# Yuba City

- Marysville PM 2.5



# Nonattainment Area Redesignation

Request and Maintenance Plan

Adopted by the

Feather River Air Quality Management District on April 1 , 2013

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013



### This PM 2.5 

### Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan was prepared by :

T he Feather River Air Qual ity Management District

1007 Live Oak Boulevard, Suite B

- 3

Yuba City, CA 95991

Phone (530) 634

- 7659

Principal Author: Sondra Spaethe, Planner II, FRAQMD

Reviewed by: David A. Valler, Jr., APCO, FRAQMD

With Contributions from:

Jim Wagoner, B utte C ounty A ir Q uality M anagement D istrict

Armen Kamian, B utte C ounty A ir Q uality M anagement D istrict

Kasia Turkiewicz, C alifornia A ir R esources B oard

The FRAQMD would like to thank the California Air Resources Board for their

contributions in the development of this Plan, as well as the Sacramento Area Council

of Governments for providing the vehicle activity data used to generate the inventories

and creati on of the motor vehicle emission budgets.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013



## Table of Contents

I: Executive Summary I

- 1

II: Introduction & Background II

- 1

a. Planning Area II

- 1

b. Background on Particulate Matter Air Pollution II

- 2

c. Health Impacts II

- 3

III: Regulatory History & Plan Elements III

- 1

a. National Ambient Air Quality Standards III

- 1

b. Overview of Particulate Matter NAAQS III

- 1

c. Designations III

- 2

d. Clean Data Policy III

- 2

e. Statutory Requirements for Redesignation III

- 3

IV: Air Quality IV

- 1

a. Monitoring Site Information IV

- 1

b. Design Values and Monitoring Data IV

- 2

c. Components of PM 2.5 

### in the Planning Area IV

- 5

i. Speciation Data IV

- 5

d. Air Quality Trends IV

- 7

e. Exceptional Event Documentation IV

- 7

V: Emission Inventory V

- 1

VI: Maintenance Demonstration VI

- 1

a. Control Strategy VI

- 3

VII: Maintenance Contingency Measures VII

- 1

a. Measures to be adopted and “action level” VII

- 1

b. Commitment to continue to operate monitoring network VII

- 2

c. Verification of Continued Attainment VII

- 3

VIII: Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets VIII

- 1

IX: Conclusions IX

- 1

Appendix A: De finition of Yuba City

- Marysville Planning Area

Appendix B: Emission Inventories

B

- 1: 2011 Inventory

B

- 2: 2017 Projected Inventory

B

- 3: 2024 Projected Inventory

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

I

- 1 Chapter I: Executive Summary

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

## I

. Executive Summary

The PM 2.5 

### Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan is intended to provide

necessary data and analys e s to demonstrate that the Yuba City

- Marysville PM 2.5



### nonattainment area has attained the 2006 24

- hour PM 2.5 

### national ambient air quality

standa rd and shall continue to maintain the standard for ten years from the approval of

the Plan.

The Yuba City

- Marysville nonattainment area attained the 2006 24

- hour PM 2.5 

### standard

during the 2006

- 2008 monitoring period, and continued to monitor attainment in 2009,

2010, and 2011, with preliminary 2012 data showing that the area continues to meet the

standard. The determination is based on complete, quality assured, and certified

monitoring data from the Yuba City

- Almond Street monitor.

The area has attain ed the standard through the implementation of permanent and

enforceable measures adopted by the Feather River Air Quality Management District

and the California Air Resources Board.

This Maintenance Plan has been prepared to incorporate all of the requirements in

section 175A of the Clean Air Act ( CAA ) . The District requests that the United States

Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA or EPA ) find all of the requirements

applicable under section 110 and Part D are met and redesignate the Yuba City

Marysville area to attainment for the 2006 24

- hour PM 2.5 

### national ambient air qualit y

standard ( NAAQS )

.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

II

- 1 Chapter II: Introduction & Background

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

## II

. Introduction and Background

a. Planning Area

On October 8, 2008, the US EPA design at ed the Yuba City

- Marysville PM 2.5 

### Planning

Area as nonattainment for the 24

- hour PM 2.5 

### NAAQS . The designations and

classifications were printed in the Federal Register on November 13, 2009 (74 FR

58688 ) and became effective on December 14, 2009. The Yuba City

- Marysville PM 2.5 

### Planning Area (Planning Area) is located in the south eastern portion of the Sacramento

Valley Air Basin (SVAB) and includes all of Sutter County and a portion of Yuba County,

as described in Appendix A

. Figure II

- 1 shows the geographic location of the Planning

Area within the SVAB.

The SVAB is bound on the north and wes t by the Coastal Mountain Range, on the east

by the southern portion of the Cascade Mountain Range and the northern portion of the

Sierra Nevada Mountains, and on the south by the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. These

mountain ranges reach heights in excess of 6

, 000 feet above mean sea level (MSL)

, with individual peaks rising much higher. Although a portion of the Planning Area is at

elevations higher than 1,000 feet above MSL, the vast majority of its populace lives and

works below that elevation.

Summer conditions are typically characterized by high temperatures and low humidity,

with prevailing winds from the south. Summer temperatures average approximately

90  F during the day and 50  F at night.

Winter conditions are characterized by occasional rainstorms interspersed with stagnant

and some times foggy weather. Winter daytime temperatures average in the low 50s and

nighttime temperatures average in the upper 30s. During winter, north winds become

more frequent, but winds from the south predominate. Rainfall occurs mainly from late

October t o early May, averaging 17.2 inches per year, but varies significantly each year.

In addition to prevailing wind patterns that control the rate of dispersion of local pollutant

emissions, Yuba and Sutter counties experience two types of inversions that affect the

air quality. The first type of inversion layer contributes to photochemical smog problems

by confining pollution to a shallow layer near the ground. This occurs in the summer

when sinking air forms a “lid” over the region. The second type of inversion occurs

when the air near the ground cools while the air aloft remains warm. These inversions

occur during winter nights and can cause localized air pollution “hot spots” near

emission sources because of poor dispersion.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

II

- 2 Chapter II: Introduction & Background

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Figure II

- 1

b. Background on P articulate Matter Air Pollution

Fine partic ulate matter, referred to as PM 2.5 

### , is that portion of particulate matter that is

2.5 micro ns and smaller in diameter. PM 2.5 

### pollution can be small particles or liquid

aerosols. PM 2.5 

### pollution is classified in terms of primary and secondary particles.

All primary particles are emitted directly from a stack, volume source, or area source as

either filterable or condensable particulate matter (PM). Primary PM is the sum of

filterable and condens able PM. Examples include particulate from combustion sources

(both filterable and condensable), fugitive dust sources, and sea salt spray. Filterable

and condensable PM are further discussed in Chapter V.

Secondary particles are those formed through chemi cal reactions involving atmospheric

oxygen, water vapor, hydroxyl radicals, nitrates, sulfates, sulfur dioxide (SO 2 

### ), oxides of

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

II

- 3 Chapter II: Introduction & Background

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### nitrogen (NO X 

### ), ammonia (NH 3 

### ) and organic gases from natural and anthropogenic

sources. Particulate matter may be produced by n atural causes (e.g., pollen, ocean salt

spray, wind

- blown dust and soil erosion) and by human activity (e.g., road dust,

agricultural operations, fuel combustion products, wood burning, rock crushing, cement

production and motor vehicles).

c. Health Impacts

Health studies have shown a significant association between fine particles and

premature death from heart or lung disease. Fine particles can aggravate heart and

lung disease and have been linked to effects such as: cardiovascular symptoms;

cardiac arrhythmias; heart attacks; respiratory symptoms; asthma attacks; and

bronchitis

. These effects can result in increased hospital admissions, emergency room

visits, absences from sch ool or work, and restricted activity days. Individuals that may

be particularly sensitive to fine particle exposure include people with heart or lung

disease, the elderly , and children 1



### .

1 Air Quality Designations for the 2006 24

- hour Fine Particles ( 74 FR 58688 )

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

III

- 1 Chapter III: Regulatory History and Plan Elements

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

## III

. Regulatory H istory/Plan Elements

Pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ( U.S.

EPA or EPA) sets primary air quality standards to protect public health including

protection of sensitive populations such as asthmatics, children and the elderly, and

secondary standards to protect public welfare including the protection against

decreased visibility and damage to crops, animals, vegetati on and buildings. Achieving

the federal standards protects public health, reduces the region’s health care costs, and

improves the quality of life for residents. This chapter describes EPA’s process for

setting health

- based standards and designating area s based on those standards, the

history of the PM 2.5 

### standard and the Planning Area’s designations , the CAA

requirements for areas based on those designations, and the statutory requirements an

area must meet to be redesignated to attainment.

a. National Ambient Air Quality Standards

The Clean Air Act (CAA) was adopted in 1970. The legislation authorized the

development of comprehensive federal and state r egulations to limit emissions f r o m

stationary and mobile sources. The CAA was amended in 1977 and a gain in 1990.

