CHAPTER 4

AQMP CONTROL STRATEGY

Introduction

Overall Attainment Strategy

Long-Term Emission Reduction Measures

Overall Emission Reductions
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 1

INTRODUCTION

The overall control strategy in the AQMP provides the path to achieving emission 

reductions and air quality goals. Implementation of the 1997 AQMP is based on a series 

of control measures that vary by source type, such as stationary or mobile, as well as by 

the pollutant that is being targeted. Although great strides have been made in air 

pollution control technologies, air quality goals cannot be achieved without significant 

further advancements.

This chapter discusses the control measures for the 1997 AQMP and associated emission 

reductions. Where appropriate, information regarding the differences between the 1994 

AQMP and the 1997 AQMP are identified. For additional information and details on 

control measures please refer to Appendix IV. For additional information regarding 

baseline emission projections and estimated reductions, please refer to Appendix III.

OVERALL ATTAINMENT STRATEGY

The overall control strategy for this Plan is designed to meet applicable state and federal 

requirements, including attainment with ambient air quality standards. Similar to the 

1994 AQMP, the 1997 AQMP proposes two tiers of emission reduction measures, based 

on availability and readiness of technology. 

Short- and intermediate-term measures propose the application of available technologies 

and management practices between 1997 and the year 2005. These measures rely on 

known technologies and proposed actions to be taken by several agencies that currently 

have the statutory authority to implement such measures. These measures are designed 

to satisfy the federal Clean Air Act requirement of reasonably available control 

technologies [Section 172(c)], and the California Clean Air Act requirements of Best 

Available Retrofit Control Technologies (BARCT) [Health and Safety Code Section 

40919, Subsection C]. 

To ultimately achieve ambient air quality standards, additional emissions reductions will 

be necessary beyond the implementation of short- and intermediate-term measures. 

Long-term measures rely on the advancement of technologies and control methods that 

can reasonably be expected to occur between 2000 and 2010. These long-term measures 

rely on further development and refinement of known low- and zero-emission control 

technologies in addition to technological breakthroughs. 
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 2

Designing the Overall Strategy

To develop the control strategy required in the Plan to meet state and federal 

requirements, an iterative process of technology review and ambient air quality modeling 

is utilized. Specifically, a remaining emissions target is defined utilizing air quality 

modeling that will achieve the ambient air quality standards. Technological assessments 

are then performed to determine if specific technological advancements can be expected 

to result in meeting this remaining emissions target. Further modeling analyses are 

conducted using the actual emissions reductions achieved based on the technology 

review process. Ultimately an overall emissions target is determined that achieves the 

ambient air quality standard and for which controls have been defined. Figure 4-1 

illustrates this iterative process used to define the preferred control strategy. 

The 1994 California Ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) control strategy serves as 

the starting point to demonstrate attainment of both federal PM10 and ozone air quality 

standards. If necessary, additional controls from the 1994 comprehensive AQMP or 

other alternative approaches would be added to attain the federal air quality standards. 

Furthermore, these additional control measures would be evaluated to determine 

consistency with potential future air quality standards and ensure the most cost-effective 

path to meet multiple clean air standards.

FIGURE 4-1

Iterative Process to Define Emission Reduction Scenario

Control Strategy Development

Future Air Quality 

Projection

Implement Control 

Strategy

Yes

No

PM10 Attainment?

Ozone Attainment?

Yes
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 3

Short- and Intermediate-term Emission Reduction Measures

The 1997 AQMP includes 34 stationary and 20 mobile source control measures. A 

summary of these measures is provided below. A detailed description of the control 

measures is provided in Appendix IV-A: 

 Section I: District’s Stationary Source Control Measures

 Section II:* District’s Mobile Source Control Measures

 Section IV: ARB Mobile Source Control Strategy

 Section V: Further Study Measures

 Section VI: Contingency Measures

A description of the transportation improvement and advanced transportation technology 

measures is provided in Appendix IV-B.

Short- and intermediate-term emission reduction control measures are proposed to be 

implemented between 1997 and 2005. These measures primarily rely on the traditional 

command and control approach facilitated by market incentive programs to implement 

technological solutions and control methods.

Stationary Source Control Measures

Stationary controls are proposed to reduce emissions from both point sources (permitted 

facilities) and area (generally small and non-permitted) sources. 

All but three stationary source control measures were previously contained in the 1994 

AQMP or the California Ozone SIP. One 1994 contingency measure for stationary 

sources has been placed in the Further Studies category. Sections I and V of Appendix 

IV provides detailed descriptions for each of these measures. In addition, previously 

subsumed command and control measures for coatings and solvents under the proposed 

VOC RECLAIM program have now become the primary approach and are updated to 

reflect the most recent technology assessment and rule implementation schedule. Three 

new measures are added in the 1997 AQMP: Intercredit Trading Program, Air Quality 

Investment Program and Promotion of Catalyst-Surface Coating Technology Programs 

for Air Conditioning Units. These measures are designed to enhance compliance 

flexibility, to facilitate the implementation of the command and control measures. Table 

 

*

Section III has been removed. Please refer to Appendix IV-B.
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 4

4-1 provides a listing of the short- and intermediate-term stationary source control 

measures.

Categorization of Stationary Source Control Measures

Stationary source control measures in the 1997 AQMP are grouped into 6 subcategories 

as described below:

Group 1 Coatings and Solvents

Group 2 Petroleum Operations, Refueling, and Fugitive VOC Emissions

Group 3 Combustion Sources

Group 4 Fugitive Dust and Miscellaneous Source Categories

Group 5 Compliance Flexibility Programs

Group 6 Long-Term Stationary Source Measures

A detailed description of the control measures in each of the above groups is provided in 

Section I of Appendix IV.

TABLE 4-1

Short- and Intermediate-Term Stationary Source Control Measures

1997 AQMP Number Control Measure Title

Coatings and Solvents

CTS-02E Further Emission Reductions from Adhesives (Rule 1168) (VOC)

CTS-02H Further Emission Reductions from Metal Parts and Products (Rule 1107) (VOC)

CTS-02M Further Emission Reductions from Plastic, Rubber, Glass Coatings (Rule 1145) (VOC)

CTS-02N Further Emission Reductions from Solvent Degreasers (Rule 1122) (VOC)

CTS-02O Further Emission Reductions from Solvent Usage (Rule 442) (VOC)

CTS-03 Consumer Product Education Labeling Program (VOC)

CTS-04 Public Awareness/Education Programs - Area Sources (VOC)

CTS-07 Further Emission Reductions from Architectural Coatings (Rule 1113) (VOC) 

CP-02 Emission Reductions from Consumer Products (VOC)

DPR-01 Emission Reductions from Pesticide Applications (VOC)
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 5

TABLE 4-1

(concluded)

1997 AQMP Number Control Measure Title

Petroleum Operations and Fugitive Emissions

FUG-03 Further Emission Reductions from Floating Roof Tanks (VOC)

FUG-04 Further Emission Reductions of Fugitive Sources (VOC)

Combustion Sources

CMB-02B Control of Emissions from Small Boilers and Process Heaters (NOx)

CMB-03 Area Source Credits Programs (All Pollutants)

CMB-04 Area Source Credits for Energy Conservation/Efficiency (NOx)

CMB-06 Emission Standards for New Commercial and Residential Water Heaters (NOx)

CMB-07 Emission Reductions from Petroleum Refinery Flares (All Pollutants)

CMB-09 Emission Reductions from Petroleum Refinery FCCUs (PM10)

Fugitive Dust Measures

BCM-01 Emission Reductions from Paved Roads (PM10)

