San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

Chapter 5 : Control Strategy

2012 PM2.5 Plan 

# Chapter 5

Control Strategy

2012 PM2.5 Plan SJVUAPCDSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

Chapter 5 : Control Strategy

2012 PM2.5 Plan This page intentionally blank.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 1 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan 

### Chapter 5 : Control Strategy

The District’s strategy for attaining the 2006 PM2.5 standard is a multifaceted approach that utilizes a combination of conventional and innovative control strategies. This comprehensive strategy includes r egulat ory actions ; i ncentive programs ; t echnology

a dvancement programs ; policy and legislative platforms ; public outreach, participation and communication ; and additional strategies. Not only does this strategy consist of conventional and innovative strategies, but it also builds off of existing strategies , thus making this plan a fusion of existing and new measures

.

Th is chapter focus es on r eg ulatory control actions and additional strategies while incentives

, t echnology a dvancement, and the legislative platform and c ommunity outreach efforts are discussed in Chapter s 6, 7, and 8 , respectively

.



### 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE REGULATORY CONTROL S T RATEGY

T he San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District has implemented a comprehensive regulatory control strategy over the past couple of decades

. Since 1992, the District has adopted over 500 new rules and amendments to implement this aggressive control strategy . Many current rules are fourth or fifth generation, meaning that they have been revised and emission limits have been lowered, as new emission control technology has become available and cost

- effective

. Air quality improveme nts in the Valley document the success of the District’s innovative and effective rules. Previously adopted 2012 PM2.5 Plan regulatory control measures are achieving 247.8 tons per day (tpd) of NOx reductions and 15.7 tpd of PM2.5 reductions ; these measur es include both stationary and area source control measures as well as ARB rules for mobile sources (see Section 5. 1 .2 for a listing of ARB rules and a brief discussion)

. T he District’s regulatory authority is centered on stationary sources and some area

- wide sources, and the District’s stringent and innovative rules on these

sources , such as those for residential fireplaces, glass manufacturing, and agricultural burning, have set benchmarks for California and the nation. States and the federal government

— but not regional agencies like the District

— can directly regulate tailpipe emissions from mobile sources. ARB has adopted tough regulations for heavy

- duty trucks, off

- road equipment, and other mobile sources. However , the District has also adopted innov ative regulations such as Indirect Source Review and Employer

- based Trip Reduction to reduce emissions from mobile sources within the District’s limited jurisdiction over these sources.

These and other District and ARB rules already guarantee that emissio ns will continue to be reduc ed over the coming years . N ew rule s and rule amendments identified in this plan combined with other control strategies discussed in C hapters 6 through 8 will provide necessary emissions reductions to complement those already being achieved and contribute to PM2.5 air quality improvement s in the Valley.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 2 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan 5.1.1 District Regulation s Contributing to Continued PM2.5 Improvement

The District’s current rules and regulations reflect technologies and meth ods that are far beyond minimum required control levels. In December 2010, the California Air Resources Board ( ARB ) determined that , based on the District’s State Implementation Plans (SIP) and the evaluation of control feasibility in all rulemaking actio ns, the District has undertaken all feasible measures to reduce nonattainment air pollutants from sources within the District’s jurisdiction and regulatory control

. 1 This determination considered all air pollution controls and standards applicable to all source categories under the D istrict’s authority based on maximum reductions achievable as well as technological, social, environmental, energy and economic factors, including cost

effectiveness. 2

The aggressive regulations already adopted under previou s attainment plans also serve as control measures for the 2012 PM2.5 Plan

. These adopted regulations will dramatically reduce directly emitted PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors (NOx and SOx) as they are fully implemented over the next few years, greatly c ontributing to the Valley’s progress toward the 2006 PM2.5 standard

. EPA prefers reliance on control measures that have already been adopted over ones that have yet to be approved. EPA has gone so far as to disapprove attainment plans that demonstrated an over

- reliance on unapproved measures. As such, the recognition of recently adopted and implemented District and ARB control measures is an important component of this plan.

T able 5

- 1 and the discussion that follows summarize adopted District rules achie ving new emissions reductions after 2007, the base year for this plan. However, even pre

2007 emissions reductions, such as those achieved through the District’s Conservation Management Practices (CMP) rule (Rule 4550) and Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 P rohibitions)

, are contributing and will continue to contribute to the Valley’s progress toward the 2006 PM2.5 standard

.

1 ARB Executive Order G

- 10

- 126. (2010, December 10), required under California Health and Safety Code §40612.
2 California Administrative Code, Title 17 §70600(a)(1). (2012)San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 3 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan Table 5

- 1 Adopted District Rules

District Rule Adoption/ Amendment Date(s) Emissions

Reduced 1 (tons per day)

Rule 4103 Open Burning 05/19/2005 05/17/2007 04/15/2010 0.12 tpd NOx

0.34 tpd PM2.5

Rule 4106 Prescribed Burning and Hazard Reduction Burning 1/21/2001 NQ 4

Rule 4204 Cotton Gins 2/17/2005 0.79 tpd PM

Rule 4307 Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters 2 to

5 MMBtu/hr 12/15/2005 04/20/2006 10/16/2008 05/19/2011 3.36 tpd NOx

Rule 4308 Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters

0.075 to <2 MMBtu/hr 10/20/2005 12/17/2009 3.30 tpd NOx

Rule 4309 Dryers, Dehydrators, and Ovens 12/15/2005 0.65 tpd NOx

Rule 4311 Flares 06/15/2006 06/18/2009 0.06 tpd SOx

Rules 4306 & 4320 Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process

Heaters >5 MMBtu/hr 03/17/2005 10/16/2008 3.50 tpd NOx

3.60 tpd SOx
Rule 4352 Solid Fuel Fired Boilers, Steam Generators and

Process Heaters 05/18/2006 12/15/2011 NQ 4

Rule 4354 Glass Melting Furnaces 08/17/2006 10/16/2008 09/16/2010 05/19/2011 3.37 tpd NOx

1.70 tpd SOx 0.11 tpd PM2.5

R ule 4550 Conservation Management Practices 08/19/2004 34 .2 tpd PM
Rule 4692 Commercial Charbroiling 09/17/2009 0.08 tpd PM2.5

Rule 4702 Internal Combustion Engines 6/16/2005 04/20/2006 01/18/2007 08/18/2011 22.43 tpd NOx

Rule 4703 Stationary Gas Turbines 08/17/2006 0 9 /20/2007 2.20 tpd NOx

Rule 4901 Wood Burning Fireplaces and Wood Burning Heaters 10/16/2008 2.40 tpd PM2.5 2

Rule 4902 Residential Water Heaters 03/19/2009 1.03 tpd NOx
Rule 4905 Natural Gas

- Fired, Fan

- Type Residential Central

Furnaces 10/20/2005 2.6 tpd NOx

R egulation VIII R ules Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions 08/19/2004 20.4 tpd PM

Rule 9310 School Bus Fleets 09/21/2006 0.8 tpd NOx 0.03 tpd of PM2.5
Rule 9410 Employer

- based Trip Reduction 12/17/2009 0.6 tpd NOx

Rule 9510 Indirect Source Review 12/12/2005 2.2 tpd NOx 3 1.4 tpd PM 1. Total emissions reduced upon full implementation of all listed rule amendments. 2. As an average for November

– April; the reductions on any given “No Burn” day are much higher.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 4 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan 3. Though ISR is achieving real emissions reductions, these reductions are not credited in the State Implementation Plan, per EPA’s May 9, 2011 approval of the ISR rule. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR

- 2011

- 05

- 09/pdf/2011

- 11133.pdf . As such, the emissions reductions from ISR are not incorporated in this plan’s emissions inventories, nor are these emissions reductions credited in this plan’s Reasonable Further Progress (RF P) or the attainment demonstrations. 4. NQ = not quantif ied

Rule 4103 Open Burning The provisions of Rule 4103 apply to open burning conducted in the Valley and, in conjunction with the District’s Smoke Management System (SMS), have reduced the total acre age of agricultural materials burned in the Valley by 80% since 2002. After working extensively with stakeholders to understand viable alternatives to burning and associated costs, the District provided recommendations for allowing or prohibiting the open burning of agricultural material categories in the District’s 2010 Final Staff Report and Recommendations on Agricultural Burning

. The April 2010 amendments to Rule 4103 incorporate California Health and Safety Code requirements and require the District to review its determinations for any postponed crops and materials at least once every five years. The recommendations adopted as a result of the 2010 Final Staff Report and Recommendations on Agricultural Burning result in a reduction of 0.12 tons per da y (tpd) of NOx and 0.34 tpd of PM2.5 emissions.

Rule 4106 Prescribed Burning and Hazard Reduction Burning Since the adoption of Rule 4106, the District has developed cooperative relationships with land management agencies (LMAs), which are the agencies that regularly conduct prescribed burning operations

. T he District advises LMA s on which days would be the most conducive for igniting a burn project, based on air quality and meteorological conditions. This collaborative effort ensures that the ignition of burn projects occurs when air quality and dispersion conditions are favorable, thus lessening the health impacts on Valley citizens and on air quality in the Valley. The adoption of Rule 4106 was not aimed at reducing the total emissi ons from this category

, as the District recognizes the importance of both prescribed burning and hazard reduction burning ; rather

, the adoption of Rule 4106 established tools that the District could use to manage smoke emissions in the Valley.