The CAA and amendments require the EPA adopt NAAQS for six criteria pollutants : ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and lead

. EPA formally designates areas as “nonattainment” (not meeting the standar d),

“unclassifiable/attainment” (meeting the standard or expected to be meeting the

standard despite a lack of monitoring data), or “unclassifiable” (insufficient data to

classify).

Once nonattainment designations take effect, the state and local governments have

usually three years to develop implementation plans outlining how areas will attain and

maintain the standards by reducing air pollutant emissions. The CAA requires EPA to

co nduct a periodic review of the science upon which the standards are based and the

standards themselves.

b. Overview of P articulate Matter NAAQS

EPA issues NAAQS for particulate matter , one of the six criteria pollutants

. EPA first

issued standards for particulate matter in 1971 and has subsequently revised t he

standards in 1987, 1997 and 2006

. The 2006 revision address ed two categories of

particle pollution: fine particles (PM 2.5 

### ), which are 2.5 microns in diameter and smaller;

and inhalable coarse particles (PM 10 

### ) which are smaller than 10 mic rons a nd larger than

2.5 micro ns

.

The EPA established the separate annual and 24

- hour standards for PM 2.5 

### in 1997 (62

FR 38652). The annual stan dard was set at 15 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m 3 

### ).

The 24

- hour standard was set at 65 μg/m 3 

### , based on a 3

- year average of the 98 th



### percentile of 24

- hour PM 2.5 

### concentrations.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

III

- 2 Chapter III: Regulatory History and Plan Elements

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### In 2006, EPA tightened the 24

- hour PM 2.5 

### standard from 65 μ 

### g/m 3 

### to 35 μg/m 3 

### , and

retained the current annual PM 2.5 

### standard at 15 μg/m 3



### . The revised 24

- hour PM 2.5



### s tandards were published on October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144) and became effective on

December 18, 2006.

c. Designations

On November 13, 2009 ( 74 FR 58688) EPA promulgated air quality designations for all

areas in the U.S. for the 2006 PM 2.5 

### NAAQS , effective on December 14, 20 09. The

Yuba City

- Marysville area was designated nona ttainment for the 24

- hour PM 2.5 

### NAAQS

based on 2005

- 2007 monitoring data. State Implementation Plan s (SIP s ) were due to

EPA by December 14, 2012. Figu re III

- 1 shows the nonattainment area. Appendix A

contains the description from the federal register notice.

Figure III

- 1

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

III

- 3 Chapter III: Regulatory History and Plan Elements

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### d. Clean Data Policy

A reas designated as nonattainment that attain the standard prior to the SIP submittal

deadline, or prior to an area’s approved attainment date, are eligible for reduced

regulatory requirements as described in EPA’s “Clean Data Policy.” 2 

### The Yuba City

Marysville area attained the PM 2.5 

### NAA QS in 2008 (based on 2006

- 2008 data) and

continued attainment between 2009 and 201 1 . Preliminary analysis shows that the

area contin ues to meet the standard in 201 2 . A Clean Data Request was submitted by

the State of California for the area on June 8, 2010. On January 10, 2013, the EPA

determine d that the area has attained the 2006 24

- hour fine particle standard based on

2009

- 2011 monitoring data 3



### . Table III

- 1 summarized the CAA requirements for PM 2.5 

### Nonattainment Areas, the Clean Data Policy exemptions for areas that attain the

standards, and the ir location in this Plan.

This Plan is intended to provide the air quality monitoring and emissions data to

demonstrate the area has attained the PM 2.5 

### stand ard. In addition, it includes regulatory

requirements to ensure the Yuba City

- Marysville area will maintain compliance with the

national PM 2.5 

### standard in the future.

e. Statutory Requirements for Redesignation

There are five statutory requirements an area must meet to be redesignated to

attainment. These are:

1) EPA determines that the area has attained the NAAQS.

2) EPA has fully approved the area’s applicable implementation plan under section

110(k).

3) EPA determines improvement in air quality is due to enfo rceable emission

reductions.

4) The area has a fully approved maintenance plan meeting section 175A.

5) The area has met all of the requirements applicable to the area under section

110 and Part D prior to the approv al of the redesignation.

The Yuba City

- Marysville area attained the PM 2.5 

### NAAQS in 2008 as described in the

Clean Data Request 4



### . EPA has determine d that the area has attained the 24

- hour

standard

. Approval o f the Maintenance Plan and redesignation can occur

simultaneously 5 

### . The District has attained the standard through enforceable emissions

reductions as detailed in Chapter VI. The Maintenance Plan has been prepared to

incorporate all of the requirements in section 175A of the CAA. The District requests

that EPA find all of th e requirements applicable under section 110 and Part D are met

2 Memorandum of December 14, 2004, from Steve Page, Director, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning EPA and

Standards to Air Division Directors, ‘‘Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards.’’

3 Determination of Attainment for the Yuba City

- Marysville Nonatt ainment Area for the 2006 Fine Particle

Standard; California; Determination Regarding Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements, 78 FR2211, January 10,

2013.

4 Clean Data Request

, James N. Goldstene, Air Resources Board, June 8, 2010.

5 Procedures for Pr

ocessing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment , Calcagni memo, Sept 4, 1992, page 3

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

III

- 4 Chapter III: Regulatory History and Plan Elements

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### and redesignate the Yuba City

- Marysville area to attainment for the 24

- hour PM 2.5 

### NAAQS.

Table II I

- 1 CAA Requirements for PM 2.5 

### Nonattainment Areas and Areas with Clean Data

General

Requirements Federal

CAA PM 2.5

Implementation

Rule Description Required for

area with

clean data? Location

in Plan

Attainment Date 172(b)(2) 72 FR 20601 Nonattainment areas should

reach attainment as

expeditiously as practicable, but

no later than 5 years from

designation. No

- areas with

clean data

have already

met standard. N ot

A pplicable

RACT/RACM 172(c)(1) 72 FR 20609

-

20633 SIP provisions should provide

for the implementation of

reasonably available control

measures and reasonably

available control technologies. No

- s uspended

(72 FR 20665

section

51.1004(c) N ot

A pplicable

RFP 172(c)(2) 72 FR 20633

-

20645 SIP provisions must provide for

reasonable further progress. No

- s uspended

(72 FR 20665

section

51.1004(c) N ot

A pplicable

Contingency

Provisions 172(c)(1) 72 FR 20642

-

20645 The SIP must provide for the

implementation of specific

measures that would take effect

without further action by the

State and that w ould be

undertaken if the area fails to

make RFP or attainment on

time. No

- s uspended

(72 FR 20665

section

51.1004(c) N ot

A pplicable

Emissions

Inventory 172(c)(3) 72 FR 20647

-

20651 The SIP must include a

comprehensive, current

inventory of actual emissions

from all sources of the relevant

pollutants in the area. Yes Chapter V

NSR 172(c)(4

- 5) 72 FR The SIP must identify and

quantify the emissions of

pollutants that will be allowed

(in accord ance with section

173(a)(1)(B), from the

c onstruction and operation of

major new or modified

stationary sources in the area.

The SIP must require permits

for new or modified stationary

sources. Yes Chapter

VI

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

IV

- 1 Chapter IV: Air Quality

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

## IV

. Air Quality

The Yuba City

- Marysville Planning A rea, designated nonattainment for the 2006 24

- hr

PM 2.5 

### National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), has attained the standard. This

determination is based upon complete, quality assured, quality controlled, an d certified

ambient air monitoring data that show that this area has monitored attainment of the

2006 PM 2.5 

### NAAQS during the 2006

- 2008 monitoring period. Furthermore, 2009, 2010,

2011 and preliminary 201 2 data demonstrates continued attainment of the stan dard.

The ARB requested the EPA find the Yuba City

- Marysville Planning A rea in attainment

for the 2006 24

- hour fine particulate NAAQS on June 8, 2010 6 

### . The request was based

on review of quality assured and certified PM 2.5 

### data that show attainment of the

NAAQS during the 2006

- 2008 period . The data shows continued attainment through

the 2009

- 2011 period. Preliminary data for 2012 indicate that the area continues to

meet the standard.

On January 10, 2013 , the EPA determine d that the area has attained t he standard

based on 2009

- 2011 monitoring data. The final action also included a review of the

quality assured, and certified PM 2.5 

### ambient air monitoring data and found the data to be

complete 7



### .

a. Monitoring Site Information

The Yuba City

- Maysville Planning A rea has one monitoring site, Yuba City

- Almond

Street (site number 06

- 101

- 0003), that collects PM 2.5 

### air quality data for a comparison to

the NAAQS. The monitoring site is equipped with a Federal Reference Monitor (FRM).

