### ENCLOSURE 1



## STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION

FOR FEDERAL NITROGEN DIOXIDE STANDARD

INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS

Release Date: October 15, 2012 Hearing Date: Novem ber 15 , 201 2[This page intentionally blank]TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION

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

OVERVIEW

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

APPENDIX A : STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION FOR FEDERAL

NITROGEN DIOXIDE STANDARD INFRASTRUCTURE
REQUIREMENTS

Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System (§110(a)(2)(B ) )

................................ ... A

- 1 Programs for Enforcement, PSD, and NSR (§110(a)(2)( C ) )

................................ ..... A

- 3 Interstate and International Transport Provisions (§110(a)(2)( D ) )

............................ A

- 6 Adequate Personnel, Funding, and Authority (§110(a)(2)( E ) )

................................ .. A

- 8 Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting (§110(a)(2)( F ) )

................................ ... A

- 9 Contingency Plans for Emergency Episodes ( §110(a)(2)( G ) )

................................ A

- 10

Future SIP Revisions (§110(a)(2)( H ) )

................................ ................................ ..... A

- 1 1 Consultation with Government Officials, Public Notification, PSD, and Visibility Protection (§110(a)(2)( J ) )

................................ .................... A

- 1 1 Air Quality Modeling/Data (§ 110(a)(2)( K ) )

................................ .............................. A

- 1 3 Permitting Fees (§110(a)(2)( L ) )

................................ ................................ .............. A

- 1 3 Consultation/Participation by Affected Local Entities (§110(a)(2)( M ) )

..................... A

- 1 4

iLIST OF TABLES

Page

TABLE 1: Required Infrastructure SIP Elements

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

AP PENDIX A: STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION FOR FEDERAL

NITROGEN DIOXIDE STANDARD INFRASTRUCTURE
REQUIREMENTS

TABLE A

- 1: Required California Monitors for the Federal NO 2 Standard

................ A

- 2

TABLE A

- 2 : California Districts with SIP

- Approved PSD NO 2 Rules

....................... A

- 5

TABLE A

- 3: Status of District PSD Rule Development and Approval

...................... A

- 6

iiINTRODUCTION

The purpose of this report is to provide a revision to the infrastructure portion of California’s State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revi sion is required under the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and is limited to changes that specifically address the N ational A mbient A ir Q uality

S tandard for nitrogen dioxide (federal NO 2 standard or NO 2 standard ). Furthermore, it is primarily focused on the n ew 1

- hour NO 2 standard, although provisions could also impact the

annual NO 2 standard. Because this I nfrastructure SIP is specific to NO 2 , it contains no changes for any other air pollutant.

The following paragraphs provide background information on th e federal NO 2 s tandard and requirements for the infrastructure portion of the SIP. The actual language of the SIP revision is provided in Appendix A: Sta te Implementation Plan Revision f or Federal Nitrogen Dioxide Standard Infrastructure Requirements.

OVERVIEW

On January 22, 2010 , the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) revised

the federal NO 2 s tandard. U.S. EPA made no changes to the existing annual standard of

53 parts per billion (ppb) that was originally promulgated in 1971

. However, U.S. EPA also adopted a new 1

- hour standard of 100 ppb. The 1

- hour standard is designed to protect against short

- term NO 2 exposure , and c ompliance is measured as a three

- year average of

the 98 th percentile concentration.

When U.S. EPA revises an existing standard, or as in the case of the 1

- hour NO 2 standard, promulgates a new standard , CAA Section 110(a)(1) requires each state to revise their SIP to show they have the authority and programs needed to implement, maintain, and enforce the

stan dard , regardless of designation status

. This documentation is submitted to U.S. EPA for approval and is generally referred to as an Infrastructure SIP. States must submit an Infrastructure SIP within three years after a federal standard is adopted or rev ised.

California’s NO 2 Infrastructure SIP is due to U.S. EPA by January 22, 2013

.

California has already addressed most of the infrastructure requirements in a comprehensive Infrastructure SIP submitted in response to the CAA of 1970 and approved by U.S. EPA in 1979 (40 Code of Federal Regulations 52.220). The Air Resources Board ( ARB or Board)

has submitted amendments to the Infrastructure SIP to comply with revisions to the federal

8

- hour ozone standard , the federal PM 2.5 standard, and the federal lead standard, but

U.S. EPA has not yet acted fully on these revisions. Th e current proposed revision for the

20 10 federal NO 2 standard continues to affirm the Board’s commitment to comply with CAA requirements. In addition, the revision addresse s new elemen ts required by U.S. EPA’s

20 10 revision of the federal NO 2 standard , including new NO 2 ambient monitoring requirements

.

1The specific elements that must be included in the NO 2 Infrastructure SIP are listed in

CAA Section 110(a)(2). Table 1 lists the page number in Appendix A where each element is addressed. As mentioned earlier, the NO 2 Infrastructure SIP will become p art of the overall statewide SIP, upon approval by U.S. EPA

.

