E

Staff Report

Minor Updates to Yuba City-Marysville PM2.5 Maintenance Plan and Redesignation

Request

Release Date: January 17, 2014 Sóheduled for Consideration: February 20, 2014

II. REVISED EMISSION INVENTORY 1

III. ADDITIONAL ANALYSES SUPPORTING ATTAINMENT RESULTS FROM

PERMANENT AND ENFORCEABLE EMISSION REDUCTIONS 3

IV. DISCUSSION OF FUTURE YEAR COMPOSITION USED IN CALCULATION OF THE

2024 DESIGN VALUE 8

IV. CONTINGENCY PLAN 9

V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION g

3
35 ig/m 3.Effective December 14, 2009, U.S. EPA designated 

y

Area as nonattainment for this more stringent 24-hour PM2.5 standard. The federal

Clean Air Act (CAA) establishes planning requirements for those areas that exceed the

health-based standards. These nonattainment areas must develop and implement

a

State Implementation Plan (SIP) that demonstrates how they will attain the standards by

specified dates.

Since the Yuba City-Marysville nonattainment area attained the 24-hour PM2.5

standard prior to the SIP submittal deadline, the area was eligible for reduced regulatory

requirements under the U.S. EPA’s Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particulate National

Ambient Air Quality Standards. The Feather River Air Quality Management District

(District) addressed the remaining SIP requirements in the Yuba City-Marysville PM2.5

Nonattainment Area Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan (Redesignation

Request/Maintenance Plan). The Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan was

approved by the District Board and by the Air Resource Board (ARB) on April 1, 2013

and April25, 2013, respectively. On May 23, 2013, ARB submitted the plan to

U.S. EPA.

In 2013, U.S. EPA was directed by the Courts to implement the PM2.5 standard under

subpart

4 of the Clean Air Act (Act) rather than subpart 1 In order to evaluate and

approve the Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan under subpart

4 of the Act,

U.S. EPA staff requested additional technical information on several elements of the

Plan. The Minor Updates to Yuba City-Marysville PM2.5 Maintenance Plan and

Redesignation Request (Minor Updates) provides U.S. EPA with the additional

information to approve the Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan and redesignate

the Yuba City-Marysville PM2.5 nonattainment area to attainment for the PM2.5

standard.

II REVISED EMISSION INVENTORY

In order to address subpart

4 requirements, emission inventories that were originally

submitted as part of the Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan are expanded to

include ammonia (NH3) and Volatile Organic. Carbon (VOC). To support the

maintenance demonstration and document the emission reductions that provided for

attainment, the 2011 attainment year emission inventory was augmented with an earlier

year inventory, 2005, when the region was still over the 24-hour PM2.5 standard. Table

I lists NOx, PM2.5, SOx, NH3, and VOCs emissions for 2005 2011, 2017, and 2024.

I
3908 4.7717 4.3239

Areawide Sources 1.1075 1.0876 1.2791 1.2748

Mobile Total 20.9369 13.8089 9.7553 6.3056

On-Road Mobile 12.8955 8.3763 53** 3.1**

OtherMobile 8.0414 5.4326 4.6179 3.3593

Grand Total V 26.5385 19.2873 15.9687 12.0580PM2.5

Stationary Sources 0.9812 0.8732 1.0446 1.1248

Areawide Sources 4.0302 3.8288 4.0732 3.9642

Mobile Total 0.7698 0.5568 0.389 0.3171

On-Road Mobile 0.3557 0.2688 0.2** 0.2**

Other Mobile 0.4141 0.288 0.2182 0.1438

Grand Total 5.7812 5.2588 5.5360 5.4328

SOx

Stationary Sources 0.1295 0.1254 0.2375 0.2387

Areawide Sources 0.1555 0.1478 0.2518 0.2471

Mobile Total 0.2887 0.0806. 0.0845 0.0848

On-Road Mobile 0.0887 0.0246 0.028 0.28

Other Mobile 0.2 0.056 0.0563 0.0567

Grand Total 0.5737 0.3538 0.5738 0.5706

NH3 V

V

V

V

V

V

Stationary Sources V 0.306 0.3575 0.4131 0.483

Areawide Sources V V

V 4.5568V . 4.4945 4.3461 4.2563

Mobile Total V 0.2245 0.1946 0.1702 0.1629

On-Road Mobile 0.2225 0.1926 0.1682 0.1609

Other Mobile 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002

Grand Total 5.0873 5.0466 4.9294 4.9022

VOCs V

Stationary Sources 3.8225 4.0252 4.5383 4.107

Areawide Sources 5.754 5.4627 6.2757 6.4784

Mobile Total V

V

6.6997 5.1509 3.4347 2.8421

On-Road Mobile 3.7252 2.8017 1.4752 1.1129

V Other Mobile 2.9745 2.3492 1.9595 1.7292

Grand Total 16.2762 14.6388 14.2487 13.4275

* Displayed to ten thousandths place to show change in emission. ** Future year on-road mobile inventory for NOx and PM2.5 replaced with motor vehicle emission budgets.

