# Attachment 2 Complete Copy of the Amendments to the 2004 Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration PlanEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised October20. 2005 

### TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES

........................................................................................................... v LIST OF FIGURES

.........................................................................................................vi



### .

### .

................................................................................................ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VJI

.................................................................................................. 

### 1 INTRODUCTION 1-1



### ....................................................................... 1.1 PURPOSE OF THIS PLAN 1-1



### ........................................................................ 1.2 REGULATORY ASPECTS 1-2



### .............................................................. 1.2.1 Attainment Classification 1-2

............................................................... 1.2.2 Agency Responsibilities 1-3



### ........................................................ 1.2.3 Sanctions, FIP and penalties 1-4



### .................................................................................... 1.2.4 Conformity 1-4



### ................................................................... 1.3 SJVAB PLANNING HISTORY 1-5

.......................................................... 1.4 SERIOUS AREA REQUIREMENTS 1-8 1.5 PLAN DEVELOPMENT



### ............................................................................. 1-10 1.5.1

. Process



### ................................................................................... 1210



### ...................................................................................... 1.5.2 Schedule 1-11

........................................................................................ 1.5.3 Content 1-11



### ............................................................. 

### 2 SANJOAQUIN VALLEY AIR QUALITY 2-1 2.1 INTRODUCTION



### ....................................................................................... 2.1



### ...................................... 2.2 AIR QUAI-ITY DETERMINANTS IN THE SJVAB 2-2 2.2.1 General

........................................................................................ 2-2 2.2.2 Geography and Topography



### ........................................................2-2 2.2.3 Climate



### ......................................................................................... 2-3



### .......................................................................... 2.2.4 Ozone Transport 2-6 2.2.5 Population

....................................................................................2-7 2.2.6 Development Patterns

.................................................................. 2-8 2.3 OZONE

...................................................................................................... 2-9 2.3.1 Background



### .................................................................................. 2-9 2.3.2 Adverse Effects

...........................................................................-2-9 2.3.3 Precursors and Formations

.......................................................... 2-11 2.3.4 Design Value Determinations from Ozone Levels



### ........................ 2-12 2.3.5 Area Classification for the One (1)-Hour Ozone Standard



### ........... 2-13 2.3.6 One (1)-Hour Ozone Exceedance Trends

.................................... 2-13 2.3.7 Status of Federal 8-Hour Standard

.............................................. 2-15 2.4 OZONE MONITORING



### ............................................................................. 2-16 2.4.1 Monitoring Network

....................................................................... 2-16 2.4.2 Other Ozone Monitoring

............................................................... 2-18 2.4.3 Conclusion

................................................................................... 2-26

SJVUA PCD .Tableof Contents IEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised October20. 2005
2.5 OTHER POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN INTHE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY

..................................................................................................... 2.26 2.5.1 Particulate Matter

......................................................................... 2-26 2.5.2 Carbon Monoxide

.........................................................................2-28 2.5.3 Toxic Air Pollutants



### ...................................................................... 2-28 2.6 REFERENCES



### .......................................................................................... 2-29



### ................................................................................... 3 EMISSIONS INVENTORY 3-1

....................................................................................... 3.1 IN-TRODUCTION 3-1 3.2 INVENTORY TYPES



### ................................................................................. 3-1



### ....................................................................... 3.2.1 Modeling Inventory 3-1



### ....................................................................... 3.2.2 Planning Inventory 3-3



### ......................................................... 3.2.3 Data Sources and Accuracy 3-3



### ............................................................... 3.2.4 Emission Source Types 3-4 3.3 BASELINEYEAR EMISSIONS



### ................................................................. 3-6



### ........................................................................... 3.4 FUTURE INVENTORIES 3-12 3.4.1 Growth Factors



### ...........................................................................3-12



### ............................................................................. 3.4.2 Control Factors 3-13



### ...................................... 3.4.3 Inclusion of Emission Reduction Credits 3-13



### ........................................................................ 3.5 CONFORMITY BUDGETS 3-23



### ........................................... 3.6 EMISSIONS INVENTORY UNCERTAIN-I-IES 3-24



### ........................................................................................... 3.7 CONCLUSION 3-25



### ....................................................................................... 4 CONTROL STRATEGY 4-1



### ....................................................................................... 4.1 INTRODUCTION 4-1



### ....................................... 4.2 DISTRICT RULE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE 4-1



### ............................................................. 4.2.1 District Control Measures 4-4



### ............................................................... 4.2.2 Control Measures Table 4-5 4.2.3 2004-2007 Control Measures

....................................................... 4-8 4.2.4 Potential Control Measures Requiring Further Study

................... 4-28

................................ 4.2.5 Reasonably Available Control Technologies 4-35



### .......................... 4.2.6 Clean Fuels or Advanced Control Technologies 4-37



### .................................................................. 4.3 FUTURE STUDY MEASURES 4-37 4.3.1 Mobile Source Measures

............................................................. 4-38



### ............................................................................. 4.3.2 Other Sources 4-39 4.3.3 Sustainable Incentives



### ................................................................. 4-40

........................................................ 4.4 DISTRICT INCENTIVE PROGRAMS 4-41

........................................ 4.4.1 Heavy-Duty Engine Incentive Program 4-42 4.4.2 Electric Lawn Mower Incentives



### ...................................................4-42



### .......................................................................... 4.4.3 Future Programs 4-43

SJVUA PCD Table of Contents IIEXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN RevisedOctober20. 2005



### ............................................................................... 4.5 PUBLIC EDUCATION 4-43 4.5.1 Outreach Program

........................................................................ 4-44 4.5.2 District Publications



### ...................................................................... 4-45 4.5.3 Youth Education



### ...........................................................................4-45 4.5.4 EventsIActivities

........................................................................... 4-46

.................................................. 4.6 

### OVERVIEWOFREGIONALTPARACM 4-46 4.6.1 Introduction



### .................................................................................. 4-46

.................................................... 4.6.2 Overview of existing measures 4-47

................................................................... 4.6.3 Suggested measures 4-50 4.6.4 Adopted measures



### ....................................................................... 4-51



### ....................................................................... 4.6.5 Public Participation 4-51



### ............................... 4.7 STATE EMISSION REDUCTIONS FOR THE SJVAB 4-53



### .................................................................................. 4.7.1 Introduction 4-53

..................................................... 4.7.2 Current Implementation Status 4-54

....................... 4.7.3 ARB Commitments for Extreme OADP for SJVAB 4-55



### ................................................................... 4.8 CON1-INGENCYMEASURES 4-57 4.9 LONG-TERM MEASURES



### .....................;

### .................................................. 4-58 5 FUTURE OZONE AIR QUALITY



### ......................................................................... 5-1



### .............................................................. 5.1 INTRODUCTION 

### & SUMMARY 5-1 5.2 PARTICIPANTS



### ...................................................................................5-1



### ....................................................................................... 5.3 MODEL CHOICE 5-1 5.4 MODEL BASE CASE

................................................................................ 5-2



### ............................................................... 5.5 FUTUREYEAR PROJECTIONS 5-5



### ........................................................... 5.6 ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION 5-9

.......................................... 5.7 MODELING CAVEATSAND FUTURE WORK 5-13 6 OUTREACH

......................................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 IN-rRODUC1-ION

....................................................................................... 6-1 6.2 PRE-DRAFT PLAN WORKSHOPS

...........................................................6-1 6.3 CITIZEN'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE



### ....................................................... 6-2 6.4 DISTRICT GOVERNING BOARD



### ............................................................. 6-2 6.5 WEB SITE POSTINGS



### .............................................................................. 6-3 6.6 STUDY AGENCY

...................................................................................... 6-3 6.7 DRAFT EXTREME OADP



### ......................................................................... 6-3 6.8 PROPOSED EXTREME OADP



### ................................................................. 6-4



### ............................................. 

### 7 RATE OF PROGRESS (ROP) DEMONSTRATION 7-1



### ........................................................................................ 7.1 INTRODUCTION 7-1



### ......................... 7.2 1990 RATE OF PROGRESS BASELINE INVENTORIES 7-1

................................... 7.3 FUTUREYEAR (2008AND 2010) INVENTORIES 7-3 7.4 1990-2008 MILESTONE (51 PERCENT) DEMONSTRA1-ION



### .................. 7-3



### ..................................... 7.4.1 Required 51 Percent Reduction for 2008 7-4



### ......................................... 7.4.2 2008 Rate of Progress Demonstration 7-4

SJVUAPCD Table of Contents

... 111EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised October20. 2005

.................. 7.5 1990-2010 MILESTONE (57 PERCENT) DEMONSTRATION 7-6

..................................... 7.5.1 Required57PercentReductionfor2010 7-6

................................................................. 7.5.2 201 0 Rate of Progress 7-9

............ 7.6 PRIOR ROP 

### & MILESTONE COMPLIANCE DEMONSTRATION 7-13 7.6.1 Prior ROP

.................................................................................... 7-13

......................................... 7.6.2 Milestone Compliance Demonstration 7-15 7.7 REFERENCES

..........................................................................................7-16 8 CALIFORNIA CLEAN AIR ACT TRIENNIAL PROGRESS REPORT AND



### ................................................................................................. PLAN REVISION 8-1 8.1 IN-TRODUCTION



### ....................................................................................... 8-1 8.1.1 Attainment Demonstration



### ............................................................ 8-2 8.1.2 Air Basin Description



### .................................................................... 8-2

........................................................ 8.2 

### OZONEAIRQUALITYINDICATORS 8-3 8.2.1 Air Quality Indicators



### ................................................................... -8-3

................................. 8.2.2 Expected Peak Day Concentration (EPDC) 8-3 8.2.3 Exposure Indicators



### .................................................................... 8-4

.......... 8.3 PROGRESS TOWARD AIR QUALITY STANDARD ATTAINMENT 8-6



### ....................................................................... 8.4 TRANSPORT MITIGATION 8-13



### .............................................. 8.5 CONTROL MEASURE IMPLEMENTA1-ION 8-16



### ........................................... 8.5.1 Stationary Source Control Measures 8-16



### ................................................. 8.5.2 Mobile Source Control Measures 8-19 8.5.3 Land Use Programs



### ..................................................................... 8-22



### ....................................................................................... 8.6 PLAN REVISION 8-23



### .................................................................................. 8.6.1 Introduction 8-23



### ........................................................................... 8.6.2 Control Strategy 8-23

............................... 8.6.3 Updated Strategy and Expected Reductions 8-25



### ............................................................... 8.6.4 Further Study Measures 8-26

.......................................................................................... 8.7 REFERENCES 8-27



### .......................................................................... 9 ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY 9-1



### .............................................................................................. 9.1 ACRONYMS 9-1 9.2 GLOSSARY



### ............................................................................................... 9-4 APPENDICES



### ................................... A



### . County Emission Inventoriesfor On-Road Motor Vehicles A-1 B



### . Current List of Emission Reduction Credits

.......................................................... B-1 C



### . Regional Transportation Planning Agency Commitments



### ....................................C-1 D



### . Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations



### ............................................................D-1



### .................................................... E



### . Cap onstationary Source Growth by Pollutant E-1 F



### . Suggested Control Measures



### ...............................................................................F-1



### ................................................................................. G



### . Clean Air Act Requirements G-1 

### H

. Comments and Responses: Public Review of Draft Extreme OADP

................... H-1

. - SJVUAPCD - Table of ContentsEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN RevisedOctober20. 2005

Table # Table 1-1 Table 1-2 Table 2-1 Table 2-2 Table 3-1 Table 3-2 Table 3-3 Table 3-4 Table 4-1 Table 4-2 Table 4-3 Table 5-1 Table 7-1 Table 7-2 Table 7-3 Table 7-4 Table 7-5 Table 7-6 Table 8-1 Table 8-2 Table 8-3 Table 8-4 Table 8-5 Table 8-6 

### LIST OF 

### TABLES Title Page #

..................... Nonattainment Classifcation and Design Value Assignment 1-2



### .............. Requirements for Severe versus Extreme Nonattainment Areas 1-9 SJVAB Populationsand Land Area



### ........................................................... 2-8

................ Ozone Monitoring Stations in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin 2-19

.................. SJVAB 2000. 2008 and 2010 Planniug Emissions Inventories 3-7 Estimated NOx Growth. Control and Estimated Offset Usefor Stationary Sources



### .................................................................................... 3-15 EstimatedVOC Growth. Control and Estimated Offset Use for Stationary Sources

.................................................................................... 3-18



### ........................................................... Transportation Conformity Budgets 3-24



### ........................................ District Cor~trol Measure Schedule (2004-2007) 4-2

................................ Potential Control Measures Requiring Further Study 4-6

...................... Defined State Measures from the 2003 Statewide Strategy 4-56

.................................. SJVAB Federal 1 -Hour Ozone Attainment Concept 5-11 1990 ROP BaselineYear Inventory



### ........................................................... 7-2 1990 Adjusted Base Year VOC Inventory Calculations (TonslDay)



### ..........7-3 Reductions from Adopted Rules and Regulations Not Included in

.................................................. the 2008 and 2010 Projected Inventories 7-4



### ...................................... 2008 Rate of Progress Demonstration Summary 7-7



### ...................................... 2010 Rate of Progress Demonstration Summary 7-11 Comparison of Unadjusted Emissions Inventories used in Amended



### ................................................ 200212005 ROP Plan and Extreme OADP 7-14 San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Ozone Exceedances



### ................................... 8-7 BARCT Rules



### ............................................................................................ 8-15 2001 -2003 Rulemaking Schedule

.............................................................. 8-16 Actual Emissions Reductions for District Rules Affecting Ozone Precursor Emissions (2000-2002)



### ............................................................. 8-19 RulemakingSchedule for 2003-2005



### ........................................................ 8-25 Planning Emissions Inventories (summer. tonslday)

.................................8-26

SJVUAPCD ListofTables

### EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN RevisedOctober20.2005

Figure Figure 2-1 Figure 2-2 Figure2-3 Figure 2-4 Figure 2-5 Figure2-6 Figure 4-1 Figure 5-1 Figwe 5-2 Figure 5-3 Figure 5-4 Figure 5-5 Figure 7-1 Figure 7-2 Figure 8-1 Figure 8-2 Figure 8-3 Figure 8-4 Figure 8-5 Figure 8-6 Figure 8-7 Figure 8-8 Figure 8-9 Figure 8-1 0 

### LIST OF 

### FIGURES Title Page #



### ............................ Counties Comprisingthe San Joaquin Valley Air Basin 2-1



### ........................ San Joaquin Valley Wind Patterns During Ozone Season 2-4 Basin 

### I -Hour Design Value for 1986-2003



### ................................................ 2-13



### ...................... Number of Days Over the 

### I -Hour Federal Ozone Standard 2-14



### .................................................. San Joaquin Valley Ozone Exceedances 2-15

................... San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Air Quality Monitoring Network 2-17 Overviewof Local Government Control Measure Processfor the



### ....................................... Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan 4-49



### ....................... Wind Field for July 30. 2000 at 5:00 AM and 3:00 PM PST 5-4



### ............................. Maximum Ozone Concentration. 2000 CCOS Episode 5-6

..................... Change in Maximum Ozone Concentration due to Wildfires 5-7 Maximum Ozone Concentration. 2010. without Additional Controls



### ..........5-8



### .................... Carrying Capacity Diagram for Bakersfield on July 30. 2010 5-10 Graphical Summary of 2008 ROP Demonstration for San Joaquin Valley Ozone



### ............................................................................................. 7-8 Graphical Summary of 2010 ROP Demonstration for San Joaquin



### ............................................................................................. Valley Ozone 7-12



### ............................... Expected Peak Day Concentration at Arvin-Bear Site 8-8 Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Bakersfield Golden State Site



### .......................................................................................................... 8-9 Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Bakersfield 5558



### ..................................................................................... California Ave Site 8-9



### . . ............ Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Clovis N Villa Ave Site 8-10

............... Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Fresno 1' Street Site 8-10



### .................... Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Hanford-Irwin Site 8-11 Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Maricopa-Stanislaus



### .................................................................................................. Street Site 8-11 Expected Peak Day Concentration at the Merced-South Coffee Ave



### .Site



### .................................................................................................... 8-12



### ........................................ Area Weighted Exposure per Square Kilometer 8-12



### ............................................... Population Weighted Exposure per Person 8-13



### SJVUAPCD List ofFigures vi

## Chapter 

## 4

# - Control StrategyEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05


### 4 

### CONTROL STRATEGY

Federal law requires the District, as an extreme nonattainment area for the federal I-hour ozone standard, to include certain provisions in the attainment plan. Specifically, the Federal CleanAir Act (CAA) requires that this plan must "provide for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures as expeditiocrsly as practicable", (Section 172(c)(l)) make "reasonable further progress." (Section 172(c)(2)) and include "enforceable emission limitations, and such other control measures, means or techniques..." which are needed and appropriate to demonstrate cornpliancewith the federal standards (Section 172(c)(6)). The California Clean Air Act, as codified in the California Health and Safety Code (CH&SC), also requires the planto include provisions for the use of best available retrofit control technology (BARCT)for existing permitted sources. (CH&SC Section 40919(a)(3)) and include "every feasible measure in the plan

### ..." (CH&SC Section 40914(b)(2) To satisfy these CAA and CH&SC requirements, this section of the Plan includes control measures for stationary sources subject to District regulations (with associated rule development schedules) and control measures for mobile and area sources subject to ARB rules. It also summarizes commitments made by the Valley Regional Transportation PlanningAgencies (RTPA) to undertake projects with air quality benefits. Lastly, Chapter 4 includes information about local, state, and federal pollution control incentive programs. 

### 4.2 

### DISTRICT RULE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE As a result of the previouslyAmended 2002 and2005 Ozone RateofProgress Plan (Ozone ROPPlan) and the 2003 PMIO Plan (PMIO Plan), the District is already committedto develop a number of control measures in the form of new or amended rules. The control measures in the Ozone ROPPlanare designed to reduce NOx and VOC emissions. Duringthe winter months, these pollutants are also sources of secondary PMIO, so the 

### PMIO Plan includes control measures for NOx and VOC as well. The rule development schedule shown in Table 4-1 includes commitments from those plans for NOx and VOC reductions. The basis for these control measures isfederal, state and local requirementsor other considerations that are identified in the control measure detail section of this report. These measures do not include 

### PMIO Plancommitmentsthat would not impact ozone formation.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control Strategy 4- 1

### EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Rev~sed 10/20/05


### Table 4-1: District Control Measure Schedule (2004

# - 2007)

- 9510 New6 Indirect Source Mitigation1 3180 New6 E Small Boilers, Process Heaters, Steam Generators, 4Q-2005 NOx 4307 New6 2.0

### - 5.0 MM~tulhr F 4694 New6 Wineries

### - Fermentation and Storage

H 4702~ Stationary IC Engines 2Q

### - 2005 NOx

pppp I 4309 New6 Commercial ~r~ers~ 4Q-2005 NOx J 4565 New CompostingIBiosolids Operations -- K 4602 Automotive Coating L 4570 Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations 2Q - 2006 VOC



### SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4

# - Control Strategy

### EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05


### Table 4-1: District Control Measure Schedule (2004

## - 2007) '(cont.)

3Q-2007 VOC Q 41 03 Open Burning Phase Ill R 4682 Polymeric Foam Manufacturing 3Q - 2007 VOC S 4703 Stationary Gas Turbines (< 10 MW, distributed generation) -- T -4621, 4624 Gasoline Storage& Transfer U New Aviation Fuel Transfer, Phase 1 1 CCOS data is not available. Emissionsand reductions based on reductions generated byfunding projects with Indirect Source Mitigation fees. 2 CCOS data is not available. Emissions and reductions based on preliminary draft staff report. 3 CCOS data is not available. Emissions and reductions based on contracted emissions inventory report. 4 Rules with an average daily emissions of less than 0.05 tonslday may be includedto satisfy federal and state requirementsfor RACT, BACTor all feasible controls.

