# Air Resources Board Mary D. Nichols, Chairman Linda S. Adams 1001 1 Street P.O. Box 2815 Arnold Schwarzenegger

Secretary for Sacramento, California 95812 www.arb.ca.gov Governor Env~ronrnental Protection


### July 14,2010

Mr. Jared Blumenfeld RegionalAdministrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, California 94105 Dear Mr. Blumenfeld: The Air Resources Board (ARB) istransmitting to the United States Enviror~~iiental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA)the 2010 Coso Junction PMIO Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan (Plan) for the Coso Junction PlanningArea developed by the Great Basin UnifiedAir Pollution Control District (GBUAPCD). The District adopted the Plan on May 17,201 0 and transmitted it to ARB on May 19. ARB approvedthe Plan on June 24 as a revisionto the California State Implementation Plan. This package consists of two hard copies and one compact disk of the following materials. I. May 19,2010, letterfrom Mr.Theodore D. Schade,Air Pollution Control Officer for GBUAPCD, transmitting: A. Governing Board Resolution 2010-01 (Attachment 1): Approving the PMIO Maintenance Planfor the Coso Junction Planning Area and Certifyingthat the PMlO Redesignation Request and PMlO Maintenance Plan are exempt from CEQA requirements; B. 2010 PMlO Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Coso Junction PlanningArea (Attachment 2); C. Evidence of Compliance with California's procedural requirements: Notice of Exemption from CEQA (Attachment 3) and 30-Day Notice of Public Hearing (Attachment 4); D. Evidence of Public Notice (Attachment 5); and E. Minutes from Public Hearing (Attachment 6).

The energychallenge facing Californiais real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energyconsumption. For a list ofsimple waysyou can reduce demand and cutyour energy costs, see our website: htt~://www.arb.ca.aov. 

### California Environmental Protection Agency Printed on RecycledPaper

### Mr. Jared Blumenfeld July 14, 201 0 Page2
II. Public notice evidence and transcript for the ARB Public Meeting to Consider Approval of the Coso Junction PlanningArea PM10 Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan. Ill. Resolution 10-25 adoptingthe Coso Junction Planning Area PMlO Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan. IV. ARB Staff Report, Analysis of the Coso Junction PMl 0 Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan. ARB is committed toworking with U.S. EPA staff to provide any additional clarifying information you may need. If you have any questions, please contact LynnTerry, Deputy Executive Officer, at (916) 322-2739, or Karen Magliano, Chief, Air Quality Data Branch, at (91 6) 322-7137. 

# I fxecutive Officer

cc: (WIO Attachments) Mr. Theodore D. Schade Air Pollution Control Officer Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District 157 Short Street Bishop, California 93514-3537 Ms. Lynn Terry Deputy Executive Officer Air Resources Board Ms. Karen Magliano Planning and Technical Support Division Air Resources Board

## 2010 PMIO Plan for the Great Basin UnifiedAir Pollution Control District



# District Submittal PackageRESOLUTION 2010-01
RESOLUTION OF THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE GREAT BASIN UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT ADOPTING THE 2010 PMIO MAINTENANCE PLANAND REDESIGNATION REQUEST FOR THE COSO JUNCTION PLANNING AREA AND MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT

WHEREAS, on August 6, 2002, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)designated the Coso Junction Planning Area as a nonattainment area for the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for particulate matter of ten (10) microns or less in diameter (PMIO); and WHEREAS, the Coso Junction Planning Area for PM10 includes Rose
, Valley, the Coso Geothermal Known Resource Area, and a portion of the China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station in southern lnyo County; and WHEREAS, the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, in accordance with the designation by USEPA of the Coso Junction Planning Area as a nonattainment area adopted the 2004 State Implementation Plan for the Coso Junction Planning Area; and WHEREAS, since adoption of the 2004 State Implementation Plan PMIO air quality has improved significantly inthe Coso Junction Planning Area as a result of implementing dust control measures for windblown dust at Owens Lake, California, which is the major contributing source of PMIO to the Coso Junction Planning Area; and WHEREAS, PM10 concentrations measured inthe Coso Junction Planning Area demonstrated compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PMIOfrom 2006 through 2009; and WHEREAS, future compliance in the Coso Junction Planning Area will be ensured as a result of the implementation of dust control measures at Owens Lake, California through requirements contained in the PMIO State Implementation Plan for the Owens Valley Planning Area, approved by the USEPA in 1998 and as revised by the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District and California Air Resources Board in2003 and 2008; and WHEREAS, the 1990 federal CleanAir Act provides for the State of California. after reasonable notice and public hearings,to requestthat the USEPA redesignate the Coso Junction Planning Area to attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PM10; and

Resolrlt~on 2070-01 May 17, 2010 Page 1 of3WHEREAS, a redesignation of the Coso Junction Planning Area to attainmentwith the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PMIO requires a revis~on of the State Implementation Plan, which provides for the maintenance and enforcement of the PMIOstandard in the Coso Junction PlanningArea (also known as a maintenance plan); and WHEREAS, under California law, the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Corltrol District is the governmental entity charged with the responsibility of developing and adopting such a maintenance plan for the Coso Junction PMIO Plann~t'lg Area, and with the timely submittal of such adopted plan to the California Air Resources Board; and WHEREAS, pursuantto the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the 2010 PMIO Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Coso Junct~on Planning Area is exempt under §15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District has developed and circulated for public review, and received and considered public comment upon the revised 2010 PM10 Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Coso Junction Planning Area; and WHEREAS the 2010 PM 10 Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Coso Junction Plannlng Area is now before this Governing Board for consideration of final adoption. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that following review by this Governing Board of the revised 2010 PMIO Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Coso Junction Planning Area, after cons~deration of written and oral public comments received on the proposed 2010 PMI0 ~aintenance Plan and Redesignation Request, this Governing Board hereby finds as follows:

1. The major source contributing to the PMIO nonattainment problem in the Coso Junction Planning Area iswindblown dust from the Owens Lake bed; 2. PMIO monitoring demonstrated that the Coso Junction Planning Area has attained the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PMI0 as a result of control measures implemented at Owens Lake.

Resolulion 2010-01

May 17.2010 Page 2 of 33. The 1998 Owens Valley State Implementation Plan and revisions in2003 and 2008 will ensure that compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PM10 is maintained inthe Coso Junction Planning Area;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED. that in consideration of each of the foregoing findings, statements and legal requirements, this Governing Board hereby approves and adopts the proposed 2010 PMIO Maintenance Planfor the Coso Junction Planning Area; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the adopted State Implementation Plan for the CosoJunction PlanningArea be forwarded for appropriate review to the California Air Resources Board with a requestto redesignate the Coso Junction Planning Area to attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PM10. APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Governing Board of the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District this 17th day of May, 2010, by the following vote: AYES, Board members - Sweeney, Arcularius, Veatch, Cervantes, Eastman, Hazard

NOES: O
ABSTAIN: 0 ABSENT: Board members - McCarrol&)lfiunt 

# f lQvhim Tom Sweeney, Boa
ATTEST:

, ( 1 -#.{ -L.. 

## ',-j\,c 

# + .& &"f.. <-. Tori DeHaven, Clerk of the Board

Resolution 201C-01 May 17.20?0 Paye 3 of 3TheodoreD Scha:le Air P,i!ut~on Contr~i Gffice:



## GREAT 

## BASIN UNIFIED AIR

## POLLUTION CONTROL 

## DISTRICT 157ShortStreet, Rlshop, California 93514-3537 760-872-8211 ]-'ax:760-872-6109
BIO#I 00517-4c May 17, 2010


### I 

### HEREBY CERTIFY that at a regular meeting ofthe Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District Governing Board held in the Mono County Supervisors Chambers in Bridgeport, California on May 17,2010 an order was duly made and entered as follows: AGENDA ITEM#4~: APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 2010-01 AND THE 201O 

### PMIO MAINTENANCE PLAN AND REDESIGNATION REQUEST FOR THE COSO JUNCTION PLANNING AREA A motion was made by Cervantes and seconded by Arcularius approving Board Resolution 201 0-01,which 1) requests the US Environmental ProtectionAgency to redesignatethe Coso Juntion Planning Area from nonattainment for the federal PMIO standard to attainment, 2) adopts the PM10 maintenance plan to ensure that compliance with the federal PMIO standard is maintained in the Coso Junction Planning Area. The Board than further directed the APCO to file a CEQA notice of exemption for this project.

Ayes: Board Members 

## -Arcularius, Hazard, Sweeney, Cervantes.Veatch, Eastman Noes: 

### 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: Board Members

## - McCarroll, Hunt Motion carried 6/0 and so ordered



## I ATTEST:

1 

## . :I I

-I\ ( \ ILLL"+\, 

### c :-4<

, ..>*< , . Tor1 DeHaven, Clerk of the Board

# 2010 PMlOMaintenance Plan and Redesignation Request forthe CosoJunction Planning Area May 17,2010
Prepared by: Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District

2010 District Governing Board: 

### Tom Sweeney, Alpine County, Chairman Linda Arcularius, Inyo County, Vice-Chairman Richard Cervantes, Inyo County Byng Hunt, Mono County D, "Hap" Hazard, Mono County Neil McCarroll, Town ofMammoth Lakes Henry "Skip" Veatch, Alpine County

Authors: 

### Duane Ono, Deputy Air Pollution Control Officer Ken Richmond, ENVIRON International Corp.

Great Basin Unified Air.Pollution Control District 

### Theodore Schade,Air Pollution Control Officer 157Short Street Bishop, California 935 14 Tel: (760) 872-821, Fax: (760) 872-6109 Website: www

### .gbuapcd.orgTllc authors gratefully acknowledge the excellent support from Mike Slates for providing maps, Phil1 Kiddoo and Chris Howard for analyzing the PMlO and meteorological data, Dan Johnson for data collection and photo documentation at CosoJunction, and Jonathan Bccknell for updating the emissions inventory for permitted facilities.2010 CosoJunction PMlO Maintenance Plan


### PMlO Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Coso Junction PMlO Planning Area
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This document is a revision to the 2004 PMlO StateImplementation Plan (SIP) for the Coso Junction PMlO Planning Area. It includes 1)a request to redesignate the area from nonattainment for the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PMlO (federal standard)to attainment based on monitoring data and a modeling analysis, and 2) a maintenance plan that contains requirements to ensure the federal PM10 standard will not be violated in the future. As required to redesignate the area to attainment, the enclosed monitoring data and modeling analysis showthe Coso Junction Planning Area (CJPA) had less than or equal to 1.0average annual exceedances ofthe federal PMlO standard (150 Clglm3 for a 24-hour average) duringthe 3-year period from January 2007 through December 2009. The 2004 State Implementation Plan forthe Coso Junction Planning Area examined the PMlO problem during the period from 1985 to 2003. Duringthat period, 15violations ofthe federal 24-hour PM10 standard were monitored atthe Coso Junction rest area on Highway US 395. Thirteen ofthose violationswere found to have been caused by windblown dust from the dry lake bed of Owens Lake that is 14 miles outside (to the north) ofthe Coso Junction Planning Area. In November 2004, the District adopted a SIPfor the CJPA to explain how the area would be brought into attainment. Since PMlO violations at Coso Junction were primarily caused by windblown dust from OwensLake, the Coso Junction attainment demonstration relied on implementing dust controls outside ofthe planning area. Under the 2003 OwensValley PMlO SIP,windblown dust from 29.8 square miles ofthe dry lake bed at Owens Lake were required to be controlled by December 2006. A dispersion modeling analysis showedthese dust mitigation efforts would be adequate to bring the Coso Junction Planning Area into attainment. A review ofdaily ambient monitoring data from Coso Junction showed three monitored exceedances of the federal 24-hour PMlO standard (150 micrograms per cubic meter, during the 3-year period from January 2007through December 2009. The federal 24-hour PMlO standard allows no more than an average of 1.0 expected exceedancesper year over a 3-year period. Since daily PMlO monitor data showed the monitor site had an average of 1.0 exceedancesper year, PM 10 levels near the monitor site can be considered to be in attainment with the federal standard. A closer examination ofthe three exceedances found that two exceedances in 2007 (61512007, 217 pg/m3; 121612007,283 were caused by windblown dust from an unpaved truck parking area west ofthe PM10 monitor site. The owner ofthe unpaved parking area was notified and the area was graveled in 2008 and surfaced with asphalt in 2009 to control fugitive dust. The third monitored exceedance (12/22/2009, 168 was caused by windblown dust 

### from Owens Lake. During that event, dust source areas at Owens Lake that were not previously identified in the 2003 OwensValley SIPcontributed to the exceedance at CosoJunction. A revision to the Owens Valley SIP in 2008 included the majority ofthese dust source areas as part ofa11 additional 9.8 square miles ofthe lake bed that was controlled using shallow flooding in2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan April 2010. Another 3.5 square miles ofthe lake bed are expected to be controlled by October 20 10. Therefore, dust control measures were implemented to mitigate the causes ofdust for all three PM 10exceedancesat Coso Junction that took place during the 3-year attainment demonstration period. Although daily PM10monitor data collected at the CosoJunction rest area showed the area could be considered to be in attainment with the federal standard, higher PM10 levels are likely to have occurred at locations closer to OwensLake, since this isthe primary source of windblown dust that caused CosoJunction to be designated nonattainment. Themonitor site at the CosoJunction rest area is about 18miles south of OwensLake, while the northern boundary ofthc CJPA is closer at 14miles from Owens Lake. To determine ifwindblown dust from Owens Lake caused PM 10violations atthe northern boundary or at other locations in the CJPA, a dispersion model was run to analyze windblown dust impacts for the 3-year period from July 2006 through June 2009. Toevaluate attainment through a modeling analysis, the fourth highest value over a 3-year period must be below 150Clg/m3 at all locations. TheDistrict used the CALPUFFdispersion model, which is a guideline model recommended by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) for long-range transport and situations where complex winds influence dispersion. As expected, the CALPUFF model showed the highest PM 10 concentrations were at the northern boundary ofthe CJPA. The highest site had two days with modeled impacts above 150 C1g/m3 and a third high concentration of 150 ~lg/rn~. Since 150 Clg/m3 is not an exceedance of the PMlO standard there were only two modeled exceedances at the highest receptor site in the CJPA. The fourth highest modeled value at the same site for the 3-yearperiod was 137Clg/m3. Therefore, the CALPUFF model analysis demonstrated it is reasonable to believe that attainment ofthe standard was achieved at all locations in the planning area. As a result ofour evaluation of monitoring data and a CALPUFFmodeling analysis, the District recom~nends through the adoption of this SIPrevision that the California Air Resources Board request the US EPA redesignate the CosoJunction Planning Area from nonattainmentto attainment for the federal PMlO standard. Toensure compliance with the federal PMlO standard is maintained in future years, the District evaluated future activities that could affect PM10 levels in the planning areaand the adequacy of existingrules, policies and emission control requirements to control emissions from those sources and activities. District stafffound that existing rules for fugitive dust and new source review were adequateto control potential new sourceswithin the CosoJunction Planning Area. For PMlO sourcesoutside the planning area, the major concern is for windblown dust from Owens Lake. District staffbelieves the control strategy and contingency requirements in the 2008 OwensValley PM 10 SIP are adequatetoprotect air quality in the CosoJunction area. 'Therefore, no additional contingency measures will be needed to ensure future compliance with the federal PM10 standard in the CosoJunction Planning Area.2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan
PMlO Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the CosoJunctionPMlO Planning Area Table of Contents Page 