TABLE 1 Required Infrastructure SIP Elements *

Infrastructure SIP Element Clean Air Act Requirement Element Description

Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System §110(a)(2)(B) Page A

- 1

Programs for Enforcement, PSD, and NSR §110(a)(2)(C) Page A

- 3

Interstate and International Transport

Provisions §110(a)(2)(D) Page A

- 6

Adequate Personnel, Funding, and Authority §110(a)(2) (E) Page A

- 8

Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting §110(a)(2)(F) Page A

- 9

Contingency Plans for Emergency Episodes §110(a)(2)(G) Page A

- 10

Future SIP Revisions §110(a)(2)(H) Page A

- 1 1

Consu ltation with Government Officials, Public Notification, PSD, and Visibility Protection §110(a)(2)(J) Page A

- 1 1

Air Quality Modeling/Data §110(a)(2)(K) Page A

- 1 3

Permitting Fees §110(a)(2)(L) Page A

- 1 3

Consultation/Participation by Affected Local

Enti ties §110(a)(2)(M) Page A

- 1 4

 Note that states are not required to address elements §110(a)(2)(A) and §110(a)(2)(I) in the Infrastructure

SIP because these elements are specific to nonattainment areas. As U.S. EPA interprets the Clean Air Act,

SIPs incor

porating any necessary local nonattainment area controls are not due within three years of promulgation of the federal standard, but rather are due at the same t ime as the nonattainment area planning requirements (75 FR 64 74 ).

In addition to the infrast ructure requirements, U.S. EPA designates areas as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable to facilitate subsequent planning efforts to attain the federal standards. When a new standard is adopted or an existing standard is revised, states have

one y ear to submit area designation recommendations. ARB submitted area designation

recommendations for the revised federal NO 2 standard on January 24, 2011

. Copies of the submittal package and final area designations are available on U.S. EPA ’s website at : http://www.epa.gov/airquality/nitrogenoxides/designations/region/region9.html

. Based on data collected during 2008 through 2010, all California monitors show com pliance with both the

new 1

- hour standard and the annual standard. Thus, U.S. EPA designated a ll areas o f the

State as unclassifiable/a ttainment for the f ederal NO 2 standard

.

2

### A PPENDIX A

STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION

FOR FEDERAL NITROGE N DIOXIDE STANDARD

INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS[This page intentionally blank]Ap pendix A Page A

- 1 APPENDIX A State Implementation Plan Revision

for Federal Nitrogen Dioxide Standard Infrastruc ture Requirements

Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data Sys tem [§110(a)(2)(B)]

This section requires states to monitor, compile, and analyze ambient nitrogen dioxide (NO 2

) concentrations and provide the data to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA).

NO 2 monitoring requirements include p opulation

- oriented monitoring and near

- roadway monitoring in urban areas with a population of 500,000 or more . California’s existing NO 2 monitoring network is sufficient to satisfy the population

- oriented requirements. Air Resources Board (ARB) staff are working with local air pollution control and air quality management districts (districts) and U.S. EPA to identify the best locations for up to 15 new near

- roadway

monitors. The NO 2 final rule specifies that these monitors be deployed in 2013 . However,

U.S. EPA has issued a proposed rule (October 5, 2012) to revise the deadline and deploy the

near

- road monitors in phases between 2014 and 2017

. ARB and the districts will work closely with U.S. EPA to address the implementation of the new near

- roadway mon itors through the network planning process.

Discussion

ARB, districts, private contractors, and other government entities (for example, the

National Parks Service) maintain a statewide network of monitoring sites. Instruments at

these sites collect data for a variety of air pollutants, as well as a number of meteorological parameters. Current information about California’s overall air quality monitoring program, as well as information about individual monitoring sites, is available on ARB’s website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/aqmoninca.htm . Data collected at the individual monitoring sites are compiled, analyzed, and reported to U.S. EPA’s Air Qu ality System per the schedule set forth in federal monitoring regulations. These data are also available on ARB’s website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam . In addition, ARB and districts submit annual air quality

m onitoring plans to U.S. EPA that describe how the State and districts comply with monitoring requirements, including proposed changes to the monitoring network.

Table A

- 1 provides a summary of the monitors required in California for the 2010 federal

NO 2 standard, including both near

- roadway and community

- wide monitors. Although

some NO 2 is directly emitted by combustion sources

, most of it is formed in the atmosphere from oxides of nitrogen or NO

x emissions . U.S. EPA estimates that nationwide, mobile

s ources account for approximately 60 percent of NO

x emissions, and therefore,

short

- term near

- roadway exposures can dominate personal NO 2 exposure. To address

this traffic

- related exposure, U.S. EPA established a new NO 2 near

- roadway monitoring requirement for large urban areas. This requirement is consistent with U.S. EPA’s recent focus on high, source

- oriented, short

- term exposures and is similar to the approach taken

in revising monitoring requirements for the federal lead and sulfur dioxide standards.

One near

- roadway NO 2 monitor is required in each Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSA)

with a population of 500,000 or more

. Near

- roadway monitors must be located withinAp pendix A Page A

- 2

50 meters (about 164 feet) of the roadway edge, where maximum concentrations are

expe cted to occur. CBSAs with a population of 2,500,000 or more or CBSAs with a population of 500,000 or more and at least one road segment having an Annual Average Daily

Traffic (AADT) count of 250 ,00 0 or more vehicles must have two near

- roadway monitors.