Please see the control measure details for additional information. All data reflect CCOS SIP information using summer daily planning inventories, intons per day (tpd), except as noted. 6This control measure appears in2003 PMIO Plan (Tables 4-17 through 4-20, as amended, December2003), but elements of the rule (e.g., estimated emissions

reductions, baseline emissions, rule description, etc.) have been updated for this Extreme OADP;consequently, the control measure elements may not match those presented in the 2003 PMIO Plan for the same measure. Furthermore, the following additional PMIO Plan control measures, which are not shown above inTable 4-1 because they were adopted as rules before the Table was developed (ca January 2004), are used inthis Extreme OADPfor attainment (Chapter5) and rate of progress (Chapter 7) demonstrations: Rule 4604 (Can and Coil Coating), Rule 4408 (Glycol Dehydration Systems), Rule 4610 (Glass Coating Operations), Rule 4306 (Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters), and Incentive Programs. Emissions reductions from these rules as given inTables 4-17 through 4-20 of the 2003 PMIO Plan were converted to summer emissions before being used elsewhere inthis Extreme OADP. 7 The 2008 baseline and Emission Reductions were originally included the Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan because the early versions ofthe plan were

dependenton reductions from future rulesto meet 2008 and 201 0 Rate of Progress (ROP) requirements. Onthe day of plan adoption, District staff substituted a new ROP demonstration that met the 2008 and 2010 ROP milestones with rules adopted as of September 2002, thereby eliminating the need for 2008 Commitments. These commitments were inadvertently left inthe plan when it was sent to EPA on November 15, 2004. State law prohibits the inclusion of control measures in the State Implementation Plan that are not neededto meet federal Clean Air Act requirements (California Health and Safety Code 539062). Consequently, the District removed the 2008 Commitments.



### SJVUAPCD Chapter 4

# - ControlStrategyEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
4.2.1 District Control Measures Section 172 of the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) requires non-attainment plans to: "provide for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as practical (including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the area as may beobtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology) and shall provide for attainment of the national primary ambient air quality standards." To determine what stationary source control measures might befeasible for adoption in the SJVAB, the District considered the California Air Resources Board's 

### Identification of Performance Standards for Stationary Sources (as updated May 16, 2002); control measures committed to or successfully implemented in other regions [including South CoastAir Quality Management District,the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and the HoustonGalveston (Texas) Area]; and control measures suggested by staff and members of the public at workshops held during the control measure development process. Some of those control measures were eliminated from the 

### Ozone ROP Plan and 

### PMlO Plan commitments, however, because:

# - the District had already adopted rules as effective asthose described, similar rules are currently being developed, or the SJVAB has few or no sources inthe affected categories. The District evaluated the remaining control measures, using baseline inventories, known control technology, potential emission reductions, and the feasibility of implementation by 2008. Based upon this evaluation, the District placed measures intothe control measure schedule. From 2004 to 2007, the District's rule development schedulewill include the rules shown in Table 4-1. The schedule includes both new rules and amendments to existing rules that are necessary to satisfy applicable requirements including RACT, BARCT, and reasonable further progress toward attaining the one-hour ozone standard. The control measures indicated are those that the District commits to either developing as r~~les, or evaluatingfor possible rule development. Projects may be added or removed based on information received during the development of the Plan; detailed examination of the emission inventories and feasible control measures; or future local, state and federal requirements. The District may develop new control measure schedules in future years. These schedules will be reflected in future SIP amendments that would be adopted by the District Governing Board, submitted to ARB for review and approval, and then submitted to EPA as a SIP amendment. For the purposes of implementingthis 

### Extreme OADP,the District is committed to adopt and implement control measures that will achieve, in aggregate, the emissions reductions specified in Table 4-1 and described in Section 4.2.3.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4 

## - Control Strategy 4-4EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
Emission reductions achieved in excess of the amount committed to in a given year can be applied to the emission reduction commitments of subsequent years. The District is committed to adopt the control measures listed in Table 4-1 unless these measures, or a portion thereof, are found infeasible and the District adopts other substitute measures that achieve equivalent reductions to meet any required milestone. Findings of infeasibilitywill be made at a regularly scheduled meeting of the District Governing Board with proper notification. Forthe purposes of State Implementation Plan commitments, infeasibility meansthat the proposed control strategy is not reasonably likely to be available by the implementation date in question, the actual emission inventory is significantly less than originally presented inthe plan, or achievement of the emission reductions by that date is not cost-effective. The District acknowledges that this commitment is enforceable under Section 304(f) of the federal Clean Air Act.


### 4.2.2 Control Measures Table Table 4-1 summarizes ozone precursor control measures grouped according to their proposed rule development schedule. In order to demonstrate compliance with the 2010 federal ozone standard, the District must have three years of "clean" air quality data. Therefore, control measures must be adopted as rules and implemented by operators by Spring 2008, in order for the measures to generate air quality benefits that satisfy the ozone attainment deadline. The control measures were scheduled based on a number of factors including the size of the existing emission inventory; the feasibility of control measuresfor the class and category of source; projected emission reductions which might result; similar controls already required or proposed by other districts; and possible implementation schedules. Some control measureswere considered that will require additional refinement of the emissions inventory and/or further research into feasible emission controls. These measures have been placed in Table 4-2 for further study. Table 4-1 contains control measures for the rule projects currently scheduled to be developed in 2004 through 2007, as well as their projected adoption dates, emissions inventories for 2008 and 2010, and estimated reductions. These are measures for which the District has an adequate emissions inventory and/or for which reasonable control measures have been established by the District or other agency. The District has already begun rule development on many of the rules that are listed for 2004 and 2005 adoption.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

# - Control Strategy 4-5EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05

Table 4-2: Potential Control Measures Requiring Further Study

When available, emission inventory data for 2008 and 201 0 was taken from the ARB State Implementation Plan (SIP) Emission Projects (Central California Ozone Study (CCOS) Domain), Version 2.1 1, datasets (http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/ccos/fcemssumcatcc211.php). This data reflects the daily summer average emissions from the various for stationary source categories. The future year inventory was adjusted by ARB for projected growth and controlled for rule requirements that would apply to the source category prior to the indicatedyear. No adjustment was made to the baseline for the control measures indicated in Table 4-1 but the results of the proposed control measures are reflected in the "reductions" column. Further Study A B C D E F G H I J K

As noted in Table 4-1, emissions inventory data from several sources was used for the measures such as Composting/Biosolids Operations, for which the CCOS data was not available, or for measures such Commercial Dryers, which will only affect a small subset of a larger industrial emissions category. The emissions inventory information differs from tlie CCOS data in that it is typically calculated as an annual average rather than a summertime average. Ifcomparable CCOS data were not available, the alternate data was not adjusted for growth. Because some of the emissions categories are not addressed by current rules and

S



### JVUAPCD Rule Number(s) 2280 New 4402' 4625 New 4653 4607 4641 4607 4902 New New

Chapter

### 4

# - Control Strategy 4-6

Description Portable Equipment Asphalt Plant DryersIHeaters Sumps, Pits, and Wastewater Processing Equipment Fugitive Emissions - Heavy Oil Stream Adhesives NOx, VOC VOC VOC VOC GraphicArts Cutback Asphalt Application Restaurants, Under-fired Charbroilers ResidentialWater Heaters Furnaces Brandy Production VOC NOx, VOC NOx VOCEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 regulations, the emission inventories were also not controlled for the current applicable rules. Sources for this data include the ARB emission inventory data, District-contracted emissions inventory studies, and District staff reports. Footnotes in Table 4-1 describe the specific data sources used. Due to the necessary assumptions made in compiling the data for the CCOS inventories, the ARB emission inventory, and the contracted study inventories, results of the final rule development calculations may differ from each of these. As a routine step in the r~~le development process, the District generates specific emission baseline and reduction information. Such information is typically based on detailed information about actual equipment and control levels, and therefore is a more accurate reflection of the true emissions and reduction potentials in the SJVAB. Where appropriate, the more accurate data will be submitted to update the CCOS and ARB inventories. Future planning exercises will reflect the more accurate baseline inventory and emission reduction data as it is developed. The emission reductions indicated in Table 4-1 are based on percent reductions from the baseline emission inventories. These percentages reflect assumed control technologies, control effectiveness, and rule applicability and penetration rates. The percent reduction represents the District's reduction commitment for the particular control measure. Table 4-1 emission reduction numbers (in tons per day) reflect the current emission inventory data and reflect the outcome of the percentage commitment, but are subject to revision as the inventories are refined. For example, scientists and engineers are now studying the emission factor for the Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations category to determine if the current factor accurately represents VOC emissions. The outcome of that study will be used to update the emissions inventory and could result in a new estimated emissions reduction. These changes, however, will not necessarily impact the percent reduction that is applied to the category. Table 4-2 indicates the further study categories that the Districtwill investigate for potential future emission reductions. Assuming controls are feasible and emission reductions are significant, rule development activity for these categories would most likely occur in 2006 or later.These projects would address categories for which adequate emission inventories are not currently available or for which emission control strategies must be further researched and developed. Consequently, the further study measures in Table 4-2 are not District commitments for specific emission reductions or for future rulemaking. Rather, they are areas of further study to determine the potential for future emission reductions. For several of these measures, staff has already begun examining the emissions data and conducting research on potential control measures. The District believes that some of the measures may have small baseline emission inventories that would not generate sigrrificant emission reductions. Other control measures may be proposed based on technology-forcing standards proposed by other districts and for which a particular emission standard has not

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

# - Control Strategy 4-7EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05 been demonstrated or is not commonly available. Each of the measures in Table 4-2 will befurther evaluated, and may be either placed in the rule development schedule or ruled out as potential control measures. 4.2.3 2004 

### -2007 Control Measures This section provides specific information about the control measures, as shown in Table 4-1, that are scheduled for rule development between 2004 and 2007. The District will determine the details of the resulting rules during the rule development process based on applicable federal, state and local requirements, socioeconomic factors, and other information provided by public comments. Duringthe rule development process, the District examines the existing rules of other air districts, and in-use and emerging control technologies, to identify levels representing the best feasible control standard for a given measure. Emission reductions shown are based on implementing feasible controls on the applicable emission inventories. The District may adjust these reductions to reflect any new control technology, source data, or practices that are discovered during rule development process. 4.2.3.1 Control Measure

### A: New Rule 4409 (Oil and Gas Fugitives) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: New Rule4409 is a Current Rule commitment in the PMlO Plan and was listed in the Ozone ROP Plan as an All Feasible Measure suggested by the EPA. It would reduce fugitive VOC emissions from crude oil and gas production operations and natural gas processing plants. AFFECTED SOURCES: Rule 4409 would apply to sources involved in the production of crude oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids. There are approximately 200 businesses in the San Joaquin Valley that are potentially subject to Rule 4409. The California Department of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources Report shows approximately 105 oil andlor gas production fields in the San Joaquin Valley. The District's permit database indicates eight permitted natural gas processing plants. DESCRIPTION: Crude oil and gas production facilities and natural gas processing facilities contain a large number of various types of components such as pipes, flanges, valves, fittings, threaded connections, hatches, pressure relief valves, pumps, and compressors. Leakage of fluids or gases from these components can be expected to occur during process and transfer operations, causing fugitive VOC emissions. The actual percentage of leaking components for most of these facilities may be small, but due to the large number of components the fugitive VOC emissions from leaking components, in aggregate, could be significant.
SJVUAPCD Chapter 4 

## - ControlStrategy 4-8EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05



### Possible controls include loweringthe current gaseous leak threshold of 10,000 ppmv, eliminating some existing exemptions, improving the existing inspection and repair programs by increasingthe frequency of inspection, and shortening the repair period for leaking components and replacing frequently leaking components with BestAvailable Control Technology. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: 

### The rule was adopted on April 20,2005. Full implementation is scheduledfor the second quarter of 2006. EMISSIONSAND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: 

### Total VOC emissions from sources subject to Rule 4409 are estimated to be 10.4 tons per day in 2008. After full implementationof Rule 4409, reductions of 4.7 tons of VOC per day are anticipated. 4.2.3.2 Control Measure B: New Rule 4455 (Refinery & Chemical Fugitives) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: 

### New Rule 4455 is a Current Rule commitment in the PMIO Plan and was listed in the Ozone ROP Plan 

### as an All Feasible Measure suggested by the EPA. Rule 4455 would replace existing Rules 4451 and 4452, and itwould reduce fugitive VOC emissions from leaking components in petroleum refining and chemical manufacturing plants by strengthening and expanding the requirements compared to the existing rules. AFFECTED SOURCES: 

### Rule 4455 would apply to businesses involved in petroleum refining and production of industrial organic chemicals. There are four petroleum refineriesand one gas-liquids processing facility that would be subject to Rule 4455. One chemical plant currently operates in the San Joaquin Valley. DESCRIPTION: 

### Petroleum facilities, gas liquids processing facilities, and chemical plants contain a large numberof various types of components such as pipes, flanges, valves, threaded connections, pressure relief valves, process drains, pumps, and compressors. Leakage of fluids or gases from these components can be expected to occur during process and transfer operations, causing fugitive VOC emissions. The actual percentage of leaking components for most of these facilities may be small, but due to the large number of components the fugitive VOC emissions from leaking components, in aggregate, could be large. In general, the state RACTIBARCTguidelines and similar rules from other air districts establish lower leak thresholds, require operators to conduct more frequent inspectionsof components, and provide shorter periods to repair leaking componentsthan currently allowed in Rules 4451 and 4452. Rule 4455 would

SJVUAPCD - ---- Chapter4 

## - Control Strategy 4-9EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN I Revised 10/20/05 replace those rules and would be more effective by implementing a rigorous leak detection and repair program and by requiring BACT equipment to replace frequently leaking devices. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: The rule was adopted on April 20, 2005.. Full implementation is scheduled for the second quarter of 2006. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: Total VOC emissions from sources subjectto Rule 4455 are estimated to be 0.5 tons per day in 2008. Upon full implementationof Rule 4455, reductions of 0.2 tons of VOC per day are anticipated. 

### 4.2.3.3 Control Measure C: New Rule 9310 ( 

### Fleet Rule 

### -School Buses) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: The PMIO Plan and Ozone ROP Plan identified the needfor on-road fleet rules to address mobile source emissions in the San Joaquin Valley. Rule 9310 is a new rule that would reduce NOx and PMIO emissions from school bus fleets and consequently reduce the public's exposure to toxic air contaminants (TACs) and criteria pollutants. Reductions would be accomplished through the use of new, cleaner vehicles or by retrofitting existing buses with improved engines or emission controls. AFFECTED SOURCES: Rule 9310 would apply to operators of school bus fleets for elementary and secondary schools. Based on a 2003 survey, there are approximately 2,755 schools buses, operating in public and private contract fleets, in the District. This was the single largest group of public agency fleet vehicles of any one particular fleet class, accour~ting for 45% of the total number of fleet vehicles in the District. DESCRIPTION: The new rule is designed to reduce NOx and PM emissions from school buses.This rule is intended to achieve greater and earlier NOx and 

### PM emission reductions than would occur through the normal vehicle replacement process for these buses. Emissions from school bus fleets could be reduced in a number ofways, including replacing existing buses with newer, cleaner buses before their normally scheduled retirement; replacing older engines of existing buses with newer engines using cleaner emissions technology; retrofitting emission control technology to existing buses; or modifying existing buses to use cleaner-burning diesel or alternate fuels.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control Strategy 4-10

### EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 Generally, older-model school buses emit more TACs and other air pollutants than the more current models. More than one-third of the existing school buses are fifteen years old or older, and were manufactured to less stringent emission standards than those for later-model school buses. The oldest buses would benefit mostfrom either complete replacement or repowering to reduce tailpipe emissions. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: Rule development is in progresswith adoption scheduled for third quarter of 2006. Implementation will begin in the fourth quarter of 2007; however, due to the quantity and the cost of school buses, and limited school district budgets, full rule implementation is expected to occur well after 2010. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: Total NOx emissions from sources that will be subject to Rule 9310 are estimated to be 2.5 tons per day in 2008, with 0.1tonslday of NOx reduced by 2010. Upon full implementation of this rule in 2015, reductions of 1.1 tons of NOx per day is anticipated. 4.2.3.4 Control Measure 

### D: New Rules 9510 (Indirect Source Mitigation Program) and 3180 (Indirect Source Mitigation Fee) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: These rules are Current Rule commitments inthe 2003 PMIO Plan and post-2003 Control Measures in ,the Ozone ROP Plan. In addition, California State Senate Bill (SB) 709, approved September22, 2003 requires the Districtto adopta schedule of fees on area-wide and indirect sources of emissionsthat are regulated, but for which permits are not issued. Growth in indirect source emissions and related area source emissionsoffsets a substantial portionof the benefitof emission controls on motorvehicles and stationary sources. Mitigationfees provide an option to reduce emissions off-site when additional on-site emission reductionsare notfeasible. AFFECTED SOURCES: Phase I of the program, contained in Rule951 0 and 3180, will be applicableto residential development projectsthat generate indirect emissionsfrom mobile sourcesand area source emissionsfrom other on-site activities not subject to District permitting. Phase 

### IIand Phase Illwill address 

### commerciaIlinstitutionaland industrial development projects (respectively) that generate indirect emissionsfroni mobile sources and area source emissions from other on-site activities not subject to District permitting. DESCRIPTION:lndirectsources are land use activities,such as housing developments, shopping malls, and industrialsites, that attract or generate motor vehicle trips. lndirect source emissions are not emitteddirectlyfrom permitted equipment or activities atthe location, as isthe case for traditional permitted stationary sources such as boilers, engines or fuel storagetanks. lndirect source



### SJVUAPCD Chapter4

# - Control Strategy 4-1 1I EXTREMEOZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
emissions are created by motorvehicle trips to and from the site. The program is also considering emissionsfrom area sources such as water heaters and landscape maintenanceequipment. This programwill have three phasesat a minimumand will include residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional developments. Under the lndirect Source Mitigation Program, development projects would be requiredto mitigate a portion of their emissions with onsite mitigationand/or by contributing to a mitigationfund that would be usedto pay for the most cost-effective projects to reduce emissions. The amount of the fee can be revised depending on the emission reductions required to meet rate of progressand the err~ission reducing projectsavailable to fund. The program could be managed by the Districtor delegatedto cities and counties. 

### IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: Rule adoption is scheduledfor fourth quarter of 2005. Rule implementationwill begin inthe first quarter of 2006. 

### EMISSIONSAND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: The District has committed to 

### a reduction of 4.0 tons perday of NOxfrom the lndirect Source Mitigation Program in the 2003 

### PMlO Plan. The reductions associatedwith Phase 

### Ithrough Rule 9510 and 3180 will bea portion of that number that has yet to be determined. The NOx reductionsare projectedto comefrom reducing emissions from off-site mobile sources, such as heavyduty trucks, school buses, and off-road equipment. Reductionscould also be generated by development measures that reducevehicle trips or miles traveled, and area source emissionsfrom equipmentand products usedfor buildingand landscape maintenance. The mitigation program will not be limited to these sources, however, and any cost-effectiveprojectthat reduces emissionswould be considered. 4.2.3.5 Control Measure 

### E: New Rule 4307 (Small Boilers, Process Heaters, and Steam Generators, 2.0-5.0 MMBtulhr) 

### REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: New Rule4307 is a New Commitment (ID I) inthe 

### PMIO Plan and was listed in the 

### Ozone ROP Plan as an All Feasible Measure suggested by the EPA. It is intended to reduce NOx and SOX emissions and to reduce future increases in carbon monoxide (CO) emissions from boilers, process heaters, and steam generators. The measure would affect any new or existing boiler, steam generator, and/or process heater with a rated heat input capacity greater than 2 million Btulhour but less than or equal to 5 MMBtuIhr. The 

### PMIO Plan identified emissions from these units as a significant category. Since NOx and SOXemissions from smaller boilers, steam generators, and process heaters, exceed the de minimus threshold levels, they are subject to federal BACM requirements. The District currently has rules applying to similar equipment rated greater than 5.0 MMBtuIhr.

- SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control Strategy 4-12EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
AFFECTED SOURCES: Facilities with units that are subject to this control measure represent a wide range of industries, including but not limitedto medical facilities, educational institutions, office buildings, prisons, military facilities, hotels, and industrial facilities (including agl-iculturalprocessing facilities). Due to the diversity of affected industries, units inthis source category are located throughout the SJVAB. Based on population and job base, there are likely to be more units located in urban and suburban settings. The emissions inventory categories affected include Manufacturing and Industrial Fuel Combustion, and Service and Commercial-Other Fuel Combustion. DESCRIPTION:These units are not currently regulated by the District permitting process or a prohibitory rule. The District does not currently issue permits to operate for gas-fired equipment in this source category, but may do so in the future. Combustion modifications appropriate for small boilers, steam generators, and process heaters include low excess air, low NOx burners, waterlsteam injection,and flue gas recirculation (FGR). Post-combustion controls can include the use of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) or selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) treatment of the exhaust stream. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: Rule adoption is scheduled for the fourth quarter of 2005. Implementation is scheduled to begin in the fourth quarter of 2007 with full BACM implementation by 2009. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: Total NOx emissionsfrom this category are estimatedto be 8.8 tons per day in 2008. Upon final implementationof this control measure, 1.0tons per day of NOx reductions is anticipated. 4.2.3.6 Control Measure F: New Rule 4694 (Wineries 

### - Fermentation and Storage) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: New Rule4694 is a New Commitment (ID 

### K) in the PMlO Plan and a post-2003 control measure in the Ozone ROP Plan. It is intendedto reduceVOC emissions from the fermentation of grapes in winery operations. 'The Ozone ROP Plan identified emissions from such operations as exceeding the major source threshold level; consequently, Federal RACT requirements apply to these operations. AFFECTED SOURCES: According to the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC), there are 109 wineries licensed to operate in the SJVAB. Of these wineries, 43 facilities produce 99% of the emissions;the rule is most likely to affect these facilities.

SJVUAPCD Chapter 

### 4 

## - Control Strategy 4-13EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05


### DESCRIPTION: Two winery processes that produce sigr~i,ficant VOC emissions are wine fermentation and bulk wine storage. This control measure is designed to reduce the emissions from the fermentation and storage processes. Future rule development will address the VOC emissions from brandy production and storage. While limited fermentation may be conducted at any time of the year, the primary fermentation season occurs in the fall, during a 90-day periodfollowing the grape harvest. Fermentation of a single batch of wine will normally be completed in a three to ten day period, depending in the variety of wine and the chemistry of the particular batch. The process of fermentation produces VOC emissions which offgas to the atmosphere through tank openings. The District does not regulate these operations through either the permitting process or a prohibitory rule. Emission controls (other than process refrigeration) are not currently being used during the production of wines. Reduction of VOC could be achieved through the use of tanks with vapor collection and control systems, carbon adsorption, water scrubbers, catalytic incineration, condensation, and additional temperature control as appropriate. 

### IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: Rule adoption is scheduled for the fourth quarter of 2005. Full implementation is projectedfor the year 2009. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: Total summer planningVOC err~issions from sources subject to the wineries control nieasure are estimated to be 2.1 tons per day in 2008. Upon final implementation of the wine fermentation control measure, summer planning reductionsof 0.7 tons of VOC per day are anticipated. 4.2.3.7 Control Measure G: Rule 4352 (Solid Fuel Fired Boiler, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters) 

### REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: Amending Rule 4.352 is a New Commitment (ID 

### H) in the 

### PMlO Plan and a post-2003 Control Measure in the 

### Ozone ROP Plan. NOx emissions from solid fuel fired boilers, steam generators, and process heaters, exceed the major source threshold levels, and therefore are subject to federal RACT requirements. This commitment is intended to address those requirements. 

### AFFECTED SOURCES: There are 14 permitted units in this category within the District ,with half of the units located in the District's Southern Region, and the remaining units split between the Central and Northern Regions. Facilities in this category generate utility and industrial power (electricity and heat) by burning solid fuels including petroleum coke, municipal solid waste, tires or biomass

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

# - Control Strategy 4-14EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 wastes (including wood, vine clippings, leaves, grass, and other by products of the farming and food processing industries). DESCRIPTION: Rule 4352 (Solid Fuel-Fired Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters) regulates the NOx and CO emissions froni this category by specifying allowable emission rates. Rule 4352 currently contains the old definition for the major source NOxthreshold so it applies only to units at facilities emitting over 50 tons of NOx peryear. The rule is being amended to include the current majordefinition and ensure that all major sources are subject to this rule. The rule's current emission limits may be made more stri~gent if amended to be consistent with current state's 

### " all feasible measure" requirements. Existing facilities are already operating at or below the "all feasible" NOx limit so no NOx reductions would resultfrom incorporating that limit. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE:Adoption of Rule 4352 is scheduled for the second quarter of 2006, and full implementation is scheduled for the first quarter in 2009. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS:Total NOx emissions from sources subject to this control measure are estimated to be 3.8 tons per day in 2008. Because existing facilities are already compliant with the "all feasible" measure NOx emission level, no actual reduction is anticipated. 4.2.3.8 Control Measure 

### H: Rule 4702 (Stationary IC Engines) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE:Amending Rule 4702 is a New Commitment (ID 

### N) inthe PMlO Plan and a post-2003 Control Measure in the Ozone ROP Plan. This rule currently controls NOx emissions from stationary, spark-ignited IC engines. Rule 4702 would be expanded to cover all internal combustion engines rated greater than 50 brake horsepower, includingthose used in agricultural operations. AFFECTED SOURCES: It is estimated that there are approximately 4,500 diesel fueled internal combustion engines, rated greater than 50 brake horsepower, used in agricultural irrigation operations inthe 

### SJVAB. The nurr~ber of sparkignition internal combustion engines, rated greater than 50 brake horsepower and used in agricultural operations is currently estimated at approximately 530 units (engines powering wind machines could significantly increase this number; note that these machines typically do not operate during ozone season, so this omission is not important for this Extreme OADP. DESCRIPTION: Rule 4702 currently controls emissions from spark-ignition stationary IC engines by requiring them to meet specific NOx emission limits

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

# - Control Strategy 4-15EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05 when operating. All engines used in agricultural operations were previously exempted from Rule 4702 pursuant to state law, (CH&SC 42310(e)). That law was rescinded effective January 1, 2004 and the District is currently amending Rl~le 4702 to address this equipment category and other compression ignition engines. NOx emissions reduction can be achieved by making such engines, as well as all diesel-fueled engines, subject to NOx emission limits in Rule 4702. Many farmers have recently installed new, cleaner-burning engines with funding under the Moyer program. Further reductions can be achieved by increasing the stringency of NOx emission limitsto meet recently adopted Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) standards and by making the standards applicable to certain engines now exempted from the rule. There are several possible options that are commonly used to control engine emissions. The option with the highest reduction potential is to replace existing engines with electric motors and many locations already have hookup for electric motors. Other strategieswould include replacing old engines with newer cleaner engines; retrofit older engineswith add-on exhaust control devices; or converting existing engines to a cleaner-burning fuel or alternate fuels. The emission limits and compliance schedule for agricultural engines will be developed pursuantto the requirementsof CH&SC 40724 and will reflect the most stringent technically and economically feasible of the candidate control options. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: CH&SC 40724 mandated the schedule for rule developmentfor such engines. Therefore, on or before July 1, 2005, the District must propose to adopt the final rules at a noticed public hearing, and rule implementation must commence on or before January 1, 2006. The rule was adopted on June 16,2005. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTION: The NOx emissions from internal combustion engines rated greater than 50 brake horsepower and used in agricultural irrigation operations, are estimated to be 21.0 tons per day in 2008. Upon full implementation, it is anticipatedthose NOx emissions would be reduced by 8.4 tons per day. 4.2.3.9 Control Measure I: New Rule4309 (Commercial Dryers) ' REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: This new rule is a New Commitment (ID C) in the PMIO Plan and a post-2003 Control Measure in the Ozone ROP Plan. NOx and SOXemissionsfrom industrialand commercial dryers exceed the "de minimus threshold" levels,therefore, are subject to federal BACM requirements.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

# - ControlStrategy 4-16EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
AFFECTED SOURCES: Dryers are usedto remove water from process material by heating which causing evaporation of the water. Most dryers in the SJVAB are used to remove moisture from fruits, nuts, vegetables, cotton, and also from clothing at laundries and dry cleaning plants. Facilities with units that are subject to this control measure represent a wide range of industries, including but not limited to cotton ginning, nut, fruits and vegetable processing, dairy products, laundry cleaning services, and concrete manufacturing. Units in this source category are located throughout the eight co~~nty area of the SJVAB. DESCRIPTION: These units are currently subject to District permitting requirements, but not a specific prohibitory rule. The new rule would establish NOx and SOXemission standards for dryers subject to permitting requirements. Differing emission standards may be established based on the heat input capacity of the dryer, and whether the unit is new or existing. Dryers are typically direct-fired, meaning that the exhaust directly contacts the material being heated. To reduce particulate contamination, dryers are predominantly fired on natural gas or propane. Emission controls appropriate for dryers include use of PUC quality natural gas, excess air controllers, low-NOx burners, and flue gas recirculation (FGR). IMPLEMENTATIONSCHEDULE: Rule adoption is scheduled for the fourth quarter of 2005. Full BACM implementation for NOx and SOXis projectedfor the year 2009. EMISSIONSAND EMISSIONS REDUCTION: Total NOx emissions from sources subject to the Dryer control measure are estimated to be 8.8 tons per day in 2008. Uponfinal implementation of the dryer control measure, a reduction of 1.0 tons per day of NOx is anticipated. 4.2.3.10 Control Measure

### J: New Rule4565 (CompostinglBiosoIids Operations) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: This new rule is identified in the Ozone ROP Plan as requiring additional emissions inventojr development. This rule is designed to reduceVOC emissions created during the con- posting of biosolids including sewage sludge, agriculturalwaste, and other greenwaste. AFFECTED SOURCES: This category would address emissions from new and existing sources involved with composting biosolids or mixtures of biosolids including emissions arising from the beneficial use or disposal of sewage sludge derived from the treatment of municipal wastewater, whether from within the District and imported from outside the District. Beneficial uses include land application, composting, and use as landfill cover, among.others. Disposal methods include surface disposal, landfilling, and incineration. Facilities

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - ControlStrategy 4-17EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
involvedwith these activities are classified as Biosolids Management (EIC 199- 995-0260-0000). DESCRIPTION: This project would investigate the emissions and controls for composting biosolidsto determine if emission controls are feasible and if VOC reductions are achievable. Biosolids are primarily generated as waste byproductsfrom municipal wastewater treatment, livestock operations, agricultural operations and commercial and residential landscaping. Many factors increase the potential emissions inventory for this category. These factors include: Growing populations in Valley communities increases demands on municipal wastewater treatment as well as generating more landscaping waste material. New and expanded confined animal feeding operations generate more livestock waste. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is currently working on a rule amendment to have the removal of livestock waste from the South Coast Air Basin as a control option, which may increase the District's inventory for this category. Recent changes to the CH&SC will phase out traditional open burning of agricultural waste, increasing pressure to compost. State and federal landfill regulations promote composting of green waste and other biodegradable materials to extend landfill capacities. VOC emission controls are currently under investigation and could include vapor collection and control systems, forced aeration, and windrow of materialsto generate beneficial soil amendments, IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: Adoption for this control measure will be the first quarter of 2007 with full implementa.tionprojected for the year 2010. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: Total VOC emissions .from sources subject to this rule arF estimatedto be 0.7 tons per day in 2008. Upon full implementationof this rule, a reduction of 0.1 tons of VOC per day is anticipated. 

### 4.2.3.11

. 

### Control Measure 

### K: Rule 4602 (Automotive Coating) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE:Amending Rule 4602 was listed in the Ozone ROP Plan as anAll Feasible Measure suggested by the EPA. This control measure is intended to reduce VOC emissions from coating used in automotive coating operations by incorporating more stringent material limits.

SJVUAPCD 4-18 Chapter4

## - Control StrategyEXTREMEOZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05
AFFECTED SOURCES: The measure would affect any new or existing operations involvedwith coating automobile, parts, and accessories. DESCRIPTION: Rule4602 controls emissions from automobile and automotive parts and products coating operations by specifying coating material VOC limits, allowable application equipment, and emission control options. CAPCOA has proposed that districts adopt a uniform rulefor this category based on the most stringent coating material limits required by the various districts. Amendments to Rule 4602 would incorporate those new standards and help establish a uniform automotive coating requirement throughout California. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: Adoption of Rule 4602 amendments is scheduled for the third quarter of 2006, and full implementation is scheduledfor the first quarter in 2009. EMISSIONSAND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: Total VOC emissions from sources subject to Rule 4602 are estimated to be 1.6 tons per day in 2008. Upon full implementationof this rule, a reduction 0.1 tons of VOC per day is anticipated. 4.2.3.12 Control Measure 

### L: New Rule

### 4570 (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: New Rule4570 is a New Commitment (ID A) in the PMIO Plan and a post-2003 Control Measure in the Ozone ROP Plan. It is intendedto reduce VOC emissions from ConcentratedAnimal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). This is also a requirementof CH&SC Section 40724.6. AFFECTED SOURCES: Rule4570 would affect operations including dairies, cattle feedlots, poultry ranches, and other agricultural operations involving animal husbandry. The exact number of affectedfacilitieswill be determined during the rule development process based on exemption levels derived from the costeffectiveness of available controls. DESCRIPTION: Operations involvedwith the raising of fowls or animals were previouslyexempted from District permitting pursuant to state law (CH&SC 42310(e)) that was rescinded effective January 

### I, 2004. VOC emissions may be reduced by controllingemissions from feedlots and from supporting operations such as waste treatment lagoons. The BACM and BARCTerr~issior~ lirr~its and con-~pliance schedule for CAFOswill be developed pursuant to the requirementsof CH&SC 40724.6 and will reflect the technical and economicfeasibility of candidate control options.

SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4

## - ControlStrategy 4-19EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: CH&SC 40724.6 mandates the schedule for rule development for CAFOs. Therefore, on or before July 1, 2006, the District must propose to adopt the final rules at a noticed public hearing, and rule implementation must commence on or before January 1, 2007. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: Total VOC emissions from sources subject to Rule4570 are estimated to be 60.9 tons per day in 2008. Upon full implementation of this rule, a reduction of 15.8 tons of VOC per day is anticipated. These emission estimates are based on the currently accepted emission factors. Research in this area is being conducted which may lead to more accurate emission factors. The emissions and emission reductions may be updated inthe future to reflect the most accurate information and such information would be incorporated into future plan updates. 4.2.3.13 Control Measure M: Rule 4662 (Organic Solvent Degreasing Operations); Rule 4663 (Organic Solvent Cleaning, Storage, and Disposal); Rule 4602 (Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating); Rule 4603 (Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Products); Rule 4604 (Can and Coil Coating Operations); Rule 4605 (Aerospace Assemblies and Component Coating); Rule 4606 (Wood Products Coating); Rule 4607 (Graphic Arts); Rule (Adhesives); and Rule 4684 (Polyester Resin Operations) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: Amending these rules was identified as a state required "All Feasible Measure". This control measure is intendedto reduce VOC err~issions from organic solvents used in parts and equipment cleaning by incorporating more stringent VOC content limits. AFFECTED SOURCES: The measurewould affect any new or existing operations involved using organic solvents for parts or equipment cleaning. DESCRIPTION: Rule 4662 controls VOC emissions from organic solvent degreasing operations by specifying solvent VOC limits, allowable application equipment, and emission control options. Rule 4663 controls VOC emissions from organic solvents used to clean parts and equipment outside of the degreasers covered by Rule 4662. The other rules address solvents used to prepare surfaces and clean equipment used in the applicable operation addressed by the rules. Since these rules were last amended, other air districts have started requiring lower-VOC solvents (25 grams VOC per liter). Amendments to these rules would incorporate this new standard and help establish a uniform organic solvent cleaning standardfor businesses in California.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4 

## - Control Strategy 4-20EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: 

### Amendments of these rules is scheduled for the third quarter of 2007 with full implementation scheduled for the fourth quarter in 2008. EMISSIONSAND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: The emissions from sources affected by the control measure are estimated at 4.9 tons VOC per day in 2008. Upon final implementation of the proposed control measure, a reduction of 1.3 tons of VOC per day is anticipated. 4.2.3.14 Control Measure N: New Rule 4308 (Water Heaters, 0.075-2.0 MMBtulhr) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: 

### This new rule is a New Commitment (ID J) in the PMIO Plan 

### and a post-2003 control in the Ozone ROP Plan. 

### NOx emissions from industrial, commercial and institutional water heaters in the SJVAB appear to be large enough to warrant control through new emission control measures. AFFECTED SOURCES: 

### Facilities with such units represent a wide range of industries, including medical facilities, educational institutions, office buildings, prisons, military facilities, hotels, and industrial facilities. Due to the diversity of industries, units in this source category are located throughout the District, but pi-imal-ily in urban and suburban settings. Thus the sources likely to be affected by this rule are not confinedto a particular geographic area within the SJVAB nor are they confinedto a particular economic sector. DESCRIPTION: 

### The new rulewould likely affect new commercial, industrial,or institutionalwater heaterswith a rated heat input capacity between 75,000 Btulhr and 2 MMBtuIhr. These heaterstypically use fuel combustion to heatwater neededfor industrial, commercial, or institutional processes. Affected units are similar in principle to residentialwater heaters, but combust fuel at greater rates and produce greater quantities of hotwater. For this particular control measure, NOx prohibitory rules may be coupled with a financial incentive programto accelerate the replacement or retrofitof higher-polluting units. The District does not control these en~issions either through the perrr~itting process or through a prohibitory rule, and the District does not anticipate issuing permits for these units in the future. IMPLEMENTA TlON SCHEDULE: 

### Rule adoption is scheduled for the fourth quarter of 2005. Standards will apply to new units commencing in the first quarter of 2007. Full implementationis expected to take 20 to 30 years. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: Total NOx emissions from sources subject to the Water Heaters control measure are estimated to be 1.4

SJVUAPCD Chapter4 

## - Control Strategy 4-21EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
tons per day in 2008. By 2010, through implementation of Control Measure N, the District anticipates a reduction of 0.2 tons per day of NOxfrom that amount (such that the 1.4 tonslday would be reduced to 1.2 tonslday). 4.2.3.15 Control Measure 

### 0:Rule 4401 (Steam-Enhanced Oil Well Vents) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: Amending Rule 4401 is a New Commitment (ID L) in the PMlO Plan and a post-2003 Cor~trol Measure in the Ozone ROP Plan. VOC emissionsfrom steam enhanced crude oil production well vents are significant and the rule can be strengthened to generate emission reductions. AFFECTED SOURCES: This control measure would reduce VOC emissions from steam-enhanced crude oil production wells and associated vapor collection and control systems. 1998,there were approximately 23,000 active steam enhanced crude oil production wells in the SJVAB. Most of the steam enhanced crude oil production wells are located in Kern County. As the wells operate throughout the year, emissions occur uniformly during the year. Rule 4401 prohibits the operation of steam enhanced crude oil production wells unless the VOC emissions from oil productionwell vents are reduced by at least 99 percent by weight. This level of control can be achieved through the operation of a vapor collection and control system. The rule also requiresthat well vent vapor collection and control systems be maintained in good repair, with standards for specified allowable number of leaks depending upon the number of wells connected to the systems. Limited numbers of cyclic wells that meet specified conditions are currently exempted from the rule. Sources are also subject to Rule 4002 (National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants). DESCRIP1-ION: Further emission reductions can be achieved by lowering the exemption thresholds to make more sources subject to the rule. The rule is enforced through District permit and enforcement programs and wo1.11d include inspections, annual on-site emission source testing, and record keepirlg. IMPLEMENTATIONSCHEDULE: Adoption for this control measure is anticipated by the fourth quarter of 2006 and full BACM implementation is projected by 2010. EMISSIONSAND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: Total VOC emissions from sources subject to the Steam-Enhanced Crude Oil Production Well Vents control measure are estimatedto be 13.2 tons per day in 2008. Upon full implementation of this rule, a reduction of 1.4 tons ofVOC per day is anticipated.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control Strategy 4-22EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05
4.2.3.16 Control Measure P: Rule 4651 (Soil Decontamination) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: Amending Rule 4651 is identified in the Ozone ROP Plan as requiring additional emissions inventory development. This rule is designed to reduce VOC emissions created during activities inthe remediation of contaminated soils. AFFECTED SOURCES: This rule applies to projects for remediation of contaminated soils. Soil contamination from organic materials occurs due to leaking storage and handling systems, operating losses, and accidental spills. Remediation projects are normally short-lived, typically ranging from a few hours to a year, depending on the extent of the contamination. Due to the unplanned, unexpected and random nature of spills, it is not possible to quantify a specific number of sources. DESCRIPTION: This project would upgrade the control requirements for soil remediation operations. Soil remediation is normally conducted using either insitu techniques, inwhich the contaminated soil is left in place, or ex-situ techniques, in which the soil is excavated then treated and replaced, or permanently removed from the site. In-situ remediation techniques include soil vapor extraction, bioremediation, and liquid displacement. Ex-situ remediation techniques include limited aeration, thermal desorption (drying); and landfilling. VOC emissions generated by remediation projects can be controlled by a variety of common VOC controls such as capture and thermal destruction, biofiltration beds, carbon adsorption, condensation, and burial in sealed drums or in impermeable landfills. Past in-situ projects have predominantly relied on soil vapor extraction and either carbon adsorption or thermal destruction, but bioremediation hasalso gained favor for smaller projects. Bioremediation uses either naturally-occurring or specifically-introduced microbes to consume soil contaminants. Ex-situ remediation favors limitedsoil aeration for small or low-level concentration. Larger projects typically involve excavation and then landfilling the soil as a hazardous material. A limited survey of landfill operators indicated that as much as 90% of the contaminated soil received in 2002 was from sources outside the SJVAB. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: Adoption for this control measure is anticipated in the third quarter of 2007 with full implementation for VOC control projected for the year 2009. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: Total VOC emissions from sources subject to this control measure are estimated to be less than 0.05 tons per day in 2008. Uponfull implementation of this rule, a reduction of less than

SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4

## - ControlStrategy 4-23EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05
0.05 tons of VOC per day is anticipated. These figures are subject to revision since the current emissions inventory may not have captured all of the contaminated material originating from sources outside of the District. 4.2.3.17 Control Measure Q: Rule4103 (Open Burning Phase Ill) 

### REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: Amending Rule 4103 is intended to reduce NOx and VOC emissions from the open burning of agricultural waste materials as required by recent amendments to the California Health and Safety Code (CH&SC),which are described below. 