### Executive Summary Table of Contents Glossary 1 

### iii 

### v Sections 

### 1 Planning Area 

### 1 2 Clean Air Act Regulatory History 1 

### 3 Air Quality 4 

### 4 Attainment Emissions Inventory 

### 9 4.1 Stationary Source Emissions 

### 9 4.2 Area Source Emissions 9 4.3 Mobile SourceEmissions 10 4.4 Emissions Growth Forecast 10 4.5 Wind Erosion from Sources Other than OwensLake 11 

### 5 Control Strategy 11 

### 5.1 Contingency Measures 12 5.2 Miscellaneous Sourcesand Model Background 15 6 Air Quality Modeling and Attainment Demonstration 16 6.1 Modeling Techniques 16 6.2 Model Results 18 7 

### Transportation Conformity 22 8 General Conformity 

### 9 Request to Redesignate CosoJunction to Attainment 22 10 Request toApprove CosoJunction PM10Maintenance Plan 23 1 1 

### References 242010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan

PMlO Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Coso Junction PMlO Planning Area Table of Contents

Appendices A PM 10Air Quality Data for Coso Junction, CA (1985 -2009) 

### H PMI0 Concentrations and I-Iourly 

### Meteorological Data for Exccedance Days Board Order #080 128-01 Requiringthe City of Los Angeles to Undcrtake Measures to Control PMlO Enlissions from thc Dricd Bed oSOwcns Lake 

### D Dispersion Modeling Results for Coso Junction PMlO Planning Area Figures Coso Junction PNI 10 Planning Area map Former Searles Valley PM 10Planning Area map PM10 n~onitors in and ncar the Coso Junction Planning Area Emissions trend for Owens Lake emission reductions Photo oftruck parking area west of Coso Junction PM10 monitor site CALI'UFF modeling domain 4"' highest PM I0 model concentration from July 2006through June 2009 Map of 24-hour average PM 10 predictions forthe design day Page 2 3 5 13 15 17 20 2

### 1

Tables 1 Summary ofPM10 exceedances in the Coso Junction Planning Area 6 2 Exceedances associated with windblown dust from Owens Lake 7 

### 3 Annual PMlO Concentrations in the Coso Junction Planning Area 8 4 PM 10emissions inventory forthe Coso Junction Planning Area (2009-2025) 10 5 Existing District Rules and Regulations for control sources of PM 10 14 6 Summary ofmaximum PMl0 model predictions 192010 CosoJunction PMIO Maintenance Plan


### GLOSSARY
CALPUFF CARB CFR CH&SC CJPA CoGa CoJu District Dust ID Program Federal Standard GBUAPCD PMlO PSD SIP US EPA A USEPA recommended air quality model for long-range transport and situationswhere complex winds influence dispersion. California Air Resources Board Code ofFederal Regulations California Health and Safety Code CosoJunction Planning Area Coso Gate model receptor site CosoJunction model receptor site Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District Owens Lake Dust Identification Program National Ambient Air Quality Standard (PM10 = 

### 150vg/rn3for a 24-hour average) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District particulate matter less than 10 microns Prevention of Significant Deterioration State Implementation Plan United StatesEnvironmental Protection Agency

kilometers meters per second miles per hour micrograms per cubic meter2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan



### BLANK PAGE2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan
PMlO MaintenancePlan and Redesignation Request for the Coso Junction PMlO Planning Area 1 Planning Area The Coso Junction PMlO Planning Area (CJPA) is located in Eastern California in the southern portion of Inyo County (Figure 1).It is an arid desert area that receives less than 5 inches ofrain per year.The area is rural in nature and sparsely populated. The principle PM 10monitor site is located atthe Coso Junction rest area in the Rose Valley. Thisvalley is flanked by the Sierra Nevada and Coso mountain ranges. The China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station, which covers most of the CJPA, is generally restricted from public access. Air pollution in the Coso Junction Planning Area is dominated by windblown dust transported from OwensLake, which is located outside the planning area. Air pollution from District permitted facilities within the CJPA boundaries has generally not had a significant impact on PMlO concentrations in the planning area. These sources include the Coso geothermal power operations, military operations at the China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station, and volcanic cinder and pumice mining operations. Although generally not a problem in the planning area, high PM 10readings were documented in 1990 due to windblown dust from abandoned agricultural land, in 2002 from a wildfire, and in 1990from windblown dust from an unpaved truck parking area. None of thesetypes ofevents are expected to recur at CosoJunction. The agricultural landjust north ofthe monitor site was stabilized by natural vegetation cover in 1991 after the land was fallowed. Since that time no agricultural activities have taken place in the CJPA. Dust from the unpaved truck parking area, located adjacent to the PM10monitor site was mitigated by covering it with gravel in 2008 and then asphalt pavement in 2009. 

### 2 Clean Air Act Regulatory History

. The Coso Junction Planning Area was initially designated as a PMlO nonattainment area in 1987 along with the Indian Wells Valley and Trona. Together they comprised the Searles Valley PMlO nonattainment area as shown in Figure 2. The Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District adopted a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Coso Junction portion ofthe Searles Valley PM10 nonattainment area in November 1991 (GBUAPCD, 1991).This was followed by air quality plans for the Indian Wells Valley and Trona, which were regulated by the Kern County Air Pollution Control District and the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (formerly San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control District). In August 2002, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)redesignated the SearlesValley into three separate PMlO nonattainment areas. Under this regulatory action, Coso Junction and the Indian Wells Valley were classified as moderate PMlO nonattainment areas, and a finding ofattainment was made for Trona. (Federal Register, 2002a, 2002b) In 2003, Indian Wells Valley was reclassified to attainmentwith US EPA's approvaI ofthe Moderate Area SIPand Maintenance SIP. (Federal Register, 2003a and 2003b) In November 2004, the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District adopted a SIPrevision for the CosoJunction PM 10PlanningArea that forecast compliancewith the federal PMlO standard in 2010.2010 Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan Figure 1. The Coso Junction PlanningArea is located inthe southern portion of lnyo County, CA. Much ofthe planning area iscovered by the China Lake NavalAir Weapons Station, which has restricted access for the general public. Most of the PMIO standard exceedances monitored at Coso Junction were caused bywindblown dust from the exposed lake bed at Owens Lake.2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan

Figure 2. The Searles Valley PMIO NonattainmentArea was reclassified into three separate planning areas in 2002. Indian Wells Valley and Trona were classified attainment for the federal PMlO standard in 2002 and 2003.

The Coso Junction attainment demonstration was based on controlling dust from Owens Lake, which was scheduled to implement dust control measures on 29.8 square miles ofthe lake bed by December 

### 31,2006. The 2004 CosoJunction SIP included a CALPUFF dispersion model analysis that indicated that after dust controls were implemented at Owens Lake at the end of 2006, the Coso Junction Area would be in attainment. However, an additional 

### 3 years ofdata collection and monitoring were needed to demonstrate the CJPA had attained the PMlO standard. This document is intended to provide the air quality monitoring data and modeling analysisto demonstrate the area has attained the PMlO standard. In addition, it includes regulatory requirements to ensure the CJPA will maintain compliance with the federal PMlO standard in the future.2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan
3 Air Quality 

### 'fwcnty-two exceedances ofthe federal 24-hour PMlO standard were monitored at Coso Junction in the 24years from 1985 to 2009. Eighteen out of22 of these exceedances were caused by dust fro117OwensLake. High northerly winds and high PM10 concentrations near Owens Lake are good indicators for windblown dustto be transported from the exposed lake bed at Owens Lake to the CJPA. '1'0 

### docu~ncnt he Owens Lake dust impact at Coso Junction and other downwind sitcs, a 

### specialpurpose monitoring network was operated from 1993to 1996. 

### Thc monitoring network shown in 

### IYigurc 3 mcasurcd Owens Lake dust impacts at five downwind sitcs and found exceedanccs of the standard as far as 50 miles from Owens Lakc. PM I0 monitors at Coso Junction, Navy 1, and Pcarso~lvillc are within the CJPA boundaries. Sites north of Coso Junction are in the Owcns Valley PM 10 planning area and the monitor sites in Ridgecrest and Inyokern are in the Indian Wells PMlO planning area. Table 1 shows a summary of the PM 10exceedances monitored in the CJPA and the levels measured at other sites in the network. Table 2 shows PM10 concentrations, wind speed and directions in 

### the Owens Lake area for these exceedance days. As previously mentioned, 18 of the 22 exceedances in the CJPA were caused by dust from Owens Lake. The exceptionsto this are four events measured at Coso Junction on 4/23/90, 7/25/02, 6/5/07, and 12/6/07. The event on 4/23/90 was caused by windblown dust from abandoned agricultural land located upwind from the monitor site. In 1991, this agricultural field naturally revegetated after heavy March rains. Sincethat time, the field has remained covered with volunteer vegetation and has not been observed as a dust source area. (GBUAPCD, 1991) The event on 7/25/02 was caused by smoke from the McNally wildfire in the Sierra about 20 miles west of the planning area. About 150,000acres of mixed conifer, heavy brush and grass burned from July 2 1to August 29, 2002. (Wilderness Society, 2003) Twoevents on 6/5/07 and 12/6/07 were caused by windblown dust from an unpaved truck parking area west ofthe PM10 monitor site. Thetruck stop owner was notified and the parking area was surfaced with gravel in 2008 and recycled asphalt in 2009. Table 

### 3 shows the number ofmonitored exceedances per year, and the expected number of exceedances per year based on the monitoring frequency. Prior to 2006, samples were normally collected on a once every sixth-day, or once every third-day schedule. In 2006, daily PMlO monitoring was initiated at Coso Junction. Table 

### 3 also includes the 3-year annual average PMlO concentrations for Coso Junction, which in 2009 was 19 Clg/m3. However, it should be noted that the US EPA revoked the annual PMlO standard in 2006, which at the time was set at 50 Clg/rn3. A complete list ofPM10 monitor data for Coso Junction and other nearby sites is included in Appendix A, and hourly data for the 22 exceedances is summarized in Appendix B.2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan Figure 3. PMlO monitor locations in and near the Coso Junction Planning Area.
,Rj PMlO Sites 

# ivLone Pine

I

Owens

ex\ 

### ,' 

# . " 

# -- / 

# -- / Vb, Dirty Socks 

## - I Olancha



## R ' Coso Junction

t Navy I \

\\ \I 

# - I ! t \I\

I II 

### #qPearsonville I I 1 1 I I t

# ".

_---

Y \ 0 5 10 15 Miles 1 J2010 Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan

Table I. Summary of PMIO exceedances monitoredover 150 pglm3inthe Coso Junction Planning Area and concentrations at other sites onthe same day. See Table 2 for causes of exceedances inthe CJPA for the dates shown below and Appendix Bfor hourly meteorologicaldata for these events.2010 CosoJunction PMlO Maintenance Plan

Table 2. Overthe last25 years, violations of the federal PMIOstandard in the Coso Junction Planning Area were primarily caused by dust from the Owens Lakearea. See Table 1for PMIO concentrations on the dates shown below and Appendix B for hourly meteorological data for these events.
Exceedance Date
412511985

- 41211986 6/7/1986 Max Speed MPH @ 10 m 30.0

111 511987 21311989 

# 1 I212311993 

# 1 25.7 

# 1 35 

# 1 Nwind all day. Owens Lake Dust 

# 1 37.5 27.5

412311990 1012611993 Direction of Max Wind Degrees

335

40.0 38.0



# 1 41811995 

# 1 23.2 

# 1 316 

# 1 COSO Junction Met, Owens Lake Dust 

# 1 Primary Cause of Exceedance
Nwind all day, Owens Lake Dust,Coso Met 350

26.0 29.3

I I I

-- 41911995 

# / COSO Junction Met, Owens Lake Dust 

# I Nwind all day, Owens Lake Dust

35 285



# 1 412111995 

# 1 29.2 

# / 7 

# / Nwind all day. Owens Lake Dust 

# 1 315 Variable winds during day, Owens Lake I Dust

Nwind all day, Owens Lake Dust Variable winds during day, Owens Lake Dust 

# 1
272 18

.

1/5/1994

- 38 

# 1 Nwind all day. Owens Lake Dust 

# I AbandonedAg Land Dust Nwind all day,Owens Lake Dust

22 31.O



# 1 5/23/1996 

# 1 30.7 

# 1 5 

# 1 Nwind all day. Owens Lake Dust 

# 1 Variable winds during day, Owens Lake Dust

31611998 311811998



# 1 I21612007 

# 1 42.6 

# 1 252 

# 1 Wwind. Coso Junction Parking Area Dust 

# 1 34.9 12.0 

### --- 

# 1 7/25/2002 17.6 

# 1 I212812006 6/5/2007 354 Variable winds during day, Owens Lake Dust 48 Variable winds during day, Owens Lake Dust 163 

# 1 2/2/2003 McNally Firesmoke 36.2 46.8 36.2 

# 1 I212212009 

# 1 39.1 3 

# 1 Nwind all day. Owens Lake Dust 337 

## 1 Nwind all day, Owens Lake Dust

1 264

Nwind, Regionaland Owens Lake Dust W wind, Coso Junction ParkingArea Dust2010 Coso Junction PM10 Maintenance Plan

Table 3. The expected number of exceedances peryear has decreased since dust control measureswere implemented on 29.8 square miles ofthe Owens Lake bed in December2006. PMI0 Concentration (pglm3) Number Average Average 24-Hour Exceeds Per Year I Year 

# 1 1985 

## 1 Invalid 307 1 49

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Invalid 28.78 16.69 32.28 Invalid Invalid 38

25.92 0 36 388 692 309 92 59 254 1 2 1 0 2 12 6 12 61 58 51 542010 Coso Junction PM10 Maintenance Plan



### More information on the CosoJunction PMlO monitor site is included in the District's annual Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, which was approved by the US EPA. 