BCM-03 Further Emission Reductions from Unpaved Roads, Unpaved Parking Lots and Staging Areas 

(PM10)

BCM-04 Emission Reductions from Agricultural Activities (PM10)

BCM-06 Further Emission Reductions from Fugitive Dust Sources to Meet Requirements of Best 

Available Control Measures (PM10)

Miscellaneous Sources 

MSC-01 Promotion of Lighter Color Roofing and Road Materials and Tree Planting Programs 

(All Pollutants)

MSC-02 In-Use Compliance Program for Air Pollution Control Equipment (All Pollutants)

MSC-03 Promotion of Catalyst-Surface Coating Technology Programs for Air Conditioning Units

PRC-01 Emission Reductions from Woodworking Operations (PM10)

PRC-03 Emission Reductions from Restaurant Operations (VOC, PM10)

WST-01 Emission Reductions from Livestock Waste (VOC, PM10, Ammonia)

WST-02 Emission Reductions from Composting (VOC, PM10, Ammonia)

WST-03 Emission Reductions from Waste Burning (VOC)

WST-04 Emission Reductions from Disposal of Materials Containing Volatile Organic Compounds 

(VOC)

FSS-04 Emission Charges of $5,000 per Ton of VOC for Stationary Sources Emitting Over 10 Tons 

per Year (VOC)

Compliance Flexibility Programs 

FLX-01 Intercredit Trading Program (All Pollutants)

FLX-02 Air Quality Investment Program (All Pollutants)
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 6

Stationary Source Control Methods and Associated Emission Reductions

As previously discussed, short- and intermediate-term measures rely on available control 

technologies. The control methods for stationary sources identified in Table 4-2 below 

rely on a variety of control technologies and management practices. Control 

technologies vary according to the source type and pollutant being controlled and 

generally include a process or physical modification such as product reformulation, 

installation of air pollution control equipment, etc. In addition, management 

modifications include administrative changes such as improved housekeeping 

techniques, inspection and maintenance programs, etc. 

TABLE 4-2

Stationary Source Control Methods

Source Category Control Method

Coatings and Solvents  Market Incentives

 Reformulation

 Higher Transfer Efficiency

 Process Improvements

 Add-On Controls

 Alternative Coating and Solvent 

Application Methods

 Alternative Pesticide Formulation, 

Application and Methods

 Improved Housekeeping Practices

Petroleum Operations and  Market Incentives

Fugitive VOC Emissions  Process Modifications

 Add-On Controls Systems

 Improved Vapor Recovery Systems

 Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance 

Combustion Sources  Market Incentives

 Add-On Controls

 Process Improvement

 Improved Energy Efficiency

Fugitive Dust and Miscellaneous  Road Dust Suppression

Sources  Watering of Disturbed Surface Areas

 Windbreaks

 Paving at Areas Adjacent to Roadways

 Chemical Stabilization of Unpaved Areas 
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 7

TABLE 4-2

(Concluded)

Source Category Control Method

Fugitive Dust and Miscellaneous  Aggregate Covering of Unpaved Roads

Sources (Cont.)  Track-Out Prevention

 Street Cleaning

 Bedliners in and Covering of Fill Import 

and Export Vehicles

 Post-Event Street Clean-Up

 Revegetation of Disturbed Surface Areas

 Reduced Vehicular Speeds on Unpaved 

Roads

 Soil Erosion Control for Agricultural 

Activities

 Add-On Controls

 Public Awareness Programs

Compliance Flexibility Programs  Compliance Flexibility to Lower 

Compliance Costs

 Promotion of Early Reductions

 Incentivize Clean Technologies

 Investment in Clean Technologies

A variety of innovative implementation approaches are proposed to facilitate and/or 

compliment the implementation of these measures, such as intercredit trading, public 

awareness programs, equipment certification, etc.

Coatings and Solvents

Controls for the coatings and solvents category are primarily targeted at reducing VOC 

emissions. The primary control approach for this category is command and control 

regulations with additional compliance options provided by the Intercredit Trading 

Program and/or Air Quality Investment Program (AQIP). Regulated sources have the 

options to: (1) apply prescribed control technology; (2) purchase emission credits in an 

open market in lieu of controls; or (3) participate in the AQIP which will in turn generate 

equivalent emission reductions. The substitution measures provided in the 1994 AQMP 

for control measure CTS-01 - VOC RECLAIM are now combined with CTS-02 -

Control of Emissions from Solvents and Coatings.

In addition, the District is proposing to develop a series of public awareness and 

education programs for small source categories. The intent of these programs is to 
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 8

develop a partnership between the District and smaller more diverse businesses to 

educate sources on alternative products, techniques, processes, and equipment 

modifications that can be used at their facility to reduce pollution. Examples of 

potentially targeted businesses include beauty salons, leather repair shops, and 

laboratories.

Included in category are two measures that will be implemented by ARB to further 

reduce emissions from consumer products and by the state Department of Pesticides 

Regulation (DPR) to control pesticide emissions as originally contained in the 1994 

California Ozone SIP.

Petroleum Operations and Fugitive VOC Emissions

This category pertains primarily to operations and materials associated with the 

petroleum and chemical industries. Within this category there are two control measures 

targeting fugitive VOC emissions associated with transfer and storage of organic liquids 

and industrial processes.

Combustion Sources

There are six control measures in this category, two of which are area source credit 

programs designed primarily to provide compliance flexibility and to incentivize clean 

technologies. These include commercial and residential equipment and energy 

conservation strategies. There is another measure for new commercial and residential 

water heaters. In addition, a proposed rule for petroleum refinery flares is being 

developed to first assess the emission inventory for this source category; another rule is 

being developed for the control of PM10 emissions from refinery fluid catalytic cracking 

units (FCCUs); and lastly, a rule is proposed for NOx reductions from small boilers and 

process heaters.

In addition, the results of technology review as required by the District RECLAIM Rule 

2015 - Backstop Provisions are incorporated in the 1997 AQMP. The purpose of the 

technology review is to ensure that the facility allocations are based on control methods 

that are likely to be technologically feasible. Furthermore, proposed changes in 

allocation due to further technology assessment are reflected in the Plan to account for 

potential increases in emissions.

Fugitive Dust and Miscellaneous Sources

This category includes a total of 14 control measures. Ten measures are designed for a 

variety of sources ranging from service-oriented industries such as restaurants and 

agricultural activities, to waste-related emissions such as livestock waste, waste burning, 

and disposal of VOC-containing materials. An incentive program is proposed to 
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 9

promote the use of lighter color roofing, road materials, or tree planting. A second 

incentive program is proposed to promote catalyst surface coating technologies for air 

conditioning units. An in-use compliance program is also considered to ensure the 

performance of air pollution control equipment. A measure regarding emissions charges 

for stationary sources as required under federal law is proposed for further study to 

determine its applicability and feasibility.

Fugitive Dust Control Measure Cost and Technical Feasibility

For the 1994 PM10 Best Available Control Measures (BACM) SIP submittal, five best 

available control measures were provided to control fugitive dust emissions. As part of 

that submittal, the BACM SIP committed to adopt all candidate BACM within four years 

of the reclassification date (i.e., February 8, 1997) with the exception of any measure that 

did not meet a specified cost and technological feasibility criteria. The SIP revision 

identified the criteria as follows:

(1-1) Cost feasibility:

A control measure will be considered cost feasible if the cost-effectiveness is 

less than $5,300 per ton of PM10 reduced on an annual basis. 