Rule 420 4 Cotton Gins Rule 4204 is among the most stringent rules in the nation for cotton gins and cotton ginning operations . Agricultural stakeholders and interested groups participated extensively throughout the rule development process in 2005

. The rule requ ires the installation of 1D

- 3D cyclone s, a PM control device, onto each cotton gin which has significantly reduced PM emissions from this source category. T he final compliance d eadline for these units came into effect in 200 8

. This rule results in 0. 79 t pd of PM emissions reductions

.

Rule 4307 Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters 2 to 5 MMBtu/hr Rule 4307 is the most stringent rule in the country for controlling emissions from fuel combustion

- producing heat and energy for manufacturing and proc essing purposes. Emissions from these units are generally controlled through either combustion modification or exhaust gas treatment. Recent amendments strengthened the rule by removing some exemptions, imposing NOx limits of 9 or 12 ppmv for new andSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 5 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan rep lacement units, and adding a menu approach for particulate matter control that includes SOx controls. While offering affected businesses cost

- effective compliance options, this rule will generate 3.36 tpd of NOx reductions by the final compliance deadline in 2015.

Rule 4308 Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters 0.075 to < 2

MMBtu/hr A dopted in 2005 and amended in 2009 to enforce lower NOx limits , Rule 4308 controls emissions from boilers, steam generators, and process heaters in the size range of 0.075 to less than 2 MMBtu/hr

. The District amended this rule through a n extensive public process involving the public and other air districts to recei ve feedback on what emissions limits were feasible and could achieve the greatest emissions reductions. As

a point

- of

- sale rule, and not a rule forcing replacement by a particular date, emissions

are redu ced when consumers replac e older units with newer, low

- NOx units as of the January 1, 2011

, compliance date . The District will achieve 1.64 tpd of NOx reductions by 2019 and 3.30 tpd of NOx reductions by full implementation in 2031 , based on an average equipment life of 20 years

.

Rule 4309 Dryers, Dehydrators, and Ovens The District adopted Rule 4309 in 2005 to enforce NOx emission limits between 3.5

- 12 ppmv for four categories of equipment. R epresentatives of affected industries and interested groups participate d extensively throughout the rule de velopment process. The rule requirements limit combustion NOx emissions from dryers, dehydrators, and ovens. These sources generally use either combustion modification technologies or post combustion flue gas clean

- up to achieve the NOx limits in the rul e

. T he final compliance d eadline for these units came into effect in 2009. This rule results in 0.65 tpd of NOx emissions reductions

.

Rule 4311 Flares Amended on June 18, 2009

, Rule 4311 controls emissions from industrial flares used at oil and gas pro duction facilities , se w a ge treatment plants , waste incineration and petroleum refining operations . The 2009 amendments require flare operators to submit flare minimization plans , p erform additional monitoring and record keeping , submit reports of planned and unplanned flaring activities to the District, and meet petroleum refinery SO2 performance targets

. When fully implemented in 2017, this rule is expected to reduce SOx emissions by 0.06 tpd

.

Rule 4320 Boilers, Steam Gener ators, and Process Heaters > 5 MMBtu/hr The District adopted Rule 4320 in 2008, with multiple generations of Rules 4305 and 4306 preceding this rule to regulate this source category . This rule is the most stringent rule in the nation for controlling emissi ons from fuel combustion

- producing heat and energy for manufacturing and processing purposes

, and it is equivalent to BACT standards for this source category. Facilities generally control e missions from these

sources through combustion modification or exh aust gas treatment. This rule and the 2005 amendment of Rule 4306 will generate 3.5 tpd of NOx reductions and 3.6 tpd of SOx reductions upon full implementation in 2014. Rule 4306 generated 0.2 tpd of NOx reductions with the 2005 rule amendment, assuming 25% of the food industry tookSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 6 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan advantage of the enhanced NOx limits option put into the rule . The remaining 3.3 tpd of NOx reductions and 3.6 tpd of SOx reductions come from the 2008 adoption of Rule 4320. However, per EPA’s approval of Rule 4320, Rule 4 320 emission reductions cannot be directly credited in the District’s SIP be cause a portion of the reductions result from an emissions fee compliance option

. 3

Rule 4352 Solid Fuel Fired Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters Rule 4352 was adopted in 1994 and has since been amended three times . I t is one of the most stringent rules in the country for this source category. Facilities subject to this rule have invested millions of dollars to implement innovative control technologies and have signifi cantly reduced emissions from solid fuel fired boilers. P revious rule

amending projects for Rule 4352 have not quantified specific emissions reductions because the rule amendments were meant to satisfy EPA RACT requirements and all units were determined t o be operating at or below the proposed emission limits

. However, t he increased presence of biomass facilities in the Valley, from either new facilities or other solid fuel fired boilers that have converted to biomass, continues to significantly reduce NO x and PM emissions from open burning practices. To date, agricultural burning has been reduced by 70% and approximately 90% of agricultural burning is projected to be eliminated in the coming years. In addition, the NOx limits in Rule 4352 have continual ly been revised to ensure that facilities are complying with the most stringent NOx limits possible

, and that new facilities would also be required to implement effective emission control technologies to comply with the stringent emissions limits.

Rule 4 354 Glass Melting Furnaces District Rule 4354 , adopted in 1994 and subsequently amended six times, is one of the most stringent rules in the nation for controlling NOx, SOx, and PM emissions from industrial glass manufacturing plants that make flat glass ( window and automotive windshields), container glass (bottles and jars), and fiberglass (insulation). Recent amendments include more stringent NOx emission limits based on BACT level controls for container glass, fiberglass

, and flat glass . The rule gives special consideration to container glass and fiberglass manufacturers who use 30% post

- consumer materials under the state glass recycling regulations . The rule also includ es a technology forcing limit for flat glass furnaces. As a result of this stringe nt prohibitory rule and continuing efforts on behalf of this industry to reduce emissions, the Valley ’s glass melting furnaces

use low

- NOx firing technology

. With compliance deadlines through January 1, 2014, this rule is expected to reduce an additional 3.28 tpd of NOx emissions

, 1.12 tpd of SOx emissions

, and 0.11 tpd of PM2.5 emissions when fully implemented.

Rule 4550 Conservation Management Plans Rule 4550 was adopted to help bring the Valley into attainment of federal PM10 standards, and applies to on

- field farming and agricultural operation sites located within the Valley. Rule 4550 was the first rule of its kind in the nation to target fugitive

3 Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan (SJVUAPCD Rule 4320); Proposed and Final Rules. 75 Fed. Reg. 214, pp. 68294

– 68296. (2010, November 5). Retrieved from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR

- 2010

- 11

- 05/pdf/2010

- 28019.pdf . And 76 Fed. Reg. 58. (2011, March 25). Retrieved from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR

2011

- 03

- 25/pdf/2011

- 7090.pdf

.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 7 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan particulate emissions from agricultural operations

, and it has served as a model for other regions. Th e District worked extensively with numerous stakeholders, growers, and the Agricultural Technical Committee for the San Joaquin Valleywide Air Pollution Study Agency (A g Tech) for two years prior to developing the Conservation Management Practices (CMP) Rul e. The District also worked with agricultural stakeholders and other agencies, such as the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), following rule adoption to ensure affected sources were assisted as much as possible in understanding and complying w ith the requirements of Rule 4550. Through this rule, PM emissions have been reduced by 35.3 tons per day. Similarly, implementation of Rule 4550 by agricultural operations has resulted in the reduction of PM2.5 emissions through the reduction of passes of agricultural equipment and implementation of other conservation practices.

Rule 4692 Commercial Charbroiling District Rule 4692 reduces PM emissions by requiring catalytic oxidizers for chain

driven charbroilers, including those used in many typical fast

- food restaurants. Rule 4692 is among the most stringent rules in the nation for control ing emissions from commercial charbroiling operations. The original rule, adopted in March 2002, reduced PM2.5 emissions from chain

- driven charbroilers by 84%. T he September 2009 rule amendment expanded rule applicability to more chain

- driven charbroilers. Rule 4692 has been fully implemented since 2011, reducing PM2.5 emissions by 0.0 1 8 tpd . T he District also created a $500,000 pilot Charbroiler Incentive Progr am (CHIP) to fund the installation of PM2.5 controls on under

- fired charbroilers and further investigate the economic feasibility and availability of such controls.

Rule 4702 Internal Combustion Engines The District has amended R ule 4702 four times since 2005 to implement NOx limits for agricultural operations engines, implement more stringent NOx limit for non

- agricultural operations (non

- AO) engines, and to extend rule applicability to units 25

– 50 brake horsepower (bhp). With m ultiple generations of rule amendments, Rule 4702 is the most stringent rule in the nation for this source category. Facilities generally control NOx emissions that result from the fuel combustion of internal combustion engines with advanced technologies

, such as selective non

- catalytic reduction and selective catalytic reduction. The most recent rule amendments in 2011 lowered NOx limits for non

- AO engines and will achieve an additional 1.43 tpd in NOx reductions by the final compliance deadlines in 2018

.

Rule 4703 Stationary Gas Turbines The District most recently amended Rule 4703 in September 2007 to reduce the NOx limits for existing stationary gas turbines that are 10 megawatts (MW) or less. This amendment achieve d additional NOx emissions reductions from turbines used for cogeneration of electrical energy and steam for thermally enhanced oil recovery operations in the Valley. This rule equals or exceeds the most stringent source control of any air district in Cali fornia by requiring BACT at these facilities. The District designed c ompliance schedules to allow reasonable time for completing modi fication and retrofit actions during scheduled overhauls of the gas turbines. The most recentSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 8 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan rule amendment achieves an additional 2.2 tpd of NOx reductions upon full implementation and compliance deadline of January 1, 2012

.

