## Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plan s (SIP)

for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins

and

Proposed SIP Revision s

Release Date: March 29, 2011 Hearing Date: April 28, 2011



# Air Resources Board California Environmental Protection AgencyThis document has been prepared by the staff of the California Air Resources

Board. Publication does not signify that the contents reflect the views and policies of the Air Resources Board.Table of Contents

California Is Meeting Its Clean Air Commitments for 2014

............................. 1

The Clean Air Act Set a Process to Develop and Implement SIPs

................ 2

U.S. EPA Can Now Approve the PM2.5 SIPs for the South Coast and the San Joaquin Valley

................................ ................................ ............................ 3

ARB’s Clean Air Commitment is Enforceable

................................ ................. 4

The Technical Foundation for the PM2.5 SIPs is Sound

................................ 5

ARB Is Implementing Its Rulemaking Calendar

................................ .............. 7

ARB Accounts for the Impact of the Recession on Goods Movement

......... 9

Air Quality Continues to Improve

................................ ................................ ... 11

California Is Moving Forward

................................ ................................ .......... 12

APPENDICIES

APPENDIX A: Descriptions of the Proposed SIP Revisions

APPENDIX B: Rulemaking Calendar

APPENDIX C: Reasona ble Further Progress Tables

APPENDIX D: Transportation Conformity Budgets

APPENDIX E: Additional Documentation

APPENDIX F : Revisions to 2007 PM2.5 and Ozone State Implementation

Plan for South Coast Air Basin and Coachella Valley, March

2011

APPENDIX G: An alysis of Environmental Impactspage left intentionally blankMarch 29, 2011 1



### California Is Meeting Its Clean Air Commitments for 2014

For several years

, California has been implementing PM2.5 (fine particulate matter)

S tate Implementation Plans (S IP ) for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air

Basin s

. As required by the federal Clean Air Act (Act) , t hese SIPs show how California plans to attain the annual PM2.5 standard by the 2014 deadline , with specific emission
targets for each region. With a few years remaining until the attainment deadline

, California is meeting the commitments identified in the PM2.5 SIPs

, and air quality continues to improve.

Figures 1 and 2 illustrate California’s progress with rulemaking comp leted to date and

the last three years of SIP implementation remaining . The San Joaquin Valley meets,

and the South Coast is 9 4 percent of the way to wards achieving the 2014 emissions

levels identified in the ir respective PM2.5 SIPs.

In 2010, the Air R esources Board ( ARB ) revisited key regulations to account for the lower emission levels resulting from the economic downturn and provided some economic relief to affected industries while maintaining the 2014 emissions target. This is reflected in Figures 1 and 2.



### Figure 1March 29, 2011 2 

### Figure 2

The Clean Air Act Set a Process to Develop and Implement SIPs

California’s primary responsibility under the Clean Air Act is clear

– to develop and implement air quality plans to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) by the required deadlines. The Act mandates a specific process for developing and implementing the SIPs necessary for demonstrating how the NAAQS

will be attained

. The Act specifies process es for federal sanctions if states fail to develop or to implement required SIPs and requires s tates to prepare additional SIP revisions if a standard is not met by the deadline.

In California

, ARB and the local air districts develop and adopt SIPs based on th e best

scientific data available at the time. The SIP development process takes 2

- 3 year s, and

involves emissions and air quality data gathering and analysis, air quality modeling and

documentation

, control strategy development, transportation conformity budget development, reasonable further progress analyses, and a comprehensive public

process before the plan is ready for co nsideration and approval by local districts and

ARB

. Adding to the complexity, t he S tate and local portions must be woven together to reflect the respective regulatory responsibilities.March 29, 2011 3

Key to this process , and a defining component of the State’s SIP commitment, is the air quality modeling results that identify the level of emissions needed in the attainment year to achiev e the federal standard. Air quality modeling is an analytical tool that is

used to test a scenario of future emissions

, and the associated impact on air quality

, in

order to identify a target level of emissions expected to result in attainment. The SIP i s then designed to meet this emissions target. The modeling also provides data which

informs the selection of the most effective control strategy

.

After adoption

, ARB s ubmit s the SIP to U.S. EPA for review and approval . The work of implementation then b egins, focused on achieving the SIP target level of emissions by the required deadline

. Once the plan is adopted, emissions accounting is the appropriate tool to track progress

, address any shortfalls , and ensure the State is meeting the legal commitments contained in the plan.

In the case where a region fails to attain a federal standard by the attainment deadline

, Section 110 of the Act sets out a separate, sequential process that would require

U.S. EPA to direct the state to develop a new SIP with a new attainment deadline.

T he Act’s step

- wise approach of attainment planning, SIP implementation, and monitoring attainment status avoid s forcing states into a perpetual planning process

. Instead, the Act directs most of the effort towards achieving attainment through rule adoption and SIP implementation. New plans come into play only when an air quality standard is not met by the applicable deadline

.



### U.S. EPA Can Now Approve the PM2.5 SIP s for the South Coast and

the San Jo aquin Valley

California is following the SIP development and implementation process mandated by

the Act , despite the delay in federal action on the PM2.5 SIPs for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley. Implementation and tracking of SIP commitments beg an immediately upon State approval of the PM2.5 SIPs. T his progress report documents both the regulatory and air quality progress that has been made in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley since the PM2.5 plans were adopted in 2007 and 2008 respectively

.

This report also provides targeted revisions to the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley

PM2.5 SIPs due to recent revisions to ARB’s rules affecting in

- use trucks and buses

and off

- road construction equipment. These SIP revisions are limited to an updated

calendar of ARB rulemaking, updates to the Reasonable Further Progress tables and

associated reductions for contingency purposes , and adjustments to the transportation conformity budgets.

In a separate action on March 4, 2011, the South Coast adopted revisions to their PM2.5 and Ozone SIP for the South Coast Air Basin and Coachella Valley. These revisions are contained in Appendix F. They update the implementation status of theMarch 29, 2011 4

district’s control measures to meet the PM2.5 attainment date, r evise the control measure adoption schedule , and modify the District’s emissions reduction commitment

to reflect improvements to the off

- road emissions estimates for 2014.

Together, these submittals should provide what U.S. EPA needs to fully approve the PM2.5 plans for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley

.



### ARB’s Clean Air Commitment is Enforceable

While California 's emission s levels have in some cases declined substantially since

2007 as a result of the economic recession , ARB continue s to fully implement the

PM2.5 SIPs.

When ARB adopted the 2007 State Strategy as a SIP revision , the State of California made a legal commitment, required by the Clean Air Act and enforceable in federal
court, to reduce emissions to the levels necessar y for attainment

. ARB specifically identified several ways this emission reduction commitment could be achieved:

 N ew measures as described in the SIP

 O ther alternative measures that ARB had not considered at the time the SIP was adopted

 I ncentive programs that support the replacement or retrofit of aging, higher polluting pieces of equipment

 A ctual emission decreases

As a result of the recession

, a ctual emission decreases move d California closer to the

emissions levels needed for attainment in 2014. The recession has reduc ed economic activity and emissions, most notably in the goods movement sector

. This has allow ed

ARB to maintain the State’s SIP commitments in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley while also providing some near

- term economic relief t o affected industries.

