hour ozone and PM2.5 standards. 

Review of the cumulative impacts from all proposed new measures or strategies 

shows there may be potentially significant adverse impacts if all measures are 

adopted. Therefore, alternatives to the State Strategy are considered below. 

Alternative 1 — No Project 

CEQA documents typically assume that the adoption of a ‘no project’ alternative 

would result in no further action on the part of the project proponent or lead 

agency. For example, in the case of a proposed housing development project, 

adopting the ‘no project’ alternative terminates further consideration of that 

housing development or any housing development alternative identified in the 

associated CEQA document. In that case, the existing setting would remain 

unchanged. 

One interpretation of the ‘no project’ alternative is that if this alternative was 

selected, all the measures in the State Strategy are rejected. Since the State 

Strategy contains all currently known feasible State strategies or measures that 

ARB could potentially take to reduce ozone-forming emissions, this would mean 

that no additional measures on existing sources or measures on uncontrolled 

sources would be developed. The result would be the eventual deterioration of 

California air quality as population increases and would very likely prevent the 

State from being able to meet its requirement to meet the 8-hour ozone and 

PM2.5 standards. In addition, California would fail to meet federal Clean Air Act 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 39 

mandates and would be subject to federal sanctions. Water quality would suffer 

as acidic rain increases and toxic air contaminants are deposited on the ground. 

Public exposure to toxic materials would increase. Higher levels of air pollutants 

would deteriorate aesthetics by increasing haze and would damage crops. Only 

modest benefits would be achieved from a no project alternatives, such as any 

small increase in solid or hazardous waste would not be generated. 

 Alternative 2 — Adopt Fewer Measures 

As mentioned previously, the State Strategy contains all measures to reduce 

ozone that ARB staff has determined are feasible to achieve. Instead of adopting 

all of these measures, ARB could adopt only some of them, although there would 

be numerous alternative subsets of the measures identified in the State Strategy 

to consider. However, adopting fewer measures would not result in the expected 

emissions reductions needed to meet the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 standards. 

This would then place an increased responsibility on local districts and the 

federal government to achieve sufficient emissions reductions to meet the 

standard. 

Alternative 3 — Adopt Measures with Different Emission Standards 

For each individual measure, many alternatives exist for various levels of control 

and variable emission standards for the regulated sources. It is not possible to 

examine these many alternatives in detail without engaging in speculation, 

because the measures ultimately adopted by ARB will depend on the information 

that is learned in the future during the regulatory development process. In 

general, however, ARB staff believes that it will be necessary to adopt all State 

Strategy measures and emission standards that are determined to be feasible, 

rather than a subset of feasible measures and standards. To attain the federal 

ozone standard in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley, significant additional 

emission reductions will be needed beyond the defined measures specifically 

identified in the Strategy. Therefore, failing to adopt all feasible measures and 

emission standards would result in failure to meet federal Clean Air Act 

mandates and would subject the State to federal sanctions. 

Impacts of Individual Proposed Measures

The measures in the State Strategy will help make progress toward our goal of 

healthy air for all Californians. Each of the defined State measures was 

evaluated to identify adverse environmental impacts. The following table lists 

each of the measures, any potentially significant environmental impacts, and 

possible mitigation strategies
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 40 

Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of 

the Proposed 2007 State Strategies for the California SIP 

Strategy Description Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts Pote

PASSENGER VEHICLES Expanded Passenger Vehicle Retirement: 

Increase the number of vehicles in the BAR scrappage program. 

Air: Potential for incidental refrigerant leaks from 

air conditioning systems when attaching equipment to facilitate removal of the refrigerant. Solid/Hazardous Waste: Lead, chromium, and 

mercury in vehicles can become toxic air contaminants and pose health risks to facility workers. Solid/Hazardous Waste: Increased scrappage including steel, plastics and other materials that could potentially be disposed in landfills. Water: Fuel, oil, and lubricants may leak and 

disperse into groundwater. If improperly disposed, elements including lead, chromium and mercury can disperse into ground or surface water as part of landfill leachate. 

Ensure bepractices aPromote rof hazardoPromote rparts and Proper facadherence the collect

Modification of Reformulated Gasoline Program: 

Modify California’s Reformulated Gasoline Program to offset ROG emissions due to the increased use of ethanol as an additive. 

Energy: Ethanol blends have about 30 percent 

less energy by volume than gasoline, so increased ethanol in gasoline will decrease fuel economy by about 0.3 percent for each 1 percent of ethanol. 

Manufactuuse more new motor increased older modenot be add
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 41 

Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of 

the Proposed 2007 State Strategies for the California SIP 

Strategy Description Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts Pote

Water: Ethanol reduces electron-acceptors in 

groundwater and reduces biodegradation of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene contained in gasoline. Potential for increase of groundwater plumes. 

None iden

Smog Check Improvements

Low Pressure Evaporative Test: 

Require testing and repair of evaporative system leaks for all vehicles subject to Smog Check inspection. 

Solid/Hazardous Waste: Increased disposal of 

faulty emission control parts. 

Recycle fucatalyst w

More Stringent Cutpoints: 

Set more stringent Smog Check pass/fail cutpoints. 

Solid/Hazardous Waste: Increased disposal of 

faulty emission control parts. 

Recycle fucatalyst w

Annual Inspections of Older Vehicles: 

Inspect annually rather than every two years. 

Solid/Hazardous Waste: Increased scrappage, 

disposal and repair of faulty emission control parts. 

Promote rparts and 

Annual Inspections for High Annual Mileage Vehicles: 

Inspect annually rather than every two years. 

Solid/Hazardous Waste: Increased scrappage, 

disposal and repair of faulty emission control parts. 

Promote rparts and 

Add Visible Smoke Test: 

Include in the Smog Check test a visible smoke test to identify vehicles with excess PM emissions. 

Solid/Hazardous Waste: Increased scrappage, 

disposal and repair of faulty emission control parts. 

Promote rparts and 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 42 

Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of 

the Proposed 2007 State Strategies for the California SIP 

Strategy Description Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts Pote

Inspection of Light- and Medium-Duty Diesels: 

Include light- and medium-duty diesel vehicles in Smog Check to improve maintenance and reduce emissions. Repair poorly maintained or old emission systems. 

Solid/Hazardous Waste: Increased scrappage, 

disposal and repair of faulty emission control parts. 

Promote rparts and 

Inspection of Motorcycles:

Include motorcycle inspections as part of Smog Check. 

Solid/Hazardous Waste: Increased disposal of 

faulty emission control parts. 

Promote rparts and 

TRUCKS Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks:

Reduce excess emissions attributable to engine deterioration, poor maintenance, or tampering. Conduct visual, under-the-hood inspections of the emission control devices. 

Air: Use of Diesel Particulate Filters (DPFs) may 

accelerate conversion of nitric oxide (NO) to nitrogen dioxide (NO2). 

Air: Potential to increase ozone concentration, 

nitric acid, and secondary particulate matter 

formation. Air: Metals from various forms of catalyzed 

aftertreatment systems can be eroded and emitted as airborne PM, such as vanadium pentoxide from SCR. Air: Idling while waiting to be tested or while being tested could slightly increase all emissions. Air: Other secondary emissions are likely to include organonitrogen compounds, many of which are listed as TACs and are carcinogenic. 

Design DPNO2 conve

Design syefficiency. 

Ban use ometals and catalyst fozeolites) wvanadium. 

Design syefficiencie

Deploy alteformulationemissions compound
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 43 

Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of 

the Proposed 2007 State Strategies for the California SIP 

Strategy Description Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts Pote

(continued) Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks Energy: Active regeneration of DPFs may include 

using external fuel or energy to burn off accumulated carbon and associated hydrocarbons trapped on filter. Energy: Maintaining the integrity of the add-on controls could extend the time period for the decrease in fuel economy. Hazards/Hazardous Materials: Increased idling at 

inspection stops has potential to expose anyone nearby to increased toxic diesel PM emissions. Noise: Increased number of trucks and idling at 

inspection stops could cause an increase in noise. Solid/Hazardous Waste: Waste ash from DPFs 

containing zinc may be generated. Solid/Hazardous Waste: Focus of measure is to maintain and repair devices, not replace them. If they are replaced, they may be sent to landfills. Transportation/Traffic: Existing roadside inspection 

program will likely be expanded and increase the number of locations where trucks will be pulled over and tested. 

assess depotential e

Promote ethough effto be neglDesign syefficiency. Locate insbuffer zonsensitive rLocate inswith a buffstop and sPromote rwaste manscrappageNone requImpact is nsignificant would not 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 44 

Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of 

the Proposed 2007 State Strategies for the California SIP 

Strategy Description Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts Pote

GOODS MOVEMENT Clean Up Existing Commercial Harbor Craft:

Reduce emissions by replacing or retrofitting old engines. 

Air: Increased levels of NO2 affecting ozone and 

secondary nitrate formation and nitric acid. May enhance formation of sulfates. Air: Selective catalytic reduction (SCR) of diesel 

exhaust using urea injection may increase ammonia emissions. Air: Reduction of fuel efficiency due to exhaust backpressures may require more fuel use resulting in increased CO2 emissions. 

Energy: Retrofitting post-combustion controls on 

engines may result in increased fuel use. Hazards/Hazardous Materials: Use of additives in 

diesel fuel or the use of alternative diesel fuels may create new hazards or enhance the hazard of diesel fuel. Solid/Hazardous Waste: Waste ash from DPFs 

containing zinc may be generated. Scrappage of older engines and their components. Water: Emulsified diesel fuel or fuel additives may 

increase soluble components in surface and subsurface water that could result from spillage and leakage from storage tanks. 

Use low-sAdjust urestoichiomerespect to Design syefficiencieDesign syefficiencieAny reformthe requirebe revieweevaluationwill be ideprocess. Promote rof materiaRequire spsafe stora
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 45 

Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of 

the Proposed 2007 State Strategies for the California SIP 

Strategy Description Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts Pote

Auxiliary Ship Engine Cold Ironing and Other Clean Technology:

Reduce emissions from ships at berth with at-dock technologies such as cold ironing (electrical power) and other clean technologies. 

Air: Localized release of criteria pollutants and 

toxic air contaminants from power plants. Energy: Increased energy demand for shore-side 

power. Solid/Hazardous Waste: Emission filters may 

capture more emissions and require disposal of hazardous ash. 

Promote usources. Promote uand adopt source conEnsure prohazardous 

Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuels: 

Further reduce emissions from main engines through added retrofits such as selected catalytic reduction. Support efforts to accelerate use of cleaner ships and rebuilt engines. Require ships to use low sulfur diesel fuel in main engines. 

Air: SCR could increase releases of ammonia. 

Air: Diesel oxidation catalyst could form sulfates at higher temperatures. Air: Technologies such as low-NOx fuel injection, delayed injection timing and water vapor added to combustion chamber can cause slight increases in PM, hydrocarbons and CO2. Air: Distillation of heavy fuels can increase CO2 emissions at refineries. Solid/Hazardous Waste: Diesel oxidation catalysts 

which contain platinum are considered hazardous at end of life. 

Promote cUse low suDesign syefficiencieAir district must evaluquality impfeasible. Promote rfrom DOC

Port Truck Modernization: 

Retrofit or replace older heavy-duty diesel trucks that 

Air: Use of Diesel Particulate Filters (DPFs) may 

accelerate conversion of nitrous oxide (NO) to 

Design DPNO2 conve
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 46 

Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of 

the Proposed 2007 State Strategies for the California SIP 

Strategy Description Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts Pote

service ports. nitrogen dioxide (NO2). Potential to increase 

ozone concentration, nitric acid, and secondary particulate matter formation. Energy: Increased use of fuel or energy for active 

regeneration of DPFs. Solid/Hazardous Waste: Waste ash from DPF 

containing zinc may be generated. 

Use renewPromote r

Locomotive Engines: 

Accelerate the introduction of cleaner line haul engines (Tiers 2.5 & 3) and concurrently rebuild older engines to cleaner standards using exhaust after treatment devices. 

Air: NOx would be slightly higher, and the SCRs 

would require urea. This could increase ammonia slip. Air: NO2 fraction may be increased with DPFs, total 

NO

X remains approximately the same. 

Air: SO

X could increase at higher temperatures as 

well as NO2. 

Energy: Diesel particulate filters, diesel oxidation 

catalysts, and SCRs can decrease fuel efficiency due to pressure loss and regeneration issues. After treatment technology would have the potential to reduce fuel efficiency. Hazards/Hazardous Materials: Possible high levels 

of zinc in DPF ash would need to be handled properly. Solid/Hazardous Waste: DPF’s will need to be 

disposed of once removed. Depending on catalytic material used during manufacturing, DOCs could become hazardous waste when they are removed. 

Design coexhaust teoptimum rutilized. None idenUse ultra lAdjust urestoichiomerespect to Install ammPromote rof materiaMaintain thtechnology working orschedule. nonhazardmaterial. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 47 

Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of 

the Proposed 2007 State Strategies for the California SIP 

Strategy Description Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts Pote

CONSTRUCTION AND OTHER EQUIPMENT Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment:

Establish fleet average emission limits for construction fleets requiring older engines be retrofitted or replaced with cleaner engines. 

Air: Diesel particulate filters, lean NOx catalysts 

and SCRs may have slight fuel economy penalty causing increase in CO2 emissions. 

Air: Diesel oxidation catalysts may form sulfates at 

high temperatures. Air: Diesel particulate filters may increase NO2

portion of NOx emissions. Air: Increased ammonia emissions from SCRs. 

Air: Secondary emissions from SCR are likely to include organonitrogen compounds, many of which are listed as TACs and are carcinogenic. Energy: Diesel particulate filters may require 

electricity to regenerate the filter. Hazards/Hazardous Materials: Metals from various 

forms of catalyzed aftertreatment systems can be eroded and bleed out into the environment, e.g., vanadium pentoxide from SCR. Solid/Hazardous Waste:Engines that are replaced 

through repowering could be sent to a landfill. 

Design syefficiency. Use low suto minimizUse filters 20 percen

ratio. Use an amdownstreaoxidize amDeploy altformulatioemissions compoundPromote crenewable Ban use ometals and catalyst fozeolites) wvanadiumSet guidelmethods ofilters, (i.escrapping landfill) 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 48 

Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of 

the Proposed 2007 State Strategies for the California SIP 

Strategy Description Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts Pote

(continued) Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment:

Solid/Hazardous Waste: Catalyzed aftertreatment 

systems could be hazardous waste at the end of their useful life, depending on materials in catalytic coating. Solid/Hazardous Waste: Particulate filters could be hazardous waste due to ash containing metals, such as zinc. Also ash from periodic cleaning of filters could be considered hazardous for the same reasons. Water: Fluids (oils, etc) in engines that are 

replaced through repowering could leach into water. 

Depending aftertreatmprecious mReduce amsuch as by lubrication 

Ensure promaintenan

AGRICULTURAL EQUIPMENT Agricultural Equipment Fleet Modernization: Accelerate 

fleet modernization of agricultural equipment by replacing older, dirtier equipment with engines reflecting cleaner technologies. 

Although there is no specific proposal at this time for agricultural equipment, if an emission reduction strategy similar to the Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment is pursued, the potential adverse environmental impacts would be expected to be the same. 

EVAPORATIVE & EXHAUST STRATEGIES New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats: 

Adopt catalyst-based standards for new outboard engines and evaporative emission standards for all sources of recreational boat evaporative emissions. 

None identified. None requ
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 49 

Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of 

the Proposed 2007 State Strategies for the California SIP 

Strategy Description Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts Pote

Off-Road Recreational Vehicle Expanded Emission Standards:

Adopt exhaust and evaporative emission standards to reduce the amount of ROG from off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain vehicles. 

Air (exhaust): Potential for two-way catalysts to 

emit higher levels of NO2 affecting ozone, NO2, nitric acid, and secondary particulate. Noise: May increase if catalysts are used. 

Solid/Hazardous Waste (exhaust): Exhaust 

catalysts may contain hazardous materials including precious metals and benzene residue. Solid/Hazardous Waste (evaporative): Evaporative 

canisters may contain hazardous material including precious metals and benzene residue. Solid/Hazardous Waste (evaporative): Faulty control parts may be disposed of in landfills. 

Use of threreduce HCemissionsEncourage include soRequire prrecycling. Require prrecycling. Promote r

Portable Outboard Marine Tank Evaporative Standards:

Set evaporative emission standards to reduce emissions from tanks, hoses, primers bulbs and connecting devices. 

None identified. None requ

Refueling Gasoline Tank Evaporative Standards: 

Set standards for refueling gasoline tanks typically mounted on pickups and large recreational vehicles and used to refuel equipment and other smaller vehicles. 

Solid/Hazardous Waste: Replacement control 

parts, such as carbon canisters and low permeating hoses, may be sent to landfills. 

Promote r

Gas Station Refueling Hose Evaporative Standards:

Set evaporative emission standards to control permeation from gasoline dispenser hoses. 

None identified. None requ
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 50 

Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of 

the Proposed 2007 State Strategies for the California SIP 

Strategy Description Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts Pote

Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above Ground Storage Tanks: 

Adopt enhanced vapor recovery performance standards and specifications to control standing loss and working loss emissions from above ground gasoline storage tanks. 

None identified since replaced parts are usually reconditioned. 

None requ

CONSUMER PRODUCTS Tighten standards or require product reformulation for consumer products categories. 

Air: Potential small increase in greenhouse gases, 

depending on the alternative used. Air: Potential increase of TACs, depending on formulation. Hazards/Hazardous Materials: Reformulation for 

exempt VOC solvents may potentially increase flammability of solvent such as acetone and methyl acetate. Water: Any increase in PERC could negatively 

impact wastewater. 

Ensure thanot the soProhibit uswhere thereformulatExisting reconsumer that ensursignificant transport aNone iden
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 51 

Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts of 

the Proposed 2007 State Strategies for the California SIP 

Strategy Description Potential Adverse Environmental Impacts Pote

PESTICIDES Restrict VOC emitted from field fumigation, and set a reactivity standard or requirement for registration of some liquid pesticides. 

Agriculture: Acreage no longer fumigated to 

achieve VOC reductions could be converted to non-agricultural uses. Air: Methyl bromide and methyl isothiocyanate, 

which are ozone-depleting substances, may increase slightly in Ventura County. Solid/Hazardous Waste: Solid waste disposal may 

increase due to use of plastic tarpaulins under the proposed regulation. Water: Post-fumigation water treatments may 

require greater quantities of water use. 