Rule 4901 Wood

- Burning Fire places and Wood

- Burning Heaters The District amended Rule 4901 on October 16, 2008 nearly one year ahead of the deadline in the corresponding plan commitment to reduc e the wood

- burning curtailment threshold

. Through this rule and the District’s corresponding Check

- Before

- You

- Burn program, the District prohibits use of wood

- burning fireplaces and wood

- burning heaters in areas with natural gas service when air quality is forecast to be above 30 μg/m3 of PM2.5. Rule amendments have reduced PM2.5 emissions by an average 2.4 tpd , as averaged o ver the months of November through April ; reductions on any give n No

- Burn day are much higher

.

Rule 4902 Residential Water Heaters The District adopted Rule 4902 on July 17, 1993 to control NOx emissions from natural gas

- fired residential water heaters with heat input rates less than or equal to 75,000 Btu/hr by enf orcing NOx emissions limit of 40 nanograms of NOx per Joule of heat output (ng/J)

. The District amended Rule 4902 in 2009 to strengthen the rule by lowering the limit to 10 ng/J for new or replacement water heaters and to a limit of 14 ng/J for instantaneous water heaters. Retailer compliance dates ranged from 2010 to 2012, depending on the unit type

. On and after the applicable compliance date, retailers have been required to sell only units complying with the new limits. As a point

of

- sale r ule, complying units are installed as pre

- existing units require normal replacement and as other new units are needed. The rule has controlled NOx emissions by approximately 88% for this source category

. The 2009 amendments reduced an additional 0.5 tpd of NOx.

Rule 4905 Natural Gas

- Fired, Fan

- Type Residential Central Furnaces Rule 4905 was adopted in 2005 to establish NOx limits for residential central furnaces supplied, sold, or installed in the Valley with a rated heat input capacity of less than 17 5,000 Btu/hour. The rule set a NOx emission limit of 0.093 pounds per million Btu of heat output (lb/MMBtu) for all units. As a point

- of

- sale rule, and not a rule forcing replacement by a particular date, emissions are reduced when consumers replace olde r units with newer, low

- NOx units as of the January 1, 2007 compliance date. The current rule will achieve 2.6 tpd of NOx reductions. The District has committed to amend ing Rule 4905 in 2014 , which will lower NOx emission limits for these units even further and crea te additional NOx emissions reductions for this source category.

Rule 9310 School Bus Fleets The District adopted Rule 9310 in September 2006 to limit NOx, PM, and diesel toxic air

co ntaminants from school bus fleets. Diesel

- fueled school bus fleet operators must replace or retrofit all of their school buses to meet the applicable ARB and EPA emission standards for engines by 2016. The rule also requires all existing gasoline or alte rnative

- fueled school buses and any diesel school buses manufactured after October 1, 2002 to be operated according to manufacturer specifications and

, if replaced, shall meet all applicable ARB and EPA current

- year emissions standards for the year of deli very of that school bus engine and fuel type.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 9 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan Rule 9410 Employer

- B ased Trip Reduction (eTRIP Rule) Although the District does not have authority to regulate tailpipe emissions, the District can adopt regulatory approaches to promote the reduction of vehi cle miles traveled. The goal of the eTRIP Rule is to reduce single

- occupancy

- vehicle work commutes. The eTRIP Rule requires the Valley’s larger employers, representing a wide range of locales and sectors, to select and implement workplace measures that m ake it easier for their employees to choose ridesharing and alternative transportation. Because of the diversity of employers covered by the eTRIP Rule, the rule was built with a flexible, menu

- based approach. Using the Employer Trip Reduction Implementa tion Plan ( eTRIP ) , employers choose from a list of measures, each contributing to a workplace that encourages employees to reduce their dependence on single

- occupancy vehicles. Each eTRIP measure has a point value, and employer eTRIPs must reach specified point targets for each strategy over a phased

- in compliance schedule (2010

– 2015). The District has continually provided employer assistance through training, guidance materials, promotional information, and online reporting options

. Upon full implementation, the eTRIP Rule will reduce NOx and VOC emissions from passenger vehicle commute trips by approximately 1.2 ton per day. See www.valleyair.org/tripreduction.htm for fur ther information about the eTRIP Rule.

Rule 9510 Indirect Source Review (ISR) The District’s adoption of Rule 9510 in 2005 was the first time in the nation that an air agency used regulation to control emissions from indirect sources. Clean Air Act Sect ion 110(a)(5)(C) defines an indirect source as a “facility, building, structure, installation, real property, road, or highway which attracts, or may attract, mobile sources of pollution .” The District’s ISR rule reduces mobile source emissions from new d evelopment projects

. ISR’s on

- site mitigation component encourages beneficial changes in land development patterns and practices. The off

- site mitigation option applies assessed ISR fees to the District’s cost

- effective emissions reductions incentive pro grams. The District conducts extensive outreach on ISR and prepares an annual report on ISR implementation. The District’s 2010

, 5

- year evaluation of ISR implementation noted that

, in spite of economic downtown in the construction industry, ISR has achie ved emission reductions and has resulted in positive changes in land development practices and processes in the Valley. No other air district has a rule quite like the District’s ISR rule. As such, the District’s rule is the most stringent and effective ISR rule.

Regulation VIII Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions In 2004, the District adopted amendments to Regulation VIII to upgrade existing RACM level rules to meet the more stringent BACM level required in serious PM10 nonattainment areas. These regulations are just as stringent if not more stringent than fugitive dust regulations at other air districts and comparable federal regulations. Regulation VIII prohibitory standards are performance based

, whereby the operators are allowed to deter mine the control technique sufficient to limit visible dust emissions to 20 percent opacity and, in certain instances, to implement requirements for a stabilized surface. Dust control plans , test methods and standards, and recordkeeping requirements are the major provisions required under Regulation VIII. The 2004 amendments to Regulation VIII achieved approximately 20.4 tons per day of PMSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 10 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan reductions and were critical in the District’s attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Stand ard for PM10.

5.1.2 ARB Regulation s Contributing to Continued PM2.5 Improvement

Since 1989

, ARB has adopted and amended a number of regulations aimed at reducing exposure to diesel PM and NOx from fuel sources, freight transport sources like heavy

duty diesel trucks, transportation sources like passenger cars and buses, and off

- road sources like large construction equipment. These regulations have significantly reduced PM2.5 precursors and direct PM2.5 emissions throughout the Valley.

Table 5

- 2 below includes a list of all the regulations adopted or amended by ARB from 2000 to 2011

. Phased implementation of these regulations are produc ing increasing emission reduction benefits until 2019 and beyond as the regulated fleets are retrofitted, and as older and dirtier fleet units are replaced with newer and cleaner models at an accelerated pace. Several rules in par ticular; including Cleaner In

- Use Heavy Duty Trucks, Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment, Advanced Clean Car Program, Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program, and the Enhanced Smog Check Program , will be achieving significant emissions reductions critically needed to attain the standard under this plan

.
In addition, ARB and District staff are w orking closely to identify and distribut e incentive funds to accelerate dirty engine replacement . Key programs include the Carl Moyer Program

, the Goods Movement Program

, the Lower

- Emission School Bus Program

, and the Air Quality Improvement Program (AQIP ). These incentive

- based programs work in tandem with regulations to accelerate deployment of cleaner technology.

Table 5

- 2 Adopted ARB Regulations

ARB Regulation Adoption Date Category Advanced Clean Car Program 1/27/2012 On

- road Expanded Off

- Road Recreational Vehicle Emission Standards 12/16/2011 Off

- road

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment 12/17/2010 Off

- road Port Truck Modernization 12/17/2010 Off

- road Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks 12/16/2010 On

- road Accelerated Introduction of Cleaner Line

- Haul Locomotives 06/24/2010 Other Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program (formerly called the Expanded Vehicle Retirement Program) 06/24/2010 On

- road

Smog Check Improvements 08/31/2009 On

- road Portable Outboard Marine Tanks 09/25/2008 Off

- road Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 11/15/2007 Other Voluntary Accelerated Retirement Regulation 12/07/2006 On

- road Emergency Regulation for Portable Equipment Registration Program, Airborne Toxic Control Measures and Portable and Stationary diesel

- Fueled Engines 12/06/2006 Off

- road

Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Stationary Compression Ignition Engines (Agricultural Eng. Exemption removal) 11/16/2006 Other

Distributed Generation Guidelines and Regulations 10/19/2006 OtherSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 11 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan ARB Regulation Adoption Date Category Zero Emission Bus Regulation 10/19/2006 On

- road Heavy

- Duty In

- Use Compliance Regulation 09/28/2006 On

- road On

- Board Diagnostic II 09/28/2006 On

- road Off

- Highway Recreational Vehicles and Engines 07/20/2006 Off

- road California Motor Vehicle Service Information Rule 06/22/2006 On

- road Portable Equipment Registration Program 06/22/2006 Off

- road Fork Lifts and Other Industrial Equipment (Large Off

- Road Spark Ignition Engines > 1 liter) 05/26/2006 Off

- road

Technical Amendments to Evaporative Exhaust and Evaporative Emissions Test Procedures 05/25/2006 On