(1-2) Technological feasibility:

A control measure will be considered technically feasible if all of the following 

conditions are satisfied:

(a) The control technology is currently available; and

(b) The control efficiency has been demonstrated to achieve a minimum of at 

least 10 percent.

Table 4-3 presents a summary of the preliminary candidate BACM cost and 

technological feasibility analysis. As Table 4-3 indicates, BCM 1d/1e (curb and 

gutter/chemical stabilization) exceeds the cost feasibility criteria. Table 4-3 also shows 

that BCM-2 (wider use of plans) does not meet the 10 percent control efficiency criteria. 

Additionally, initial studies indicate that emissions from weed abatement activities are 

insignificant on a regional scale and should be managed on a local level1. Accordingly, 

BCM-5 (weed abatement) will not be considered as a primary control measure. These 

measures are proposed to serve as contingency measures for fugitive dust sources and are 

presented in Chapter 9 and Appendix IV. As specified by CAA 172(c)(9), these PM10

contingency measures would only become effective if the Basin fails to make reasonable 

further progress or attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date.

 

1 AeroVironment, Fugitive Dust Study Characterization of Uninventoried Sources, Report Number AV-94-06-214A, 

March 1996.
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 10

TABLE 4-3

Fugitive Dust (PM10) Best Available Control Measures2

AQMP Measure 

Number $/Ton

Technology 

Available

Control 

Efficiency3

BCM-01 (a, b, c) $50 Yes 60%

BCM - 01(d, e) $5,604 Yes 75%

BCM - 02 $377 Yes 6%

BCM - 03 $563 Yes 75%

BCM - 04 $154 Yes 28%

BCM - 05 Not Determined

BCM - 06 $212 Yes 12%

2Contingency measures are in bold text.

3Applies only to a portion of the source category emissions.

Based on the cost and technical feasibility assessment, four best available control 

measures (i.e., BCM-1a, b, c, BCM-3, BCM-4 and BCM-6) are provided in the 1997 

AQMP.

Compliance Flexibility Programs

Two control measures are proposed under this category which are new additions to the 

1997 AQMP as compared to the 1994 AQMP. The two control measures (Intercredit 

Trading Program and Air Quality Investment Program) are designed to complement 

command and control measures. The primary objectives of the two measures are to 

enhance regulatory compliance flexibility by providing additional compliance options 

and thereby lowering compliance costs and to incentivize early reductions and 

advancement of clean technologies through emission credit banking provisions. These 

two measures are essential to the successful introduction of the long-term control 

measures.

Ozone Depleting Compounds

As a result of worldwide concern over the destruction of the stratospheric ozone layer, 

the use of certain stratospheric ozone depleting compounds (ODCs) is scheduled to be 

internationally eliminated under the Montreal Protocol.
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 11

ODCs such as 1,1,1-trichloroethane and CFC-113 are currently used in cleaning, 

precision cleaning, electronics, coatings, adhesives, aerosols, and flexible slabstock foam 

manufacturing in the Basin. As part of the adoption of the Federal Reactive Organic 

Compounds Rate-of-Progress Plan, the District’s Governing Board directed staff to 

consider the impacts on the urban ozone problem from the replacement of ODCs with 

VOC-containing materials.

In 1992 an ODC Working Group comprised of representatives from the District, ARB, 

EPA, industry, and other interested parties was established to evaluate the impact of a 

potential VOC increase resulting from elimination of ODCs. The ODC Working Group 

developed substitution estimates based on categories of usage and types of processes. In 

January 1996, the District prepared “Ozone Depleting Compounds Replacement 

Guidelines” to facilitate the transition from ODCs to substances that are the most 

environmentally benign. Based on the estimates provided in the guideline document, an 

additional 11 tons/day of VOC is projected by the year 2010 as compared to the baseline 

projections discussed in Chapter 3. An adjustment has been made in the remaining 

emissions inventory to account for these future year emission increases, which are 

subject to District review at the time of conversion to comply with the criteria established 

by the guideline document. 

On-Road Mobile Source Control Measures

On-road motor vehicles, which include passenger cars, light-duty trucks, medium-duty 

vehicles, heavy-duty vehicles, and motorcycles, currently number approximately 10 

million in the South Coast Air Basin. In 1995, these vehicles traveled more than 300 

million miles per day, and by the year 2010, vehicle miles traveled is projected to be 

about 380 million miles per day. ARB and U.S. EPA have primary authority to control 

mobile source emissions through the adoption of emission standards and other related 

requirements; whereas the District has more limited authority to reduce emissions from 

these sources.

The 1997 AQMP includes seven on-road mobile source control measures. Two 

measures are proposed for District implementation, four measures are provided for ARB 

implementation, and one control measure is proposed for U.S. EPA implementation. The 

two District on-road control measures are new to the 1997 AQMP, and are voluntary, 

market-based measures, while the remaining control measures are from the 1994

California Ozone SIP. Table 4-4 summarizes the on-road vehicle control measures, 

using traditional command and control as well as market based approaches.
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 12

TABLE 4-4

Short- and Intermediate-term Mobile Source Control Measures

1997 AQMP Number Control Measure Title

On-Road Mobile Source Control Measures

M1 Accelerated Retirement of Light-Duty Vehicles

M4 Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles; Early Introduction of low NOx Engines

M5 Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles; Additional NOx Reductions in California

M6 Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles; 2.0 g/bhp-hr NOx Standard - National

M7 Accelerated Retirement of Heavy-Duty Vehicles

MON-09 In-Use Vehicle Emission Mitigation

MON-10 Emissions Reduction Credit for Truck Stop Electrification

Off-Road Mobile Source Control Measures

M11 Industrial Equipment; Gas & LPG - California

M12 Industrial Equipment - Gas & LPG - National

M13 Marine Vessels; National and International Standards

M14 Locomotives; Nationwide Standards, New and Rebuilt

M16 Pleasure Craft; Nationwide Emission Standards

MOF-07 Credits for the Replacement of Existing Pleasure Craft Engines with New Lower 

Polluting Engines

Transportation Improvements

TCM-01 Transportation Improvements

Advanced Transportation Technology Measures

ATT-01 Telecommunications

ATT-02 Advanced Shuttle Transit

ATT-03 Zero-Emission Vehicles/Infrastructure

ATT-04 Alternative Fuel Vehicles/Infrastructure

ATT-05 Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems (IVHS)

Further Study Strategy

FSS-02 Market-Based Transportation Pricing

Technology-Based Control Measures

In the past, the control of on-road vehicle emissions was achieved primarily from the 

adoption of more stringent emission standards. The most significant action that has 

taken place in pursuing this approach was the adoption of the Low-Emission Vehicle and 

Clean Fuels regulations by ARB in September 1990. This regulation established 

stringent tailpipe standards and mandated low-emission vehicle sales for the years 1994 

through 2003. This regulation is applicable for passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and 

medium-duty vehicles, and its principal requirements are summarized as follows:

 establishes vehicle emission standards that will require additional VOC and NOx

emission reductions of approximately 80 percent and 50 percent, respectively, 

compared to 1994 emission standards;
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 13

 requires the sale of zero-emission vehicles beginning in 2003; 

 allows the use of vehicles powered by alternative fuels; and 

 requires the widespread availability of alternative fuels, based on the number of 

alternative-fueled vehicles produced by automobile manufacturers.