### (GBUAPCD, 2009a) As a commitment in the maintenance plan for the CJPA the District is authorized to continue daily PMlO monitoring at the CosoJunction rest areato ensure new and existing sources ofPM 10are identified and controlled, ifnecessary. (CH&SC $40001)

4 Attainment Emissions Inventory 

### The attainment emissions inventory for the CJPA is based on estimated daily PM10 emissions for 2008. Emission estimates for 2008 aretypical ofemissionsin the CJPA over the 3-year period (2007-09) when PMlO compliance was determined from monitoring and modeling evaluations. PMlO emissionsgenerated in the CJPA are primarily from permitted facilities on the China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station property, which is generally restricted from public access. Table 4 showsthe daily PM10 emissions inventory for permitted facilities in the CJPA and for area and mobile sources. Total PM 10emissions are estimated at 1,478pounds per day. In comparison, total daily PMlO emissions generated in the CJPA are lessthan 0.1% ofthe emissions caused by windblown dust from Owens Lake, which is the primary cause ofPM10 violations at Coso Junction. PMlO emissions from OwensLake wereestimated at 1.55million pounds for the CJPA design day (January 5,2007). 4.1 Stationary Source Emissions The point source emission estimates shown in Table 

### 4 were developed from information contained in current District and federal Title

### V permit files. Unpaved road and haul road emissions for permitted sources are included in the daily emissions for each facility. Emissions were based on 10-hour workdays for the pumice and rock plants. 4.2 Area Source Emissions Unpaved road dust emissions in the area source category are estimated for non-permitted facility related traffic. An estimateofPMlO emissions from reentrained road dust from unpaved roads is based on the method found in US EPA's CompilationofAirPollution Emission Factors,AP-42 (USEPA, 2006). Eq. 1
Where: E = 

### PMlO emissions in pound per vehicle mile traveled s = 

### silt content ofroad surfacematerial (5%) S = 

### mean vehicle speed (30 miles per hour) M = 

### surface material moisture content (assume0.3%) C = 

### emission factor for 1980's vehicle fleet exhaust,brake wear and tire wear (0.00047for PMI0). For PMlO from public unpaved roads: k = 

### 1.8,a = 

### 1,d =

### 0.5 and c =

### 0.2.2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan

Table 4. Daily PMlO emissions inventory for the Coso Junction Planning Area for 2008 through 2025. For the purpose of the maintenance plan, no significant growth is expected in the emissions inventory through the year 2025. (~aily PMlO Emissionsfor 2008 through 2025 

### 1 StationarySources 

### 1 Poundsldav 

### 1 1 167 

### i 1 California Lightweight Pumice

China Lake NavalAir Weapons Station Coso Operating Company HalliburtonServices Twin Mountain Rock



### 1 Mobile Sources 

### 1 1
1 Total PMlO (~ounds ~er dad 

### 1 1.478 

### 1 On-Road MotorVehicles

Equation 

### 1 yields an emission rate of 0.83 pounds of PM10 per vehicle mile traveled. Assunling an average of2 vehicle trips per day on 50 miles of unpaved roads 

### in the public portion ofthe CJPA, yields 100vehicle-miles per day and 83 pounds of PMlO per day. (CARB, 20 10a) 12

PMlO from paved road dust is based on CARB's emission estimates for Inyo County 

### in 2008 (0.99 tons of PM 10 per day) and pro-rated forthe proportion of traffic 

### in the CJPA (5.1%), which yields 101 pounds per day. (CARB, 20lob) Based on population growth in Inyo County, area source emissions are not expected to change significantly in future years. 4.3 Mobile Source Emissions PM 10 from on-road motor vehicle emissions (excludes re-entrained road dust) is based on CARB's emission estimates for lnyo County in 2008 (0.12 tons of PMIO per day) and pro-rated forthe proportion oftraffic in the CJPA (5.1%), which yields 12pounds per day. (CARB, 2010) The mobile source emissions are not expected to change in future years. 4.4 Emissions Growth Forecast Due to the sparse population, lack of population growth, and the expectation that industrial operations in the planning area will not change significantly, the emissions inventory forecast will remain stable for all future years. The 2000 US census shows 102 people living in the Coso Junction Planning area in the communities ofPearsonville and klomewood Canyon. This is about 0.5% ofthe total population ofInyo County. According to the 

### US Census Bureau, Inyo County's population declined from 18,281 in 1990 to 17,945in 2000. Population continued to2010 Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan


### decline to 17,136 in 2008. Over those 18 years, Inyo County's population decreased by 4.5%. (US CensusBureau, 20 10) For the purpose ofthe emissions forecast for the maintenance plan, the daily PM10 emissions inventory will be the same as shown in Table 4 for the next 17 years through the year 2025. 4.5 Wind Erosion from SourcesOther than Owens Lake Undisturbed open areas in the CJPA are generally invulnerable to significant wind erosion. Ambient monitors show low PM10 concentrations (23 vg/m3)on windy days when winds are not from the direction ofOwens Lake or other known windblown dust source areas (see section 5.2). Two known windblown dust source areas in the CJPA, however were found to be significant. In 1990 and 2007, three exceedances ofthe federal PMlO standard were monitored at Coso Junction, which were caused by windblown dust from a fallow agricultural field and an unpaved truck parking area (see Table 2). As noted in the air quality discussion, these areas are no longer a dust problem sincethe agricultural field is protected by volunteer vegetation cover and the truck parking area is now paved. Sincethese areas areno longer a significant source ofdust, they arenot included in the daily PMlO emissions in Table 4 for the years 2008 through 2025. However, PM 10emissions from these source areas can be estimated for each ofthe event days in 1990 and 2007. A wind tunnel-based emissions algorithm was developed for the 1998Owens Valley PMlO SIP, which can be used to estimate PMlO emissionsfrom the agricultural field 

### ,public unpaved roadways and the unpaved truck parking area. The Owens Lake emissions equation forthe fall period (equation 2) provides a good estimate for wind erosion in the CJPA sincethe surfaces can be considered to be disturbed, but they lack the efflorescent salts that characterize the lake bed surface at Owens Lake in the spring. (E =

### 0 in equation 2 for u

### 57.6 m/s) (GBUAPCD, 1998) E = 

### 1.34x 

### 10-5 e(0.25X~) Eq. 2 Where: 

### E = 

### PMlO emissions in grams per square meter per second u = 

### Hourly averagewind speed at 10m in meters per second (for u >

### 7.6 m/s) Appendix B includes meteorological data for these three wind events. The agricultural field covered 314.5 acres on 412311990, and the PMlO emissionson that day are estimated at 12,566 pounds. Wind erosion from the unpaved truck parking area (4.7 acres) is estimated at 55

### 1 pounds on 6/5/2007 and 763 pounds on 12/6/2007. Wind erosion from unpaved roadways in the CJPA (46.8 acres) is estimated at 5,489 pounds on 6/5/2007 and 7,611 pounds on 12/6/2007.



### 5 Control Strategy 

### As discussed in the Air Quality section ofthis document,PM10 exceedances in the CJPA are primarily due to the transport ofwindblown dust from the Owens Lake area. Therefore, achieving emission reductions at Owens Lake is the primary control strategy for reaching attainment in the CJPA. The US EPA classified the southern OwensValley as a serious PMlO2010 CosoJunction PMlO Maintenance Plan


### nonattainment area 

### in 1993 and required a SIPbe developed to achieve compliance with the federal standard. A SIP was adopted in 1998and approved by the US EPA for the Owens Valley with an interim control strategythat required dust controlson 16.5 square miles ofthe lakebed. Under the Owens Valley SIP,the City ofLos Angeles is responsible for mitigating the dust generated 

### from OwensLake in orderto bring the area into attainment with the federal standard. (CI3UAPCD, 1998) The Owens Valley SIPwas revised in 2003 to expand dust controlsto 29.8 square miles of the lake bed by December 31,2006.(GBUAPCD, 2003)The City ofLos Angeles successfullyimplemented these control measures by the required deadline. Another revision to the Owens Valley SIP in 2008 expanded controlrequirements to a total of43.1 square miles ofthe Owens Lake bed. The Board Orderto implement control measures in the 2008 SIP is included asAppendix C ofthis 

### document. Tlic City ofLos Angcles is expected to havc dust control measurcs i~nplementcd on 39.6 square ~nilcs ofthe lakebed by April 

### 1, 2010, and then to expand the control area to 43.1 square miles by October I, 2010. (CBUAPCD, 2008; GBUAPCD, 2009b) Figure 

### 4 shows the annual PMlO emissions trend for the Owens Valley planning area. The blue line represents total PMlO emissions from all sources in the planning area, and the red line rcpresents the windblown dust emissions from the Owens Lake bed. The dashed lines represent emission forecastsfor Owens Lake based on the implementation ofadditional control measures on the lake bed and 

### in the Keeler Dunes. Actual PMI0 emissions from the Owens Lake bed have been reduced by 90% since 2000 when the City ofLos Angeles initiated efforts to control windblown dust at Owens Lake. Windblown dust emissionswere estimated using hourly PM10 emission measurements collected through the Owens Lake Dust Identification Program. Hourly data on windblown dust was collected from 2000 through 2008 using the methodology described in the Owens Valley PM10 SIP. (GBUAPCD,2008) The decrease

### in windblown dust emissions from Owens Lake after 2006 is reflected in the reduction 

### in Owens Lake-caused PMlO exceedances monitored at Coso Junction in 2007,2008 and 2009 (Table 3). The additional 2008 Owens Valley SIP control measures,which will be implemented in 2010 should result in 

### even lower PM10 levels at Coso Junctionthan those observed duringthis 3-year period. Other sources ofPM10 that caused exceedancesof the federal standard at Coso Junction included; awildfire and windblown dust from agriculturaloperation and from an unpaved truck parking area. These-eventswere discussed 

### in the Air Quality section ofthis document. Current District rules are adequate to prevent agricultural operations, prescribed burning, and windblown dust from disturbed surface areas from causing exceedancesofthe standard in the future. Table 5 showsthe current District rulesthat limit PM 10emissions 

### in the planning area. 5.1 ContingencyMeasures The Owens Valley SIP also includes contingencymeasures (referred to as Supplemental Control Requirements in the Owens Valley SIP) that require the City of Los Angeles to implement dust control measures on any new windblown dust areas on the lakebed and to improve dust control measures in 

### areaswhere it is necessary to prevent exceedancesofthe PMlO standard at any locationon the shoreline of Owens Lake (see Appendix C,Board Order #080128-01Requiring the 

### CityofLosAngeles to Undertake Measures to Control PMI0Emissions from the Dried Bed ofOwensLake). 

### The District will rely on all the PMlO controlmeasures and the Supplemental Control Requirements in the Owens Valley SIP,and existingDistrict rules to ensure compliance2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan Figure 4. Since 2000, actual PMlO emissions from the exposed lakebed at Owens Lake have decreased by 90% as a result of dust control measures implemented by the City of LosAngeles. PMlO emissionswill decrease in 2011 after additional dust controls are implemented on 13.3 square miles of the lake bed. This will bringthe total to 43.1 square miles of dust control areas.

-t--lakabad Ernlsslonr

is maintained in the CJPA. The Board Order in Appendix C includes all the Owens Lake control measures and the Supplemental Control Requirements, which the District will rely on to prevent Owens Lake dust from causing future violations in the CJPA. (GBUAPCD, 2008) The District is authorized to continue daily ambient PMlO monitoring at Coso Junction (CH&SC 

## 9 40001). If an exceedance ofthe federal PMlO standard is monitored theDistrict will investigate the cause ofthe exceedance within 60days following the end of the calendar quarter during which the event occurred. Exceedances found to be caused by dust from Owens Lake will be investigated to determine ifthe required control measures were properly implemented in accordance with Board Order#080128-01. Exceedances found to be caused by dust from local sourcesthat are subject to current District regulations will be addressed and corrected. Exceedances found to be caused by Exceptional Events, such aswildfires or earthquakes will be flagged in accordance with US EPA policy (Federal Register, 2007). To prevent new facilitiesfrom causing an air pollution problem, any new facilities in the CJPA that may emit air pollution will be subjectto the District's new source review rules (209-A, 216 and 2 16-A). Facilities that qualify as a major source under the US EPA federal permitting guidelines will also be subject to federal PSD (Prevention of Significant Deterioration) permitting requirements (40 CFR 51.166and 52.21).2010 Coso Junction PM10 Maintenance Plan

Table 5. Existing District rules and regulations to control sources of PM10.
Description
209-A

21 Requires new sources with PMlO emissions greater than 250 pounds per day of total suspendedparticulates, or facility modifications of greaterthan 15tons per year of PM 10to apply Best Available Control Technology to control PM eniissions. Requires the Air Pollution Control Officer to evaluate air pollution impacts before issuing an Authority to Construct or Permit to Opcrate for a new facility, 216-A

408 I Limits agricultural burning operations to designated burn days and requires a burn permit. I<cquirespermits for any new secondary source of air pollution including buildings, commercial parking and housing developments. Limits visible emissions from any source, except those exempted under Rule 405, to

40

409 

# 1 Limits range improvement burning to designated burn days and requires a burn plan be approved by the Air Pollution Control Officer. 400 I less than Ringelmann 1 or 20% opacity. Requires reasonable precautions be taken to prevent visible particulate emissions from crossingthe property boundary.

410 

# 1 Limits forest management burning lodesignated burn days and requires a burn plan be aoproved by the Air Pollution Control Officer. Prohibits sources of air pollution from causing a nuisance to the public or endangering 402 public health and safety.

