State of California E____ CaUfor?!f

a En vir menaiPrctecticn A2ency 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

## This document has been reviewed by the staff of the California Air Resources Board and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Air Resources Board, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement

or recommendation

for use.TABLE OF CONTENTS I. BACKGROUND

1 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

## I. BACKGROUND In becember 2006, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) lowered the 24-hour national ambient air quality standard (standard) for PM2.5 from 65 ig/m 3 to 35 ig/m 3 . Effective December
14, 2009, U.S. EPA designated the Yuba City-Marysville 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. ITable

1. Yuba City-Marysvll)e PM2.5 Nonattainment Area Emission lnventories* Category

I 2005 2011

I 2017 2024 NOx Stationary Sources
4.4941 4.3908 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 TotalV 26.5385 19.2873 15.9687 12.0580 PM2.5 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 NH3VVVVVV Stationary SourcesV 0.306 0.3575 0.4131 0.483 Areawide SourcesVVV 4.5568V. 4.4945 4.3461 4.2563 Mobile TotalV 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 VOCsV Stationary Sources
3.8225 4.0252 4.5383 4.107 Areawide Sources

5.754 5.4627 6.2757 6.4784 Mobile TotalVV 6.6997 5.1509 3.4347 2.8421 On-Road Mobile 3.7252 2.8017 1.4752 1.1129V 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

## III. ADDITIONAL ANALYSES SUPPORTING ATTAINMENT RESULTS FROM PERMANENT AND ENFORCEABLE EMISSION REDUCTIONS The CAA requires demonstration that the air quality improvement

that resulted

in attainment

of the standard can be reasonably

attributed

to permanent and enforceable emission reductions. The Yuba City-Marysville

Area first attained the standard

in 2008 and continues

to attain through 2012. The 24-hour design value decreased from 36 j.gIm 3 in 2005 to 26 i.g/m 3 in 2012. This is a 10 ig/m 3 decrease, 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 precursors declined 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. 3Data 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

5 On-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 30 Figure

1. Changes

in Emissions Between 2005 and 2011--- 15 25 ‘- a) C 0 4- C 0 10- E w
5 0

20O5 2011 PM2.5

1 SOx 4

## Table
3. 2005-2011 NOx Emission Changes

in On-Road Mobile Source Categories On-Road Mobile Source Categories

2005 2011 2005-2011 Reductions tpd tpd tpd HEAVY HEAVY DUTY DIESELTRUCKS (HHDV) 6.3103 3.5449 2.7654

44 LIGHT DUTYTRUCKS-1(LDT1)

0.2318 0.1342 0.0976

42 OTHER BUSES

- MOTOR COACH

- DIESEL (OBC) 0.0439 0.0266 0.0173

39 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 

## 5Table
6. 2005-2011 PM2.5 Emission Changes

in ‘Other Mobile Source Categories’ Other Mobile Sources

2005 2011 2005-2011 Reductions.

tpd tpd tpd. % OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT

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 the contrary, 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.

65000 4500 4000 3500 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 

## Figure
2. GDP for All Industry 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

## 7IV. DISCUSSION
OF FUTURE YEAR COMPOSITION USED IN CALCULATION

OF THE 2024 DESIGN VALUE In the Redesignation Request/Maintenance
Plan, the District assumed that the PM2.5 composition

on high concentration days did not change between 2004-2006 and 2011 Due to the nature of the PM2.5 problem

in the Yuba City-Marysville Area and the form 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.

8Figure
3. Sacramento-T Street (2004-2006)

Figure 4. Sacramento-T Street (2010-2012) Passive 1% Crustal 1% 

## 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 RECOMMENDATIONV 

## The Minor Updates

to Yuba City-Maiysville

PM2.5 Maintenance Plan andV 

## Redesignation Request include additional supporting information and analysis
as requested
by U.S. EPA to facilitate their approval and redesignation

to attainment forV 

## 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. Passive 1% Crustal 1%

9Appendix

A Feather River Air Quality Management District Letter 1

## 1007 Live Oak Blvd. Suite B-3 Yuba City, CA 95991 (530) 634-7659 FAX (530) 634-7660 www.fraqmd.org Christopher

D. Brown, AICP Air Pollution Control Officer 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 in the 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 to sources 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 after the 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 Sewing Sonar and Vuba CourniesClarifications
To Yuba City-Marysvllle PM2.5 Redesignation Request!Matntenance
Plan Date Page2 The District contingency plan also listed several measures that may be considered for adoption upon trigger activation. These included: Reasonably Available Control Technology

on stationary sources, opening burning restrictions, fugitive dust and opacity restrictions, and restrictions
on residential wood burning devices. The US EPA R9 asked the District to clarify which measures would be considered. The District would consider the following measures

in its analysis:V Source Category:

Control Measures To Consider Stationary Sources Combustion Devices (Boilers, incinerators,V engines, and turbines). Industrial Processes (Manufacturing, industrial, agricultural,

oil and gas) Opening Burning Restrictions Managed Burning (Agricultural and residentialV opening burning). Prescribed BurningV Fugitive DustV Paved Roads (Truck covering, construction • site measures, storm water drainage)V Unpaved Roads (Paving and surfaceVVV improvements, chemical stabilization, speed•V reduction)VV Cànstruction and Demolition (Truck covering,.V access areas, watering). Storage Piles (wet suppression and dustVVV control)•V Agricultural Processes (Reducing dust fromV 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 D B/s Is File: ChronClarifications
To Yuba City-Marysville PM2.5 Redesignation RequestlMaintenance

Plan Date Page

3 Cc: Sylvia Vanderspek, Branch Chief, Air Quality Planning ARB, PC Box2815, Sacramento,
CA 95812 Webster Tasat, Manager, Central Valley Air Quality Planning Section ARB, PC Box 2815, Sacramento,
CA 95812 John Ungvarsky, Air Planning Office, Air Division USEPA Region
9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING TO CONSIDER THE APPROVAL
OF MINOR UPDATES TO THE YUBA CITY-MARYSVILLE PM2.5 MAINTENANCE PLAN AND REDESIGNATION REQUEST 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, 2014V TIME: 9:00 a.m.V PLACE: California Environmental Protection AgencyV •

Air Resources Board Byron Sher AuditoriumVV

1001

I Street•V Sacramento, CalifOrnia 95814V 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 theV 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 3 to 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

## standard. The Redesig nation Request/Maintenance

Plan was approved
by the Board on April 25, 2013. On May 23, 2013, ARB submitted the Redesignation Request/Maintenance

Plan to U.S. EPA for approval
as a revision
to the California SIP. As a result of a United States Court of Appeals ruling that directed U.S. EPA to implement the PM2.5 standard under subpart

4 of the Clean Air Act rather than subpart

1, U.S. EPA staff requested the emission inventory for the Redesignation Request/Maintenance.

Plan be expanded

to include VOCs and ammonia emissions. U.S. EPA also asked for clarification

of several other 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 the contingency 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 physically submitted

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.

2SPECiAL ACCOMMODATION REQUEST Consistent with California Government Code Section 7296.2, special accommodation

or language needs may be provided for any of the following: • An interpreter

to be available

at the hearing; • 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•M E E TIN G STATE OF CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD 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—3171APPEARANCES BOARD MEMBERS 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)476-3171APPEARANCES (CONTINUED) STAFF 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)476-31714 APPEARANCES (CONTINUED) ALSO PRESENT 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 Air Mr. 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)476-3171Item 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 INDEX

PAGE 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—3171INDEX (CONTINUED)

PAGE Item 14—2--4 Mr. Magavern

124 Ms. 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)476-31711 1 PROCEEDINGS 2 CHAIRPERSON NICHOLS: Want to welcome everybody 3 to this meeting
of the Air Resources Board. And we will 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)476-31712 1 BOAP.D CLERK JENSEN: Dr. Sherriffs? 2 Professor Sperling? 3 BOARD MEMBER SPERLING: Here. 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)476-31713 1 room. In the event of
a fire alarm, we’re required