### AFFECTED SOURCES: Rule4103 regulates and coordinates the use of open burning while trying to minimize impacts on the public. Affected sources are agricultural operations throughoutthe Valley which use open burning to dispose of agriculturalwaste, eliminate pests, and control plant diseases. 

### DESCRIPTION: Rule 4103 prohibits agricultural burning on days that the District declares to be no-burn days. No-burn days are days during which meteorological conditions are not conduciveto good ventilation and mixing, but they are not necessarily days expected to experience high ozone concentrations. Open burning is controlled on dayswhen the ozone standard is injeopardy of being exceeded. This rule also prescribes conditions under which burning must be conductedto minimize smoke and controls would be instituted on those days when emissions of NOx and VOC contribute to exceedances of the ozone standard. Open burning is now required be phased out between 2005 and 2010, pursuant to the schedule in CH&SC 41855.5(a). CH&SC 41855.6 allows the Districtto postpone the commencement date of a burn prohibition, provided several conditions exist, including the lack of economically feasible alternatives to burning. NOx and VOC emissions reduction will be achieved by the new requirement. CH&SC 41855.5(d)(I) requires the District develop a rule to regulate limited open burningfor disposal of diseased crops and weed control. 

### IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: CH&SC 4.1855.5 mandated the schedule for rule development for these projects. On or before January 1, 2005, the District must proposeto adopt the final diseased-crop burning rule at a noticed public hearing, and rule implementation must commence on or before January 1, 2006. Provisions of the open burning restrictions are self-implementing and will begin in June 2005 with full implementation by 2010. The District will adopt rule amendments before the applicable restrictiondates which address appropriate provisions for selected materialsfor which there are no reasonable alternatives to burning.

- - SJVUAPCD -- - Chapter

### 4

## - ControlStrategy 4-24EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05


### EMISSIONSAND EMISSIONS REDUCTION: Adoption for this control measure will be phased in during 2005 and 2007 with full implementation projected for the year 2010. Total emissions from sources subject to this control measure are estimated to be 2.3 tons of NOx and 5.8 tons of VOC per day in 2008. Upon full implementation of this rule, a reduction of 1.Itons per day of NOx and 2.9 tons per day of VOC is anticipated in 2010. The exact reductions realized will depend on the extent to which open burning practices can be replaced by cost-effective, technologically feasible alternatives. 4.2.3.18 Control Measure R: Rule 4682 (Polymeric Foam Manufacturing) 

### REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE:This category was listed in the 

### Ozone ROP Plan as an "All Feasible Measure" suggested by the EPA. Amending Rule 4682 is intended to reduce VOC emissions from manufactl-wingpolymeric foam and foam products by specifying material VOC content limits and emission control devices. 

### AFFECTED SOURCES: This category is primarily concerned with VOC emissions from the manufacturing of polystyrene, polyethylene, and polypropylenefoam products, specifically consumer foam products such as coffee cups, food containers and packing material. There are ten manufacturers of these foam products located within the District. 

### DESCRIPTION: Plasticfoam products include a wide range of materials, including packaging for food and fragile products, building insulation, and a variety of other consumer items. Foams are manufactured by utilizing blowing agents, commonly hydrocarbons, which form vapor-filled "cells" within the plastic. After manufacturing, foam products contain residual blowing agent, which diffuse, while stored at the facility and after being transported from the facility. Rule 4682 limits emissions from polystyrene foam, polyethylene, and polypropylene manufacturing, but only for selected operations and equipment within the process. This rulewould be expanded to include VOC emission reduction or control from product curing areas and general product storage, similar to those employed by several of the existing sources. Possible controls for this category include switching to an alternative, non-VOC blowing agent or employing capture and control systems for the VOC emissions. All ten manufacturers within the SJVUAPCD are still utilizing primarily VOC blowing agents (either directly or in the form of EPS beads).

SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4 

## - Control StrategyEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05


### IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: Adoption of Rule 4682 amendments is scheduled for the third quarter of 2007, and full implementation is scheduled for the fourth quarter in 2009. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: Total VOC emissions from sources subject to Rule4682 are estimated to be 0.3 tons per day in 2008. Upon full implementationof this rule, less than 0.1 tons per day of VOC reductions are anticipated. 4.2.3.19 Control Measure S: Rule 4703 (Stationary Gas Turbines) 

### REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: This category is being identified by public comment as warranting additional control measure development. Existing Rule4703 addresses NOx emission limits for stationary gas turbines. This control measure would specifically examine controls for turbines rated less than 10 MW and used for distributed power generation. AFFECTED SOURCES: Stationary gas turbines are used for mechanical power, electrical power generation, and steam and heat generation roles in oil production and refining,food processing, petroleum transportation, irrigation districtwater pumping, and commercial power generation. DESCRIPTION: Rule4703 limits NOx emissions from turbines. Existing turbines in the SJVAB generally control NOx emissions through water or steam injection,dry low-NOx combustion technology, selective catalytic reduction, or some combination thereof. Since this rulewas last amended in 2002, CARB published emission standardsfor turbines used in electrical power generation. The CARB standards apply to newor modified turbines but may be attainable by existing turbines depending on the development of new burnertechnology. The control measurewould examinethe feasibility of CARB NOx and CO limits for stationary gas turbines, rated <I 0.0 MW. Turbines rated greater than 10 MW are subjectto requirementssimilar to the CARB limits. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: Adoption for 

### tl- is control measure is anticipated in the third quarter of 2007 with full implementationfor NOx control projectedfor the year 2010. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: The emissionsfrom sources affected by the control measure are estimated at 2.5 tons NOxIday. Upon final implementationof the proposed control measure, a reduction of 0.6 tons of NOx per day is anticipated. 4.2.3.20 Control MeasureT: Rule 4621 (Storage and Transfer of Gasoline) and Rule4624 (Organic Liquid Loading)

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control Strategy 4-26EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATlON PLAN Revised 10/20/05

REASON-FORCONTROL MEASURE: Amending Rules 4621 and 4624 is a Post-2003 Control Measure inthe Ozone ROP Plan. It is designed to reduce VOC emissions from gasoline terminals and bulk plants which result from transfer equipment and operations. AFFECTED SOURCES: Rule4621 applies to bulk plants storing gasoline in large, aboveground tanks, and transferring the gasoline to delivery trucks via loadivg racks. There are fugitive VOC emissions from the fittings on the tanks, piping (valves and flanges), and from the loading rack operations (displaced vapor space from the delivery trucks). DESCRIPTION: Rules 4624 and 4621 contains VOC emission control performance limit for tanks and equipment used to store and transfer organic liquid, specifically gasoline. Since the last rule update, the standards for control ofVOC fugitive emissions have become more stringent. Strengthening the current rule standards is feasible and would result in additional emission reductions. Possible control enhancements include increased inspection and maintenance frequencies, tank seal repair or replacement, and retrofitting old systems with newer technologies. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: Adoption for this control measure is anticipated in the fourth quarter of 2007 with full implementationfor VOC controls projected for the year 2010. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: The emissions from sources affected by the control measure are estimated at 3.3 tons VOC per day in 2008. Upon final implementation of the proposed control measure, a reduction of 0.9 tons of VOC per day is anticipated. 4.2.3.21 Control Measure 

### U: New Rule (Aviation Fuel Transfer, Phase I) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: This category is a Post-2003 Control Measure in the Ozone ROP Plan. The new rule would reduce fugithe VOC emissions created during Phase 1 aircraft refueling operations. Phase 1 operations include filling aviation fuel bulk storage tanks using primary fuel delivery trucks as well as filling an airport's fuel delivery trucks from the bulk storage tanks. Itdoes not include filling an aircraft's on-board fuel tanks. AFFECTED SOURCES: This measure would affect operations with bulk aviation fuel storage, including military, civilian, and private airports or air fleet services. These tanks typically hold either aviation gasoline or a variety of kerosene-based jet fuel. There are 43 airports in the SJVAB that sell one or both types of ,these fuels.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4 

## - Control Strategy 4-27

### EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05


### DESCRIPTION: This operation would investigate the emission inventory and feasible control measures for bulk aviation fuel storage tanks. Fugitive VOC emissions are released from these tanks due to spillage and vapor displacement during Phase 1 operations and from venting through relief valves to prevent excessive pressure from diurnal heating. Rule 4621 addresses Phase 1 requirementsfor tanks holding motor vehicle fuel, but not aviation fuel. Also, while Rule 4623 addresses fueling motor vehicles, it does not apply to fueling aircraft since aircraft do not have uniform fueling points and the Phase 2 equipment is not certified for that use. Fugitive emissions can be controlled with pressure-vacuum relief valves on storage tanks, submerged'fill tubes to reduce splashing, and vapor recovery or destruction systems similar to those used for Phase 

### Imotor vehicle fueling operations. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: Adoption for this control measure is anticipated in the fourth quarter of 2007 with full implementation for VOC control is projected for the year 2010. EMISSIONS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS: The emissions from sources affected by the control measure are estimated at 0.2 tons VOC per day in 2008. Upon final implementationofthe proposed control measure, a reduction of less than 0.05 tons of VOC per day is anticipated. 4.2.4 PotentialControl Measures Requiring Further Study This section provides information about the possible future control measures, as shown in Table 4-2, which require further study. Exact details of the resulting rules will be determined during the rule development process based on applicable federal, state and local requirements, socioeconomic factors and specific information provided by the public comments. Some of these are control measureswith small baseline inventories that would bethe least effective in achieving significant emission reductions in an expeditious manner. These control measures will be further evaluated and may be eliminated as potential controls. 4.2.4.1 Further Study ProjectA: 

### Rule 2280 (Portable Equipment Registration Program) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: Amending Rule 2280 is a Post -2003 Control Measure inthe Ozone ROP Plan. This control measure could reduce NOx emissions from fuel combustion by registered portable equipment.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4 

## - Control Strategy 4-28EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05


### AFFECTED SOURCES: Rule 2280 applies to portable equipment that is operated at various locations in the District and are not registered under the state portable equipment program. Such equipment, primarily portable engines, is used in many industries for a variety of tasks including electrical power generation, pumping, concrete production, abrasive blasting, and providing mechanical power. District emission estimates are calculated by ARB using their Off-Road Model. Current ARB and the District registries for these types of equipment may be incomplete due to units that are not registered with either agency or which could be registered with other districts. 

### DESCRIPTION: Portable engines create NOx emissions by burning diesel fuel, gasoline, natural gas, or propane/liquefied petroleuni gas. Such units are required to register with either the District or with ARB and are subject to the en-~ission standards of the applicable portable engine registration program. New units are subject to emission standards set by ARB and EPA for the current year of manufacture. Emissions from older diesel engines can be significantly higher (1 2 grams NOx/bhp-hr) than currer~tly manufactured diesel engines (5.9 grams NOx/bhpt~r). Starting in 2006, the new engine standard will drop to 3.0 gram (NOx 

### + VOC)/bhp-hr for larger engines, with all new engines meeting that standard by 2008. It is important to note that manufacturers may meet the emission standards on a production-averaged basis and that individual engines or engine types may have higher emissions. Spark-ignited engines are not expected to generate comparable emission reductions since these engines typically meet or exceed the applicable EPA and ARB standards. The state portable equipment regulation program is currently under revision to address the health risks associated with emissions of diesel particulate emissions. These emissions can be effectively controlled with either diesel oxidation catalyst, and catalyzed diesel particulate filters. Both catalysts also reduce 50-90% of VOC emissions, used in conjunction with lower-sulfurfuel. The diesel fuel sulfur limit will be lowered to 15 ppmv effective September 1, 2006. Similar catalysts for NOx reduction are under development for off-road engine applications and may be suitable for portable engine applications after further re,finement. It is also feasible to generate NOx reductions through the replacement of existing, older portable engines with newer units according to an advanced retirement schedule.

SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4

# - Control StrategyEXTREMEOZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
4.2.4.2 Further Study Project B

## - New Rule (Asphalt Plant DryerslHeaters) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: This category is a Post-2003 Control Measure in the Ozone ROP Plan. This new rule could reduce NOx and VOC emissions asphalt production operations. There are currently no District rules specifically addressing asphalt production equipment. AFFECTED SOURCES: This control measure would apply to asphalt production facilities operating in the Districtwith material heating equipment. DESCRIPTION: Asphalt is produced using a mixture of mineraland petroleum components. During production,the mineral components, gravel and crushed rocks, is heated to remove excess moisture before mixing with the petroleumbased bindingagent. Heat may also be used to heat the petroleum binder during mixing and storage. A direct-fired heater is typically used for the dryinglmixing process, so the heaterexhaust is contaminated with PMIO and VOC released from the heated products. PMIO and VOC emissions, commonly seen as blue smoke, may also resultfrom the material handling and storage equipment. Significant NOx emissions can also result from combustion of fuel for the heaters. Possible control measures include clean burning fuel and low-NOx burnersfor the heaters, capture and controls for the blue smoke emissions, and catalytic particulate filters to reduce fugitive VOC and PMIO from the exhaust stream. This control measure is being addressed as part of Control Measure 

### I. 4.2.4.3 Further Study Project C: Rules 4402 and 4625 (Sumps, Pits, and Wastewater Processing Equipment) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: This category is a Post-2003 Control Measure in the Ozone ROP Plan. Amending Rules 4402 and 4625 would reduce VOC emissions from oilfield sumps, pits, and wastewater processingequipment. AFFECTED SOURCES: Rules4402 and 4625 apply to oil and gas production sumps, pits and wastewater processing equipment. There approximately 200 businesses in the approximately 105oil andlor gas productionfields in the SJVAB. DESCRIPTION: Oil and gas productionoperations generate large quantities of wastewater and sand as a waste product of the primary extraction. Many of these facilities use open pitsto separate oil, water and sand generated during oil and gas production. Most primary separation is now accomplished in controlled

SJVUAPCD Chapter4 

## - Control Strategy 4-30EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 

### separation tanks, but secondary and final separation can still occur in open pits. The District is updating the emissions inventory of those sumps, including both heavy and light crude oil facilities. The District will also explore feasible control options that could generate additional VOC emission reductions. 4.2.4.4 Further Study Project 

### D 

## - New Rule (Fugitive Emissions 

### - Heavy Oil Stream) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: 

### This category requires additional emissions inventory development. Additional controls could reduce fugitive VOC emissionsfrom equipment used in heavy crude oil production, transport, and refining. Heavy crude oil is defined as oil having an API gravity of less than 30 degrees. The District currently has no rules specifically addressingthese heavy crude equipment emissions. AFFECTED SOURCES: 

### This rule would apply to sources involved with heavy crude oil crude oil production, transport and refining. DESCRIPTION: 

### This category requires an emissions inventory of fugitive volatile organic compounds from leaking components that carry streams of heavy crude oil that are located in crude oil production and processingfacilities and crude oil refining facilities. Heavy crude oil components are currently exempt from existing District Rules 4403, 4451, and 4452 as well as new Rules 4409 and 4455 that are currently under development. District Rule 4401 addresses casing gases associated with heavy crude oil production but not components on liquid streams. The District does not currently have information on the number of heavy crude oil components. Estimates of the VOC emissions from leaking components are related to the total number of components and can be calculated using EPA, ARB or CAPCOA methodologies. Possible controls include establishing allowablethe gaseous leak threshold(s), creating an inspection and repair programs with a specific minimum frequency of inspection, stating the maximum repair periodfor leaking components, and requiring replacement of frequently leaking components with Best Available Control Technology. 4.2.4.5 Further Study Project 

### E: Rule 4653 (Adhesives) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: 

### This category was listed in the Ozone ROP Plan 

### as an All Feasible Measure suggested by the EPA. Amending Rule 4653 could reduce VOC emissionsfrom use of adhesives by specifying material VOC standards andlor requiring the use of alternate emission control system.

SJVUAPCD Chapter 

### 4

# - Control Strategy 4-31EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
AFFECTED SOURCES:

### Adhesive materials are used in a wide variety of industries including commercial production facilities, construction activities, and maintenanceand repair operations. Rule 4653 exempts users of less than 20 gallons of adhesives per year so most affected sources will be commercial users in the manufacturing or constructionfields. DESCRIPTION: 

### Rule 4653 controlsVOC emissions resulting from adhesive usage. VOC err~issions result from the solvents used to pre-clean materials being bonded,from the adhesive material as it cures, and from solvents used to clean the finished productand application equipment. The existing materialVOC content limits and exemptions will be examined to determine if stricter standards can be developed similar to those recently proposed by other air districts. 4.2.4.6 Further Study Project F: Rule 4607 (Graphic Arts) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: 

### This category is a Post-2003 Control Measure in the Ozone ROP Plan. 

### Amending Rule 4607 would reduce fugitive VOC emissionsfrom graphic arts operations involved in the coating of paper, fabric and film coating and those involved in screen printing. AFFECTED SOURCES: 

### The measurewould affect any new or existing operations involvedwith graphic arts, paper or fabric coating, and screen printing. DESCRIPTION: 

### Rule 4607 controls emissions from graphic arts operations by specifying coating materialVOC limits, cleaning solvent VOC limits, allowable applicationequipment, evaporative loss minimization practices, and en-~ission control options. Since this rulewas last amended, other air districts have adopted more stringent VOC limits for certain coatings categories. Amendments to this rule could incorporate those new standards and help establish a uniform graphic arts requirementthroughout California. 4.2.4.7 Further Study ProjectG: Rule 4641 (CutbackAsphalt Application) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: 

### This category is a Post-2003 Control Measure in the Ozone ROP Plan. 

### Amending Rule 4641 could reduce VOC emissionsfrom cutback asphalt application. AFFECTED SOURCES:

### This control measurewould apply to operators involved with the manufacture and use of cutback asphalt, slow cure asphalt and emulsified asphalt. Use of these asphalts includes roadway paving and maintenanceoperations, parking area constr~~ction, and dust control.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

# - Control Strategy 4-32EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05


### DESCRIPTION: Cutback asphalt is a paving grade of asphalt liquefiedwith petroleum distillates and generally classified as medium or rapid cure as defined in Rule 4641. Rule 4641 controls VOC emissions by limiting the use of asphaltic materials and allowable applicationtemperature. While the VOC content of asphaltic roof coating material is regulated under Rule 4601, further emission reductions may be possible by extending this rule to include asphalt roofing operations. Such operations heat the asphalt to allow application on large industrial facilities. The heating of the asphalt in large kettles results in fugitive VOC emissions. Possible controlsfor such kettles include close-fitting lids, tightly controlled operatingtemperatures, and afterburners. Some operators already use lids and operating temperature lirr~its to reduce smoke and odors. The afterburners, however, are uncommon for this application and may require early retirement of existing kettles. 4.2.4.8 Further Study Project 

### H: Rule 4692 (Restaurants

## - Under-fired Charbroilers) 

### REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: This category is a Post-2003 Control Measure in the 

### Ozone ROP Plan. Amending Rule4692 would reduce fugitive VOC emissions from restaurants using charbroiling equipment for food preparation. 