The 1997 AQMP, consistent with 1994 AQMP, includes a control measure that proposes 

ARB adoption of emission standards that are more stringent than existing low-emission 

vehicle requirements, to continue the progress in reducing passenger car and light-duty 

truck emissions for the post 2003 timeframe. This is based on the development of costeffective gasoline engine control technology, along with anticipated advancements in 

electric vehicle battery technology and supporting infrastructure. With regard to 

medium-duty vehicles, it is proposed that the current requirements applicable for the 

1998 to 2002 timeframe be modified by ARB to accelerate the in-use penetration of lowemission vehicles and ultra-low emission medium-duty vehicles. Again, carryover this 

proposal from the previous plan is based on assumptions regarding expected 

advancements in light-duty vehicle emission control technology that would be applicable 

for the medium-duty vehicle sector. 

With regard to heavy-duty vehicles, the approach for further reducing emissions depends 

on whether the vehicles are powered with gasoline or diesel fuel. For gasoline-fueled 

heavy-duty vehicles, ARB proposes to obtain oxides of nitrogen and VOC emission 

reductions by lowering emission standards, through the application of emission control 

technology (i.e., utilization of three-way catalytic converters) that is already well 

established for light-duty vehicles. For diesel-powered heavy-duty vehicles, ARB is 

proposing a combination of strategies in an overall effort to maximize the utilization of 

very low NOx emitting engines in California trucking fleets. These strategies include the 

adoption by ARB of more stringent NOx emission standards, effective for the post 2002 

timeframe, as well as U.S. EPA adoption of correspondingly stringent nationwide oxides 

of nitrogen emission standards for the post 2004 timeframe. U.S. EPA action in this area 

is particularly important since a significant amount of diesel-fueled heavy-duty vehicles 

operating in California are powered with federally certified engines.

Market-Based/Incentive Strategies

The 1994 AQMP included a number of market-based control measures that have been 

adopted in 1995 as District Rules 1612 and 1620. These include MON-01 - Emissions 

Reduction Credit for Low-Emission Retrofit Fleet Vehicles, MON-05 - Emissions 

Reduction Credit for Heavy-Duty Buses, and MON-06 - Emissions Reduction Credit for 

Heavy-Duty Trucks. In continuing this approach to reduce mobile source emissions, the 

1997 AQMP includes several market-based/incentive control measures targeting the 

light- and heavy-duty vehicle sectors. With regard to District implementation, it is 
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 14

proposed that mobile source emission reduction credits be issued for certain strategies 

that will produce emission reductions surplus to existing or planned requirements, such 

as truck stop electrification and the use of fuel additives.

The 1997 AQMP also includes market-based/incentive control measures for ARB 

implementation. Specifically, it is proposed that ARB adopt regulations implementing a 

75,000 vehicle per year accelerated retirement program for light-duty vehicles beginning 

in 1999 (Control Measure M1), with a smaller pilot-scale program to be implemented in 

the 1996 to 1998 timeframe. The oldest, highest-emitting vehicles would be targeted for 

this program. It is also proposed that a similar strategy be implemented for heavy-duty 

diesel trucks (Control Measure M7), targeting the accelerated retirement of 1,600 

vehicles, using the same implementation dates as the light-duty vehicle accelerated 

retirement program. Finally, a market incentive rule, to be implemented by ARB and/or 

the District, is proposed with the objective of accelerating the penetration of low-NOx

heavy-duty engines in local trucking fleets. This would occur in the 1996 to 2002 

timeframe, prior to the implementation of revised oxides of nitrogen emission standards 

for heavy-duty engines.

Off-Road Mobile Source Control Measures

Off-road mobile sources refer to off-road vehicles and mobile non-vehicular equipment 

categories such as aircraft, trains, marine vessels, farm and construction equipment (e.g., 

bulldozers), industrial equipment (e.g., forklifts), and utility equipment (e.g., lawn 

mowers). The authority to develop and implement regulations for off-road mobile 

sources lies primarily with the U.S. EPA, ARB, and to a lesser extent with the District.

The 1997 AQMP includes a total of six off-road mobile source control measures. Four 

measures are based on U.S. EPA implementation, one measure is provided for ARB 

implementation, and one control measure is provided for District implementation. The 

District control measure is new to the 1997 AQMP and is a voluntary market-based 

measure. The remaining control measures represent control measures from the 1994 

California Ozone SIP and target mandatory emission limits for certain types of off-road 

equipment categories. Table 4-4 provides a list of the off-road mobile source measures.

Because of practical and legal considerations, the majority of control measures for offroad mobile sources focus on the U.S. EPA adoption of nationwide emission standards. 

Control measures proposing emission standards for new aircraft engines, as well as new 

and rebuilt and locomotive engines target U.S. EPA or other federal agencies 

implementation, since the federal government has sole authority over these emission 

sources. For the same reason, U.S. EPA implementation is assigned to control measures 

that propose more stringent emission standards for diesel powered off-road industrial 

equipment, and gasoline and LPG powered industrial equipment from 25 to 175 
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 15

horsepower. (It should be noted that industrial equipment can include emission sources 

that are categorized under the farm and construction equipment category above and 

below 175 horsepower. Since U.S. EPA has sole authority for farm and construction 

equipment below 175 horsepower, separate control measures targeting industrial 

equipment have been included based on whether implementation would be assigned to 

ARB or U.S. EPA.)

A control measure proposing nationwide emission standards implemented by U.S. EPA, 

in conjunction with international standards, is also the most viable approach for reducing 

marine vessel emissions since many of these vessels are not based in California or the 

United States. Finally, nationwide emission standards for pleasure craft are being 

proposed since manufacturers would have a larger market base to promote the 

development of emission control technology. As a backstop strategy, ARB would act to 

adopt emission standards (where legally permitted) for off-road emission sources if U.S. 

EPA fails to adopt nationwide standards.

The District’s new market-based control measure proposes the issuance of mobile source 

emission reduction credits for programs that accelerate the replacement of existing 

pleasure craft engines with new lower-polluting engines. These programs would be 

voluntarily implemented and would provide industry with more flexible and potentially 

more cost-effective approaches in complying with District emission reduction 

requirements. 

Transportation Control Measures

One transportation control measure (TCM), five advanced transportation technology 

(ATT) measures, and one further study strategy measure (FSS) have been included in the 

1997 AQMP and are listed in Table 4-4.

Specific performance based transportation standards were replaced by 1996 state 

legislation. Recent federal and state legislation provides for alternative control 

approaches which can achieve equivalent emission reductions to the AVO-based 

programs to be developed in place of commuter rideshare programs. District Rule 2202 

was adopted in December 1995 to provide the mechanism for employers of 100 

employees or more to achieve targeted emission reductions through a menu of control 

options approach. The emission reductions obtained through Rule 2202 implementation 

are currently included as part of the baseline emissions inventory estimates. Upcoming 

efforts to replace Rule 2202, as called for in SB 836 (Lewis) through voluntary rideshare 

programs or other means, are to be based on actions that provide surplus, real and 

quantifiable emission reductions equivalent to those that would have otherwise occurred 

under Rule 2202. Thus, the full emission reduction attributable to Rule 2202 will be 

achieved and is accounted for in the 1997 AQMP.
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 16

Control Measure Development

Several policy committees as well as local governments submitted recommendations to 

SCAG and the District regarding control measure development and implementation for 

the 1994 AQMP. These included: the TCM Policy Committee; Advanced 

Transportation Technology (ATT) Task Force; Market Incentives Task Force; Regional 

Railroad Air Quality Emission Reduction Board; and Subregional Organizations. In 

addition, the SCAG Regional Council recommended that the proposed transportation 

control measures be included as part of the 1994 AQMP. These measures and 

recommendations have been moved forward and included in the 1997 AQMP.