- road

Diesel Verification Procedure, Warranty & In

- Use 03/23/2006 On

- road AB1009 Heavy

- Duty Vehicle Smoke Inspection Program 01/26/2006 On

- road Diesel Particulate Matter Control Measure for On

- Road Heavy

- Duty Diesel

- Fueled V ehicles Owned or Operated by Public Agencies and Utilities 12/08/2005 On

- road

Mobile Cargo Handling Equipment at Ports and Intermodal Rail Yards 12/08/2005 Off

- road

Marine Inboard Sterndrive Engines 11/17/2005 Off

- road Requirements to Reduce Idling Emissions from New and In

Use Trucks, Beginning in 2008 10/20/2005 On

- road

2007

- 2009 Model

- Year Heavy Duty Urban Bus Engines and the Fleet Rule for Transit Agencies 09/15/2005 On

- road

Portable Fuel Containers (PFC) [Part 1 of 2 ] 09/15/2005 Off road Portable Fuel Containers (PFC) [Part 2 of 2] 09/15/2005 Off road On

- Board Diagnostic System Requirements for 2010 and Subsequent Model

- Year Heavy

- Duty Engines (HD OBD) 07/21/2005 On

- road

Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Stationar y Compression Ignition Engines amendments 05/26/2005 Other

Transit Fleet Rule 02/24/2005 On

- road Off

- Road Compression Ignition Engines 12/09/2004 Off

- road Emergency Regulation for Temporary Delay of Diesel Fuel Lubricity Standard 11/24/2004 Fuels

Diesel Fuel Standards for Harbor Craft & Locomotives 11/18/2004 Fuels Greenhouse Gas 09/23/2004 On

- road Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Diesel Particulate from Diesel Fueled Commercial Vehicle Idling 07/22/2004 On

- road

Urban Bus Engines/Fleet Rule for Transit Agencies 06/24/2004 On

- road Engine Manufacturer Diagnostic System Requirements for 2007 and Subsequent Model Heavy Duty Engines 05/20/2004 On

- road

Heavy Duty Diesel Engine

- Chip Reflash 03/27/2004 On

- road Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Diesel

- Fueled Portable Engines 02/26/2004 Off

- road

Modifications to the Statewide Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP) Regulations 02/26/2004 Off

- road

CA Motor Vehicle Service Information Rule 01/22/2004 On

- road Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Diesel Particulate for Transport Refrigeration Units 12/11/2003 On

- road

Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Stationary Compression Ignition Engines 12/11/2003 Other

Diesel Retrofit Verification Procedure, Warranty and In

- Use Compliance Requirements Amendments 12/11/2003 On

- road

Small Off

- Road Engines (SORE) 09/25/2003 Off

- road Solid Waste Collection Vehicles 09/24/2003 On

- road Off

- Highway Recreation Vehicles 07/24/2003 Off

- roadSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 12 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan ARB Regulation Adoption Date Category Specifications for Motor Vehicle Diesel Fuel 07/24/2003 Fuels Zero Emission Vehicle Amendments for 2003 03/25/2003 On

- road Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Diesel Particulate from School Bus Idling 12/12/2002 On

- road

Low Emission Vehicles II. Align Heavy Duty Gas Engine Standards with Federal Standards; minor administrative changes 12/12/2002 On

- road

Revision to Transit Bus Regulations Amendments 10/24/2002 On

- road Diesel Retrofit Verification Procedure, Warranty and In

- Use Compliance Requirements 05/16/2002 On

- road

On

- Board Diagnostic II Review Amendments 04/25/2002 On

- road Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Outdoor Residential Waste Burning 02/21/2002 Other

Voluntary Accelerated Light Duty Vehicle Retirement Regulations 02/21/2002 On

- road

California Motor Vehicle Service Information Rule 12/13/2001 On

- road Distributed Generation Guidelines and Regulations 11/15/2001 Other Low Emission Vehicle Regulations 11/15/2001 On

- road Heavy Duty Diesel Engine Standards for 2 007 and Later 10/25/2001 On

- road Marine Inboard Engines 07/26/2001 Off

- road Zero Emission Vehicle Infrastructure and Standardization of Electric Vehicle Charging Equipment 06/28/2001 On

- road

Zero Emission Vehicle Regulation Update 01/25/2001 On

- road Heavy Duty Diesel Engines "Not

- to

- Exceed (NTE)" Test Procedures 12/07/2000 On

- r oad

Light

- and Medium Duty Low Emission Vehicle Alignment with Federal Standards. Exhaust Emission Standards for Heavy Duty Gas Engines 12/07/2000 On

- road

Air Toxic Control Measure for Chlorinated Toxic Air Contaminants from Automotive Maintenance and Repair Facilities 04/27/2000 Other

Transit Bus Standards 02/24/2000 On

- road Off

- Road Compression Ignition Engines 01/27/2000 Off

- road

Some of the most si gnificant regulations adopted by ARB in recent years, such as the Truck and Bus Regulation and the Off

- Road Regulation, depend on truck and equipment owners playing a key role in implementation. Accordingly, ARB’s approach to ensuring compliance is based on a comprehensive outreach and education effort. ARB staff develops regulatory assistance tools, conducts and coordinates compliance assistance and outreach activities, administers incentive programs, and actively enforces the entire suite of diesel regu lations. ARB’s goal is to provide readily accessible and clear information for all diesel rules and incentive programs.

ARB compliance assistance and outreach activities also include the following :

 Training and implementation classes conducted by ARB staff in classroom settings throughout the State , including at community colleges

 Participation at business events throughout California, giving presentations, displaying materials, providing handouts

, and responding to questions

 Marketing efforts such as advertisements, press releases

, a television presence, and radio spots, including public service announcements statewide

 Websites for ARB’s multiple programsSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 13 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan Complementing these efforts, ARB and D istrict enforcement actively provide a level playing field for the regulated entities and ensure the emission reduction benefits are achieved.

The following summaries highlight ARB’s most recent key regulation s , the roll out of their phased implementation deadlines and corresponding emission reduction schedule, and support ing outreach and enforcement efforts.

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks (Truck and Bus Regulation) One of the most significant rules adopted by ARB within the past five years is the Truck and Bus Regulation

, adopted in December 2008. In December 2010, ARB revised specific provisions of the in

- use heavy

- duty truck rule, in recognition of the deep economic effects of the recession on these businesses and the corresponding decline in their emissions. This rule represents a multi

- year effort to turn over the legacy fleet of engines and replace them with the cleanest technology available.

Starting in 2012, the Truck and Bus Regulation phases in requirements applicable to an increasingly larger percentage of the truck and bus fleet over time, so tha t by 2023

, nearly all older vehicles will need to be upgraded to have exhaust emissions meeting 2010 model year engine emissions levels. Replacing older, dirtier trucks sooner than they otherwise would have been retired results in lower NOx and PM2.5 emis sions in 2019.

The regulation applies to nearly all privately and federally owned diesel

- fueled trucks and buses with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 14,000 pounds, including on

- road and off

- road agricultural yard goats, and privately a nd publicly owned school buses. Moreover, the regulation applies to any person, business, school district, or federal government agency that owns, operates, leases

, or rents affected vehicles. The regulation also establishes requirements for any in

- state or out

- of

- state motor carrier, California

- based broker, or any California resident who directs or dispatches vehicles subject to the regulation. Finally, California sellers of a vehicle subject to the regulation would have to disclose the regulation’s po tential applicability to buyers of the vehicles. Approximately 170,000 businesses in nearly all industry sectors in California, and almost a million vehicles that operate on California roads each year

, are affected. Some common industry sectors that ope rate vehicles subject to the regulation include for

- hire transportation, construction, manufacturing, retail and wholesale trade, vehicle leasing and rental, bus lines, and agriculture.

In addition to the Truck and Bus Regulation, separate regulations red uce emissions from other public fleets, solid waste collection trucks

, and transit buses. Trucks that transport marine containers must comply with the drayage truck regulation.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 14 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan ARB compliance assistance and outreach activities in support of the Truck and Bus Regulation include the following :

 The Truck Regulations Upload and Compliance Reporting System, an online reporting tool developed and maintained by ARB staff

 The Truck and Bus regulation’s fleet calculator, a tool designed to assist fleet owners in evaluating various compliance strategies

 Targeted training sessions all over the State

 Out

- of

- state training sessions conducted by a contractor

January 1, 2012 was the first deadline for trucks to install diesel particulate filters, with reporting require d by the end of March 2012. Over 200,000 trucks reported by the required deadline. To ensure the success of these requirements, in the three

- month period before the compliance deadline, ARB staff spoke with over 16,000 people by phone and sent notificati on postcards to over 200,000 people in California and neighboring states.

ARB and D istrict enforcement provides a level playing field for the regulated entities and ensures the emission reduction benefits are achieved. ARB staff enforce diesel regulation s addressing idling, transport refrigeration units (TRU) and drayage trucks, and recently began enforcing the Truck and Bus regulation as it came up to its first compliance deadline in 2012.

In general, enforcement is conducted by doing unscheduled road side inspections. An inspection team may typically focus on truck stops, rest stops, industrial areas, ports, environmental justice areas

, and cold storage facilities. Vehicles are audited for all applicable requirements, including smoke, emission contro l labels, and diesel particulate filters. To expand enforcement capabilities, ARB contracts with the District and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District to conduct inspections in their respective jurisdictions.