### AFFECTED SOURCES: This control measure would affect any new or existing operations involved with under-fired charbroilers. 

### DESCRIPTION: Rule4692 currently applies to restaurants using chain-driven charbroilers. At the time the rule was adopted in March 2002, the only feasible control was not applicableto under-fired charbroilers. An under-fired charbroiler is a grill in which food is placed on an iron grate above a heat source. As the food cooks,fats or marinades drip onto heat source producingsmoke that providesthe characteristic charredflavor. In the late 1990's, studies on charbroiler emission factors found that under-fired charbroiling is the methodthat producesthe largest amount of PM and VOC emissions. Due to the enclosed nature of a chain-driven charbroiler, it is possible to equip such equipmentwith an exhaust catalytic converter to control the VOC emissions. Under-firedcharbroilers, however, are more open units with significantly lower exhaust temperatures that are not compatiblewith catalytic converter controls.

SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4

## - Control Strategy 4-33

### EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
4.2.4.9 Further Study Project 

### I: Rule 4902 (Residential Water Heaters) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: 

### Amending Rule4902 was identified as under the Significant Source Category in the PMIO Plan and a Post-2003 Control Measure in the Ozone ROP Plan. AFFECTED SOURCES: 

### Residentialwater heaters are typically fired on natural gas or propane, emitting NOx emissions from the combustion of the fuel. These units are locatedthroughout the District in urban, suburban, and rural settings. DESCRIPTION: 

### These units are currently regulated by the District under Rule 4902. That rule requires new and replacement heatersto be certifiedwith NOx emissions of less than 40 nanograms per Joule (0.093 Ib NOx per million BTU) of heat output. The South Coast AQMD Rule 1121 will require residentialwater heaters to meet a 10 nanograms per Joule NOx standard in 2005. That standard is not consideredto have been demonstrated as technologically feasible, but may be so demonstrated in the future. If such equipment is manufactured and readily available,the Districtcould achieve a 75% NOx reduction by adopting a similar standard. That standard would only apply to new or replacement water heaters so units installed priorto the any new standard taking effectwould remain for their useful life. 4.2.4.10 Further Study Project 

### J 

## - New Rule ( Furnaces) REASON FOR CONTROL MEASURE: 

### : This category is a Post-2003 Control Measure in the Ozone ROP Plan. 

### Itwas designated as a control measure to reduce NOx emissions from industrial furnaces. AFFECTED SOURCES: 

### Industrialfurnaces are typically fired on natural gas or propane, emitting NOx emissions from the combustion of the fuel. These units are located throughout the District in a variety of industrieswhich require high temperatures for operations such as smelting, curing materials, heat treating metals, ceramicfiring, and cleaning impurities from metal products. DESCRIPTION: 

### Rule 4305 and 4306 regulate boilers, steam generatorsand process heaters but specifically excludesfurnaces. Furnaces typically use a direct-fired heaterwhere the material being heated directly contacts the exhaust from the burner. This contact can lead to the heater exhaust becoming contaminated with PMIO and VOC released from the heated products. Significant NOx emissions can also resultfrom combustion of fuel for the heaters.

SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4

## - Control Strategy 4-34EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 Possible control measures include clean burning fuel and low-NOx burners for the heaters and catalytic particulate filters to reduce fugitive VOC and PMIOfrom the exhaust stream. 4.2.4.11 Further Study Project 

### K: New Rule (Brandy Production) REASONFOR CONTROL MEASURE: Brandy production is a potentially significant source of VOC emissions. New control measures could be designed to reduce VOC emissions created during the productionof brandy, including distillation, aging and bottling. AFFECTED SOURCES: The California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) maintains a database of all facilities permitted to produce alcoholic beverages in California. The database contains facility specific information covering permitted productionvolumes and licensed operation of alcohol stills. DESCRIPTION: Brandy production is not currently regulated by the District permitting process or addressed by a prohibitory rule. VOC emissions in brandy production are created during distillation, aging, and bottling. Brandy is typically aged for 2 to 10 years in oak barrels and this is considered the largest source of VOC emissions from this process. Emission controls (other than process refrigeration) are not currently being used during the production of wines. Reductions of VOC could be achieved by equipping distillation equipment, storage facilities, and processing areas with vapor collection and control systems, carbon adsorption, water scrubbers, catalytic incineration, condensation, and additional temperature control, as appropriate. 4.2.5 Reasonably Available Control Technologies (RACT) Section 172(c)(l) of the federal Clean Air Act requires nonattainment plansto: "provide for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as practical (including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology) and shall provide for attainment of the national primary ambient air quality standards." For areas designated as extreme non-attainment status, RACT control measures would apply to sources with emissions greater than 10tons per year. As a prior severe nonattainment area, the District already had RACT for sources greater than 25 tons. Therefore, staff only evaluated the existing permitted sources with

SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4 

## - Control Strategy 4-35EXTREMEOZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05
baseline inventories between 10 and 25 tons per year of NOx or VOC. Based upon this evaluation, the District identified the following RACT control measures: 4.2.5.1 Dryers and Dehydrators NOx emissions from large industrial dryers are not currently addressed by existing rules but are scheduled for developme~it in Table 4-1 as Control Measure 1, Commercial Dryers. 4.2.5.2 Flares NOx emissions from flares at major sources are addressed by Rule 4311 (Flares). Sources emitting between 10 and 25 tons per year would become subject to this rulewhen the definition of "Major Source" is amended in Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review). 4.2.5.3 Jet EngineTest Cells NOx emissions from jet engine test cells are difficult to control through traditional means due to the highflow, low NOx concentration, and low temperature of the exhaust stream. A review of existing BACT clearinghouses failed to produce viable control measures. The emissions from the source located in the District will be limited by a FederalOperating Permit that isenforceable through Title V of the federal CleanAir Act. Given the lack of available controls and the federal enforceability of the existing limits, the District will monitor potential future controls for this category, but does not plan to schedule a control measure at this time. 4.2.5.4 Fumigation

# - Agricultural Products The California Department of Pesticide Regulation has authority over field application of Methyl Bromide (MeBr) for soil fumigation. The District has authority over application of MeBr releasedfrom post-harvest fumigation of agricultural products. In 1999,the EPA has developed a schedule for the phaseout of MeBr in accordance with the 1987 Montreal Protocol. While some exceptions are currently being considered for critical uses, a critical use capwill significantly eliminate these emissions and negate the need for any rule-making action.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

# - ControlStrategy 4-36EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
4.2.6 Clean Fuels orAdvanced ControlTechnology Section 182(e)(3)of the federal Clean Air Act directs extreme nonattainment areas to require: "that each new, modified, and existing electric utility and industrial and commercial boiler which emits more than 25 tons peryear of oxides of nitrogen - (A) burn as its primary fuel natural gas, methanol, or ethanol (or comparable low polluting fuel), or 

### (6) use advancedtechnology (such as catalytic control technology or other comparably effective control methods) for reduction of emissions of nitrogen" District Rules 4305, 4306, and 4352 address NOx emission limits for the boilers in this category. Most of the boilers under Rules 4305 and 4306 are fired on natural gas and therefore satisfy the requirement of paragraph (A) above. Liquid-fuel fired boilers are also addressed by ,thoserules and the applicable NOx emission limits satisfy the requirement of paragraph (6) above. Solid-fuel fired boilers are addressed by Rule 4352 and the applicable NOx emission limits satisfy the requirement of paragraph (6) above. Therefore, the District already complies with this requirement and there is no need to include additional control measures in this plan to satisfy the section of the federal CleanAir Act. 

### 4.3 FUTURE STUDY MEASURES The California Clean Air Act requires districts to develop ambient air quality standard attainment plans that consider "the full spectrum of emission sources and focus particular attention on reducing emissions from transportation and area-wide emission sources." (Health and Safety Code, Section 40910). In particular, districts responsiblefor air basins designated as having "serious," "severe," or "extreme" air pollution, "shall, to the extent necessary to meet the requirements of the plan

### ,..." include in their attainment plans "[m]easures to achieve the use of a significant number of low-emission motor vehicles by operators of motor vehicle fleets." [Health and Safety Code section 40919(a)(4)]. Although ARB is responsiblefor setting vehicle emission standards, ARB and districts such as the SJVUAPCD have the authority to ensure that cleaner vehicles are employed.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - ControlStrategyEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 Appendix 

### F summarizes control measure concepts suggested by stakeholders during or after the first two sets of workshops held for this Extreme OADP. Control measures listed in Tables 4-1 and 4-2, as well as the ideas for future measures listed below, capture a number of these concepts. The District will consider these and other ideas for control measures to be used in the development of future ozone attainment demonstration plans. Section 4.3.1 addresses mobile sources, Section4.3.2 addresses other types of sources (particularly as suggested by stakeholders during public review of the Draft Extreme OADP-see Appendix H), and Section 4.3.3 describes ideas for nontraditional methods of reducing air pollution, termed "sustainable incentives." 4.3.1 Mobile Sources ARB is adopting or developing several mobile source rules. These rules address err~issions from refuse haulers, urban transit vehicles, and other heavy duty vehicles; vehicle idling limits; diesel fuel sulfur limits; toxic emissions from transportation refrigeration units; and other similar measures. The District is not currently planningto pursue any enhanced requirements to the mobile source rules that ARB has adopted or is developing. Stakeholders have identified a number of potential non-traditional mobile source emission control measure ideas for future study. The District will investigate the feasibility of additional programs that reduce eniissions from mobile sources. These measures would address sources commonly outside District jurisdiction, and thus would necessitate teaming with other agencies that have more direct authority over these sources. Several special programs have been suggested that could reduce mobile source emissions, including the following: Gross emitters, both passenger and heavy-duty vehicles, can produce ten times the emissions of newervehicles. An effective program for reducing emissionsfrom this source category would have the following key elements: (1) a remote sensing program that identifies and targets only the grossemitting vehicles that are used on a regular basis; (2) adequate financial incentives to encourage retirement of the gross-emitting vehicle; and (3) use of a voucher (or similar system) to ensure that incentives can only be usedto purchase a vehicle with lower emissions than the one being replaced.

e Emissions from heavy-duty vehicles increase with higher operating speeds, so reductionsof NOx,VOC, and diesel PM may be possible with stricter enforcement of the existing speed limits on public roads, highways and freeways. The District couldwork to develop funding sources for special CHP patrols along Highway 

### 99 for increased enforcement of truck speed limits. The ARB Heavy-dutyVehicle Inspections program for conducting roadside testing of heavy-duty vehicles primarily focuses on Highway 99 and lnterstate 

### 5, and is very limited in scope due to current state budget problems. The
SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control Strategy 4-38EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
District could seek special funding to revitalize and strengthen this program to increase its geographic coverage and to include anti-smoke inspection; RPM recording; snap-accelerationtest; visual inspection of emissions, and fuel testing to ensure use of California diesel. These roadside inspections can identify gross-pollutersthat may otherwise escape the normal inspection requirements. -This area of further study is also of particular interest given the greater potential for foreign-registered trucks to pass through the SJVAB in light of the June 

### 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding the North American FreeTrade Agreement; foreign-registered trucks may have substantially different emissions profiles than U.S. registered trucks. Through-truck traffic on Highway 

### 99 can produce significant emissions along the most densely populated portion of the Valley. Re-designation of Highway 

### 99 between Manteca and Wheeler Ridge as a "no through-truck route" and designating Interstate5 as sole truck route for through-Valley truck traffic would mitigate the impact of the trucks without unduly impacting the interstate conimerce. This measure would also reduce congestion for localtraffic, decrease intra-valley travel time, and reduce the associated emissions. Heavy-duty vehicles may idle at truck stops for hours at a time to run refrigeratorsand provide power for operator air conditioning during meal breaks and rest stops. Emissions from idling trucks at truck stops can be reduced with alternative power systems such as auxiliary power units, thermal storage systems, and truck stop electrification. Each of these supplies power and other needed amenitiesto truck stop customers but with a lower emissions burden than idling each truck's diesel engine. ARB'Semission reduction program for mobile sources is highly dependent on lleet turnover. Fleet turnover could be enhanced by adjusting the California vehicle license fee and registration fee such that as vehicles age, they become more expensive to register. New vehicles, which at any given time are the lowest emitters, would bethe least expensive to register. Consideration could also be given to giving further fee reductions to vehicles with emissions ratings of ATPZEV or better that are registered and used in the state's dirtiest air basins. 4.3.2 

### Other 

### Sources Stakeholders have suggested a number of control measure ideas that do not involve the mobile source emission category. Principal among these are ideas for using the vegetation in and around urban areas to help manage air quality with the recognitionthat such vegetation can function as both a source of ozone precursor emissions as well as a sink for ozone. Major ideas suggested were: Study the role of urban landscapingand agriculture in the SJVAB's air quality, perhaps through CCOS. The study should includethe concept of
SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4

## - Control Strategy 4-39EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 vegetative buffer zones, especially hardwood forests, around urban areas experiencirlg high ozone levels. Create urban tree planting guidelines for highways, parks and private development that emphasize air quality improvements (e.g., areas with high asthma rates would encourage low pollen, low allergenic species); Develop an education programfor agencies, schools, the public, nurseries and landscapers that provides information on o biogenic emissions from various plants used in urban landscapes, o the role of these plants in contributing to ozone production, and o equipment emissions from maintaining various types of landscapes (e.g., a lawn requires more cutting and leaf blowing than an area planted with groundcovers). Identify sources of funding for public agencies to make landscape changes that improve ozone air quality. 

### 4.3.3 Sustainable lncentives Alternative approaches for reducing emissions, as discussed in the following paragraphs, have been suggested for consideration by a number of parties. The District is considering how to work these ideas for alternative approaches into its control strategy where feasible. To promote the implementation of practices that reduce air pollution from a variety of sources, including exempt sources, industry suggested the development of sustainable incentives. The concept of sustainable incentives includes financial measures, programs, andlor prohibitory rule alternative compliance plansthat provide an economic mechanism to fund air pollution reduction measures. Sustainable incentives may be in the form of private industry andlor fol-~ndation grants, federal andlor state government grants, tax credits, prohibitory rule incentives,and other programs. The concept of sustainable incentives is based upon existing programs such as the federal farm bill's "Environmental Quality lncentives Program (EQIP); the State's Carl Moyer Program;the District's Heavy-Duty Program (see next section), and other programsthat offset the implementation cost of pollution reduction measures. Many of these existing programs operate within the framework of a partnership involving private industry, the public, and public agencies. As proposed by industry, the concept of sustainable incentives revolves around a market-basedapproach to pollution reduction using measures that are economicallysound and that are supported by scientific research. Basic concepts could include

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control Strategy 4-40

### EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 Local air pollution controllair quality management districts, EPA, and ARB would assist local municipalities and other public agencies in acquiring additional funding. The funding would be used to implement emission reductions; expand existing incentive programs, such as EQIP and Carl Moyer; and offset mitigation cost needs of the localtransportation agencies and communities. Such funding could be generated from either governmental sources in the form of grants or from industrial sources in the form of alternative compliance fees or penalties. These regulatory agencies would consider suggestions for alternative emission reduction programs that generate equivalent emissions reductions to those identified in prohibitory rules, but are less costly to implement. Such programs would obtain emission reductions by contributing to such programs as EQIP, by reducing onsite emissions, or by allowing the use of valid emissions reductions from secondary sources located in the immediate vicinity of

. those sources seeking the use of the alternative emission reductions. 

### 4.4 DISTRICT INCENTIVE PROGRAMS The District has operated incentive programs since 

### 1992.The programs have expanded infunding and increased in sophistication over the years. lncentive program funding has been derived from several sources. Current programs use a combination of state and local funds includingARB'S Carl Moyer Program, San Joaquin Valley Emergency Clean Air Attainment Program (VECAP) funds, State Peaker Power Plant Offset (State ERC) funds, and District Department of Motor Vehicles Surcharge Fees (DMV Fees). Of these funding sources, only DMVfees are under the sole control of the District. The District has achieved significant, cost-effective emission reductions from a variety of grant programs. The District has awarded over $80 million to projects that have resulted in over 

### 33 tons of lifetime emission reductionsat a cost-effectiveness of approximately $6,50Olton. The District is currently operatingtwo programs aimed at reducing ozone precursor emissions: the Heavy-Duty Engine Emission Reduction lncentive Program (Heavy-Duty Program) and the Electric Lawnmower Incentives Program. Each of these is discussed below, followed by a discussion of future programs



### SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - ControlStrategy 4-41

### EXTREMEOZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05


### 4.4.1 Heavy-Duty Engine Emission Reduction Incentive Program The Heavy-Duty Engine Emission Reduction Incentive Program (Heavy-Duty Program) is by far the District's largest and most successful incentive program. The Heavy-Duty Program accepts applications for a wide variety of engines that power vehicles or equipment. Heavy-duty trucks, buses, and heavy off-road engines are significant sources of nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions within the Valley. Although the District does not have the authority to regulate vehicle tailpipe emissions, it can provide monetary incentives to reduce err~ission from these sources. It provides funding for new purchases, engine re-powering, or retrofits. Emission reductions are obtained when the project applicant purchases vehicles and engines that are cleaner than required by current emission standards or installs an emission certified retrofit kit on an existing engine. The District pays the differential cost of purchasing the lower emitting technology compared to conventionaltechnology up to a cost-effectiveness cap of $1 3,600 per ton for NOx. The program is primarily aimed at NOx reductions, but many projects also achieve fine particulate matter (PM 10) reductions. The first projects that were funded underthe Heavy-Duty Program began operating in 1998. Since then, additional funds have been allocated each year to the program and additional projects have become operational. Project life varies from 7 to 20 years depending on the application. The averqge project life is 7.7 years based on the mix of projects receivedto date. SIP submittalsfor the SJVAB typically have not included emission reductions from the Heavy-Duty Program. However, the 2003 PMIO Plan did include reductions in the mobile source category from the Heavy Duty Engine incentive program. This 

### Extreme OADP uses a similar approach for incentive-based emissions reductions. 4.4.2 Electric Lawnmower Incentives The District held lawnmower exchanges in 2001 and 2002. 

### A total of 2260 electric, rechargeable mowerswere distributed at a 50 percent discount to residents in Bakersfield, Fresno, Merced, Modesto, Stockton and Visalia. The events were made possiblethrough support and sponsorship from Black and Decker;the CaliforniaAir Resources Board; California Integrated Waste Management Board; Fresno, Merced, Stanislaus and Tulare counties; and the cities of Bakersfield, Fresno and Modesto. For 2004, the District funding provided similar incentives in the form of discount coupons for electric and pushtype lawn mowers; 327 mowerswere sold in 2004 under the coupon program.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control Strategy 4-42EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN - Revised 10/20/05
4.4.3 Future Programs The Mobile Source Emission Reduction Incentive Program (MSIP) isthe most developed of the future programs. Although not yet approved by the Governing Board as of July 2004, MSlP provides incentives for specific projects that will reduce motor vehicle emissions within the District. The purpose of the MSlP is to assist the District in attaining the requirements of the California Clean Air Act. This is accomplished by allocating funds to cost-effective projects that have the greatest motor vehicle emission reductions, thereby creating long-term air quality benefits for the San Joaquin Valley. All projects must have a direct air quality benefit to the District. Any portion of a projectthat does not directly benefit the District within its boundaries will not be allowed for funding or in calculating emission reductions. Principal MSlP components that are envisioned at this time include the Light- and Medium-Duty Vehicle Component, the E-Mobility (Telecommunications) Component, the Bicycle Infrastructure Component, the Public Transportation and Commuter Vanpool Subsidy Component, and the Alternative Fuel Vehicle MechanicTraining Component.


### 4.5 

### PUBLIC 

### EDUCATION Engaging the public in efforts to reduce emissions is a key element of the ozone attainment demonstration strategy. Education increases public supportfor new and controversial regulations. Helping people understand the complex issues underlying the ozone problem further improves this support. There are many actions that individuals can undertake to reduce emissions that cause ozone. When members of the public are aware that they can make a difference and are convinced that the problem is real, many people will change their behavior in a positiveway. The District's educational program has expanded and evolved over the years. It uses a variety of media and techniques to ensure the widest possible dissemination of air quality information. It uses direct marketing approaches with traditional media including television, radio, and print. It networks with other agencies, educational institutions, organizations, industry groups, and the news media in educational efforts. It produces educational materials, such as videos, brochures, and fact sheets that provide focused information to targeted audiences. While this section of the 

### Extreme

### OADPdoes not specify emissions reductions that can be used for attainment demonstrations or rate of progress demonstrations, it is a very important component of the District's overall air quality management program. The following sections describe key elements of the District's Public Education program that help reduce emissions.
SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4 

## - ControlStrategyEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05


### 4.5.1 Outreach Program The District's outreach program contains traditional approaches and approaches that are unique to the SJVAB. An overview of the District's program is provided below. Spare the Air - The District's Spare the Air Program is a voluntary program that encourages businesses and residentsto avoid pollution-producing activities on days when high ozone levels are expected, primarily during the summer season. In additionto extensive multi-media English and Spanish language campaigns, information regarding the program is communicatedto employers through comprehensiveemployer packets (bilingual), and Spare the Air fairs throughout the Valley. -The District notifies participating employers and the public, via faxes, news broadcasts, and radio announcements, when it is predicted that the ozone standard will be exceeded the following day. The public is asked to postpone or avoid such activities as using oil-based paints, solvents, aerosol spray cans, and gasoline-poweredlawn equipment,and avoid making unnecessary vehicle trips. EducationalVideos -The District isworking on development of educational videos for improvingair quality. A recent project focuses on topics such as why we have air quality problems in the SJVAB, where the pollution comes from, the impact of air pollution on public health, agricultural crops and naturalvegetation, and District Rulesand Regulations. The District has produced three other educationalvideos; two of these videos describe commute alternatives,and the third explainsthe District's Spare the Air program. Valleywide Public Service Announcements and Paid Advertisinq - Public Service Announcements (PSAs) have been created for use on television and radio stationsthroughout the SJVAB. These short PSAs 

### (30-60 second) remind the public to use public transportation, share ridesto work (rideshare),walk to lunch, buy nonvolatile consumer products, etc., as their contribution to improvingair quality. Also, through enhanced public outreach, the District has strengthened its Smoking Vehicle Program, which encouragesthe publicto report vehicles with excessive visible emissions. An extensive public outreach campaign also informs SJVAB residents about the Sparethe Air program. Pollutant Standard Index (PSI) Predictions - Daily PSI predictions are faxed directlyto localtelevision, radio, and newspaper media to educate the public about air quality and advise them of days with poor air quality so that activities can be modified. The widest possible distributionof no burn day information is criticalto obtaining a high level of compliance. -The District has a staff meteorologistto provide more accurate air quality predictionsfor the SJVAB. Forecasts now use more detailed information specificto the localdaily conditions in the SJVAB.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

# - Control Strategy 4-44EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 Air Quality Symposium- The District holds the Air Quality Symposium about every other year. A wide variety of organizations, businesses and individuals participate. Past versions of the syr~~posium, have drawn over 200 attendees. The events include keynote speakers, general sessions, breakout sessions on topics of special interest, and air quality exhibits. The 2004 Symposium is scheduled for September 29-30, 2004 in Bakersfield, and the theme is exploring unique solutions to the clean air challenges that face us all. 4.5.2 District Publications Information Pam~hlets 

### -The District continues to develop new and updated brochures to address air quality issues in the SJVAB. Current brochures include the following: Automotive Checkbook (vehicle maintenance record book), the Smoking Vehicle Program, and Air Pollution Health Effects. Newsletter -The Valley

### Air News is a monthly publication of the District widely distributed throughout the SJVAB. The newsletter highlights current activitiesof the District, summarizes Governing Board actions, highlights commendable efforts by Valley businesses in reducing air pollution beyond what is required, and discusses other relevant air quality issues. 4.5.3 Youth Education As partof the youth education program, schools are able to contactthe District office to request classroom presentations on a variety of topics. Children of the SJVAB also have the opportunity to become a member of the Clean Air Kids Club and have newslettersand other information sent directly to their homes regarding air pollution and what they can do to help prevent it. Environmental curriculum and special activities have been provided to primary schools since the fall of 2000. In 2004, the District will expand the environmental curriculum to include a component for middle and high school students. The District is also participating in a growing program that involvesthe flying of flags at schools to indicate the air quality status for a given day during the school year.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4 

## - Control Strategy 4-45EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05



### The District works with local groups such as the American Lung Association and rideshare agenciesto promote annual events that reinforce clean air activities, such as thefollowing: Event Earth Day CleanAir Month Rideshare Week Car Care Month Lead Orqanization Time of Year Local Earth Day Sponsors April American Lung Association May Local Rideshare Committee October Calif. State Automobile Assn. October andAmerican Lung Association 

### A wide variety of localactivities are conducted by organizations and agencies throughout theValley. Such activities include the annual CleanAir Rally sponsored by ProjectCleanAir and the annual Conservation Fair by the County of San Joaquin. The District participates in many of these events and encourages activities that increasepublic awareness of air pollutionand p~~blic participationin programs or activities to reduce air pollution. The District has scheduled a Community Dayfor October2004 

### as a way for membersofthe community to visit the District's Central Ofice, learn how the Districtoperates, and learn howto effectively participate inthe public processfor improvingair quality. 

### 4.6 OVERVIEW OF REGIONALTPA RACM 4.6.1 Introduction 

### The San Joaquin Valley is a single air quality nonattainment area containing eight Metropolitan Planning Organizations(MPOs),which are also regional transportation planning agencies (RTPAs or TPAs) within the Valley. The Valley is hometo many diverse communities containing predominantly rural as well as predominantly urban areas peopled by individuals from many different parts of the world. This overview describes the process led by the Valley RTPAsto identifyand implement potentially reasonably available control measures (RACM) affecting local transportationactivity. Each RTPA covers a county with numerous cities, public interest groups, transit agencies, and a ridesharingagency in some cases. Collectively, the Valley RTPAs have conducteda thorough RACM process that addresses the entire San Joaquin Valley. In order to ensure thoroughness, the RTPAs have coordinated with each other through a Valleywide committee that meets biweeklylmonthlyto discuss their individual progress on RACM, obtain input and feedback from the other agencies on the committee, and share other relevant information. They also provide documentation regarding the local government control measures and meetings held at the county level to the group through a RACMwebsite.
SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4

# - Control Strategy 4-46EXTREMEOZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05 Another feature of the coordination is development of a common format for providing documentation on the RACM process. The Valleywide committee is composed of each R-TPA,the District, Caltrans, ARB, EPA, the Federal Highway Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration. This committee provides regular opportunity for the eight Valley RTPAs to obtain inputfrom each other and the other agencies involved in developiug the Extreme 

### OADPfor the Valley. The Valley RTPAs have limited legal authority to implement emission reduction measures. However, their status as regional transportation planning agencies places them in a position to help coordinate and facilitate consensus among their member jurisdictions, which do have authority to implement some measures. Therefore, the RTPAs led a process to identify and evaluate potential measures affecting local transportation activity. The Valley RTPAs recognize the importance of clean air for their communities and are doing their part in helpingto find ways to improve the air. The RTPA role in this RACM process is to lead local agencies in (1) the identification and implementation process for measures that may reduce ozone precursor emissions associated with local transportation activity that may be irnplernented at the local level; and (2) docurnenting reasons for not implementing measures that are not economically or tech~iically feasible. The individual jurisdictions within each county have primary control of funding and irnplementation for local governmentcontrol measures associated with transportation. However, since the Valley RTPAs are all part of one nonattainment area they have coordinated their processtogether in order to share ideasoffered by the public andjurisdictions to provide consistencyfor the entire process including approachesto documentation. Figure 4-1 gives an overview of the local government control measure process used for this plan. 4.6.2 Overview of Existing Measures The Valley RTPAs and their member agencies have long been involved in examining ways to contribute to improvements in air quality through implementation of local measures as well as provision of funding for measures being implemented by the Air District. Ingeneral, the existing control measures include transit improvements, ridesharing and ride-matching programs, telecommuting, compressedworkweeks, bicycle programs, pedestrian programs (such as street design to encouragewalking), traffic flow improvements, and numerous land-use programs. In addition, Valley RTPAs have a history of supporting mobile source reduction incentives. Nearly all counties inthe Valley have also allocated funding to alternative fuel projects. Money has been allocated to local school agencies for clean fuels infrastructure, as well as to the Air District's Heavy-Duty Motor Vehicle Emission Reduction Program for clean fuels municipal or public fleet purchases.

SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4 

## - ControlStrategyEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 In addition, since 1992the Valley RTPAs have maintained a Work Program agreement with the Air District that includes elements relatedto exploration of local government control measures and ongoing collaboration on air quality planning activities. The Valley RTPAs are legal entities that allocate CMAQ monies. Air quality and emissions benefits play a key role in the ranking process of each RTPA's selection of CMAQ projects. It is important to note that the Valley RTPAs and member jurisdictions completed a processto identify and implement Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) for the Severe Area Ozone Plan inApril 2002. Although this Plan was never finalized, the control measures were incorporated in the 

### Amended 2002 and2005 Rate ofProgress Plan for San Joaquin Valley Ozone. The control measures evaluated focused on the specific transportation control measures listed in Section 108(f) of the CleanAir Act. Collectively, local governments adopted a broad range of commitmentsto implement control measures. These extensive commitments demonstrate the level of effort that is being made by the local jurisdictions to reduce emissions and to improve air quality. The resolutions adopted by the respective entities to commit to implement local government control measures are included in the Regional Transportation Planning Agency Commitmentsfor Implementation Document,April 2002. The document is availablefor public review at the central San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD office located in Fresnoandwas included in the 

### Amended 2002 and 2005 Rate ofProgress Plan for San Joaquin Valley Ozone.

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control Strategy 4-48

### EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
Figure 4-1 OVERVIEW OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONTROL MEASURE PROCESS FOR THE 

### EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN STEP 1: RTPAs request memberjurisdictions to adopt RACM resolutions in November 2003. Transmit model resolution package, including existing RACM commitments to all local jurisdictions.

STEP 2:

STEP 3: - 

### RTPAs and memberjurisdictions adopt resolutions in accordance with the model resolution package and submit to RTPAs for compilation. Each implementing agency passes resolution describing the measures to be implemented Measure description Legal Authority for implementation Funding for measures Enforcement Each implementing agency also describes reasons for rejecting any measures Technologically or economically infeasible Otherwise unreasonable

Air Quality Consultant prepares Commitment document and submits to the Air District.

SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4

# - Control Strategy

### EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
4.6.3 Suggested measures 

### In order to maximize input from individual cities and other jurisdictions, as well as the public, the RTPA-level RACM process has been conducted on an individual county level, with Valley-wide coordination provided through a consultant. Each RTPA conducted the RACM process in 200312004 in a manner consistent with their individualcommittee structuresand public processes. This RACM process used the previous RACM process (dated April 2002) to the extent possible. The Suggested Measuresthat were considered at that time included existing localgovernment control measures in the SJVAB and example control measures in other ozone nonattainment areas. The list was organized by category using the specific transportation control measures listed in Section 108(f)of the Clean Air Act. It is important to note that the only other Extreme Ozone Nonattainment Area in the country is the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) in California. RTPA staff and consultants reviewedthe transportation control measures included in the SCAB 2003Air Quality ManagementPlanto see if the South Coast Air Quality Management Districtadopted any new measures not previously considered in the SJVAB. Inspection of the SCAB 2003 Air Quality Management Plan determined that the list of control measuresfor consideration was taken from the RegionalTransportationPlanningAgency Commitmentsfor Implementation Document, April 2002 (this isthe description of commitments developedfor the Amended2002 and2005 Rate of Progress Plan for San Joaquin Valley Ozone). It was determined that the South Coast Air Quality Management Districtadded no new measuresto this list for consideration. Therefore, no new measures were available to the San Joaquin Valley for consideration in the Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan RACM process. The summary of commitments and submitted resolutions (with existing commitmentsand reasoned justification) were transmitted to each jurisdiction to be used as the starting point. Each measure listed on the Summary of Commitments should either have a commitment or reasoned justification for each implementing entity. In general, the localjurisdictions reviewed the adopted resolution packageto determine if existingcommitments could be strengthened. Examplesof strengthening included extending the implementationschedule for the measure through 2010 or including additionalfinancial resources. Ifthe existing commitment is not ongoing (e.g., implementation expires in 2005) andlor cannot be strengthened, then reasonedjustification should have been developed. In addition, the localjurisdictions reviewedthe adopted resolution packageto determine if any measures that were previously found not feasible are now
SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control Strategy 4-50EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05


### feasible for implementation. If so, a new commitment for implementation should have been developed. If not, the reasoned justification should have been l~pdated accordingly. 4.6.4 

### Adopted measures Each RTPA memberjurisdiction has identified measures that are technologically and economicallyfeasible for implementation by that entity. The appropriate governing body has adopted formal resolutions to commit to implement control measures. If a jurisdiction decided that a measure was not feasible for implementation,thejurisdiction documented the "reasoned justification'' for nonimplementation,as required by EPAfor the RACM 

### process. This justification is based on technologicalor economic infeasibility. The resolutionsadopted by the respective entities to commit to implement local government con,trolmeasures are included in the corresponding Regional Transportation Planning Agency Commitmentsfor lmplementation Document (Volumes 4 and 5, 

### dated March 2004) [Appendix C (uncirculated) to this Plan]. The document is availablefor public review at the District's office in Fresno,the ARB'Soffice in Sacramento, and EPA's Region 9 office in San Francisco. Collectively, a broad range of commitments to implement control measures were adopted by the local governments. These extensive commitments demonstrate the level of effort that is being made to improve air quality. It is importantto note that specific emissions reduction targets for each of the measures have not been included in this Extreme OADP. However, in many cases these commitments will produce emission reductions above and beyond what has been quantified in ,the Extreme OADP. These adopted control measures represent additional. efforts by the local jurisdictions to reduce emissions and improve air quality. 4.6.5 

### Public Participation The 1992 Transportation 

### & Air Quality PlanningGuidelines, which address public participation, are issuedjointly by the U.S,Environmental ProtectionAgency and the U.S. Departmentof Transportation. These guidelines are designed to encourage an effective public participation programfor the development and implementation of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). According to the guidelines, the objectives of the public participation program should be to: 1. Promote public awareness of the air pollution problem, the SIP revision process, and the effects of various transportation control measures; 2. Encourage active participation from a variety of interest groups in the plan preparation process; 

### 3. Promote public understanding and agreement on the transportation control measures necessaryto improve air quality;
SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control StrategyEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
4. Providefor the identification of both interested and affected constituencies; 

### 5. Ensure that the agencies and elected officials are responsive to these constituencies; and 6. Encourage a spirit of openness and trust among elected officials, agencies, and the public. Public Involvement Processfor Transportation and Air Qualitv Passage of the lntermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) expanded emphasis on public involvement in the metropolitan planning process. The intent of the public involvement provisions in ISTEA is to increase public awareness and involvement in transportation planning and programming. ISTEA requires that the metropolitan planning organization provide citizens, affected public agencies, representatives of transportation agencies, private providers of transportation and other interested parties a reasonable opportunity to comment on proposed transportation plans and programs. These provisions have been continued under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21'' Century (TEA-21). Title VI Considerations Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color and national origin by recipients and sub-recipients of federal funds and prohibits exclusion from participation, denial of benefits, or being subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. Additional federal and state laws and directives prohibit discriminationon the basis of age, gender, handicap or disability. The Executive Order of 1994 on Environmental Justice encourages consideration of environmental justice concerns, especially the impact of programs and activities on low-income and minority populations. The Act and its related laws and directives hereinafter are called, collectively, Title VI. Decision Makinq Structure and Public Participation The San JoaquinValley contains eight counties. The transportation planning process in each county is conducted by an MPO or RTPA. Each transportation planning agency performs planning functions in accordance with applicable transportation and air quality planning guidelines and Title VI considerations. These eight agencies are leading the process to identify, evaluate and implement potential RACM measures pertaining to the transportation sector that may be implementedon a local level. Workshops The District conducted public workshops on developing an Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan on July 23, 2003 and on January 6 and 7,2004. The July

SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control StrategyEXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 2003 workshop presented an overview of the air quality plan development process. One public comment addressed the RACM process, and asked if RTPAs would revisit prior RACM commitments for the 

### Extreme OADP. The January 2004 Workshop include a presentation addressing the status of the TPA RACM process. No public comments were received on the R-TPA RACM process from the January workshops. The District also conducted public workshops on the Draft Extreme OADP on August 12 and 13,2004. The presentation on control measures at these workshops included a summary of the completed RACM process. No public comments were received on the completed RACM process and corresponding commitment documents. The SJVAB RTPAs have developed a website (located at 

### http://www.fresnocoa.orq) to serve as a resource for each county, as well as to provide the publicwith detailed information on the RACM process. This page contains relevant RACM guidance documents, agendas, and minutes for the biweeklylmonthly R-TPA meetings coordinating the RACM process. 

### 4.7 

### STATE EMISSION REDUCTIONS FOR 'THE 

### SJVAB' 4.7.1 Introduction Motor vehicles and equipment under State and federal jurisdiction, while responsible for about 

### 55 percent of ozone-forming gases in the SJVAB in 2004, are also contributing the majority of the emission reductions needed for attainment. Adopted State and federal regulations for cleaner engines and fuels are driving down Valley emissions of ozone precursors - reactive organic gases (ROG, also referredto as VOC elsewhere in this Plan) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) 

### - by over 225 tons per day (tpd), or over 35 percent, between 2000 and 201 0. To provide additional statewide emission reductions needed to achieve the federal health-basedair quality standards, ARB adopted the 

### 2003 

### State and Federal Strategy for the California State lmplemenfation Plan (Statewide Strategy) on October 23, 2003. ARB submitted the Statewide Strategy to EPA for approval as a revision to the California SIP on January 4, 2004. The Statewide Strategy identifies the Board's near-term regulatory agenda to reduce ozone and particulate matter by developing and adopting defined new measures from 2002 through 2009, with implementation prior to the 2010 ozone season. It includes commitments for the Boardto consider 19 specific statewide measures, plus the BureauofAutomotive Repair's planned improvements to the

1 ARB staff preparedthis section, and the District did not change the text other than to format it for consistencywith the remainderofthe Extreme OADP and to conduct minor editing.
SJVUAPCD Chapter4

# - Control Strategy 4-53EXTREMEOZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 

### Smog Check program and the continuation of the Department of Pesticide Regulation's approved SIP obligation2 to reduce volatile emissionsfrom pesticides. The Statewide Strategy includes a process to identify longer-term solutions for additional reductionsfrom sources under Statelfederalllocal control. The defined control measures in the Statewide Strategy cover on-road vehicles, off-road equipment, ports and harbor-craft, fuels and refueling, and consumer products. Measuresto clean up the existing fleet of mobile sources complement lower emissionstandards for newengines and consumer products. Other measures would reduce vapor emissions from gasoline storage and refueling. These defined measures are listed in Table 4-3. The Statewide Strategy, which includes detailed descriptions of each of the measures, is available at http:/lwww.arb.ca.qov/planninqlsip/sffed03lsedO3. 

### htm. The Statewide Strategy discussesthe need to obtain continued funding for the Carl Moyer incentive program to supplement regulatory actions requiringclean up of the existing fleet of diesel vehicles and equipment. New State funding for the Moyer program would enable additional clean engine projectsand provide emission reductionsto be credited towards the State's obligation. When adopting the Statewide Strategy,the Board delegated to the ARB Executive Officer the responsibilityto quantify the appropriate benefitsfrom the near-term measures for other areas that need further reductions inthe 2010 timeframe and to reflect these benefits in the regional SIPS. ARB staff estimates that the near-term measures inthe Statewide Strategy will provide 15 tpd ROG and 20 tpd NOx in the San JoaquinValley in 2010. ARB previously committed to achieve 10tpd of new NOx reductionsas part of the PMlO Plan,which is a subset of the 20 tpd NOx discussed here. 

### 4.7.2 Current Implementation Status 

### ARB has already startedto implement the Statewide Strategy. Several of the measures in the Strategy are comprehensive approaches for the source category, encompassing multiple rulemakingsor other actions that will contribute to the total reductions expected. As of July.1,2004, ARB has taken action on the following measures:

e 

### The low sulfur diesel fuel regulationadopted in July 2003 fulfills SIP measure FUEL-2. 

### The small off-road engine emission standards adopted in September 2003 fulfill SIP measures SMALL OFF-RD-1 and SMALL OFF-RD-2.

40 CFR Part 52, Federal Reqister, January 8, 1997, pages 1150-1187.
SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4 

### - Control Strategy 4-54

### EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05
The particulate matter control measurefor diesel-poweredsolid waste collection vehicles adopted September 2003 fulfills part of SIP measure ONRD 

### HVY DUTY-3. The voluntary emission control software upgrade programfor diesel trucks approved in March 2004 fulfills part of SIP measure ON-RD HVY DUTY-3. 'This voluntary measure includes a regulatory backstop to ensure that the anticipated emission reductionsoccur by 2010. The engine manufacturer diagnostics requirements for new diesel trucks adopted in May 2004 fulfill part of SIP measure ON-RD HVY DUTY-3. The consumer products regulationadopted in June 2004 fulfill SIP measure CONS-1. By 2004, ARB had begun implementing an expanded community-based inspection programfor diesel trucks and buses, fulfilling SIP measureON-RD HVY DUTY-1. In additionto these defined SIP measures, ARB adopted three controlsfor diesel stationary engines, portable engines, and transportation refrigeration units in February 2004 that will contribute to meeting the State's obligations. 4.7.3 

### ARB Commitments for Extreme OADPfor SJVAB ARB commits to adopt and irr~plement measuresto achieve, at a minimum, 15 tpd ROG and 20 tpd NOx emission reductions in the San JoaquinValley Air Basin by the 2010 ozone season. ARB will adopt measuresto achieve these reductions between2002-2009. ARB may meet this commitment by adopting one or more of the control measures in Table 4-3, by adopting one or more alternative control measures, or by implementing incentive program(s), so long as the aggregate errlission reductioncommitment is achieved.



### SJVUAPCD Chapter 4 

## - ControlStrategyEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
Table 4-3. Defined State Measures from the 2003 Statewide Strategy Strategy 

# I mv=ncv, Name

~A$~uTY-~ 

# 1 Pursue Approaches to Clean Up the Existing and New TruckIBus Fleet 

# 1 . - -. LTIMED-DUTY-1 Replace or Upgrade Emission Control Systems on Existing Passenger

- OFF-RD CI-I 

## I Pursue Approaches to Clean Up the Existing Heavy-Duty Off-Road LTIMED-DUTY-2 (BAR) ON-RD HVY DUTY-1 (ARB)

(ARB) 

## I ~~ui~ment Fleet (~om~ression~l~nition ~n~ines) - OFF-RD CI-2 

## 1 Implement Registration and Inspection Program for Existing Off-Road Improve Smog Check to Reduce Emissions from Existing Passenger & Cargo Vehicles Augment Truck and Bus Highway Inspections with Community-Based lns~ections

(ARB) 

## I ~qui~ment to Detect Excess

### missions (~6rn~ression lgniGon Engines) OFF-RD LSI-1 

### 1 Set Lower Emission Standardsfor New Off-Road Gas Engines (Spark (ARB) LS1-2 (ARB) SMALL (ARB) SMALL oFF-RD-2 (ARB) MARINE-1

Recover Fuel Vapors from Gasoline Dispensing at Marinas Reduce Fuel PermeationThrough Gasoline Dispenser Hoses PEST-1 Implement Existing Pesticide Strategy - . 

### . Ignited Engines25 hp and Greater) Clean Up Existing Off-Road Gas Equipment Through Retrofit Controls and New Emission Standards (Spark-Ignition Engines25 hp and Greater) Set Lower Emission Standardsfor New Handheld Small Engines and Equipment (Spark lgnited Engines Under 25 hp such as Weed Trimmers, Leaf Blowers, and Chainsaws) Set Lower Emission Standardsfor New Non-Handheld Small Engines and Equipment (Spark Ignited Engines Under 25 hp such as Lawnmowers) Pursue Approaches to Clean Upthe Existinq Harbor Craft Fleet

### - (ARB) MAR1NE-2 (ARB) FUEL-1 (ARB) FUEL-2 (ARB) CONS-1

(ARB) CONS-2

(ARB) FVR-1 (ARB)

SJVUAPCD 

### - Cleaner Engines and Fuels PursueApproaches to Reduce Land-Based Port Emissions- Alternative Fuels, Cleaner Engines, Retrofit Controls, Electrification, Education Programs, Operational Controls Set Additives Standardsfor Diesel Fuel to Control Engine Deposits Set Low-Sulfur Standards for Diesel Fuelfor TrucksIBuses, Off-Road Equipment, and Stationary Engines Set New Consumer Products Limits for 2006 Set New Consumer Products Limitsfor 2008-2010 Increase Recovery of Fuel Vapors from Aboveground Storage Tanks

Chapter 

### 4 

## - ControlStrategy 4-56EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05


### 4.8 

### Contingency Measures In general, contingency measures are control measures that go into effect, without further action by the State or the EPA Administrator, if planned emission controls fail to reach desired goals and targets. The FCAA defines two types of contingencies: (1) "specific measures to be undertaken if the area fails to make reasonable further progress, or to attain the national primary ambient air quality standard by the attainment date applicable under this part" [Title I, Part 

### D, Section 179 (c)(9)] and (2) "specific measuresto be undertaken if the area fails to meet any applicable milestone" [Title 

### I, Part D, Section 182(c)(9)]. Forthe SJVAB, the concept of contingency measures is almost a moot point, for several reasons. First, areas such as the SJVAB that have been aggressively developing and implementing emission control measures over the past twenty years have already achieved most of the emissions reductions that are within the authority of the Districtto control and that are techr~ically and economically feasible. In essence, the "low-hangingfruit" has already been picked. The likelihood of identifying new source categories under District authority to control, with attendant large emission reductions, isvery small; any control measures beyond what have been identified in this Plan and within the District's authority to implement are likely to have relatively small emissions reductions3, and thus would be of minimal value as contingency measures. Second, prior to the next ROP milestone year for 1 -hour ozone, the District will be developing three major air quality plans as SIP subn~ittals that will control ozone precursor emissions: the 2006 PMlOPlan, the 2007 8-hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan, and the 2008 PM2.5/Regional Haze Plan. The 

### PMlO Plan is required in the final rule approvingthe 2003 

### PMlO Plan (69 FR 30035), and the dates for submittal of the 8-hour Ozone Plan and the PM2.5/Regional Haze Planare driven by EPAfinal rule language stating that plans are due three years after the effective date of designations (final rules not yet published). Each of these plans will develop additional control measures for ozone precursor emissions independent of this Extreme OADP, and thus will help in meeting ROP milestonesandlor attainment goals for the federal 1-hour ozone standard if needed. The magnitude of reductions from control measures outside of the Extreme OADP is likely to exceed what is needed for the Extreme OADPfor contingency 

## measure^.^ Therefore, control measures developedfor

3 Note that 14of the 21 new District control measures listed in Table 4-1 of this Plan achieve reductions in ozone precursor emissions of 1.0 tonslday or less each for 2010; the total 2010 reductions estimated from these 14 measures are about 5.8 tonslday compared to a total SJVAB 2010 inventory of over 760 tonslday VOC and NOx combined. 4 For example, Reynolds, Blanchard and Ziman identify, through photochemical grid modeling, that NOx emissions must be reduced to about 10% of 1999 base case values to attain the 8-hour ozone standard inthe SJVAB ("Understandingthe Effectiveness of Precursor Reductions in Lowering 8-hr Ozone Concentrations, J. Air & Waste Man., 53: 195-205, February 2003).
SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4

## - Control StrategyEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 these other plans serve the same function as contingency measures developed exclusively for the 

### Extreme OADP. Third, EPA plans to revoke the federal 1-hour ozone standard before the next 1- hour ROP milestoneyear for the SJVAB (2008), so the concept of contingency measures for federal 1-hour ozone standard requirements has diminished importancefor the SJVAB (i.e., once the standard is revoked on June 15, 2005, EPA is not obligated to determine if an area has met the 1-hour standard by the area's attainment date [40 CFR 51.905(e)]). Fourth, because the District is using "long-term measures1' as part of its control strategy (see Section4.8), it is required by the federal Clean Air Act to identify the contingency measureswith reductions equal to those achieved by long-term measures no later than three years before implementation of proposed plan provisions [Section 182(e)(5) of the federal Clean Air Act]. For the District, this would involve not only identifying the long-term measures, but also redoing this 

### Extreme OADPwith whatever new information and tools are available relatedto the formation of ozone in the SJVAB. Thus, an additional planning requirement relatedto long-term measures provides another level of contingency in that the District will reevaluate the SJVAB 1-hour ozone attainment control strategy in 2007=,well in advance of the next ROP milestone year (2008) or the attainment year (201O), and will add new measures as warranted by the updated assessment of ozone air quality at that time. This represents the functional equivalent of contingency measures as defined in the federal Clean Air Act. 

### 4.9 

### LONG-TERM MEASURES Section 182(e)(5) of the Federal Clean Air Act allows EPA to approve provisions of an implementation planfor an Extreme Area that anticipate the development of new control techniques or improvementof existing control technologies, and an attainment demonstration based on such provisions. This provision of the federal Clean Air Act is dependent upon the state demonstrating that such provisions are not needed for incremental emissions reductions in the 1990-2000 time frame, and that the state has submitted enforceable commitments to develop and adopt contingency measures to be implemented if the anticipated future technologies do not achieve planned emission reductions. The state must submit these contingency measuresto EPA no later than three years before proposed implementationof the plan provisions and approved or disapproved by EPA in accordancewith Section 11 0 of the federal Clean Air Act. The contingency measures must be sufficientto achieve the emissions reductions needed for ROP or attainment demonstration purposes. For this Extreme OADP, ozone

5 If€PA revokes the 1-hour standard as planned, then the Districtwould not update the 1-hour Extreme OADP in 2007, but instead would developthe Shour OADPfor submittal in June 2007.
SJVUAPCD Chapter4

## - Control Strategy 4-58EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 precursor emission reductions must be implemented no later than Spring 2010 to affect ozone levels in the attainment year of 2010. Thus the Districtwould need to identify the Section 182(e)(5) contingency measures no later than spring of 2007. Because of other ongoing and planned major SIP submittals, the District will fulfill the intent of the Section 182(e)(5)contingency measure requirements by identifying and implementing control measures above and beyond the Extreme OADPthat will help attain the federal 

### I -hour ozone standards. The District has a legally enforceable commitment to revise the PMIO Plan and submit it to EPA by March 31, 2006 (69 

### FR 5431), and a regulatory requirementto submit an 8-hour OADPby June 15, 2007. Each of these would create ozone precursor emission reductionsthat are beyondthe scope of this Extreme OADPby Spring 2007, and would thus meet the intent of contingency measures for Section 182(e)(5). For this Extreme OADP,the magnitudeof the long-term measures is fairly small (a few tonslday each of VOC and NOx), and represents a small percent of the 2010 inventory (see Section 5.6). Consequently, the cor~trol measures developed for the other plans mentioned abovewould easily cover the magnitude of reductio~is required for the long-term measures.

SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 4

## - Control Strategy 4-59

# Chapter 

# 8 

# - CALIFORNIA CLEAN AIR ACT TRIENNIAL PROGRESS REPORT AND PLAN REVISIONEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 

### 8

. 

### CALIFORNIA CLEAN AIR ACT TRIENNIAL PROGRESS REPORT AND PLAN REVISION 8.1 

### INTRODUCTION Section 40910 of the California Health and Safety Code (CH&SC) requires air pollution control districts in the state to achieve and maintain state ambient air quality standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide at the earliest practicable date. Section 4091 1 of the CH&SC 

### reql- ires all districts designated as nonattainmentfor the state standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, or nitrogen dioxideto prepare and submit a plan for attaining and maintaining the standards to the California Air Resources Board (ARB). Section40924 (b) of the CH&SC requires districts to prepare a report every ,threeyears summarizing progress in meeting the schedules for developing, adopting, and implementingthe air pollution control measures contained in each district's plan for attaining the California air quality standards. Section40925(a) of the CH&SC requires districts to review and revise their original 1991Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP) 

### to correct for deficiencies in meeting the interim measures of progress incorporated intothe plan pursuant Section 40914 [emission reductions], and to incorporate new data or projections into the Plan. This requirement, termed a Triennial AQAP Revision, is on the same reporting schedule as the Triennial Progress Report, and is us~~ally combined with the progress report. InJanuary 1992, the District prepared and adopted the 1991Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP) 

### [SJVUAPCD 19921. ARB approved this plan in December 1992. The 1991AQAP 

### covers ozone and carbon monoxide, since the Districtwas classified as nonattainmentfor these two state standards at that time.' Inaccordance with the CH&SC, the District subsequently prepared Triennial Progress Reports and Plan Revisions as updates to this initial 1991 AQAP 

### in 1998and in 2001 (SJVUAPCD 1998; SJVUAPCD 2001). This Chapter of the Extreme OADP 

### representsthe third Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision for the District; as such, it covers the period 2000- 2002, and its original due date was December 31, 2003. However, for Districts preparing State Implementation Plan (SIP) submittals in 2004, ARB revised the due date to be the time of the 2004 SIP submittal. Because the District has attained the California ambient air quality standard for carbon monoxide, ARB no longer requires the Districtto address carbon

1 The Districtwas also designated as nonattainmentfor the state particulate matter standard; however, as noted above. Section40911does not reauire the devel0Dment of ~lans for districts

- .- that are designated nonattainmentfor California particulate matter standards. ' SJVUAPCD Chapter 8

### - California Clean Air Act Triennial Progress Report and Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
monoxide in progress reports and plan revisions. This chapter of the Extreme OADPthus focuses on the state ambient air quality standard for ozone (as opposed to the other chapters of the Extreme OADP that address compliance with federal ozone standards). In 1998, the District adopted the California CleanAirAct Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision 1995-1997 (1997 Triennial Update); ARB approved this report in October 1999. No change in the District's ozone attainment strategy was set forth inthe Update. In 2001, the District adopted the California CleanAirAct Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision 1997-1 999 (2000 Triennial Update). No change in the District's ozone attainment strategy was set forth in the Update. The District's adopted strategy is based on the latter alternative. For the 2000-2002 period, this chapter of the OADP represents the triennial plan (2003 Triennial Update). 8.1 .I Attainment Designation California's ambient air quality standard for ozone is 0.09 ppm. For an area to attain the state I-hour ozone standard, representative and corrlplete ambient air quality monitoring data must show that measured I-houraverage ozone levels did not exceed 0.09 ppm (CH&SC70303, 70304). Unlike the federal standard, the state ozone standard is strictly a level not to be exceeded. Thus, occurrence of even a single one-hour period with measured ozone levels in excess of 0.09 ppm is enough to designatean area as nonattainment for the state standard (unlike the federal 1 -hour ozone standard, in which four exceedances in three years are needed for designation as nonattainment). Also unlike the federal standard, State law does not establish attainment dates for ambient standards, but instead requires evaluation of trends and continued progress in reducing errlissionsthat lead to unhealthy pollutant levels. Based on the designation criteria established by Section 40921.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, ARB has classified the SJVAB as severe nonattainment for the California I-hour ozone standard. Because of this classification, the District is subject to stringent requirements in the CCAA and must apply all feasible measuresto reduce emissions. 8.1.2 Air Basin Description The San Joaquin Valley (Valley) is a major geographic, population, and agricultural region of California. The District,and the corresponding air basin, includes the counties of San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare and theValley portion of Kern County. Comprising about 24,840 square miles, it represents approximately 16%of the geographic area of California and is the second largest air basin in California. The California Departmentof Finance estimatesthat the District's population will grow to 3.6 SJVUAPCD Chapter 8

### - California CleanAir Act Triennial Progress Report and Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN RevisedIORO/O~ million by 2005. Major urban centers include Bakersfield, Fresno, Modesto and Stockton. The Valley consists of a continuous inter-mountain valley that is approximately 250 miles long and averages 80 miles wide. It is defined by the Sierra Nevada mountains in the east (8,000 to 14,000 feet in elevation), the Coast Range in the west (reaching 5,020 feet in elevation), and the Tehachapi mountains in the south (6,000 to 8,000 feet in elevation). The Valley opens to the Carquinez Straits inthe northwhere the San Joaquin-Sacramento Delta empties into San Francisco Bay. Exceptfor its foothill and mountain areas, the SJVAB is essentially flat with a slight downward gradient to the northwest. Approximately 31 percentof the total land area within the SJVAB is under public ownership. The federal government is the largest public landholder, with approximately 94 percent of the total public-owned land under itsjurisdiction. For the most part, the holdings consist of National Forest lands, National Parks, wildlife refuge areas, plus a major military air base located on the Valley floor. The Valley is predominately agriculturally oriented, including foothill and mountain areas devoted to grazing and timber sales. Currently, the majority of industry remains directly or indirectly related to providing services, products and support to agriculture. In addition, industries related to the production of natural resources are scattered throughout the District. Various lumbering operations that process timber harvested from the nearby National Forests and private forestlands are located along the east side of the District. The District also has substantial petroleum production fields in the southern COI-~nties, while oil refineries are located in Kern County. See Chapter 2 for more detailed information on the SJVAB. 