Through January 18, 2007 , the monitor collected samples on a one in six days

schedule. Starting on January 19, 2007, the sampling frequency was increased to daily.

PM 2.5 

### data are submitted to the EPA database, Air Quality System (AQS). The data are

available to the public via AQS ( http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/aqsweb/ ) or via

ARB ’s web site: http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/ds.htm ).

6 June 8, 2010 letter from James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, ARB, to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator,

U.S. EPA Region 9.

7 Determination of Attainment for the Yuba City

- Marysville Nonattainment Area for the 2006 Fine Particle

Standard; California; Determination Regarding Applicability of Clean Air Act Requirements, 78 FR 2211, January 10,

2013.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

IV

- 2 Chapter IV: Air Quality

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Figure IV

- 1 Yuba City

- Almond Street Monitor

b. Design Values and Monitoring Data

A monitoring site is considered to be in attainment of the 24

- hour standard when the 24

- hour design value is less than or equal to 35 μg/m 3 

### . The 24

- hour design value is the

three year average of annual 98 th 

### percentile of 24

- hour values recorded at each site.

The design values for the Yuba City

- Almond Street monitor for 200 0 through 2011 are

summarized in Table IV

- 1 . The U.S. EPA regulations require at least 75 percent of data

capture in each quarter of a c onsecutive 3

- year period in order for a design value to be

valid. The data meet the completeness r equirements, therefore, the design values are

considered valid.

The 24

- hour design values provided in Table IV

- 1 are calculated in accordance with 40

CFR part 50, Appendix N (2006, amended 2007). Table IV

- 2 shows the top values and

98 th 

### percentiles for 200 7 , 2009

, 2010, and 2011 . 2008 data are shown separately in

Table IV

- 3. The 2008 data include exceptional events captured during summer 2008

Northern California wildfires, for which documentation has been submitted to the EPA 8



### . Data that have been flagged for exceptional events were excluded from the design

value calculations.

8 PM 2.5 and PM 10 Natural Event Document, Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires, June/July/August 2008,

August 28, 2009

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

IV

- 3 Chapter IV: Air Quality

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Table IV

- 1 Summary Statistics for Yuba City, 2000

- 20 11

24

- hr Standard μg/m 3 Annual Standard

μg/m 3 Percent Number of

Year Yearly

98th

Percentile Design

Value Annual

Average Design

Value Data Capture Samples

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total

2000 38 53 10.6 23.7 94 93 87 93 15 17 14 16 62

2001 54 49 11.9 12.9 100 100 100 100 15 18 15 15 63

2002 34 42 13.6 12 87 87 100 80 14 15 18 15 62

2003 29 39 9.5 11.6 100 100 100 93 15 16 16 15 62

2004 38 34 10 11 100 100 100 93 15 15 16 15 61

2005 42 36 9.5 9.6 87 100 100 100 15 16 25 16 72

2006 41 40 11.3 10.3 87 93 93 100 16 15 16 17 64

2007 34 39 8.2 9.7 93 100 93 83 63 80 86 76 305

2008 23.1 33 8.4 9.3 79 97 90 85 72 88 83 78 321

2009 27.5 28 7.9 8.2 92 99 91 97 83 90 84 89 346

2010 17.1 23 5.9 7.4 77 93 89 96 69 85 82 88 324

2011 37.1 27 8.0 7.3 79 82 96 92 71 75 87 85 318



### Data Affected by Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

IV

- 4 Chapter IV: Air Quality

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Table IV

- 2 To p PM 2.5 

### measurements during 2007

- 2011

Rank PM 2.5 ( μg/m 3 ) Date Comments

2007*

1 45 1/27/07

2 42 12/15/07

3 40 2/2/07

4 38 2/3/07

5 37 2/4/07

6 36 12/14/07

7 34 1/28/07 98th percentile, 7th highest value

8 34 2/1/07

9 33.7 11/25/07

10 31.6 11/26/07

2008 98 th Percentile addressed in Table 3.

2009

1 41.8 12/25/09

2 36.3 12/26/09

3 35.2 12/4/09

4 30.8 1/14/09

5 30.2 12/20/09

6 29 1/30/09

7 27.5 12/27/09 98th Percentile 7th highest value

8 27.2 1/13/09

9 26.5 1/16/09

10 26.3 1/17/09

2010

1 72.2 7/4/10

2 26.9 12/4/10

3 23 11/5/10

4 20.4 12/24/10

5 18.3 1/29/10

6 18.2 2/4/10

7 17.1 1/6/10 98th Percentile 7th highest value

8 15.9 2/19/10

9 15.7 1/28/10

10 14.7 10/20/10

2011

1 57 7/4/11

2 46.4 12/29/11

3 41.9 12/9/11

4 41.5 12/25/11

5 40.4 12/20/11

6 39.1 12/24/11

7 37.1 12/10/11 98th Percentile 7th highest value

8 37.1 12/26/11

9 35.2 12/18/11

10 31.3 12/28/11

* Two sampling frequencies in 2007

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

IV

- 5 Chapter IV: Air Quality

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

### c. Air Quality Trends

Ambient PM 2.5 

### air quality has improved dramatically since the District began monitoring

for PM 2.5 

### in 1998. Between 2001 and 2011, the 24

- hour and the annual average design

values declined 45 to 50 percent due to emission reductions (see Figure IV

- 2 ).

Figure IV

- 2 PM 2.5 

### Trends in the Planning A rea

*Fire impacted days have been removed from the calculated design values.



### d. Components of PM 2.5 

### in the Planning Area

Analysis by the District and EPA ind icates the key components of PM 2.5 

### in the Planning

Area are ammonium nitrate and organic carbon. Organic carbon is the significant PM 2.5



### species and is localized. Histori cally

, PM 2.5 

### pollution is dominated during the winter

months by smoke from residential woo d burning stoves and fireplaces. The winter

months of November through February are when t he exceed e nces of the standard

typically occur , as shown in Figure IV

- 3 . Agricultural and residential open burning also

contributes to the PM 2.5 

### problem in the Planning Area . Due to meteorological conditions,

smoke collects in localized, concentrated pockets. This means that the smoke from just

one fire can cause a significant problem for the entire neighborhood. Because airborne

particles take time to settle, the problem int ensifies quickly. Additionally, smoke particles

are so tiny that they may seep into homes despite closed doors and windows.

Neighbors of wood burners may be breathing unhealthy particles, even if they are not

using their own wood burning stoves or fireplac es. Emissions of residential wood 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Annual Average Design Value (ug/m3)

24 - hr Design Value (ug/m3)

Year Trends in 24

- hr and Annual Average Design Values*

Natl 24HrDV Natl Ann Avg DV

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

IV

- 6 Chapter IV: Air Quality

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

### burning stoves and fireplaces, agricultural and residential open burning, and other

sources are included in Chapter V Emission Inventory

.

Figure IV

- 3 : Number of PM 2.5 

### Exceedences by Month

i. Speciation Data

Chemical composition data are helpful in understanding the types of emission sources

that contribute to ambient PM 2.5 

### . Since the se kinds of data are not collected in the Yuba

City

- Marysville nonattainment area, the EPA arraigned for having the limited chemical

ana lysis performed on FRM Teflon filter s 9 

### . These new data were intended to assist EPA

and the States with the identification of boundaries for potential NA areas and to also

assist with development of future control strategies if the areas are designated as

n onattainment

.

A total of 14 filters were analyzed from the Yuba City

- Almond Street monitor

representing sampling days occurring during the months of October through April from

the years 2004, 2005, and 200 6

. Archived Teflon filters were analyzed by a

combination of X

- ray Fluorescence (XRF) to provide elemental concentrations and Ion

Chromatography (IC) to estimate ions (sulfate, nitrate, potassium, ammonium, etc.). No

measure of elemental carbon or organic ca rbon were made as part of this project as

these carbon species cannot be measured on Teflon filters using the thermal optical

procedures that are standard in speciation analysis. Carbonaceous mass was

estimated by material balance following the SANDWICH m ethod.

9 Availability of New Speciation Data for Some Areas that EPA Intends to Designate as Nonattainment, Neil

Frank, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, September 18, 2008

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Nov Dec Jan Feb 

# PM

2.5 

# Exceedences 2000

- 2011

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

IV

- 7 Chapter IV: Air Quality

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

### The speciation data (summarized in Figure IV

- 4 ) show that on high PM 2.5 

### days, total

carbonaceous mass (TCM) and ammonium nitrate comprise over 90 percent of PM 2.5



### mass . Sulfates and crustal material compose a smal l portion on high PM 2.5 

### days (6 %

and 2% respectively).