I n June 2012, U.S. EPA released a document titled, Near

- Road NO 2 Monitoring Technical

Assistance Document ( http://www.epa.gov/ttnamti1/files/nearroad/NearRoadTAD.pdf ), to help states and local air monitoring agencies implement the near

- roadway monitoring requirements. Potential near

- roadway sites will be evaluated using six factors: AADT,

fleet mix, congestion patterns, roadway design, terrain, and meteorology. In addition to

these factors, other considerations that may impact site selection include federal siting

criteria (for example probe height and distance from obstructions), site logistics (for example, site access and safety), and population exposure. ARB and the d istricts a re working with

U.S. EPA to identify appropriate near

- roadway site location s. The estimated number of

near

- roadway monitors shown below reflect information specified in U.S. EPA’s 2010 final

NO 2 rule.

TABLE A

- 1

Required California Monitors for the Feder al NO 2 Standard

District CBSA Counties Included Near

- Road

Monitor* Community

Wide

Monitor**

Bay Area AQMD San Francisco

- Oakland

Fremont Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Mateo,

Marin 2 1

San Jose

- Sunnyvale

Santa Clara Santa Clara 1 1

Sacrament o Metropolitan AQMD Sacramento

- Arden

Arcade

- Roseville Sacramento, Placer 2*** 1

San Diego County

AQMD San Diego

- Carlsbad

- San

Marcos San Diego 2 1

San Joaquin Valley

Unified APCD Bakersfield Kern 1 not required

Fresno Fresno 1 not required

Modesto Stanislaus 1 not required

Stockton San Joaquin 1 not required

South Coast AQMD Los Angeles

- Long Beach

Santa Ana Los Angeles, Orange 2 1

Riverside

- San Bernardino

- Ontario Riverside, San Bernardino 2 1

Ventura County

APCD Oxnard

- Thousand Oaks

Ventura Ventura 1 not required

 The estimated number of near

- roadway monitors is based on conditions specified in the final NO 2 rule using 2008 Census Bureau data and data from the 2007 Highway Performance Monitoring System maintained by the U.S. Department of Tr ansportation Federal Highway Administration. The number of required monitors may not reflect cu rrent conditions. ** The estimated number of community

- wide monitors is based on 2008 data. A sufficient number of community

- wide monitors already operate as part of the long

- term statewide NO 2 monitoring network.

*** Based on 2010 data , the Sacramento a rea requires only one near

- roadway monitor because the AADT for all road segments is now lower than the trigger level specified in the final NO 2 rule for a sec ond near

- roadway

monitor.Ap pendix A Page A

- 3

The near

- road network is anticipated to provide an infrastructure capable of housing other ambient air monitoring equipment. U.S. EPA requires a subset of these sites to include carbon monoxide monitoring, phased in during 2015 through 2017. States are also encouraged to monitor for other pollutants at the near

- roadway sites. Information from the

near

- roadway monitors will help broaden the understanding of air quality conditions and pollutant interactions, furthering the abili ty to evaluate air quality models, develop emissions control strategies, and support long

- term scientific studies

– including health studies about

near

- roadway exposures.

In addition to the near

- roadway monitors, any CBSA with a population of 1,000,000 or more must also have one community

- wide monitor (refer to Table A

- 1). As mentioned previously, California’s existing statewide network of more than 80 community

- wide NO 2 monitors has been operating for many years and far exceeds the minimum federal requir ements. Data from these existing community

- wide monitors show no violation of either the annual NO 2 standard of 53 parts per billion (ppb) or the new federal 1

- hour NO 2 standard of 100 ppb and provided the basis for U.S. EPA’s NO 2 unclassifiable/attainmen t area designations promulgated in January 2012. Finally, U.S. EPA Regional Administrators are working to identify a subset of at least 40 NO 2 monitors nationwide, to help protect communities that are susceptible and vulnerable to NO 2 - related health effec ts. It is likely that seven of these

40 monitors will be located in California

Programs for Enforcement, PSD, and NSR [§110(a)(2)(C)]

This section requires states to enforce control measures associated with attaining and maintaining the federal NO 2 standard and to implement a permitting program to regulate the construction and modification of major stationary sources of NO 2

. In addition, Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) programs must also apply to stationary sou rces that emit Greenhouse

Gases (GHG) , in accordance with U.S. EPA’s Tailoring Rule.

ARB has a comprehensive enforcement program in place that covers stationary sources, as well as other sources of pollutants, statewide. At the local level, d istricts are responsible for

stationa ry source permi t t ing programs. Each district has develop ed its own program, resulting in a comp rehensive set of applicable rules and regulations. Currently, f ive districts have

SIP

- approved PSD programs. Two districts operate programs with partial deleg ation

, while

P SD p rograms in the remaining districts are administered by U.S. EPA. A number of those districts that do not currently operate their own PSD program are in the process of obtaining PSD authority from U.S. EPA.

Discussion

ARB’s enforcement program covers mobile sources, stationary sources, consumer products, and fuels. Details about the program are available on ARB’s website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/enf/enf.htm . In addition to the statewide program , districts implementAp pendix A Page A

- 4

rules incorporating California Health and Safety Code provisions that grant all district officers and employees the authority to adopt and enforce their own rules and regulations (California Health and Safety Code sections 4 0001, 40120, 40702, 407 52, 40753, and 41510). ARB

reviews and audits district enforcement program s as part of its oversight role and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code section 41500. ARB also reviews district rules at their draft, propo sed, and adopted stages to ensure the rules meet all applicable State and federal requirements. ARB maintains an online publicly

- accessible district rule s database

at http://www.arb.ca.gov/drdb/drdb.htm

.