As the economy recovers, ARB will continue to track emission trends to ensure the 2014 emission targets are met. I f future emissions were to exceed the SIP target, the

State's commitment could be made up with additional controls, incentive programs, or other programs to bring emissions down to the necessary l evels

. A discussion of how ARB accounted for the recession is found later in this report.

State law 1 assigns ARB the primary responsibility to ensur e California's compliance with the federal Clean Air Act. Traditionally, ARB shares that responsibility with local air districts through defined SIP commitments at both the S tate and local level . In the case

of the PM2.5 SIP , there is also an expectation on the part of the State that the federal government provide additional emission reductions based on the U.S. EPA’s authority to regulate locomotives and other national sources of air pollution.

1 California Health and Safety Code section 39003.March 29, 2011 5

However, if there is a shortfall in a SIP due to lack of f ederal action

, California will be required to achieve additional emission reductions. For example, the SIP for the South Coast calls for reductions of 10 tons per day of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) from sources

U.S. EPA or other federal agencies regulate. I f the federal government does not provide the expected emission reductions , ARB still has the obligation that the

emissions targets specified in the SIP are met by the required deadline.



### The Technical Foundation for the PM2.5 SI Ps i s Sound

ARB exercised its responsibility at the time of SIP development, public review, and Board adoption, to ensure that the PM2.5 attainment demonstrations met all applicable Clean Air Act requirements, used the best information available at the time, and

ident ified a path to attainment that is technically achievable. ARB’s SIP commitment to reduce emissions to the levels necessary for PM2.5 attainment relies on the strong scientific foundation provided in the SIPs for both the South Coast Air Basin and the

San Joaquin Valley.

In a recent court decision 2 , the Court called upon U.S. EPA to exercise its affirmative duty to ensure the State’s plan is adequate for attainment of the applicable federal standard. Given the strong science supporting California's PM2.5 SIPs, U.S. EPA's assessment of SIP adequacy should focus on the State's demonstrated progress in implementing the adopted plan and achieving real world reductions in air pollution

. Adopted SIPs should not be set aside unless there is compelling scientific evidence that the adopted attainment demons tration is substantially flawed, taking into account the

unavoidable uncertainties in emission estimates, air quality modeling, and other

technical elements.

In the case of the PM2.5 SIPs for the South Coast Air Basin and San Joaquin Valley,

there has bee n no significant change to the fundamental science and air quality modeling used to set the 2014 emissions targets. T he SIP modeling remain s in accordance with U.S. EPA requirements and should be approved by U.S. EPA. Similarly, the overall control strate gy is unchanged and in the process of being implemented

. Initiating new air quality modeling to reassess the existing attainment demonstration would serve no practical purpose. T he biggest change since the PM2.5 SIPs were adopted is the unanticipated slow down in economic growth and what it means for PM2.5 precursor emissions in 2014. An emissions accounting that incorporates the impacts of the recession, future emission changes, and the benefits of new SIP measures is the appropriate approach to assess th e adequacy of the PM2.5 SIPs now close to final implementation.

2 U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Association of Irritated Residents, et al. v. U.S. EPA, filed February 2, 2011.March 29, 2011 6

Development and adoption of the PM2.5 SIPs in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley followed the mandated process, and resulted in a resource

- intensive, 3

- year technical effort with a public process that stretched over a year. The end result is a plan whose technical underpinnings remain sound even as new information has become available during SIP implementation. While new emission forecasts are included in the accounting for progr ess towards the 2014 emissions target, the target itself should not change.

Air quality modeling is an analytical tool that is used to test a scenario of future emissions, and the associated impact on air quality, in order to identify a target level of emissions expected to result in attainment of an air quality standard. The air quality modeling contained in the PM2.5 SIP s is built on the results of the multimillion dollar air quality studies conducted in central California, including the $50 million C alifornia Regional Particulate Air Quality Study ( CRPAQS ) and the Central California Ozone Study (CCOS)

.

The ability of an air quality model to predict the attainment year emission targets relies

on adequate model performance in the base year. Small ch anges in base year emissions would not substantially change the fundamental relationship between emissions and measured air quality in the base year modeling. The recession does not impact the SIP base year modeling since both regions used base years prio r to the

recession. The new emissions inventory data primarily impact current emissions and estimates of future emissions as the economy recovers and do not substantially change the total regional emissions in the base years. Therefore, the air quality m odeling and

the 2014 emission s targets should be approved by U.S. EPA.

California’s development and implementation of the PM2.5 SIPs in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley illustrates the process mandated by the Act to reach attainment in

2014. In d eveloping and then adopting the 2007 and 2008 PM2.5 SIPs for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley, the ARB and local air districts provided a technically complete attainment plan. Once the plans were adopted, California's focus appropriately turned to S IP implementation. For its part, U.S. EPA’s sulfur in marine

fuels rule has also advanced PM2.5 reductions in the South Coast. The SIP technical

foundation meets U.S. EPA requirements , control measures are being implemented, and progress is being made. As a result, a modeling update at this juncture is neither necessary nor appropriate.March 29, 2011 7



### A RB Is Implementing Its Rulemaking Calendar

A key component of SIP implementation is the rulemaking calendar. ARB adopted a SIP revision ( the 2007 State Strategy ) t hat map ped out the actions it would take to reduce PM2.5 direct and precursor emissions to levels designed to bring California

nonattainment areas into compliance with federal health

- based air quality standards. ARB had initiated rule development for seve ral measures e ven before the Board adopted the State Strategy in late 2007. This work continues, with several State and

local district measures schedule d for adoption between now and 2014. T he respective air district plans provide information about the l ocal efforts to adopt and implement local

control measures. Table 1 provides an update on the status of SIP measures in the 2007 State Strategy.

The 2007 State Strategy identifies a comprehensive set of State control strategies that support attainment through a combination of technologically feasible, cost

- effecti ve, and far reaching measures. ARB actions to date , together with rules adopted by the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley air districts, will bring the two regions within 9 4 percent and 100 pe rcent of the emission levels needed to reach attainment in 2014 in the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley, respectively. Some of the most important adopted State regulations include:

 C leanup of the existing truck fleet statewide

 Repowering or replacing older, dirtier off

- road construction vehicles, and installing exhaust retrofits

 Lower sulfur limits on fuels used by ships in California waters

 Control of emissions from goods movement sources

 Smog Check improvementsMarch 29, 2011 8 Table 1 Proposed Update to 2007 St ate Strategy: PM2.5 SIP Measures

Agency Actions Implementation
Passenger Vehicles

Smog Check Improvements BAR 2007

- 2009 2008

- 2010;

2013 1

Expanded Vehicle Retirement (AB 118) ARB/BAR 2007 2009 Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program ARB 2007 2010