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment (Off

- Road Regulation) Another significant rule adopted by ARB within the past five years is the Off

- Road Regulation

, which was first approved in 2007 and amended in 2010 in response to the economic recession. These off

- road vehicles are used in construction, manufacturing, the rental industry, road maintenance, airport ground support

, and landscaping. In December 2011, the Off

- Road Regulation was modified to include on

- road trucks with two diesel engines.

The Off

- Road Regulation will significantly reduce emi ssions of diesel PM and NOx from the over 150,000 in

- use off

- road diesel vehicles that operate in California by requiring their owners to modernize their fleets and install exhaust retrofits. The regulation affects dozens of vehicle types used in thousand s of fleets by requiring owners to modernize their fleets by replacing older engines or vehicles with newer, cleaner models ; retiring older vehicles or using them less often ; or by applying retrofit exhaust controls.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 15 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan The Off

- Road Regulation imposes idlin g limits on off

- road diesel vehicles, requires a written idling policy, and requires a disclosure when selling vehicles. The regulation also requires that all vehicles be reported to ARB and labeled ; restricts the addition of older vehicles into fleets ; a nd requires fleets to reduce their emissions by retiring, replacing, or repowering older engines, or installing verified exhaust retrofits. The requirements and compliance dates of the Off

- Road Regulation vary by fleet size.

Once ARB receives authorizati on from EPA, fleets will be subject to increasingly more stringent restrictions on adding older vehicles. The regulation also sets performance requirements. While the regulation has many specific provisions, in general

, by each compliance deadline, a fle et must demonstrate that it has either met the fleet average target for that year, or has completed BACT requirements. The performance requirements of the Off

- Road Regulation will be phased in from January 1, 2014

, through January 1, 2019. The combined i mpact of the performance requirements results in steady declines in NOx and PM2.5 emissions from 2014 to 2019 and beyond.

Compliance assistance and outreach activities in support of the Off

- Road Regulation include the following :

 The Diesel Off

- R oad On

- L i ne Reporting System, an online reporting tool developed and maintained by ARB staff

 The Diesel Hotline (866

- 6DIESEL), which provides regulated operators with answers (in English, Spanish, and Punjabi) about the regulations and access to ARB staff

 The Off

- road Listserv, providing equipment owners and dealerships with timely announcement of regulatory changes, regulatory assistance documents, and reminders for deadlines

ARB staff began compliance outreach in 2008 in preparation for the initial 2010 dead line. Staff is again ramping up outreach efforts in preparation for the 2014 deadline. ARB staff has sent over 50,000 postcards with compliance information to equipment owners. ARB staff began planning outreach efforts for owners of on

- road trucks with two diesel engines in spring of 2012

. In general, enforcement is conducted through unscheduled fleet audits. Fleet audits are conducted when inspectors notice a trend of violations occurring fo r a given business. Vehicles are audited for all applicable requirements, including smoke, emission control labels, and diesel particulate filters.

Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) Many gasoline engines now emit at near

- zero emission levels of smog

- forming emiss ions. Conventional hybrid electric vehicles have been commercialized, and the number of models offered for sale is quickly expanding. Recently, battery

- electric vehicles and plug

- in hybrid

- electric vehicles have been introduced for sale, and fuel cell el ectric vehicles are expected to be sold beginning in 2015. This movement towards commercialization of advanced clean cars has occurred because of ARB’s Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) regulation, which affects passenger cars and light

- duty trucks.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 16 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan Continuin g its leadership role in developing innovative and ground

- breaking emission control programs, ARB’s ACC Program, approved in January 2012, is a pioneering package of regulations, that although separate in construction, each regulation is related in terms o f the synergy developed to address both ambient air quality needs and climate change. The ACC program combines the control of smog, soot

- causing pollutants

, and greenhouse gas emissions into a single

, coordinated package of requirements for model years 20 15 through 2025. The program assures the development of environmentally superior cars that will continue to deliver the performance
, utility, and safety vehicle owners have come to expect. The ACC program approved by ARB in January 2012 included amendments affecting the current ZEV regulation through the 2017 model year in order to enable manufacturers to successfully meet 2018 and subsequent model

- year requirements. The ZEV amendments for 2018 and subsequent model years in the ACC program approved by ARB in January 2012 are intended to achieve commercialization through simplifying the regulation and pushing technology to higher volume production in order to achieve cost reductions.

The ACC Program will produce increasing benefits over time as new cleaner cars enter the fleet displacing older and dirtier vehicles. In this manner, the benefits in 2019 will be realized through the cumulative reduction in emissions achieved by new cars enterin g the fleet in 2017 through 2019. This program will continue to provide benefits well after 2025 as vehicles meeting the new standards replace older, higher

- emitting vehicles.

Expanded Passenger Vehicle Retirement Voluntary accelerated vehicle retiremen t or car scrap programs provide monetary incentives to vehicle owners to retire older, more polluting vehicles. The purpose of these programs is to reduce fleet emissions by accelerating the turnover of the existing fleet and subsequent replacement with n ewer, cleaner vehicles. Reducing emissions from the existing fleet is a component of California’s SIP , which outlines the State’s strategy for meeting health

- based ambient air quality standards. Both State and local vehicle retirement programs are availa ble.

California’s updated voluntary vehicle retirement program is administered by the Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR) and provides $1,000 per vehicle

, and $1,500 for low

income consumers

, for unwanted vehicles that have either failed or passed their las t Smog Check Test and that meet certain eligibility guidelines. This program is referred to as the Consumer Assistance Program.

The Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program (EFMP) was approved by the AB 118 legislation to augment the State’s existing vehic le retirement program. Approximately $30 million is available annually through 2015 to fund the EFMP via a $1 increase in vehicle registration fees. ARB developed the program in consultation with BAR. The program is jointly administered by both BAR ( for vehicle retirement ) and local air districts ( for vehicle replacement )

.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 17 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan Other programs, in addition to vehicle retirement programs, help to clean up the light

- duty fleet. The AQIP, established by AB 118, is an ARB voluntary incentive program to fund clea n vehicle and equipment projects. The Clean Vehicle Rebate Project (CVRP) is one of the current projects under AQIP. CVRP, started in 2009, is designed to accelerate widespread commercialization of zero

- emission vehicles and plug

- in hybrid electric vehic les by providing consumer rebates up to $2,500 to partially offset the higher cost of these advanced technologies. These vehicles are a key element of California’s strategy for meeting health based air quality standards and climate change goals.

The CVRP is administered statewide by the California Center for Sustainable Energy (CCSE). In f iscal y ears 2009

– 2012, $26.1 million, including $2 million provided by the California Energy Commission, funded approximately 2,000 rebates. In June 2012, the ARB allocated $15

– 21 million to the CVRP as outlined in the AQIP FY2012

– 2013 Funding Plan.
Improvements and Enhancements to California’s Smog Check Program The following requirements were added to improve and enhance the Smog Check Program, making it more inclusive of motor vehicles and effective on smog reductions:

 Low pressure evaporative test;

 More stringent pass/fail cutpoints;

 Visible smoke test; and

 Inspection of light

- and medium

- duty diesel vehicles.

AB 2289, adopted in October 2010, is a new law restructuring California’s Smog Check Program, streamlining and strengthening inspections, increasing penalties for misconduct, and reducing costs to motorists. This new law, sponsored by ARB and BAR, promises faster and less expensive Smog Checks by talk ing advantage of diagnostic software installed on all vehicles since 2000. The new law also directs vehicles without this equipment to high

- performing stations, helping to ensure that these cars comply with current emission standards.

This program will r educe consumer costs by having stations take advantage of diagnostic software that monitors pollution

- reduction components and tailpipe emissions. This technology, known as On

- Board Diagnostics (OBD), has been required on all new vehicles since 1996. Und er the new law, testing of passenger vehicles using OBD will begin mid

- 2013 on all vehicles model years 2000 or newer. This should result in reduced consumer costs by up to $180 million annually.

5.1.3 District VOC Regulations

The rules identified in Section 5.1.1 are adopted District rules that reduce directly emitted PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors ( NOx and SOx )

. As discussed in detail in Chapter 4 (Scientific Foundation and PM2.5 Modeling Results)

, VOCs have the potential to contribute to the formation of two different PM2.5 components : secondary organic aerosols (SOA s ) and ammonium nitrate (nitrate)

. Recent research andSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 18 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan modeling shows that the contribution of these components to the Valley’s total observed PM2.5 concentrations is minimal, as is the con tribution of anthropogenic VOCs (those not from biogenic sources) to the formation of these PM2.5 components. As such, a VOC

- centric control strategy is much less effective for reducing PM2.5 concentrations than are primary PM2.5 controls or NOx controls

. Although reducing VOC emissions does not contribute to attainment of the PM2.5 standard , it does contribute to improved ozone air quality in the Valley. The District has successfully reduced VOC emissions through numerous rules adopted or amended unde r the 2007 Ozone Plan

. For a detailed discussion on VOC rules and emissions reduced, refer to the 2007 Ozone Plan and the 2009 RACT SIP Demonstration report. Two examples of VOC reducing rules include :

 Rule 4570 Confined Animal Facilities A mended on Oct ober 21, 2010, uses a best management practices approach to reduce emissions from confined animal facilities

. The 2010 amendment relied on the latest scientific research and reduced 31.8 tpd VOC emissions

.

 Rule 4566 Organic Material Composting Operations A dopted August 18, 2011, Rule 4566 is the result of collaborative efforts with affected stakeholders and the utilization of the best scientific information available; the rule reduces emissions through the use of watering systems or compost cover, reducing 19 tpd of VOC emissions.