California Health and Safety Code section 40000 gives districts the responsibility of controlling air pollution from stationary source s. This includes responsibility for New Source

Review (NSR) and PSD

. Both NSR and PSD address the construction or modi fication of stationary sources so they do not cause or contribute to a violation of federal standards

. NSR applies in nonattainment areas, whereas PSD applies in areas designated as unclassifiable or attainment . As noted previously, all areas of Californ ia are designated

as unclassifiable/attainment for NO 2 . Thus, PSD applies statewide for NO 2

.

In an effort to ensure that proposed new or modified source s comply with the federal
standard, district and State representatives worked cooperatively through th e California Air

Pollution Control Officer ’ s Association, or CAPCOA, to develop a common platform of information, tools, and stationary source modeling recommendations specific to the new

1

- hour NO 2 standard

. The protocols are describ ed i n a document titl ed Modeling Compliance

of the Federal 1

- Hour NO 2 NAAQS

, released October 27, 2011. The modeling protocols are consistent with guidance provided by U.S

. EPA.

Currently i n California , PSD programs are (1) fully implemented by a district, (2) partially implemented by a district, or (3) wh olly implemented by U.S. EPA. F ive California districts

have authority to fully implement their SIP

- approved PSD progr am (refer to Table A

- 2). A

sixth district, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District , is awaiting final approval of

their Rule 2410, which will give them authority to implement a PSD program. Table A

- 2 lists the districts with PSD authority, their qualifying rules, the PSD permitting emissions trigger levels, and the Federal Register approval citation. The SIP

- approved PSD programs in these districts also apply to GHG emissions, in accordance with U.S. EPA’s Tailoring Rule.Ap pendix A Page A

- 5 TABLE A

-

2

Calif ornia Districts with SIP

- Approved PSD NO 2 Rules

District Applicable

District

Rule NO 2 Trigger Level for Major

New Source

PSD Permit NO 2 Trigger Level for Major

Modified

Source PSD

Permit SIP Approval

Federal Register

Citation

Mendocino County Air Quality Management District Rule 220 220 pounds/day 220 pounds/day 50 FR 30942

Monterey Bay Unified

Air Pollution Control District Rule 207 150 pounds/day 150 pounds/day 65 FR 5433

North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District Rule 220 40 tons/year 40 ton s/year 50 FR 30941

Northern Sonoma County

Air Pollution Control District Rule 220 40 tons/year 40 tons/year 50 FR 30943

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Rule 203 100 or 250 tons/year* 40 tons/year 76 FR 43183

San Joaquin Valley Un ified

Air Pollution Control District Rule 2410 100 or 250 tons/year* 40 tons/year Pending**

* The 100 tons/year trigger applies only to certain types of sources, including petroleum refineries, kraft pulp mills, and portland cement plants, whereas the 2 50 tons/year trigger applies to all other types of sources not specifically listed in 40 Code of Federal Regulations 52.21(b)(1)(i)(a).

* * On June 16, 2011, the San Joaquin Valley district adopted Rule 2410, covering PSD permitting. The r ule was

submitted to U.S. EPA, and the proposed r ule was published in the Federal Register on June 1, 2012 (77 FR 32493). ARB anticipates the rule will be final by November 1, 2012; however, this is dependent on when

notice of the final rule is published in the Federal Re gister

.

In addition to the six districts listed in Table A

- 2, two California districts, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and the South Coast Air Quality Management District, operate their PSD programs with partial delegation authority. Those portions of their PSD programs that have not been delegated are administered by U.S. EPA. The remaining districts in California have PSD programs for both NO 2 and GHG that are wholly administered by

U.S. EPA. However, a number of these districts are at various stages in the rule development and submittal process for U.S. EPA approval. The current status of the district efforts are

summarized in Table A

- 3.Ap pendix A Page A

- 6 TABLE A

- 3

Status o f District PSD Rule Development and Approval

District District Rule

Number St atus

Antelope Valley Air Quality Management

District - - - Rule under develop ment

San Francisco Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2.2 Rule under develop ment

Butte County Air Quality Management

District 1107 Rule adopted by district; awaiting submit tal to

U.S. EPA

Eastern Kern County Air Pollution Control

District 210.4 Submitted to U.S. EPA, but not yet proposed

Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control

District 221 Rule adopted by district ; awaiting submittal to

U.S. EPA

Imperial County Air Poll ution Control

District 904 Submitted to U.S. EPA, but not yet proposed

Mojave Desert Air Quality Management

District --- Rule under develop ment

Placer County Air Pollution Control

District 518 Submitted to U.S. EPA, but not yet proposed

San Diego County Air Pollution Control

District 20.3 Rule adopted by district; awaiting submittal to

U.S. EPA

San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution

Control District 220 Rule adopted by district; awaiting submittal to

U.S. EPA

Santa Barbara County Air Pollution

Control Di strict 803 Rule adopted by district; awaiting submittal to

U.S. EPA

South Coast Air Quality Management

District Reg XVII Delegation from U.S. EPA; SIP for GHG out for public comment

Ventura County Air Pollution Control

District 26.1 Rule adopted by distr ict; awaiting submittal to

U.S. EPA

Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management

District 3.24 Submitted to U.S. EPA, but not yet proposed

Interstate and International Transport Provisions [§110(a)(2)(D)]

This section prohibits the transport of NO 2 from one st ate to another, where the pollutant could c ontribut e significantly to violations of the federal NO 2 standard,

interfere with maintenance of the federal NO 2 standard , or contribute to reduced visibility

.