Emission lareas primapplication The allowaonly in Veto be neglMost fumigtarpaulins measure. current disexpected tDrip chemsystems raapplicationthe use of undesirabtractor usein water usexpected t
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 52 

ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 

Introduction

ARB staff has estimated the costs and economic impacts that could result in 

2014 from the proposed State Strategy to reduce emissions of oxides of nitrogen 

(NOx), reactive organic gases (ROG), fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and oxides 

of sulfur (SOx) in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley State Implementation 

Plans (SIP). The emission reductions are needed to meet the attainment 

deadlines for the federal 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 standards. This analysis 

includes the costs and economic impacts of all proposed control measures under 

State jurisdiction, including passenger vehicles and trucks, goods movement, 

construction and mining equipment, engine exhaust and evaporation, and 

consumer products. It is important to note that the costs reflected in this section 

represent costs incurred in 2014 only although some measures will begin to be 

implemented prior to 2014 and continue after 2014. 

The proposed State Strategy measures, when adopted as rules or regulations, 

are likely to cause technological changes that could increase the production 

costs for regulated industries. Increased costs could have an initial 

contractionary effect on those industries, which in turn could affect other related 

industries either negatively or positively. For example, industries that provide 

supplies and services to affected industries could experience a reduction in 

demand for their products and services while suppliers of environmental products 

and services could experience an increase in their sales. The net effect on the 

California economy of these activities hinges on the extent to which products and 

services are obtained locally. Using an updated version of EnvironmentalDynamic Random Analysis model (E-DRAM)1

, staff estimated the net effects in 

2014 of these activities on the affected industries and the overall economy. The 

California industries affected most are those engaged in the production, 

distribution, sales, and use of cars and trucks, goods movement, off-road 

equipment and engines, and consumer products. 

The proposed State Strategy would bring about significant societal benefits, 

including less illness and medical expenses and fewer lost work and school days, 

to Californians. In its report to Congress in 1999, U.S. EPA found that the 

monetized benefits of the Clean Air Act exceed its compliance costs by a ratio of 

four to one.2 Using the findings in this report and considering that ARB 

regulations are usually more stringent and thus more costly, ARB staff estimates 

 

1

 For a complete description of E-DRAM, see Peter Berck, “The Economy-wide Effects of AirQuality Regulations,” prepared for California Air Resources Board, June 2005. Industrial sectors 

in the E-DRAM were further refined by David Roland-Holst and Ryan Kellogg, “Documentation of 

the 120 Sector SAM for California, 2003,” July 2006. 

2

 U.S. EPA Report to Congress, “The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act 1990 to 2010,” 

November 1999. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 53 

that each dollar spent on clean air in California generates, on average, three 

dollars in societal benefits. 

Annual direct costs of all proposed State Strategy measures are estimated to be 

$4.6 billion in 2014. Increased costs that would result from the proposed State 

Strategy would reduce California’s economic output in 2014 from $2.948 trillion to 

$2.938 trillion (roughly $10 billion or 0.30 percent), personal income by $5 billion 

(0.30 percent), and California employment by approximately 37,000 jobs (0.20 

percent). These changes reflect a slight slow-down in the growth of the 

California economy from what it would be otherwise. From 2007 through 2014, 

California output is expected to grow by $74 billion, personal income by 

$45 billion, and employment by 198,900 per year. The impact of the proposed 

State Strategy would be a slight reduction in the annual growth rate of: economic 

output (from 2.85 percent to 2.80 percent); personal income (from 2.90 percent to 

2.88 percent); and employment (from 1.20 percent to 1.17 percent). 

Cost of Control Measures

Most control measures identified in the proposed State Strategy rely on the 

application of current technologies to achieve additional emission reductions. 

Some control measures, however, rely on the development of new technologies. 

The implementation of these control measures may fundamentally change the 

ways many products are manufactured, distributed, and used. Whether these 

changes require the reformulation of a consumer product or gasoline, retrofit of 

diesel trucks and buses, more stringent standards on in-board and outboard 

marine engines or modernization of port trucks, we assumed that they impose 

costs on businesses. This analysis provides estimates of those direct costs. 

ARB staff estimated the cost of each control measure using the most reliable 

information available. For some control measures, staff developed control costs 

directly based on the application of current technologies. For most control 

measures, however, staff estimated control costs indirectly by multiplying either 

the cost-effectiveness estimate by the emission reduction associated with the 

proposed State Strategy measure, or an estimate of the unit cost increase by the 

number of products that are projected to be used. 

The control costs in this report represent very rough estimates of the costs of the 

proposed State Strategy and may change when more specific regulatory 

language is developed. There is an extensive public process as part of the 

development of each proposed State Strategy measure into a regulation or 

program. ARB staff gathers detailed industry-specific information and assesses 

the potential costs to businesses, government, and consumers. The measures 

will be discussed at public workshops, and proposed regulations will go through 

the public hearing process as required by law. When specific regulatory 

language is developed, it will be possible to analyze potential costs and 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 54 

economic impacts in more detail. This information will be presented with each 

regulatory proposal for Board consideration. 

Cost-effectiveness Estimates 

Cost-effectiveness is an estimate of the unit cost of reducing a pollutant which 

varies by pollutant and control strategy. The ARB cost-effectiveness estimation 

of its past control measures for ROG reductions from consumer products range 

from under $0.50 per pound ($1,000 per ton) to about $6 per pound ($12,000 per 

ton). For NOx+ROG reductions from mobile sources, the range varies from less 

than $0.50 per pound ($1,000 per ton) to about $3 per pound ($6,000 per ton). 

The figures below show cost-effectiveness estimates for California consumer 

products and mobile source control and fuel measures approved by the ARB in 

the late 1980s, 1990s, and early 2000s. 

Cost-Effectiveness Values for Various Consumer Products Regulations 

Cost-Effectiveness of Major Regulations

 Consumer Products

Automotive

Coatings

Consumer

Products

Consumer

Products

Aerosol Adhesives

Consumer Aerosol Coatings

Products

Aerosol Coatings

Consumer 

Products

Consumer 

Products Consumer 

Products

Consumer 

Products

Antiperspirants

Aerosol painting Architectural

Coatings

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

198819891990

1991

1992

1993

199419951996199719981999

2000

2001

2002

20032004

2005

2006

2007

Board Hearing Year

Dollars per Pound of VOC Reduction
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 55 

Cost-Effectiveness Values for Various Mobile-Source and Fuel Regulations 

In the early 2000s, ARB adopted a number of PM control measures. The costeffectiveness estimates for those measures ranged from $7 per pound ($14,000 

per ton) to $28 per pound ($56,000 per ton). 

For the purpose of this analysis, ARB staff made a very conservative assumption 

that future emission reductions will be more expensive to obtain than the past 

reductions. This is because firms are required to meet more stringent air quality 

standards or to control emission sources previously unregulated because of the 

high cost of control. In the past, however, businesses have always found 

innovative ways to meet standards at costs much lower than estimated by staff. 

We have no reason to believe that this trend will not continue in the future. For 

example, in 1988 the South Coast Air District estimated the cost of NOx 

reduction from a natural gas-fired power plant to be about $25,000 per ton 

compared to the industry estimate of $45,000 per ton. By 1995, when the rule 

requirements became effective, the actual cost of NOx control from power plants 

was about $12,000 per ton. Similarly, ARB staff estimated the cost to control 

evaporative emissions from vehicles to be about $170 per vehicle in 1990 while 

Cost-Effectiveness of Major Regulations

 Mobile Sources and Fuel

LSI Engine

In-Use Truck

Urban Bus

Small Off-Road

Marine Engine

2007 HDDE

Off-Road Cycle 2.4 HDDE

NTE & ESC

Off-Cycle LDT

2-Stroke Lawn

Off-Road Motorcycle

RFG 2

4-Stroke Lawn

OBD 1 Off-Road Diesel

0.4 Nox LDV

0.25 HC LDV

5g HDD

LEV Medium Truck

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

19851986198719881989199019911992199319941995

19961997199819992000200120022003

2004200520062007

Board Hearing Year

Dollars per Pound of Ozone Precursor
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 56 

the industry estimate was about $783 per vehicle. When the regulation was 

implemented, the actual cost of the regulation was closer to the lower estimate.3 

The cost-effectiveness estimates used for the proposed State Strategy ranged 

from a low of approximately $3,000 to a high of $32,000 per ton of ROG 

emissions reduced, from $3,000 to $43,000 per ton of NOx emissions reduced, 

and from $5,000 to $55,000 per ton of PM emissions reduced. The costeffectiveness estimates for SOx range from $8,000 to $43,000 per ton and are 

based on the use of clean fuels in ships and cold ironing of ship engines. These 

two measures are expected to reduce SOx emissions by 75 tons. The tables 

below illustrate how the cost of reducing a ton of either ROG or NOx would rise 

as more emission reductions are required. All cost-effectiveness numbers are in 

constant 2006 dollars. 

Cost-Effectiveness Ranking of the Statewide Control Measures for 

ROG Reduction 

Statewide Measures 

Average 

C/E 

(2006 

$/ton) 

Rank Estimated 

Statewide 

ROG Red. 

(TPD) 

Estimated 

Statewide 

Cumulative

ROG Red. 

(TPD)

More Stringent Cutpoints (Smog Check) $3,020 1 1.6 1.6 

Recreational Boat New Standards $4,754 2 14.3 15.9 

Consumer Products $4,852 3 30.6 46.5 

Low Pressure Evaporative Test $5,427 4 8.2 54.7 

Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives $10,082 5 3.8 58.5 

Old Vehicle Retirement $11,426 6 5.9 64.4 

Off-Road Recreational Evaporative $13,385 7 20.1 84.5 

Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment $13,600 8 7.1 91.6 

Reformulated Gasoline Program $14,253 9 16.0 107.6 

High Mileage Vehicles (Smog Check) $15,773 10 1.0 108.6 

Older Vehicle Inspection (Smog Check) $21,303 11 6.3 114.9 

Motorcycle Inspection (Smog Check) $22,780 12 4.1 119.0 

Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks $31,789 13 22.3 141.3 

 

3

 Lents, J.; Barnes, K.; Nikkila, N.; and Tatsutani, M.; The Regulation of Automobile Emissions: A 

Case Study. In Environmental Regulation and Technology Innovation: Controlling Mercury 

Emissions from Coal-fired Boilers. Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management, 

Boston, MA, September 2000. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 57 

Cost-Effectiveness Ranking of the Statewide Control Measures for 

NOx Reduction 

Statewide Measures 

Average 

C/E 

(2006 

$/ton) 

Rank Estimated 

Statewide 

NOx Red. 

(TPD)

Estimated 

Statewide 

Cumulative

NOx Red. 

(TPD)

More Stringent Cutpoints (Smog Check) $3,020 1 4.1 4.1 

Recreational Boat New Standards $4,754 2 1.3 5.4 

Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft $4,964 3 16.3 21.7 

Cleaner Ship Engines and Fuels $8,092 4 94.4 116.1 

Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives $10,082 5 40.5 156.6 

Old Vehicle Retirement $11,426 6 4.8 161.4 

Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment $13,600 7 27.8 189.2 

High Mileage Vehicles (Smog Check) $15,280 8 3.3 192.5 

Light/Med. Duty Diesels (Smog Check) $18,600 9 1.1 193.6 

Old Vehicle Inspection (Smog Check) $21,303 10 14.5 208.1 

Motorcycle Inspection (Smog Check) $22,780 11 1.1 209.2 

Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks $31,789 12 193.8 403.0 

Port Truck Modernization $32,536 13 2.0 405.0 

Auxiliary Ship Engine Cold Ironing $42,866 14 26.0 431 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 58 

 

Cost-Effectiveness Ranking of the Statewide Control Measures for 

PM2.5 Reduction 

Statewide Measures 

Average 

C/E 

(2006 

$/ton) 

Rank Estimated 

Statewide 

ROG 

Red.(TPD) 

Estimated 

Statewide 

Cumulative

ROG Red. 

(TPD) 

Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft $4,964 1 0.8 0.8 

Cleaner Ship Engines and Fuels $7,553 2 11.7 12.5 

Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives $10,082 3 1.3 13.8 

Old Vehicle Retirement $11,426 4 0.1 13.9 

Lt./Med. Duty Diesels (Smoke Check) $18,600 5 0.1 14.0 

Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment $20,899 6 6.6 20.6 

Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks $31,789 7 12.7 33.3 

Truck Fleet Modernization $32,536 8 0.6 33.9 

Auxiliary Ship Engine Cold Ironing $42,866 9 0.4 34.3 

Visible Smoke Test (Smoke Check) $54,782 10 0.4 34.7 

Annual Costs 

Annual direct costs of all proposed State Strategy measures in 2014 are 

estimated to be approximately $4.6 billion. This represents about 0.2 percent of 

the California Gross State Product (GSP) in 2014. GSP measures the value of 

all goods and services produced in California in a given year. 

The table below provides estimates of total annual costs of the proposed State 

Strategy by source categories for the year 2014. Measures to reduce emissions 

from heavy-duty trucks alone account for 57 percent of annual State Strategy 

costs. Measures to reduce emissions from passenger cars and heavy-duty 

trucks combined account for 66 percent of the costs. 

Measures to reduce emissions from goods movement at California ports account 

for 26 percent of annual proposed State Strategy costs, of which about 81 

percent stems from the use of cleaner engines and fuel for ships and the 

application of cold ironing to auxiliary ship engines. The remaining annual State 

Strategy cost is associated with measures that intend to reduce emissions from 

construction equipment (4 percent), 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 59 

off-road engine exhaust and evaporation (3 percent), and consumer products 

(1 percent). All costs are in constant 2006 dollars. 

Estimates of Total Annual Costs of the Proposed State Strategy for 2014 

 (Millions of 2006 Dollars) 

 Statewide 

Cost 

% of 

Total 

Passenger Vehicles: 396.6 8.6 

Smog Check: 

Low Pressure Evaporative Test 16.2 

More Stringent Cutpoints 6.3 

Annual Inspections for Older Vehicles 161.7 

Annual Inspections for High Annual Mileage Vehicles 24.8 

Add Visible Smoke Test 8.0 

Inspection of Light-Duty Diesels 8.2 

Inspection of Motorcycles 43.2 

Other: 

Old Vehicle Retirement 45.0 

Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program 83.2 

Trucks: 2,654.8 57.4 

Cleaner In-Use Heavy-Duty Trucks 2,654.8 

Goods Movement: 1,186.2 25.7 

Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 31.0 

Auxiliary Ship Engine Cold Ironing & Other Clean Technology 422.4 

Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuels 534.0 

Accelerated Introduction of Cleaner Line-Haul Locomotives 167.9 

Port Truck Modernization 30.9 

Construction Equipment: 206.0 4.4 

Cleaner In-Use Off-Road Equipment 206.0 

Evaporative & Exhaust Standards: 125.3 2.7 

New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 27.1 

Off-Road Recreational Vehicle Expanded Emission Standards 98.2 

Consumer Products: 54.2 1.2 

Tighten Standards 54.2 

Total 4,623.1 100.0 

 

Annual costs of the proposed State Strategy can also be classified by the type of 

pollutants. The table below provides a list of affected pollutants and their 

associated costs. As shown in the following table, NOx control accounts for 75 

percent of total annual costs, ROG control for 15 percent, SOx control for 5 

percent and PM2.5 for 5 percent. Of $4.6 billion total annual statewide costs, the 

cost for South Coast businesses and consumers will be $1.3 billion or 29 percent 

of statewide costs, and for San Joaquin Valley businesses and consumers it will 

be $757 million or 16 percent of the statewide costs. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 60 

Estimated Annual Costs of the Proposed State Strategy by Pollutants 

(Millions of 2006 Dollars)

Annual Costs Pollutant Statewide South Coast San Joaquin % of 

Total 

ROG $ 699.9 $ 227.8 $113.9 15 

NOx $3,449.7 $ 976.5 $608.3 75 

SOx $ 230.0 $ 61.1 N/A 5 

PM2.5 $ 243.5 $ 63.2 $ 35.1 5 

Total $4,623.1 $1,328.6 $757.3 100.0 

In order to estimate the total impact of the proposed State Strategy on the 

California economy, we also classified these costs according to the latest 

E-DRAM industrial sector classifications. The new model has 108 industrial 

sectors, of which six industrial sectors and one household sector would be 

affected directly by the proposed State Strategy. The next table provides 

estimates of total annual costs by affected industries and government. About 

1 percent of the total annual cost would be borne by government and about 

83 percent by transportation industry. The balance will be borne by the vehicle 

service industry (6 percent), construction industry (4 percent), boat and shipping 

repair industry (3 percent), petroleum refinery industry (2 percent), and chemical 

and drug industry (1 percent). 

Estimates of Total Annual Costs of Proposed State Strategy by Affected 

Industries for 2014 

(Millions of 2006 Dollars) 

Industry Annual Costs %Total

Boat and Ship Building Repair $ 125.3 3 

Chemical and Drugs Manufacturing $ 54.2 1 

Construction Industry $ 206.0 4 

Government Payments to Household $ 45.0 1 

Petroleum Refining $ 83.2 2 

Vehicle Services $ 268.4 6 

Transportation $3,841.0 83 

Total $4,623.1 100 

Economic Impacts

Control costs provide a means to estimate the direct expenditures that will be 

incurred by California businesses, governments, and individuals to meet the 

requirements of the proposed State Strategy. These costs would in turn bring 

about additional (indirect) changes in the California economy that may increase 

the overall costs. Increased control costs, for example, may result in higher 

product prices. California firms may respond by cutting back production and 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 61 

decreasing employment. On the other hand, the planned control measures may 

also increase demand for environmental products and services, thus inducing 

firms supplying those products and services to expand their production and 

increase their hiring of workers. 

This change in costs will in turn affect other industries both negatively and 

positively. The net effect on the California economy of these activities hinges on 

the extent to which products and services are obtained locally. Using a 

macroeconomic model, staff estimated the net effects of these activities on 

affected industries and the overall economy. The California industries affected 

most are those engaged in the production, distribution, sales, and use of 

passenger vehicles and trucks, goods movement, construction and agricultural 

equipment, engine exhaust and evaporation, and consumer products. 

The economic model, however, does not account for the enormous benefits to 

California businesses and citizens that air quality regulations will bring. Improved 

air quality reduces illness and infant mortality and increases natural resources 

and work force productivity. Control programs also induce significant 

advancement of clean technologies. As stated earlier, ARB staff estimates that 

the benefits to California from currently adopted air pollution control measures 

exceed the costs by about three to one. That is, each dollar spent on clean air 

generates, on average, three dollars in societal benefits that improve the quality 

of life. 

Environmental-Dynamic Revenue Analysis Model (E-DRAM) 

The overall impact of all direct and indirect economic effects associated with the 

planned control measures are estimated using a computable general equilibrium 

(CGE) model of the California economy. A CGE model simulates various 

economic relationships in a market economy where prices and production adjust 

in response to changes in behavior resulting from regulatory changes. More 

specifically, it describes the relationships among producers, consumers, 

government, and the rest of the world. The CGE model used for this analysis is 

the latest updated version of the Environmental Dynamic Revenue Analysis 

Model (E-DRAM). E-DRAM was first developed as DRAM for the California 

Department of Finance 4

. The model can be used to measure the total impact of 

a change caused by a regulation in one industry on all other industries within 

California. The economic impact results are measured in terms of changes in the 

State output, personal income, and employment. 