Control Method Objectives

The status of the objectives for the implementation of the 1994 AQMP developed by the 

Transportation Committees and Task Forces are as follows: a delegation and substitution 

process, to allow delegation for implementation of regional indirect source rules and/or 

substitution of local implementation plans or measures for requirements of District rules, 

has been developed and approved by the Governing Board; however, since future ISRs, 

have not been incorporated in the 1997 AQMP, the delegation substitution process 

relative to these rules is also not incorporated in this Plan. The delegation substitution 

process is still available for any future regional transportation rule. The process is 

described in greater detail in Appendix IV-B. The Partnership to accelerate 

implementation of advanced transportation technologies has been implemented and is 

proceeding with the implementation of the ATTs included in the 1994 AQMP; and the 

REACH Task Force has been convened and is in the process of developing market-based 

solutions to regional transportation and air quality problems. The current proposal from 

the REACH Task Force is included in the 1997 AQMP as a further study strategy 

measure.

Control Methods

A list of control methods for transportation control measures is summarized in Table 4-5. 

As shown below, control methods are categorized into three groupings: advanced 

transportation technologies, transportation improvements, and a further study strategy.

TABLE 4-5

Transportation Control Methods
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 17

Source Category Control Method

Advanced Transportation Technologies  Telecommunications

 Smart Shuttle Transit

 Zero Emissions Vehicles/Infrastructure

 Alternative Fuel Vehicles/Infrastructure

 Intelligent Vehicle Highway System 

(IVHS)

Transportation Improvements  Transportation Improvements

 Capital-based Actions and Their 

Pricing Alternatives

 HOV Lanes

 Transit Improvements

 Traffic Flow Improvements

 Park and Ride and Intermodal 

Facilities

 Urban Freeway, Bicycle, and 

Pedestrian Facilities

 Non-Capital-based Actions and 

Information Services

 Rideshare Matching

 Congestion Management 

Program-based TDM

 Telecommunication 

Facilities/Satellite Work 

Centers

 TDM Demonstration 

Projects/Programs

 Transit Pass Centers

Further Study Strategy  REACH Task Force Recommendations

Emission Reductions from Short- and Intermediate-Term Control Measures

Short and intermediate-term control measures potentially available for implementation by 

2005 were identified and to the extent possible quantified. These quantified measures 

were modeled to determine their effectiveness in meeting the attainment goals. For 

stationary point sources, measures were quantified for equipment and industry categories 

which are more detailed than quantifying measures based in large part on equipment 

categories. Appendix III provides a more detailed discussion of the emissions 

inventories for the South Coast Air Basin, and emission estimation techniques used for 

quantifying reductions for the 1997 AQMP.

A summary of emission reductions available by the year 2000 for short- and 

intermediate-term measures is provided in Tables 4-6 through 4-8. Emission reductions 
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 18

represent the difference between the projected baseline and the remaining emissions. In 

addition, the tables identify projected reductions based on the summer planning inventory 

for VOC and NOx emissions; the winter planning inventory for CO and NOx emissions; 

and the annual average inventory for SOx and PM10 emissions. The CO emission 

reductions in 2000 represent the level of control needed to achieve the federal CO 

standard. 

TABLE 4-6

Emission Reductions for Short- and Intermediate-Term Measures for 2000

Based on Summer Planning Inventory (tons per day)

Sources VOC NOX

Year 2000 Baseline 937 916

Stationary 467 109

Mobile

 On Road 335 509

 Off-Road 135 298

Emission Reductions

Short-, Intermediate-Term Measures 18 5

Stationary

Mobile

 On-Road 9 11

 Off-Road 1 1

Total Reductions (All Measures) 28 17

2000 Remaining Emissions 909 899
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 19

TABLE 4-7

Emission Reductions for Short- and Intermediate-Term Measures for 2000

Based on Winter Planning Inventory (tons per day)

Sources CO NOX

Year 2000 Baseline 5142 960 

Stationary 295 130 

Mobile

 On Road 3298 535 

 Off-Road 1549 295 

Emission Reductions

Short-, Intermediate-Term Measures

Stationary 1 5

Mobile

 On-Road 173 12

 Off-Road 0 1

Total Reductions (All Measures) 174 18

2000 Remaining Emissions 4968 942 
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 20

TABLE 4-8

Emission Reductions for Short- and Intermediate-Term Measures for 2000

Based on Annual Average Inventory (Tons per Day)

Sources SOX PM10

Year 2000 Baseline 66 441 

Stationary 18 410 

Mobile

 On Road 14 16

 Off-Road 34 15

Emission Reductions

Short-, Intermediate-Term Measures

Stationary 0 134 

Mobile

 On-Road 0 0

 Off-Road 0 0

Total Reductions (All Measures) 0 134 

2000 Remaining Emissions 66 307 

LONG-TERM EMISSION REDUCTION MEASURES

Previous AQMPs showed that achievement of ambient air quality standards will require 

additional emission reductions beyond the implementation of short- and intermediateterm control measures. Historically, the AQMP has emphasized and relied upon the 

continual need to deploy advanced air pollution control technologies and cleaner fuels to 

ultimately achieve air quality goals. In the 1994 AQMP, emissions reduction targets 

were established for the remaining emissions after implementation of short- and 

intermediate-term controls. These targets, referred to as long-term or Section 182(e)(5) 

control measures, were based on the application of advanced technologies and additional 

market incentives and operational measures. The 1997 AQMP reached similar 

conclusions and proposed to further reduce emissions through measures that are based on 

specific technological advancements and control methods that can be reasonably 

expected to be implemented and in use by the year 2010. These technologies and control 

methods cannot be fully implemented today; however, recent promising advancements 

suggest that such technologies could be commercially viable and implemented over the 

next 13 years.
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 21

Section 182(e)(5) Control Measures

Section 182(e)(5) of the federal Clean Air Act allows extreme ozone nonattainment areas 

to develop control measures which rely on anticipated development of new control 

techniques or improvement of existing control technologies. An enforceable 

commitment to develop and adopt contingency measures, to be implemented should the 

proposed control measures fail to meet stated emission reductions, must be made. 

Contingency measures for the Section 182(e)(5) measures must be submitted to the U.S. 

EPA no later than three years before proposed implementation of the Section 182(e)(5) 

measures.

Many of the long-term emission reduction measures which rely on technologies that are 

not fully developed for commercial use (such as fuel cells, hydrogen engines, and flywheel batteries) are considered as meeting Section 182(e)(5) requirements. Other 

measures such as market-incentive programs which promote the advancement of new 

technologies, or long-term measures which rely on improving existing control 

technologies and have future compliance dates beyond 2000, are also considered as part 

of the Section 182(e)(5) control measures.

The U.S. EPA approved the Section 182(e)(5) measures in the 1994 California Ozone 

SIP. The long-term measures listed in Table 4-9 are those provided in the 1994 

California Ozone SIP and serve as the Section 182(e)(5) control measures for the 1997 

AQMP. Many of the District and Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review 

Committee (MSRC) programs and the associated fundings are intended to demonstrate 

new technologies for the long-term measures listed in Table 4-9, some of which are 

discussed in this chapter. When the new advanced technology demonstrations are 

completed, an assessment is performed to determine the feasibility of the advanced 

technology. If the technology is feasible, future rule development will be undertaken to 

realize the emission reductions associated with the long-term measures. Thus, the 

advanced technology projects funded by the District and the MSRC are an important and 

necessary process in order to ensure the realization of advanced technologies within the 

next 13 years.

As part of its action on the 1994 California Ozone SIP, an “additional measures” 

approach was provided by ARB to achieve further mobile source emission reductions. 