2
and continues to attain through 2012. The 24-hour design value decreased from

36 j.gIm 3in 2005 to 26 i.g/m 3in 2012. This is a 10 ig/m 3decrease, which represents a

28 percent reduction. The 2012 design value is 26 percent below the standard.

The analyses presented in this section provides additional information requested by

U.S. EPA that the improvement in PM2.5 air quality can be reasonably attributed to

permanent and enforceable emission reductions of directly emitted PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursors and was not a result of adverse economy or unusually favorable

meteorological conditions.

Permanent and enforceable emission reductions

Between 2005 and 2011, emissions of directly emitted PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursorsdeclined significantly as a result of control measures listed in Tables VI-5 and Vl-6 of

the Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan. These permanent and enforceable

reductions in directly emitted PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors resulted in improvements in

air quality. The majority of reductions are a result of ARB’s statewide motor vehicle

regulations listed in Table VI-6, including NOx control programs and fleet rules to

reduce both NOx and PM from diesel engines.Tables 2 through 8 and Figure 1 compare 2005 and 2011 emission year inventories,

demonstrating that the controls listed in Tables Vl-5 and Vl-6 of the Redesignation

Request/Maintenance Plan contributed to reductions in PM2.5 emissions, which in turn

lead to reductions in PM2.5 concentrations. Table 2 summarizes 2005 and 2011

emissions by major source category and by pollutant. Comparison of the 2005 and

2011 inventories reveals that directly emitted PM2.5 emissions decreased 9 percent,

NOx emissions decreased 27 percent, and SOx emissions decreased 38 percent.

These reductions were primarily associated with mobile source categories, both on-road

and off-road. Tables 3 through 8 show changes in these two categories.

3
Data in Tables 2 through 8 displayed to ten thousandths place to show change in emissions.,

Table 2. Yuba City-Marysville PM2.5 Nonattainment Area 2005 and 2011 Emission

Changes

Source Category 2005 2011 2005-2011 Reductions

tpd tpd tpd %

ItI:

Stationary Sources 4.4941 4.3908 0.103 2

Areawide Sources 1.1075 1.0876 0.020 2

On-Road Mobile Soy rces 12.8955 8.3763 4.5 19 35

Other Mobile Sources 8.0414 5.4326 2.609 32

All Sectors 26.5385 19.2873 7.251 27

Stationary Sources 0.9812 0.8732 0.108 11

Areawide Sources 4.0302 3.8288 0.201 5On-Road Mobile Sources 0.3557 0.2688 0.087 24

Other Mobile Sources 0.4141 0.288 0.126 30

All Sectors 5.7812 5.2588 0.522 9

I.’IIE

Stationary Sources 0.1295 0.1254 0.004 3

Areawide Sources 0.1555 0.1478 0.008 5

On-Road Mobile Sources 0.0887 0.0246 0.064 72

Other Mobile Sources 0.2 0.056 0.144 72

All Sectors 0.5737 0.3538 0.220 38

15

a)

C

0

4-

C0

10 -

E

w

5

0

20O5

2011

PM2.5

1

SOx

4
OTHER BUSES - MOTOR COACH - DIESEL (OBC) 0.0439 0.0266 

MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESELTRUCKS (MHDV) 1.1794 0.7189 0.4605 39

LIGHT DUTY PASSENGER (IDA) 1.0787 0.6751 0.4036 37

ALL OTHER BUSES - DIESEL (O.BD) 0.0278 0.0185 0.0093 33

LIGHT DUTY TRUCKS -2 (LDT2) 1.0969 0.74 0.3569 33

SCHOOL BUSES -DIESEL (SBD) 0.0662 0.0481 0.0181 27

LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS -2 (LHDV2) 0.018 0.014 0.0040 22

MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.9216 0.7769 0.1447 16

LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 1.2607 1.0665 0.1942 15

HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.0377 0.0325 0.0052 14

LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 2 (LHDV2) 0.1761 0. 1526 0.0235 13

OTHER BUSES - GAS (OBG) 0.0094 0.0083 0.0011 12

MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.0507 0.0453 0.0054 11

LIGHT HEAVY DUTY GAS TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.271 0.2487 0.0223 8

HEAW DUTY GAS URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.009 0.0084 0.0006 7

MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.0412 0.035 0.0027 7

SCHOOL BUSES - GAS (SBG) 0.0034 0.0032 0.0002 6

Table 4. 2005-2011 NOx Emission Changes in ‘Other Mobile Source Categories’

Other Mobile Source Categories 2005 .. 2011 2005-2011 Reductions

tpd tpd tpd

%

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 2.3139 1.1788 1.135 49

TRAINS 1.9447 1.2534 0.699 36

FARM EQUIPMENT 3.3499 2.5708 0.779 23

RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.0575 0.0536. 0.004 7

Table 5. 2005-2011 PM2.5 Emission Changes in On-Road Mobile Source Categories

On-Road Mobile Source Categories 2005 2011 2005-2011 Reductions

tpd tpd tpd

%

MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.0459 0.028 0.0179 39

ALL OTHER BUSES - DIESEL (OBD) 0.0013 0.0008 0.0005 38

HEAVYHEAVYDUTYDIESELTRUCKS(HHDV) 0.1941 0.1273 0.0668 34

OTHER BUSES - MOTOR COACH - DIESEL (OBC) 0.0012 0.0008 0.0004 33

SCHOOL BUSES - DIESEL (SBD) 0.0041 0.0029 0.0012 29

LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS - 1 (LHDV1) 0.0187 00175 0.0012 6

MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS (MDV) 0.0181 0.0174 0.0007

4

5
0.1135 0.0586 0.055 48

TRAINS 0.0517 0.0323 0.019. 38 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.1903 0.1424 0.048 25

RECREATIONAL BOAtS 0.0181 0.0145 0.004 20

OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.0015 0.0012 <0.001 20

Table 7. 2005-2011 SOx Emission Changes in On-Road Mobile Source Categories

On-Road Mobile Source Categories 2005 2011 2005-2011 Reductions

. .tpd tpd tpd SCHOOL BUSES - DIESEL (SBD) 0.0005 . <0.0001 >0.0004 >90

OTHER BUSES - MOTOR COACH - DIESEL (OBC) 0.0003 <0.0001 >0.0002 >90

ALL OTHER BUSES - DIESEL (OBD) 0.0003 <0.0001 >0.0002 >90

MOTOR HOMES (MH) 0.0002 <0.0001 >0.0001 >90

MEDIUM HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS (MHDV) 0.0101 0.0009 0.0092 91

HEAWHEAVYDUTYDIESELTRUCKS(HHDV) 0.0511 0.0048 0.0463 91

LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS -1 (LHDV1) 0.009 0.0010 0.0080 89

LIGHT HEAVY DUTY DIESEL TRUCKS -2 (LHDV2) 0.0013 0.0002 0.0011 85

HEAVY DUTY DIESEL URBAN BUSES (UB) 0.0005 0.0001 0.0004 80

Table 8. 2005-2011 SOx Emission Changes in ‘Other Mobile Source Categories’

Other Mobile Source Categories 2005 2011 2005-2011 Reductions

tpd tpd tpd TRAINS 0.1113 0.0010 0.110 99

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 0.0105 0.0003 0.010

. 97

FARM EQUIPMENT 0.0263 0.0028 0.024 89

Role of economic conditions and meteorology

The improvement in air quality was not due to a decline in the economy. On thecontrary, the economy grew about 20 percent between 2004 and 2012. Figure 2 shows Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for the Yuba City-Marysville Metropolitan Statistical Area. The increase in GDP between 2004 and 2012 is an indicator of economic

progress.

6
3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

Data source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis

In addition, the air quality improvement was not due to favorable meteorological

conditions. During the flveyear period, when the design values were below the

standard, the area experienced a variety of meteorological conditions. For example,

2011 was extremely conducive to PM2.5 pollution, including a stagnation period that

persisted for over 20 days. Despite this, 2011 and 2012 design values are significantly

below the.standard. The standard meteorological parameters, including annual average

temperature and precipitation, were similar during the three recent years showing

attainment (2010-2012) as well as the 2004-2006 nonattainment period (Table 9).

Table 9. Average Temperature and Precipitation

Year Avg Temp (°F) Avg Precipitation (in/year)

2004 62.6 20

2005 62.6 26

2006 62.6 20

2007 62.6 12

2008 62.6 16

2009 66.2 17

2010 62.6 23

2011 59.0 20

2012 62.6 25

2004-2006 Avg 62.6 22

2010-2012 Avg 62.6 23

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

7
of the standard, it is appropriate to assume that composition would not change significantly. Furthermore, control programs targeting all key contributors to PM2.5

mass lead to fairly equivalent reduction in key components.

Chemical composition data are not routinely collected at the Yuba City monitor. The only chemical composition data available for this area are 2004-2006 data analyzed by U.S. EPA to support the initial designations. Staff expect that despite a significant decline in emissions between 2005 and 2011, the chemical composition on a typical exceedance day would not change significantly. The meteorological phenomenon leading to high PM2.5 concentrations is the same today as it was in 2005. Under

stagnant winter weather, elevated concentrations are due to the formation of secondary pollutants and the accumulation of primary-emitted PM2.5. The declines in emissions reduced the frequency and magnitude of high concentration day events, but are expected to have little impact on exceedance day composition.

In addition, control programs targeted all key contributors to the PM2.5 mass. The two largest contributors to PM2.5 mass in the Yuba City-Marysville area are wood burning and ammonium nitrate. Concurrent reductions in both directly emitted PM2.5 and NOx emission that contribute to these components. Therefore composition remains the

same despite the decrease in PM2.5 levels.

Figures 3 and 4 show the changes in chemical composition on a typical exceedance at the Sacramento-T Street site (the closest site with chemical composition data and similar meteorological conditions) between 2004-2006 and 2010-2012. Despite the decrease in emissions over the years the composition in 201 0-2012 is very similar to that in 2004-2006.