California has longstanding programs to reduce N O

x emissions from all types of sources as part of the statewide strategy to attain the federal ozone and PM 2.5 standards. These

programs also benefit NO 2 , which is a component of NO

x . Currently, there are no NO 2 nonattainment areas in the nation . C alifo rnia’s current network of community

- wide monitors

show NO 2 design values are below the level of the standard and thus, there is no potential for

NO 2 transport impact. Although h igher concentrations are expected near heavily travelled roadways

, these conce ntrations fall off rather quickly with distance from the road. T herefore,

whereas traffic

- related emissions have a potential to cause localized violations, they pose noAp pendix A Page A

- 7

potential for transport impact. In addition to nonattainment and maintenance issues

, NO 2 can impact visibility

. California ’s approved Regional Haze Plan will mitigate an y potential visibility impacts.

Discussion

California’s challenges with attaining the federal ozone and PM 2.5 standards have led to the development and implementatio n of one of the nation’s most compr e hensive emissions control strategies. The current statewide SIP strategy is heavily focused on reducing NO

x emissions . The reduction in NO

x emissions will directly benefit NO 2 air quality , as the majority

of NO 2 is not directly emitted, but is formed in the atmosphere from NO

x emissions

. A vailable monitoring data show that ambient NO 2 design values at all California sites are below the

level of the federal standards

. Current (2011) 1

- hour NO 2 design values rang e from 5 ppb to

75 ppb

, and annual NO 2 design values rang e from 1 ppb to 2 5 ppb, statewide

. With

continued implementation of the statewide SIP strategy, these design values are expected to

be reduced even further.

In addition to the current monitoring network, the 2010 federal NO 2 standard requires states to

establish a network of near

- roadway monitors, designed to capture concentrations along the most heavily travelled roads. Because motor vehicles are the largest source of NO

x emissions, U.S. EPA expects that concentrations at the near

- roadway sites will be higher than those measured by the current network. However, U.S. EPA also acknowledges that these

near

- roadway concentrations drop off quickly with distance from the roadway , so the impacts

are localized

. California’s most heavily travelled roadways are located in the highly developed, urban core regions (for example, Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Francisco Bay Area, and San Joaquin Valley). T hese urban regions are not adjacent to any state boundary . As a result, traffic

- related NO

x emissions in these areas will not contribute significantly to nonattainment, or interfere with maintenance of the NO 2 standard in another

area

. Should this become an issue in the future, California has a comprehensive mobile

s ource program and will address the need for any additional mobile source control measures through the SIP process

.

Finally, California submitted a SIP revision on November 16, 2007, addressing federal

t ransport requirements for the 1997 federal ozone an d PM 2.5 standards

. Although this Transport SIP does not deal specifical ly with NO 2 , it is relevant

, because the NO

x emissions that are precursors to ozone and PM 2.5 , also contribute to NO 2

. U.S. EPA approved all elements of California’s Transport SIP, ex cept the PSD element . U.S. EPA approved the PSD

element for those districts with a SIP

- approved PSD program and disapproved it for those

districts that lack a SIP

- approved PSD program ( 76 FR 48002; refer to previous section titled

“ Programs for Enforcemen t, PSD, and NSR [§110(a)(2)(C)] ” ). Fully a pprov ed elements of the Transport SIP include findings that California emissions (1) do not contribute to ozone or

PM 2.5 nonattainment in any other state (76 FR 34872), (2) do not interfere with maintenance

of th e ozone or PM 2.5 s tandards in any other state ( PSD element, partially approved;

76 FR 48002 ), and (3) do not interfere with other states’ measures to protect visibility (76 FR 34608 ). This last element comprises California’s Regional Haze Plan. Copies of California’s Transport SIP and Regional Haze Plan are available on ARB’s website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/sip.htm

.Ap pendix A Page A

- 8

Adequate Personnel, Funding, and Authority [§110(a)(2)(E)]

This section requires states and local districts to maintain adequate personnel, funding, and legal authority to implement their SIP and to ensure that a majority

of their board members represent the public interest

.

A majority of ARB and district budgets g o toward meeting federal CAA mandate s. Much of this funding comprises fees collected from regulated emission sources and dedicated to a ir pollution control activities. All ARB and district b oard members and program staff must comply with conflict of inte rest requirements established in State law.

Discussion

Each year, t he California State Legislature a pproves ARB’s funding and staff resources for carrying out CAA

- related programs. Similarly, district budgets are approved each year by the

districts ’ gov erning board s . The annual budget process provides a periodic update that enables ARB and the districts to adjust funding and personnel needs. Although it is not legally possible for ARB and the districts to provide specific commitments about future

- year funding, the annual budget appropriations process undertaken by the California State Legislature enables ARB to present a request for resources required to meet the mandates of the CAA. These mandated programs have received State funding for more than thr ee decades, and there is consistently strong public support in California for providing clean air. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that implementation of CAA mandates will continue to be funded at an appropriate level.