No specific control approaches were identified with the adoption of the California Ozone 

SIP. However, many of the advanced technology projects under the District’s 

sponsorship could be feasible by the mid-2000s and would complement the market-based 

approaches for these additional measures.

The advanced technologies proposed for implementation in this Plan are based largely on 

the projects funded or co-funded by the District’s Technology Advancement Office 

(TAO), as well as projects funded by MSRC which was established in 1990 with the 
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 22

adoption of Assembly Bill 2766. The primary purpose of TAO is to conduct publicprivate research, development, and demonstration projects in order to identify and 

promote low- and zero-emissions technologies for both mobile and stationary sources. 

The District has developed a Technology Advancement Plan to comply with recent 

Legislative requirements. This plan, which will be updated periodically to be as 

responsive as possible to technological advances, is available upon request and includes 

an overview of the TAO program, project planning and selection processes, and 

proposed project areas.

The primary purpose of AB 2766 is to ensure that District’s and, in the Basin, local 

governments implementing CCAA have access to the funds necessary to implement the 

California Clean Air Act (CCAA) of 1988. In addition, a fund of monies set aside to 

obtain emission reductions from mobile sources through a grant program developed by 

MSRC. To this end, MSRC funding can be used solely for projects to reduce air 

pollution from motor vehicles.

Some of the key technological advancements resulting from the District and MSRC 

programs are highlighted and reviewed below. A 1995 report entitled “Building Markets 

for Low-Emission Technologies and Clean Fuels: A Status Report on 

Commercialization and Technology Transfer,” which provides more detailed information 

on District-funded technologies, is available upon request.

Multiple Application Advanced Technologies

Fuel Cells /Advanced Battery Technologies

Advanced zero and near-zero emission technologies (such as fuel cells) are needed to 

help meet the District’s air quality goals by the year 2010. If deployed on a large scale, 

such technologies can achieve substantial air pollution reductions for a wide spectrum of 

stationary and mobile sources.

Fuel cells are devices that electrochemically convert hydrogen and oxygen into electricity 

and pure water, with little or no emissions. Most fuel cell systems obtain oxygen from 

ambient air. Hydrogen can be generated through catalytic steam reforming of a 

hydrogen-rich fuel such as methanol or natural gas. Fuel cells and batteries offer similar 

advantages over internal combustion engines, including zero or near-zero emissions, high 

fuel efficiency, good power, few moving parts, and low noise. A key difference is that 

unlike batteries, fuel cells can provide continuous operation because they generate power 

from an external fuel supply. Thus, fuel cell electric vehicles offer comparable driving 

range and refueling time to today’s gasoline vehicles, while battery-electric vehicles must 

be recharged over the course of several hours from the electrical grid.
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 23

Fuel cells are currently being developed for a wide variety of applications, and the 

District’s technology advancement program has played a leading role towards expediting 

their commercialization. For example, the District has formed and convened a Fuel Cell 

Implementation Task Force to help develop incentives for the manufacture of fuel cell 

technologies. The District is working with the federal government and various privatesector entities to expedite commercialization of proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel 

cells in transit buses and automobiles. As a follow-up to a District-co-funded project, by 

late 1997 one fuel cell manufacturer will deploy 10 prototype PEM fuel cell buses in 

revenue service at three North American cities. The manufacturer has now achieved 

diesel-equivalent power density in its fuel cell powerplant for buses and cars, and is 

projecting commercialization of PEM fuel cell buses by 2000. Virtually all the major 

automobile manufacturers are working on fuel cell passenger cars, and two have 

announced their intention to conduct pre-production demonstrations of PEM fuel cell 

cars within the next five years. The District is also working with the federal government 

to develop methanol-fueled phosphoric acid fuel cell transit buses. This prototype 

technology is now being optimized and scaled up, with prospects for commercialization 

by about 2005.

Progress with fuel cells for stationary applications is also proceeding steadily. Since the 

District became the first commercial site for a 200kW PC-25 Phosphoric Acid Fuel Cell 

(PAFC) unit for stationary power, more than 70 units are on order or have gone on line 

around the world. Units installed between 1993 and 1994 have logged more than 7,500 

hours continuously, with an average availability exceeding 95 percent. Operating 

efficiency, in terms of thermal input (lower heating value of natural gas) to electrical 

output, has averaged 40 percent. Measured emissions are so low that the District has 

exempted these powerplants from all air quality permitting requirements in the greater 

Los Angeles basin. Noise levels are also extremely low. The latest version of this PAFC 

technology, the PC 25C, is lighter, smaller, and costs about 40 percent less (from $5000 

per kW to $3000 per kW). The target cost, at which the PC-25 sales are expected to be 

self-sustaining, is $1,500 per kW. The manufacturer’s aim is to achieve this cost target 

by the end of 1998 through increased production and sales.

According to a report sponsored by the ARB, entitled, “Performance and Availability of 

Batteries for Electric Vehicles: A Report of the Battery Technical Advisory Panel,” 

dated December 11, 1995, improved lead-acid and nickel cadmium batteries will be used 

in electric vehicles in the near future. However, a variety of advanced battery 

technologies which will provide greater vehicle range are being developed for use in 

production electric vehicles during the 2000 to 2001 timeframe and beyond. Some of the 

most notable technologies include nickel-metal-hydride, lithium-ion, and sodium-nickelchloride. Honda and Toyota have announced they will introduce pilot fleets of electric 

vehicles with nickel-metal-hydride batteries in 1998. Refuelable zinc-air battery systems 

which provide long vehicle range are also being developed.
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 24

In July 1995, the MSRC created the “Quick Charge” program, intended as a large-scale 

pilot demonstration of electric vehicles within the jurisdiction of the District during 

1996, 1997, and 1998. This demonstration will aid local communities, manufacturers, 

and utilities to test the consumer market and demonstrate the infrastructure, permitting 

processes, and coordination that would be necessary for the eventual introduction of 

larger quantities of electric vehicles. The pilot demonstration seeks to identify and 

resolve potential barriers to broad electric vehicle commercialization. Among the 

various issues to be addressed are the following: battery recycling, charging methods, 

codes and standards, consumer education and training, emergency response training, 

equipment availability, electric vehicle service capability, fast charging, home charging, 

incentives, permitting, remote charging, utility capacity, and utility electric rates.

Concurrently, the MSRC has initially allocated revenues to be leveraged with local 

funding to create “Quick Charge” electric vehicle corridor communities. This program 

supports the deployment of electric vehicles along designated freeway corridors and 

within specific communities that have committed to be electric vehicle ready. Local 

government will play a critical role in permitting and inspection, adopting codes and 

ordinances, and providing public recharging infrastructure.

Alternative Fuels

Significant advancements have been made in the development and use of alternative 

clean fuels for a variety of on- and off-road mobile sources as well as stationary source 

applications. Alternative fuel technologies for on-road sources include methanol, 

ethanol, propane, compressed natural gas and electricity. Numerous District and MSRC 

projects have demonstrated the viability of each of these fuels. While progress has been 

made, further advancements or infrastructure are required for full commercialization.

Emission reductions can be expected from light-duty off-road engines based on zero- or 

near-zero-emission technologies such as electric or battery-powered equipment or fuel 

cell-powered units. These technologies are expected to eventually be used for the 

majority of light-duty off-road equipment (e.g., pumps, compressors, and forklifts). For 

heavy-duty off-road engines (i.e., > 50 hp), advanced alternative fuel technologies can 

also be relied upon to achieve additional emissions reductions. 