8
IV. CONTINGENCY PLAN

U.S. EPA requested additional clarification from the District related to timing associated

with the contingency plan if the area were to fall out of attainment. On

December 19, 2013, the District clarified several aspects of the contingency measure

commitment in a letter to U.S. EPA and ARB. The District letter is included in.

Appendix A. V

V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION V

The Minor Updates to Yuba City-Maiysville PM2.5 Maintenance Plan and V

Redesignation Request include additional supporting information and analysis as

requested by U.S. EPA to facilitate their approval and redesignation to attainment for V

the PM2.5 standard. ARB staff recommends that the Board adopt the Minor Updates as

a revision to the California SIP for submittal to U.S; EPA.

9
Appendix A

Feather River Air Quality Management District Letter

1
December 19, 2013

Deborah Jordan, Director Air Programs Division Richard Corey, Executive Officer

Environmental Protection Agency Region

9 Air Resources Board

75 Hawthorne Street P0 Box 2815

San Francisco, CA 94105 Sacramento, CA 95812

Dear Ms. Jordan and Mr. Corey,

The Feather River Air Quality Management District would like to clarify the contingency plan inthe Vuba City-Marysville PM2.5 Nonattainment Area Redesignation Request and Maintenance

Plan (Plan) adopted by the District’s Board of Directors on April 1, 2013.

The, Clean Air Act requires that each maintenance plan contain provisions to assure that the

District will promptly correct any violation of the standard which occurs after the redesignation of

the area as an attainment area (42 usc 7505a (d)). The contingency measures in the Plan are

included in Chapter VII. In the Plan, the District described

a process and timeline to occur

should the standard be violated. The District identified the 24-hour PM2.5 design value as the

“trigger” that would initiate the contingency plan. Within 60 days of the trigger the District shall

commence analysis to determine if the exceedance was caused by an exceptional event or

instrument malfunction, and also evaluate the meteorological conditions and the emissions

inventory. Following the analysis, the contingency plan stated that the District shall consult with

interested parties, community organizations, and industry to identify voluntary and incentive

based measures to reduce directly emitted PM2.5 or precursor emissions that can be

implemented prior to the next January 1St. If it is determined that the violation occurred due tosources within the District, then by November 1 of the year following the year in which the

trigger was activated, the District will begin adoption of rules for ensuring attainment. The Plan

committed to adopting rules by the following August 31 and required compliance within two

years of rule adoption.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 (US EPA R9) has requested clarification

regarding the contingency plan measures. The District would like to clarify the contingency plan

by committing to actions occurring within

a number of months rather than calendar dates.

The voluntary and incentive based measures would be implemented within nine (9) months afterthe trigger activation.

The District wouJd like to clarify that, if new or revised rules are necessary to ensure attainment,

each rule would be adopted and implemented promptly and expediently, but not later than 18 to

24 months after trigger activation. The intent of this clarification is for the 18-24 month time

frame described immediately above to replace the time frame described in the maintenance

plan adopted on April 1,2013. V
Source Category: Control Measures To Consider Stationary Sources

V

Combustion Devices (Boilers, incinerators, engines, and turbines)

. Industrial Processes (Manufacturing, industrial, agricultural, oil and gas) Opening Burning Restrictions Managed Burning (Agricultural and residential

V opening burning)

. Prescribed Burning V Fugitive Dust V Paved Roads (Truck covering, construction

• site measures, storm water drainage) V

Unpaved Roads (Paving and surface V

V

V improvements, chemical stabilization, speed

• V reduction)

V

V

Cànstruction and Demolition (Truck covering,

.

V

access areas, watering)

V

. Storage Piles (wet suppression and dust

V

V control)

• V

V

Agricultural Processes (Reducing dust from tilling, harvesting, processing; also

conservation) Opacity Restrictions Visible emissions limitations VResidential Wood Burning Devices Mandatory curtailment, coriversion/upgradeof

existing devices, restrictions on new devices)

The list is for clarification purposes and would not limit the District in considering additional rules based on the results of the analysis as to the source of the exceedance.

The District is committed to working with US EPA R9 staff to provide any additional clarifying information you may need to ensure expeditious approval of the Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for the Yuba City-Marysville PM2.5 Nonattainment Area. If you have questions or would like additional information, please have your staff contact Ms. Sondra Spaethe, Air Quality Planner, at (530) 634-7659 ext. 210.

Regards,

Christopher D. Brown, AICP

Air Pollution Control Officer

C DB/sIsFile: Chron
John Ungvarsky, Air Planning Office, Air Division

USEPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105
The Air Resources Board (ARB or Board) will conduct

a public meeting at the time and place noted below to consider approval of Minor Updates to the Yuba City-Marysville PM2.5 Nonattainment Area Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 Standard (Minor Updates). If approved by the Board, ARB will submit the Minor Updates to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) for approval as

a revision to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP).