Over the last several years, more than 80 percent of ARB’s budget has gon e toward meeting

CAA mandates. Furthermore, the majority of ARB’s budget comprises dedicated fees collected from regulated emission sources. These funds can only be used for air pollution

control activities and are periodically adjusted to maintain the funding necessary for ARB programs. Districts receive funding from fees paid by regulated businesses, motor vehicle registration fees, State and federal grants, and other local revenue sources. Collectively, the

2009

- 2010 ARB and district budgets totaled $1.2 billion, with 3,422.4 full

- time equivalent staff positions. If a district fails to meet its responsibilities, California Health and Safety Code

s ection 39002 grants ARB the overall regulatory authority for districts’ air pollution control programs and the power to implement these programs.

California Government Code Sections 8 7100 through 87105 and Sections 87 300 through

87 314 specify conflict of interest requirements for State and local government agencie s

. These requirements specifically prohibit all S tate and local public officials from participating in governmental decisions in which they have a financial interest. They also direct ARB and the districts to develop conflict of interest policies to meet these legal requirements. Each year,

all A RB Board members and pro gram staff must complete a c onflict of i nterest statement (Form 700) , which becomes a public document. L ocal government boards and program staff are subject to similar disclosure requirem ents

.Ap pendix A Page A

- 9

Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting [§110(a)(2)(F)]

This section calls for states to require owners and operators of stationary

sources to install, maintain, and replace equipment for monitor ing stationary

source oxides of nitrogen emis sions and to provide periodic reports on these

emissions.

NO

x is generally the emissions component measured to reflect NO 2

. ARB maintains an emissions inventory for NO

x that goes beyond what U.S. EPA requires. In addition, State and district rules requ ire stationary source owners and operators to determine the amount of NO

x emitted by their facilities.

Discussion

D istricts are responsible for stationary source monitoring and reporting . However , ARB compiles stationary source emissions data from the districts and reports the information to

U.S. EPA. The specific legal requirement s are set forth in U.S. EPA’s Air Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR) rule ( http://www.epa.gov/t tn/chief/aerr/final_published_aerr.pdf )

. Facilities emitting 2,500 tons per year (tpy) or more of NO

x are required to report their emissions annually, while facilities emitting from 100 tpy to 2,499 tpy of NO

x are required to
report once every three year s. In addition to these reporting requirements, many districts have rules establishing federally enforceable permitting requirements , which are often more stringent than the U.S. EPA AERR rule requirements. For example, South Coast’s reporting requireme nts ( http://www.aqmd.gov/titlev/WhatIsTV.html ) have a lower threshold of 10 tpy

NO

x for stationary sources located in the South Coast Air Basin.

ARB maintains a publicly

- accessible emissions invento ry , including NO

x emissions, with information for more than 14,000 stationary source facilities in California. The inventory is

available on the ARB website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/disclaim.htm

. I n addition to emissions information for stationary sources, t he inventory includes emissi ons from other types of sources, including mobile sources (such as cars, trucks, and ocean going vessels),

area

- wide sources (such as residential fuel combustion and m anaged burning and disposal),

and wildfires. The NO

x emissions inventory is relevant not only to the NO 2 standard, but also for ozone and particulate matter ( PM 2.5 and PM 10 ), for which NO

x is a precursor.

Emissions estimates for stationary sources rely in part, on accurate emissions monitoring data. In addition, emissions monitoring data provide a basis for determining whether facilities

meet performance standards established in S tate and district rules. California Health and Safety Code s ection 41511 authorizes ARB and districts to adopt rules and regulations requiring any emission source owner or operator to take reasonable steps to determine the

amount of emissions released from the source. This would include emissions that contribute

to a violatio n of any ambient air quality standard, including the federal NO 2 standard

. In order to determine the amount of emissions coming from a particular source, d istricts have rules giving the Air Pollution Control Officer authority to request the installation, use, maintenance, and inspection of Continuous Emission Monitoring System ( CEMS ) equipment. Some district

rules that trigger the CEMS requirement are tied to specific so urce categories and/orAp pendix A Page A

- 10

emissions thresholds. These rules specify performance standa rds for the monitoring equipment, requirements for recordkeeping and reporting, and requirements for violation and equipment breakdown notification.

Contingency Plans for Emergency Episodes [§110(a)(2)(G)]

This section requires state s to include a co ntingency plan for NO 2 in their SIP and to have adequate authority to implement the plan during emergency episodes in areas that meet a specified threshold concentration

.

State law grants ARB and the districts authority comparable to U.S. EPA ’s authority to halt pollutant emissions that could cause a public health emergency or nuisance. NO 2 concentrations in California are well below the emergency threshold level specified in federal regulations

, and all areas are designated as unclassifiable/attainment. Thus, no area is required to have a contingency plan for NO 2 emergency episodes.

Discussion

States are to provide for authority comparable to that in CAA Section 303, which gives

U.S. EPA legal authority to halt the emission of air pollutants causi ng or contributing to injury

of the public or welfare. U.S. EPA is further authorized to either bring a lawsuit in federal court or, if such civil action cannot assure prompt protection of public health or welfare, to issue such orders as may be necessary to protect public health

, welfare

, or the environment. The authority granted to the U.S. EPA Administrator is vested in ARB and the distri cts under

California Health & Sa fety Code Section 42400

, et seq. These sections of California law apply to a range o f emission violations and impose penalties that are equivalent to or exceed

federal penalties for comparable violations.