Many activities of the District program are directed at crediting commercialization of 

alternative fuel vehicles that are fully certified and warranted under state regulations for 

light- and medium-duty vehicles. In January 1994, the ARB certified a 1994 Chrysler 

natural gas minivan to meet the stringent ultra low-emission vehicle (ULEV) emission 

standards. The Dodge Caravans and Plymouth Voyagers were certified to less than half 

of the nonmethane organic gas (NMOG) standard, one-sixth of the CO standard, and 

one-tenth of the NOx standard. These front-wheel drive vehicles are equipped with a 3.3 
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 25

liter V-6 engine using a three-way catalytic converter, heated oxygen sensor, and 

sequential multi-port natural gas fuel injection system

Retail sale of ARB-certified methanol transitional low-emission vehicles (TLEV) has 

followed several years of strategically targeted demonstration programs, with co-funding 

from the District program, to address key commercialization barriers.

To date, there are no light- or medium-duty propane vehicles certified to ARB lowemission vehicle standards. Working both with original equipment manufacturers and 

aftermarket companies, the District program has sponsored projects designed to advance 

the state of the art in low-emission propane vehicles.

Hydrogen also offers an extremely good option. It can substantially eliminate a range of 

criteria, toxic, and global-warming pollutants by significantly reducing tailpipe, 

refueling, and evaporative emissions. In addition, since it can be made from water and is 

recyclable, its supply is potentially inexhaustible.

The fuel can be used in dedicated or hybrid internal combustion engines, or in fuel cells. 

Ballard and Mercedes-Benz have already made substantial progress in developing 

hydrogen powered fuel cell vehicles. However, the entry of such vehicles into the 

marketplace is constrained due to a complete absence of a hydrogen fueling 

infrastructure. However, ARB LEV requirements mandate the establishment of alternate 

fuel outlets if vehicle sales, propelled by a particular fuel, reach 20,000 or more.

Renewable Power Generation Technologies

Several technologies are on the horizon that involve the production of fuel for mobile or 

stationary applications from renewable energy sources. Some technologies that have 

been demonstrated either through the efforts of the District and MSRC, or by others 

include: use of photovoltaics to recharge electric vehicles; generation of hydrogen 

through electrolysis of water which can be utilized for mobile or stationary applications; 

and generation of electricity with a solar concentrator in combination with a Stirling 

engine system. 

Advanced Mobile and Transportation Technologies

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) 

In recent years, many technological advances have occurred in making the vehicle and 

the highway more intelligent, mostly in order to improve traffic. Several technologies 

are considered part of the general category of ITS including: traffic signal 

synchronization; interchangeable message signs; traveler information systems; automatic 

course finders; variable ramp metering; automatic fee collection systems; and vehicle 
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 26

platooning systems. The District is a major participant in the planning and development 

of various elements of ITS.

Remote Sensing Devices

Remote sensing devices (RSDs) are instruments capable of measuring instantaneous 

concentrations of pollutants in the exhaust of vehicles. These devices have been in the 

development stages for several years and are now commercially available for use. The 

District and others have been extensively involved in the research, development and 

application of RSDs. 

In recent years, major advancements have been made in the technical capabilities of the 

devices such as the ability to measure volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen, 

and carbon monoxide. In addition, a program funded by the District demonstrated that 

RSDs can be used to detect high-emitting vehicles, and that most of these vehicles can be 

repaired at an acceptable cost.

Advanced Add-On Control Technologies

Significant research is in progress to advance control technologies for on-road motor 

vehicles. For gasoline vehicles, improvements in three-way catalytic converter 

technology (such as the utilization of greater catalyst loadings, improved wash coats, and 

electrically heated catalysts) have shown the potential to further reduce volatile organic 

compounds and oxides of nitrogen emissions by more than 80 and 50 percent, 

respectively. Improvements in fuel management techniques, in an effort to maintain 

stoichiometric air fuel mixtures during warm engine operating conditions, have also been 

responsible for substantial reductions in vehicle emissions. These techniques include 

sequential fuel injection, dual oxygen sensor systems, and adaptive transient control. 

These technologies are transferable to off-road mobile source applications as well as to 

the existing on-road vehicle fleet whose emission control systems have deteriorated or 

are of less advanced design.

Relative to diesel-powered vehicles, it is anticipated that improvements in NOx reduction 

technologies will occur in the areas of lean NOx catalysts and exhaust gas circulation. In 

addition, alternative fuels such as methanol and natural gas, used in diesel engine 

applications, have shown the potential to reduce NOx emissions by more than 50 percent. 

Again, these technologies are expected to be transferable to off-road mobile source 

applications. 
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 27

Stationary and Area Source Technologies

Appendix IV-A of the 1997 AQMP provides a more detailed discussion of each longterm measure including a description of the source category, potential control 

technologies, and implementation milestones.

Zero-VOC Coating Formulations 

Significant advancements have been made relative to the development and application of 

zero- or near-zero-VOC coating formulations. Powder coatings, UV coatings for various 

substrates, zero-VOC interior flat architectural coating materials, as well as waterborne 

lacquers for wood products, are examples of technological advancements that have 

developed over the last 5 to 10 years. The source categories subject to the long-term 

control measures include architectural coatings, solvent degreasing and cleaning 

operations and miscellaneous industrial coating operations. The focus of the long-term 

control measures for these source categories is primarily the small and unpermitted 

sources. Therefore, in addition to control technologies, innovative implementation 

mechanism is also needed to successfully carry out the control program.

Zero-VOC Consumer Products

Haircare products, deodorants and laundry cleaning materials are examples of products 

that contain VOCs. The use of these products represents a significant source of 

emissions. Lower VOC containing products have been developed, in part due to the 

California consumer products regulations. Further development and use of less-polluting 

products are key technological advancements proposed in this Plan. 

Fugitive Emissions

Fugitive emissions from industrial processes, chemical plants, refineries, and oil and gas 

production sources, or transfer and storage of organic materials contribute to overall 

VOC emissions. Efficient and cost-effective technologies such as enhanced inspection 

and maintenance program, leakless valves, or vapor recovery device are critical to 

support further reductions from fugitive emission source categories.

Miscellaneous Sources

This source category represented many small and unspecified emission sources and yet in 

aggregate a significant contribution to the overall emissions. Development of an 

emission reduction strategy, first requires a better emission inventory to identify specific 

sources of emissions. Applicable controls or innovative controls can then be developed 

in conjunction with better management practices and effective regulatory programs to 

reduce emissions.
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 28

Emission Reduction Targets

Table 4-9 lists long-term or 182(e)(5) measures calling for advanced technologies. It 

represents the emission reduction targets beyond the short- and intermediate-measures.

Alternative Control Approaches

Spatial and temporal emission reduction programs offer a potentially viable method of

reducing ambient concentrations of atmospheric pollutants. These methods are described 

below and will continue to be further evaluated in the future.

An alternative to the application of the long-term advanced control technologies 

described above, or an in-concert approach, is the selective reduction of sources in 

certain geographical zones in the Basin. Advanced technologies and control practices 

could be targeted for those areas of the Basin that contribute more significantly to the 

exceedances of the ambient air quality standards than other areas. Under this approach, 

further advanced control zones would be identified and programs developed. 