### 5.1.4 District Ammonia Regulations

Although ammonia is among the chemical precursors that can form secondary PM2.5, research shows that ammonia controls are not effective for reducing ammonium nitrate in the Valley (see Chapter 4). Additionally, as the modeling sensitivity analysis has shown in Appendix G, reductions in ammonia emissions achieve insignificant reductions in the 2019 PM2.5 design v alue mass compared to reductions of direct PM2.5 and NOx emissions.

Th e District has already achieved significant ammonia emissions reductions through several amendments of Rule 4570, Confined Animal Facilities , which has required best management practice s for manure management and other areas to reduce VOC and ammonia emissions

. Despite the insignificant contribution of ammonia reductions towards attainment of the PM2.5 standard , the District has evaluated the feasibility of obtaining additional ammonia emissions reductions and has been unable to identify any additional reasonable measures. As discussed in Section 5.3.3 below, the District explored the possibility of requiring the application of sodium bisulfate (SBS), as include d as a potential control measure in the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) 2012 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), and determined that this control strategy would be ineffective, extremely costly, has potential detrimental unintended consequences, and is likel y infeasible for dairies within the San Joaquin Valley. While reducing ammonia is not an effective strategy for reducing PM2.5San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 19 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan concentrations in the San Joaquin Valley, t he District commi ts to continue to analyze and support studies regarding ammonia emissions at confined animal facilities , for the purpose of evaluating the potential effectiveness of additional ammonia controls on confined animal facilities in reducing PM2.5 concentrations in the Valley (discussed in more detail in Section 5.3.3, Furth er Study Measures).

5. 2 Evaluating Control Measures for New Control Strategy Opportunities

For this plan, the District thoroughly analyzed opportunities to further reduce emissions of directly

- emitted PM2.5, NOx, and SOx. 4 Appendices C and D of this pla n present this analysis, organized by practice or equipment type. The control strategy resulting from this analysis reflects a multi

- faceted approach to implementing emissions control technologies and practices.

While the adopted regulations noted abov e are achieving significant emissions reductions, more emissions reductions are needed to meet current EPA air quality standards. T he District and ARB must continue to consider new control measure opportunities to ensure expeditious attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 standard.

5.2.1 Evaluation of Control Measures The District has e valuat ed all sectors and equipment types for additional emission reduction opportunities. This analysis is presented in Appendi ces C and D of this plan. In particular, Appendix D (Stationary and Area Source Control Strateg y Evaluation ) focuses on sources under the District’s regulatory control

. The District has used the following key factors to evaluate p otential emission reduction opportunities:

 Technological Feasibility

. The District looked for any control technologies not already required that might be available to further reduce emissions from sources of air pollution in the Valley. Th is include s new technologies and technologies that may not have been cost

- effective in the past. The technologies used in BACT guidelines ; permits ; and other air districts’ rules, regulations, guidelines, and studies were reviewed for their feasibility, including how commercially available the technology currently is and whether the techn ology has been used in practice.

 Cost

- Effectiveness

. C ost

- effectiveness is the cost of emissions controls compared to the amount of emissions reductions that would be achieved by those controls. The District does not have a pre

- determined cost

- effecti veness threshold, but control options with extremely high cost

- effectiveness (high dollars per ton of pollutant reduction) can be deemed unreasonable and inappropriate for regulation.

 Risk

- b ased Strategy

. Th rough its Risk

- based Strategy (RBS), the District is maximizing public health improvements resulting from the District’s attainment

4 As noted in Chapter 4 and other areas of this plan, VOC and ammonia reductions to not significantly contribute to the Valley’s attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 standard

.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 20 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan strategies and related initiatives. As described in Chapter 2 of this plan, the District uses a five

- factor exposure assessment meth odology to evaluate the PM2.5 attainment strategy under the RBS and prioritize control measures that maximize public health.

Embedded in the technological feasibilit y and cost

- effectiveness analysis is the District’s evaluation of RACT and RACM. A PM2.5 plan must demonstrate that RACT and RACM are in place for direct PM2.5 and the area’s relevant precursors

. 5

 Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT ). RACT is the lowest reasonable emissions limit that a particular source is capable of meeting, considering technolo gical and economic feasibility of the technology. RACT changes over time as new technologies become feasible and cost

- effective, thus making them reasonable to require . Therefore, the District focuses its review on changes in technologies since the last RACT demonstration. The District has conducted comprehensive reviews of all NOx and VOC rules for compliance with federal RACT requirements. For these reviews, the District evalua tes all District rules against federal rules, regulations, and technology guidelines, as well as any comparable rules from California’s most technologically progressive air districts. In response to the District’s 2009 RACT Demonstration for Ozone State I mplementation Plans (2009 RACT SIP) and related rule amending projects, EPA has issued federal actions documenting their approval of District rules and their concurrence that District rules are at least as stringent as RACT. These efforts show that many D istrict rules are more stringent than established RACT standards. RACT is the minimum level of control that nonattainment areas must achieve for existing sources, but because of the Valley’s extensive air quality challenges, the District must continuously look beyond RACT.

 Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM)

. Whereas RACT is specific to an emissions source, RACM is a collection of measures that, taken as a group, advance attainment of an air quality standard by at least one year.

RACT and RACM are, by definition, reasonable. Although air quality attainment plans must include a thorough analysis of reasonably available measures, it need not analyze every conceivable measure; reasonab leness must drive the analysis. The Dist rict would not re quire any measure that is absurd, unenforceable, impractical, or that would cause severely disruptive socioeconomic impacts (e.g., gas rationing and mandatory source shutdowns). RACT is discussed throughout Appendix D. Chapter 9 of this plan synthesizes how this plan’s control strategy meets RACM requirements.

5 Clean A ir Fine Particle Implementation Rule [PM2.5 Rule], 72 Fed. Reg. 79, pp. 20610

- 20612. (2007, April 25). Available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR

- 2007

- 04

- 25/pdf/E7

- 6347.pdfSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 21 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan 5.2.2 Control Strategy Commitments

The District’s thorough evaluation of control measures for potential opportunities to further reduce emissions, as discussed in Section 5.2.1, resulted in nu merous commitments for future actions on the part of the District, not all of which are regulatory actions. As noted at the beginning of this chapter, the District is using a multi

- faceted emissions control approach to reach beyond traditional regulations with innovative approaches. Some control measure opportunities are not appropriate for regulatory commitments at the time of plan adoption. Reasons for this include limits on the District’s regulatory authority, costs, a need for additional information, the need for technology development, and the need to demonstrate the technology in practice. The opportunities that are better suited for incentive programs, technology demonstration, and other approaches are discussed in Chapters 6, 7, and 8. These com bined efforts expedite emissions reductions and pave the way for future regulatory measures that might be needed under upcoming attainment plans for future EPA air quality standards.



### 5. 3 NEW CONTROL MEASURES

T he District is committing to five rule pro jects , including one new rule and four amendments to existing rules. The District evaluated these control measures based on the review criteria described in Section 5. 2 and will develop the rule project s using a public rule development process as describe d in Section 5.3.2.

5.3.1 Regulatory Control Measure Commitments

Based on the control measure analyses in Appendices C and D, and the attainment needs identified through the photochemical modeling and other air quality analyses of this plan , the District proposes the regulatory control measures shown in Table 5

- 3 , and as discussed in further detail below

.

Table 5

- 3 Regulatory Control Measure Commitments

Rule Amendment Date Compliance

Date Emissions

reductions*
Rule 4308 Boilers, Steam Generators, and

Process Heaters 0.075 to <2 MMBtu/hr 2013 2015 TBD

Rule 4692 Commercial Charbroiling 2016 2017 0.4 tpd PM2.5 Rule 4901 Wood Burning F ireplaces and Wood

Burning Heaters 2016 2016/ 2017 1.5 tpd of PM2.5

Rule 4905 Natural Gas

- Fired, Fan

- Type

Residential Central Furnaces 2014 2015 TBD

Rule 9610 SIP

- Creditability of Incentives 2013 2013 TBD
* Based on full implementation and best available information as of this plan. A more thorough evaluation of control techniques and feasibility will be conducted at the time of rule development.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 22 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan Rule 4308 Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters 0.075 to <2

MMBtu/hr Analysis for this 2012 PM2.5 Plan indicates that lower ing the NOx emission limit for instantaneous water heaters in the size range of 0.075

– 0.4 MMBtu/hr is technologically feasible and cost

- effective. T he District therefore commits t o amend Rule 4308 in 2013 to lower the NOx emission limit for instantaneous water heaters in the size range of 0.075

– 0.4 MMBtu/hr from the current level of 55 ppmv to 20 ppmv with an anticipated compliance date of 2015.

Rule 4692 Commercial Charbroiling E xisting Rule 4692 achieves significant emissions reductions from chain

- driven charbroilers ; however, the rule does not require emissions controls for under

- fired charbroilers

. Analys is for the 2012 PM2.5 Plan indicate s that extending the applicability of the rule to under

- fired units could further reduce PM2.5 emissions by 20% (0.4 tpd PM2.5) from the baseline inventory for under

- fired charbroilers upon implementation in 2017

. The modeling conducted for this plan shows that reducing emissions from under

fired charbroiling by 20% in Kern County is necessary for attainment; thus, b y reducing emissions 20% Valley

- wide, the District achieves significant health benefits Valley

- wide per the District’s Risk

- based Strategy

. Research and demonstration projects are underway to evaluate emission control technologies for under

- fired charbroilers in support of this measure. Therefore, t he District commits to amend Rule 4692 in 2016 to add requirements for under

- fired charbroilers, with a n anticipated compl iance date of 2017.

Rule 4901 Wood Burning Fireplaces and Wood Burning Heaters Since 2003, District Rule 4901 and the associated Check

- Before

- You

- Burn program have reduce d harmful species of PM2.5 when and where those reductions are most needed

— in urbani zed areas when the local weather conditions are forecast to inhibit PM dispersion. Analysis for this 2012 PM2.5 Plan indicates that lowering the threshold level for calling wood

- burning curtailments could further reduce emissions from this source category by 1.5 tpd of PM2.5. The amended rule would also include a new contingency provision (see Chapter 9). T he District commits to amend Rule 4901 in 2016 with enforcement to begin the 2016/2017 winter season. This is a four

- part commitme nt (refer to Append ix D for more details) : 1. L ower the threshold level for calling wood

- burning curtailments from the current 30 μg/m3 to ≥ 20 μg/m3 2. R eview the meteorological conditions that lead to elevated PM2.5, to prevent the buildup of PM2.5 that may lead to a potential e xceedance day 3. C onsider expanding the wood burning season to include October and/or March 4. Analyze the feasibility of al lowing the use of the cleanest certified wood burning devices at specified curtailment levels

. Enforcing this added flexibility would be difficult given the challenge in distinguishing wood smoke emissions from various wood burning devices, and the District would explore various options during the rule development process for ensuring that this issue is addressed.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 23 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan Rule 4905 Natural Gas

- Fired, Fan

- Type Residential Central Furnaces In the 2008 PM2.5 Plan

, t he District committed to amend Rule 4905 in 2014 to establish more stringent NOx emission limits for new and replacement natural gas

- fired, fan

- type residential central furnaces

. B a sed on the preliminary results of a SCAQMD study of emissions control technologies for furnaces

, the technology required to meet new NOx standards will be available by 2015

. A nalysis for this 2012 PM2.5 Plan also suggests that emissions may be reduced by extending the applicability of the rule to include commercial units , though additional analysis is needed to confirm the technological feasibility and cost

- effectiveness of incorporating commercial units into Rule 4905 . This will be further evaluated during the rule

- amending project. The District commits to amend Rule 4905 in 2014 to lower the NOx emission limits for residential furnaces and to examine the possibility of incorporating NOx limits for natural gas

- fired, fan

- type, commercial central furn aces into the rule , with a n anticipated compliance date of 2015

.

Rule 9610 SIP Creditability of Incentives The District’s successful incentive

- based measures have been reducing pollutant emissions above and beyond reductions being achieved through trad itional regulations. Historically, EPA has not granted credit for incentive

- based reductions for use in SIPs to meet Clean Air Act obligations. This new District rule will establish appropriate mechanisms for the District to take SIP credit for eligible incentive programs. Once given credit, SIP

- creditable

, incentive

- based emissions reductions will be used alongside regulatory measures to meet federal Clean Air Act requirements, such as requirements for contingency reductions and reasonable further progr ess (s ee Chapter 6 for more information )

.

5 .3.2 Rule Development Process After plan adoption, the District adopts or amends rule s per the plan’s regulatory control

measure commitments . In these efforts, the District is committed to a transparent public process that includes stakeholder, industry, and other

- agency input at every step possible.

Figure 5

- 1 Rule Development Process

Research for potential emission reduction opportunities Draft Rule

with CAC Review Cost

effectiveness and emission reduction analyses Socioeconomic

& CEQA Analyses Proposed

Rule and Final Draft Staff Report Governing

Board Public Hearing

Public Involvement throughout Rule Development ProcessSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 24 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan Contrasting the broader plan development effort, the rule development process allows greater focus on a single sector or technology area. Early in the rule development process, p rior to preparing a draft rule

, staff researches technologies and explores options for emiss ions reductions , gathering preliminary data and performing literature reviews of relevant studies. Through a series of public workshops and focus group meetings, staff presents draft rule concepts and receives feedback on specific technology costs, techni cal insight, and general public comment s . Staff uses this information gathering and discussion to refine the rule throughout the rule development process. Using this iterative process of gathering the most up

- to

- date cost a nd technical information, staff analyzes cost

- effective ness and potential emissions reductions. These analyses are shared with the public throughout the rule development process.

During the ongoing public workshop process, the District enlists the services of an economic consultant to analyze the proposed rule’s socioeconomic impact

, pursuant to California Health a nd Safety Code Section 40728.5. As with draft versions of the rule, the District gives the public and stakeholders the opportunity to review the analysis and provide furt her feedback. To the extent possible, the District minimizes significant economic and socioeconomic impacts by evaluating viable alternatives, adjusting proposed limits, or extending compliance schedules.

Staff presents the final draft version of the staf f report and proposed rule, including the cost

- effectiveness analysis, socioeconomic impact report, emissions reductions analysis, RACT analysis, and California Environmental Quality Assessment (CEQA), to the Governing Board during a public hearing. The Go verning Board ultimately determines the balance between air quality improvement and rule impacts when adopting proposed rules.

Once adopted, the District forwards the rule through ARB to EPA for inclusion into the SIP , as appropriate . EPA evaluates the rule, determines if the rule meets federal requirements , and provides an opportunity for further public comment. After this review and comment period, EPA will amend the SIP to include the new rule , as appropriate

. Beyond the rule de velopment and adoption process, District staff will continue to engage the public and affected source operators throughout implementation and compliance

. Additionally, District staff continues public outreach and education through notifications to stakeho lders of the rule adoption, issuance of compliance bulletins, and assist ance through the District’s Small Business Assistance program.

5. 3. 3 Further Study Measures As discussed in this chapter and Appendices C and D, the District thoroughly reviewed the Valley’s current emissions sources and emissions control measures to search for additional control measure opportunities. Chapters 5, 6, 7, and 8 outline a number of specific actions that are being taken to reduce emissions for this plan. In some cases, though, additional information is needed regarding the current emissions inventory, the effectiveness of current controls, and the potential of additional controls. The DistrictSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 25 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan will continue to review these areas as f urther s tudy m easures , summarized in Table 5

- 4

. These analyses can provide the foundation for related control measure commitments in future attainment plans.

Table 5

- 4 Further Study Measures

Control Measure Description Completion Date

Rule 4103 Open Burning Evaluate the feasibility of postponed burning activities every 5 years, as outlined in the current rule. 2015

Rule 4106 Prescribed

Burning Examine the feasibility of implementing a biomass

removal program similar to one in Placer County. 2013

Rule 4311 Flares Review flare minimization plans and annual reports for further emission reduction opportunities

. 2013

Rule 4550 Conservation

Management Plans Analyze existing studies and support new studies

to establish a more accurate inventory of PM2.5 emissions and identify potential additional emission reduction opportunities. 2014

Rule 4570 Confined Animal

Facilities Analyze existing studies on ammonia at confined

animal facilities and evaluate potential ammonia controls for their effectiveness in reducing PM2.5 concentrations in the Valley. 201 7

SC 001 Lawn Care Equipment Evaluate emissions inventory and technology

demonstration efforts to identify potential emission reduction opportunities. 2013

SC 005 Asphalt/Concrete Operations Examine feasibility of warm

- mix asphalt as a

potential emission reduction opportunity. 2013

Rule 4103 Open Burning The District recently re

- evaluated the 2010 Final Staff Report and Recommendations on Agricultural Burning in May 2012 and found there were no significant changes in the economic feasibility of various alternatives to agricultural burning. Annually, the District evalu ates each crop category still allowed to burn and determines a cost threshold based on the economic feasibilit y of alternatives to burning. The District carefully manages the remaining agricultural burning under its Smoke Management System to ensure that burning is only allowed on days when the amount burned would not cause or contribute to an exceedance of any air quality standard

, and to ensure that there are

no cost

- effective alternatives available

. The District will continue to consider the economic fe asibility of burning alternatives on a case

- by

- case basis and continue with the five

- year evaluation period outlined in Rule 4103.

Rule 4106 Prescribed Burning Placer County Air Pollution Control District has implemented a successful program for reducing emissions from hazard reduction burning by removing biomass from the area and sending it for combustion at a biomass plant. The District has considered theSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 26 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan feas ibility of implementing a similar program in the Valley; however, the unique Valley geography presents several challenges in implementing a comparable program. Such challenges need to be evaluated before determining whether a biomass removal program could be implemented successfully and result in cost

- effective emissions reductions for the Valley. The District commits to further evaluating these challenges and the potential for such a program in the future.

Rule 4311 Flares Effective July 1, 2012, f acil ities subject to the flare minimization plans (FMPs) provision in Rule 4311 are required to submit annual reports to the District with r eportable f

laring

e vent and a nnual m onitoring r eport data. The information in these annual reports could potentially provide insight for further emission s reduction opportunities for this source category. The first reports under this Rule 4311 provision were not due to the District until July 31, 2012. G iven the time necessary to thoroughly analyze the FMPs, reportable flaring event reports, and annual monitoring reports, the District commits to analy zing these documents in the future.