DATE: February 20, 2014 V

TIME: 9:00 a.m. V

PLACE: California Environmental Protection Agency V

• Air Resources Board

Byron Sher Auditorium V

•

V 1001 I Street V

Sacramento, CalifOrnia 95814 V

This item may be considered at

a two-day meeting of the Board, which will commence

at 9:00 a.m., February 20, 2014. This item is scheduled to be heard on the Board’s Consent Calendar. All items on the consent calendar can be voted on by the Board immediately after the start of the public meeting. An item will be removed, from the V consent calendar if requested by

a Board member or if someone in the audience

requests to speak on that item.

In December 2Q06, U.S. EPA lowered the 24-hour national ambient air quality standard (standard) for PM2.5 from 65 Lg/m 3to 35 pglm 3.Effective December 14, 2009, U.S. EP,A designated the Yuba City-Marysvil!e Area as nonattainment for this more stringent 24-hour PM2.5 standard. The federal Clean Air Act establishes planning requirements for those areas that exceed the health-based standards.

Since the Yuba City-Marysville nonattainment area adequately reduced its 24-hour PM2.5 emissions to meet the standard prior to the SIP submittal deadline of December 14, 2012, the area was eligible for reduced regulatory requirements under the U.S. EPA Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particulate National AmbientAir Quality Standards (VClean Data Policy). The Feather River.Air Quality Management District (District) adopted the Yuba City-Marysville PM2.

5 Noriattainment Area Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan (Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan) on April 1, 2013 to address the remaining SIP requirements and to request to be redesignated as attainment for the PM2.5
subpart 4 of the Clean Air Act rathe

p

emission inventory for the Redesignation Request/Maintenance. Plan be expanded to

include VOCs and ammonia emissions. U.S. EPA also asked for clarification of severalother issues. ARB staff drafted the Minor Updates to address these requests. The

Minor Updates also include as an attachment a letter from the District clarifying thecontingency provisions in the plan.

The Minor Updates will be available for public review at least 30 days prior to the Board

meeting. Copies of the Minor Updates may be obtained from ARB’s Public Information

Office, 1001 I Street, First Floor, Environmental Services Center, Sacramento,California, 95814, (916) 322-2990. The Minor Updates may also be obtained from

ARB’s website at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/sip.htm.

Interested members of the public may present comments orally or in writing at the

meeting and comments may be submitted by postal mail or by electronic submittal

before the meeting. To be considered by the Board, written comments not physicallysubmitted at the meeting must be received no later than 5:00 p.m., Tuesday 1

February 18, 2014, and addressed to the following:

Postal mail: Clerk of the Board, Air Resources Board

1001 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814

Electronic submittal: httix/!www.arb.ca.gov/lispub/comm/bclist.php

Please note that under the California Public Records Act (Government Code

section 6250 et seq.), your written and verbal comments, attachments, and associated

contact information (e.g., your address; phone, email, etc.) become part of the public

record and can be released to the public upon request.

ARB requests that written and email statements on this item be filed at least 10 days

prior to the meeting so that ARB staff and Board members have additional time to

consider each comment. Further inquiries regarding this matter should be directed to

Mr. Webster Tasat, Manager, Central Valley Air Quality Planning Section, Air Quality

Planning and Science Division at (916) 323-4950 or Ms. Kasia Turkiewicz, Air

Resources Engineer, Central Valley Air Quality Planning Section, Air Quality Planning

and Science Division at (916) 445-6497.

2
Documents made available in an alternate format or another language;

• A disability-related reasonable accommodation.

To request these special accommodations or language needs, please contact the Clerk of the Board at (916) 322-5594 or by facsimile at (916) 322-3928 as soon as possible, but no later than 10 business days before the scheduled Board hearing. TTY/TDD/Speech to Speech users may dial 711 for the California Relay Service.

Consecuente con Ia secciOn 7296.2 del COdigo de Gobierno de California, una acomodaciOn especial o necesidades linguisticas pueden ser suministradas para cualquiera de los siguientes:

• Un intérprete que esté disponibte en Ia audiencia;• Documentosdisponibles en un formato alterno u otro idioma;

• Una acomodaciOn razonable relacionados con una incapacidad.

Para solicitar estas comodidades especiales o necesidades de otro idioma, por favor Ilame a Ia oficina del Consejo al (916) 322-5594 o envié un fax a (916) 322-3928 lo más pronto posible, pero no menos de 10 dIas de trabajo antes del dia programado para Ia audiencia del Consejo. TTYITDD/Personas que necesiten este servicio pueden marcar el 711 para el Servicio de Retransmisiôn de Mensajes de California.

CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD

‘\ ....-‘- ‘

Richard W. Corey

Executive Officer

Date: January 15, 2014

The energy challenge facing California is real. Eve,y Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut

your energy cosfs, see our website at ww’.arb.ca.gov.

3
4’

--

•W: 4.

a
CAL/EPA HEADQUARTERS

BYRON SHER AUDITORIUM

SECOND FLOOR

1001 I STREET

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2014

9:05 A.M.

TIFFANY C. KRAFT, CSR

CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER

LICENSE NUMBER 12277

J&K COURT REPORTING, LLC (916)476—3171
Ms. Nary Nichols, Chairperson

Dr. John Balmes

Ms. Sandra Berg

Mr. Hector De La Torre

Supervisor John Gioia

Mayor Judy Mitchell

Mrs Barbara Riordan

Supervisor Ron Roberts

Supervisor Phil Serna

Dr. Daniel Sperling

STAFF

Mr. Richard Corey, Executive Officer

Mr. Alberto Ayala, Deputy Executive Officer

Ms. Edie Chang., Deputy Executive Officer

Ms. Lynn Terry, Deputy Executive Officer

Ms. Ellen Peter, Chief Counsel

Ms. La Ronda Bowen, Ombudsman

Mr. Steve Cliff, Assistant Chief, SSD

Mr. John DaMassa, Chief, Modeling and Meteorology Branch,AQPS

J&K COURT REPORTING, LLC (916)476-3171
Mr. Ajith Kaduwela, Staff Air Pollution Specialist, Modeling and Meteorological Branch

Ms. Karen Magliano, Assistant Chief, Air Quality Planning and Science Division

Ms. Cynthia Marvin, Chief, SSD

Ms.. Marcelle Surovik, Air Pollution Specialist, Energy Section, Stationary Source Division

ALSO PRESENT

Mr. McKinley Addy, AdTra, Inc.

Ms. Adrienne Alvard, Union of Concerned Scientists

Nr. Anthony Andreoni, CMUA

Mr. Paul Baer, Ph.D., California and Western States Climate Economist

Ms. SusieBerlin, NCPA

Mr. Neil Black, California Bioenergy

Mr. Lewi Blumburg, California Climate Change Program, Nature Conservancy

Mr. Frank Caponi, LA County Sanitation Districts

Mr. Casey Creamer, CCGGA/WAPA

Ms. Sarah Deslauriers, California Wastewater Climate Change Group

Mr. Evan Edgar, California Compost Coalition

J&K COURT REPORTING, LLC (916)476-3171
Ms. Sam Emmersen, GWAC

Mr. Mac Farrell, Environment California Research & Policy

Center

Mr. James Garner, Dairy Cares

Ms. Claire Halbrook, PG&E

Mr. Frank Harris, Southern California Edison

Ms. Bonnie Holmes-Gen, American Lung Association

Mr. Steve Jones, Waste Industry

Ms. Larissa Koehier, Environmental Defense Fund

Mr. Kenneth Koyama, CAPCOA

Mr. Nick Lapis, Californians Against Waste

Ms. Julia Levin, Bioenergy Association of California

Mr. Gary Liss, Gary Liss & Associates

Mr. Bill Magavern, Coalition for Clean AirMr. Paul Mason, Pacific Forest Trust

Ms. Jerilyn Mendoza, Southern California Gas Company

Mr. Ken Nold, Turlock Irrigation District

Ms. Kathryn Phillips, Sierra Club

Ms. Dorothy Rothrock, CMTA/A8321G

Ms. Mikhael Skvarla, CCEEB

J&K COURT REPORTING, LLC (916)476-3171
Item 14—2--i

Chairperson Nichols

Motion

Vote 3

Item 14—2—2

Chairperson Nichols

Executive Director Corey Ombudsman Boweri

Chairperson Nichols

Executive Director Corey Staff Presentation

3

3

Item 14—2—3

3

5

6

30

31

32

Item 14—2—4

Chairperson Nichols 66 Executive Director Corey 67 Staff Presentation 69 Mr. Koyama 82 Ms. Mendoza 82 Mr. Caponi 85 Ms. Rothrock 86 Ms. Levin 88 Mr. Black 91 Mr. Edgar 93 Ms. Emmersen . 95 Ms. Haibrook 97 Mr. Garner 99 Ms. Koehler 101 Mr. Lapis 103 Mr. Mason 105 Ms. Deslauriers 106 Mr. Harris 108 Ms. Holmes—Gen 110 Mr. Liss 113 Ms. Phillips 115 Mr. Nold 116 Dr. Baer 119 Mr. Farrell 121 Mr. Jones 123

J&K COURT REPORTING, LLC (916) 476—3171
Item 14

Mr. Magavern 124Ms. Skvarla 126

Mr. Addy

128

Mr. Andreoni 130

Ms. Berlin 132

Mr. Creamer 135

Ms. Alvard 137

Mr. Blumburg 139

Adjournment

168

Reporter’s Certificate 169

J&K COURT REPORTING, LLC (916)476-3171
4 begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. If you’ll all please

5 rise.

6 (Thereupon the Pledge of Allegiance was

7 Recited in unison.)8 CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: The Clerk will please call

9 the roll.