Figure IV

- 4 Speciation Results

The results from speciation data were also included in EPA’s Technical Support

document (TSD) for the designations 10 

### . The TSD concluded that the speciation data

support the idea that localized residential wood combustion on stagnant winter nights is

what pushes the monitor into violation. This conclusion is consistent with observed

hourly monitoring data and emissions inventory data in that residential wood

combustion is a main contributor to wintertime PM 2.5 

### exceedences in the Planning Area.

10 Technical Support for State and Tribal Air Quality 24

- hour Fine Particle (PM 2.5 ) Designations , U.S.EPA Office

of Air Quality Planning and Standards, December, 2008.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

IV

- 8 Chapter IV: Air Quality

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

### e. Exceptional Event Documentation

During the summer of 2008, wild fires resulted in high PM 2.5 

### concentrations in northern

and central California. Between June 22 and July 19, 2008, the Yuba City

- Almond

Street monitoring site captured 17 days with concentrations so high that they would

have been considered for the selection of the 98 th 

### percentile fo r 2008, even though the

typical concentrations for this time of the year are between 5 and 10 μ 

### g/m 3 

### . With 321

data points collected in 2008, the 7 th 

### highest value would correspond to a 98 th



### percentile. Table IV

- 3 illustrates the top 30 concentrations for 2008, including 17

concentrations that were captured during the wildfires. Table IV

- 3 also shows that all 17

days affected by the fires have to be excluded from 98 th 

### percentile selection in order to

reach the 7 th 

### highest value not impacted by the fire. The magnitude of concentrations

captured during fire is further illustrated in Figure IV

- 5

. These data have been flagged

in U.S. EPA’s AQS database and the documentation was submitted to U.S. EPA on

August 28, 200 9 11



### .

In addition to the Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires exceptional event, there

are two additional exceptional events that the District has requested be flag ged in the

database. The two dates are July 4, 2010, and July 4, 2011. Both of these

ex ceedences were caused by firework events. The July 4, 2010, exceptional event

impacted the 2010 design value by a small amount (17.1 μg/m 3 

### vs. 15.9 μg/m 3 

### ). The

July 4, 2011, exceptional event did not have an impact on the 2011 design value as the

98 th 

### percentile with or without the event is 37.1 μg/m 3



### .

Figure IV

- 5 2008 PM 2.5 

### Concentrations at Yuba City

- Almond Street Monitor

11 PM 2.5 and PM 10 Natural Event Document, Summer 2008 Nort hern California Wildfires, June/July/August 2008,

August 28, 2009

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

IV

- 9 Chapter IV: Air Quality

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Table IV

- 3 Top 30 PM 2.5 

### FRM Concentrations during 2008

Rank (E E Excluded) PM 2.5 ( μ g/m3) Date Exceptional Event

127.3 7/10/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

105.5 6/27/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

99 7/9/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

94 6/25/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

68.8 6/24/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

68.5 6/26/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

1 64.6 10/30/08

54.2 7/7/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

45.4 6/23/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

34.8 7/5/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

31.7 7/8/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

2 29.2 11/25/08

29.1 6/28/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

29 7/6/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

3 26.2 11/23/08

4 25.3 11/26/08

25.1 6/22/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

5 25 2/9/08

25 7/19/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

24.7 7/1/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

24.5 7/4/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

24.5 7/11/08 Summer 2008 Northern California Wildfires

6 23.9 1/20/08

7 23.1 1/14/08

22.9 11/15/08

21.7 11/27/08

21.7 11/22/08

21.5 8/14/08

21.2 7/2/08

20.7 2/10/08

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

V

- 1 Chapter V: Attainment Emission Inventory

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

## V. Emission Inventory

This chapter summarizes emissions that occurred in the Planning Area dur ing the

attainment year of 2011. This inventory year has been selected to comply with CAA

requirements. The winter inventory has been prepared due to the nature of the PM 2.5 

### exceedences, as explained in Chapter IV

.

The emission inventory is divided into four main categories: stationary sources, area

sources, off

- road mobile sources, and on

- r oad mobile sources. The 2011 stationary

source emissions are estimated based on reported data from facilities. The area source

emissions are estimated jointly by ARB and the District. The on

- road mobile source

emissions are calculated using ARB’s EMFAC2011. The off

- road mobile source

emissions in the past were calculated using ARB’s OFFROAD model. The model has

now been replaced by category specific methods and inventory models, available at

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/categories.htm#offroad_motor_vehicles . For unlisted

categories, OFFROAD2007 was used to calculate emissions.

Stationary sources are emitters with one or more emission sources at a permitted

facility w ith an identified location (e.g. power plant, rice dryer). The District collects

throughput data annually from all permitted facilities and reports emissions from

facilities that exceed 10 tons per year of the criteria pollutants carbon monoxide

, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxid e, and particulate matter, and emissions that exceed 5 tons

per year of lead. As of June 12, 2012, the District ha d 592 active permits, of which

almost all reside within the Planning Area.

Area sources generally consist of many small emission sources (e.g. residential fuel

combustion, architectural coatings) which are distributed across the District. Area

source emissions were devel oped by ARB and the District. An example of s pecific

categories that were updated for this Plan include residential fuel combustion, managed

burning, pesticides and fertilizers, and paved/unpaved road dust. For more information

on area source methodologies , visit www.arb.ca.gov

.

Mobile sources include on

- road and off

- road sources. On

- road mobile source

emissions are calculated using socio

- economic data and transportation models provide

by Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG), and EMFAC2011 inventories

provided by ARB. The inventory reflects SACOG’s revised activity data from the

Metropolitan Transportation/Sustainable Communities Strategy Plan for 2035. The off

road mobile source emissions were calculated based on the methodologies listed on

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/categories.htm#offroad_motor_vehicles

.

Tables V

- 1 present s the 2011 winter emission inventory by major source category.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

V

- 2 Chapter V: Attainment Emission Inventory

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Table V

- 1 : Summary of Emissions by Major Source Category

2011 Winter Emissions (tons/ day )

Emission Source Type PM 2.5 

### NOx ROG NH 3 

### SOx

Stationary 0.87 4.391 4.03 0.36 0.125

Fuel Combus t ion 0.28 4.38 0.41 0.01 0.13

Waste Disposal 0 0 0 0.35 0

Cleaning & Surface Coating 0.004 0.001 0.77 0 0

Petroleum Production & Marketing 0 0.0001 2.84 0 0

Industrial Processes 0.59 0.011 0.01 0 0.001

Area 3.83 1.09 5.46 4.50 0.15

Solvent Evaporation 0 0 2.22 2.92 0

Misc. Processes Total 3.83 1.09 3.2 1.57 0.15

Residential Fuel Combus t ion 1.60 0.58 2.13 0.10 0.06

Farming Operations 0.91 0 0.43 1.07 0

Mana ged Burning & Disposal 0.82 0.51 0.66 0.10 0.09

Other Misc

. Processes 0.51 0.001 0.02 0.31 0

On

- Road Motor Vehicles 0.27 8.38 2.80 0.19 0.03

Other Mobile 0.88 5.43 2.35 0.002 0.06



### Total 5.26 19.29 14.64 5.05 0.35

Mobile sources account for 72% of the NOx emissions and 38% of the ROG emissions

in 2011. However, mobile sources only account for a small portion of the emissions of

SOx (23%), PM 2.5 

### (11%), and ammonia (4%).

Stationary sources contribute the most to the SOx inventory at 36%. They account for

26% of the ROG emissions, 23% of the NOx emissions, 17% of PM 2.5 

### emissions, and

7% of the ammonia emissions.

Area sources account for the majority of ammonia emissions (89%) and PM 2.5 

### emissions (72%). The area sou rces that contribute the most to ammonia emissions are

solvent evaporation (pesticides and fertilizers). Area sources contribute a smaller

portion to NOx (5%), ROG (36%), and SOx (41%).

The Planning Area observes the highest concentrations of PM 2.5 

### durin g the winter

months. Area sources contribute the greatest portion of directly emitted PM 2.5 

### during

the winter (72%). Figure V

- 2 provides the contribution of the major area sources to the

2011 winter emission inventory. Of the major area sources, residen tial fuel combustion

accounts for 42% of the PM 2.5 

### . Managed burning accounts for 24% and farming

operations account for 21%.