The new model is based on a revised database called a social accounting matrix 

(SAM). The revisions to SAM include a calibration of the base year in the model 

to calendar year 2003 from fiscal year 1998-1999, an updating of energy data, 

and a more detailed sectoring of the California economy. The new E-DRAM 

 

4

 For a complete description of DRAM, see Berck, Peter, E. Golan and B. Smith, “Dynamic 

Revenue Analysis for California, California Department of Finance, Summer 1996. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 62 

divides the California economy into 174 distinct sectors, consisting of 108 

industrial sectors, two factor sectors (labor and capital), eight household sectors 

(classified by income level), nine composite goods sectors, one investment 

sector, and 45 government sectors (seven federal, 27 State, and 11 local), and 

one sector that represents the rest of the world. 

Data for the industrial sectors originated with the Bureau of Economic Analysis of 

the U.S. Department of Commerce, based on the Census of Business – a 

detailed survey of companies conducted in the U.S. every five years. The 

conversion of national data to updated California data is accomplished by Impact 

Analysis for Planning (IMPLAN), a program that primarily utilizes state-level 

employment data to scale national-level industrial data down to the size of a 

state. 

In much the same way as firms, households are also aggregated. California 

households were divided into categories based upon their taxable income. There 

are seven such categories in the model, each one corresponding to a California 

personal income tax marginal tax rate (0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 9.3 percent). Thus, 

the income for the “one-percent” household is calculated by adding up the 

income from all households in the one-percent bracket. 

Similarly, the expenditure of the one-percent household on agricultural goods is 

calculated by adding up all expenditure on agricultural goods for these 

households. The total expenditure on agricultural goods is found by adding the 

expenditure of all households together. 

Overall Economic Impact 

Increased costs of the proposed State Strategy will affect the California economy 

through many complex interactions. E-DRAM was developed to simulate many 

of these complex interactions. Using the model, ARB staff, in consultation with 

UC Berkeley researchers, conducted an assessment of the economic impacts of 

the proposed State Strategy on the California economy. 

The results shown below are based on preliminary emission reduction estimates 

and may change slightly. ARB staff will perform a confirmatory analysis with EDRAM prior to the hearing for Board approval. 

The following table summarizes the impact of the proposed State Strategy on the 

California economy in the year 2014, based on the E-DRAM results. We project 

the costs of the proposed State Strategy will reduce California economic output 

by roughly $9 billion (0.3 percent) and California employment by approximately 

37,000 jobs (0.2 percent) in 2014. Personal income would also decline by 

roughly $5 billion (0.3 percent) in 2014. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix E 63 

Impact on the California Economy of Proposed State Strategy in the Year 

2014 

(Billions of 2006 Dollars) 

California Economy Without State 

Strategy 

With State 

Strategy 

Difference 

(Impact) 

% Total

Output $2,948 $2,939 -$ 9 -0.3 

Personal Income $1,739 $1,734 -$ 5 -0.3 

Employment (thousands) 17,782 17,745 - 37 -0.2 

Conclusion

Total annual direct costs associated with the proposed State Strategy are 

estimated to be approximately $4.6 billion in 2014, 29 percent of which will be on 

South Coast residents and 16 percent on San Joaquin residents. Accounting for 

indirect costs, the proposed State Strategy is expected to reduce California 

economic output by about $9 billion, personal income by about $5 billion, and 

employment by about 37,000 in 2014. In the context of the State’s economy, the 

economic impact of the proposed State Strategy is small and is not expected to 

impose a noticeable impact. It should be noted here that the proposed State 

Strategy would bring about significant societal benefits to Californians. These 

benefits, which are difficult to express solely in economic terms, are not 

quantified in this analysis. Prior analyses have estimated that the benefits of 

California’s air quality regulations exceed the costs by a ratio of about three to 

one. 
Appendix F 

Emission Inventory Description 
(This page intentionally left blank.)
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 1 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 2

Purpose ...................................................................................................................... 2

Statutory Requirements ............................................................................................ 2

Emission Inventory Overview................................................................................... 2

Basic Elements of the Emission Inventory.......................................................... 2

Agency Responsibilities........................................................................................ 3

Pollutants and Precursors .................................................................................... 4

Geographic Considerations .................................................................................. 6

Base Year Inventory Selection for the SIP........................................................... 7

Emission Estimation Concepts............................................................................. 7

Emission Forecasting Overview........................................................................... 7

Types of Inventories (Annual Average, Seasonal, Modeling) ............................ 8

2. Emission Inventory Improvements.......................................................................... 9

Overview..................................................................................................................... 9

Improvement Process ............................................................................................... 9

Planning and Development - SIP .......................................................................... 9

Regulatory Support................................................................................................ 9

Special Studies / Research ................................................................................... 9

Stakeholder Outreach.......................................................................................... 10

Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)...................................................... 10

Specific Category Improvements........................................................................... 11

Stationary ............................................................................................................. 11

Mobile.................................................................................................................... 13

Biogenic................................................................................................................ 18

3. Emissions Estimation Methods and Documentation........................................... 19

Major NOx/ROG Categories .................................................................................... 19

Emissions Estimation Methods.............................................................................. 19

Stationary Emissions........................................................................................... 19

Area-wide Emissions ........................................................................................... 21

CEFS Forecasting Algorithm (Used for Stationary, Area-wide, Aircraft, and 

Ships).................................................................................................................... 22

Temporal Factors (Stationary and Area Sources Only).................................... 23

Growth Factors (Stationary and Area Sources Only) ....................................... 23

Control Factors .................................................................................................... 24

Mobile Sources..................................................................................................... 25

Biogenics (Overview of the BEIGIS Model) ....................................................... 34

Emissions Inventory Systems Data (CEIDARS, CEFS)..................................... 35
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 2 

1. Introduction 

Purpose

This Emission Inventory Appendix describes the emission inventory and the role it 

plays in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) development process. An emission 

inventory is an estimate of the amount and type of pollutants emitted into the 

atmosphere over a defined period of time. Emission inventories serve three principal 

roles in the development of the SIP: 

• They provide the emissions data used for developing control strategies; 

• They are a primary input to photochemical modeling used in attainment 

demonstrations; and 

• They are used to track progress in meeting the emission reduction commitments. 

This document will discuss the requirements for SIP development as it pertains to 

emission inventories, describe the elements (or sectors) that make up an emission 

inventory, provide an overview of the methodologies used to derive emission estimates, 

summarize the recent improvements to the emission inventory, and explain how the 

emission inventory is documented through Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control 

(QC). 

Statutory Requirements

The federal Clean Air Act (CAA) contains the statutory requirements for attaining clean 

air (air quality standards). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) 

regulations list requirements pertaining to emissions information that must be included 

as part of the SIP submittal package. The regulations require that the SIP emission 

inventory contain the pollutants for which an area is nonattainment. For an 8-hour 

ozone SIP, the emission inventory must contain the two ozone precursors: oxides of 

nitrogen (NOx) and reactive organic gases (ROG). (The terms, ROG and VOC (volatile 

organic compounds), are used interchangeably in this document.) For the PM2.5 SIP, 

the emission inventory must contain directly emitted PM2.5 and PM precursors: NOx, 

ROG, sulfur oxides (SOx), and ammonia (NH3). 

Emission Inventory Overview

Basic Elements of the Emission Inventory 

An emission inventory is a critical tool in the evaluation of air pollution. Very simply, an 

emission inventory is a systematic listing of the sources of air pollution along with the 

amount of pollution emitted from each source or category over a given time period. 

Emission inventories are an estimate of the air pollution emissions that are actually 

released into the environment—they are not measurements of ambient concentrations. 

The following are examples of pollution sources by key sectors: 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 3 

• Industrial sources—power plants and oil refineries; 

• Area-wide sources—consumer products and residential fuel combustion for 

heating homes; 

• On-road sources—passenger vehicles and heavy-duty trucks; 

• Off-road mobile sources—aircraft, trains, ships, recreational boats, construction 

equipment and farm equipment; and 

• Non-anthropogenic (natural) sources—biogenic (or vegetation), geogenic 

(petroleum seeps), and wildfires. 

The first four sectors listed are examples of anthropogenic, or human caused, emission 

sources. California’s statewide emission inventory includes over 17,000 individual 

facilities (or point sources) where business addresses are specifically identified. These 

facilities comprise approximately 14,000 process/industry types. 

The emission inventory also includes approximately 450 area-wide source categories. 

The area-wide source categories include aggregated point sources, or facilities, that are 

not inventoried individually but are estimated as a group and reported as a single 

source category, for example, gas stations and dry cleaners. Area-wide sources 

typically are associated with human activity and take place over a wide geographic 

area. Consumer products and unpaved road dust are additional examples of area-wide 

sources. The complete methodologies for these and all area-wide source categories 

can be found at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/areasrc/areameth.htm. 

The mobile source emission inventory is developed by ARB’s emission factor models - 

EMFAC and OFFROAD. EMFAC estimates on-road emissions from all on-road motor 

vehicles, from passenger cars through heavy duty diesel trucks, and groups them in 

250 categories (or technology groups). Off-road categories include emissions from all 

vehicles and equipment that operate off-road which includes aircraft, locomotives, lawn 

and garden, cargo handling, construction, and ships and harbor-craft. OFFROAD 

groups these equipment into 1300 categories. For each category in EMFAC and 

OFFROAD, emissions are given by emission mode (e.g. running exhaust, starts, 

evaporative losses, and tire and brake wear). 

Non-anthropogenic sources generally include source categories with naturally occurring 

emissions such as wildfires and geogenic sources (e.g., petroleum seeps). 

Agency Responsibilities 

ARB works jointly with the thirty-five local air pollution control and air quality 

management districts (districts) to develop a comprehensive statewide emission 

inventory. Districts are responsible for developing emission estimates for major facilities 

(point sources) in their jurisdictions by working closely with facility owners. Districts are 

also responsible for developing emission estimates for approximately one-third of the 

non-point (or area-wide) sources. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 4 

ARB is responsible for developing the mobile source inventory (both on-road and offroad sources) and the remaining two-thirds of the area-wide sources. ARB works with 

other state agencies including the California Department of Transportation (CalTRANS), 

the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), and local councils of government (COGs) to 

assemble motor vehicle activity information necessary for the mobile source emission 

estimation models. To estimate emissions for the remaining two-thirds of the area-wide 

sources, ARB works jointly with State agencies, such as the Department of Pesticide 

Regulation (DPR) which develops the emission estimates for pesticides and the 

California Energy Commission which maintains power production and energy demand 

data that are critical for estimating future emissions growth from power plants.

Pollutants and Precursors 

California’s ozone attainment strategy is to reduce emissions of ozone precursors – 

NOx and VOC. The strategy for reducing PM2.5 focuses on reducing NOx. 

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) 

NOx from anthropogenic sources occurs primarily when fossil fuels are combusted at 

high temperatures. The table below shows that in 2006, 85 percent of NOx emissions in 

California are generated from mobile sources such as cars, trucks, buses, aircraft, and 

trains, while area-wide and stationary sources contribute the remaining 15 percent. 

2006 Statewide Emission Inventory – Nitrogen Oxides 

NOx Emissions (Annual Average) 

Source Tons/day Percent 

Stationary 419 12 percent 

Area-wide 96 3 percent 

On-road Mobile 1848 51 percent 

Gasoline vehicles 679 19 percent 

Diesel vehicles 1169 32 percent 

Other Mobile 1235 34 percent 

Gasoline vehicles 76 2 percent 

Diesel vehicles 825 23 percent 

Other 333 9 percent 

Total Statewide 3598 100 percent 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 5 

Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) 

Reactive Organic Gases1 are any compound of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide, 

carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium 

carbonate, which participate in atmospheric photochemical reactions to form ozone and 

particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) in the atmosphere. References ii and iii provide 

information on the differences between ROG and VOCs. 

The primary anthropogenic sources of ROG in California, as shown in the table below, 

are on-road mobile which includes exhaust, fuel evaporation, and incomplete fuel 

combustion, and area-wide sources which includes solvents from dry-cleaning, 

degreasing, and coating operations. 

2006 Statewide Emission Inventory – Reactive Organic Gases 

ROG Emissions (Annual Average) 

Source Tons/day Percent 

Stationary 389 17 percent 

Area-wide 654 28 percent 

On-road Mobile 743 32 percent 

Gasoline vehicles 670 29 percent 

Diesel vehicles 73 3 percent 

Other Mobile 541 23 percent 

Gasoline vehicles 389 17 percent 

Diesel vehicles 111 5 percent 

Other 41 2 percent 

Total Statewide 2327 100 percent 

Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 

Particulate matter (PM) is a complex mixture of varying sized particles and liquid 

droplets including components such as acids, organic chemicals, metal, and soil or 

dust. There are two types of PM: primary and secondary. Primary PM is emitted 

directly from a source, such as unpaved roads, fires, and demolition or construction 

sites. Secondary PM is formed by complex reactions in the atmosphere with chemicals 

such as sulfur and nitrogen dioxides. The majority of “fine particles” (PM2.5) is formed 

by these complex reactions. A subset of PM2.5 of particular concern are those that are 

emitted by diesel engines. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 6 

2006 Statewide Emission Inventory – PM2.5

PM Emissions (Annual Average) 

Source tons/day Percent 

Stationary 103 13 percent 

Area-wide 568 70 percent 

On-road Mobile 66 8 percent 

Gasoline vehicles 15 2 percent 

Diesel vehicles 43 5 percent 

Break & Tire wear 8 1 percent 

Other Mobile 81 10 percent 

Gasoline vehicles 10 1 percent 

Diesel vehicles 41 5 percent 

Other 29 4 percent 

Total Statewide 817 100 percent 

Geographic Considerations 

In California, the emission inventory is constructed at the district, air basin, and county 

levels. This provides the flexibility needed to meet the jurisdictional requirements of 

local and State governments while addressing the spatial aspects of air quality issues. 

In cases where nonattainment areas do not line up with these geographic boundaries, 

ARB further resolves the inventory to estimate the portion of emissions that occur within 

nonattainment area boundary lines. This is done by selecting only the point sources 

that fall within the nonattainment area boundaries, and estimating the emissions 

contribution of each area-wide and mobile source category to the nonattainment area. 

California recently approved the statewide Emission Reduction Plan for Ports and 

Goods Movement that extends the off-shore boundaries for estimating the emission 

impact from shipping activities, thus leading to a modification in the geographic 

accounting of the off-shore emissions in the inventory. Formerly, only marine emissions 

occurring within a 3-mile range were included as part of California’s emission inventory. 

The SIP emission inventory now includes emissions from shipping activities out to 100 

miles. In the new definition, emissions occurring within three miles of the shore line are 

assigned to the nearest air basin (e.g., emissions occurring within three miles of the Los 

Angeles County shore line are assigned to Los Angeles County in the South Coast Air 

Basin). Emissions occurring outside the 3-mile boundary are assigned to the Outer 

Continental Shelf Air Basin, but are still associated with the responsible county and 

district (e.g. the emissions occurring outside of the 3-mile boundary of Los Angeles 

County would be assigned to the Outer Continental Shelf Air Basin and would be the 

responsibility of the South Coast Air District). 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 7 

Base Year Inventory Selection for the SIP 

The SIP is based on emission projections that are linked to a base year inventory. 

U.S. EPA identified 2002 as the emission inventory base year for the 8-hour ozone and 

PM2.5 SIPs. This selection was announced by memoranda to the States in 

November 18, 20022

. 

Emission Estimation Concepts 

The key to the emission inventory is found in what is termed the “emission process”. 

The emission process defines the fundamental level at which emissions are calculated, 

stored, and maintained in the inventory. The total emissions for each emission process 

are calculated by applying a process rate (i.e., the number of emission activity units) to 

the emission factor (i.e., the amount of emissions per activity unit). 

In principle, this simple concept holds for all emission sectors (i.e., point, area-wide, 

on-road mobile, and off-road mobile). Differences lie in the method or approach used to 

derive the process rate and emission factors. For example, the emissions from a power 

plant could be calculated by applying an emission factor (pounds of emissions per 

megawatt-hour) times the number of megawatt-hours of electrical energy generated. 

The emissions from the light-duty passenger car fleet could be calculated by applying 

an emission factor (grams of emissions per mile traveled) times the total vehicle miles 

traveled (VMT) for that mobile category. It should be noted that the examples above 

are simplified—particularly for on-road and off-road emissions. These emission factors 

are specific to model year, technology and fuel type, and are adjusted for temperature, 

humidity, and operating speed. 

Emission Forecasting Overview 

Emissions forecasting depends on two independent variables: growth and control. For 

stationary sources, socioeconomic growth profiles are developed and linked to the 

inventory via the inventory process and/or industry types. For example, power plant 

growth is estimated based on the combined effects of economic growth in the sector 

along with the projected energy utilization by the California Energy Commission (CEC). 

Growth for consumer products is estimated by population growth at the county level. 

These growth profiles are constructed for the entire timeframe addressed in the SIP. 

The California Emission Forecasting System (CEFS) includes growth data for the period 

1990–2030 for SIP forecasting exercises. Similarly, control profiles are constructed to 

reflect adopted emission control measures. A control profile is developed that describes 

the implementation of the rule and the profile is included as part of the baseline CEFS 

forecasts. CEFS projections are run for the entire State by applying the growth and 

control profiles to the 2002 base year inventory to obtain the projections needed for SIP 

analysis. 

EMFAC and OFFROAD do not use a base year projection approach. Rather, the 

emission models employ sophisticated routines that predict vehicle fleet turnover by 

vehicle model year. As with stationary sources, EMFAC and OFFROAD include control 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 8 

algorithms that account for all adopted regulatory actions (e.g., an amended emission 

standard to be implemented by a certain year, or increased stringency on a roadside 

inspection program to be implemented in a future year) which, when combined with the 

fleet turnover algorithms, provide baseline projections. 

CEFS integrates the projected inventories for stationary and mobile sources into a 

single database to provide a comprehensive statewide forecast inventory. 

Nonattainment area inventories are extracted from this comprehensive inventory. This 

establishes the baseline projections from which the SIP inventory is constructed. The 

data are accessible to ARB and district planners via user-friendly web reporting tools. 

Types of Inventories (Annual Average, Seasonal, Modeling) 

Annual Average

Annual average emissions data by major source category in tons per day are derived 

from a simple average by taking the annual emissions reported (or estimated) in tons 

per year and dividing the emissions by 365 days. 