Limits wildland management burning to designated burn days and requires a burn plan be approved by the Air Pollution Control Officer. 502 

# 1 Requires conservation management plans to reduce fugitive dust emissions from agricultural operations greater than 10 acres in Inyo, Mono and Alpine Counties Requires that federal actions and federally funded transportation-related projects Reg. XI1 conform to SIPrules and that they donot interfere with effortsto attain federal air quality standards. Requires that federal actions and federally funded projects conform to SIPrules and Reg 

# I that they do not interfere with efforts to attain federal air quality standards. Federal actionsthat have the potential to emit more than 100tons per year of PM10 in the CJPA will be required to complete a conformity determination.2010 CosoJunction PMIO Maintenance Plan Figure 5. Windblown dustfrom this truck parking area located west of the PMIO monitor site at the CosoJunction rest area causedtwo exceedances of the PMIO standard in 2007. The parking area was graveled in 2008 to control dust. In 2009, most of itwas paved and used as astaging area for a highway construction project. 'The PMIO monitor site isthe structure with the railing on top inthe center of the photo. Coso Junctionwind measurementsare taken at a 10 m height on the tower to the left (north)of the PMIO monitor. (View looking to the northeast, February24, 2010)



### 5.2 Miscellaneous Sourcesand Model Background To determine the PMlO contribution from miscellaneous sources other than Owens Lake on days with Owens Lake dust events,the District reviewed the hourly PMlO data from the Coso Junction monitor site. By looking at hours with high winds (>7 

### mls, 16 mph) and screening out wind directions from Owens Lake and the unpaved parking area located to the west ofthe monitor, the average PMlO concentration at CosoJunction was determined to be 23 pg/m3on windy days. This is close to the average background concentration of20 pg/m3that was determined for sites in the OwensValley Planning Area. Ifthe unpaved parking area had been included in the wind direction screening,the average PMlO concentration for high wind hours would have been 40 pg/m3. However, sincethis source has already been adequately controlled by gravel and asphalt pavement it will not be treated in the model attainment demonstration. Figure 5 shows a photo taken on February 24, 2010 ofthe paved truck parking area located west ofthe Coso Junction PMlO monitor site. To account for sources other than windblown dust from Owens Lake in the attainment demonstration a background concentration of 20 pg/m3was added to all 24-hour model predictions.2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan
6 Air Quality Modeling and Attainment Demonstration 

### Since 18 ofthe 22 PM10 violationsmonitored at Coso Junction were found to have been caused by windblown dust from the Owens Lake bed, the Owens Valley PMlO model was used to model the attainment demonstrationfor the Coso Junction PM 10redesignation request and maintenanceplan. It should be noted the four non-Owens Lake-caused exceedances,were caused by: windblown dust from a fallow agricultural field,which is now stabilized with volunteer vegetation; an unpaved truck parking area, which has since been paved and graveled; and a wildfire in 2002. The air quality modeling study was not intended to simulate these types of non-recurrent events. Dispersion modeling was performed to estimate PM10 concentrations during high wind events along the southern boundary oftheOwensValley PM10 Planning Area, which is the northern boundary of the CJPA.Dust source areas at Owens Lake were simulated using the methods described in the Owens Valley PMl0PlanningArea 2003 and 2008 State ImplementationPlan revisions (GBUAPCD, 2003; GBUAPCD, 2008). Based on the sand flux and meteorological data collected duringJuly 2006 to June 2009, the simulations suggest PMlO concentrations from dust source areas on Owens Lake will not cause violations of the federal PM10 standard in the neighboring CosoJunction PM 10planning area. 6.1 Modeling Techniques Dispersion model simulationswere performed with the regulatory version 5.8 of the CALPUFF modeling system followingthe techniques ofthe Owens Lake Dust ID Program summarized in the 2003 and 2008 Owen Valley SIPS.Thedata collected by the Owens Lake Dust ID Program include surface meteorological data (at 10mheight), upper air meteorological soundings, source area delineations, and horizontal sand flux observations. Sand flux measurementsare used asthe basis for PMlo emission rates from windblown sources on Owens dry lakebed. Full details on the modeling protocol for this study can be found in DistrictBoard Order#080128-01, Attachment C, Section 6.0 (included as Appendix C 

### ofthis document). Someof the features of the Coso Junction CALPUFFmodel simulation were: Model simulationperiod was from July 2006 to June 2009 using the last three years of data available from the Owens Lake Dust ID Program. The Owens Valley study domain was extended to the south to include the common boundary ofthe southern Owens Valley and northern Coso Junction PMIO planning areas. The revised modeling domain is depicted 

### in Figure 6.The revised study domain is 36 km-by-67 km versus the Owens Valley domain of34 km-by-48 km. The same vertical and horizontal mesh sizes are used in both modeling analyses. Data collected at two additional surface meteorological stations 

### in the southern portions ofthe current domain were used to construct the wind fieldsfor the simulations.Data from the Coso Junction (CoJu) and Coso Gate (CoGa) sites shown in Figure 6 were prepared using the samemethods as described in the Owens Valley PMlO SIP.2010 Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan
Figure 6. The dispersion modelingdomainfor the Owens Valley and Coso Junction Planning Areas was 36 km by 67 km.

USGS Land Use

Salt Flat/Sand/Barren

Wetland

Water

Forest
Range Agriculture

Mixed urban

@ Met. Site TEOM

UTM East-West (h)2010 

### Coso Junction PM10 MaintenancePlan
To assess attainment,PMlO concentration predictionswere obtained at 90 receptors placed along the southern Owens Valley PMlO Planning Area boundary. 'Phe receptor interval shown in Figure 6 is 300-600 m. A receptor was also placed at the Coso Junction site where current and historical PM 10observations arelhavebeen collected. Area source PMlO emission fluxes were calculated using hourly Sensit sand motion data and seasonal proportionality constants (K-factors) for July 2006 to June 2009. The proceduresused to derive the seasonal75th percentile K-factors are described in the 2003 and 2008 Owens Valley PMlO SIPS. Twelve different area source configurationswere available from the Owens Lake Dust ID Program based on source delineationsforthe three-year period. No additional controls were assumed for the Owens Lake sources. Sources were characterized as observed during the simulationperiod without the effects ofcontrols planned for many of these areas. As in the 2003 and 2008 Owens Valley SIP attainment demonstrations, the current simulationsonly include windblown emissions from sources on the lakebed and the Keeler Dunes.As discussed 

### in the previous section, in orderto account for background and miscellaneous sources, model predictionswere added to a background concentration of20 pg/m3.This same background concentration is also included in the modeling protocol for the Owens Valley SIP (GBUAPCD, 2003; GBUAPCD, 2008). Attainment for the 24-hour PM 10NAAQS was assessed using the fourthhighest daily prediction at the same receptor duringthe three-year simulation. Appendix Dof this document provides a summary of the model results. It also includesan evaluation ofmodel performance comparing predictionsand observations for 10monitor sites in the Owens Valley and Coso Junction planning areas. The model performance results suggest model predictions as a whole are relatively unbiased, but scattered, and that the predicted frequency distributions are generallywithin a factor-of-two of the observed distribution.
6.2 Model Results Table 6 summarizesthe results for the CALPUFF simulationsofOwensLake dust events during July 2006 through June2009, conservatively assuming no future controls would reduce emissions. Figure 7 shows predicted 24-hour design concentrations at the common planning area boundary. The design concentration is the 4th highest 24-hour prediction in the three-year simulation. lfthe design concentration is under the federal standard of 150pg/m3,then that location is in attainment with the standard. The modeling resuIts show the highest design concentration including background at the boundary ofthe CJPA is 137pg/m3.2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan
Table 6. Summary of maximum PMlO model predictions in the Coso Junction Planning Area for the period from July 2006 through June 2009. The design concentration is the 4'h highest 24-hour prediction inthe three-year simulationatthe same location, in this case it is 137 pglm3.



### As would be expected, the highest 24-hour PMlO concentration occurred at theboundary ofthe OwensValley and CosoJunction planning areas near the valley floor and alongthe west side of the valley. The model showed PMlO concentrations decreasing at distances further fiom Owens Lake. The added distance tothe southern boundary ofthe Owens Valley Planning Area and associated greater dilution of dust source plumes, produces much lower predictions than for receptors placed along the Owens Lake shoreline. Figure 8 

### showsthat 24-hour average PMlO concentrations for the model design day for Coso Junction (January 

### 5,2007) decreased at locations further fiom Owens Lake. The dust sources on the Owens Lake bed were simulated as ground level area sources located inside the historical shoreline. TheCALPUFF modeling system assumes passive, non-buoyant ground based sourcesremain ground based asthey travel downwind and concentrations within individual dust plumes always decrease with downwind distance. Stagnation and re-circulation of dust source plumes that might result in pockets ofhigher concentrations at fixed downwind receptor locationsgenerally do not occur concurrently with the regional high wind events that are necessary to produce emissions on the lakebed. When only emissions from lakebed sources are considered, attainment ofthePM10 standard at the northern boundary ofthe CJPA is sufficient to demonstrate attainment within the entire planning area.2010 Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan Figure 7. The predicted 4thhighest 24-hour PMIO concentration over 3 years for receptors on the northern boundary ofthe CJPA are shown on the map below. Every 4threceptor concentration is plotted on the map. The 3-year modeling period is from July 2006 through June 2009.

1 I 1\11 I,~II 1111 I 71 11 I 11 71 400 405 410 415 420 425 430 UTM East-West (km)2010 Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan Figure 8. This isopleth map shows model concentrationsfor the 4thhighest day inthe CJPA over the 3-year modeling period (January 5, 2007). Modeled 24-hour average PMIO concentrations are belowthe federal standardof 150 pglm3 at all locations in the CJPA.

IJ7fM fiat

### - Wcst (krn)2010 Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan


### It should be noted the current analysis used estimates ofwindblown emissions duringJuly 2006 through June 2009-future emissions will be substantially lower. The model simulations for the attainment demonstration did not account for controls currently planned on many ofthese source areas that will be implemented in the future. If planned controls, such asthe 13.3 square miles that will be completed in October 2010 were considered in the modeling analysis, predicted concentrationswould be much lower than suggested by the current simulations.

7 Transportation Conformity 

### 'I'l+ansportation conformity requirementscontained in District Regulation XI1 requirc that federal actions and 

### federally funded transportation pl.ojects conform to SIPrules and that they do not interfere 

### with efforts to attain federal air quality stands. Transportation sources wcrc 1101

### found to contribute to the nonattainment problem at Coso Junction and PM10 from paved roads. Estimated at 113pounds per day, paved road emissions comprise less than 10% ofthe daily PM 10emissions in the CJPA (seeTable4), and lessthan 11100'~ of a percent ofthe Owens Lake dust emissions on the design day (1.55 million pounds on January 5, 2007). Due to their benign role in the PM10 problem in the CJPA,transportation-related projects such asroad construclion will be exempt from Transportation Conformity determination requirements under District Regulation 

### XII.

8 General Conformity 

### General conformity requirements contained in District Regulation XI11 require that fcderal actions and federally funded projects conform to SIPrules and that they do not interfere with efforts to attain federal air quality standards. A conformity determination is currently required for any federally hnded (non-transportation) project or action that takes place in a moderate PM 10nonattainment area, including the CJPA that hasthe potential to exceed a de minimfs 

### PM 10emissionsthreshold of 100 tons per year. In order to maintain the stringencyofcontrol requirements in the CJPA under a maintenance plan, the District will retain the 100tons of PM 10per year deminimis

### emissions threshold for triggering a conformity determination as currently required under District Regulation XIII.



### 9 Requestto Redesignate CosoJunction to Attainment 

### Through this document the District demonstrated that, over the 3-year period from January 2007 through December 2009, the CosoJunction area attained the federal 24-hour standard for PM 10. Daily PMlO monitoring data collected at CosoJunction over the last 3 years has not shown more than 1.0exceedances ofthe PM 10standard per year asrequired to demonstrate attainment ofthe federal standard. In addition, a dispersion modeling analysis was performed for a 3-year period to demonstrate no more than 1.0 exceedances ofthe PMIO standard could be expected at any location in the CosoJunction Planning Area. The District believes the Coso Junctio~l PM10 PlanningArea has attained the federal PM10 standard and requests the California Air Resources Board recommend to the USEnvironmental Protection Agency that the areabe redesignated from nonattainment to attainment wit-hthe federal PM10 standard.2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan


### 10 Request to Approve CosoJunction PMlO Maintenance Plan 

### Toensurethat compliancewith the federal PM10 standard is maintained in future years, the District evaluated future activitiesthat could affect PMlO levels in the planning area and the adequacy ofexisting rules, policies and emission control requirements to control emissions from those sourcesand activities. District stafffound that existingrules for fugitive dust, new source review and General Conformity were adequateto control potential new sourceswithin the Coso Junction Planning Area. Emissions from PMlO sources in the CJPA decreased over the last 18years dueto a drop in local population and the closing ofone ofthe permitted facilities. Emission sources in the CJPA are not expected to increase in the future, but it is more likely that they will either remain steady or decline. However, ifnew facilitiesare constructed in the CJPA, District regulations for new source review (Rule 209-A, 2

### 16, and 216-A) and federal PSD regulations (40 CFR 51.166and 52.21) will prevent PMlO emissions from new facilities from causing or contributing to exceedances ofthe PMl0 standard. The major concern for maintaining PM10 compliance in the CJPA is for windblown dust from OwensLake. Since 13.5 square miles ofadditional control measures are expected to be implemented at Owens Lake by October 1,20 10, PMlO air quality is expected to continue to improve in the CJPA asemissions from Owens Lake decline. District staff believes the control strategy and contingency requirements in the 2008 Owens Valley PM 10 SIP are adequate to protect air quality in the CosoJunction area. Therefore, no additional contingency measures will be needed to ensure future compliance with the federal PMIO standard in the CJPA. Furthermore, asa commitment in the CosoJunction PMlO Maintenance Plan, the District will continue daily monitoring ofPM 10atthe CosoJunction rest area to help ensure new sourcesof PM 10 are identified and controlled ifnecessary. Ifan exceedance ofthe federal PMlO standard is monitored the District will investigatethe cause ofthe exceedance within 60days from the end ofthe calendar quarter in which the event occurred. Exceedances found tobe caused by dust from Owens Lake will be investigated to determine iftherequired control measureswere properly implemented in accordance with Board Order #080 128-01. 