Area sources also account for the greatest portion of ammonia emissions (89%). Figure

V

- 3 provides the contribution of the maj or area sources to the 2011 winter emission

inventory. The majority of the winter ammonia emissions are due to solvent

evaporation, specifically pesticides and fertilizers, which account for 65% of the

emissions. Farming operations account for 24% of the winter ammonia emissions.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

V

- 3 Chapter V: Attainment Emission Inventory

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Figure V

- 1 : Contribution by Source Category to 2011 Winter Emissions

23%

5%

42% 30% 

### NOx Emissions: 19.29 tons/day

26%

36% 18% 20% 

### ROG Emissions: 14.64 tons/day

17%

72% 5% 6% 

### PM

2.5 

### Emissions: 5.26 tons/day

36%

41% 7% 16% 

### SOx Emissions: 0.35 tons/day

7%

89% 4% 0% 

### NH

3 

### Emissions: 5.05 tons/day

38%

38% 7% 17% 

# Stationary Sources

Area Sources

On-Road Motor Vehicles

Other Mobile Sources

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

V

- 4 Chapter V: Attainment Emission Inventory

PM 2.5 Redesignaion Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Figure V

- 2 : Contribution of Major Area Sources to Winter PM 2.5 

### Emission Inventory

Figure V

- 3: Contribution of Major Area Sources to Winter NH 3 

### Emission Inventory 42%

24% 21% 13% 

## Area Source PM

2.5 

## Emissions: 3.83 tons/year

Residential Fuel

Combustion

Farming Operations

Managed Burning &

Disposal

Other Misc Processes

65%

2% 24% 2% 7% 

# Area Source NH

3 

# Emissions: 4.50 tons/day

Solvent Evaporation

Residential Fuel

Combusion

Farming Operations

Mananged Burning &

Disposal

Other Misc Processes

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

VI

- 1 Chapter VI: Maintenance Demonstration

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

## VI. Maintenance Demonstration

The required Maintenance Plan must provide for maintenance of the air quality in the

affected area for 10 years after the USEPA’s expected approval

. To achieve this, the

District and ARB developed an inventory for the attainment year 2011, and developed

projections for an intermediate year of 2017 and the final year of the maintenance

period, 2024. The attainment year, intermediate year, and final y ear inventories use

winter

- time emissions due to the seasonality of the PM 2.5 

### exceedences, as described in

Chapters IV and V. The maintenance demonstration includes emission s of directly

emitted PM 2.5 

### , NOx, and SOx

.

The EPA PM 2.5 

### implementation rule spec ifies that a precursor is considered “significant”

for control strategy development purposes when a significant reduction in the emission

of that precursor pollutant leads to a significant decrease in PM 2.5 

### concentration. Such

pollutants are known as “PM 2 .5 

### attainment plan precursors” (72 FR 20586). The PM 2.5 

### implementation rule also established a presumption that PM 2.5 

### , NOx, and SOx are

attainment plan precursors, while VOCs and ammonia are not unless they are needed

for attainment demonstration or are s ignificant for maintaining the NAAQS. Since the

area has maintained the standard for the past four years, without additional VOCs or

ammonia controls, these two precursors are not significant in order for the area to

maintain the NAAQS. Therefore, the ma intenance demonstration includes emissions of

direct PM 2.5 

### , SOx, and NOx. The emission projections for 2017 and 2024 are presented

in Table VI

- 1

. The change in emissions from 2011 to 2024 is presented in Table VI

- 2.

The District issues emission reduction credits (ERCs) for pollutant emission reductions

due to equipment shutdown or voluntary control. These ERCs may then be used as

“offsets” to compensate for an increase in emissions from a new or modified major

emissio n source regulated by the District. Since ERCs represent potential emissions,

they need to be taken into account in the future emission inventories. T o ensure that

the use of ERCs will not jeopardize the District’s PM 2.5 

### maintenance goals, the amount

of E RCs issued for reductions of NOx, SOx, and PM 10 

### that occurred prior to 2011 are

added to the emission inventory projections for 2017 and 2024 in the maintenance

demonstration. The District only issues ERCs for PM 10 

### and has not identified the PM 2.5 

### portion of the ERC. When creating the future year inventories for the Maintenance

Demonstration, the District applied the amount of PM 10 

### ERCs to the future year

inventories of PM 2.5 

### . As PM 2.5 

### is a portion of PM 10 

### , this approach conservatively

estimates the maximum pollutant increase if all ERCs were redeemed within the District

during the Maintenance Period.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

VI

- 2 Chapter VI: Maintenance Demonstration

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Table VI

- 1: Projected Wintertime Emissions for Maintenance Demonstration , tons/day



### PM 2.5 

### NOx SOx

Emission Source Type 2017 2024 2017 2024 2017 2024

Stationary 1.045 1.125 4.772 4.324 0.237 0.239

Fuel Combus t ion 0.286 0.269 4.755 4.306 0.234 0.235

Waste Disposal 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cleaning & Surface Coating 0.005 0.006 0.001 0.001 0 0

Petroleum Production & Marketing 0 0 0 0 0 0

Industrial Processes 0.754 0.850 0.016 0.019 0.003 0.004

Area 4.073 3.964 1.279 1.275 0.252 0.247

Solvent Evaporation 0 0 0 0 0 0

Misc. Processes Total 4.073 3.964 1.279 1.275 0.252 0.247

Residential Fuel Combus t ion 1.698 1.656 0.705 0.718 0.083 0.084

Farming Operations 0.932 0.878 0 0 0 0

Mana ged Burning & Disposal 0.854 0.823 0.573 0.556 0.169 0.163

Other Misc

. Processes 0.589 0.607 0.001 0.001 0 0

On

- Road Motor Vehicles * 0. 2 0. 2 5.3 3.1 0.028 0.028

Other Mobile 0.218 0.144 4.618 3.359 0.056 0.057



### Total 5.536 5.433 15. 969 12.058 0.574 0.571

ERC’s That Have Been Included in the

Above Inventory: 1.292 1.292 0.888 0.888 0.224 0.224

*On

- Road Motor Vehicle PM2.5 and NOx inventory has been replaced with Motor Vehicle Emission

Budgets



### Table VI

- 2: Projected Change by Pollutant , tons/day

Pollutant 2011 2017 2024 Projected Change % Change

NOx 19.287 15. 969 12.058

- 7.229

- 37 %

PM 2.5 

### 5.259 5.536 5.433 + 0.174 + 3%

SOx 0.354 0.574 0.571 + 0.217 + 61%



### Emissions of NO x are projected to decline by 37 % between 2011 and 2024. However,

emissions of SOx and directly emitted PM 2.5 

### are projected to rise by 61% and 3 %

, respectively . Therefore, further evaluation was needed to determine whether the area

would continue to meet the standard in 2024.

The combined impact of the decrease in NOx emissions and the increase in SOx and

PM 2.5 

### emissions was considered according to the air quality impact of the respective

pollutants on the nonattainment area. The speciation data collected from the Yuba City

Almond Street m onitor was used to determine the relative contribution toward the 2011

design value, as shown in Table VI

- 3

.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

VI

- 3 Chapter VI: Maintenance Demonstration

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Ta ble VI

- 3 : Contribution toward 2011 Design Value

Percent

of mass Contribution toward

2011 DV of 27 μ 

### g/m 3



### Carbonaceous aerosols 54% 14.6 μ 

### g/m 3



### Nitrate 38% 10.3 μ 

### g/m 3



### Sulfate 6% 1.6 μ 

### g/m 3



### Crustal material 2% 0.5 μ 

### g/m 3



### Assuming that all of the carbonaceous aerosols and crustal material are from directly

emitted PM 2.5 

### , the projected increase in direct PM 2.5 

### emissions will cause a

corresponding 3 % or 0.45 μ 

### g/m 3 

### increase in the ambient concentrations of direct PM 2.5 

### component. The projected 61% increase in SOx would increase the sulfate

contribution from 1.6 μ 

### g/m 3 

### to 2.6 μ 

### g/m 3 

### . The projected 37 % reduction in NO x will

cause a corresponding 3.8 μ 

### g/m 3 

### decrease in the design value concentrations. The

overall impact to the 2024 design value is expected to be a decrease of 2. 4 μ 

### g/m 3 

### , from

27 μ 

### g/m 3 

### to 24. 6 μ 

### g/m 3 

### , which is well below the standard of 35 μ 

### g/m 3



### . Therefor e,

maintenance of the standard is demonstrated. The resultant changes to the 2024

design value are summarized in Table VI

- 4.