Trucks

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks ARB 2007, 2008,

2010 2011

- 2015

Goods Movement Sources
Auxiliary Ship Engine Cold Ironing & Other Clean Tech

EPA/ARB/

Local 2007, 2008 2010

Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel 2 Fuel: 2008

- 2011 20 09

- 2015

Engines: 2008 2011

Port Truck Modernization ARB, Local 2007,2008,

2010 2008

- 2020

Accelerated Intro. of Cleaner Line

- Haul Locomotives 3 EPA/ARB 2008 2012 Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft ARB 2007, 2010 2009

- 2018

Off

- Road Equipment

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment 4 ARB 2007, 2010 2009

Other Off

- Road Sources

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

- Road Recreational Vehicle Emission

S tandard s 5 ARB See notes See notes

Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above

- Ground Storage

Tanks ARB 2008 2009

- 2016

Additional Evaporative Emission Standards 5 2009 2010

- 2012

See notes See notes

Areawide Sources

Consumer Products Program ARB 2008 2010

2009 2013

- 2014

2011 2014
Pesticide Regulation DPR 2008, 2009 2009

1 In 2010, the State Legislature improved the effectiveness of the Smog Check program (AB 2289), requiring the Bureau of Automotive Repair to direct older vehicles to high performing auto technicians and test stations for inspection and certification. This new program will be effective in 2013.

2 In July 2008, ARB adopted a regulation that applies to ships operating within 24 nautical miles (nm) of the California Coastline and visiting California ports. These vessels must use less polluting marine

distillate f uel for their main engines, auxiliary engines, and boilers instead of heavy fuel oil. The first phase of cleaner fuel for ship main engines took effect in 2009, with a second phase currently scheduled

in 2012 . By 2015, the International Maritime Organiza tion's fuel sulfur requirements for the North American Emission Control Area will match ARB’s phase 2 standards and extend out to 200 miles from

California Coastline.

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

- haul locomotive engines not alr eady accounted for by enforceable agreements with the railroads. Those cleaner line

- hauls will begin operation by 2012.

4 Reductions begin in 2014.

5 Expected action in 2013, with implementation schedules to be determined in rulemaking process.March 29, 2011 9

Table s 2 and 3 show the progress toward s meeting the State’s enforceable SIP commitment in each region

. The table s include the benefits of local and State controls

for each PM2.5 precursor pollutant

. To maintain consistency with how each air district displays p rogress in their documents, the South Coast table is displayed in equivalents of nitrogen oxides (NOx) , while the San Joaquin Valley table is in PM2.5 equivalents.

NOx and PM2.5 equivalent emissions are calculated using weighting factors from the

SIP tech nical analyses to arithmetically combine the precursor pollutants that form

PM2.5

. The factors are necessary since the relative effectiveness o f each pollutant in reducing atmospheric PM2.5 varies by pollutant and region. From a technical perspective

, it does not m atter which pollutant is used as the equivalence benchmark to illustrate progress since the same scientific data is applied regardless of how equivalency is expressed

.



### Table 2

Table 3 San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Progress to Date with Adopted Rules
annual average tons per day

SOx PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 eq. 2005 Inventory 26 86 575 176 2014 SIP Emissions Target 24 63 291 119 2014 Forecast with Adopted Rules 21 65 298 119

% progress 201% 90% 98% 100%



### ARB Accounts for the Impact of the Recession on Goods Movement

T he recession has imposed s ignificant downward pressure on economic activity in the

State. In order to meet their bottom line and maximize production output, many
businesses have cut back debt, reduced employment, extended workforce hours , and

sold assets, including part of their motor vehicle fleets

. In some sectors, t he s e adjustments resulting from the recession are expected to continue for some time

, extending beyond the 2014 attainment date

.March 29, 2011 10

Two of the sectors hit the h ardest by the recession are the construction industry and goods movement, including the trucking and shipping industries. These impacts , as well as recovery scenarios, were reflected in ARB’s 2010 amendments to the statewide truck and construction regulat ions and are reflected in the goods movement cat egories included in this report

. The one exception is the locomotive emissions estimate. ARB

s taff is still in the process of incorporating the latest information on locomotive activity into programs for re ducing regional emissions and localized impacts.

In the 2010 assess ment of the impacts of the recession

, ARB staff evaluated a variety of sources of information including economic forecasts, fuel tax reports, highway performance monitoring data, equipment financial filing records, and vehicle sales information. The data indicated the recession impacted mobile so urces in three ways. First, the recession reduced vehicle activity. Overall, trucking activity in California, measured by fuel usage, decreased by nearly 20 percent between 2007 and 2010.

Construction

- related activity declined by 50 percent between 2005 and 2010. These declines were dramatic, and in many cases unprecedented.

Second, the depth of the recession, being much more severe than economic recessions of the past 70 years, affected the forecast rate of future economic growth. Several

economic forecasting groups including the University of California

– Los Angeles, the University of the Pacific

, and the California Department of Finance forecast that economic recovery and expansion , and rising employment levels will occur relatively slowly over t he next five years. ARB used these estimates to reduce its forecasted vehicle activity levels from previously anticipated levels.

Third, the recession had a major impact on new vehicle sales, which in many cases fell by 80

- 90 percent from the peak leve ls seen in 2005

- 2007. Sales volumes are projected to increase gradually, and are n ot forecast to reach previous levels for several years.

This has also reduced the penetration of the newest, cleanest vehicles into the California market, leaving fleets ol der than they would have been without the recession.

T his economic outlook was used in the 2010 review of the statewide on

- road truck

rules

, and resulted in a 2010 emissions inventory that is about 35 percent lower than

estimated when the original rules were adopted in 2008

. Similarly, t he updated off

- road inventory calculated during development of the construction rule is about 80 percent lower than previously estimated, with half the change attributable to the recession and

hal f attributable to new emissions data and analysis

.

When ARB revised the statewide truck and off

- road fleet rules in 2010 , the new inventory projections were used to design the timetable and regulatory provisions in such a way that emission benefits are preserved as economic growth picks up and full rule implementation phases in. T he revised rules provide credits for fleets that have

downsized to account for the recession, while allowing for a delay of additional capital

investments until 2016 . The rule s provide incentives for early vehicle retrofit and turnover to achieve emissions reductions necessary for 2014, while offering someMarch 29, 2011 11

economic relief . The revised rules will still provide the emissions reductions necessary to meet air quality standards, bu t do so at a lower cost. Concurrently, ARB retained and expanded the benefits of the drayage truck rule to protect communities near ports and rail yards.

The improvements would not significantly change the inventories for trucks, construction equipment, and ocean going vessels in years prior to the recession. T he changes are small in the context of the entire emissions inventory

, consequently the total regional SIP base year inventories need not be changed . The new information indicate s that the

2014 economic activity estimates made prior to the recession are too high. Looking forward, r evised economic activity forecasts and improvements to future emission

estimate s from these source categories are reflected in the emissions accounting to

assess prog r ess toward the SIP commitments, in the updated RFP demonstration, and

in new conformity budget calculations.



### Air Quality Continues to Improve

As a result of SIP implementation efforts at the local and State level

, air quality is improving in both the Sou th Coast and San Joaquin Valley regions.