10 BOARD CLERK JENSEN: Dr. Balmes?

11 BOARD MEMBER BALMES: Here.

12 BOARD CLERK JENSEN: Ms. Berg?

13 BOARD MEMBER BERG: Here.

14 BOARD CLERK JENSEN: Mr. De La Torre?

15 Mr. Eisenhut?

16 Supervisor Gioia?

17 BOARD MEMBER GIOIA: Here.

18 BOARD CLERK JENSEN: Mayor Mitchell?

19 BOARD MEMBER MITCHELL: Here.’

20 BOARD CLERK JENSEN: Mrs. Riordan?21 CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: Here.

22 BOARD CLERK JENSEN: Supervisor Roberts?

23 BOARD MEMBER ROBERTS: Here.

24 BOARD CLERK JENSEN: Supervisor Serna?

25 BOARD MEMBER SERNA: Here.

J&K, COURT REPORTING, LLC (916)476-3171
3 

4 BOARD CLERK JENSEN: Chairman Nichols?

5 CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: Here.

6 BOARD CLERK JENSEN: Madam Chairman, we have a

7 quorum.

8 CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: Is there anybody in the

9 audience who has never been to a meeting of the Air

10 Resources Board? In that case, I’m going to read the

11 entire script just for you.

12 Anyone who wishes to testify should fill out a

13 request to speak card that’s available in the lobby

14 outside the boardroom. Please return it toa Board

15 assistant or to the clerk of the Board seated down here in

16 front prior to the commencement of your item. Also,

17 speakers need to be aware that the Board will impose a

18 three—minute time limit. Please state your full and last

19 name when you come up to your podium; Put your testimony

20 into your own words. It’s easier for the Board to follow

21 if you go straight to your main points. You do not need

22 to read your written testimony since it will be entered

23 into the record.

24 For safety reasons, please note the emergency

25 exits to the rear and to-my right and left side of the

J&K COURT REPORTING, LLC (916)476-3171
4 when we can return to the hearing room and resume the

5 hearing.

6 Okay. That’s it. Now our first item this

7 morning is on consent. This is minor updates to the Yuba

8 City—Marysville PM2.5 Maintenance Plan and redesignating9 request. It’s a submittal for our State Implementation

10 Plan. I’d like to ask the Clerk if any witnesses have

11 signed up to testify on this. Nope, they have not.

12 Are there any Board members who would like to see

13 this item removed from consent? If hot, then I will close14 the record and ask if all the Board members have had an

15 opportunity to review this item, if I could have a motion

16 to approve.

17 BOARD MEMBER BERG: So moved.

18 BOARD MEMBER SERNA: Second.

19 BOARD MEMBER RIORDAN: Second.

20 CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: All in favor please say

21 Aye.

22 (Ayes)

23 CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: Opposed?

24 Any abstentions? Great.

25 That’s goodnews. We like this.

J&K COURT REPORTING, LLC (916)476-3171
4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

ago, she came with a vision of making this office one of

the most effective in the nation in several ways:

First, by ensuring that the voices of California

small business owners are heard early in our policy

discussions often as regulations are being developed and

that their perspective and expertise are more thoroughly

integrated into the ARB’s program.

Second, •by increasing the opportunities for the

Board tounderstand and provide the tools small businesses

need to meet or exceed regulations.

And finally, by making the Ombudsman and other

staff at all levels more proactive as well as responsive

to issues that affectsmall businesses and other

stakeholders.

La Ronda has touched every ARB program that has

any way of dealing with small businesses and help them to

think like small businesses. She works to identify

opportunities for the Board to engage in small business

assistance by listening and identifying new opportunities

that may emerge from regulatory policy. And she’s been

instrumental in guiding small businesses through our

processes and helping- us to navigate some thorny issues.

J&K COURT REPORTING, LLC (916)476-3171
February 20, 2014

Agenda Item No.: 14-2-1

WHEREAS, the Legislature in Health and Safety Code section 39602 has

designated the State Air Resources Board (ARB or Board) as the air pollution controlagency for all purposes set forth in federal law;

WHEREAS, ARB is res5onsible for preparing the State Implementation Plan (SIP)for attaining and maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

as required by the federal Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. section 7401 et seq. (Act)), and

to this end is directed by Health and Safety Code section 39602 to coordinate the

activities of all local and regional air pollution control and air quality management

districts (districts) necessary to comply with the Act;WHEREAS, section 39602 of the Health and Safety Code also provides that the SIP

shall include only those provisions necessary to meet the requirements of the Act;

WHEREAS, ARB has responsibility for ensuring that the districts meet their

responsibilities under the Act pursuant to sections 39002, 39500, 39602, and 41650

of the Health and Safety Code;

WHEREAS, ARB is authorized by section 39600 of the Health and Safety Code to

do such acts as may be necessary for the proper execution of its powers and duties;

WHEREAS, sections 39515 and 39516 of the Health and Safety Code provide that

any duty may be delegated to the Board’s Executive Officer as the Board deemsappropriate;

WHEREAS, the local districts have primary responsibility for controlling air pollution

from nonvehicular sources and for adopting control measures, rules, and regulationsto attain the NAAQS within their boundaries pursuant to sections 39002, 40000,40001, 40701, 40702, and 41650 of the Health and Safety Code;

WHEREAS, the Feather River Air Quality anagement District (Feather River

District) is responsible for carrying out.these responsibilities in Yuba and Sutter

Counties pursuant to section 40300 of the Health and Safety Code;
WHEREAS, in March 2007, U.S. EPA finalized the PM2.5 implementation rule

(Rule) which established the requirements states must meet in developing PM2.5

SIPs;

WHEREAS, nonattainment areas that attain the standard prior to the SIP submittal

due date are eligible for reduced regulatory requirements as described in U.S. EPA’s

Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particulate National Ambient Air Quality Standards

(Clean Data Policy) released on December 14, 2004;

WHEREAS, when a nonattainment area has air quality levels below the standard,

the Clean Data Policy specifies that the attainment demonstration, reasonablefurther progress, reasonably available contro[ measures, and contingency SIP

elements are no longer required;

WHEREAS, consistent with section. 107(d)(3)(E) of the Act, the Feather River District

has demonstrated attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS in the 2006-2008 period for the

Yuba City-Marysville PM2.5 nonattainment area, based on quality-assured federal

reference method monitoring data from the State and local monitoring network;

WHEREAS, on June 8, 2010, ARB submitted a request to the U.S. EPA to issue a

Clean Data Finding for the Yuba City-Marysville PM2.5 nonattainment area basedon 2009-2011 data;

WHEREAS, on January 10, 2013, U.S. EPA determined that the Yuba

City-Marysville PM2.5 nonattainment area has attained the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS

based on 2009-2011 data;

WHEREAS, section 1 07(d)(3)(D) of the Act provides that a state may request

U.S. EPA to redesignate an area from nonattainment to attainment of the NAAQS;

WHEREAS, section 1 07(d)(3)(E) of the Act sets forth the requirements which must

be met for the U.S. EPA to redesignate an area from nonattainment to attainment of

the NAAQS;

WHEREAS, the Feather River District developed the Yuba City-Maiysville PM2.5

RequestiMaintenance Plan) to address the requirements of the Act;
documents in accordancewith State and federal law;

WHEREAS, on April 25, 2013, the Board approved the Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan asa revision to the California SIP;

WHEREAS, on May 23, 2013, ARB transmitted the approved Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan to U.S. EPA for inclusion into the SIP to be effective, for purposes of federal law, upon approval by U.S. EPA;

WHEREAS, U.S. EPA was directed by

a January 4, 2013, ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to implement the PM2.5 standard under subpart

4 of the Act rather than subpart 1;

WHEREAS, to evaluate the Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan Under subpart

4 requirements, U.S. EPA staff requested that the emission inventory be expanded to include volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and ammonia emissions, and that other clarifications be made:

WHEREAS, ARB staff drafted the Minor Updates to the Yuba City-Marysville PM2.5 Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request (Minor Updates) as

a proposed revision to the SIP to address this request;

WHEREAS, that portion of the ARB’s regulatory program that involves the adoption, approval, amendment, or repeal of standards,’ rules, regulations, or plans has been certified by the Secretary of Resources Agency pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines section 15251(d)), and ARB conducts it CEQA review pursuant to this certified

program (California Code of Regulations, title 17, sections 60001 -60007);

WHEREAS, ARB staff reviewed the Minor Updates and concluded it is exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15061, subdivision (b)(3) because there is no possibility that the Minor Updates may result in a significant adverse impact on the environment since the revisions are limited to

an expanded emissions inventory and other minor clarifications requested by U.S. EPA, and it does not contain any new proposals for emission control measures

or other actions that could result in adverse impacts to the environment;
WHEREAS, the Minor Updates include the following:

1. Additional information documenting that the Yuba City-Marysville area

attained the 24-hr PM2.5 standard due to perrilanent and enforceable

emission reductions;

2. Supporting documentation for calculating the projected 2024 maintenance

design value; and

3. Consistent with subpart

4 of the Act, an emission inventory for directly emitted

PM2.5 and all PM2.5 precursors, updated to include VOCs and ammonia.

WHEREAS, the Board finds that:

1. The proposed Minor Updates meet the applicable requirements established

by the Act and U.S. EPA regulations;

2. The Board certifies pursuant to 40 CFR section 51.102 that the proposed

Minor Updates meet the notice and public hearing requirements specified in

40 CFR section 51.102; and

3. The Minor Updates are exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to

CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty

that there is no possibility that the proposed SIP revision may result in

a

significant adverse impact on the environment since the Minor Updates are

limited to an expanded emissions inventory and other minor clarifications

requested by U.S. EPA, and it does not contain any new proposals for

emission control measures or other actions that could result in adverse

impacts to the environment.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board hereby approves the Minor

Updates to the Yuba City-Marysville PM2.5 Maintenance Plan and Redesignation

Request as

a revision to the California SIP.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board hereby directs the Executive Offlcer to

forward the Minor Update to U.S. EPA for inclusion in the SIP to be effective, for

purposes of federal law, upon approval by U.S. EPA.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board directs the Executive Officer to work

with the Feather River District and U.S. EPA and take appropriate action to resolve

áñy

b lêfeiess Or ability1se ä?iëêd[ñth

submission.
Board.

I1

Tracy Jensen,”Cldrk of the Board