Seasonal Inventories

Summer and winter planning emissions take into account the temporal variation (e.g. 

activity variation) of emissions at a facility or a source category throughout the year. 

This is accomplished by collecting throughput or activity data from point source facilities 

where available, and developing temporal profiles for area sources to estimate monthly 

variation of the emissions. CEFS calculates summer and winter planning emissions 

based on these temporal data. The summer planning season for California is MayOctober, and the winter planning season is November-April. (Note: U.S. EPA assumes 

a shorter summer planning period (June-August) in its temporal data collection 

schema.) California requires planning evaluations to be based on a longer summer 

because it experiences longer periods in which temperatures are warm enough to 

contribute to ozone formation than most other states). The summer season planning 

emission inventory is used in ozone SIP planning. 

Modeling Inventories

CEFS also generates emission inputs for photochemical modeling exercises. The 

categories handled by CEFS are stationary, area-wide and off-road mobile sources. 

(Note: Modeling emissions for the on-road sector are generated with EMFAC/DTIM, 

and these modeling inputs are handled outside of CEFS.) Modeling inventories are 

month/day-specific estimates that are temporally and spatially resolved at a finer level 

than planning inventories—CEFS calculates emissions for a typical weekday or a typical 

weekend day based on weekly operation profiles identified for the emissions processes. 

Point source locations are identified in CEFS by the Universal Transverse Mercator 

(UTM--North American Datum (NAD83) version) geographic coordinate system. 

Modeling inventory projections include facility level emissions at the facility, device, and 

process level with stack locations and associated flow characteristic as applicable. 

Area source emissions are maintained at the county level and are further resolved 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 9 

based on spatial surrogates as a post-processing step prior to modeling. The day 

specific emissions are generated for typical weekday and weekend periods. 

Planning and Modeling Inventory Differences

The temporal information used to determine seasonal planning inventories is also used 

to develop month/day-specific modeling inventories—the data are just further resolved 

for modeling inventories. It should be noted that modeling inventories generated by 

CEFS are not actual day specific emissions based on field studies—they are estimates 

of emissions for “typical” operating conditions. In some cases, “actual” day-specific 

information is available and this can be used to overwrite the results of the CEFS 

emission modeling inventory outputs. It is important to note that because modeling 

inventories are month/day-specific, the emission numbers will not match the planning 

inventory emissions. 

2. Emission Inventory Improvements 

Overview

ARB devotes substantial effort to continually improve the emission inventory. Updates 

to the inventory occur through three processes: planning and development, regulatory 

support, and special studies. The new information acquired and methodologies 

developed are folded back into the models as well as the methodologies for sources not 

previously included. This is a dynamic process and ARB will continually work to 

improve its methodologies through research and stakeholder feedback. 

Improvement Process 

Planning and Development - SIP 

The planning process is undertaken to develop strategies for meeting air quality goals. 

The SIP inventory is the centerpiece data element for determining future attainment in 

photochemical modeling exercises, and the basis for defining control strategies. 

Regulatory Support 

The regulatory process identifies potential emission reductions. This typically involves 

new surveys to gather the most up-to-date data (e.g. equipment activity and 

populations). These improved data allow for more accurate emission estimates and 

identify key areas where reductions can be achieved. The planning and regulatory 

processes are also used to solicit peer review and stakeholder input. 

Special Studies / Research 

Another mechanism through which improvements are made is special studies. These 

studies may or may not be associated with the SIP or regulatory support processes but 

are used to further the understanding of emission modeling and verification. Special 

studies include funding or participating in cutting edge research projects, developing 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 10 

innovative emission inventory methodologies, and collaborating with industry, academia 

and the public to better understand emissions processes. Examples of special studies 

include, but are not limited to, Southern California Ozone Study and Central California 

Ozone Study related research. The results from these projects have provided data that 

allow validation checks between observed air quality and emission trends3

, and 

emissions associated with air quality exceedances4

. 

Stakeholder Outreach 

ARB works jointly with other State agencies, districts, and stakeholders to develop a 

comprehensive emission inventory on an annual basis. Comprehensive inventories are 

submitted triennially and partial inventories are submitted annually to U.S. EPA for the 

National Emission Inventory5

 (NEI). ARB also publishes the most current emission 

inventory in the annual Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality6

. 

Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) 

QA/QC is a formal process focused specifically on ensuring the integrity and accuracy 

of the inventories for the California 2007 8-hour ozone SIP and PM2.5 SIP in California. 

ARB formally initiated this comprehensive effort in September 2004 through its 

Emission Inventory Technical Advisory Committee (EITAC). This started an iterative 

process of continual updates to the 2002 base year emission inventory for stationary 

point and area-wide sources (including growth and control data), leading up to the 

finalization of the SIP inventory. In addition, ARB emission inventory staff worked jointly 

with the ARB’s modeling staff through the Gridded Emission Coordination Group that 

includes district modeling staff and industry representatives. A principle aim of this 

group is to provide a critical feedback loop to emission inventory staff to ensure that 

inventory inputs have been reliably prepared for use in photochemical modeling. 

The statewide emissions inventories are assembled and maintained by ARB in the 

California Emission Inventory Development and Reporting System (CEIDARS) and 

California Emission Forecasting and Planning Inventory System (CEFS) databases. 

Before an emission inventory is approved, a series of checks are performed to assure 

that the correct statewide emissions estimates are reported. Upon completion of the 

models, various scenarios are run to provide emissions by county, air basin, district, EIC 

code, pollutant, calendar year, and season. Queries are then run on these scenarios to 

provide the statewide emission totals by pollutant and year. Finally, as a check to 

ensure that what CEFS estimates as state totals match what EMFAC/OFFROAD 

estimates, the CEFS queries are matched against EMFAC/OFFROAD model output. 

Inventory verification7

 is another important step to ensure the accuracy of the emission 

inventory. Since 1987 there have been a number of studies that have contributed to 

model development. In these tests, emissions from vehicle fleets are compared to 

output for similar fleets calculated from the EMFAC model. Comparisons have been 

made between EMFAC fuel consumption estimates and actual fuel sales for that fleet 

reported by the State Board of Equalization, and emissions derived from fuel sales and 

remote sensing data. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 11 

Specific Category Improvements

Stationary 

Methods for estimating emissions from industrial point sources have continually 

improved as district staff work with facility owners to ensure that reported emissions are 

real as opposed to permitted (or potential) values. The California Clean Air Act Fee 

Regulation imposes fees on large permitted point sources thus encouraging facility 

owners to report the most accurate emissions possible. ARB audits the district 

emission inventory programs on a planned cycle to further ensure that emission 

inventory program requirements are met. 

Area-wide 

New survey data for consumer products and architectural coatings improve the 

aggregated inventory estimates as well as a better characterization of emissions at the 

product type. Currently there are 152 consumer product categories and 56 architectural 

coatings categories - the 1994 SIP inventory only had three categories each. The same 

is true for degreasing categories - the 1994 SIP had only five categories and the current 

inventory now has 32 categories. Improvements have also been made to the 

agricultural industry categories as a result of a partnership between ARB and the 

agricultural community. ARB participates in an ad-hoc agricultural advisory committee 

to approve methods used for estimating base year emissions and future year growth 

and control assumptions for forecasting. The methodologies for the following categories 

have also been updated: auto refinishing, industrial coatings and solvents, livestock 

husbandry, pesticides, waste burning, wildland fire use, ammonia, and wineries. The 

most recent improvements to the area-wide emission inventory sectors are described 

below: 

 Ammonia 

A comprehensive 2002 ammonia inventory was developed for all area-wide sources (in 

addition to on-road, off-road, and natural sources). The emissions were calculated 

using data provided in reports by ENVIRON and the NASA Ames Research Center. 

 Architectural Coatings 

In response to the California Clean Air Act Fee Regulation, several architectural coating 

manufacturers submitted revisions to their 2001 survey data (calendar year 2000 sales). 

The changes in sales volume and emissions were applied uniformly across all 

categories. 

 Auto Refinishing 

This category was updated using data from a 2001 ARB survey and the emissions were 

grown to 2002. 

 Consumer Products 

Two sets of changes have been incorporated into the consumer products inventory. 

First, manufacturers submitted revisions to their 1997 survey data in response to the 

California Clean Air Act Fee Regulation and resulted in updates for 13 categories. Next, 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 12 

results of the 2001 Consumer Products Survey have been incorporated. Some 

categories have been expanded and several new categories have been added. 

 Industrial Coatings and Solvents 

The emissions for several of these categories have been updated using the 

U.S. Census Bureau’s 2002 Industrial Report for Paint and Allied Products. The 

nationwide consumption data were apportioned to California using manufacturing 

employment data for the industry sectors likely to use the specific types of industrial 

coatings. 

 Livestock Husbandry 

ARB published a new methodology in 2004 for estimating ROG emissions from 

livestock facilities including dairies, feedlots, poultry operations, and other confined 

animal facilities. The methodology also includes PM estimates for dairies and feedlots. 

The emission estimates are based on animal population data from the year 2000. ARB 

uses district-specific data where available and employs a generalized methodology 

where data are lacking. For permitting purposes and to more fully reflect the processspecific livestock emissions, the San Joaquin Valley Air District has adopted livestock 

emission factors that differ from the ARB default values. 

 Pesticides 

The pesticide inventory includes the emissions from agricultural and structural 

applications. Updated emissions for 2003 are calculated using information from the 

annual Pesticide Use Report (PUR) database and pesticide product emission potential 

(EP) data maintained by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR). The 

EPs that are assigned to the products are either measured by thermogravimetric 

analysis (TGA), calculated by DPR chemists, or assigned a default value equal to the 

median TGA-based EP in each formulation category. Prior to 2002, DPR assigned EP 

values to products with no measured values as the maximum TGA in that category. The 

use of median rather than maximum TGA values has resulted in a significant lowering of 

ROG emissions for pesticides with default emission values. The average 2003 TOG and 

ROG emissions from all agricultural and structural pesticides were 55 percent lower in 

2003 than in 1995. The most significant reduction was in the structural methyl bromide 

category, likely due the Montreal Protocol, which mandates the phase-out of methyl 

bromide. 

 Waste Burning 

Emissions result from the waste burning of agricultural residues, weed abatement, 

range improvement, and other materials. Although this is a district-reported category, 

ARB has developed default 2002 emission estimates for several districts that have not 

provided updates in recent years. Updated emissions data have been developed for 

the following areas: South Coast Air Basin, Mojave Desert Air Basin, San Diego Air 

Basin, Salton Sea Air Basin, Amador County, and Western Nevada County. There 

have been no changes to the underlying methodology for calculating emissions. The 

emissions are based on district-reported burning activity. Emission factors and fuel 

loading values have been expanded to include more specific crop types. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 13 

 Wildland Fire Use (WFU) 

A WFU is a naturally ignited lightning fire that is managed for resources benefit. The 

WFU emission inventory category was created in 2004, and inventory back-populated to 

1994 where data were available. WFU emissions are calculated using the Geographic 

Information System (GIS) based Emission Estimating System model developed for ARB 

by UC Berkeley’s Center for the Assessment and Monitoring of Forest and 

Environmental Resources laboratory. 

 Wineries 

This is a newly updated methodology for wine fermentation emissions. The emission 

factors for wine fermentation have not been updated from the older methodology, but 

the source of wine fermentation activity has been updated. The Tax and Trade Bureau 

(TTB) is now the source of estimates for amounts of wine fermented in the state. 

Temporal data gained from the TTB records allow us to give detailed monthly breakouts 

of wine fermentation in the state. 

Mobile 

ARB is continually improving EMFAC and OFFROAD, and emission inventory elements 

as represented in each model. The following discussion includes evolution of EMFAC 

and OFFROAD, inventory verification, and improvements made for EMFAC2007 and 

the SIP. 

On-road 

The following are modifications to the model and the inventory since the last SP. For a 

more thorough technical explanation please refer to the tech memos at 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/msei.htm, and 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/previous_version.htm. The changes below are 

those changes reflected in EMFAC2007 that have occurred since EMFAC2002. 

 Revisions to the Methodology used to Characterize the On-road Vehicle Fleet 

Vehicle population data by class, age and geographic area used in EMFAC are based 

on the Vehicle Registration Database maintained by the California Department of Motor 

Vehicles (DMV). EMFAC back-casts historic changes in vehicle population using the 

oldest DMV data available, and forecasts from the most recent. As new data are 

received, projections are replaced with actual data. EMFAC2007 population estimates 

were updated based on 2000-2005 data. 

 Modification of Mileage Accrual Rates 

Previous mileage accrual rates were based on Smog Check data acquired from 1991-

1995. To more accurately model vehicle miles traveled, the new model incorporates 

data from Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR) 2001-2003 for the following gasoline 

powered vehicle classes: passenger cars, light-duty trucks (Tiers 1 and 2), mediumduty trucks, light heavy-duty trucks (Tier 4 and 5), and motor homes. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 14 

 Updating Vehicle Miles Traveled and Speed Distributions 

Vehicle miles traveled and speed distributions were submitted by transportation 

planning agencies for the South Coast, the San Francisco Bay Area, and San Diego 

and Santa Barbara Counties and used to update EMFAC. 

 Modifications to the Inspection Maintenance Programs 

Modifications were made to reflect the changes in inspection and maintenance (I&M) 

programs for areas that upgraded to the enhanced Accelerated Simulation Mode 

program and change-of-ownership exemptions. 

 Ethanol Permeation 

In the prior EMFAC, evaporative emissions were correlated to oxygen content. 

Evaporative emissions from methyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE) and ethanol (EtOH) were 

assumed to be similar since both contained two percent oxygen. Because recently 

completed studies indicate that EtOH has much higher permeation rates through fuel 

tank walls, hoses and fittings, EMFAC was modified to reflect these findings. 

 Revision of Heavy Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck Emission Factors and Speed 

Correction Factors 

New chassis dynamometer testing data developed through the CRC E55-59 program 

were analyzed and integrated into EMFAC. Emission factors for this category reflect all 

available data from CRC as well as other data sets. These data were used to develop 

new emission factors and speed correction factors. New tampering, mal-maintenance 

and malfunction survey data were used to update deterioration rates, demonstrating 

that heavy heavy-duty diesel truck emissions are greater than previously estimated. 

Trucks were for the first time tested over an ARB-developed heavy-heavy-duty test 

cycle, generating idle emissions data covering a wide span of model years as well as 

emission data at several different speeds and idle. These new data have been adopted 

by ARB and used to generate new emission factors and new speed correction factors. 

 Redistribution of Heavy Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck Vehicle Miles Traveled in 

California 

Vehicle miles traveled estimates are provided by the transportation planning agencies, 

but ARB is responsible for the distribution of that VMT by vehicle class and region. 

Heavy duty diesel truck VMT in EMFAC2002 was allocated based on truck registration. 

This method is appropriate for light duty vehicles and heavy duty gasoline trucks, but 

heavy heavy-duty diesel trucks travel extensively outside their registration counties. 

VMT was redistributed in EMFAC2007 using survey information from the California 

Department of Transportation (CalTrans) and modeled from MVSTAFF, an annual 

report by CalTrans. The new distribution more accurately reflects actual truck travel 

patterns in California. 

 Revised Break Wear PM Emission Factors 

EMFAC has been modified to account for true brake counts. Previously a single 

emission factor for brake wear, based on a 1983 study,8

 was used to calculate the 

amount of airborne dust attributable to break wear (12.8 mg/mile). This emission factor 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 15 

assumed that all vehicles were equipped with four brakes, even if the vehicle had more 

than four brakes. 

 On-road Fuel Correction Factors 

Fuel correction factors are used to reflect the impact on emissions of commercial fuels 

compared to the fuel used during the certification process. Modifications to the fuel 

correction factors (FCFs) were incorporated into EMFAC2007 for both diesel and 

gasoline. For example, the FCFs for Phase II reformulated gasoline (RFG) were 

modified for the 1996-2003 calendar years to be cumulative to the Phase I (1992-1995 

calendar years) values. Additionally, the impacts of ethanol on evaporative processes, 

changes in sulfur and aromatics composition in fuel, exhaust hydrocarbon benefits for 

clean diesel, and an out-of-state diesel fueling rate of 10 percent were incorporated. 

 Revised Planning Humidity Profiles 

Meteorological conditions impact the emissions process in vehicles, therefore, 

EMFAC2007 incorporates ambient relative humidity profiles to determine NOx

conversion in exhaust as well as air conditioner usage by automobile drivers. 

Previously, EMFAC used annual average daily relative humidity profiles for each county 

or geographical area in the State. EMFAC2007 now incorporates hour-by-hour 

temperature, relative humidity, and ozone concentration data from 700 stations for the 

years 1996-2004. 

 Revised Planning Temperature Profiles 

EMFAC2007 contains daily ambient temperature profiles for use in evaluating 

evaporative emissions and other heating/cooling related processes. In the previous 

EMFAC, hourly temperature observations collected on high ozone days were spatially 

distributed by zip code and weighted by population. The resulting weighted profiles 

seemed rather cool. Weighting in EMFAC2007 is done by vehicle miles traveled (VMT) 

and provides more representative temperature profiles. 

 Corrections to Heavy-duty Gas Cap Benefits 

In reviewing the gas cap benefits staff noticed reductions on hydrocarbon emissions 

were negligible for heavy duty gasoline vehicles. Further review revealed the gas cap 

benefits were not fully implemented in EMFAC. In EMFAC2007, the gas cap algorithm 

has been implemented for heavy duty vehicles. 

 Coding Corrections 

Several coding errors have been corrected which results in a minor change to 

emissions estimates. 

Other Mobile

The following measures are reflected in OFFROAD2007 or the external modules. For a 

more thorough discussion on improvements to the other mobile inventory, please refer 

to the tech memos at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/msei.htm. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 16 

 Addition of Tier 4 Emission Factors to Off-Road Large Compression Ignition 

Engines (>25 hp) 

The previous OFFROAD model only provided emission factors based on Tier 0, 1, 2 

and 3 emission standards for compression-ignited engines greater than 25 horsepower 

(hp). In 2003, Tier 4 emission standards were adopted by ARB and the OFFROAD 

model has been updated to incorporate these new standards. 

 Off-road exhaust emissions inventory fuel correction factors 

Fuel correction factors have been modified to be consistent with EMFAC and to take 

into account current reformulated gasoline impacts. Carbon monoxide fuel correction 

factors for summertime and wintertime fuel which vary geographically, and the benefits 

of ultra low sulfur diesel (requirement commencing in 2007) were applied. 

 Addendum to Evaporative Emissions 

The current version of the OFFROAD model includes an updated estimate of the 

evaporative emissions from large spark-ignited engines, including those used in 

recreational marine applications. 