The South Coast has seen dramatic improvement in PM2.5 air quality, with a 37 percent

decrease in the basin

- wide annual average design value over the last eight years. This decrease has occurred despite the incl usion of a new high site monitor in Mira Loma (Riverside County) in 2006. Based on data in 2009, sites outside the Riverside area already me e t or are close to meeting the annual standard. While final South Coast data

for 2010 are not yet available, indications are that concentrations have continued to further decline and that only the site at Mira Loma now exceeds the annual standard.

The San Joaquin Valley has also experienced an improvement in PM2.5 air quality, although the progress is not as uniform across the region. The biggest decreases occurred in the northern and central part of the Valley where the design values for

various monitors decreased 25 to 37 percent between 2001 and 2010. Today

, sites in

the northern and ce ntral Valley meet or are close to meeting the annual standard. The southern San Joaquin Valley, which includes the Bakersfield area, has also shown improvement, with annual design values decreasing 10 to 20 percent.

Air quality design values reflect a three

- year average which is used for comparison to federal standards. However, evaluating multiple measures of air quality can provide a broader picture of overall air quality progress. For example, individual year annual

PM2.5 values for 2009 and 2010 t hroughout the Valley show significant improvement. In 2010, only two of the twelve sites in the Valley (Corcoran and Bakersfield) recorded

annual concentrations that exceed the federal air quality standard

. Peak 24

- hour PM2.5

concentrations have also dec lined significantly, dropping over 30 percent since 2001. The Air Quality Index (AQI) is another measure that is used to evaluate daily air qualityMarch 29, 2011 12

conditions. Between 2001 and 2010, the number of days considered unhealthy und er the AQI has been cut in h alf.



### California Is Moving Forward

California has made tremendous progress in cleaning the air over the past several
decades, providing environmental leader ship and meeting Clean Air Act requirements

. As California’s PM2.5 SIPs are being implemented to meet a 2014 deadline, additional SIPs will need to be developed for other air quality standards. ARB is working with local

air districts to develop new SIPs in 2012 that are required to address the dail y 24

- hour PM2.5 federal air quality standard by 2017

. U.S. EPA 's anticipated promulgation of a more stringent ozone standard will trigger a new round of SIP s with attainment

deadlines w e ll beyond 2020

. As these effort s proceed , ARB will use the most recent emissions inventory data from category

- specific rules, refine existing inventory models,

and conduct additional air quality modeling.

A s required by the federal Clean A ir Act , the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley

PM2.5 SIPs show how California plans to attain the annual PM2.5 standard by the 2014 deadline, with specific emission targets for each region. With three years remaining

until the attainment deadline

, California is meeting the commitments identified in the

PM2. 5 SIPs, and air quality continues to improve. With California’s progress on rulemaking the San Joaquin Valley meets, and the South Coast is 94 percent of the way towards achieving the emissions levels identified in their respective PM2.5 SIPs for

attainme nt in 2014. The SIP s’ technical foundation is sound, control measures are being implemented, and progress is being made. The targeted revisions to the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley PM2.5 SIPs should provide what U.S. EPA needs to fully approve the P M2.5 plans for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley

.

# APPENDICIESProgress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix A 1 

### A PPENDIX A : Description s of the Proposed SIP Revisions

Updates to ARB’s Rulemaking Calendar

ARB staff is proposing updates to ARB’s Rulemaking Calendar to reflect the current status of adopted PM2.5 measures and changes to expected action dates for three of

these measures: new emission standards for recreational boats, expanded off

- road recreational vehicle emission standards, and additional evaporative emission standards. ARB proposes to modify the action date for all three measures from the existing range

of 2009

- 2010 to 2013. ARB action on these measures in this timeframe will allow implementation to occur by the 2014 attainment date. ARB’s commitments to achieve emission reductions by specified dates, as identified in the 2007 State Strategy, remain unchanged and are not altered by the proposed changes to ARB’s rulemaking calendar. Appendix B provides the PM2.5 SIP revision for the updated rulemaking calendar.

Reasonable Further Progress

The federal Clean Air Act (Act) requires that SIPs show there will be steady progress in reducing emissions during the years leading to the attainment date, called reasonable further progress (RFP). ARB staff is proposing updates to the RFP tables to reflect the current status of adopted measures and account for changes due to the recession. These revisions are necessary to reflect current fo recasted emissions as a result of the impacts of the recession on key source categories in the SIPs. Appendix C provides the SIP revision for the updated RFP tables.

The Act also requires attainment plans to identify “contingency measures” to be implement ed if nonattainment areas fail to m eet RFP requirements or to attain the federal air quality standards on time. These contingency measures are to take effect without further ARB or air district action, and thus must be measures that have already been adop ted when the SIP is submitted to U.S. EPA.

For PM2.5, U.S. EPA requires that the RFP plan show generally linear progress for the precursor pollutants identified in the attainment demonstration. For the San Joaquin Valley this includes direct PM2.5, NOx, and S O x . F or the South Coast Air Basin it also includes ROG. Since both the San Joaquin Valley and South Coast Air Basin show attainment in 2014, 2009 and 2012 are the milestone years for RFP . ARB is providing contingency measures for the 2012 RFP mile stone and 2014 attainment years as appropriate.

ARB is updating the RFP milestone emission levels to reflect the impact of the recession and recent changes to the i n

- u se h eavy

- d uty t ruck and o ff

- r oad e quipmentProgress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix A 2 rules, and also the o cean

- g oing v essels rul e for the South Coast. Appendix C Tables 1 and 2 display project ed emission levels in each of the RFP years, showing continuous progress towards the attainment levels for the San Joaquin Valley and the South Coast Air Basin, respectively. The RFP levels in both areas meet U.S. EPA requirements for demonstrating generally linear progress.

For the San Joaquin Valley, the estimates of emission levels in the RFP milestone years consider baseline emissions and emission reductions accomplished by District adopted rules. Approximately one year’s worth of RFP reductions are reserved from existing

emission reductions for contingency purposes for NOx and SOx in 2012. For PM2.5, SOx reductions that are in excess of those needed to meet RFP and contingency are reserved for PM2.5 contingency purposes

.

For the South Coast, emission estimates for the milestone years considered baseline emissions, emission reductions from ARB adopted rules, and emission reductions accomplished by District adopted rules. All existing e mission reductions are credited towards meeting the RFP milestones, with no reduction s withheld for contingency

purposes . This is appropriate given recent air quality progress in the South Coast.

For the 2014 attainment year, the additional emission reductions accrued in 2015 from baseline emission reductions are relied upon to meet th e contingency requirements for both the San Joaquin Valley and the South Coast.

Updates to the Transportation Conformity Budgets

ARB is proposing to update the transportation conformity budgets applicable to the

federal annual PM2.5 standard for the Sou th Coast and San Joaquin Valley and establish a trading mechanism that will ensure that the impact of on

- road emissions will be consistent with the attainment demonstration in future years

. The basis for the trading mechanism is the SIP attainment mode ling which established the relative contribution of each PM2.5 precursor pollutant. These updates account for the action taken by the Board in December to amend the truck and bus regulations to include better data and improvements to the emissions invento ry, and reflects the current rulemaking calendar

. Appendix D provides the SIP revision and description of the trading mech a nism

.