to 2 evacuate this room immediately
and go down the stairs and 3 out of the building until we hear the all—clear signal 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 redesignating 9 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 close 14 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)476-31714 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Our next item is the report from the Ombudsman. When we brought
La Ronda Bowen to the Air Resources Board to revamp the Board’s Office of the Ombudsman four years 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)476-3171StateofCaliforniaAIRRESOURCESBOARDMinorUpdatestoYubaCity-MarysvillePM2..5MaintenancePlanand.RedesignationRequestResolution14-6February20,2014AgendaItemNo.:14-2-1WHEREAS,theLegislatureinHealthandSafetyCodesection39602hasdesignatedtheStateAirResourcesBoard(ARBorBoard)astheairpollutioncontrolagencyforallpurposessetforthinfederallaw;WHEREAS,ARBisres5onsibleforpreparingtheStateImplementationPlan(SIP)forattainingandmaintainingtheNationalAmbientAirQualityStandards(NAAQS)asrequiredbythefederalCleanAirAct(42U.S.C.section7401etseq.(Act)),andtothisendisdirectedbyHealthandSafetyCodesection39602tocoordinatetheactivitiesofalllocalandregionalairpollutioncontrolandairqualitymanagementdistricts(districts)necessarytocomplywiththeAct;WHEREAS,section39602oftheHealthandSafetyCodealsoprovidesthattheSIPshallincludeonlythoseprovisionsnecessarytomeettherequirementsoftheAct;WHEREAS,ARBhasresponsibilityforensuringthatthedistrictsmeettheirresponsibilitiesundertheActpursuanttosections39002,39500,39602,and41650oftheHealthandSafetyCode;WHEREAS,ARBisauthorizedbysection39600oftheHealthandSafetyCodetodosuchactsasmaybenecessaryfortheproperexecutionofitspowersandduties;WHEREAS,sections39515and39516oftheHealthandSafetyCodeprovidethatanydutymaybedelegatedtotheBoard’sExecutiveOfficerastheBoarddeemsappropriate;WHEREAS,thelocaldistrictshaveprimaryresponsibilityforcontrollingairpollutionfromnonvehicularsourcesandforadoptingcontrolmeasures,rules,andregulationstoattaintheNAAQSwithintheirboundariespursuanttosections39002,40000,40001,40701,40702,and41650oftheHealthandSafetyCode;WHEREAS,theFeatherRiverAirQualityanagementDistrict(FeatherRiverDistrict)isresponsibleforcarryingout.theseresponsibilitiesinYubaandSutterCountiespursuanttosection40300oftheHealthandSafetyCode;Resolution14-62WHEREAS,inDecember2006,theUnitedStatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency(U.S.EPA)loweredthe24-hourNAAQSforfineparticulatematter(PM2.5)from65pg/rn3to35pg/rn3;WHEREAS,effectiveDecember14,2009,U.S.EPAdesignatedtheYubaCity-MarysvillePlanningAreaasnonattainmentforthe35pg/rn3PM2.5NAAQSandestablishedaSIPduedateofDecember14,2012;WHEREAS,inMarch2007,U.S.EPAfinalizedthePM2.5implementationrule(Rule)whichestablishedtherequirementsstatesmustmeetindevelopingPM2.5SIPs;WHEREAS,nonattainmentareasthatattainthestandardpriortotheSIPsubmittalduedateareeligibleforreducedregulatoryrequirementsasdescribedinU.S.EPA’sCleanDataPolicyfortheFineParticulateNationalAmbientAirQualityStandards(CleanDataPolicy)releasedonDecember14,2004;WHEREAS,whenanonattainmentareahasairqualitylevelsbelowthestandard,theCleanDataPolicyspecifiesthattheattainmentdemonstration,reasonablefurtherprogress,reasonablyavailablecontro[measures,andcontingencySIPelementsarenolongerrequired;WHEREAS,consistentwithsection.107(d)(3)(E)oftheAct,theFeatherRiverDistricthasdemonstratedattainmentofthePM2.5NAAQSinthe2006-2008periodfortheYubaCity-MarysvillePM2.5nonattainmentarea,basedonquality-assuredfederalreferencemethodmonitoringdatafromtheStateandlocalmonitoringnetwork;WHEREAS,onJune8,2010,ARBsubmittedarequesttotheU.S.EPAtoissueaCleanDataFindingfortheYubaCity-MarysvillePM2.5nonattainmentareabasedon2009-2011data;WHEREAS,onJanuary10,2013,U.S.EPAdeterminedthattheYubaCity-MarysvillePM2.5nonattainmentareahasattainedthe24-hourPM2.5NAAQSbasedon2009-2011data;WHEREAS,section107(d)(3)(D)oftheActprovidesthatastatemayrequestU.S.EPAtoredesignateanareafromnonattainmenttoattainmentoftheNAAQS;WHEREAS,section107(d)(3)(E)oftheActsetsforththerequirementswhichmustbemetfortheU.S.EPAtoredesignateanareafromnonattainmenttoattainmentoftheNAAQS;WHEREAS,theFeatherRiverDistrictdevelopedtheYubaCity-MaiysvillePM2.5RequestiMaintenancePlan)toaddresstherequirementsoftheAct;Resolution 14-6

3 WHEREAS, following

a public hearing on April
1, 2013, the Governing Board of the Feather River District voted to approve the Redesignation Request/Maintenance Plan: WHEREAS,

on April 8, 2013, the Feather River District transmitted the Redesignation Request/Maintenance
Plan to ARB for approval
as a revision
to the California SIP, along with proof of public notice publication, and environmental 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;Resolution 14-6

4 WHEREAS, 110(l) of the Act and 40 CFR section 51.102 require one or more public hearings, preceded
by at least 30-day notice and opportunity for public review, be conducted prior to the adoption and submittal

to U.S. EPA of any SIP revision; WHEREAS,

on January 17, 2014, ARB provided

a 30-day notice and circulated for public review the proposed Minor Updates; 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.Resolution 14-6.

5 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board authorizes the Executive Officer to include

in the SIP submittal any technical corrections, clarifications,

or additions that may be necessary

to secure U.S. EPA approval.

I hereby certify that the above
is a true and correct copy of Resolution 14-6, as adopted by the Air ResoUrces Board. I1 Tracy Jensen,”Cldrk

of the Board