Table VI

- 4: Projected Pollutant Impact to 2024 Design Value

Pollutant Contribution

toward 2011 DV Change from

2011 to 2024 Resultant change to

2024 DV

Directly emitted

PM 2.5 

### 15.1 μ 

### g/m 3 

### +3 % Increase by 0.45 μ 

### g/m 3



### SOx 1.6 μ 

### g/m 3 

### +61% Increase by 1.0 μ 

### g/m 3



### NOx 10.3 μ 

### g/m 3



### - 37 % Decrease by 3.8 μ 

### g/m 3



### Overall change to 2024 design value expected Decrease by 2. 4 μ 

### g/m 3



### In addition, the application of PM10 ERCs to the future year inventories overestimates

the amount of PM 2.5 

### in 2017 and 2024 should every ERC be redeemed.

a. Control Strategy

To prevent new facilities from causing PM 2.5 

### emissions impact on the Yuba City

Marysville area, any new facilities that may emit PM 2.5 

### will be subject to the District’s

New Source Review rule (Rule 10.1). New major sources of PM 2.5 

### would be required to

implement Best Available Control Technology, and supply offsets for emission s

increases. After the area is redesignated to attainment, new and modified major

sources with significant PM 2.5 

### emissions may be subject to Prevention of Significant

Deterioration (PSD) permitting requirements and review (40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21).

Additi onally, Table VI

- 5 shows District rules and regulations adopted or amended since

designation that control sources of PM 2.5



### .

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

VI

- 4 Chapter VI: Maintenance Demonstration

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Table VI

- 5 District PM 2.5 

### Rules and Regulations Adopted /Amended Since Nonattainment Designation

Rule Version Title Description

2.0.F.1

10/6/2008 Open Burning Prohibits open fires for purpose of disposal or waste or other material

.

2.0.F.2 Open Burning Prohibits sources of air pollution from causing a nuisance to the public

or endangering public health and safety

.

2.0.H Open Burning Requires permits for any open burning

.

2.0.J Open Burning Restricts agricultural burning hours based on air quality conditions.

2.0.J.7 Open Burning Requires Rice Straw Burning to comply with Smoke Management

Program

.

2.0.J.8 Open Burning Requires Wildland vegetation and forest management burning to

comply with Sacramento Valley Air Basin Smoke Management

Program

.

2.0.L.3 Open Burning Limits Residential burning to specific days providing it is a permissible

burn day

.

2.0.L.4 Open Burning Limits Residential burning to specific hours providing it is a

permissible burn day

.

3.17 October

2009 Wood Heating

Devices Requires newly installed residential wood heating devices to meet

EPA Phase II emission standards. Also establishes volunt ary no

- burn

advisory program. Also prohibits burning unseasoned wood

3.19 6/6/2011 Vehicle & Mobile

Equipment Coating Limits particulate matter emissions by requiring spray booths.



### The ARB has also adopted measures to reduce direct emissions of PM 2.5 

### as well as

precursor emissions. These measures are described in Table VI

- 6.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

VI

- 5 Chapter VI: Maintenance Demonstration

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Table VI

- 6 State Strategy that Provides PM 2.5 

### Reductions

Agency Actions Implementation



### Passenger Vehicles

Smog Check Improvements BAR 2007

- 2009 2008

- 2010;2013 1

Expanded Vehicle Retirement (AB 118) ARB/BAR 2007 2009



### Trucks

Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program ARB 2007 2010

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks ARB 2007, 2008, 2010 2011

- 2015



### Goods Movement Sources

Auxiliary Ship Engine Cold Ironing & Other Clean Tech EPA/ARB/

Local 2007, 2008 2010

Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel 2 Fuel: 2008

- 2011 2009

- 2015

Engines: 2008 2011

Port Truck Modernization ARB, Local 2007,2008,

2010 2008

- 2020

Accelerated Intro. of Cleaner Line

- Haul Locomotives 3 EPA/ARB 2008 2012

Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft ARB 2007, 2010 2009

- 2018



### Off

- Road Equipment

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment 4 ARB 2007, 2010 2009



### Other Off

- Road Sources

New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 5 ARB See notes See notes

Expanded Off

- Road Recreational Vehicle Emission

Standards 5 ARB See notes See notes

Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above

- Ground Storage

Tanks ARB 2008 2009

- 2016

Additional Evaporative Emission Standards 5 2009 2010

- 2012

See notes See notes



### Areawide Sources

Consumer Products Program ARB 2008 2010

2009 2013

- 2014

2011 2014

Pesticide Regulation DPR 2008, 2009 2009

1 In 2010, the State Legislature improved the effectiveness of the Smog Check program (AB 2289),

requiring the Bureau of Automotive Repair to direct older vehicles to high performing auto technicians and

test stations for inspection and certification. This new program will be effective in 2013.

2 In July 2008, ARB adopted a regulation that applies to ships operating within 24 nautical miles (nm) of

the California Coastline and visiting California ports. These vessels must use less polluting marine

distillate fuel for their main engines, auxiliary engines, and boilers instead of heavy fuel oil. The first phase

of cleaner fuel for ship main engines took e ffect in 2009, with a second phase currently scheduled in

2012. By 2015, the International Maritime Organization's fuel sulfur requirements for the North American

Emission Control Area will match ARB’s phase 2 standards and extend out to 200 miles from Cal ifornia

Coastline.

3 In 2008, ARB awarded Prop 1B bond funds to upgrade line

- haul locomotive engines not already

accounted for by enforceable agreements with the railroads. Those cleaner line

- hauls will begin operation

by 2012.

4 Reductions begin in 2014.

5 Expected action in 2013, with implementation schedules to be determined in rulemaking process.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

VII

- 1 Chapter VII: Contingency Measures

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

## VII. Maintenance Plan Contingency Measures

a. Measures to be adopted and “action level”

The District will use the 24

- hour design value as the contingency plan trigger. The

action levels will be prompted by the monitored levels at the Yuba City

- Almond Street

monitoring station

. In the event that the 24

- hour design value (the 3

- year average of the

98 th 

### percentile) at this site exceeds the level of the 2006 PM 2.5 

### NAAQS, within 60 days

the District shall commence analyses including meteorological evaluation of h igh PM 2.5 

### days and emissions inventory assessment . The analyses will also include whether the

exceedenc e was caused by an exceptional event or an instrument malfunction.

Once the analyses are complete, the District will consult with interested parties,

community organizations, and industry to identify voluntary and incentive based

measures to reduce directly emitted PM 2.5 

### or precursors that can be implemented prior

to the next January 1. The District will make its analyses and summary of voluntary

measu res available to the public at a Board Meeting.

If it is determined that the violation or exceedence occurred due to sources within the

District , then by November 1 of the year following the year in which the trigger has been

activated, the District will complete sufficient analyses to begin adoption of necessary

rules for ensuring attainment and maintenance of the 24

- hour PM 2.5 

### NAAQS. If new

rules are necessary , then they would be adopted by the following August 3 1. Each

adopted rule will include a schedule that will require compliance with the rule no later

than 2 years after adoption of the rule.

The measures that will be considered for adoption upon a trigger of the contingency

plan include: Reasonably Available Control Technology on stationary sources in the

nonattainment area, open burning restrictions, fugitive dust and opacity restrictions, an d

restrictions on residential wood burning devices

.

b. Commitment to continue to operate monitoring network

The existing PM 2.5 

### monitoring network in the Yuba City

- Marysville nonattainment area

includes a PM 2.5 

### FRM monitor located at 773 Almond Street in Yuba City operating on a

daily schedule and a non

- Federal Equivalence Method (non

- FEM) Beta Attenuation

Monitor (BAM) running in parallel to the FRM. The two instruments complement each

other in the monitoring n etwork as the FRM monitor provides accurate and precise data

for purposes of area designation, while the BAM provides real time data used for Air

Quality Index reporting, forecasting, and the allocation of agricultural burning. The

District is committed t o working with the ARB in the continued operation of the Yuba

City

- Almond Street monitoring station and maintaining compliance with federal law on

Ambient Air Quality Surveillance (40 CFR Part 58).

c. Verification of Continued Attainment

The ARB is responsi ble for monitoring PM 2.5 

### in the Yuba City

- Marysville Planning Area.

The ARB also oversees the quality assurance of PM 2.5 

### data and submits annual

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

VII

- 2 Chapter VII: Contingency Measures

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### monitoring network plans to the EPA on behalf of the District . The ARB commits to

maintaining an appropriat e PM 2.5 

### monitoring network through the maintenance period,

with any potential changes to be developed in collaboration with the EPA and subject to

stakeholder review. To verify continued attainment of the PM 2.5 

### standard, the ARB will

continue to conduct P M 2.5 

### monitoring and expeditiously review data as it becomes

available. The District will track the progress of the maintenance plan through the

acquisition of ambient and source emission data. All permitted stationary sources within

the District are requ ired to submit annual throughput data that the District uses to

compile the emission inventory. The District will commit to review the emission

inventory for unexpected growth in primary PM 2.5 

### or NOx that may jeopardize the

maintenance of the 2006 PM 2.5 

### NAAQS.

The District develops a comprehensive stationary source emission inventory every three

years to the ARB for submission under 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart A.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

VIII

- 1 Chapter VIII: MVEBs

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

## VIII. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets

Transportation conformity requirements contained in District Rule 10.5

- Transportation

Conformity require that federal actions and federally funded transportation projects

conform to the State Implementation Plan and that they do not interfere with efforts to

attain federal air quality standards.

The Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACO G) is the local Metropolitan

Planning Organization (MPO) responsible for making the conformity determinations and

redeterminations as required in the Planning Area. Table VI II

- 1 provides the motor

vehicle emissions budget s (MVEB) which will be used in the co nformity process. The

MVEBs were considered and approved at the February 27, 2013, meeting of the

Regional Planning Partnership.

Table VIII

- 1: MVEBs

Pollutant 2017 2024

NOx 5.3 3.1

PM 2.5 

### 0.2 0.2

The PM 2.5 

### precursor NOx is presumed to be a significant contributor to the PM 2.5 

### nonattainment area emissions by the U.S.EPA. The District is establishing MVEB for

NOx. No MVEB are being established for VOC, SOx, ammonia, or re

- entrained road

dust.

a. Ammonia and VOCs

The PM 2.5 

### implementation rule (72 FR 20586) established a presumption that PM 2.5 

### , NOx, and SOx are attainment plan precursors, while VOCs and ammonia are not unless

they are needed for attainment demonstration or are significant for maintaining the

NAAQS. Since Yuba City

- Marysville nonattainment a rea has maintained the standard

for the past four years, without additional VOCs or ammonia controls, these two

precursors are not significant in order for the area to maintain the NAAQS for the next

ten years. The ammonia and VOCs controls are not needed for demonstrating

attainment or maintaining the NAAQS, therefore they are not included in the Motor

Vehicle Emission Budgets for conformity purposes.

b. SOx

Winter on

- road SOx emissions are 0.025 tons per day, which equates to about 7% of

the total SOx em ission inventory. Based on the chemical speciation data 12 

### , sulfate

12 Chapter IV section C. Components of PM 2.5 in the Planning Area, page 4

- 5 of this Redesignation

Request/Maintenance Plan.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

VIII

- 2 Chapter VIII: MVEBs

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### comprised 6% of the total mass on high PM 2.5 

### days. Since the on

- road portion is only

7% of the total SOx emissions, it contributes 7% of 6%, or less than 0.5%, of the PM 2.5



### mass on the days measuring high PM 2.5 

### . As a result, motor vehicle SOx emissions are

not considered significant and are not included in the motor vehicle emission budgets

for conformity purposes.

c. Geologic Sources

Re

- entrained road dust only needs to be co nsidered in the conformity determination if

t he State air agency and/or the EPA have deemed the pollutant as a significant

contributor to the PM 2.5 

### nonattainment problem.

Wintertime paved road dust PM 2.5 

### emissions in 2011 are estimated at 0.13 tons per day,

which equates to 2.5% of the total PM 2.5 

### emissions. As noted in Chapter IV , all geologic

and construction source categories combined represent only about 2% of the PM 2.5



### concentrations on high days , as represented by the crustal portion of the filter mass

. Since paved road dust is about 10% of the total geologic and construction emissions

shown in the area

- wide categories in the inventory, the contribution of paved road dust

to ambient PM 2.5 

### concentration is about 0.2% (assuming that relative ambient

contributions reflect relative emissions contributions).

Wintertime unpaved road dust PM 2.5 

### emissio ns in 2011 are 0.16 tons per day or about

3% of the total PM 2.5 

### emissions. A s noted above, a ll geologic and construction source

categories combined repres ent only about 2% of the PM 2.5 

### concentrations on high PM 2.5 

### days. Since unpaved road dust is about 12% of the geologic and construction

emissions shown in the area

- wide categories in the inventory, the contribution of

un paved road dust to ambient PM 2.5 

### co ncentration is about 0.24% (assuming that

relative ambient contributions reflect relative emissions contributions).

Since the re

- entrained road dust is not a significant contributor to the PM 2.5



### nonattainment problem, the District will not be establishing MVEB for this source

category. An affirmative insignificance finding by EPA only relieves SACOG from a

regional emissions analysis for re

- entrained road dust emissions and does not relieve

them of the other transportation conformity requirements.

Total construction and demolition direct PM 2.5 

### emissions are 0.08 tons per day during

winter or about 2% of the total PM 2.5 

### emissions. A s noted above, a ll geologic and

construction source categories combined represent only about 2% of the PM 2.5



### concentrations o n high days. Since construction and demolition is about 6% of the

geologic and construction emissions shown in the area

- wide categories in the inventory,

the contribution of construction and demolition to ambient PM 2.5 

### concentration is about

0.12% (assumi ng that relative ambient contributions reflect relative emissions

contributions).

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

VIII

- 3 Chapter VIII: MVEBs

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Table VIII

- 2 summarizes the geologic source emission inventory for 2011 and projected

inventories for 2017 and 2024, and their contributions to the crustal portion of observe d

PM 2.5 

### and the PM 2.5 

### inventory as a whole. Due to their small contribution to PM 2.5 

### emissions in the Planning Area, geologic sources are not considered in the conformity

determination.

Table VIII

- 2: Geologic Sources’ Contribution to PM 2.5



### SUMMARY CATEGOR Y NAME 2011 2017 2024

Farming Operations 0.913 0.932 0.878

Construction and Demolition 0.08 0.091 0.092

Paved Road Dust 0.132 0.175 0.192

Unpaved Road Dust 0.162 0.173 0.17

Fugitive Windblown Dust 0.084 0.088 0.085



### All geologic sources

- Winter 1.371 1.459 1.417

All PM 2.5 

### sources

- Winter 5.259 5.507 5.406

Paved Road Dust as % of Crustal 10 12 14

Paved Road Dust as % of Winter PM 2.5



### Emissions 2.5 3.2 3.6

Unpaved Road Dust as % of Crustal 12 12 12

Unpaved Road Dust as % of Winter PM 2.5



### Emissions 3.1 3.1 3.1

Construction Dust as % of Crustal 6 6 6

Construction Dust as % of Winter PM 2.5



### Emissions 1.5 1.7 1.7

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

IX

- 1 Chapter IX: Conclusion

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

## IX. Conclusion

The Yuba City

- Marysville Nonattainment area attained the 2006 24

- hour PM 2.5 

### standard

during the 2006

- 2008 monitoring period, and continued to monitor attainment through

2011. The determination is based on complete, quality assured, and cer tified

monitoring data from the Yuba City

- Almond Street monitor.

The area has attained the standard through the implementation of permanent and

enforceable measures adopted by the Feather River Air Quality Management District

and the California Air Resour ces Board.

The area demonstrates maintenance of the standard for ten years through the

development of future year inventories and projecting the resultant pollutant

contributions to future PM 2.5 

### concentrations.

The Maintenance Plan has been prepared to incorporate all of the requirements in

section 175A of the CAA. The District requests that EPA find all of the requirements

applicable un der section 110 and Part D are met and redesignate the Yuba City

Marysville area to attainment for the 2006 24

- hour PM 2.5 

### NAAQS.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

A

- 1 Appendix A

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Appendix A



### Yuba City

- M arysville CA Nonattainment Area (as defined in 74 FR 58688)

Sutter County

- All

Yuba County

- That portion of Yuba County which lies west of the line described as

follows: (Mount Diablo Base and Meridian) Beginning at the intersection of the Yuba

Nevada county line and the range line common to ranges R7E and R8E, north to the

southeast corner of to wnship T18N R7E, then west along the township line common to

T17N and T18N, then north along the range line common to ranges R6E and R7E, then

west along the township line common to T19N and T18N to the Yuba

- Butte County

boundary.