The Act requires m etropolitan p lanning organizations (MPO ) to demonstrate that their

reg ional transportation plans (RTP ) and transportation improvement pr ograms (TIP ) are consistent with progress toward and attainment of the NAAQS. MPOs use modeling to estimate regional emissions based on projected motor vehicle travel on the region’s

road and transit facilities.

The level of emissions for on

- road motor vehicles, such as cars, trucks, and buses,

consistent with SIP progress and attainment

, is called a "motor vehicle emissionsProgress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix A 3 budget. ” For conformity, projected emissions from highway and transit use must be less than or equal t o the budget. Budgets are developed during the air quality planning process in consultation with ARB, regional air districts, U.S. EPA, the U.S. Department of Transportation

, and MPOs and provide for public review and comment.

The conformity budgets use t he SIP on

- road mobile source inventory which includes an updated heavy duty diesel truck and bus inventory that reflects the 2010 truck and bus regulatory amendments. This adjustment reflects the difference between the baseline

SIP on

- road motor vehicle e missions inventory from EMFAC2007 and the new truck and bus inventory that incorporates the impacts of both the recession and final regulations . The ton per day change in emissions is incorporated as a line item adjustment to the updated transportation conformity budgets (see “State Strategy Adjustment s ” line item in Tables A

- 1 and A

- 2 below)

.

Methodologically, the State Strategy Adjustments line item is then subtracted from the

baseline SIP on

- r oad motor vehicle emissions inventory from EMFAC2007. Importantly, the SIP baseline emissions inventory continues to be based on the activity data ( e.g.
vehicle miles travel led ) provided by the SIPs

.

This line item approach to account for State strateg y reductions is consistent with the approach used to develop the originally submitted budgets. Following is an example of how the line item adjustment is calculated and used to develop the conformity budget s

.

This example reflects the derivation of the 2014 NOx budget for South Coast Air Basin.

 The combined NOx emissions from medium and heavy heavy

- duty trucks, school buses

and other buses are retrieved from the baseline EMFAC2007 SIPs inventory (145 tpd NOx) and the new truck inventory (132 tpd NOx)

.

 The difference between these emissions is calculated (145 tpd

– 132 tpd = 13 tpd NOx)

.

 13 tpd NOx reflects the difference between the SIPs baseline inventory and the new truck inventory.

 13 tpd is then added to the emission reductions in CY 2014 that were already identified

in the SIPs from State and local strategies, including: Smog Check improvements and AB 923 Light and Medium

- Duty High

- Emitter Identification programs (13 tpd + 0.7 tpd = 13.7 tpd NOx)

 13.7 tpd NOx is the total “State Strategy Adjustments ” and is then entered into the conformity worksheet

The transportation conformity b udget development worksheets are included in Tables

A

- 1 and A

- 2 below, with the proposed SIPs budgets found in Appendix D.

Note that t he “Adjustments to Baseline” line item originally included benefits for adopted regulations for solid waste collection and public fleet vehicles, heavy duty chip re

- flash, and heavy duty truck idling, since the impacts of these regulations were not included in EMFAC2007. The benefits of these regulations are now reflected in the new truck and bus inventory baseline, and, therefore, are no longer included as a line item adjustment

.Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix A 4 The remaining “Adjustments to Baseline” consist of reductions from AB 1493 (Pavley)

and benefits from the on

- road portion of the Carl Moyer program.

Table A

- 1

South Coast Air Basin PM2.5 Transportation Conformity Emission Budget Worksheet s *

(Annual Average

– Tons per Day)

South Coast Air Basi n 2012 2014

ROG NOx PM2.5 ROG NOx PM2.5 Baseline Inventory 162.6 350.8 17.5 146.1 305.7 17.2

Re

- entrained Road Dust (Paved) 18.8 19.0

Re

- entrained Road Dust (Unpaved) 1.0 1.0

Road Construction Dust 0.2 0.2 State Strategy Adjustments

- 3.8

- 21.2

- 1.2

- 9.2

- 13.7

- 2.7 Adjustments to Baseline

- 0.4

- 1.2

- 0.1

- 0.6

- 1.3

- 0.2 Budget 159 329 37 137 291 35

*Budgets are rounded up to the nearest ton.Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix A 5 Table A

- 2

San Joaquin Valley Air Basin PM2.5 Transportation Conformity Emission Budget Worksheet s *

(Annual Average

– Tons per Day)

County 2012 2014

PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx

Fresno Baseline Inventory 1.82 47.82 1.65 40.6

State Strategy Adjustments 0.29 11.61 0.54 9.07

Adjustments to Baseline 0.01 0.35 0.02 0.29

Budget 1.6 35.9 1.1 31.3

Kern (SJV) Baseline Inventory 2.98 81.58 2.63 70.28

State Strategy Adjustments 1.02 31.77 1.42 26.29

Adjustments to Baseline 0.01 0.57 0.01 0.40

Budget 2.0 49.3 1.3 43.6

Kings Baseline Inventory 0.59 16.00 0.51 13.52

State Strategy Adjustments 0.18 5.33 0.25 4.20

Adjustments to Baseline 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.09

Budget 0.5 10.6 0.3 9.3

Madera Baseline Inventory 0.50 12.30 0.46 10.62

State Strategy Adjustments 0.10 3.04 0.17 2.55

Adjustments to Baseline 0.00 0.10 0.01 0.09

Budget 0.5 9.2 0.3 8.0

Merced Baseline Inventory 1.19 29.15 1.05 24.67

State Strategy Adjustments 0.35 9.11 0.49 7.16

Adjustments to Baseline 0.01 0.23 0.01 0.18

Budget 0.9 19.9 0.6 17.4

San Joaquin Baseline Inventory 1.39 35.24 1.29 30.27

State Strategy Adjustments 0.32 10.51 0.45 8.58

Adjustments to Baseline 0.01 0.26 0.01 0.20

Budget 1.1 24.5 0.9 21.5

Stanislaus Baseline Inventory 0.84 22.25 0.76 18.69

State Strategy Reductions 0.13 5.42 0.22 4.04

Adjustments to Baseline 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.10

Budget 0.8 16.7 0.6 14.6

Tulare Baseline Inventory 0.75 20.87 0.69 17.88

State Strategy Adjustments 0.11 5.05 0.20 4.05

Adjustments to Baseline 0.00 0.16 0.01 0.14

Budget 0.7 15.7 0.5 13.7

*Budgets are rounded up to the nearest tenth ton (0.1)

.Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix B 1 APPENDIX B: Rulemaking Calendar

Table B

- 1 Proposed Update to 2007 State Strategy: PM2.5 SIP Measures

Agency Actions Implementation

Passenger Vehicles

Smog Check Improvements BAR 2007

- 2009 2008

- 2010;