Rule 4550 Conservation Management Practices (CMPs) The District will continue to look for opportunities to reduce fugitive dust and emissions from agricultural operations through its Technology Advancement Program and through its collaboration with other agencies, such as the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and other agricultur al stakeholders. Collaborative research, such as the District’s involvement with EPA’s Regional Applied Research Effort (RARE), is investigating the effectiveness of CMPs on the PM2.5 fraction of fugitive dust and evaluating particulat e emissions related to conventional tilling methods versus CMP tillage methods using new technology.

Rule 4570 Confined Animal Facilities District Rule 4570 is among the most stringent rules in the nation for confined animal facilities (CAF). Rule 45 70 uses a menu

- based approach to require the implementation of best management practices to reduce emissions from confined animal facilities. As a part of the 2010 rule

- amendment process

, the District devoted extensive resources to evaluating and furtheri ng science in the area of CAF

- related emissions and potential mitigation measures. The combined efforts of the District, researchers, and agricultural stakeholders yielded profound new information that was used to develop the 2010 amendments . In particul ar, scientific research shed new light on dairy silage emissions and potential mitigation measures. As a result of these collaborations and efforts, Rule 4570 is expected to reduce 100 tpd of ammonia emissions in the Valley 6

. In ongoing efforts to furt her reduce CAF

- related emissions in the Valley, the District continues to work closely with researchers, other agencies, and ag stakeholders to seek out new technologies, work practices, and other methods. That said, no achieved

- in

practice controls have been identified that could potentially further reduce CAF emissions beyond current controls. The District has explored the possibility of

6 (2 0 10 ). Final Draft Staff Report for Revised Proposed Amendments to Rule 4 570 ( Confined Animal Facilities )

. Fresno, CA: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. http://valleyair.org/Board_meetings/GB/agenda_minutes/Agenda/2010/October/Agenda_Item_7_Oct_21_2010.pdfSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 27 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan implementing ammonia controls during periods of high PM2.5 concentrations; however, the available information indicates that this control strategy would not be feasible or effective in the Valley. The limited amount of nitric acid and sulfuric acid availa ble in the atmosphere to react with the large quantities of ammonia present in the Valley generally renders ammonia emissions controls as ineffective in reducing PM2.5.

Recent studies have cited the episodic application of sodium bisulfate (SBS) onto manure at dairies as a potential control strategy to reduce ammonia emissions. The South Coast Air Quality Management District identified this episodic application of SBS as a potential control measure within their 2012 Air Quality Management Plan. T he D istrict also evaluated this option and determined that for a variety of reasons, as discussed in this chapter, this control strategy is infeasible and ineffective for the Valley.

Most dairies in the Valley utilize a freestall design and generally restrict the cows’ access to corrals during the winter months

, since the corrals are wet and muddy. As a result, there would be very little or no fresh manure excreted in corrals during the winter. In addition, once wet conditions set in, it is not feasible to u tilize tractors in the corrals to apply SBS

, since the tractors would tend to get stuck. Application by hand at large dairies would be labor intensive, time consuming, and expensive, and would potentially pose health and safety risks to the workers.

Al though SBS is generally safe in small quantities, excessive loading of salts is a major water quality concern in the central and southern regions of the Valley

, where many dairies are located. Applying large quantities of SBS to manure that will eventuall y be applied to land may not be practical or feasible. A dairy would need to work with the Regional Water Quality Control Board to determine if this would be allowed

, and a dairy’s nutrient management plan would need to be revised. It may require hauling manure a significant distance to areas without the same salinity concerns and possibly increasing mobile emissions from hauling.

There are also significant costs associated with the application of SBS. Iowa State University Extension estimates the costs of SBS to be $660/ton. District estimates show that 1,304 lb

- 1,955 lb/cow

- yr of SBS would be needed for application to one entire corral area

, costing $430

- $645/cow

- yr. Using the District’s corral ammonia emission factor for milk cows and assuming the 50% reduction in ammonia, the cost of the ammonia reductions would be at least $41,067/ton to $61,601/ton. Information from Iowa State lists reduced costs of $129

- $193/cow

- yr for only treating heavy use areas, such as feed bunks and water troughs. It is not clear how much manure is excreted in heavy use areas

, but even if the resulting cost per ton of reduction was cut in half

, the costs would still be significant. Given the insignificant PM2.5 reduction achieved per ton of ammonia reduction, this cos t

- effectiveness translates to a much higher relative cost

effectiveness when compared to other, more effective strategies, such as NOx reductions. Also, because flush dairies are common in the Valley, the heavy use areas will generally be paved

, and the f lushing of the freestall or corral lanes already significantly reduces ammonia emissions; therefore, application of SBS to only these areas would not benefit the Valley. It would be flushed to a lagoon or pond where the high buffering capacity would rende r it ineffective and possibly increase H2S emissions.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 28 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan Due to the ineffectiveness during the peak PM2.5 season, feasibility issues with potential controls, potential environmental impacts, cost effectiveness issues, and the insignificant contribution of am monia reductions to improvements in PM2.5 concentrations

, ammonia control strategies will not further assist the Valley’s PM2.5 attainment goals at this time. However, as previously mentioned, the District intends to continue ongo ing efforts to evaluate a dditional potential strategies for reducing CAF

related emissions in the Valley. Therefore

, the District commits to continue to analyze and support studies regarding confined animal facility ammonia emissions, for the purpose of evaluating the potential e ffectiveness of additional ammonia controls on confined animal facilities in reducing PM2.5 concentrations in the Valley.

SC 001 Lawn Care Equipment The District’s Governing Board approved funding for District

- sponsored research to quantify Valley

- specific lawn care activity levels. The survey results will allow revi e w and improvement of the emissions inventory for this source category.

The District is also actively demonstrating zero

- emission lawn

- care equipment technology through the recent launch of the Zero

- Emission Commercial Lawn and Garden Equipment Demonstration Program. This program is funded with State Air Quality Improvement Program funds and will provide eligible cordless zero

- emission commercial lawn and garden equipment to commercial landscape professionals who conduct business within the Valley. The District will continue its work with commercial operators to address the concerns with commercial viability through the implementation of this program. Based on findings and feedback from program participants, the District commits to developing more incentive program options for commercial operators to assist in deploying zero

- emissions lawn and garden technologies.

SC 005 Asphalt and Concrete Operati ons Warm

- mix asphalt shows promise for reducing emissions associated with the production of asphalt for paving projects, when compared to hot

- mix asphalt, because lower temperatures result in lower levels of criteria pollutant emissions. The cost, unfamil iarity with potential implementation issues, and uncertainty in the exact percentages of potential emissions reductions are potential barriers to the technology’s use in the Valley. District staff commits to further evaluate the cost, effectiveness, and f easibility of this technology for Valley sources in the future.San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 29 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan 

### 5.4 ADDITIONAL CONTROL S TRATEGIES

Non

- regulatory strategies help accelerate attainment and have been an important part of recent District plans. For example, through the District’s Fast Track strategy, the District and its Fast Track task force have evaluated several innovative and collab orative emissions

- reducing measures, complementing the more traditional measures included in the 2007 Ozone Plan and 2008 PM2.5 Plan

. T hese Fast Track efforts have resulted in increased incentive funding being brought to the Valley, expanded public outrea ch through Healthy Air Living (see Chapter 8), and guidance documents and model policies , such as the District’s “Green Contracting” guidance and policy. Along these lines, t he following strategies are under close evaluation by District staff for potentia l PM2.5 benefits

.
5.4. 1 Energy Efficiency California has been on the forefront of developing renewable energy sources, and has implemented regulations to ensure cleaner non

- renewable energy. The District’s involvement in energy efficiency and renewable energy is guided by its Regional Energy Efficiency Strategy (REES), which was adopted in January 2010. 7 This policy identifies the District’s commitment to fostering energy efficiency and clean energy alternatives as opportunities for emissions reduction s

. Consistent with the District’s 2012 Legislative Platform, the District continues to work with stakeholders and state agencies to expand net metering and feed

- in tariffs for use of solar and other renewable energy sources, promote energy efficiency prog rams for energy end users that will result in lower emissions and a more stable electrical distribution system, and develop measures that incentivize and encourage low

- emission technologies for use of waste gas as an alternative to waste

- gas venting or fla ring.

5.4. 2 Eco

- driving Given that mobile source emissions now represent approximately 81 % of the NOx emission s in the Valley, and that mobile sources are essentially outside the regulatory control of the District, finding ways through education and outre ach to reduce such emissions in the Valley is critical to future attainment. One such program in development is Eco

- Driving. Eco

- Driving refers to everyday techniques that drivers can do to maximize the fuel economy of their vehicles. These include observing good operating maintenance, such as proper tire pressure, wheel alignment, and oil viscosity; improving aerodynamics; traveling at efficient speeds; choosing the appropriate gear for manual transmissions; driving defensively to avoi d unnecessary braking; accelerating at a constant pace; and other simple, yet often forgotten, driving techniques. A s with other informational activities conducted by the District, an Eco

- Driving program could be encompassed under the Healthy Air Living u mbrella.

7 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. (2010). Approval of the District’s Regional Energy Efficiency Strategy . Memorandum to the SJVAPCD Governing Board. Public Hearing, January 21, 2010. http://www.valleyair.org/Board_meetings/GB/agenda_minutes/Agenda/2010/January/Agenda_Item_7_Jan_21_2010. pdfSan Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District December 20
, 2012

5

- 30 Chapter 5 : Control Strategy 2012 PM2.5 Plan This page intentionally blank.