 Revisions to the Diesel Transport Refrigeration Units (TRU) Off-road Inventory 

TRU emissions are calculated in the OFFROAD model as a function of emission rate, 

population, activity, average horsepower, and load factor. With the exception of the 

emission rates, all other factors were based on the 1997 Power Systems Research 

(PSR) report. Since late 2002, ARB has obtained more up-to-date population and 

activity estimates from surveys of TRU manufacturers. These results have revised the 

input factors of population, activity, load factor, average horsepower, growth factors, 

survival rates, and useful lifetime estimates to the OFFROAD model. 

 Estimation of the Impact of Ethanol on Off-Road Evaporative Emissions 

Since the phase out of methyl-tert-butyl ether (MTBE) as a gasoline additive in 2004 

ethanol (EtOH) has been used as an additive to meet the required two percent oxygen 

content in commercially dispensed gasoline. Because MTBE and EtOH both contained 

two percent oxygen, their evaporative emissions were assumed to be similar. However, 

recently completed studies indicate this is not a correct assumption. These tests 

indicate that EtOH has much higher permeation rates through fuel tank walls, hoses and 

fittings. OFFROAD2007 reflects these findings. 

 Recreational Marine 

Growth factors and engine-to-boat ratios were updated with more recent DMV and 

National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA) data. Additionally, evaporative 

emissions are separated into operating and storage emissions. 

 Agricultural 

Based on findings from the Agricultural Advisory Committee, growth factors for the 

San Joaquin Valley were updated. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 17 

 Recreational Vehicles 

The OFFROAD model has been modified to account for updated population for MC, All 

Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) and snowmobiles using Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) 

calendar year 1991-2005 totals. Human population data from Census 2000, personal 

income, and median household income data from Department of Finance were also 

applied to develop the growth rate for recreational vehicles. DMV 2005 registration data 

has been used to update county allocation factors. In addition, DMV registration also 

shows the inactive population for MC, ATV and snowmobile. Thus, the diurnal and 

resting emissions for inactive population for these three equipments are included in the 

OFFROAD2007. Also, the activity and load factor for snowmobile were updated to be 

the same as U.S. EPA’s NONROAD model. Activity results from U.S. EPA’s 

NONROAD model for specialty vehicles, benefits of golf carts and specialty vehicles 

subject to small off-road engine and large spark ignition (LSI) controls, benefits of 

snowmobiles subject to the U.S. EPA’s capping standard, and the addition of OFMC 

and ATV evaporative emission factors as grams per mile were calculated in 

OFFROAD2007. 

Although the overall statewide emissions from recreational vehicle are the same, the 

distribution of emissions to the specific county/air basin/air district has been changed 

relative the location where the equipment is stored or operated. The storage allocation 

is relevant to the diurnal and resting emissions from active and inactive recreational 

vehicles and is based on the county of DMV registration. The operational allocation 

applies to exhaust, hot soak and running loss emissions and represents where the 

off-road trails are located. 

 Construction and Ground Service Equipment (D> 25 horsepower) 

The OFFROAD model was updated with population, useful life, age distribution, annual 

activity, growth data and a deterioration rate cap introduced based on the 2003 McKay 

& Co. Study, ARB’s 2005 Off-Road Diesel In-Use Equipment Survey, ARB’s 2006 OffRoad Diesel In-Use Mini Survey, 2003 TIAX Survey of Public Fleets, and input from 

industry and stakeholders in public workgroup meetings and workshops. 

 Small Off-Road Equipment (SORE) 

The OFFROAD model was updated with: new exhaust and evaporative standards; new 

population and activity estimates for residential lawn and garden equipment obtained 

from the Lawn and Garden Survey; new population estimates for commercial lawn and 

garden equipment from an ERG survey; and modified small off-road engine survival rate 

curves using information from the Outdoor Power Equipment Institute. 

The following changes were made to external modules: 

 Changes to the Locomotive Inventory 

Locomotive growth factors were revised in the OFFROAD model based on new data 

that better reflected locomotive operations, including projected growth in intermodal 

freight traffic, both domestic and international, U.S. industrial production, and various 

railroad statistics available from the Association of American Railroads (AAR). Other 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 18 

measures such as the 1998 South Coast and 2005 State memorandum of 

understanding were also reflected. 

 Cargo Handling Equipment 

A separate methodology for cargo handling equipment at the ports and inter-modal rail 

yards per the Cargo Handling Equipment Air Toxic Control Measure (December 2005) 

was incorporated. 

 Ocean Going Vessels 

The OGV inventory reflects updated population and activity data for ocean-going 

vessels statewide. The emission estimates were developed for main and auxiliary 

engines in eight vessel types (auto carrier, bulk cargo, container, general cargo, 

passenger, reefer, roll-on roll-off and tankers). In addition, methodology was developed 

to allocate statewide emissions to individual ports and districts. The ARB regulation 

requiring vessels with auxiliary engines to switch from heavy fuel oil to marine distillate 

within 24 nautical miles of California was incorporated into the inventory. 

 Commercial Harbor Craft 

The commercial harbor craft inventory was revised with a single statewide approach. 

OFFROAD emission factors were used to calculate emissions and adjusted to better 

reflect the “E3” test cycle which is more representative of marine engines. 

 Portable Fuel Containers/Gas Cans

Emission estimates were developed from data such as percentage of 

household/businesses with cans, average cans per household/business, average 

volume of cans, and refill frequencies collected during two surveys in 1998 and 2004. 

Allocation factors and growth rates for residential gas cans are based on the 

Department of Finance's Census 2000 data and landscaping employment growth 

projected by EDD (California Employment Development Department). 

Biogenic 

After its original application to the Southern California Ozone Study domain, the 

biogenic emission inventory GIS (BEIGIS) model was expanded to the Central 

California Ozone Study/California Regional Particulate Air Quality Study domain. In 

order to represent central and northern California conditions during summer and winter 

seasons, the BEIGIS model has incorporated further inputs, such as crop Geographic 

Information System (GIS) data for central and northern California developed by the 

California Department of Water Resources (DWR). Because it is a statewide land 

use/land cover database, the Gap Analysis Program (GAP) is still used to represent 

natural areas in the model. Urban vegetation survey data for Fresno, Oakland, and 

Sacramento were compiled from several studies and used to develop urban land use 

biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOC) inputs for other urban areas in the central 

and northern California portion of the model. Crop BVOC and leaf mass factors for 

additional crops listed in DWR crop GIS databases were compiled from literature. Crop 

calendars developed by the University of California-Davis Department of Agricultural 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 19 

and Resource Economics were consulted in order to develop growing season and 

dormant season crop BVOC inputs. In-leaf and off-leaf season BVOC profiles were 

also developed for natural and urban areas, in order to account for the presence of 

deciduous and evergreen species in landscapes. A 1 km2

 resolution winter Leaf Area 

Index (LAI) raster derived from Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) 

satellite data9

 was used in order to account for winter dormancy in natural areas and 

croplands. 

3. Emissions Estimation Methods and Documentation 

Major NOx/ROG Categories

Mobile sources account for about 75 percent of ozone precursor emissions (ROG and 

NOx) in the State in 2006 and will continue to dominate the inventory in 2020, however 

total emissions from all sources will drop 28 percent from 5,924 tons/day to 4,237 

tons/day. 

Stationary

14%

Area-Wide

13%

Mobile

73%

2006 Stationary

21%

Area-Wide

19%

Mobile

60%

2020

Emissions Inventory for ROG and NOx by Category Statewide 2005 and 2020 

Emissions Estimation Methods 

Stationary Emissions 

Stationary emission sources identified on an individual basis or a single source are 

called point sources. Emissions from point sources are estimated from facilities that 

emit more than ten tons per year of any criteria pollutant. They are identified by name 

and location. A facility may have many individual, identifiable sources of emissions or 

(points) of emissions. For example, a coffee processing facility may have a boiler, 

roaster, grinder, and packing station as emission points. In addition, a point source may 

have one or more processes or operation. For example, a boiler burning natural gas 

part-time and oil part-time is considered to have two processes because emission rates 

are different for the two fuels. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 20 

The emissions for each point are computed as the product of use factor (an indicator of 

the extent of the activity per unit time) and an emission factor (the quantity of pollutant 

emitted per unit of the use factor). Point source use factors usually relate to a process 

rate, such as the amount of fuel oil consumed in a boiler or the amount of asphalt 

concrete produced at a batch plant. The general equation used to calculate the 

emissions is shown below: 

EMS =PR x EF x CONV 

Where: EMS = Emissions (tons/year) 

 PR = Process Rate or activity data in (SCC unit/year) 

 EF = Emission factor (mass/SCC unit) 

 CONV = Unit conversion factor 

Emission factors are derived from tests that relate emissions to the process causing the 

emissions. When adequate source test data are available for a source, these data are 

used to derive emission factors for the emission calculations. When adequate source 

test data for a source are not available, an alternative is to use average emission factors 

for similar emitting sources. These factors are usually derived by averaging the results 

of many tests of similar sources. Such factors are published by federal U.S. EPA in 

Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. The published emission factors in AP-42 

are usually calculated for devices without control equipment. Because controls may 

very among different facilities, it is therefore necessary to adjust the emissions factors to 

account for the specific control equipment being used. 

In the base year emission inventory, controlled emissions are estimated by applying 

control efficiency factors to the “uncontrolled” emissions. These base year control 

factors take into account operational upsets and equipment malfunctions that lead to 

excess emissions. The resulting “controlled” inventory represents the actual emissions 

that have occurred over the 365 day calendar year. Due to the wide variation in how 

districts account for these operational fluctuations, rule effectiveness is not accounted 

for as an explicit reporting variable in CEIDARS, rather, rule effectiveness is treated as 

an implied variable maintained by the districts as part of the actual “controlled” emission 

estimates that are submitted to ARB. 

In some cases, it is possible to determine emissions using a materials balance which 

reconciles the amounts of materials that enter and leave a process. This method is 

used for many sources, such as painting processes, where it is assumed that all the 

solvent used in the coating eventually evaporates. 

The source information along with activity data and emission factors used to calculate 

emissions for all point sources are kept in district’s files and are reported to ARB on a 

regular basis (generally once a year). 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 21 

Data Acquisition

Information on emissions from stationary sources is obtained primarily from the districts 

which have primary responsibility under state law (Health and Safety Code section 

40000) for regulation of stationary sources of air pollution. 

In developing the emission inventory, there is considerable interaction between ARB 

and the districts. The planning process for an inventory development starts with the 

assessment of needs and requirements. Following the initial inventory planning, ARB 

collaborates with districts to prepare inventory development schedules and updates to 

the inventory. 

Area-wide Emissions 

Area source methodologies are used to calculate emissions from aggregated point 

sources and area-wide sources. Aggregated point sources are many small point 

sources, or facilities, that are not inventoried individually but are estimated as a group 

and reported as a single source category. Examples include gas stations and dry 

cleaners. Because many of these sources are already accounted for as facilities or 

point sources (see the previous section on Stationary Emissions), the area source 

emissions are reconciled with point emissions before being added to the emission 

inventory. For example, the area source methodology for dry cleaners is used to 

calculate the total emissions for a particular county. These area source emissions are 

then reconciled by subtracting the emissions for dry cleaners already accounted for in 

the point source inventory. 

Area-wide sources include source categories associated with human activity and 

emissions take place over a wide geographic area. Consumer products and unpaved 

road dust are examples of area-wide sources. 

Both ARB and districts share responsibility in updating the various area-wide source 

categories. Some categories are the responsibility of the district while other categories 

are ARB’s responsibility. ARB methodologies and many of the districts methodologies 

can be accessed at http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/areasrc/index0.htm. 

Data Acquisition

When ARB develops an area-wide source methodology, many possible sources of 

activity data and emission factors are considered. Often data are obtained during the 

development of regulations. For example, in developing consumer product regulations, 

ARB routinely conducts statewide surveys. Research studies, some of which are 

sponsored by ARB, are another source of emissions data. Finally, various state and 

federal agencies may have relevant data needed to estimate emissions. 

If activity data are not available at the county level, then statewide emissions are 

apportioned to counties using a surrogate. In the case of consumer products, statewide 

emissions are apportioned to counties using population. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 22 

Once ARB has developed a draft methodology, it is submitted to Emission Inventory 

Technical Advisory Committee (EITAC) for review. EITAC is composed of emission 

inventory staff from the districts, ARB, and U.S. EPA. Following EITAC review and 

incorporation of recommended changes, the methodology becomes final and, where 

appropriate, emissions are reconciled with the point source inventory. Finally, process 

rate and emissions transaction format files are prepared and the CEIDARS database is 

updated. 

The districts also provide updated emissions data to ARB. Process rate and emissions 

transaction format files provided by the districts are used to update the CEIDARS 

database. When they are provided, the methodologies developed by districts are 

reviewed by ARB. 

CEFS Forecasting Algorithm (Used for Stationary, Area-wide, Aircraft, and Ships) 

The general forecasting equation for stationary sources is shown below. The CEFS 

processor calculates seasonal projections for planning and month/day specific 

projections for photochemical modeling inputs. CEFS employs a region and emission 

category selection hierarchy when selecting and applying growth and control factors. 

Consider, for example, a rule which applies to the entire universe of a particular process 

type (identified by source classification code (SCC)). If that rule is more stringent for a 

particular industry (identified by SIC), then a control profile specific to the SCC/SIC 

combination can be assigned. CEFS will cycle through the control data records 

applying the highest level of the selection hierarchy to that category (i.e. the growth and 

control data can be “layered” to target the source categories exactly as the rule calls for 

without double-counting (or overlaps). The same type of logic is used for the growth 

data. 

E _ fy E _by TF FRAC GF [CF CF ... CF ] ( r,s,p,y ) ( r,s,p,o ) ( r,s ) ( r,s,p,y ) ( r,s ) ( r,m ,s,p ) ( r,m ,s,p ) ( r,m ,s,p ) i = ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ 1 2

where 

 Primary Variables: 

 E_fy = Emissions in the future year (tons/day; annual average or seasonal) 

 E_by = Emissions in the base year (tons/year) 

 TF = Temporal Factor (or “Seasonal Adjustment Factor”) 

 FRAC = ROG, VOC, PM10 , or PM2.5 fraction (if applicable) 

 GF = Growth Factor (is the ratio of two activity levels at the end-point years) 

 CF = Control Factor (is the ratio of two control levels at the end-point years) 

 

Subscript Variables: 

 r = region (district, air basin, county) 

s = the source category (SCC/SIC or EIC for the TREND algorithm; The GIS 

 algorithm performs the projections at the facility level.) 

 p = the pollutant 

 m = the control measure (i = the ith control measure) 

 y = the year to be projected 

 o = the base year 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 23 

Temporal Factors (Stationary and Area Sources Only) 

To better characterize emissions affected by seasons, seasonal adjustment factors (or 

“temporal factors”) are used to apportion emissions into the periods under 

consideration. The temporal algorithm used for calculating seasonal emission 

inventories was rewritten to better approximate the seasonal variation of emissions. In 

the prior algorithm used in the 1994 SIP, emission estimates for point sources

represented an “average annual operating day”. The assessment of this algorithm 

showed that it did not accurately estimate seasonal emissions because the algorithm 

was driven by the number of operating days a point source process operates. For 

processes that operated intermittently, this resulted in exaggerated seasonal emission 

estimates because the algorithm assumed that all intermittent processes operated 

simultaneously. For area sources, the prior algorithm estimated emissions based on an 

“average seasonal operating day”. 

ROG, VOC, PM10 and PM2.5 Fractions 

The reactive portion of the total organic gas (TOG) emissions (expressed as ROG) are 

calculated by applying reactive fractions which are maintained in CEIDARS. Districts 

may supply fractions at the facility/device/process level for point source processes. If 

these data are not provided at this level, default fractions maintained by ARB at the 

SCC level are invoked. In like manner, the portion of PM falling within the 10 micron 

and 2.5 micron size ranges (i.e. PM10 and PM2.5 respectively) are estimated from 

district-supplied fractions or by applying size fractions maintained by ARB in CEIDARS. 

As with the temporal factor, an emission-weighted fraction is developed for each 

SCC/SIC pair. 

Growth Factors (Stationary and Area Sources Only) 

Growth factors are derived from county-specific economic activity profiles, population 

forecasts, and other socio/demographic activity. Growth profiles are typically 

associated with the type of industry and secondarily to the type of emission process. 

For point sources, economic output profiles by industrial sector are typically linked to the 

emission sources via SIC. For area sources, other growth parameters such as 

population, dwelling units, fuel usage etc. may be used. The growth factor is the ratio of 

the growth level in the future year to the growth level in the base year. These growth 

levels are also region and source category dependent. 

Data Acquisition

Growth factor data for use in CEFS are acquired from the districts, and where no data 

are available, growth activity projections are constructed from ARB contracts10 with 

experts in the economic and demographic growth. ARB may also develop growth 

estimates in consultation with stakeholders. For example, ARB led an effort to revise 

growth assumptions in agricultural categories, under guidance of the State’s Agricultural 

Advisory Committee. Geographically speaking, much of the State relies on these 

constructed growth projections while other high emission regions, such as the South 

Coast and Bay Area, submit their own growth estimates based on data provided by 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 24 

local councils of government (COGs). The varied sources of growth data are 

assembled into a comprehensive statewide growth data set that can be used for 

statewide emission projections. 

Control Factors 

Control factors are derived from “adopted” ARB regulations, district rules, and 

“proposed” measures which impose emission reductions or a technological change on a 

particular emission process. Control factors comprise three components: Control 

Efficiency, Rule Effectiveness, and Rule Penetration. Control factors are closely linked 

to the type of emission process and secondarily to the type of industry. Control levels 

are assigned to emission categories which are targeted by the rules via emission 

inventory codes (SCC/SIC, EIC etc.) used in CEIDARS. The control factor is the ratio of 

the control level in the future year to the control level in the base year. These control 

levels are also region, control measure, source category, and pollutant dependent. 

Data Acquisition 

The baseline emission projections require a full complement of control factor data that 

account for the “adopted” rules that are on the books by a predetermined cutoff date. A 

major component of the CEFS program is its ability to link rules to targeted emission 

categories and quantify the emission reductions associated with the rules. 

Implementation of CEFS requires districts to submit local control rule profiles (for all 

rules leading to emission reductions) that link the rules to the appropriate emission 

categories. The profiles must describe the behavior of the rule (i.e. whether the rule is 

phased in a linear fashion or abrupt implementation in the form of a step function). The 

rule profiles must be designed to be pollutant specific and must carry enough data 

points to adequately characterize the rule over the implementation period. The CEFS 

program interpolates the profile for intermediate years in either a step or linear mode 

depending on what the district has flagged for the rule. The construction of a 

comprehensive control rule data set for a large district is a sizeable undertaking. Some 

districts develop the control profiles in house, while others have opted to contract the 

work out. In either case, ARB staff work closely with the district staff and/or contractors 

to educate staff on the proper construction of the control profiles. In gearing up for the 

8-Hour Ozone SIP, in Fall 2004, ARB conducted a special forecasting workshop to 

provide guidance to districts on all aspects of the emission forecasting program 

including presentations on forecasting logic and input data requirements. In most 

cases, districts responded by submitting rule-specific control profiles for their adopted 

rules as required. 

ARB also develops control profiles for state rules and International Maritime 

Organizations (IMOs) such as for consumer products, pesticides, architectural coatings, 

and ships. For state rules, ARB deploys interdivisional teams to develop, refine, and 

finalize the control profiles to be used in SIP projections. Similar data requirements 

exist for the development of these control profiles as described above for district rules. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 25 

Mobile Sources 

Mobile sources include all non-stationary sources of 

air pollution such as cars, trucks, motorcycles, buses, 

airplanes, and locomotives. In general, emissions are 

calculated as the product of the number of sources 

 population/volume), activity and emission factor. 

E = Pop * A * EF 

where, 

E = pollutant specific emissions [mass emitted per unit 

time] 

Pop = population of on-road mobile sources [-] 

A = activity (travel data) [e.g. miles traveled per day, or hours operational] 

EF = source specific emission factor [mass per unit activity] 

In California, most mobile source inventories are estimated by two mathematical 

modeling tools: EMFAC for on-road sources and OFFROAD for off-road sources. 

Because many different types of data are necessary to develop an inventory, ARB must 

rely on other organizations to provide that data. The inventory has involved the efforts 

of the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, CalTrans, the Southern 

California Council of Governments (SCAG), and the DMV. CalTrans provides SCAG 

with information regarding highway projects so that they can estimate and project 

vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from their Travel Demand Model (TDM). This activity data 

are then coupled with the emission factors generated from ARB’s Emission Factor 

Model (EMFAC2007) and population data provided by the DMV to calculate the 

emission inventory. Finally, all statewide emission inventories are assembled and 

maintained by ARB in the CEIDARS and CEFS databases. 

On-Road Emission Inventory 

EMFAC contains several different modules that account for different portions of the onroad inventory calculation process. EMFAC covers on-road mobile sources including 

gas and diesel cars, trucks, buses, and motorcycles. The subsequent sections illustrate 

the methods by which the on-road emission inventory is developed. For more detailed 

information please refer to the ARB website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/onroad.htm. A guide to online documentation is also provided at the end of this section. 

Source Categories 

On-road mobile sources are categorized into thirteen vehicle classes, two fuel types 

(gas and diesel), and three technology categories (catalyst, noncatalyst and diesel) as 

indicated in the table below. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 26 

EMFAC Vehicle Categories 

Class Description Weight (GVW) Abbreviation Technology Group 

PC Light Duty Autos (Passenger Cars) All LDA NCAT, CAT, DSL 

T1 Light-Duty Trucks (LDT1) 0-3,750 LDT1 NCAT, CAT, DSL 

T2 Light-Duty Trucks (LDT2) 3,751-5,750 LDT2 NCAT, CAT, DSL 

T3 Medium-Duty Trucks 5,751-8,500 MDV NCAT, CAT, DSL 

T4 Light-Heavy Duty Trucks (LHDV1) 8,501-10,000 LHDT1 NCAT, CAT, DSL 

T5 Light-Heavy Duty Trucks (LHDV2) 10,001-14,000 LHDT2 NCAT, CAT, DSL 

T6 Medium-Heavy Duty Trucks (MHDV) 14,001-33,000 MHDT NCAT, CAT, DSL 

T7 Heavy-Heavy Duty Trucks (HHDV) 33,001+ HHDT NCAT, CAT, DSL 

UB Urban Bus (UB) All UB CAT, DSL 

OB Other Bus OBUS CAT, DSL 

SB School Buses All SBUS CAT, DSL 

MH Motor Homes All MH CAT, DSL 

MC Motorcycles All MCY NCAT, CAT 

Population and Activity

In general, population data are obtained from vehicle registration data compiled by DMV 

and classified according to fuel, class, technology group, age (model year) and 

geographic area. Further calculations require data on population growth rates by 

calendar year, vehicle class, fuel type and geographic area. These estimates are 

coupled with activity data and emission factors, as indicated previously, to estimate total 

emissions. 

On-road activity refers most commonly to vehicle miles traveled, speed, and number of 

trips for each vehicle type and model year. 

Vehicle Miles Traveled 

Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) are the number of 

miles traveled by a given vehicle in a specified 

time period and is estimated from the inspection 

and maintenance program (I&M) where the model 

year and odometer reading is taken. The COG’s 

provide VMT as estimated by their transportation 

demand models. EMFAC then matches VMT 

estimated in the model to those values provided by 

the COGs. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 27 

This analysis is completed for each county and helps to elucidate regional differences in 

travel. VMT is calculated based on the vehicle population and accrual rates by age, 

vehicle class, fuel type, by geographic and inspection and maintenance option. The 

model also contains hourly distributions of VMT by class. 

Vehicle Starts or Trips 

Vehicle starts are obtained for gasoline-powered vehicles except heavy-duty trucks and 

included as an input to the inventory. Starts are used to calculate trip emissions and 

calculated as the product of a per-vehicle start rate (starts per vehicle per day) and the 

fleet population. The estimates of trips per day are based on travel surveys and vehicle 

instrumented data for passenger cars, and light and medium duty trucks. 

Ambient Temperatures 

Because motor vehicle emissions are dependent on temperature and humidity profiles, 

historical meteorological data are compiled. The emission inventory process includes 

data on averaged monthly, summer and winter episodic diurnal temperatures for each 

geographic area as well as averaged monthly relative humidity for each geographic 

area. The following table indicates the primary data sources for activity and population: 

Emission Factors

Emission factor used in EMFAC are based on emission tests with dynamometers 

coupled with certification data yield base emission rates (BERs) that are adjusted with 

correction factors, and vehicle inspection and maintenance (I&M) programs (e.g. smog 

check scenarios). Correction factors are applied for non-standard operating conditions 

such as what mode the vehicle is in (e.g. hot/cold/start/running), trip speed, 

environmental conditions, and inspection and maintenance programs within that 

geographic area. These correction factors include, but are not limited to, speed 

correction factors, temperature correction factors, fuel correction factors and driving 

cycle correction factors. Emission factors are 

provided for different temperatures, operating 

speeds, emission modes, model types, model 

years, technology types, fuel, and relative 

humidity. These emission factors can be 

expressed as grams per vehicle, grams per 

mile, grams/hour and grams per start. Activity 

data are matched to the corresponding 

emission factor to estimate total emissions. 

EMFAC includes tailpipe exhaust and 

evaporative emissions as part of the on-road 

inventory. Tailpipe exhaust emissions include 

running, idle and start exhausts. Running 

exhaust represents emissions released from the tailpipe under hot stabilized conditions, 

while idle and start exhaust, the other tailpipe emissions, include any emissions 

associated with idling and starting the vehicle. Evaporative emissions consist of hot 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 28 

soaks, diurnals, resting losses and running losses all of which are generated by the 

evaporation of fuel from an engine. The inventory accounts for particulate matter (PM) 

associated with tire and break wear. 

Guide to Online Documentation 

“Understanding the On-Road Emissions Inventory Program” - 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/on-road.htm

Mobile Source Emission Estimates - 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/emfac2002_output_table.htm

Previous Model Versions and Revisions - 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/previous_version.htm, 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/latest_revisions.htm

EMFAC Technical Support Documentation - 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/doctable_test.htm

Tech Memos - http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/msei.htm

Other Mobile Emission Inventory 

Off-road mobile sources include off-road vehicles such as boats, outdoor recreational 

vehicles (ORV’s), industrial and construction equipment, farm equipment, lawn and 

garden equipment, ships, aircraft, and trains. OFFROAD is used to estimate emissions 

for most of these categories. Other sources such as ocean going vessels and 

commercial harbor craft are based on calculations in modules external to OFFROAD. 

Off-road emissions are calculated much in the same way as on-road emissions – the 

product of emission factor, activity, and population. The model also incorporates 

elements such as technology types, population, activity, horsepower, load factors, and 

control factors. For more detailed information please refer to the ARB website at 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/offroad/off-road.htm. In addition, a guide to online 

documentation is provided at the end of this section. 

Source Categories

Off-road sources are divided up into eight major categories: aircraft, trains, ships and 

commercial boats, recreational boats, off-road recreational vehicles, off-road equipment, 

farm equipment, and fuel storage and handling. The categories are then subdivided by 

fuel type, engine type, horsepower group and preempted or non-preempted status to 

better characterize emissions, adopted and proposed control strategies, and use. 

Outlined below are a few categorical descriptions. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 29 

Commercial Marine Vessels 

Commercial marine vessels include ocean-going ships and harbor craft, but exclude 

recreational vessels. Ocean-going ships include international trade vessels such as 

container ships, bulk carriers, general cargo ships, tankers, and auto carriers. 

Passenger cruise ships, and some military and Coast Guard vessels, are also included 

in this category. 

The diesel engines powering the majority of oceangoing ships are referred to by U.S. 

EPA as “Category 3” engines, meaning they have a displacement greater than 30 liters 

per cylinder. These engines are available in configurations with 4 to 14 cylinders, and 

power outputs ranging from roughly 5 to 100 megawatts. 

Ocean-going ships generally run boilers and diesel generators in addition to propulsion 

engines, particularly while “hotelling” in port. Diesel generators provide electrical power 

for lights and equipment, and boilers provide steam for hot water and fuel heating. 

Most ocean-going ships run their main propulsion engines (and many newer ships also 

run their auxiliary engines) on intermediate fuel oil (IFO 180 or IFO 380). This fuel is 

also referred to as “bunker fuel,” and requires heating to reduce its viscosity to a point 

where it can be properly atomized and combusted. Bunker fuel typically contains much 

higher levels of sulfur, nitrogen, ash, and other compounds which increase exhaust 

emissions. Diesel-powered gas turbine engines and auxiliary engines on many oceangoing ships use lighter “distillate” diesel fuel (also referred to as marine gas oil), which is 

much lower in sulfur and other contaminants. 

Harbor craft (or the “captive fleet”) include tugboats, commercial fishing vessels, 

commercial passenger fishing vessels, work boats, crew boats, ferries, and some Coast 

Guard and military vessels. These vessels generally stay within California coastal 

waters and often leave and return to the same port. Most harbor craft use dieselpowered propulsion and auxiliary engines that generally run on distillate diesel fuel. 

Locomotives and Rail-yards 

Railroads operate national locomotive fleets that travel between states daily, currently 

moving more than 40 percent of the total intercity revenue ton-miles of freight in the 

United States. 

Compression-Ignition (diesel) Engines 

Off-road compression-ignition (CI) engines are diesel engines primarily used in farm, 

construction, and industrial equipment. Examples include tractors, excavators, dozers, 

scrapers, portable generators, transport refrigeration units (TRUs), irrigation pumps, 

welders, compressors, scrubbers, and sweepers. Locomotives, commercial marine 

vessels, marine engines over 37 kilowatts (kW), or recreational vehicles are excluded 

from this category. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 30 

Large Spark-Ignition Engines 

The large spark-ignition engine (LSI) category consists of off-road spark-ignition 

engines greater than 25 horsepower and typically fueled by gasoline or liquefied 

petroleum gas (LPG). A small number are fueled by compressed natural gas (CNG), 

and some have dual fuel capability. LSI engines are most commonly found in forklifts, 

specialty vehicles, portable generators, pumps, compressors, farm equipment, and 

construction equipment. This category excludes marine propulsion engines, engines 

used in equipment that operate on rails, recreational vehicles, snowmobiles, and gas 

turbines. 

Recreational Vehicles 

This category consists of off-road motorcycles and all terrain vehicles (ATVs), both of 

which are designed for operation over rough terrain. U.S. EPA standards for exhaust 

and evaporative for off-road motorcycles and ATVs were established in 2006. Although 

the federal exhaust standards are not as stringent as California’s, California will benefit 

from the evaporative standards which control fuel tank and fuel line permeability. 

In 1994, ARB approved off-highway recreational vehicle regulations (including off-road 

motorcycles). These regulations established exhaust emission standards and test 

procedures that included off-road motorcycles and ATVs. The regulations also provided 

specific coding requirements of the vehicle identification number to distinguish an 

emission-compliant vehicle. In 1998, the regulations were amended to link vehicle 

registration and usage to compliance with California’s exhaust emission standards. 

Those in compliance are eligible for off-highway vehicle (OHV) green sticker registration 

that allows year-round operation in designated off-road areas. Those not in compliance 

are eligible for OHV red sticker registration that allows operation only during designated 

months when ozone levels are low. These revisions affect engines built in 1997 greater 

than 90 cc. The same standards also apply to engines built in 1999 of 90 cc or less. 

Engines built pre-1997 and pre-1999, respectively, are not subject to this regulation. 

Small Off-Road Engine (SORE) 

The small off-road engine (SORE or "small engine") category consists of off-road sparkignition engines fueled typically by gasoline, liquid petroleum gas (LPG) or other 

alternative fuels and below 25 horsepower. The SORE category includes lawn, garden 

and other maintenance utility equipment. Within this category, engines are typically 

grouped by engine displacement measured in cubic centimeters (cc). Engines under 

65 cc displacement are traditionally associated with handheld equipment such as weed 

trimmers, leaf blowers and chain saws. Engines greater than 65 cc displacement are 

collectively referred to as non-handheld small off-road engines. Non-handheld 

equipment is primarily lawn mowers, but also includes other equipment such as riding 

mowers and generator sets. 

The sources of evaporative emissions from this category are from gasoline vapors 

vented from the carburetor and fuel cap and occur from diurnal (emissions due to daily 

temperature changes), hot soak (occur after shutdown of equipment), and running loss 

(occur during equipment operation) processes. Permeation (liquid gasoline migrating 

through the walls of plastic fuel tanks) is also another source of emissions. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 31 

Activity and Population

As with the on-road inventory, emission factors must be coupled with population and 

activity data to estimate total emissions. The statewide equipment population of offroad mobile sources was collected from a variety of sources including industry and 

government agencies. Then growth factors based on socioeconomic indicators and 

scrappage factors were applied to determine future populations. Scrappage, or attrition, 

functions describe the relationship between equipment age and the proportion of 

equipment that has been removed from service. It is expressed as a fraction of the 

average lifetime of the equipment and is a function of the expected life of the engine, 

the annual hours of operation, and the 

average load factor. 

Activity includes information such as 

annual average usage hours, load factor, 

brake-specific fuel consumption, and 

starts per year for each equipment type 

by fuel, engine type, and horsepower 

group. 

Data Acquisition

The statewide equipment populations were obtained through various industry and 

government agency sources. Power Systems Research (PSR) is the source for many 

of the state population estimates for off-road categories. PSR’s Power Systems 

Research/Compass International’s 1996 Database contained engine data compiled over 

the last 7 years, and included engine sales records for every engine installed in North 

America, as well as imported engine-driven products. Engine data includes 

horsepower, model number and engine description (number of cylinders, turbocharged 

versus naturally-aspirated, displacement, etc). Some of the principal data sources, by 

category, are listed in the table below: 

The Portable Equipment Database is maintained by ARB. Data are obtained through a 

voluntary registration program with the State as an alternate method of obtaining an 

operational permit for off-road non-propulsion engines. Equipment populations for 

dredging, oil drilling, lawn and garden, military tactical support and other portable 

equipment categories were obtained directly from the Portable Equipment Database. In 

order to avoid double counting, the population of generators, pumps and compressors 

found in the drilling, dredging, tactical support and other portable equipment, were 

subtracted from the industrial and light-commercial categories. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 32 

Category Data Source

Agricultural United States Department of 

Agriculture(USDA), Power Systems 

Research (PSR) 

Construction and Mining MacKay & Company, PSR, Portable 

Equipment Database, Energy & 

Environmental Analysis (EEA) 

Light Commercial PSR, Portable Equipment Database 

Industrial PSR, Booz Allen-Hamilton (BAH) 

Logging Power Systems Research 

Lawn and Garden Portable Equipment Database, BAH 

Airport Ground Support Air Transport Association (ATA), EEA 

Transport Refrigeration Units PSR, Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) 

Dredging Portable Equipment Database 

Oil Drilling Portable Equipment Database 

Military Tactical Support Equipment Portable Equipment Database 

Recreational Equipment Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) 

Pleasure Craft U.S. Coast Guard, DMV 

Commercial and Government Vessels BAH, US Coast Guard, CA Department of 

Fish and Game, ARB Survey 

Locomotive and Rail Operations Booz Allen-Hamilton 

Aircraft (Commercial, Military and General) Booz Allen-Hamilton 

Agricultural Aircraft Booz Allen-Hamilton 

Ocean-Going Vessels CA State Lands Commission, Port of 

Los Angeles EI, Survey, US Army Corp of 

Engineers, Entec 

Agricultural Engines District Permit Data, Carl Moyer Program, 

Sonoma Technology, CA Department of 

Water Resources Farmland Monitoring and 

Mapping Program 

MacKay & Company conducted surveys in 1991, 1995, and 1999 to estimate 

nationwide construction equipment population and usage. This work was sponsored by 

Construction Equipment Magazine. MacKay & Company’s 1999 Construction 

Equipment population analysis was used to obtain populations for those construction 

equipment contained in the analysis. Since data in MacKay’s analysis are nationwide, 

staff used a factor of 10 percent in order to estimate California’s statewide population. 

U.S. EPA staff estimated that 10 percent of the total nationwide dollar amount spent on 

construction-related activities occurs in California. For specific pieces of construction 

equipment not found in MacKay’s analysis, 10 percent of PSR’s nationwide data were 

used. 

Finally, all statewide emission inventories are assembled and maintained by ARB in 

CEIDARS and CEFS databases. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 33 

Emission Factors

ARB estimates all off-road mobile emissions with OFFROAD. OFFROAD integrates 

emission factors by model year for hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), carbon 

dioxide (CO2), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), particulate matter (PM), and oxides of sulfur 

(SOx). Hydrocarbon emissions are modeled for three types of engine processes: 

exhaust, evaporative and start emissions. 

The emission factors for each engine are a 

function of new engine emissions expressed 

in grams per brake horsepower hour and 

deterioration rates. Deterioration is due 

primarily to tampering and mal-maintenance 

and wear on engine parts with use, and 

occurs at different rates for each pollutant. 

The OFFROAD methodology for estimating 

deterioration is based on the zero-hour 

emission rate (g/bhp-hr), the deterioration 

rate (increase in emissions per unit of 

activity, g/bhp-hr2), and the number of hours 

accumulated on the equipment. Equipmentspecific emission factors are obtained by 

adjusting the appropriate engine emission rate by how the equipment is used (duty 

cycle). Finally, control factors can be applied to emissions or population to account for 

regulatory control scenarios. 

Guide to Online Documentation 

“Understanding the Off-Road Emissions Inventory Program” - 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/offroad/off-road.htm

Mobile Source Emission Estimates - 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/emfac2002_output_table.htm

Model Revisions - http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/offroad/updates.htm

OFFROAD Technical Support Documentation - http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/offroad/pubs.htm

http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/resnotes/notes/97-8.htm 

Tech Memos - http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/msei.htm
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 34 

Biogenics (Overview of the BEIGIS Model) 

Development of effective ozone and PM2.5 control strategies in California requires 

accurate emission inventories of their precursor emissions, including biogenic volatile 

organic compounds (BVOCs) such as isoprene and monoterpenes. Due to the 

heterogeneity of vegetation land cover, species composition and leaf mass distribution 

in California, quantifying BVOC emissions in this domain requires an emission inventory 

model with region-specific input databases and a high degree of spatial and temporal 

resolution. In response to this need, ARB developed a GIS-based model for estimating 

BVOC emissions, called BEIGIS, which uses California-specific input databases with a 

minimum spatial resolution of 1 km2 and an hourly temporal resolution. 

The BEIGIS isoprene emission algorithm11 is of the form I = IS × CL × CT , where I is 

the isoprene emission rate (grams isoprene per gram dry leaf mass per hour) at 

temperature T and photosynthetically active radiation flux PAR. IS is a reference 

emission factor (grams isoprene per gram dry leaf mass per hour) at a standard 

temperature of 30 °C and PAR flux of 1000 μmol m-2 s-1. CL and CT are environmental 

adjustment functions for PAR and temperature, respectively. The monoterpene 

emission algorithm adjusts a reference monoterpene emission factor by a temperature 

function11. Methylbutenol (MBO) emissions are modeled with an algorithm12 similar to 

that for isoprene. Dry leaf mass/ leaf area ratios, and reference emission factors for 

isoprene, monoterpenes and MBO, are plant species-specific and assembled from the 

scientific literature. Modeled BVOC emissions for a given spatial domain therefore 

represent the contribution by various plant species (through their leaf mass and 

emission rates) to the total BVOC emissions. 

The main inputs to BEIGIS are land use land cover (LULC) GIS databases, gridded leaf 

area index (LAI) derived from AVHRR satellite data13, leaf area/dry leaf mass factors, 

reference emission factors, and gridded hourly ambient temperature and sunlight data 

(generated by the CALMET and/or MM5 models). For urban areas, LULC databases 

were developed from regional planning agency data and botanical surveys14. Natural 

areas are represented using GAP, a statewide LULC database developed by the 

University of California-Santa Barbara for the U.S.G.S. Biological Resources Division 

and the California Department of Fish and Game15. Agricultural areas are represented 

using crop GIS databases developed by the California Department of Water Resources 

(http://www.landwateruse.water.ca.gov). Ground surveys have been funded by ARB to 

validate vegetation land cover and LAI input databases used in BEIGIS16. Model 

validation using micrometeorological flux measurements is on-going. BEIGIS 

assimilates spatial and temporal inputs and executes BVOC emission algorithms within 

a GIS. Outputs from BEIGIS are gridded 1 km2

 hourly emissions of isoprene, 

monoterpenes and MBO, aggregated to 16 km2 or 25 km2 resolution, depending on 

photochemical modeling requirements. A fourth BVOC category called “other” biogenic 

VOC (OVOC) is comprised of compounds such as acetone, methanol, and other 

oxygenated BVOCs. OVOC is not modeled directly. Gridded hourly OVOC emissions 

are estimated as an added fraction, scaled to 30 percent of the sum of isoprene, 

monoterpene, and MBO within each grid cell. A speciation profile is applied to the 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 35 

OVOC fraction based on OVOCs measured at Blodgett Experimental Forest17. The 

BEIGIS model was first applied in the Southern California Ozone Study18 (SCOS97). 

Emissions Inventory Systems Data (CEIDARS, CEFS) 

ARB redesigned its base year emission inventory system (known as the California 

Emissions Inventory Development and Reporting System (CEIDARS)) in 1995 and 

emission forecasting system (known as the California Emission Forecasting System 

(CEFS)). Technical papers describing these systems are available on request. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 36 

 

References 

1

 “FACT SHEET #1: Development of Organic Emission Estimates California's Emission 

Inventory and Air Quality Models” (2000) [Online] Air Resources Board. Available from 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/speciate/factsheets_model_ei_speciation_tog_8_00.pdf

[Accessed March 2007] 

2 2002 Base Year Emission Inventory SIP Planning: 8-hr Ozone, PM2.5 and Regional 

Haze Programs (2002) [Online] Environmental Protection Agency. Available from 

http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/eidocs/2002baseinven_102502new.pdf [Accessed 

February 2007] 

3

 ARB Project 05-6CCOS with Dr. Charles L. Blanchard. Understanding Relationships 

Between Changes in Ambient Ozone and Precursor Concentrations and Changes in 

VOC and NOx Emissions from 1990 to 2004 in Central California 

4

 STI - 05-3CCOS - Comparison of Ambient Measurements to Emissions 

Representations for Modeling 

5 National Emissions Inventories for the U.S. (2007) [Online] Environmental Protection 

Agency. Available from http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/index.html [Accessed February 

2007] 

6 The California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality (2006) [Online] California Air 

Resources Board. Available from http://arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanac.htm

[Accessed February 2007] 

7 Triennial Review of the Emission Inventory SB 2174 Public Workshop November 2000 

(2000) [Online] California Air Resources Board. Available from 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/sb2174slides/ [Accessed February 2007] 8

 Cha, S.; Carter, P.; Bradow, R. Simulation of Automobile Brake Wear Dynamics and 

Estimation of Emissions, Society of Automotive Engineers, SAE Paper 831036, 

Warrendale, PA, 1983. 

9

 Nikolov, N; Zeller, K. Efficient retrieval of vegetation leaf area index and canopy 

clumping factor from satellite data to support pollutant deposition assessments. 

Environmental Pollution vol 141 (3) 539-549 (2006). 

10 E. H. Pechan & Associates, Development of Emission Growth Surrogates and Activity 

Projections Used in Forecasting Point and Area Source Emissions, Final Report, 

February 26, 2001. 

11 Guenther, A. B., P. R. Zimmerman, P. C. Harley, R. K. Monson and R. Fall. 1993. 

Isoprene and monoterpene emission rate variability – model evaluations and sensitivity 

analyses. Journal of Geophysical Research. 98(D7): 12609-12617. 

Guenther, A. B. R. K. Monson and R. Fall. 1991. Isoprene and monoterpene emission 

rate variability: observations with eucalyptus and emission rate algorithm development. 

Journal of Geophysical Research. 96: 10799-10808. 

12 Harley, P., V. Fridd-Stroud, J. Greenberg, A. Guenther and P. Vasconcellos. 1996. 

Emission of 2-methyl-3-buten-2-ol by pines: A potentially large natural source of 

reactive carbon to the atmosphere. Journal of Geophysical Research. 103: 25479-

25486. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix F 37 

 13 Nikolov, N. and K. Zeller. 2006. Efficient retrieval of vegetation leaf area index and 

canopy clumping factor from satellite data to support pollutant deposition assessments. 

Environmental Pollution. Vol. 141 Issue 3: 539-549. DOI:10.1016/j.envpol.2005.08.059 

14 Benjamin, M., Sudol, M., Bloch, L. and A. Winer. 1996. Low-emitting urban forests: 

ataxonomic methodology for assigning isoprene and monoterpene emission rates. 

Atmospheric Environment. 30 (9): 1437-1452. 

Horie, Y., Sidawi, S. and R. Ellefsen. 1990. Inventory of leaf biomass and emission 

factors for vegetation in California’s south coast air basin. Final Technical Report III-C. 

South Coast Air Quality Management District. Diamond Bar, CA. 

Nowak, D. J. 1991. Urban forest development and structure: Analysis of 

Oakland,California. PhD dissertation. University of California, Berkeley, CA. 

Sidawi, S. and Y. Horie. 1992. Leaf biomass density for urban, agricultural and 

naturalvegetation in California’s San Joaquin Valley. Final Report. San Joaquin Valley 

Air Pollution Study Agency. 

15 Davis, F. W., D. M. Stoms, A. D. Hollander, K. A. Thomas, P. A. Stine, D. Odion, M. I. 

Borchert, J. H. Thorne, M. V. Gray, R. E. Walker, K. Warner, and J. Graae. 1995. The 

California GAP Analysis Project—Final Report. University of California, Santa Barbara, 

CA. [http://www.biogeog.ucsb.edu/projects/gap/gap_rep.html]

16 Karlik, J. and A. McKay. 1999. Development of methodology and databases for 

estimating leaf masses in California airsheds. Final Report. Contract No. 97-719. State 

of California Air Resources Board. Sacramento, CA. 

Karlik, J. 2002. Validation of databases for modeling biogenic volatile organic compound 

emissions in central California. Final Report. Contract No. 00-16CCOS. San 

Joaquin Valleywide Air Pollution Study Agency and California Environmental Protection 

Agency – Air Resources Board. 

Winer, A., Karlik, J. and J. Arey. 1998. Biogenic hydrocarbon inventories for California: 

generation of essential databases. Final Report. Contract No. 95-309. State of 

California Air Resources Board. Sacramento, CA. 

Winer, A. and Karlik, J. 2001. Development and validation of databases for modeling 

biogenic hydrocarbon emissions in California’s airsheds. Final Report. Contract No. 97- 

320. California Environmental Protection Agency – Air Resources Board. Sacramento, 

CA. 

17 Lamanna, M. and A. Goldstein. 1999. In situ measurements of C2-C10 volatile 

organic compounds above a Sierra Nevada ponderosa pine plantation. Journal of 

Geophysical Research. Vol. 104, No. D17: 21247-21262. 

18 Scott, K. and M. Benjamin. 2003. Development of a biogenic volatile organic 

compounds emission inventory for the SCOS97-NARSTO domain. Atmospheric 

Environment 37, Supplement No. 2: S39-S49.
Appendix G 

Legal Authority and Other Requirements 
 

(This page intentionally left blank.)
May 7, 2007 Appendix G 1 

Overview of California’s Legal Authority

Legal authority to regulate sources of air pollution in California is found in both 

federal and state law. At the federal level, the Clean Air Act (“the Act” or “CAA”) 

calls for a two or three partner endeavor involving federal, state and, where 

permitted by state law, local authorities. The Act directs the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) to undertake a national effort to improve air 

quality. To carry out this directive, U.S. EPA is directed to establish national 

ambient air quality standards to protect the public health and welfare (CAA 

§109). 

The primary tool to be used in the effort to attain national standards is a SIP to be 

developed by each state that has one or more nonattainment areas. The SIP must 

provide for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the national 

standards (CAA §110(a)(1)). CAA § 110(a)(2)(A) broadly authorizes and directs 

states to include in their SIPs: 

 "...enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, 

means, or techniques (including economic incentives such as fees, 

marketable permits, and auctions of emissions rights), as well as 

schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be necessary or 

appropriate to meet the applicable requirements of this Act." 

While the Act requires states to develop SIPs, and clearly intends that they bear 

primary responsibility for attaining the national standards (CAA §101(a)(3)), it also 

provides U.S. EPA with two significant roles in this process. As a partner in the 

effort to attain and maintain the standards, U.S. EPA is authorized and directed to 

adopt measures to control emissions from various sources, such as consumer 

products, motor vehicles, nonroad engines and vehicles, and aircraft (CAA 

§§183(e)(3), 202, 213 and 231). Additionally, U.S. EPA has ultimate authority and 

responsibility to intervene with direct federal action if the SIP is inadequate, 

incomplete or not properly implemented by the state (CAA §§ 110(c)(1) and 113). 

Similarly, California law generally divides responsibility for meeting the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act (as well as separate, comprehensive state 

requirements related to air quality) between ARB and local air pollution control or air 

quality management districts (districts). However, other state or local agencies also 

have the authority under state law to regulate certain pollutant-emitting sources or 

activities. For example, the State's motor vehicle inspection and maintenance 

program is primarily the responsibility of the Bureau of Automotive Repair in the 

Department of Consumer Affairs, and the Department of Pesticide Regulation has 

primary authority to regulate the use of pesticides. Legal authority for state, district, 

and local efforts to improve air quality is contained primarily in Division 25.5 and 

Division 26 of the California Health and Safety Code, although authority for some 

programs is located elsewhere in the State codes.1

 

1

All section references in this discussion are to the Health and Safety Code unless otherwise 

specified. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix G 2 

Pursuant to these codes, ARB is charged with coordinating, regional and local 

efforts to attain and maintain both state and national ambient air quality standards. 

The direct statutory link between ARB and the mandates of the CAA is found in 

§39602 of the Health and Safety Code, which states: 

 "The state board is designated the air pollution control agency 

for all purposes set forth in federal law. 

 The state board is designated as the state agency responsible 

for the preparation of the state implementation plan required by the 

Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C., Sec. 7401, et seq.) and, to this end, shall 

coordinate the activities of all districts necessary to comply with that 

act. 

 Notwithstanding any other provision of this division, the state 

implementation plan shall only include those provisions necessary to 

meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act." 

In directing the California approach to improving air quality, State law divides 

control activities into vehicular and nonvehicular sectors (§§39002 and 40000). 

The control of vehicular sources is the responsibility of ARB, while primary 

responsibility for nonvehicular controls falls to the local air districts (§§ 39002, 

40000-40002, 40702, 40717; see also §§ 40400-40540 for provisions specific to 

the South Coast Air Quality Management District). These authorities have been 

used by the local districts to adopt and enforce numerous rules to control air 

pollution. In addition, ARB has comprehensive oversight authority over the districts 

to undertake nonvehicular source control activities if any districts fails to perform 

satisfactorily (§§39002, 41500, 41502, 41503, 41504, 41505 and 41652). 

The Clean Air Act requires that SIP provisions be legally enforceable. Under State 

law, a tiered system of authority for enforcement exists which parallels the authority 

to develop and implement the SIP. ARB has authority to enforce vehicular controls. 

(See, e.g., §§41510, 41511 and 41513, 43012, 43016 and 43017, 43100, 43105, 

43106, 43204-43212 and Vehicle Code §§27156, 38390 and 38391.) Primary 

responsibility for nonvehicular enforcement is vested in the local air districts. (See, 

e.g., §§41510, 41511 and 41513, and 42300 et seq.) However, if ARB finds that a 

district is not taking reasonable action to enforce applicable air pollution control 

statutes, rules and regulations, ARB may, after a public hearing, assume the 

district's enforcement powers and enforce these laws (§41505). U.S. EPA has 

similar authority to assume enforcement jurisdiction if a state fails to enforce SIP 

provisions (CAA §113). 

Within the framework of state and local shared responsibility for air pollution 

control, with ultimate air district accountability to ARB, ARB has the necessary 

statutory authority to assure compliance with the requirements of the Clean Air 

Act relating to the attainment of national standards and the rate-of-progress 

demonstrations. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix G 3 

Legal Authority to Adopt State and Federal SIP Measures

State components of the 2007 SIP are designed to reduce emissions from onroad mobile sources (passenger vehicles and trucks), off-road mobile sources 

(agricultural equipment, construction equipment, and other off-road sources), 

goods movement sources, and areawide sources (consumer products and 

pesticides). The legal authority for implementing the measures in each of these 

categories is described below. 

 Mobile Sources

Mobile source measures are a central component of the 2007 SIP. The measures 

include reductions to be realized from actions taken or to be taken at both the 

federal and state level. 

Federal Responsibility for National Mobile Source Measures 

If all areas of the State are to demonstrate attainment by the specified deadlines, a 

critical part of the overall strategy to reduce mobile source emissions in California 

must be U.S. EPA's regulation of national sources pursuant to §§202(a)(2)(B), 213 

and 231 of the Clean Air Ac (CAA). Projected emissions from sources under 

federal jurisdiction are very significant, and these emission categories are expected 

to grow dramatically through 2024 without new strategies. Under these 

circumstances, U.S. EPA has an obligation under the CAA to promulgate standards 

for these unregulated or underregulated national sources. Such measures should 

be fully creditable in the SIP. 

Certainly, U.S. EPA has the authority to adopt standards for national sources in 

order to assist states in achieving the national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS). U.S. EPA's authority derives from a number of provisions of the Clean 

Air Act which authorize or require the promulgation of various types of control 

measures. The scope of U.S. EPA's authority under many of these provisions is 

broadly defined. For example, CAA §202 directs the Administrator of the U.S. EPA 

to establish emission standards for new motor vehicles and CAA §231 directs the 

Administrator to establish aircraft emission standards. Both of these sections direct 

the Administrator to promulgate regulations in order to control emissions: 

"which, in his judgment, cause or contribute to air pollution which may 

reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welfare ..." 

(CAA §§202(a) and 231(a)(2)). 

CAA §213 provides U.S. EPA with the authority to adopt emission standards for 

nonroad engines and vehicles (such as marine vessels, construction equipment, 

and farm equipment). Under §213, the Administrator is required to determine 

whether ozone precursor or carbon monoxide emissions from nonroad engines or 

vehicles (other than locomotives) "cause, or significantly contribute to, air pollution 

which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare" and to 

regulate the sources that in his judgment "cause, or contribute to, such air 
May 7, 2007 Appendix G 4 

pollution." CAA §213 also directs the Administrator to adopt emission standards for 

new locomotives that: 

 "achieve the greatest degree of emission reduction achievable 

through the application of technology which the Administrator 

determines will be available for the locomotives or engines to which 

such standards apply, giving appropriate consideration to the cost of 

applying such technology within the period of time available to 

manufacturers and to noise, energy and safety factors associated 

with the application of such technology." (CAA §213(a)(5).) 

Federal law preempts individual states from adopting emission standards for most 

of these sources (see CAA §§209 and 233). As explained in the next section, 

however, California has concurrent authority to regulate some nonroad engines or 

vehicles including marine vessels, and California can obtain a waiver of federal 

preemption to adopt emission standards for other national source categories. 

If California is to adequately protect public health, the essential emission reductions 

necessary from these sources must be fully realized through timely promulgation of 

all feasible standards for national sources by U.S. EPA under the authorities 

provided in the Act. Without such federal control of preempted and national 

transportation sources, California simply cannot adequately protect public health 

because it is not possible to obtain sufficient emission reductions solely from 

sources under local and jurisdiction to offset uncontrolled or undercontrolled 

emissions contributed by national sources subject to federal control. 

 

The very broad language of the Clean Air Act authorizes and directs the 

Administrator to establish appropriate standards for national sources in order to 

effectively address emissions from these sources in California and other states. 

Such standards are necessary and technologically feasible; therefore, U.S. EPA 

has an obligation to promulgate these standards without delay. 

 

General State Authority for Mobile Source Measures 

ARB has broad authority under State law to regulate mobile sources. Health and 

Safety Code §§ 43000, 43000.5, 43013(b) and 43018 provide authority for ARB 

to adopt emission standards and other regulations to reduce emissions from new 

and in-use motor vehicles and other mobile sources. These authorities empower 

the Board to adopt the mobile source regulations and other control measures 

identified in this SIP. Health and Safety Code §43013(a) provides that: 

"The state board may adopt and implement motor vehicle emission 

standards, in-use performance standards, and motor vehicle fuel 

specifications for the control of air [pollutants] and sources of air 

pollution which the state board has found to be necessary, costeffective, and technologically feasible to carry out the purposes of this 

division, unless preempted by federal law." 
May 7, 2007 Appendix G 5 

In addition, Health and Safety Code §43018 provides: 

"The state board shall endeavor to achieve the maximum degree of 

emission reduction possible from vehicular and other mobile sources 

in order to accomplish the attainment of the state standards at the 

earliest practical date." 

To carry out these directives, the Board is directed to: 

"... adopt and implement emission standards for new motor vehicles 

[or new motor vehicle engines] for the control of emissions therefrom, 

which standards the state board has found to be necessary and 

technologically feasible to carry out the purposes of this division. 

Prior to adopting such standards, the state board shall consider the 

impact of such standards on the economy of the state, including, but 

not limited to, their effect on motor vehicle fuel efficiency." (§43101) 

The Board is also directed by §43013(b) to regulate other categories of mobile 

sources: 

“The state board shall ... adopt standards and regulations for ... off-road or 

nonvehicle engine categories, including, but not limited to, off-highway 

motorcycles, off-highway vehicles, construction equipment, farm equipment, 

utility engines, locomotives, and, to the extent permitted by federal law, 

marine vessels.” 

ARB is further authorized by State law to adopt Air Toxic Control Measures 

(ATCMs) to control identified toxic air contaminants (TACs). ARB has identified a 

number of substances as TACs, including “particulate emissions from dieselfueled engines” (see title 17, California Code of Regulations, sections 93000 and 

93001). The authority to identify TACs and adopt ATCMs is provided by the 

Tanner Act (Health and Safety Code §39650 et seq.). Under the Tanner Act, ARB 

may adopt ATCMs to control TAC emissions from both nonvehicular sources 

(such as off-road diesel engines and equipment, marine vessels, etc.) and from 

vehicular sources such as on-road diesel trucks (see §§36658, 39666, and 39667). 

ATCMs may specify both new and in-use emission standards for all of these 

sources. 

Each of the sections cited above must be read in the context of Health and Safety 

Code 39600, which provides that: "The state board shall do such acts as may be 

necessary for the proper execution of the powers and duties granted to, and 

imposed upon, the state board by this division and by any other provision of law." 

Pursuant to these authorities ARB has adopted the world's most stringent 

standards for passenger cars, light-duty trucks and medium-duty vehicles. ARB 

has also adopted regulations establishing standards for heavy-duty vehicles, offroad vehicles and engines, including small off-road engines and equipment (e.g., 

lawn and garden, small utility engines), off-road recreational vehicles (e.g., dirt 
May 7, 2007 Appendix G 6 

bikes, all-terrain vehicles, golf carts), off-road diesel engines and equipment (e.g., 

certain farm and construction equipment, portable generators), off-road gasoline 

and LPG engines and equipment (e.g., forklifts, airport ground support equipment), 

and marine pleasure craft (e.g., jet skies and recreational boats). 

Federal Preemption and Waivers 

The CAA preempts states, including California, from adopting requirements for 

new off-road engines smaller than 175 horsepower used in farm or construction 

equipment. (CAA §209(e)). However, the CAA does not preempt California from 

adopting requirements for new off-road engines greater than 175 horsepower 

used in farm or construction equipment. California may also adopt in-use 

emission standards for off-road engines. However, California must obtain 

authorization from the Administrator of the U.S. EPA (i.e., a waiver) under CAA 

§209(e) before any new or in-use standards for off-road vehicles can be 

enforced, unless such standards are within the scope of a previously granted 

authorization. 

In-use standards for on-road vehicles and engines (such as diesel trucks) are not 

covered by CAA §209. California is not preempted from adopting in-use, on-road 

standards and does not need to obtain a waiver for such standards. 

State Authority to Regulate Marine Vessels

State law authorizes ARB to regulate marine vessels to the extent such 

regulation is not preempted by federal law. This authority is provided by Health 

and Safety Code §§43013 and 43018 and by the Tanner Act, which authorizes 

the adoption of ATCMs to regulate diesel particulate emissions from marine 

vessels. 

The CAA places certain constraints on ARB’s legal authority to regulate 

emissions from marine vessels in California Coastal Waters. The key issue is 

whether ARB measures are engine emission standards or in-use operational 

requirements. The CAA preempts California from implementing engine emission 

standards (e.g., new or retrofit engine standards or requirements) unless 

California has received authorization from the U.S. EPA to enforce such 

standards under CAA §209(e)(2). However, the CAA does not preempt states 

from implementing in-use operational standards, which include but are not limited 

to restrictions on hours of operation, sulfur limits on fuel, and daily mass emission 

limits (see Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 89, Subpart A, as discussed at 62 FR 

67733, 67735 (December 30, 1997)). 

The 2007 SIP includes measures to require the use of cleaner, low-sulfur fuel in 

ship auxiliary and main engines. These requirements are best characterized as 

in-use operation requirements that are not preempted under the CAA. However, 

to the extent that these fuel requirements could be characterized as engine 

emission standards, California would need to get U.S. EPA authorization under 

CAA section 209(e). Authorization from U.S. EPA under CAA section 209(e) will 
May 7, 2007 Appendix G 7 

also be needed for the proposed SIP measures on harborcraft that would impose 

new engine and in-use retrofit/repower standards. 

The 2007 SIP also includes a cold-ironing measure for ships. This measure will 

likely not require U.S. EPA authorization since the measure can be drafted as an 

in-use operational requirement. Similarly, the vessel speed reduction measure in 

the SIP would clearly be an in-use operational requirement that does not require 

U.S. EPA authorization. However, to the extent these two measures mandate 

the installation and use of specific equipment on board vessels, those mandates 

would likely require U.S. EPA authorization under CAA §209(e). 

Case law supports California authority to regulate marine vessel emissions while 

the ships are at the ports and in California Coastal Waters, provided a 

reasonable “nexus” is established between the regulation and the state’s 

legitimate interest in protecting the health and safety of its citizens or its natural 

resources (see Gillis v. State of Louisiana, 294 F.3d 755, 761 (5th Cir. 2002)). 

Properly drafted to avoid impacting the internal affairs of a vessel, California 

regulations on marine vessels could also be extended to foreign-flagged vessels 

as well as U.S.-flagged ones (see Spector v. Norwegian Cruise Line, Ltd., 545 

U.S. 119, 130-131). 

Smog Check Program

California’s vehicle inspection and maintenance program (commonly referred to 

as the “smog check program”) is administered by the Bureau of Automotive 

Repair, which has the authority under state law for developing and implementing 

the program (§ 44002). The overall structure of California’s current smog check 

program was established by legislation enacted in 1994 in response to the 

requirements of the federal Clean Air Act and U.S. EPA regulations. The laws 

governing the implementation and enforcement of the program are set forth in 

Health and Safety Code §44000 et seq. 

 Fuels 

ARB has the authority to regulate the content of motor vehicle fuels. This was 

recognized by the California Supreme Court in a 1975 decision, Western Oil & Gas 

Assn. v. Orange County Air Pollution Control District (1975), 14 Cal. 3d 411, 418-

420, which held that the authority of ARB to adopt and implement motor vehicle 

emission standards includes the authority to set standards for motor vehicle fuels. 

ARB’s authority over fuels was reaffirmed and clarified in the California Clean Air 

Act of 1988, which added §43018 to the Health and Safety Code and substantially 

amended §43013. These sections provide that ARB has the authority to establish 

motor vehicle fuel regulations, and that before adopting and amending such 

regulations ARB must take certain specified actions and make specified 

determinations. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix G 8 

 Consumer Products 

ARB has broad authority under California law to regulate consumer products. 

Specifically, Health and Safety Code §41712(b) provides that: 

 "The state board shall adopt regulations to achieve the maximum 

feasible reduction in volatile organic compounds [VOC] emitted by 

consumer products, if the state board determines that adequate data 

exists to establish both of the following: 

 (1) The regulations are necessary to attain state and federal 

ambient air quality standards. 

 (2) The regulations are commercially and technologically 

feasible and necessary.” 

 (See also §39600.) 

Pursuant to this authority ARB has already adopted standards for numerous 

categories of consumer products and has achieved significant emission reductions 

from these products. ARB will continue to develop and adopt measures that limit 

the VOC emissions from consumer products. 

Vapor Recovery 

Health and Safety Code §41954 requires ARB to adopt procedures and 

performance standards for controlling gasoline vapor emissions from gasoline 

marketing operations, including transfer and storage operations, to achieve and 

maintain ambient air quality standards. This section also authorizes ARB, in 

cooperation with districts, to certify vapor recovery systems that meet the 

performance standards. Health and Safety Code §39607(d) requires ARB to adopt 

test procedures to determine compliance with ARB and districts’ non-vehicular 

standards. State law (§41954) further requires districts to use ARB test procedures 

for determining compliance with performance standards and specifications 

established by ARB. 

To comply with these provisions of state law, ARB has adopted the gasoline vapor 

recovery certification and test procedures found in 17 California Code of 

Regulations §§94010 to 94015 and 94101 to 94165. These regulations reference 

procedures for certifying vapor recovery systems and test procedures for verifying 

compliance with performance standards and specifications. 

 Pesticides 

DPR has broad authority under state law to control the use of pesticides for the 

purposes of protecting human health and the environment, including improving air 

quality. This authority is set forth in Divisions 6 and 7 of the California Food and 

Agricultural Code (FAC); (FAC §§14082, 14102, also §§12781, 12824-12828, 

12976-12977, 12991-12995, 12996-12999, 13101 and 13102). Following are more 

specific descriptions of DPR’s authority in particular areas. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix G 9 

DPR has the power to adopt regulations to carry out the provisions of the FAC 

that it is authorized to administer or enforce (FAC §§11456, 11502.5, 12781, 

12976, 12981). No pesticide may be manufactured, sold or offered for sale in 

California unless it has been registered by the DPR (§12811). DPR may place 

appropriate restrictions on a pesticide’s use, including limitations on the quantity, 

area, and manner of application (§12824). 

Use of pesticides classified as “restricted materials” often requires a permit (see 

§§14006.5; title 3, California Code of Regulations (CCR), §6412). All agricultural 

and commercial structural use fumigants are restricted materials. Permits to use 

restricted materials are issued by the appropriate County Agricultural 

Commissioner, or by DPR in counties that have no County Agricultural 

Commissioner. DPR can and does recommend permit conditions to be included 

in restricted material permits. DPR can also enact use restrictions or permit 

conditions by regulation (FAC §14007(a)). DPR must adopt regulations 

governing the use of any restricted material that the Director determines is 

injurious to the environment (FAC §14005). It is unlawful to apply any restricted 

material for which regulations have been adopted except as provided in such 

regulations (FAC §4011). 

All agricultural and commercial structural use of pesticides must be reported (title 

3, CCR §6624 and FAC §12979). Among other information, the Pesticide Use 

Reports must identify the date of application; location of property treated; total 

acres or units treated; and the pesticide and amount used (title 3, CCR §6624). 

 New Technology Measures for ARB’s Long-Term Strategy 

Like the 1994 and 1999 SIPs for the South Coast Air Basin, this SIP contains a 

special class of new technology measures necessary to contribute to attainment in 

the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley. CAA §182 sets out requirements for 

marginal, moderate, serious, severe and extreme ozone nonattainment areas, with 

the requirements for each level building on the preceding requirements. The South 

Coast and San Joaquin Valley have or intend to request to “bump-up” to an 

extreme classification in order to show attainment of the federal 8-hour ozone 

standard by 2024. As extreme areas, the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley will 

be required to meet the most strenuous requirements applicable to areas with 

lesser ozone problems, plus all of the requirements of CAA §182(e)(1) through (3). 

The following discussion applies to any California nonattainment area classified as 

extreme. 

To address attainment planning for extreme ozone nonattainment areas, 

Congress enacted CAA §182(e)(5) as part of the 1990 CAA amendments. 

Specifically, CAA §182(e)(5) provides: 

 "The Administrator may, in accordance with section 110, approve 

provisions of an implementation plan for an Extreme Area which 

anticipate development of new control techniques or improvement of 

existing control technologies, and an attainment demonstration based 
May 7, 2007 Appendix G 10 

on such provisions, if the State demonstrates to the satisfaction of the 

Administrator that-- 

 (A) such provisions are not necessary to achieve the 

incremental emission reductions required during the first 10 years 

after the date of the enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 

1990; and 

 (B) the State has submitted enforceable commitments to 

develop and adopt contingency measures to be implemented as set 

forth herein if the anticipated technologies do not achieve planned 

reductions. 

 Such contingency measures shall be submitted to the Administrator 

no later than 3 years before proposed implementation of the plan provisions 

and approved or disapproved by the Administrator in accordance with 

section 110. The contingency measures shall be adequate to produce 

emission reductions sufficient, in conjunction with other approved plan 

provisions, to achieve the periodic emission reductions required by 

subsection (b)(1) and (c)(2) and attainment by the applicable dates. If the 

Administrator determines that an Extreme Area has failed to achieve an 

emission reduction requirement set forth in subsection (b)(1) or (c)(2), and 

that failure is due in whole or part to an inability to fully implement provisions 

approved pursuant to this subsection, the Administrator shall require the 

State to implement the contingency measures to the extent necessary to 

assure compliance with subsections (b)(1) and (c)(2)." 

U.S. EPA approved the new technology measures set forth in the 1994 and 1999 

Ozone SIPS (60 FR 43379, 4381 (August 21, 1995); 65 FR 6091, 6093 (February 

8, 2000), and further explained its interpretation of §182(e)(5): 

“The 1990 Amendments to the Act added section 182(e)(5), which applies 

exclusively to “Extreme” ozone areas. This provision authorizes the State to 

use conceptual, as yet unadopted measures for its ozone attainment 

demonstration and rate-of-progress after the year 2000, if these measures 

anticipate new or improved technology or control techniques and are not 

needed to meet the progress requirements of the first 10 years . . . These 

measures necessarily are preliminary, and as such lack both regulations and 

technical support or even decisions regarding specific directions and 

approaches. Complete SIP rule elements are dependent upon future years 

of research projects, analyses of technologies and associated commercial 

feasibility, public workshops, and public decisionmaking.” (60 FR 43381) 

The 2007 SIP for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley will rely on §182(e)(5) 

measures for a significant quantity of emission reductions. This reliance was 

intended by the Act, and long-term measures that rely on new or evolving 

technology (including measures requiring complex analyses and decision-making 

and coordination among numerous government agencies) fall within the coverage 

of §182(e)(5) and are approvable as SIP revisions although not yet fully developed 

or adopted. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix G 11 

Use of Secured Incentive Funding

The emission reductions from adopted SIP measures include reductions 

achieved through incentive programs (such as the Carl Moyer program) that help 

finance the clean-up of the in-use or legacy fleet of heavy-duty diesel trucks, 

buses, and other diesel equipment. California is currently investing up to 

$140 million per year through the Carl Moyer Program. In the adopted measure 

emission reduction calculations, ARB included the benefit of emission reductions 

that will occur in future years from funds that have been directed to ARB and 

through legislation. 

ARB is able to include the benefit of these incentive programs because the funds 

have been secured for ARB through state legislation. The Carl Moyer Memorial 

Air Quality Standards program was established in 1988 and in its first six years, 

the program provided over $140 million in funding to clean up more than 6,300 

heavy-duty engines. State legislation (AB 923, 2004 and SB 1107, 2004) 

provided increased and continued funding for the program and other incentive 

programs – up to $141 million annually through 2015. The sources of this new 

funding secured in this legislation are listed below. 

1. Increased and expanded Smog Check program fee revenues directed to 

the program provide approximately $61 million per year. It is emission 

reductions from these revenues that have been included in the adopted 

measures in this SIP. 

2. An increase in the fee assessed for new tire purchases from $1 to $1.75 

provides approximately $25 million per year through 2015. The resulting 

revenues are directed to the air districts. 

3. A $2 increase in the amount of air district-imposed motor vehicle 

registration fees will provide up to $55 million per year to local air districts 

for clean air incentive programs. 

Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Discussion

U.S. EPA’s guidance requires each nonattainment area to submit a 

demonstration that it has adopted all RACM necessary to demonstrate 

attainment as expeditiously as possible. However, U.S. EPA has already 

determined that the California (i.e., ARB) control programs for mobile sources 

and fuels constitute BACM.2

 Moreover, whereas U.S. EPA deems its federal 

mobile source program to establish best available control measures for the 

nation, the California program generally goes beyond federal mobile source 

requirements (where not otherwise prescribed by federal law). Therefore, ARB 

believes that the State mobile source program exceeds federal RACM 

requirements. 

 

2

See page 5419 of the February 4, 2004 proposed rulemaking for the San 

Joaquin Valley PM10 plan, and page 30035 of the May 26, 2004 final rule. 
May 7, 2007 Appendix G 12 

Analyses of measures and adoption commitments for sources under air district 

responsibility subject to RACM and Reasonable Available Control Technology 

(RACT) requirements are included in the local air district plans. 

Conformity Budgets

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires that any action by the Federal government be 

consistent with, or "conform" to the purpose and intent of the SIP. This section of 

the Clean Air Act also requires that transportation planning agencies in areas that 

do not meet federal air quality standards demonstrate that their long range plans, 

funding programs and projects are consistent with and conform to the SIP before 

any part of the federal government grants approval, funding, or takes any other 

action on those plans, programs or projects. 

In turn, the local air quality attainment plans are required by the Clean Air Act to 

set out emissions budgets for transportation agencies to use when demonstrating 

conformity to the SIP. These emission budgets are linked to the attainment 

demonstration, and represent an upper bound, or ceiling that cannot be 

exceeded without undermining the SIP in its efforts to attain the federal air quality 

standards. Because the development of an area's emission budget takes place 

at the local level, each local plan will contain that area's transportation conformity 

emissions budgets and supporting material concerning the basis and 

development of those budgets.