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

B

- 1 Appendix B

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Appendix B: Emission Inventory

Table B

- 1 2011 Inventory

EIC SUMMARY CATEGORY NAME PM 2.5 NOx ROG NH 3 SOx

10 ELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.1129 0.9663 0.0495 0 0.0282

20 COGENERATION 0.0021 0.0046 0.0003 0 0.0002

30 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COMBUSTION) 0.0418 1.7996 0.2646 0 0.0012

50 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.0179 0.5476 0.0194 0 0.0589

52 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.0224 0.4779 0.0409 0 0.0027

60 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.0756 0.3814 0.0331 0 0.0217

99 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.0069 0.2017 0.0038 0.0098 0.0111

110 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0 0 0 0.0018 0

120 LANDFILLS 0 0 0 0.0326 0

199 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0 0 0 0.3133 0

210 LAUNDERING 0 0 0.0081 0 0

220 DEGREASING 0 0 0.2601 0 0

230 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.0042 0 0.299 0 0

240 PRINTING 0 0 0.0188 0 0

250 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0 0 0.0366 0 0

299 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.0002 0.0007 0.1443 0 0

310 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0 0.0001 2.4634 0 0

320 PETROLEUM REFINING 0 0 0.0139 0 0

330 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0 0 0.356 0 0

399 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND MARKETING) 0 0 0.0075 0 0

410 CHEMICAL 0 0 0.0001 0 0

420 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.3985 0 0.0058 0 0

430 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.0938 0.0109 0 0 0.0014

450 WOOD AND PAPER 0.0806 0 0 0 0

499 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.0163 0 0 0 0

510 CONSUMER PRODUCTS 0 0 0.9553 0 0

520 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0 0 0.4725 0 0

530 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0 0 0.1927 2.9231 0

540 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0 0 0.6042 0 0

610 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 1.5909 0.5788 2.1301 0.0971 0.0551

620 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.9125 0 0.4316 1.0661 0

630 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.0803 0 0 0 0

640 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.132 0 0 0 0

645 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.162 0 0 0 0

650 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.084 0 0 0 0

660 FIRES 0.003 0.0006 0.002 0 0

670 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.8155 0.5082 0.6564 0.0994 0.0927

690 COOKING 0.0486 0 0.0179 0 0

699 OTHER (MISCELLANEOUS PROCESSES) 0 0 0 0.3088 0

710 LIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (LDA) 0.0396 0.6751 0.7538 0.0597 0.0063

722 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS

- 1 (LDT1) 0.0045 0.1342 0.1989 0.0063 0.0007

723 LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS

- 2 (LDT2) 0.0201 0.74 0.5654 0.0432 0.0042

724 MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.0174 0.7769 0.487 0.0547 0.0047

732 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS

- 1 (LHDV1) 0.0038 0.2487 0.2061 0.0168 0.0016

733 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS

- 2 (LHDV2) 0.0002 0.014 0.013 0.0012 0.0001

734 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.0002 0.0453 0.0729 0.0005 0

736 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (HHDV) 0 0.0283 0.0232 0.0002 0

742 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS

- 1 (LHDV1) 0.0175 1.0665 0.0497 0.0006 0.001

743 LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS

- 2 (LHDV2) 0.0026 0.1526 0.0068 0 0.0002

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

B

- 2 Appendix B

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan

PM 2.5 NOx ROG NH 3 SOx

744 MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.028 0.7189 0.0391 0.0018 0.0009

746 HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (HHDV) 0.1273 3.5449 0.2071 0.0067 0.0048

750 MOTORCYCLES (MCY) 0.0005 0.0468 0.1533 0.0002 0

760 HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.0017 0.0325 0.0012 0.0001 0.0001

762 HEAVY DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0 0.0084 0.0026 0 0

771 SCHOOL BUSES

- GAS (SBG) 0 0.0032 0.0029 0 0

772 SCHOOL BUSES

- DIESEL (SBD) 0.0029 0.0481 0.0031 0.0001 0

777 OTHER BUSES

- GAS (OBG) 0 0.0083 0.0061 0.0001 0

778 OTHER BUSES

- MOTOR COACH

- DIESEL (OBC) 0.0008 0.0266 0.0015 0 0

779 ALL OTHER BUSES

- DIESEL (OBD) 0.0008 0.0185 0.0012 0 0

780 MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.0009 0.0385 0.0068 0.0004 0

810 AIRCRAFT 0.039 0.3706 0.7743 0 0.0519

820 TRAINS 0.0323 1.2534 0.0791 0 0.001

840 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.0145 0.0536 0.2755 0 0

850 OFF

- ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.0012 0.0054 0.1572 0 0

860 OFF

- ROAD EQUIPMENT 0.0586 1.1788 0.4488 0.0001 0.0003

870 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.1424 2.5708 0.5383 0.0019 0.0028

890 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0 0 0.076 0 0



### GRAND TOTAL FOR Yuba City

- Marysville PM

2.5 

### Nonattainment Area 5.2589 19.2873 14.6386 5.0466 0.3539

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

B

- 3 Appendix B

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Table B

- 2: 2017 Projected Inventory

EIC SUMMARY CATEGORY NAME PM 2.5 NOx SOx

10 ELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.1166 1.0841 0.0508

20 COGENERATION 0.0024 0.0073 0.0004

30 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COMBUSTION) 0.0401 2.0267 0.0021

50 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.0196 0.6539 0.113

52 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.0129 0.2852 0.0021

60 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.0861 0.4712 0.0428

99 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.008 0.2262 0.0228

110 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0 0 0

120 LANDFILLS 0 0 0

199 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0 0 0

210 LAUNDERING 0 0 0

220 DEGREASING 0 0 0

230 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.0052 0 0

240 PRINTING 0 0 0

250 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0 0 0

299 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.0002 0.0008 0

310 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0 0.0001 0

320 PETROLEUM REFINING 0 0 0

330 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0 0 0

399 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND MARKETING) 0 0 0

410 CHEMICAL 0 0 0

420 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.4928 0 0

430 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.1307 0.0162 0.0035

450 WOOD AND PAPER 0.0977 0 0

499 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.0323 0 0

510 CONSUMER PRODUCTS 0 0 0

520 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0 0 0

530 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0 0 0

540 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0 0 0

610 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 1.6979 0.7053 0.083

620 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.9317 0 0

630 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.091 0 0

640 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.1752 0 0

645 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.1732 0 0

650 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.0885 0 0

660 FIRES 0.0041 0.001 0

670 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.8538 0.5728 0.1688

690 COOKING 0.0578 0 0

699 OTHER (MISCELLANEOUS PROCESSES) 0 0 0

ON

- ROAD MOTOR VEHICLES* 0.2 5.3 0.028

810 AIRCRAFT 0.039 0.3704 0.0518

820 TRAINS 0.0303 1.3433 0.0014

840 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.0115 0.0522 0

850 OFF

- ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.0012 0.0067 0

860 OFF

- ROAD EQUIPMENT 0.0535 1.1912 0.0003

870 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.0827 1.6541 0.0028

890 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0 0 0



### GRAND TOTAL FOR Yuba City

- Marysville PM

2.5 

### Nonattainment Area 5.536 15. 9687 0.5736

*ON

- ROAD MOTOR VEHICLE inventory has been replaced with Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets

### Feather River Air Quality Management District April 1, 2013

B

- 4 Appendix B

PM 2.5 Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan 

### Table B

- 3: 2024 Projected Inventory

EIC SUMMARY CATEGORY NAME PM 2.5 NOx SOx

10 ELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.1089 1.0276 0.0481

20 COGENERATION 0.0026 0.0086 0.0004

30 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COMBUSTION) 0.0343 1.7016 0.0017

50 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.0193 0.6569 0.1142

52 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.0081 0.2018 0.0014

60 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 0.0878 0.4879 0.0444

99 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.0084 0.2198 0.0246

110 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0 0 0

120 LANDFILLS 0 0 0

199 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0 0 0

210 LAUNDERING 0 0 0

220 DEGREASING 0 0 0

230 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.0055 0 0

240 PRINTING 0 0 0

250 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0 0 0

299 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.0002 0.0008 0

310 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0 0.0001 0

320 PETROLEUM REFINING 0 0 0

330 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0 0 0

399 OTHER (PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND MARKETING) 0 0 0

410 CHEMICAL 0 0 0

420 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.5519 0 0

430 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.1528 0.0188 0.0039

450 WOOD AND PAPER 0.0998 0 0

499 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.0452 0 0

510 CONSUMER PRODUCTS 0 0 0

520 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0 0 0

530 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0 0 0

540 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0 0 0

610 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 1.6562 0.7179 0.0839

620 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.8785 0 0

630 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.0922 0 0

640 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.1916 0 0

645 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.17 0 0

650 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.0845 0 0

660 FIRES 0.0049 0.0012 0

670 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.8226 0.5557 0.1632

690 COOKING 0.0637 0 0

699 OTHER (MISCELLANEOUS PROCESSES) 0 0 0

ON

- ROAD MOTOR VEHICLES* 0.2 3.1 0.028

810 AIRCRAFT 0.039 0.3704 0.0518

820 TRAINS 0.0239 1.1611 0.0016

840 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.0089 0.0522 0

850 OFF

- ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.0012 0.0083 0

860 OFF

- ROAD EQUIPMENT 0.034 0.8445 0.0005

870 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.0368 0.9228 0.0028

890 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0 0 0



### GRAND TOTAL FOR Yuba City

- Marysville PM

2.5 

### Nonattainment Area 5.4328 12.058 0.5705

*On

- Road Motor Vehicle Inventory has been replaced with Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets