1

CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD

STAFF REPORT

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY PM2.5 CONTINGENCY MEASURES UPDATE

I. BACKGROUND

On April 30, 2008, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (District) adopted 

the 2008 PM2.5 Plan to address the 1997 National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(standards) for PM2.5 -- 24-hour standard of 65 μg/m3 and the annual standard of 

15 μg/m3. The plan demonstrates that the San Joaquin Valley (Valley) will attain these 

standards by 2014. On November 9, 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(U.S. EPA) approved this plan and related submittals except for the contingency 

measures1

. 

Contingency measures provide additional emission reductions in the event a 

nonattainment area fails to achieve either Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) targets 

or attain the PM2.5 standard by its attainment date. These contingency measures are 

to take effect without any further Air Resources Board (ARB) or District regulatory 

action. Neither the Clean Air Act (Act) nor U.S. EPA’s 2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

specifies the amount of contingency emission reductions. The preamble to U.S. EPA’s 

2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule suggests contingency measures should provide for 

emission reductions equivalent to about one year of the reductions needed for RFP. 

In its action, U.S. EPA determined that, while the measures in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan 

were appropriate, the plan did not document enough emission reductions from the 

contingency measures. This contingency measures disapproval triggers sanction clocks 

under the Act that run from the effective date of the final action, January 9, 2012. The 

first sanction, the offset sanction, would apply in the San Joaquin Valley 18 months 

later, July 9, 2013. The second sanction, highway funding sanctions, would be imposed 

6 months after the first sanction, January 9, 2014. 

To meet the Act’s contingency measure requirements and avoid the sanctions, the 

District adopted as a State Implementation Plan (SIP) amendment Quantification of 

Contingency Reductions for the 2008 PM2.5 Plan on June 20, 2013.

II. CONTINGENCY QUANTIFICATION

In the 2008 PM2.5 Plan, the District identified three types of contingency measures that 

go into effect without further action: 1) documented emission reductions occurring 

between 2014 and 2015 from on-going implementation of existing programs; 

2) reductions from an already adopted contingency provision in the District’s Wood 

 1 EPA, Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California; 2008 San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 

Plan and 2007 State Strategy; Final Rule. 76 FR 217, pp. 69896-69926 (November 9, 2011)

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-11-09/pdf/2011-27232.pdf
2

Burning Fireplaces and Wood Burning Heaters Rule; and 3) reductions from incentivebased projects. Quantification of Contingency Reductions for the 2008 PM2.5 Plan

updates the emission reductions estimates in the 2008 PM2.5 Plan with further analysis 

of the impacts of the District’s implementation of the Wood Burning Fireplaces and 

Wood Burning Heaters Rule contingency provision and quantification of emission 

reductions from incentive-based programs. 

The District’s SIP amendment documents 21 tons per day (tpd) of NOx and 3 tpd of 

SOx from on-going implementation of existing programs; over 3 tpd of direct PM2.5 

from the contingency trigger in the wood burning rule; and over 4 tpd of NOx plus

additional PM2.5 reductions from incentive programs. As a result, Quantification of 

Contingency Reductions for the 2008 PM2.5 Plan shows that emission reductions

equivalent to about one year of RFP are available for attainment contingency satisfying 

the U.S. EPA benchmark.

Since the District already met RFP targets, RFP contingency is not needed, and the 

current update applies to attainment contingency only. 

III. CREDIT FOR INCENTIVE-BASED REDUCTIONS

Incentive programs achieve emission reductions beyond those achieved by regulations 

through the introduction of cleaner technologies earlier than what is required by 

regulation alone. California’s incentive investment is long-standing and substantial, with 

over $700 million Statewide under the Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards 

Attainment (Carl Moyer) Program and $500 million under the Proposition 1B: Goods 

Movement Emission Reduction Program (Proposition 1B). 

The Carl Moyer Program Guidelines stringent criteria provide a strong technical 

foundation for ensuring that the projects funded attain emission reductions that are 

surplus, quantifiable, enforceable, and permanent. The Carl Moyer Guidelines have 

been developed through a public process and adopted by ARB. The Proposition 1B 

Program was established to quickly reduce air pollution emissions and health risk from 

freight movement along California’s trade corridors. The Proposition 1B Guidelines 

ensure that projects funded under this program achieve early or extra emission 

reductions not otherwise required by law or regulation. The Proposition 1B Guidelines 

have also been developed through a public process and adopted by ARB. Both 

programs have been very successful in achieving cost-effective surplus emission 

reductions. 

In addition to these Statewide programs, due to the air quality challenges in the San 

Joaquin Valley, the United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resource 

Conservation Service (NRCS) also provides incentives to replace off-road agricultural 

equipment in the Valley. In December 2010, U.S. EPA, NRCS, ARB, and the District 

signed a Statement of Principles to establish a framework for ensuring that the emission

reductions resulting from the federal incentives receive SIP credit. As noted in the 
3

Statement of Principles, the NRCS incentive program is modeled after ARB’s Carl 

Moyer Program. 

ARB and the District have been working with U.S. EPA to establish the appropriate 

mechanisms to receive SIP credit for emission reductions achieved through incentivebased projects. U.S. EPA has indicated that the District must adopt accounting rules 

and submit these rules to the SIP. To this end, the District adopted Rule 9610 - State 

Implementation Plan Credit for Emission Reductions Generated through Incentive 

Programs (Rule) on June 20, 2013. The Rule provides the administrative framework to 

report to U.S. EPA that emission reductions achieved from incentive programs 

administered by ARB, NRCS or the District are surplus, quantifiable, enforceable, and 

permanent, and are therefore eligible for SIP credit. ARB staff is also developing an 

incentive program credit rule. Staff expects to bring a rule to the ARB for its 

consideration in October 2013.

IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION

The District’s Quantification of Contingency Reductions for the 2008 PM2.5 Plan

updates the quantification of emission reductions needed for contingency allowing for 

approval of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan as meeting the requirements of the Clean Air Act. 

Once submitted to U.S. EPA, these SIP revisions should resolve the pending sanction 

clocks.

Staff recommends that the Board adopt the District’s Quantification of Contingency 

Reductions for the 2008 PM2.5 Plan as a revision to the California SIP.