### Exceedancesfound tobe caused by dust from local sources that are subject to current District regulations will be addressed and corrected. Exceedances found to be caused by Exceptional Events, such as wildfires or earthquakes will be flagged in accordance with US EPA policy (Federal Register, 2007). The District requests that this document be approved by the California Air ResourcesBoard as the PM10 Maintenance Plan for the Coso Junction Planning Area and submitted to the US Environmental Protection Agency for their consideration and approval.2010 CosoJunction PMIO Maintenance Plan
I I References CARR, 2010a. Commentson CJPA PM10 Emissions Inventory, California Air Resources Board, May 4,2010. CARB,20lob. Emissions Inventory Data, CaliforniaAir Resources Board, website accessed February l I, 2010,

### http:llwww.arb.ca.govleilemissiondata.htm. Federal Register, 2002a. Clean Air Act Redesignation and Reclassification, Searles Valley Nonattainment Area; Designation of CosoJunction, Indian Wells Valley, and Trona Nonattainn~ent Arcas; California; 

### Determination ofAttainment ofthe PM-10 Standardsfor the Coso Junction Area Particulate Matter of 10 microns or less (PM-lo), Federal Register, August 

### 6, 2002, Vol. 67, no. 151,pp 50805-50808. Federal Register, 2002b. Clean Air Act Redesignation and Reclassification, Searles Valley Nonattain~nent Area; Correction, Federal Register, September 19,2002, Vol. 67, no. 182,pp 59005-59006. Federal Register, 2003a. Approval and Promulgation ofImplementation Plans and Designation ofAreas;California - Indian Wells Valley PM-I0 Nonattainment Area, Federal Register, May 7, 2003, vol. 68, no. 88, pp. 24368-24370. Federal Register, 2003b. Correction of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California-- PM-10 Nonattainment Area, Federal Register, June 23, 2003, vol. 68, no. 120,pp. 37090-3709 1. Federal Register, 2007. Treatment of Data lnfluenced by Exceptional Events, Federal Register, March 22, 2007,vol. 72, no. 55, pp 13560-13581. GBUAPCD, 1991.Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, PMIO StateImplementation Planfor the Searles ValleyPlanningArea, GBUAPCD, Bishop, California, November 1991. GBUAPCD, 1998. Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, Owens Valley PMIO Planning Area Demonstration ofAttainment StateImplementation Plan, GBUAPCD, Bishop, California, November 16, 1998. GBUAPCD, 2003. Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, Owens Valley PM~oPlanning Area Demonstration ofAttainment State ImpfernenlationPlan 2003Revision, GBUAPCD, Bishop, California, November 13, 2003. GBUAPCD,2008. Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, 2008 Owens ValleyPMIO PlanningArea Demonstration ofArtainment StateImplementation Plan, GBUAPCD, Bishop, California, January 28,2008. GBUAPCD, 2009a. Great Basin lJnified Air Pollution Control District,Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, GBUAPCD, Bishop, CA, March 27,2009.2010 Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan GBUAPCD, 2009b. Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, Findings and Order GrantingRegular Variance from Requirements Set Forth in GoverningBoard Order 080128-0, DocketNo. GB09-06, Bishop, California, September 25, 2009. US Census Bureau, 20 10. U.S. Census Bureau, State and County QuickFacts, accessed February 11, 201 0, htt~://auickfacts.census.~iov/qfd/states/O6/06027.html. USEPA, 2006. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Compilation ofAir Pollution Emission Factors AP-42 (Fifth Edition), USEPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, updated at http://www.epa.~iov/ttn/chief/ap42/index.html. Wilderness Society, 2003. Wilderness Society,Summary of the McNally Fire, California:July 21- August 29, 2002, Science & Policy Brief, Wilderness Society, Ecology and Economics Research Department, Washington, DC, No. 10,March 2003.2010 Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan



### BLANK 

### PAGE

### GREAT BASIN UNIFIED

### AIR POLLUTION CONTROLDISTRICT 157Short Strcct, Bishop, Cahforniil 935 14-3537 Tel: 760-872-821I J:as: 760-872-61OC) 

### NOTICE OF 

### EXEMPTION TO: County Clerk County of lnyo FROM: Great Basin UnifiedAir Pollution Control District 157Short Street Bishop, California93514 Project Title: 2010 PMlO Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Coso Junction PlanningArea Project Location

## - Specific: Coso Junction area in EasternCalifornia, southern portion of lnyoCounty Project Location

## - County: lnyoCounty (See Figure 1) Descriptionof Project: The 2010 PM10 MaintenancePlanand RedesignationRequestfor the CosoJunction PlanningArea is a revisionto the 2004 State Implementation Plan (SIP)for CosoJunction. 'The proposed action includes: 1)a requestto the US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency to redesignatethe area from nonattainmentfor the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PMlO (federalstandard) to attainment based on monitoring dataand a modelinganalysis,and 2)a maintenanceplanthat includes requirements to ensurethat the federal PMlO (particulate matter less than 10 microns in nominaldiameter) standardwill not beviolated inthefuture. As requiredto redesignatethe area to attainment,monitoringdata and a modeling analysis showed thatthe Coso Junction PlanningArea (CJPA)compliedwith the federal PMlOstandard (150micrograms percubic meterfor a 24- houraverage) duringthe 3-year periodfrom January2007 through December 2009. The boundariesof the CJPA areshown in Figure 1. No new regulationsare proposedwith the approvalof the maintenance plan or the recommended action for the US EnvironmentalProtectionAgency to redesignate the CJPAfrom nonattainmentto attainmentwith thefederal standard. The Districtwill rely on existing District rulesfor PMlOand requirementsin the 2008 Owens Valley PMlOSIP to ensurethatthe federal PMlOstandard is maintainedinthe CJPA. Agency Approvingand Carrying Outthe Project: Great Basin UnifiedAir Pollution Control District Reason Whythe Project isExempt: The project will notresultina director reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change inthe environment. CEQA Guidelines$15060(c)(2);15061(b)(3).
LeadAgency Contact Person: DuaneOno, DeputyAir Pollution Control Officer,Telephone: (760) 872-821 1 

# - "- /---- C, .ZNJ) // c. Signature: 

## .- . . . B + 

### -b e +.. 

# - Title: Theodore D ~chade, Air Pollut~on Control Officer

Date Received for filing:Theodore D. Schade Air PollufionControlOfficer 

## GREAT BASIN UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL 

## DISTRICT 157ShortStreet,Bishop, California 935143537 760-872-8211 Fax:760-872-6109


### NOTICE OFPUBLIC HEARING ADOPTION AND APPROVAL OF 2010PMlO MAINTENANCE PLANAND REDESIGNATION REQUEST FOR THE COSO JUNCTION PLANNING AREA PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Governing Board of the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District (GBUAPCD) will conduct a public hearing and consider for adoption the 

### 2010 PMlO Maintenance plan and Redesignation Request for the CosoJunction Planning Area (Coso PMlO Plan). The public hearing, and the Governing Board's consideration for adoption, will occur at the District Governing Board's regular meeting on Monday, May 17, 2010 at 10:OO a.m. in the Mono County Supervisors Chamber, Mono County Courthouse, 2" Floor, Main Street (Highway 395), Bridgeport, California 935 17. The public hearing on the Coso PMlO Plan is set for 10:15 a.m. The Coso PMlO Plan includes 1) a request to redesignate the area from nonattainment for the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for PMlO (federal standard) to attainment based on monitoring data and a modeling analysis, and 2) a maintenance plan that contains requirements to ensure the federal standard will not be violated in the future. Other actions related to the adoption of the Coso PMlO Plan may also be taken at the meeting. Members of the public will have an opportunity to submit written comments or make oral statements at the public hearing. The Coso PM10 Plan is available for public review atthe GBUAPCD's Bishop Office, 157 Short Street, Bishop, California, 93514, at the GBUAPCD web-site: www.gbuapcd.org, and at Inyo County Libraries in Independence, Big Pine, Bishop, Lone Pine, Death Valley and Tecopa, California. Copies of the Coso PMlO Plan on CD are free of charge upon request. Hardcopies are available at reproduction cost ($25) and free of charge to Inyo, Mono and Alpine County residents. Written comments are invited, and should be addressed to Theodore D. Schade, Air Pollution Control Officer, Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, 157 Short Street, Bishop, CA 935 14. Written comments received by the close of business Wednesday, April 28, 2010, will be included in the staff report sent tothe Governing Board members. Comments may also be made during the public hearing. For further information, call the District's Board Clerk, Tori DeHaven at (760) 872-8211.

lnyo Register. April 1 and April 15,2010 Mammoth T~mes: April 2,2010 Tahoe Dally Tribune: April 2,2010 Dally Independent April 1 and April 15,2010

## PROOF OF PUBLIC ;TION (201

### 5.5 

### C.C.P.) 

### STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF INYO I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid. I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of the 

### The 

### lnyo 

### Register

County of 

## lnyo The lnyo Register has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Inyo, State of California, under date of Oct. 5, 1953, Case Number 5414; that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than non-pareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof, on the following dates, to wit:
APRIL 

### 1,15 in the 

### year 2010 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing istrue and correct. on this 15TH day of APRIL, 2010


### ,4 Signature Th~s space is for County Clerk's Filing Stamp

Proof of Publication of 

# Public Notice

ADOPTION AND APPROVAL OF2010 PMlO MAINTENANCE PLAN AND REDESIGNATION REQUEST FOR THE COSO JUNCTION -

### ., PLANNINGAREA ,A PLEASE TAKE NOTICE thatt~ the Governing Board of the

# - Great Basin Unif~ed Alr Pollution Control Dislr~ct (GBUAPCD) mll

## - conduct a pubhc hear~ng and consider for adoption the 2010 PA4 10 Maintenance plan and Redes~gnationReqilest lo/ the (Coso PM10 Plan). The public

# I
Coso Juncrron Plann~ng Area - hearing, and the Governing Board's consideration for adoptlon, will occur at the D~strlct Governing Bcard's regular meeting on Monday, May 17, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. in the Mono County Supervlsors Chamber, Mono C~unty Caurthouse, 2nd Floor, Main Street (Highwqy 395), Bridgeport, California 93517. The public hearing on the Coso PM10 Plan is set for 10.15 am. The Coso PM10 Plan Includes 1) a requestto redesignate the area from nonattalnment for the National Amblent Alr Qual~tyStandard tor PMlO (federal standard) to attalnment based on monitoring data and a model~ng analysis, and 2) a maintenance plan that contains requirements to ensure the tederal standard wrll not be v~olated In the future Other actrons related to the adoption 01 the Coso PMlO Plan may also h- ot +harn.r~t#nnhl~rn-Theodore D. Schade Air Pollul~on Control Officer 

## GREAT BASIN UNIFIED AIRPOLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT 157 Short Street, Bishop, California 93514-3537 Tel: 760-872-82 1 1 Fax: 760-872-6109

Mtg. Date: 

### July 14, 2010 To: 

### District Governing Board From: 

### Tori DeHaven, Board Clerk Subject: 

### Approval ofminutes ofthe May 17,2010Governing Board Regular Meeting Summary -

### Attached for the Board's approval are the minutes from the May 17,2010 regular meeting of the District Governing Board.

BOARDACTION Staffrecommends that the Board review and approve the minutes from the May 17,2010meeting

Attachments: May 17,20 10minutes

Governing Board Meeting Minutes from May 17,2010 July 14,2010- Agenda Item No. 3 - Page 1GOT'ERhTING BOARD ILILINIJTES 

### May 17,201 0 (All MeetingsAre Mechanically Recorded) 

### The Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District Governing Board of the Counties of Alpine, lnyo and Mono, State of California met at 10:OO am on May 17, 2010 in the Mono County Supervisors Chambers, Mono County Courthouse, Main Street, Bridgeport, California. The following Board members were present: Board Chair Tom Sweeney, Alpine County; Board member Henry "Skip" Veatch, Alpine County; Board Vice Chair Linda Arcularius, lnyo County; Board member Richard Cervantes, lnyo County; Board member D. "Hap" Hazard, Mono County and Board Alternate John Eastman,Town of Mammoth Lakes. Board members McCarroll and Hunt were absent. GBUAPCD staff present: Ted Schade, Air Pollution Control Officer and Tori DeHaven, Board Clerk. Members of the public included MartinAdams, William Vanwagoner and Eric Rosenblatt of the City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power; Justin Raglin, Lone Pine Paiute Shoshone IndianTribe and Rosanna Marrujo, Owens Valley Indian Water Commission.

Agenda Item#' 

### Board Chair Sweeney called to order the regular meeting of the District Call lo Order 

### Board at 10:06a.m. Board Member Veatch led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda Item#2 

### Board Chair Sweeney opened the public comment period for matters not on Public Comments on Matters not on 

### the agenda at 10:06am. the Agenda (No Action) 

### No members of the public offered comments. Board Chair Sweeney closed the public comment period for matters not on the agenda at 10:06 am. Agenda Item#3 

### Motion (HazardICervantes) approving the minutes of the March 15, 2010 Ofthe 

### regular meetinq of the District Governing Board. minutes of the March 15,2010 Governing Board 

### Motion carried 510 and so ordered. meeting 

### Board member Eastman abstained. BIO 100517-03 Agenda Item #4a 

### Board Chair Sweeney opened the public hearing at 10:07 am to adopt PUBLIC HEARING - ~d~~t,~~ oforders 

### orders to the City of LosAngeles to pay the 2010-2011 fiscal year SB 270 to the City of Los 

### mitigation fees as provided by Section 42316 of the California Health & Angeles to pay the 2010-201I fiscal 

### Safety Code. year SB 270 mitigation fees as provided by Section 

### APCO Schade summarized for the Board the facts and figures surrounding 42316 of the
March 15,2010 Board Meeting Page 1 of7California Health & Safety Code

Agenda Item#4b PUBLIC HEARING FiscalYear 2010-11 Total District Budget
- Staff report, public comments and approval of the District and SB 270 sub-budgets (Second of two required budget hearings) 

### the Assessment. He noted that on page 

### 11 of the Board Packet, a 'three year projection had been prepared by staff at the Board's request. He also noted a decrease in staff due to retiring employees. Board member Hazard noted that the projection was appreciated as was the general effort made by District staff. APCO Schade replied that the projections are based on "business as usual" scenarios. Things may happen which may cause the budget to fluctuate. Board Chair Sweeney called for publictestimony at 10:1 1 am. No members of the public offered testimony. Board ChairSweeney closed the public hearing at 10:ll am and returned discussion to the Board. There was a discussion between Board members and APCO Schade regarding retiring District employees and how this will affect the budget. 

### Motion (ArculariusIHazard) to adopt the "Fiscal Year 2010-2011 SB 270 Assessment Orders to Pav,"for the Reqular SB 270 budqet. Motion carried 610 and so ordered. BIO 100517-4a Board Chair Sweeney opened the public hearing at 10:21 am for the Fiscal Year 2010-2011Total District Budget. APCO Schade summarized for the Board, the aspects ofthe District budget and SB270 sub-budgets. He noted that the only "wrinkle" in the District budget isthat within the Retiree Health Benefits Trustthere is $200,000 in unfunded liability that staff would like to fully fund in additionto $100,000, using money held in reserves. The Board would needto authorize this transfer. The Board and APCO Schade discussed the budget as well as California state financial issues and funding including state subventions. Board Chair Sweeney called for public testimony at 10:29 am. No members of the public offered testimony. Board Chair Sweeney closedthe public hearing at 10:29 am and returned discussion to the Board.