2013 1

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

Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program ARB 2007 2010

Trucks

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks ARB 2007, 2008,

2010 2011

- 2015

Goods Movement Sources

Auxiliary Ship Engine Cold Ironing & Other Clean Tech

EPA/ARB/

Local 2007, 2008 2010

Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel 2 Fuel: 2008

- 2011 20 09

- 2015

Engines: 2008 2011

Port Truck Modernization ARB, Local 2007,2008,

2010 2008

- 2020

Accelerated Intro. of Cleaner Line

- Haul Locomotives 3 EPA/ARB 2008 2012

Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft ARB 2007, 2010 2009

- 2018

Off

- Road Equipment

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment 4 ARB 2007, 2010 2009

Other Off

- Road Sources

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

Expanded Off

- Road Recreational Vehicle Emission

S tandard s 5 ARB See notes See notes

Enhanced Vapor Recovery for Above

- Ground Storage

Tanks ARB 2008 2009

- 2016

Additional Evaporative Emission Standards 5 2009 2010

- 2012

See notes See notes

Areawide Sources

Consumer Products Program ARB 2008 2010

2009 2013

- 2014

2011 2014

Pesticide Regulation DPR 2008, 2009 2009Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix B 2 1 In 2010, the State Legislature improved the effectiveness of the Smog Check program (AB 2289), requiring the Bureau of Automotive Repair to direct older vehicles to high performing auto technicians and test stations for inspection and certification. This new program will be effective in 2013.

2 In July 2008, ARB adopted a regulation that applies to ships operating within 24 nautical miles (nm) of the California Coastline and visiting California ports. These vessels must use less polluting marine distillate fuel for their main engines, auxiliary engines, and boilers instead of heavy fuel o il. The first phase of cleaner fuel for ship main engines took effect in 2009, with a second phase currently scheduled in 2012. By 2015, the International Maritime Organization's fuel sulfur requirements for the North

American Emission Control Area will match ARB’s phase 2 standards and extend out to

200 miles from California Coastline.

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

- haul locomotive engines not already accounted for by enforceable agreements with the railroads. Those cleaner

li ne

- hauls will begin operation by 2012.

4 Reductions begin in 2014.

5 Expected action in 2013, with implementation schedules to be determined in rulemaking process.Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix C 1



### APPENDIX C: Reasonab le Further Progress Tables

Table C

- 1 San Joaquin Valley Air Basin PM2.5 Reasonable Further Progress

Direct PM2.5

( annual average, tpd)
2005 2009 2012 2014

Linear Benchmark 86 76 68 63

Estimated Emissions 86 73 69 63 Contingency (see SOx) *NA NA 0 NA

RFP Level 86 73 69 63

NOx
(annual average, tpd)
2005 2009 2012 2014

Linear Benchmark 575 449 354 291

Estimated Emissions 575 381 328 291 Contingency NA NA 26 NA

RFP Level 575 381 354 291

SOx

(annual average, tpd)
2005 2009 2012 2014

Linear Benchmark 26 25 24 24

Estimated Emissions 26 23 20 21** Contingency (for SOx and PM2.5) NA NA 3 NA

RFP Level 26 23 23 24

*NA: Not applicable

** Note: As a result of control measures already adopted to date, the 2014 RFP target for SOx has already been surpassed.Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix C 2 Table C

- 2

South Coast Air Basin PM2.5 Reasonable Further Progress

Direct PM2.5

( annual average, tpd)

2002 2009 2012 2014

Linear Benchmark 99 91 88 86

Estimated Emissions 99 89 89 86 Contingency *NA NA 0 NA

RFP Level 99 89 89 86

NOx
(annual average, tpd)

2002 2009 2012 2014

Linear Benchmark 1093 724 566 460

Estimated Emissions 1093 677 582 460 Contingency NA NA 0 NA

RFP Level 1093 677 582 460

ROG

(annual average, tpd)

2002 2009 2012 2014

Linear Benchmark 844 628 534 474

Estimated Emissions 844 563 514 474 Contingency NA NA 0 NA

RFP Level 844 563 514 474

SOx

(annual average, tpd)

2002 2009 2012 2014

Linear Benchmark 53 34 26 20

Estimated Emissions 53 43 26 20 Contingency NA NA 0 NA

RFP Level 53 43 26 20

*NA: Not applicableProgress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix D 1



### APPENDIX D : Transportation Conformity Budgets

Table D

- 1

South Coast Air Basin Proposed PM2.5 Transportation Conformity Emission Budgets *

(Annual Average

– Tons per Day)

2012 2014

ROG NOx PM2.5 ROG NOx PM2.5

South Coast Air Basin 1 59 329 37 137 291 35

*Budgets are rounded up to the nearest ton.

Per Section 93.124 of the conformity regulations, for transportation conformity analyses using these budgets in analysis years beyond 2014, a trading mechanism is established to allow future decreases in

NOx emissions from on

- road mobile sources to offset any on

- road increases in PM2 .5, using a

NOx:PM2.5 ratio of 10 :1. This trading mechanism will only be used

, if needed, for conformity analyses for years after 201 4

. To ensure that the trading mechanism does not impact the ability to meet the NOx budget, the NOx emission reductions available to supplement the PM 2.5 budget shall only be those remaining after the 2014 NOx budget has been met. Clear document ation of the calculations used in the trading should be included in the conformity analysis

.

In addit ion, a t the time the 2007 SIP was adopted, a 2009 budget year was a necessary MPO analysis year for federal transportation conformity purposes. Since 2009 has passed, it is no longer applicable as a conformity analysis year, and was therefore not included in these budgets.Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix D 2 Table D

- 2

San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Proposed PM2.5 Transportation Conformity Emission Budgets *

(Annual Average

– Tons per Day)

County 2012 2014

PM2.5 NOx PM2.5 NOx

Fresno 1.6 35.9 1.1 31.3 Kern (SJV) 2.0 49.3 1.3 43.6 Kings 0.5 10.6 0.3 9.3

Madera 0.5 9.2 0.3 8.0

Merced 0.9 19.9 0.6 17.4 San Joaquin 1.1 24.5 0.9 21.5

Stanislaus 0.8 16.7 0.6 14.6

Tulare 0.7 15.7 0.5 13.7

*Budgets are rounded up to the nearest tenth ton (0.1)

.

Per Section 93.124 of the conformity regulations, for transportation conformity analyses using these budgets in analysis years beyond 2014, a trading mechanism is established to allow future decreases in

NOx emissions from on

- road mobile sources to offset any on

- road increases in PM2.5, using a NOx:PM2.5 ratio of 9 :1. This trading mechanism will only be used

, if needed, for conformity analyses for years after 201 4

. To ensure that the trading mechanism does not impact the ability to meet the NOx budget, the NOx emission reductions available to supplement the PM 2.5 budget shall only be those remaining after the 2014 NOx budget has been met. Clear document ation of the calculations used in the trading should be included in the conformity analysis

.

In addition, a t the time the 2007 SIP was adopted, a 2009 budget year was a necessary MPO analysis year for federal transportation conformity purposes. Since 2009 has passed, it is no longer applicable as a conformity analysis year , and was therefore not included in these budgets.Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix E 1



### APPENDIX E: Additional Documentation

Appendix E includes additional documentation and data supporting this Progress Report and SIP Revision. It includes additional detail regarding the emissions accounting methodology, supporting data for the progress Tables 2 and 3 found in the body of the report, and information on how ARB staff accounted for the impacts of the recession

SIP Accounting

The Clean Air Act requires the use of air quality modeling to determine the “carrying capacity” or “ SIP emissions target ” ; that is, the maximum allowable emission levels that the nonattainment area can accommodate while attaining the standard.

While the adopted SIP contains a list of category

- specific measures with regulatory timelines and expected reductions, ARB’s enforceable commitment is to meet the

emissions levels needed for attainm ent with sufficient aggregate emission reductions, including any from actual changes in emissions

.

To track progress toward t he emissions target, this report uses a simple emissions accounting approach that explicitly show the impact of the recession and the benefit of the regulations ARB and the local air districts have approved since the PM2.5 SIPs were adopted. The approach looks like

(Emissions Inventory)

– (Emission Reduction s Achieved ) = ( Remaining Emissions

)

Where: Emissions Inventory = Amount of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursor

e missions the base line

Emission Reduction s

Achieved = Amount of emissions that have been

reduce either through adopted

regu l a tions or actual emission decreases

due to the recession Remaining Emissions = The PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursor

emissions level that is forecast to be remaining in the attainment year with the impacts of both regulations and the

recession.

This approach keeps the focus on meeting the ultimate goal of the emission target derived from air quality modeling. It also has the advantage of explicitly showing the impacts of both the regulatory a ctions and the recession that an emissions accounting that looks just at regulatory reductions does not.Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix E 2 Progress Details

The following series of tables provide additional documentation for T ables 2 and 3

, showing progress to date for both the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley.

South Coast Air Basin

2014 Progress to Date on ARB Rules

NOx Emissions (tpd)

SIP Current

2014

Baseline New 2014

Baseline 2014

Remaining

Emissions

Smog Check Improvements (BAR) 134.2 134.2 131.6

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks & Buses 136.0 151.2 132.6

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment (over 25hp) 96.9 28.0 27.5

Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing & Clean Tech

. 37.2 23.7 15.6
Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel

- Main Engines 33.4 38.5 20.9

Accelerated Intro. Of Cleaner Line

- Haul Locomotives 18.3 18.3 18.3
Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 15.7 15.2 11.1

Cargo Handling Equipment 5.2 3.2 3.2

New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 11.0 11.0 11.0

Co

- Benefits from Greenhouse Gas Reduction

Measures 0.0 0.0 0.0

All other local, state, and federal emissions 165 166 159
Total 2014 forecast with rules adopted to date 653 589 530

ROG Emissions (tpd)

SIP Current

2014

Baseline New 2014

Baseline 2014

Remaining

Emissions

Smog Check Improvements (BAR) 132.1 132.1 123.5

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks & Buses 10.2 8.7 5.4

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment (over 25hp) 13.4 2.6 2.5

Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing & Clean Tech

. 0.7 0.9 0.7

Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel

- Main Engines 0.2 1.9 1.4

Accelerated Intro. Of Cleaner Line

- Haul Locomotives 2.3 2.3 2.3

Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 0.7 1.2 1.1
Cargo Handling Equipment 0.6 0.3 0.3

New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 37.9 37.9 37.9

Expanded Off

- Road Rec. Vehicle Emission Standards 6.7 6.7 6.7
Consumer Products Program 102.6 102.6 96.7

All other local, state, and federal emissions 221 206
Total 2014 forecast with rules adopted to date 518 485Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix E 3 PM2.5 Emissions (tpd)

SIP Current

2014

Baseline New 2014

Baseline 2014

Remaining

Emissions

Smog Check Improvements (BAR) 7.8 7.8 7.5

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks & Buses 5.8 6.0 3.4

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment (over 25hp) 4.9 1.3 1.3

Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing & Clean Tech

. 0.6 0.5 0.4

Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel

- Main Engines 2.6 3.9 0.4

Accelerated Intro. Of Cleaner Line

- Haul Locomotives 0.7 0.7 0.7

Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 0.7 0.6 0.4
Cargo Handling Equipment 0.1 0.1 0.1

All other local, state, and federal emissions 74 73
Total 2014 forecast with rules adopted to date 95 87

SOx Emissions (tpd)

SIP Current

2014

Baseline New 2014

Baseline 2014

Remaining

Emissions

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks & Buses 0.3 0.3 0.3
Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing & Clean Tech

. 1.1 1.1 0.8

Cleaner Main Ship Engines and Fuel

- Main Engines 20.7 38.7 1.7

All other local, state, and federal emissions 21 17
Total 2014 forecast with rules adopted to date 61 20Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix E 4 San Joaquin Valley Air Basin 2014 Progress to Date on ARB Rules

NOx Emissions (tpd)

SIP Current

2014

Baseline New 2014

Baseline 2014

Remaining

Emissions

Smog Check Improvements (BAR) 41 41.2 40.5

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks & Buses 156.9 111.3 110.2

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment (over 25hp) 31.4 13.7 13.4

Accelerated Intro. Of Cleaner Line

- Haul

Locomotives 19.9 19.9 19.9

New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 3.5 3.5 3.5

All other local, state, and federal emissions 123 110
Total 2014 forecast with rules adopted to date 313 298

PM2.5 Emissions (tpd)

SIP Current

2014

Baseline New 2014

Baseline 2014

Remaining

Emissions

Smog Check Improvements (BAR) 2.5 2.5 2.4

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks & Buses 6.2 4.3 2.6

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment (over 25hp) 1.4 0.6 0.6

Accelerated Intro. Of Cleaner Line

- Haul

Locomotives 0.5 0.5 0.5

All other local, state, and federal emissions 64 59
Total 2014 forecast with rules adopted to date 72 65

SOx Emissions (tpd)

SIP Current

2014

Baseline New 2014

Baseline 2014

Remaining

Emissions

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks & Buses 0.3 0.2 0.2

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment (over 25hp) 0.0 0.0 0.0

All other local, state, and federal emissions 24 21
Total 2014 forecast with rules adopted to date 24 21Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix E 5 Assessing the Impacts of the Recession on Good Movement Related Emiss i ons

This section documents the methodologies used to account for the impacts of the economic recession on the emission inventories for trucks, in

- use off

- road equipment,

ocean

- going vessels, and cargo handling equipment. Links to more detailed information are provided.

General Methodology

The economic recession officially started in December of 2007 and ended in June 2009. It was the most severe since the Great Depression and had a severe im pact on

California industries. The emission inventories for trucks, in

- use off

- road equipment,

ocean

- going vessels, and cargo handling equipment have all been adjusted to its impact.

To understand the impact of reduc ed activity on future emissions , staff developed both

a fast and slow recover y scenario to bound the recovery possibilities.

The fast recovery scenario assumes that total activity would return to projected historically average levels in 2017 and then grow at the historical average rate after that. This scenario is based on the Congressional Budget Office forecast which indicate d that real gross domestic product at a nationwide level will converge with potential gross domestic product trends no later than 2015. Coupling this forecast with the assumption that California’s recovery will lag the nation by several years yielded the 2017 recovery date assumed for the fast recovery scenario.

In the slow recovery scenario, staff assumed that activity would be permanently depressed relative to historical levels, but continue to grow at the average historical growth rate beginning in 2 011.

While the fast and slow scenarios provide a reasonable bound of possible recoveries,

for rulemaking purposes and for this SIP update, a single forecast is needed. For this,

staff assumed an average recovery midway between the fast and slow recoverie s. The chart below illustrates the two bounding scenarios and the assumed average used in this report. This is the same approach developed to provide economic relief through last year’s regulatory amendments to the diesel trucks, buses, and off

- road equi pment

rules

.Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix E 6 In

- Use On

- Road Trucks & Buses

Staff updated the inventory for diesel trucks and buses to support ARB consideration of regulatory amendments to provide economic relief last December 2010. The update was comprehensive and included a revised population, new regional allocation factors,

l ifetime odometer assumptions, revised growth rates, forecasted vehicle age distributions to reflect the impact of the economic recession, and updated out

- of

- state vehicle activity. These changes are described in detail at http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/truckbus10/truckbus10.htm

.

This progress report required emission estimates for years and pollutants (SOx and ROG) that were not needed for the 2010 rulemaking. Staff used the same methodologies and principles used for the December 2010 regulatory inventory to develop estimates for the other years and pollutants in this report.

In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment

Just as for trucks and buses, staff completed a comprehensive revision to the inventory

for off

- road equipment to support ARB consideration in December 2010 of regulatory amendments to provide economic relief. Updates were made to the population of equipment, annual activity, load and future equipment sales. These changes are

described in detail at http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/offroadlsi10/offroadlsi10.htm

.Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix E 7 This progress report required emission estimates for years and pollutants (SOx, ROG and total organic gases (TOG)) that were not needed for the 2010 rulemaking. Staff used the same methodologies and principles used for the December 2010 regulatory inventory to develop estimates for the other years and pollutants in this report.

Ocean

- Go ing Vessels (OGV)

The OGV inventory in the PM2.5 SIP included vessel

- specific data, improved vessel traffic network, vessel

- specific hoteling and anchorage times, and improved vessel speeds. Staff has refined that inventory since then to support rulemaki ng in 2008 on the sulfur content in fuel. Staff has further updated that 2008 inventory in anticipation of amendments to the same fuel rule later this year. That information is u s ed in this report. In general

, the updates include improved algorithms for vessel speed reduction (VSR), auxiliary engine power, and estimating low load adjustment factors. Recession impacts are based on container throughput statistics for the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach

and Oakland

. OGV activity was down about 25% for th e combined ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and about 15% for the Port of Oakland between 2006 and 2009.

More information is available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/ports/marinevess/ogv.htm

.

Cargo Handling Equipment (CHE)

An update to the cargo handling equipment (CHE) inventory is currently underway using new information about the population, equipment usage, impacts of the recession and fleet turnover. The new model is still under developm ent and not available for use in this report ; therefore, staff scaled the existing PM2.5 SIP CHE emissions inventory to

account for the new data.

The inventory used for the SIP was based on population and activity values from a 2001 to 2004 survey. As pa rt of the adopted regulation, equipment owners were required to report the population of their equipment to ARB. Additionally, between 2005 and 2009 the ports and rail yards have conducted their own emissions inventories. This new

information indicates t hat the total state population is slightly higher than originally assumed. These same data sources include updates to activity and load factor. However, changes in activity and load factors offset these increases in the population.

To account for these changes, staff compared baseline 2006 emissions from the original inventory to the draft updated inventory baseline. As discussed in a recent February workshop, emissions for PM and NOx emissions are approximately 20 percent and 27 percent lower, respecti vely. For this report staff assumed 2006 emissions were 27 percent lower than in the SIP. To forecast emissions forward from 2006, staff compared the original growth assumptions for CHE to the growth in port truck activity in

the 2010 Truck and Bus Rule inventory model. Assuming that the CHE activity relate sProgress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix E 8 chiefly to the movement of shipping containers

, staff redu c e d g r owth by approximately

20%.

More information is available at http://www.a rb.ca.gov/ports/cargo/cargo.htm

.

Commercial Harbor Craft

In 2007 ARB adopted a commercial harbor craft regulation and adopted amendments to the original rule in 2010. Updates were made to the population of equipment, annual activity, and regional alloca tion. These changes are described in detail at http://www.arb.ca.gov/ports/marinevess/harborcraft/hcdocuments.htm#regulatory

.Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

M arch 29, 2011 Appendix F 1 

### APPENDIX F: Revisions to 2007 PM2.5 and Ozone State Implementation Plan for South Coast Air Basin and Coachella Valley,

March 2011Progress Report on Implementation of PM2.5 State Implementation Plans (SIP) for the

S outh Coast and San Joa quin Valley Air Basins and Proposed SIP Revisions

March 29, 2011 Appendix G 1



### APPENDIX G : Analysis of Environmental Impacts

ARB prepared an environmental analysis for the State Strategy for California's State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the New Federal PM2.5 and 8

- Hour Ozone Standards prior to its approval by the Board in September 2007 (document available for review at http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2007sip/2007sip.htm and at ARB’s offices at 1001 I Street, Sacramento, California, Room 7

- 45). The State Strategy mapp ed out the actions ARB would take to reduce emissions to levels designed to bring California into

com pliance with federal air quality standards. Various measures identified in the

2007 State Strategy have been adopted by the Board since that time, and separate, additional environmental analyses were also prepared by ARB prior to the adoption of

each of t hese measures. As part of tracking the implementation of the State Strategy, this progress report quantifies the emission reductions that have been achieved since adoption of the 2007 State Strategy

. The proposed SIP revisions do not change the

emissions levels of NOx, ROG, SOx, and direct PM2.5 that the Board committed to achieve by specific dates when it adopted the 2007 State Strategy.

The proposed SIP revisions include three components: (1) updates to ARB’s rulemaking calendar, (2) updates to reas onable further progress (RFP) tables and associated reductions for contingency purposes , and (3) updates to the transportation conformity budgets. ( See Appendix A for further descriptions of the revisions.) The proposed revisions do not cause any change that has the potential to result in a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, for the following reasons.

The updates to the rulemaking calendar reflect the current status of mea sures that have already been adopted, and changes to the expected action dates for three measures that have not yet been adopted. For these measures , the updates to the rulemaking calendar do not change the measures or their expected implementation dates i dentified in the 2007 State Strategy. They merely change the dates by which ARB staff will bring these measures to the Board for proposed action by the Board.

The updates to the RFP tables and transportation conformity budgets are proposed accounting changes made to reflect the current status of adopted measures, better data, changes due to the recession, and methodological improvements to the emission inventory. These accounting changes do not change the strategies or commitments

identified in the 200 7 State Strategy to achieve specific emissions reductions by specified dates. Because no changes have been made to the strategies or the underlying emission reduction commitments in the 2007 State Strategy, there is no potential for any of the proposed SI P revisions to cause any significant adverse environmental impacts.