The District has evaluated the potential viability of spatial and temporal approaches. As 

part of its analysis for the Environmental Impact Report for the 1994 AQMP, the District 

developed a control strategy based on the proposed control program as set forth in the 

1994 AQMP, but applied the long-term VOC stationary source measures in the western 

portion of the Basin only.
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 29

TABLE 4-9

Long-Term Control Measures Approaches

Technology

On-Road Mobile 

Measure M2

 Fuel Cells/Electric Hybrid or Equivalent

 Alternative Fuels2/Advanced Emission Controls3

New Measures Development to Achieve Overall Emission Reductions

 Market Incentives and Operational Measures

 Alternative Fuels/Advanced Emission Controls 

 Fuel Cells/Electric Hybrid

Off-Road Mobile Sources

Measure M9

 Zero-Emission Technologies

Measure M10

 Off-Road Diesel Equipment; 2.5 g/bhp-hr NOx Standard - National

Measure M15

 Aircraft; Nationwide Emission Standards

New Measure Development to Achieve Overall Emission Reductions

 Market Incentives and Operational Measures

 Alternative Fuels/Advanced Emission Controls 

 Fuel Cells/Electric Hybrid

Stationary Sources 

Control Measure CP4: Consumer Products

 Reformulations/Alternative Applications

ADV-ARCH: Architectural Coatings; ADC-CLNG: Solvent Cleaning 

and Degreasing Operations; ADV-CTS: Miscellaneous Industrial 

Coating and Solvent Operations 

 Reformulations/Alternative Applications

 Innovative Implementation Mechanism

ADV-FUG and ADV-PRC: Fugitive Emissions and Industrial Process 

Operations

 Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance

 Leakless Valves

 Enhanced Vapor Recovery

ADV-MISC:

 Improved Inventory Methodology

 Innovative Management Practices/Regulatory Programs

 

2

“Alternative Fuels” are low emission vehicles using: methanol; ethanol; other alcohols, separately or in mixtures of 85 vol% or more; natural gas, 

both liquefied and compressed; LPG or propane; hydrogen; coal-derived liquid fuels; fuels derived from biological materials; reformulated 

gasoline; or any other fuel that can provide equivalent air quality benefits.

3

“Advanced Emission Controls:” for gasoline and/or diesel include: electrically heated catalysts (EHCs); NOx reduction catalysts; oxidation 

catalysts; catalyst placement strategies; charge air aftercooling; wastegated and variable geometry turbochargers; electronic fuel systems; high 

pressure fuel injection systems; reentrant piston bowl; improved strategies for air motion in the combustion chamber; exhaust gas recirculation 

(EGR); oxygen sensors; on-board diagnostics (OBD) improvements; and particulate traps.
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 30

The District found that a long-term strategy based on such an approach can provide 

equivalent air quality benefits, achieving all of the ambient air quality standards within 

the same timeframe as the 1994 AQMP. Moreover, since the use of such approaches 

narrows the degree of control in the Basin, they can significantly reduce the cost of the 

Plan.

This analysis represented the District’s first step toward developing a comprehensive 

control strategy. Further analysis was needed to define the specific geographic zones in 

the Basin. However, the necessary quantitative tools were not available.

As part of the development of the 1997 AQMP, the District sponsored a study to develop 

an ozone assessment tool which provides the contribution from various source regions to 

ozone exceedances. An alternative control approach is provided as part of the 

Environmental Impact Report for the 1997 AQMP. While the appropriate assessment 

tools are now available, further evaluations of the specific geographic zones are needed 

to fully address the socioeconomic impacts of geographic controls.

Temporal/Seasonal Reduction Programs

In addition to spatial reduction programs and long-term advanced technologies, reduction 

efforts could be directed at the time of release of emissions. Under this approach, 

selective source emissions in the Basin could be shifted to hours that would be less 

conducive to forming photochemical pollutants and to seasons with less photochemical 

activity. One of the proposals of the Intercredit Trading Program is to allow VOC 

stationary sources to shift emissions-related activities to the winter season from the 

summer ozone season. The Environmental Impact Report for the 1997 AQMP provides 

an analysis of the air quality impacts of this alternative control approach. 

OVERALL EMISSION REDUCTIONS

A summary of emission reductions available by the years 2006 and 2010 for short-, 

intermediate- and long-term measures is provided in Tables 4-10 through 4-13. Emission 

reductions represent the difference between the projected baseline and the remaining 

emissions. For 2006, Table 4-10 identifies projected reductions based on the annual 

average inventory for all criteria pollutants (VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, and PM10). It 

represents the level of emission reductions needed to achieve the federal PM10 standards. 

For 2010, Tables 4-11 through 4-13 identify projected reductions based on the summer 

planning inventory for VOC and NOx emissions, the winter planning inventory for CO 

and NOx emissions, and the annual average inventory for SOx and PM10 emissions. 

Emission reductions by 2010 illustrate the extent of controls needed for achieving the 

federal ozone standard.
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 31

TABLE 4-10

Emission Reductions for Short-, Intermediate-, and Long-Term Measures

for 2006 Based on Average Annual Emissions Inventory (tons per day)

Sources VOC NOx CO SOx PM10

Year 2006 Baseline 801 738 3657 66 454

Stationary 459 104 191 13 424

Mobile

 On-Road 222 403 2,103 16 14

 Off-Road 120 231 1,363 37 16

Emission Reductions

Short-, IntermediateTerm Measures

Stationary 98 8 1 0 153

Mobile

 On-Road 30 50 356 0 0

 Off-Road 23 31 512 0 0

Long-Term Measures

Stationary 20 0 0 0 0

Mobile

 On-Road 5 3 0 0 0

 Off-Road 2 11 0 0 0

Total Reductions (All 

Measures)

178 103 869 0 153

2006 Remaining Emissions 623 635 2,788 66 301
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 32

TABLE 4-11

Emission Reductions for Short-, Intermediate-, and Long-Term Measures

for 2010 Based on Summer Planning Inventory (tons per day)

Sources VOC NOX

Year 2010 Baseline 839 727

Stationary 532 98

Mobile

 On Road 163 360

 Off-Road 144 269

Emission Reductions

Short-, Intermediate-Term Measures

Stationary 132 10

Mobile

 On-Road 35 61

 Off-Road 55 49

Long-Term Measures

Stationary 132 0

Mobile

 On-Road 47 21

 Off-Road 25 56

Total Reductions (All Measures) 426 197

2010 Remaining Emissions 413 530
Chapter 4 AQMP Control Strategy

4 - 33

TABLE 4-12

Emission Reductions for Short-, Intermediate-, and Long-Term Measures

for 2010 Based on Winter Planning Inventory (tons per day)

Sources CO NOX

Year 2010 Baseline 3,893 759

Stationary 337 120

Mobile

 On Road 1,913 373

 Off-Road 1,643 266

Emission Reductions

Short-, Intermediate-Term Measures

Stationary 0 9

Mobile

 On-Road 430 63

 Off-Road 1038 51

Long-Term Measures

Stationary 0 0

Mobile

 On-Road 0 21

 Off-Road 0 54

Total Reductions (All Measures) 1,468 198

2010 Remaining Emissions 2,425 561
FINAL 1997 AQMP

4 - 34

TABLE 4-13

Emission Reductions for Short-, Intermediate-, and Long-Term Measures

for 2010 Based on Annual Average Inventory (tons per day)

Sources SOX PM10

Year 2010 Baseline 70 463

Stationary 13 433

Mobile

 On Road 17 14

 Off-Road 40 16

Emission Reductions

Short-, Intermediate-Term Measures

Stationary -1** 156

Mobile

 On-Road 0 0

 Off-Road 0 0

Long-Term Measures*

Stationary 0 0

Mobile

 On-Road 0 0

 Off-Road 0 0

Total Reductions (All Measures) 0 156

2010 Remaining Emissions 71 307

*No reductions estimated, although some concurrent reductions expected due to VOC 

and NOx controls.

** Emission increase due to Rule 518.2 variance SIP allowance for Title V facilities.