March 15,2010 Board Meeting Page 2 of 7Agenda Item #4c PUBLIC HEARING Approval of the 2010 PMlO Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Coso Junction Planning Area (Coso SIP)

Agenda Item #5 Update by the APCO on the status of the Los Angeles Department of Water & Power's dust control efforts at Owens Lake, including the use of groundwater sources Motion 

### (HazardICervantes) adoptins the total Great Basin UnifiedAir Pollution Control District budqet which includes: a)the proposed fiscal vear 2010-2011 District budaet; and b) the proposed fiscal year 2010-2011 SB 270 budget as well as the authorization of the transfer of $300,000 from reserves to fullv fund the Retiree Health Benefits Trust. Motion carried 610 and so ordered. 510 10051 7-4b Board Chair Sweeney opened the public hearing at 10:30am for the 2010 PMlO Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Coso Junction PlanningArea (Coso SIP). APCO Schade stated that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is under court order to either approve the Coso SIP by July 1,2010 or redesignate the Coso Junction Area as a serious nonattainment area. He then went on to summarize for the Board the history of the Coso Junction Area's current designation by the EPA. Board Chair Sweeney called for public testimony at 10:34am. No members of the public offered testimony. Board Chair Sweeney closed the public hearing at 10:34 am and returned discussion to the Board. Motion 

### (Cervantes/Arcularius) approving Resolution 2010-01 adopt in^ 

### the 2010 PMlO Maintenance Plan and Redesiqnation Request for the Coso Junction Planning Area, making find.ingsof fact and authorizing the APCO to file a Notice of Exemptionfrom CEQA. Motion carried 610 and so ordered. 610 10051 7-4c APCO Schade recappedfor the Board the recent activities on ,theOwens Lake by the Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (the City). Phase 7 constructionwas corr~pleted by the City on time. There are a few areas that aren't as wet as they need to be but staff is working with them on that. Barnard Construction, who is contracted by the City, has been very successful and has actually assisted the District with certain construction needs including moving equipment. April 1,2010 was an important day in the settlement agreement because there were a lot of things that needed to happen in regard to dust control measures. Most got done however, some did not. One change that occurred onApril 1 is that the District was given the ability to issue notices of violation for exceedances of the PMlo standard. The City has never had to payfor any air pollution violations. Underthe new rules,the District is now allowed and prepared to enforce

March 15, 2010 Board Meeting Page 3 of7

### the issuance of NOV'swith fines upto $1

### 0,000 a day. Hethen discussed the fact that the DWP's plan for Moat & 

### Rowwas rejected by the State lands Commission and the idea is dead. APCO Schade stated for the Board and the members of the public that further discussion between the City, Board and District staff regarding the progress at Owens Lake,would be summarized in the minutes but not taken verbatim as it had been in the previous Board meeting. The Board agreed. Discussion than continued with the Board and the general consensus, as established in the previous meeting, was that fines should be imposed. The City needsto do whatever it takes to get into and remain in compliance by the October 1,2010 deadline as required by the previously issued variance. Representativesfrom the City than offered reassurance as to their progress and their efforts to come up with new ideas to replace Moat 

### & Row inthe hopes of securing a lease fromthe SLC intime to meet the October 1,2010 deadline. They also urged the Board, as inthe previous meeting, to not imposefines. However, it was the Board's position that they would back whatever decision is made by the Air Pollution Control Officer when it comes to Noticeof Violations and the issuance of fines. Agenda Item #6 

### Motion (EastmanNeatch) approvinq the consent aaenda items a throuqh f Consent Agenda 

### and h through 

### i asfollows: a) Approval of appropriation changes, carryovers and end-of-year transfer authority. b) Approval of annual Network Monitoring Plan as required by the U.S. EPA. c) Approval of budgeted consulting contracts. d) Approval of contract employee andjanitorial service contracts. e) Approval of offices and monitoring site leases. f) Approval of contracts with lnyo County for legal and financial services and contractwith external independentauditor. h) Approval of out-of-state travel for the Sr. Systems Research Analyst to attend the U.S. EPAAir Quality Systemtraining and conference in Colorado Springs, CO. i) Approval of purchase order with California Survey Drafting Supplyrrrimblefor the purchase of two Global Positioning System units and software. ($12,393.20) j) Approval of purchase order with the Sensit Company for sand motion monitors. ($1 6,686.50) Motion carried 610 and so ordered. 010 100517-06 APCO Schade briefedthe Board on the attempts to get a new van.

. 

### Although this item was previously approved it was brought back to the

March 15,2010 Board Meeting Page 4 of 7Board because it hadto be re-bid due to complications. Motion (ArculariusNeatch) approving the consent agenda items g as follows: g) Approval of purchase of a passenger van (re-bid of previously awarded vehicle). Motion carried 610 and so ordered.

Agenda Item #7 NO questions or comments were offered. Informational items (NoAclion) Agenda Item #' Board member Veatch reportedthat the Kirkwood powerhouse is going to Board member reports (NO Action) be rebuilt. It will be equipped with new-generation generators that won't be as polluting as the old ones.They are pursuing bringing commercial power up Highway 

### 88 from the Salt Springs Reservoir. There's a good chance that this will happen within the next couple years. APCO Schade noted that there is contingent in Kirkwood that does not want diesel powered generators. They want the District to order Kirkwood to use natural gas. However, there a lot of reasons that Kirkwood wouldn't be able to dothis and the APCO intends to issue a permit for the requested diesel engines. This may cause the contingent to ask for a hearing to appeal the issuance of such a permit.The woman heading the contingent opinion is looking toward the future of the Kirkwood residents. Agenda Item #9 APCO Schade noted that the Expert Panel procedures are over. Staff had a Air Pollution Control Officer's Repori booth at the Homeshow recentlythat went over very well; Board members will be provided with bags that were given out at the booth. The next regular meeting of the District Board will convene at 10:30 am on Agenda Item #lo Wednesday, July 14,2010 in Markleeville, California. The District's Board Set date and localionof next Clerk will find and reserve a handicap-accessible meeting room and contact regular meeting District Board members as to its location. (July, usually in Alpine County) Agenda ltem#11 CLOSED SESSION: Evaluationof performance 

### - Section 54957(b)(I) of CLOSED SESSION the California Government Code. Employee being evaluated: Air Pollution Control Officer. Board Chair Sweeney convened the meetingto closed session at 12:llpm. Agenda Item #I2 SESSIO~ CLOSED SESSION: Conference with Labor Negotiator 

### - Section 54957.6

March 15,2010 Board Meeting Page 5 of 7Agenda Item #I3 Approval of Memorandums of Agreement between the Great Basin UnifiedAPCD Governing Board and the Great Basin Unified APCD NonManagement and Management Employee Groups regarding changes inwages and benefits 

### of the California Government Code: Changes regarding the salaries, sdlary schedules or compensation paid in the form of fringe benefits. Employee organizations: Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District Management Employees Group, Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District Non-Management Employees Groups and Air Pollution Control Officer. Board Chair Sweeney reconvened the open session at 1:47 pm The Board came back with nothing to report on item 11. Motion (CervantesNeatch) approvinq and authorizing the Board Chair to sign a memorandum of agreement with manaqement and non-management employees which includes: a I 

### % increase in salaries from 2009-2010 for the 2010-201 1 fiscal Vear with no changes to benefits. Motion carried 610 and so ordered. BIO 10051 7-1 3 Board member Arcularius asked that staff email a "man-power report" specifying classifications and salaries for staff to all the Board members. Itwas also agreed by the Board and APCO Schade that the Air Pollution Control Officer'sjob performance evaluation and complete report would be emailed to the Board as well. Agenda Item #I4 

### Due to contractual questions, this agenda itemwill becarried over untilthe Consideration of contract amendment 

### July 14,2010 Governing Board meeting. with the Air Pollution control Officer for the provisionof personal services as a District officer

Adjournment 

### The meeting was adjourned at 1:49 p.m. The Board will reconvene in open session at 10:30 a.m. on July 14,2010 in Markleeville, California at a location to be determined.

March 15,2010 Board Meeting Page 6 of7Attest: Tom Sweeney, Chair



### Tori DeHaven, 

### Board Clerk

March 15, 20 10 Board Meeting Page 7 of 7

## 201

## 0 PMIO Plan for the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District



# Public Hearing Notice and Transcript

### CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETINGTO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE COSO JUNCTION PM10 REDESIGNATION REQUEST AND MAINTENANCE PLAN The Air Resources Board (ARB or Board) will conduct a public meeting at the time and place noted belowto consider the approval of the proposed PMlO Redesignation Request and Maintenance Planfor the Coso Junction PlanningArea that was developed and approved by the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District (District). If adopted,ARB will submit these elements to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA)for approval as a revision to the California State Implementation Plan. DATE: June 24,2010 TIME: 9:00 a.m. PLACE: California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board Byron Sher Auditorium, Second Floor 1001 1 

### Street Sacramento, California 95814 This itemwill be considered at a two-day meeting of the Board, which will commence at 9:00 a.m., June 24, 2010, and may continue at 8:30 a.m., June 25, 2010. This item is scheduled to be heard on the Board's Consent Calendar. All itemson the consent calendar will be voted on by the Board immediately after the start of the public meeting. Any item may be removed from the consent calendar by a Board member or at the request of a Board memberor if someone inthe audience would like to speak on that item. BACKGROUND The federal CleanAir Act establishes planning requirements for those areas that exceed the health-based NationalAmbient Air Quality Standards (standards). Areas are designated as nonattainment based on monitored exceedances of air quality standards. These nonattair~ment areas must develop and implement a State lmplementation Plan (SIP)that demonstrates how they will attain the standards by specified dates. The District adopted the first PMI 0 attainment planfor the Coso Junction PlanningArea (Coso Junction) in 1991. The Coso Junction attainment demonstration was based on controlling dust from Owens Lake. Inaddition, in a 2004 plan update,the District included a dispersion model analysis that indicated that after dust controls were implemented at Owens Lake, Coso Junctionwould be inattainment. On May 19, 2010, the U.S. EPA finalized its determination inthe Federal Registerthat Coso Junction attained the 24-hour PM10 standard. In this clean data finding, U.S. EPAwaived certain planning requirements including those for reasonablefurther progress, an attainment demonstration, reasonably available control measures, and contingency measures, since these provisions have the sole purpose of helping achieve attainment of the standard. On May 17, 2010, the District adopted the PMIO Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan (Plan)for Coso Junction. The Plan officially requests that this area be redesignated to attainment for the PMlOstandard and charts the course for continued maintenance of the standard. The adoption of controls on Owens Lake resulted in the Coso Junction attaining the 24-hour PMIO standard based on 2007-2009 PMIO data. PROPOSEDACTION ARB staff has reviewed the District's Maintenance Plan for Coso Junction and has concluded that it meets applicable Clean Air Act requirements. ARB staff has also determined that the Maintenance Planwould ensure continued maintenance of the standard for the required ten years following redesignation. Staff is recommending that the Board approve the Maintenance Plan, as well as the corresponding emissions inventory and maintenance demonstration as a revision to the California SIP. In addition, ARB staff is recommending that the Board approve the District's requestthat Coso Junction be redesignated from nonattainment to attainment for the federal PMI0 standard. AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS ARB staff has prepared a written Staff Report. Copies of the Staff Report may be obtained from the ARB Public Information Office, 1001

### "1" Street, First Floor, Environmental Services Center, Sacramento, California 95814, 

### (916) 322-2990.This notice, the Staff Report, and the District's Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan will be available from ARB'Swebsite at: http://www.arb,ca.qov/planninq/sip/sip.htm SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS Interested members of the public may also present comments orally or in writing at the meeting, and in writing or by e-mail beforethe meeting.To be considered by the Board, written comment submissions not physically submitted atthe meeting must be received no laterthan 12:OO noon. June 23, 2010, and addressed tothe following: Postal mail: Clerk of the Board, Air Resources Board 1001 

### 1 Street, Sacramento, California 95814 Electronic submittal: http://www.arb.ca.gov/lispub/comm/bclist.php The Board requests, but does not require that 20 copies of any written statement be submitted and that written and e-mail statements be filed at least 10days prior to themeeting so that ARB staff and Board members have time to fully consider each comment. Please note that under the California Public RecordsAct (Government Code section 6250 et seq.), your written and oral comments, attachments, and associated contact information (e.g.,your address, phone, email, etc.) become part of the public record and can be releasedto the public upon request. Additionally, this information may become availablevia Google,Yahoo, and any other search engines. Further inquiries regardingthis matter should be directed to Ms. Sylvia Zulawnick, Manager of the Particulate Matter Analysis Section, Planning and Technical Support Division at (916) 324-7163, or Elizabeth Melgoza,Air Pollution Specialist, Planning and Technical Support Division at (91 6) 322-61 61. To request a special accommodation or language needsfor any of the following: An interpreter to be available at the hearing. Have documents available in an alternateformat (i.e. Braille, Large print) or another language. A disability-related reasonable accommodation. Please contact the Clerk of the Board at (916) 322-5594 or byfacsimile at (916) 322-3928 as soon as possible, but no later than 10 business days before the scheduled Board hearing. TTYITDDISpeechto Speech users may dial 711for the California Relay Service. Para solicitar alguna comodidad especial o necesidad de otro idiorna para alguna de las siguientes: Un interprete que este disponible en la audiencia. Tener documentos disponibles en unformato alterno (por decir, sistema Braille, o en impresion grande) u otro idioma. Una acomodacion razonable relacionados con una incapacidad. Por favor llame a la oficina del Secretario del Consejode Recursos Atmosfericos al (916) 322-5594o envie un fax al(916) 322-3928 no menos de diez (I 0) dias laborales antes del dia programado para la audiencia. Para el Servicio Telefonico de California para Personas con Problemas Auditivos, 6 de telefonos TDD pueden marcar al 711. CALIFORNIAAIR RESOURCES BOARD

James N. Goldstene Executive Officer Date: June 8, 2010MEETING STATE OF CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD

JOE SERNA, JR. BUILDING CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY BYRON SHER AUDITORIUM, SECOND FLOOR 1001 I STREET SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA

THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 2010 9:14 A.M.

TIFFANY C. KRAFT, CSR, RPR CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER LICENSE NUMBER 12277

CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 (415) 457-4417APPEARANCES

BOARD MEMBERS Ms. Mary Nichols, Chairperson Dr. John R. Balmes Ms. Sandra Berg Ms. Doreene DIAdamo Ms. Lydia H. Kennard Mr. Ronald 0. Loveridge Mr. Ron Roberts Dr. Daniel Sperling Dr. John Telles Mr. Ken

## eager

STAFF Mr. James Goldstene, Executive Officer Ms. La Ronda Bowen, Ombudsman Mr. Tom Cackette, Chief Deputy Executive Officer Mr. Bob Fletcher, Deputy Executive Officer Ms. Ellen Peter, Chief Counsel Ms. Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer Ms. Lori Andreoni, Board Clerk Ms. Lezlie Kimura, Local Government Strategies Section, Planning and Technical Support Division (PTSD)

CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 (415) -457-4417APPEARANCES CONTINUED

STAFF Ms. Cynthia Marvin, Assistant Division Chief, PTSD Ms. Meri Miles, On Road Controls Branch, Mobile Source Control Division (MSCD) Mr. Todd Sterling, Air Pollution Specialist, Control Strategies Section, Stationary Source Division (SSD) Ms. Barbara Van Gee, Manager, Goods Movement Programs Section, Stationary Source Division (SSD)

ALSO PRESENT Mayor Janet Abelson, City of El Cerrito Dr. Janet Abshire Ms. Elizabeth Adams, IS EPA Ms. Anna Arriola, East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice Mr. ~nri~ue Arriola, East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice Ms. Bernice Banares, West Side of Long Beach Mr. Marcos Barbosa, ECYECJ Ms. Jenny Bard, American Lung Association Mr. Mike Barr, AAR Ms. Nidia Bautista, Coalition for Clean Air Mr. Omar Benjamin, Port of Oakland Ms. Autumn Bernstein, Climate Plan Mr. Damian Breen, Bay Area AQMD Mr. Graham Brownstein, Transform

CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 (415) 457-4417APPEARANCES CONTINUED ALSO PRESENT Mr. Tim Carmichael, CA Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition Mr. Andy Chesly, San Joaquin County Council of Governments Ms. Madeline Clarke, EYCEJ Ms. Hannah Cohen, The Cohen Group Mr. Steph DiStefano, Calthorpe Associates Mr. Terry Dressler, Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District Ms. Teri Duarte, Design Sacramento 4 Health Ms. Amanda Eaken, NRDC Mr. Evan Edgar, Clean Fleets Coalition Mr. John Ellison, Environmental Council of Sacramento Mr. Michael Endicott, Sierra Club California Ms. Devilla Ervin Mr. Gary Gallegos, San Diego County Council of Governments Ms. Connie Gallippi, The Nature Conservancy Ms. Josie Gonzales, SCAQMD Mr. Manny Goona, EYCEJ Mr. Peter Greenwald, SCAQMD Mr. Woody Hastings, Clean Air Now Mr. Steve Herninger, Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission Ms. Bonnie Holmes-Gen,American Lung Association Ms. -Andrea Hricko, USC & Public Health

CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 (415) 457-4417APPEARANCES CONTINUED ALSO PRESENT Mr. Hasan Ikhrata, Southern California Association of Governments Mr. Mike Jacob, PMSA Mr. Curt Johansen, Urban Land Institute Mr. Bob Johnson, UC Davis Mr. Bob Kard, San Diego APCD Mr. Andy Katz, Breathe California Dr. Alex Kelter, Environmental Council of Sacramento Mr. Brandon Kitagawa, RAMP Mr. Gideon Kracov, East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice Mr. Gary Liss, City of Loomis Mr. Angelo Logan, EYCEJ Mr. Kirk Marckwald, California Railroad Industry Mr. Jessie Marquez, Coalition for Safe Environment Mr. Nathen Mata, EYCEJ Mr. Eyal Matoy, Ditching Dirty Diesel Collaborative Dr. Stephen Maxwell Mr. Mike McKeever, Sacramento Area Council of Governments Mr. Armando Mejia, Urban Planner Mr. Fred Minassian, South Coast AQMD Ms. Steph Nelson, Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments Ms. Gloria Ohland, Move LA

CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 (415) 457-4417APPEARANCES CONTINUED ALSO PRESENT Mr. Dave Patterson, Mitsubishi Motors Ms. Katherine Perez, Urban Land Institute Mr. Scott Peterson, Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce Mr. Terry Preston, Walk Sacramento Ms. Jill Ratner, Rose Foundation New Voice Project Ms. Sepi Richardson, City of Brisbane Ms. Marisa Rimland, Public Health Institute Mr. Sonny Roque, East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice Mr. Jim Rothstein Ms. Rocio Ruiz, ICUC Mr. Larry Schmid, UPRR Mr. Tim Schott, California Association of Port Authorities Mr. Seyed Sedredin, San Joaquin Valley APCD Mr. Mark Stehly, BNSF Mr. Michael Villegas, Air Pollution Control Officer, Ventura County Ms. Debbie Vongviwat, East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice Mr. Barry Wallerstein, SCAQMD Mr. Jerry Walters, Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants Mr. Dennis Zane, Move LA

CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 (415) 457-4417INDEX PAGE
Item 10-6-1 Chairperson Nichols Motion vote

Item 10-6-2 Chairperson Nichols ~xecutive Officer Goldstene Staff Presentation MS. Holmes-Gen Mr. Villegas Mr. Hogo Mr. Dressler Board Discussion Motion vote

Item 10-6-5 Chairperson Nichols Executive Officer Goldstene Staff Presentation Ms. Gonzales Mr. Greenwald Mr. Wallerstein Ms. Ratner Mr. Ervin Ms. Adams Mr. Matoy Ms. Ruiz Mr. Arriola Ms. Arriola Mr. Roque Mr. Mejia Mr. Barbosa Mr. Goona Mr. Mata Ms. Clarke Mr. Logan Mr. Carmichael Ms. Vongviwat Ms. Banares Mr. Marquez

CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 (415) 457-4417INDEX CONTINUED PAGE
Item 10-6-5 (continued) Ms. Holmes-Gen Ms. Hernandez Mr. Kitagawa Ms. Bautista Mr. Kracov Ms. Hricko Mr. Stehly Mr. Schmid Mr. Barr Mr. Marckwald Board Discussion Motion Vote

Item 10-6-6 Chairperson Nichols Executive Officer Goldstene Staff Presentation Mr. Gallegos Mr. Heminger Mr. Ikhrata Mr. McKeever Mr. Chesly Board Q&A Ms. Perez Mr. Johansen Ms. Richardson Mayor Abelson Mr. Liss Dr. Maxwell Dr. Abshire Mr. Wallerstein Mr. DeStefano Ms. Eaken Mr. Walters Ms. Nelson Mr. Hightower Dr. Kelter Ms. Bard Ms. Holmes-Gen MS. Duarte Mr. Kitagawa

CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL,

,CA 94901 (415) 457-4417INDEX CONTINUED PAGE
Item 10-6-6 (continued) Ms. Cohen Ms. Bernstein Ms. Ohland Mr. Zane Mr. Preston Mr. Hastings Ms. Rimland Mr. Johnson Mr. Katz Ms. Gallippi Mr. Brownstein Mr. Endicott Mr. Ellison Board Discussion Item 10-6-3 Chairperson Nichols Executive Officer Goldstene Staff Presentation Mr. Villegas Mr. Minassian Mr. Sedredin Mr. Kard Mr. Edgar Mr. Breen Mr. enj jam in Mr. Peterson Mr. Schott Mr. Jacob Board Discussion Motion vote Item 10-6-4 Chairperson Nichols Motion

' Mr. Carmichael

Mr. Patterson Vote Public Comment Mr. Rothstein Adjournment Reporter's Certificate

CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 (415) 457-44171 PROCEEDINGS 2 CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: Good morning, ladies and 3 gentlemen. The June 24th, 2010, public meeting of the Air 4 Resources Board will come to order. 5 And we will begin the meeting as we usually do, 6 by rising and saying the Pledge of Allegiance. 7 (Thereupon the Pledge of Allegiance was Recited in unison.) CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: The Clerk will please call 10 the roll 11 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Dr. Balmes? 12 BOARD MEMBER BALMES: Here. 13 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Ms. Berg? 14 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Here 15 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Ms. DIAdamo? 16 BOARD MEMBER D'ADAMO: Here. 17 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Ms. Kennard? 18 Mayor Loveridge? 19 BOARD MEMBER LOVERIDGE: Here. 2 0 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Mrs. Riordan? 2 1 Supervisor Roberts? 2 2 BOARD MEMBER ROBERTS: Here. 2 3 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Professor Sperling? 2 4 BOARD MEMBER SPERLING: Here. 2 5 BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Dr. Telles? CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 (415) 457-4417BOARD MEMBER TELLES: Present. BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Supervisor Yeager? BOARD MEMBER YEAGER: Here. BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Chairman Nichols? CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: Here. BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: Madam Chair, we have a quorum. CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: Thank you. I have a couple of announcements to make before

we begin the meeting. First of all, there is a change in the agenda order. Item 10-6-6, which is the report to the Board on target setting efforts under SB 375 is going to be heard right after Agenda Item 10-6-5, which is the staff recommendations to provide further emissions reductions at high-risk rail yards. Translation services are available at this meeting in Spanish for anyone who wishes them. The head sets are available outside the hearing room at the attendance sign-up table. Is the 

### -- yes, thank you. (Thereupon the announcement was translated into Spanish.) CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: Anyone who wishes to testify should sign up with the attendant outside the boardroom, please. You are requested, but not required,

CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 (415) 457-44173 1 to include your name on the speaker card. It just helps 2 us organize the notes of the meeting.
3 And, in general, we impose a three-minute time 4 limit. We may actually reduce that amount if there's a 5 very heavy number of speakers and if the comments are 6 somewhat consistent or repetitive.
7 We appreciate it if when you do testify you put 8 your testimony in your own words rather than reading a 9 statement. If you have a written statement, it will go
10 into the record directly, and you don't need to read it
11 aloud to us. 12 I'm also to remind you that there are emergency 13 exits in the back of the room, as well as to my right and
14 left side up here on the podium. In the event of a fire
15 alarm, we're required to evacuate this room immediately
16 and go down the stairs, not using the elevator to get out 17 of the building. When the all-clear signal is given, 18 we'll return to the hearing room and resume the hearing.
19 We are hoping there will not be a fire drill, but we 20 understand there is one due in the next day or two. So it
21 might actually happen.
2 2 All right. The first item on the agenda is our 23 consent calendar, which is the redesignation of Coso 24 Junction for PM10. 2 5 And I'd like to ask the Board Clerk if any

CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 (415) 457-4417witnesses have signed up to testify on this item. BOARD CLERK ANDREONI: No. CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: Are there any Board members who would like to have this item removed from the consent calendar?Seeing none, I will close the record on this item. Are there any ex parte communications on this item that anyone wishes to disclose? Seeing none, the Board has before it Resolution 11 Number 10-25. Could I get a motion and a second? 12 BOARD MEMBER BERG: So moved. 13 BOARD MEMBER ROBERTS: Second. 14 CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: Motion and second. 15 We will do this by voice vote. All in favor 16 please say aye. (Ayes) CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: ,Anyopposed? Great. Now we move to a regulatory item, which is 21 proposed amendments to the regulations for commercial 22 harbor craft. Staff is proposing amendments that would 23 expand the scope of the current rule to include three 24 additional categories of harbor craft. This action would 25 result in additional diesel particulate and NOx reductions

CALIFORNIA REPORTING, LLC 52 LONGWOOD DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 (415) 457-4417

## 2010 PMIO Plan for the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District



# Air Resources Board Resolution

### State of California AIR RESOURCES BOARD Resolution 10-25

June 24, 2010 Agenda Item No: 10-6-1 WHEREAS,the Legislature in Health and Safety Code section 39602 has designated the State Air Resources Board (ARB or Board) as the air pollution control agency for all purposes set forth in federal law; WHEREAS, the ARB is responsible for the preparation of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attaining and maintaining the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) as required by the federal CleanAir Act (theAct; 42 U.S.C. section 7401 et seq.), and to this end is directed by Health and Safety Code section 39602 to coordinate the activities of all local and regional air pollution control and air quality management districts (districts) necessaryto comply with the Act; WHEREAS, section 39602 of the Health and Safety Code also provides that the SIP shall include only those provisions necessary to meet the requirements of the Act; WHEREAS, ARB has responsibility for ensuring districts meettheir responsibilities under the Act pursuantto sections 39002, 39500, 39602, and 41650 of the Health and Safety Code; WHEREAS, ARB is authorized by section 39600 of the Health and Safety Code to do such acts as may be necessary for the proper execution of its powers and duties; WHEREAS, sections 39515 and 39516 of the Health and Safety Code provide that any power, duty, purpose, function orjurisdiction of the Board may be delegated to the Board's Executive Officer as the Board deems appropriate; WHEREAS, the local air districts have primary responsibility for the control of air pollutionfrom non-vehicular sources and for adopting control measures, rules, and regulationsto attain the NAAQS within their boundaries pursuantto sections 39002, 40000,40001,40701,40702, and 4165Q of the Health and Safety Code; WHEREAS, the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District (District) was established pursuantto section 40150 of the Health and Safety Code as 

### the air pollution control district responsible for carrying out these responsibilities in the Coso Junction PlanningArea located in lnyo County;

### Resolution 10-25 2 WHEREAS, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA) designated the Coso Junction Planning Area as a "moderate" PMI0 nonattainment area in 2002; WHEREAS, in November 2004, the District adopted a SIP for the Coso Junction Planning Area which relied on implementing dust controls at Owens Lake,which was scheduled to implement dust control measures on 30 square miles of the lake bed by December 31, 2006; WHEREAS, a dispersion modeling analysis showed these dust mitigation efforts would be adequate to bring the Coso Junction Planning Area into attainment; WHEREAS, due to a consent decree, U.S. EPA is requiredto either redesignate the Coso Junction Planning Area to attainment for PMlO or bump the area up to "serious1' by July 31, 2010; WHEREAS, section 1 07(d)(3)(D) of the Act provides that a state may request U.S. EPA to redesignate an area from nonattainment to attainment for the NAAQS; WHEREAS,section 107(d)(3)(E)of the Act sets forth the req~~irements which must be met for U.S.EPA to redesignate an area from nonattainment to attainment; WHEREAS, consistent with section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Act, the District has demonstrated attainment of the PMIO NAAQS in the 2007-2009 period for the Coso Junction Planning Area, based on quality-assured federal reference method monitoring data from the State and local monitoring network; WHEREAS, on May 19,2010, U.S. EPA issued a final clean data finding for the Coso Junction Planning Area; WHEREAS, the clean data finding relieves the Coso Junction Planning Area from developing an attainment demonstration, Reasonable Further Progress, Reasonable Available Control Measures, and contingency measures; WHEREAS,the District developed the Coso Junction Maintenance Plan to address the requirements of the Act; WHEREAS, the Coso Junction Maintenance Plan contains: 1. Attainment Emission Inventory; 2. Maintenance Demonstration; and 3. Contingency Plan. WHEREAS, no significant growth is expected inthe emissions inventory through the year 2025;

### Resolution 10-25 3 

### WHEREAS, since transportation sources were not found to significantly contribute to the nonattainment problem in the Coso Junction Planning Area, transportation conformity budgets are not required; WHEREAS, federal law set forth in section 1lO(1) of the Act and Title 40, 

### Code of Federal Regulations, section 51.102, requires that one or more public hearings, preceded by at least 30 days notice and opportunity for public review, must be conducted prior to the adoption and submittal to the U.S. EPA of any SIP revision; WHEREAS, as required by federal law,the District made the Coso Junction Maintenance Plan available for public review at least 30 days prior to the hearing date; WHEREAS, following a public hearing on May 17,2010, the District Board voted to: 1. Adopt the Coso Junction Maintenance Plan to fulfill the applicable requirements of the Act for a moderate PMlO nonattainment area to be redesignated to attainment; and 2. Request a redesignation for the Coso Junction Planning Area to attainment for the PMlO standard. WHERAS,the District submitted the Coso Junction Maintenance Plan toARB as a SIP revision on May 17, 2010, in accordance with State and federal law; WHEREAS, the District requests that the Coso Junction PlanningArea be redesignated from nonattainmentto attainment with the federal PMI 0 standard; WHEREAS, the California Envirorrmental QualityAct (CEQA) requires that no project which may have significant adverse environmental impacts may be adopted as originally proposed if feasible alternative or mitigation measures are availableto reduce or eliminate such impacts, unless specific overriding considerations are identified outweigh the potential adverse consequences of any unmitigated impacts; WHEREAS, the District determined they are exempt from CEQA becausethe SIP will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change inthe environment; and WHEREAS.,,the Board finds that: 1. California's air pollution control programs have successfully reduced PMlO ambient concentrations leadingto PMI0 NAAQS attainment inthe Coso Junction Planning Area; 

### 2. The Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan is necessary for U.S. EPA to redesignatethe Coso Junction to attainment for the PMIO NAAQS; 3. The District's Coso Junction PMIO, Maintenance Plan complies with the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Act;

### Resolution 10-25 4
4. 

### The Coso Junction PMI0 Maintenance Plan provides for maintenance of the PMI0 NAAQS through 2025; 

### 5. Consistent with U.S. EPA guidance, the Coso Junction PIVIIO Maintenance Plan includes an attainment emission inventory, cornmitrnents by the District to continue operating the PMlO monitoring network; and a process to verify continued PMIO attainment; 6. 

### The Coso Junction PMlO Maintenance Plan includes contingency provisions to ensure prompt correction of any post-redesignation violation of the PMIO NAAQS; and 

### 7. The Coso Junction PIVIIO Maintenance Plan relies entirely on adopted regulations to demonstrate continued maintenance. ARB regulations which have been adopted and are reflected in the baseline emission projections were subject to environmental review and no further analysis is required at this time. WHEREAS,the Board further finds the ARB has reviewed and considered the Coso Junction Maintenance Plan, along with the comments presented by interested parties, and ARB staff finds the SIP meets the requirements of the Act and CEQA. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that .the Board hereby adopts the Coso Junction Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request as a revision to the California SIP. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board hereby directs the Executive Officer to submit the Coso Junction Maintenance Plan together with the appropriate supporting documentation to the U.S.EPA for approval as revision to the California SIP, to be effective, for purposes of federal law, upon approval by U.S. EPA. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board directs the Executive Officer to work with the District and U.S. EPA and take appropriate action to resolve any completeness or approvability issues that may arise regarding the SIP submission. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board authorizes the Executive Officerto include in the SIP submittal any technical corrections, clarifications, or additions that may be necessary to secure U.S. EPA approval. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board certifies pursuantto 40 C.F.R. Section 51.102that the proposed SIP revision was adopted after notice and public hearingas required by40 C.F.R. Section 51 .I 

### 02. 

### I hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of Resolution 10-25,as adopted by the Air Resourqes Board.

## 2010 PMIO Plan for the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District



# Air Resources Board Staff Report Analysis of the Coso Junction PM70 Redesignation Requestand Maintenance Plan

## State of California 

# -California Environmental Protection Aqency 

# AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Staff Report 

# Analysis of the Coso Junction PMlO Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan

Release Date: June 7, 

## 2010 Scheduled for Consideration: June 24, 2010This document has been reviewed bythe staff of the California Air Resources Board and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Air Resources Board, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendationfor use.TABLE OF CONTENTS

I

## . BACKGROUND

# ...................................................................................................... 1 II

## . REDESIGNATION REQUIREMENTS

## .................................................................... 1 Ill

## . EVALUATION OF THE COSO JUNCTION PLAN

# ......................;

## .......................... 2 A



### . Coso Junction Attains the 24-Hour PM10 Standard



### .......................................... 2 B


## . The State Has Met ApplicableAct Requirements



### .......................................3 C



### . Improvement in Coso Junction's PMIOAir Quality is Due to Permanent and



### ............................................................... Enforceable Reductions in Emissions 

### 3



### .............................................................................................. D



### . Maintenance Plan 4

1



### . Attainment Emission Inventory



### ......................................................................4 2



### . Maintenance Demonstration



### .......................................................................... 5



### ........................................................................ 3



### . PM10 Monitoring Network 5



### ............................................................. 4


## . Verification of ContinuedAttainment 5



### .......................................................................................... 

## . 5 Contingency Plan 5 IV

## . STAFF RECOMMENDATION

# ................................................................................ 61. BACKGROUND The Coso Junction Planning Area (Coso Junction)was initially designated as a PMIO nonattainment area in 1987along with the Indian Wells Valley and Trona areas. Together they comprised the Searles Valley PMIO nonattainment area. The Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District (District) adopted the first PMI0 attainment plan for the Coso Junction portion of the Searles Valley PMIO nonattainment area in November 1991.The Coso Junction attainment demonstration was based on controlling dust from Owens Lake. In August 2002, the US Environmental ProtectionAgency (U.S. EPA) redesignated the Searles Valley into three separate PMIO nonattainment areas; Coso Junction, Indian Wells Valley, and Trona. On May 19, 2010, the U.S. EPA finalized its determination inthe Federal Register that Coso Junction attained the 24-hour PMIO standard. Based on their clean data finding, U.S. EPA has determined that certain nonattainment area requirements do not apply, including those for reasonable further progress (RFP), an attainment demonstration, reasonably available control measures (RACM), and contingency measures, because these provision's sole purpose isto achieve attainment of the standard. On May 17, 2010, the District adopted the PMIO Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan (Plan)for Coso Junction. The Plan officially requests that this area be redesignated to attainment for the PMIO standard and charts the course for continued maintenance of the standard. The concerted adoption of controls on Owens Lake resulted inthe Coso Junction attaining the 24-hour PMIO standard based on 2007-2009 PMIO data. II. REDESIGNATION REQUIREMENTS Air Resources Board (ARB)staff reviewed the Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan within the context of the Clean Air Act (Act),which identifies the following requirements an area must meet tobe redesignatedto attainment: A. The PM10standard has been attained; 

### 6.The District has an approved State Implementation Plan (SIP) and the State has met all applicable Act requirements for PMI0 in the nonattainment area; C. The improvement in PMIO air quality is due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions; and 

### D. U.S. EPA has approved a maintenance plan. The Act also sets the general framework for maintenance plans'. Each PMIO maintenance plan must provide for continued maintenance of the PMIO standard for ten years after redesignation and includesthe following components: 1. Attainment emission inventory;

1 Calcagni, John, Memorandum, Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, September 4, 1992. http://www.epa.qov/ttn/oarpq/t5/memoranda/redesianmem090492.pdf2. Maintenance demonstration; 3. Commitment to continue the monitoring network operation; 4. Commitment for verification of continued attainment; and 5. Contingency planto promptly correct any violation of the PMI0 standard that occurs after the area has been redesignated. Ill. EVALUATION OF THE COSO JUNCTION PLAN Based on review of the Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan and the District's supporting technical analysis,ARB staff concurs that the Plan meetstheAct's requirements. The following sections describe the major elements of the Plan and the redesignation request. A. Coso Junction Attains the 24-Hour PMIO Standard PMI0 is measured at one monitoring station in Coso Junction (Figure 1).A TEOM (tapered element oscillating microbalance) collects hourly PMIO samples at this site. The 24-hour standard is met when the estimated number of exceedances measured over a three year period averages one or less per year. Daily PMIO monitoring data collected at Coso Junction over the last 3 years has shown on average no more than 1 exceedance of the PMIO standard per year as required to demonstrate attainment of the federal standard. Figure 1 illustrates the Coso Junction PMIO nonattainment area, monitor locations, and the area's close proximityto Owens Lake. Figure 1. PMlO Monitoring Stations in Coso JunctionOnthree days over the 2007 to 2009 period, the 24-hour standard was exceeded due to high wind conditionsthat suspended fugitive dust from an unpaved parking area and from Owens Lake. The owner of the unpaved parking area was notified andthe area was graveled in 2008 and surfaced with asphalt in2009 to control fugitive dust. Table 1 shows the maximum 24-hour concentration at the Coso Junction site between 2007 and 2009 and average exceedance days, demonstrating attainment. .Table 

### 1. Coso Junction PMIO Datafrom2007 to2009 Monitoring 1 Station

B. The State Has Met Applicable Act Requirements ARB and the District have met all of the Act requirements applicable for a moderate PMIO nonattainment area to be consideredfor redesignation. Dueto the clean data finding, this Planwill serve as meeting the requirement of an approved SIP. Observed Maximum 24-hour Concentration (uglm3) 

# 1 Coso Junction

C. Improvement in CosoJunction's PMIOAir Quality is Dueto Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions 2008

137 2007 283

Coso Junction is an isolated area with a population of roughly 100 people.The main source of PMIO pollution in Coso Junction is transport of fugitive dust from the Owens Valley. In 1998, the Owens Valley SIP was adopted and approved by the U.S. EPA including a control strategy that required dust controls on 16.5 square miles of the lakebed. Under the Owens Valley SIP, the City of Los Angeles is responsible for mitigating the dust generated from Owens Lake in order to bringthe area into attainment with the PMIO standard. (GBUAPCD, 1998) The Owens Valley SIP was revised in 2003 to expand dust controls to 29.8 square miles of the lake bed by December 31, 2006. The City of Los Angeles successfully implemented these control measures by the required deadline. 24-Hour ExceedanceDays

In 2008, the Owens Valley SIP was amended to expand control requirements to a total of 43.1 square miles of the Owens Lake bed. The City of Los Angeles is expected to have dust control measures implemented on 39.6 square miles of the lakebed by April 1,2010, and then to expand the control area to 43.1 square miles by October 1,2010. Overall, PMIO emissions from the Owens Lake bed have been reduced by 90% since 2000 when the City of Los Angeles initiated efforts to control windblown dust at Owens Lake. Thus, the improvement in Coso Junction is due to permanent and enforceable reductions. 3-year Average Exceedance Days 2009

168 2007-2009 3 2007-2009 1 12. Maintenance Demonstration Coso Junction is projected to maintain attainment with the PMIO standards due to ARB, District, and other State and local control measures already in.place.No significant growth or changes in the emission inventory are expected for Coso Junction throughthe year 2025. Thus, Coso Junction is expectedto maintainthe PMIO standard. In addition, regional PM10 emissions are projected to decrease even further in the future as a result of the additional controls on Owens Lake. 3. PMIO Monitoring Network The District commitsto continue PMIO monitoring to verify continued attainment of the PMIO standard.The existing PMIO monitoring network in Coso Junction includes a PMI0 TEOM monitor located at the Highway 395 rest area in Coso Junction (Figure 1). Federal regulations require daily sampling at the site reporting peak PMIO concentrations. This real-time PMIO monitor meets this daily monitoring requirement. 4. Verification of Continued Attainment To verify continued attainment of the PMIO standard, the District commits to continue daily PMIO monitoring at the Coso Junction rest area to help ensure new sources of PMIO are identified and controlled, if necessary. 5. Contingency Plan The Act requiresthe maintenance plan to include contingency provisions for prompt correction of any PMIO standard violation that might occur after the area has been redesignated to attainment. The maintenance plan is not requiredto contain fully adopted contingency measures that will go into effect without further state action as is required in attainmentSIPS. Instead, for maintenance plans,the area must have a plan to ensure that contingency measures are adopted once they are triggered. District staff believesthe control strategy and contingency requirements in the 2008 Owens Valley PMIO SIP are adequate to protect air quality in the Coso Junction area. Therefore, no additional contingency measureswill be needed to ensure future compliance with the federal PMIO standard in Coso Junction.D. Maintenance Plan The Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan includes the following components: emission inventory; commitment to continue monitoring network operation; commitment for verification of continued attainment; and contingency plan. 1. Attainment Emission Inventory An emission inventory is a critical tool used to support evaluation, control, and mitigation of air pollutionwhich is comprisedof a systematic listing of the sources of air pollutants along with the amount of pollutants emitted from each source or category over a given period of time. Emission inventories are estimates of the air pollutant emissions released into the environment

## -they are not direct ambient concentration measurements. To determinethe expected emissions infuture years, emission inventories incorporatethe effects of growth and existing regulations (baseline inventories). An attainment inventory identifiesthe level of emissions duringthe period when air quality data show attainment. The Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan presents an updated 2009 attainment inventory of direct PMIO emissions split by source subcategory. lnventory updates include the latest point, area, and mobile source emissions for the Coso Junction. Total PMIO emissions are estimated at 1,427 pounds per day for the Coso Junction, which is less than 0.1% of the emissions caused by windblowndust from Owens Lake. In addition to the 2009 adjusted baseline PMIO emissions, the Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan provides emission projectionsoutto 2025. No significant growth or changes inthe emission inventory are expectedfor Coso Junction through the year 2025. Table 

### 2. Coso Junction PM10 Emissions Inventory Daily PMlO Emissionsfor 2009through 2025 Stationary Sources 

## I Poundslday California Lightweight Pumice 

# ' China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station



## 1 Total PMlO (pounds per day) 1,427 167 84 Halliburton Services Twin Mountain Rock Area Sources Unpaved Roads Paved Roads MobileSources On Road Motor Vehicles 20 58 33 101 12 Coso Operating Company 953IV. 

### STAFF RECOMMENDATION ARB staff has reviewed the PMIO Redesignation Request and Maintenance Planfor Coso Junction and consulted with District staff during this review. ARB staff finds that the Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan meets all applicable Act requirements. ARB staff believesthat implementationof this Planwill continue to maintain PMIO levels below the national air quality standard in Coso Junction. Therefore, we recommendthat the Board adopt the Coso Junction PMIO Maintenance Plan as a revision tothe California SIPfor submittalto U.S. EPA. In addition, ARB staff recommends that the Board approve the District's request that Coso Junction be redesignated from "onattainment to attainmentfor the national PMlO standard.