In addition to having the proper authority, states must provide for adequate contingency plans to be implemented during emergency epis ode s in urban areas. Under 40 C ode of Federal Regulations (CFR) 51.150, NO 2 contingency plans are required in areas classified as Priority 1 . T he threshold concentration for a Priority 1 NO 2 area is 60 ppb, based on the

annual average concentration. Are as with annual average concentrations below 60 ppb are classified as Priority 3 areas

. Historically, the Metropolitan Los Angeles Intrastate Region (Los Angeles Region or Region) was designated as nonattainment for NO 2 and classified as a Priority 1 area

. The rest of California was designated as unclassifiable/attainment and classified as Priority 3 . Since U.S. EPA made the initial Priority classifications

, NO 2 concentrations have decreased substantially. For example, annual average

concentrations in th e Los Angeles R egion were up to 94 ppb in the early 1970s. Now, annual average concentrations range from 1 ppb to 25 ppb, statewide . These current levels are far

below the 60 ppb Priority 1 threshold.

U nder 40 CFR 51.152, Priority 3 areas do not need to develop contingency plans for

emergency episodes. Furthermore, 40 CFR 51.152(d)(1) states that th e Administrator may, at his discretion, exempt Priority 1 areas from the contingency plan requirements if thoseAp pendix A Page A

- 11

area s are designated as attainment or unc lassifiable for the federal standard under

CAA Section 107. Such is the case for the Los Angeles Re g ion with respect to NO 2 – all portions of the R egion are currently designated as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2010

federal NO 2 standard. Thus, ARB re quest s that the Administrator either exempt the

Los Angeles Region from the NO 2 contingency plan requirements or reclassify the Region as Priority 3, consistent with its current designation as unclassified/attainment for the federal NO 2 standard. With thi s act ion, no area of California is subject to the contingency plan/emergency episode requirements for NO 2

. Should the designation status of any area change in future years, ARB commits to s ubmit to U.S. EPA any necessary revisions

, through the SIP process

.

Future SIP Revisions [§110(a)(2)(H)]

This section requires states to revis e their SIP when an air quality standard i s promulgated or revised, new attainment methods become available, or U.S. EPA

determines a SIP is either inadequate or does not meet revised CAA requirements.

California has and will continue to submit revisions to its SIP, as mandated by U.S. EPA.

Discussion

Clean air is a priority in California. To help meet this goal, California is submitting this

Infrastructure SIP for NO 2 , in c ompliance with the revised federal NO 2 standard

. All areas of California are currently designated as unclassifiable/attainment for NO 2 . Should any area be designated as nonattainment in the future, ARB will work with the local district to develop an

appr ovable SIP for the nonattainment area and will submit that nonattainment SIP to

U.S. EPA by the statutory deadline. ARB maintains a current collection of all SIP documents

on its website at http://

www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/sip.htm

.

Consultation with Government Officials, Public Notification, PSD

, and Visibility

Protection [§110(a)(2)(J)]

This section requires states to meet requirements of the CAA relating to

consultation and public notific ation and to implement PSD and visibility protection programs for NO 2

.

ARB and air districts comply with all federal regulatory requirements, including requirements for consultation, notification, comment, and adoption. Furthermore, ARB

has information available on its website about ambient NO 2 concentrations and the health impacts of NO 2 in the ambient air. As describ ed earlier, in response to CAA Section 110(a)(2)( C ), PSD requirements are addressed at the district level

. Visibility

issues are addres sed in California’s approved Regional Haze SIP.Ap pendix A Page A

- 12 Discussion

CAA Section 121 requires states to provide a satisfactory process for consulting with general purpose local governments, designated organizations of elected local government officials, and any affected federal land manager in carrying out CAA requirements. California Health and Safety Code s ection 41650

, et seq.

, requires ARB to conduct public hearings and to solicit testimony from districts, air quality planning agencies, and the public when a dopting nonattainment plans for inclusion in the SIP. Additionally, the California Administrative Procedures Act, Government Code Section 11340

, et seq., requires notification and provision of comment opportunities to all parties affected by proposed reg ulations. Similarly, Health and Safety Code section 4 0 725 requires districts to conduct public hearings when adopting

, amen ding or repealing any rule.

CAA Section 127 requires states to provide measures that will be effective in notifying the public on a regular basis of instances or areas in which a federal standard wa s exceeded during the preceding calendar year. This requirement is similar to California Health and Safety Code s ection 39607, which require s ARB to implement a program for securing air quality data in each air basin and to report these data to the public. To fulfill this requirement, ARB maintains air quality data on its website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/aqdselect.php

. U. S. EPA developed the Air Quality Index (AQI) as a means to inform the public about how clean or polluted the air is and what associated health effects might be of concern. In promulgating the 2010 NO 2 standard, U.S. EPA made conforming changes to the AQI to

reflect the new 1

- hour standard

. ARB and districts use measured air quality to calculate daily
AQI values and provide the public with information about local NO 2 levels.

CAA Section 127 also requires states to advise the public about the health haza rds associated with air pollution and enhance public awareness of measures to prevent violation

of a federal standard . In compliance with this requirement, ARB maintains webpages detailing relevant health information ( http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/health/health.htm ) and ways of reducing air pollution ( http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/cando.htm ).

With respect to PSD requirements

, several distr icts in California administer fully SIP

- approved or partially delegat ed PSD programs that comply with the requirements for NO 2 . PSD programs in the remaining districts are administered by U.S. EPA through a federal stationary source permitting program und er enabling authority in 40 CF R Part 52.21

. However, a

number of these districts are currently in the process of developing or seeking U.S. EPA approval of their PSD programs. The status of the PSD program in California’s districts is

described in more d etail above, under the heading “Programs for Enforcement, PSD, and NSR [§110(a)(2)(C)].”

With respect to visibility protection

, California has in place, a Regional Haze Plan that

U.S. EPA approved on June 14, 2011. Although the Regional Haze Plan does not deal specifically with NO

x as it relates to the federal NO 2 standard, it addresses NO

x , as a component of particle pollution . Thus, provisions of the State’s Regional Haze Plan will reduce the impact of NO 2 on visibility , with the long

- term goal of im proving visibility in

Class 1 areas

. California’s Regional Haze Plan is available on the ARB website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/reghaze/reghaze.htm

.Ap pendix A Page A

- 13

Air Quality Modeling/Data [§1 10(a)(2)(K)]

This section requires states to us e air quality model s to predict the effect of NO

x

e missions on ambient concentrations and to submit the modeling data to
U.S. EPA when requested.

ARB is well versed in the use of air quality models to predic t the impact of emissions on air quality. ARB modeling complies with U.S. EPA guidance, and ARB works closely with districts that conduct their own modeling to ensure similar compliance. Modeling results are available
on request.

Discussion

The major NO

x emission sources are mobile sources and stationary sources. ARB ha s an air quality modeling group with extensive experience related to modeling all types of sources for compliance with the federal standards . Furthermore, ARB’s air quality modeling wo rk complies with U.S. EPA’s guidance on the use of models. In addition, ARB documents

information used when conducting modeling or evaluating the performance of air quality models used for this purpose. Finally , ARB consults and works closely with distri cts that conduct their own air quality modeling to ensure compatibility with federal guidelines

.

In an effort to ensure that proposed new or modified sources c omply with the federal NO 2 standard, district and State representatives worked cooperatively thr ough CAPCOA to develop a common platform of information, tools, and stationary source modeling recommendations specific to the new 1

- hour NO 2 standard. The protocols are described in a

document titled Modeling Compliance of the Federal 1

- Hour NO 2 NAAQS

, released

October 27, 2011. The modeling protocols are consistent with guidance provided by

U.S. EPA.

ARB provides air quality modeling software and do cumentation with links to databases and search engines at http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/soft.htm#modeling . This page includes a link to

both State

- approved and U.S. EPA

- approved models and doc umentation.

Permitting Fees [§110(a)(2)(L)]

This section requires states to assess NO 2 stationary source owner s or operators fees to cover the cost of reviewing and acting on a permit application

. I f a permit is granted, states must also assess fees t o cover the cost of implementing and enforcing the permit. Finally, o wners or operators m u st comply with the fee provisions of Title V Sections 501 through 507 of the CAA and pay s uch fees to the permitting authority.

Districts are responsible for issu ing stationary source permits, and each district has rules requiring additional fees subject to Title V requirements.Ap pendix A Page A

- 14 Discussion

As described in the previous section on “ Programs for Enforcement, PSD, and NSR [§ 110(a)(2)(C) ]

, ” responsibility for issuing stationary source permits is vested with the districts, and each district in California has adopted r ule s requiring an additional fee for facilities subject to Title V requirements. Information on district

- issued permits is

available on the ARB website a t http://www.arb.ca.gov/permits/airdisop.htm and http://www.arb.ca.gov/permits/permits.htm . In addition, ARB maintains various email

notif ication lists that provide subscribers with current, o n

- going email notification about updates and changes to program s related to permitting

. Information about subscribing

to these email notification lists is also available on the ARB website a t http://www.arb.ca.gov/permits/permits.htm

.

Consultation/Participation by Affected Local Entities [§110(a)(2)(M)]

This section requires states to consult with and allow political subdivisions

affected by the NO 2 Infrastructure SIP to participate in the development process

.

ARB coordinates on a regular basis with the State’s 35 districts. State law requires ARB to

conduct a public hearing and solicit input from affected agencies and the public when

dev eloping any SIP document

.

Discussion

California is divided into 35 districts, comprising county or regional local government authorities with responsibility for controlling stationary source emission s. A map of district

boundaries is available on ARB’ s website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/capcoa/dismap.htm . Links

to districts’ websites are available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/capcoa/roster.htm

.

ARB consults and provides liaison with all districts and provides for frequent and regular communication and consultation with management and staff of these districts. Because district boards are composed of local elected officials, this framework provid es for regular consultation with and participation by local government entities (cities and counties) affected by the SIP. Furthermore, California Health and Safety Code section 41650, et seq., requires

ARB to conduct a public hearing and to solicit testi mony from districts, air quality planning agencies, and the public when adopting SIP

- related documents

. The districts have a similar process for soliciting participation and comment with respect to proposed regulatory actions.