### 8.2. OZONE AIR QUALITY INDICATORS 8.2.1 Air Quality Indicators A number of ways exist to characterizeozone air quality trends. ARB has identified three air quality indicators for districts to use in the preparing triennial updates to ozone attainment plans. These are the Expected Peak Day Concentration (EPDC), the Population Weighted Exposure (PWE) and the Area Weighted Exposure (AWE). The following sections provide background information on each, along with an overview of the calc~~lation procedure. 8.2.2 Expected Peak Day Concentration (EPDC) The EPDC represents the maximum ozone concentration expected to occur once per year, on average. The EPDC is based on a statistical calculation of ambient ozone data collected at each monitoring site in the SJVUAPCD Chapter8 

### - California CleanAirAct Triennial Progress RepottandPlanRevisionEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
district. The EPDC is useful for tracking air quality progress at individual monitoring locations. Because it is based on a robust statistical calculation, it is relatively stable, thereby providing a trend indicator that is not highly influenced by year-to-year changes in meteorology. The EPDC is calculated using ozone data for a three-year period (the summary year and two years immediately before the summary year). The data included in the calculation are daily maximum 1-hour ozone observations. However,when three years of data are not available, an EPDC can be calculated using only one or two years of data. The EPDC is computed using a statistical procedure that fits an exponential-tail model to the upper tail of the distribution of concentrations. The fitted distribution then is used to determine analytically the concentration that is expected to recur at a one-in-one year rate. 8.2.3 Exposure Indicators 8.2.3.1 Description The exposure indicators provided are the population-weighted (PWE) and areaweighted exposure (AWE) indictors. These are intended to provide an indication of the potential for chronic adverse health impacts. Unlike the EPDC, whichtracks progress at individual locations, the population-weighted and areaweighted exposure indicators consolidate hourly ozone monitoring data from all sites within the district into a single exposure value. The result is a value representing the average potential exposure in an area, which in this.case, is a district. The term "potential" is used, because daily activity affects an individual's exposure. Forexample, being indoors during peak ozone concentrations will decrease a person's exposureto outdoor ozone concentrations. The purpose of the population-weighted indicator is to characterizethe potential average outdoor exposure per person to concentrations above the levelof the state ozone standard. The population-weighted exposure indicator represents a composite of exposures at individual locationsthat have been weighted to emphasize equally the potential exposure for each individual in an area. In contrast, the purpose of the area-weighted exposure indicator is to characterize the potential average annual outdoor exposure per unit area. The area-weighted exposure indicator represents a composite of exposures at individual locations that have been weighted to emphasize equally the potential exposure in all portionsof the district. The exposure analysis is based solely on ambient. (outdoor) ozone data. The calculation methodology assumes that an "exposure" occurs when a person experiences a 1-hourozone concentration outdoors that is higher than 

### 0.09 ppm, the level of the State standard. The PWE and AWE consider both the level and duration of ozone concentrations above the State standard.
SJVUAPCD Chapter8 

### - California Clean Air Act Triennial Progress Report and Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRA TIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05


### The annual exposure is the sum of all the hourly exposures during the year and presentsthe results as an average per exposed person or average per exposed unit land area. 8.2.3.2 Calculation The Time Period: 

### The population-weighted and area-weighted exposure indicators are computed as an annual value for each year. Air Quality Data: 

### The air quality data used for computingthe exposure indicators are hourly ozone data. All available data for sites in the district are used, regardless of whether the data meet designation criterion for complete and representative data. Because the individual exposure values are interpolated from data for several monitoringsites, the data for allthe sites do not needto be complete for all hours. Census Data: 

### The exposure computations are based on census data collected by the federal government. For the years from 1985to 1999,the population statistics are based on the 1990 census. For the years 2000, 2001, 2002, population data from the 2000 censuswas used. The federal government has dividedthe nation into census tracts for the purpose of counting population and obtaining demographic information. Each of these census tracts has associated with it: a (1) centroid of the census tract, (2) 

### the population residingwithin the census tract, and (3) 

### the land area of the census tract. The populationwithin each census tract is used in computing the annual population-weighted exposure, whereas, the land area of the census tract is used in computing the annual area-weighted exposure. The centroid of the censustract is used in computing both exposure indicators. Calculation Procedure for Population-Weighted Exposure: 

### Hourly ozone concentrations are interpolated to each census tract centroid. Hourly ozone exposures are computed for each centroid by subtracting the value of the State ozone standard (0.09 ppm) from each interpolated hourly concentration. If negative, the result is set equal to zero. The hourly exposures for each census tract are multiplied by the number of people residing in the census tract. These hourly exposures are then added together and divided by the total population of all of the censustracts for which interpolated exposure values are available. The result representsan hourly population-weighted exposurefor the district. The hourlyexposures are aggregated into a daily population-weighted exposure. SJVUAPCD -- Chapter8 

### - California CleanAirAct Triennial Progress Report and Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
The daily exposures are then aggregated into an annual population-weighted exposure. This is done for each year from 1985 through 2002, for which data are available. Calculation Procedure forArea-Weighted Exposure: The procedurefor computing the area-weighted exposure issimilar. In this case, the hourly exposures for each census tract are multiplied by the square kilometer land area of the census tract. These hourly exposures are then added together and divided by the total land area of all of the census tracts for which interpolated exposure values are available. The result represents an hourly area-weighted exposure for the district. The hourly exposures are aggregated into a daily area-weig h ted exposure. The daily exposures are then aggregated into an annual area-weighted exposure. This is done for each year from 1985through 2002, for which data are available. 

### 8.3 PROGRESS TOWARD AIR QUALITY STANDARD ATTAINMENT Pursuant to California Health and Safety Code (H&SC) section 40924, on or before December 31, 2003, the District is required to assess the extent of air quality improvement achieved during .thepreceding three years (2000-2002)'. The assessment of improvement should be based on: 1) ambient pollutant measurements; 2) best available modeling techniques; and 3) air quality indicators identified bythe State Board for that purpose. Based on the ARB guidance document, Guidance for Usinq Air QualityRelated Indicators in Reportinq Proqress inAttaining the State Ambient Air Quality Standards, the District's assessment of improvement is based on air quality indicators and confirmed by ambient measurements and modeling. Ambient pollutant measurements are collected from monitoring stations within the SJVAB and are incorporated into the ARB'S annually published Air Quality Data. Data used to prepare the annual statistics shown in 

### &r Qualitv Data are reflected inthe air quality indicators discussed below. Table 8-1 providestrend data for the SJVABwith respectto the state ozone ~tandard.~ As shown in Table 8-1, the number of days peryear with 1-hour ozone levels above the state standard inthe SJVAB has decreased slightly from 1990 through 2002. The remainder of this section emphasizes the indicators required by ARB for inclusion in this report.

1 For triennial Reportsdue in 2003, ARB modified the due date for air basins also preparing SIP submittals, and stated that the triennial Reports could be submittedwith, and at the same times as, SIP submittals inthe 2003-2004 time frame. 

## * Chapter 2 presents SJVAB monitoring data with respect to the federal I-hour ozone standard. SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 8 

### - California CleanAirAct Triennial Progress Reportand Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05


### ARB staff has prepareddata showing EPDC trends, population-weighted ozone exposure and area-weighted ozone exposure for many of the monitoring sites in the District that have been in operation long enough to have the necessary data (six years). The EPDC trends for the SJVAB for the period 2000-2002 show a wide degree of variability in that some are relatively steady, others decreasing, and a few showed increases (Figures 8-1 through 8-8). Of the three-year period of interest for this Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision (2000-2002), the year 2002 seemed to be when most sites experienced an increase in EPDC values. Comparison of Figures 8-1 through 8-8 with the SJVAB trends for the federal standard (Chapter2) indicates that 2002 also showed deteriorating ozone air quality, reflecting the same emissions levels and meteorological conditions that shaped the trends in EPDC levels in this time frame. TABLE 8-1 SJVAB Ozone Exceedances 1990-2002

Source: ARB 2004b 

### The area-weighted exposure chart (Figure 8-9) shows a general improvement in air quality since 1996. For the most recent reporting period (2000-2002), the trend inthis metric is generally downward, thereby showing continued improvement. However, AWE does show an increase from 2001 to 2002, again reflecting the same conditions affecting the EPDC trends and federal ozone standard tracking given in Chapter 2. The population-weighted exposure chart (Figure 8-10) prepared by the ARB shows that exposureto ozone (adjusted to reflect population distribution SJVUAPCD Chapter8

## - ~alifornia CleanAirAct Triennial Progress Reportand Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 and to give more "weight" to higher ozone values) has declined approximately 100 hours per person per year within the District between 1986 and 1993. Since 1993, the metric has shown year-to-year fluctuation near the value of 1.60 ppm-hrs per person. Forthe most recent reporting period (2000-2002), the metric showed a downward trend, with again a slight increase from 2001 to 2002. In summary, the data prepared pursuant to H&SC section 40924 shows that expected "peak day" concentration, per-capita annual exposure, and per-unit-area annual exposure for ozone have slightly declined within the SJVAB since reporting of these statistics began. The nature of the trends varies with monitoring site, and each site's trend reflects emissions and meteorological conditions, as well as the influence of other parameters (for example, the population weighted average is also affected by trends in population in the SJVAB. As shown in the following sections, the District has been aggressively developing and implementing ozone precursor emission control measures to improve ozone air quality in the SJVAB. Though these emissions reductions have been driven by compliance with federal requirements, they will help the SJVAB demonstrate continued progress toward meeting state ambient air quality standards as well. 

### Figure 

### 8-1 Expected Peak Day Concentration (EPDC) at 

### the Arvin-Bear Site

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year (End Year of Three) State Standard: 0.09 ppm Source: ARB and SJVUAPCD
SJVUAPCD Chapter8

### - California CleanAir Act Triennial Progress Report and Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
Figure 8-2 Expected Peak Day Concentration (EPDC) atthe Bakersfield Golden State Site. 0.180

0.090 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year (EndYear of Three)
Figure 8-3 Expected Peak Day Concentration (EPDC) atthe Bakersfield CaliforniaAve. Site

0.090 

### 4 1 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year (EndYear of Three) State Standard: 0.09 ppm Source: ARB and SJVUAPCD
SJVUAPCD Chapter8

## - California CleanAir Act Triennial Progress ReportandPlan RevisionEXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05
Figure 8-4 Expected Peak Day Concentration (EPDC) at the Clovis 

### N. Villa Ave. Site

0.090 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Year (End Year of Three) Figure 8-5 Expected Peak Day Concentration (EPDC) atthe Fresno 1stStreet Site

Year (End Year of Three) State Standard: 0.09 ppm Source: ARB and SJVUAPCD -

SJVUAPCD Baseline t I I I 

# .. - - - I ..4 .I 9 I 

# - II I 9 --

Chapter 8

## - California CleanAirAct Triennial Progress ReportandPlan RevisionEXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
Figure 8-6 Expected Peak Day Concentration (EPDC) atthe Hanford-Irwin Street Site

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year (End Year of Three) Figure 8-7 Expected Peak Day Concentration (EPDC) at the Maricopa-StanislausStreet Site

0.090 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year (EndYear of Three) 7

State Standard: 0.09 ppm Source: ARB and SJVUAPCD A v

I D I Baseline

SJVUAPCD Chapter8

### - California CleanAir Act Triennial Progress Reportand Plan Revision

### EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10R0/05


### Figure 8-8 Expected Peak Day Concentration (EPDC) at the Merced-South Coffee Ave. Site 0.180 

## 1

0.100- 0.0904 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year (EndYear of Three) 0.150- 

# - E 

### g 0.140- 

# - a 0.130- 

### 8 0.120-



### Figure 8-9 Area Weighted Exposure per Square Kilometer A A 

# - v 

# -

I Baseline I .I 

# - 8

0.10

1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 Year (End Year ofThree) . *Three Year MovingAverage 

### o Area-Weighted Exposure Baseline



### SJVUAPCD Chapter8

### - California CleanAirAct Triennial Progress ReportandPlan RevisionEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
Figure 8-10 Population Weighted Exposure per Person I I

0 10 

# 1 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 Year (End of Year Three) -m- Three Year Moving Average o Population-WeightedExposure Baseline


### 8.4 TRANSPORT MITIGATION The movement of air pollutants across jurisdictional boundaries is called longrange transport, or simply transport. ARB, in cooperation with local air districts, is required by the CCAA to evaluate intrastate transport and to suggest mitigation for such transport. Most violations of ozone ambient air quality standards occur under stagnant weather conditions, when pollutant concentrations build up becauseemitted pollutants do not disperse either horizontally or vertically. For ozone, these conditions occur on hot, summer days with lowwind speed liniiting horizontal dispersion, and temperature inversions in the atmosphere limiting vertical dispersion. Prevailing winds carry air pollutants and precursors from emission points to downwind locations, mixing with cleaner air or other emissions along the way. Pollutant and precursor concentrations are much lower on windy days because emissions are dispersed through larger volumes of ambient air. 'The air quality management community in California generally agrees that pollutant transport does occur among the various air districts and air basins in California. The wind direction and resulting transport direction may change significantly from day to day, depending on specific weather conditions. The ARB has identified transport couples (source and receptor areas) throughout
SJVUAPCD Chapter 8 

### - California CleanAirAct Triennial Progress ReportandPlan Revision1 EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATlON PLAN Revised 10/20/05
California. The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin is identified as both a source and a receptor of transported pollutants. ARB issued its most recent assessment of ozone transport in California inApril 2001 (ARB 2001), and concluded that transport from the Sar~ Francisco Bay Area Air Basin and the Broader SacramentoArea contributes to some exceedances of the state I-hour ozone standard in the SJVAB, and that the degree of contribution ranges from overwhelming to inconsequential3. ARB also found that the SJVAB contributes overwhelmingly to ozone exceedances in the Mojave Desert, Mountain Counties, and Great Basin Valley Air Basins, significantly to the North Central Coast, and significantlyto inconsequentiallyto the Broader Sacramento Area and the South Central Coast (ARB 2001). ARB is in the process of analyzing CCOS 2000 data to develop improved technical capabilities to better quantify transport. Future triennial progress reports and plan revisions will include the results from this body of work. In 2003, ARB amended state regulations on ozone transport mitigation. ARB retained,with minor revisions to eliminate outdated provisions, the requirement for upwind transport districts such as the San Joaquin Valley to apply best available retrofit control technology (BARCT). To ensure that upwind districts minimize their impact on downwind districts, ARB also added two new requirements relatedto the adoption of all feasible measures and no net increase thresholdsfor new source review permitting programs. The San Joaquin Valley was already required to comply with these provisions due to other existing CH&SC requirements. The District already had the most stringent new source review thresholds and had implementedallfeasible measures in lieu of meeting the annual five percent ozone precursors emissions reductions requirements. Table 8-2 identifies BARCT rules adopted by the District since 1991. The District adoptedthe majority of these rules before 1994 and continues to update them as new technology is demonstrated. To ensure that the District continues to include allfeasible measures applicable to sources under its authority, the District reviewed adopted rules of other California Air Districtsto determine if other measures should be incorporated. The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) has taken a proactive step to assist in this process by developing a list of the most stringent rules adopted by California Air Districts. The District participated inthe process of developing the list and has reviewed its own adopted rules and proposed control measures in the Extreme OADPto ensure it meets the "all feasible measure" requirement.

3 ARB uses three classificationsto describe transport: inconsequential,significant, and overwhelming (ARB 1990). SJVUAPCD Chapter8

### - California CleanAirAct Triennial Progress Report and Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
Table 8-2 BARCT Rules

VOC BARCT



### 11 I and Process Drains at Petroleum Refineries and Chemical Plants 

### 11

Rule 4401' 4402' 4403'

4404 4407 44514

Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt Paving and Rule Name Steam-Enhanced Crude Oil ProductionWell Vents Crude Oil Production Sumps Components Serving Light Crude Oil or Gases at Light Crude 011 and Gas Production Facilities & Components at Natural Gas Processing Facilities Heavy Oil Test Station - Kern County In-situ CombustionWell Vents Valves, Pressure Relief Valves, Flanges, Threaded Connections

4642' 46514 - Maintenance Operations Solid Waste Disposal Sites Volatile Organic Compound Emissionsfrom Soil Decontamination 4652 

## I Coatings and Ink Manufacturing 

# 11 4653' 

### I Adhesives

I j_a X I %S 7 NOx BARCT ""' '"< , '6 "f'i$

## ,& " jr < v."lan rq .*, -*$*- * 83 :t* 

### I Boilers. Steam Generators. and Process Heaters 

# I 4672 4681 4682' 4684' 469 1 Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning Operations RubberTire Manufacturing Polystyrene Foam, Polyethylene, and Polypropylene Manufacturing Polyester Resin Operations Vegetable Oil Processing Operations

2 BARCT for larger'unitswas adopted in 1993. BARCT for smaller unitswas adopted in 1996. 3 Last updated inthe 2001 to 2003 time frame

Scheduledfor update in this Extreme OADP (see Tables 4-1 and 4-2) 43524 ' Solid ~lel Fired Boilers, steam Generators and Process Heaters

SJVUAPCD

4354"' 4701

## '" 4703'

Chapter8

### - California Clean Air Act Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision Glass Melting Furnaces Internal Combustion Engines Stationary Gas Turbines BARCT rules ado~ted or amended in 1995-1998.EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05

- - - 

### 8.5 

### CONTROL MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION 8.5.1 Stationary Source Control Measures 

### Table 8-3 presentsthe District's rulemakingschedule and adoption activity for 2001-2003 as developed in the 2000 Triennial Plan Update and Plan Revision (SJVUAPCD 2001). Table 8-3* 2001-2003 Rulemaking Schedule

rescribed Burning and Hazard Reduction Burning

Commercial Charbroiling

SJVUAPCD Chapter8

### - California CleanAirAct Triennial ProgressReport and Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05

Table 8-3 2001-2003 Rulemaking Schedule (cont.)

PLAN SCHEDULE Glass Melting Furnaces 2Ql02 Amendment Boilers, Process Heaters, 3Ql02 Amendment and Steam Generators

Flares 3Q102 

# I New Rule
Nitric Acid Plants 3Ql02 New Rule
Foundries 3Q102 

# I New Rule Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters - Reasonably Available Control Technology Amendment

Mirror Coating Operations New Rule
Bakeries New Rule Food Products Cooking New Rule
Reduction of Animal Matter Amendment
Internal Combustion 3Ql02 Amendment Engines Stationary Gas Turbines Amendment COMMITMENT
EPA SIP Deficiency EPA SIP Deficiency EPA RACT Requirement EPA RACT Requirement EPA RACT Requirement EPA RACT Requirement

EPA SIP Deficiency

EPA RACT Requirement EPA RACT Requirement EPA RACT Requirement EPA RACT Requirement

EPA SIP Deficiency EPA SIP Deficiency

SJVUAPCD Chapter8

## - California CleanAirAct Triennial Progress Report and Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05

Table 8-3 2001-2003 Rulemaking Schedule (cont.)
RULE CONTROL MEASURE 2000 TRIENNIAL ACTIVITY COMMITMENT PLAN SCHEDULE Components Serving Light Crude Oil or Gases at Light Crude Oil and Gas Production Facilities and Components at Natural Gas Processing Facilities Amendment Feasible Control Measure

Valves, Pressure Relief Valves, Flanges, Threaded Connections and Process Drains at Petroleum Refineries and Chemical Plants Pump and Compressor Seals at Light Crude oil and Gases Production Facilities & Components at Natural Gas Processing Facilities New Rule Feasible Control Measure

Feasible Control Measure

4701 Internal Combustion 3Q/03 Amendment Feasible Engines Control Measure 4703 Stationary GasTurbines 3Ql03 Amendment Feasible Control Measure Projected emissions reductions associated with the control measures are not included on this table. District staff is still inthe process of developing this information. Projected emission reductions and a revised rulemaking schedule are included in Section 4 of this Extreme OADP. Some measures listed above were included inthe Amended 2002 and 2005 Rate of Progress Plan for San Joaquin Valley Ozone adopted December 19,2002. Source: SJVUAPCD 2001. 

### Section 40924(b)(2) of the 

### CH&SC,as well as ARB'Sguidance for triennial progress reports and plan revisions, directs districts to report actual emissions reductions achievedfor each measure scheduled for adoption in the three year period addressed by each progress report and plan revision. Table 8-4 

### presents this information for the SJVAB, inthe 2000-2002 time frame that is the focus of this Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision.

SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 8

## - California Clean Air Act Triennial Progress Report and Plan RevisionL. EXTREMEOZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05
8.5.2 Mobile Source Control Measures 8.5.2.1 Introduction Underthe CCAA's severe nonattainment classification for the state ozone standard, the District is requiredto include "reasonably available transportation control measures sufficient to substantially reducethe rate of increase in passengervehicle trips and miles traveled per trip

### ..."in its state air quality plans. The 2000 Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision addressed a number of TCMs, and this 2003 report updates those discussions and addresses new measmres identifiedafter the 2000 Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision. Table 8-4 Actual Emission Reductions for District Rules Affecting Ozone Precursor ~missions' (2000-2002)



### ( 4408 

# 1 12/19/2002 

# 1 ~ehyhration VOC 

# 1 1.7 1.5 

# 1

4601



# 1 4662 

### ( 4/19/01 

# 1 Degreasing 

# I VOC 

# 1 14.0 

# 1 11.3 

# 1 1 Systems 

### I Architectural Coatings VUL

- -- - Glass Coating

Operations VOC 0.2 0.2 Storage of Organic Li uids VOC 2.8 0.2 Oraanic Solvent 1

UI51 IUI

1 Rules may also reduce emissions of other pollutants (e.g., PM), but only ozone precursors are shown. 461 0 4623

4692 4693 4703

Reductions from mobile source measures differ from stationary source reductions inthat they are limitedto a specific time period rather than being permanent, and they are calculatedover the projects' lifetimes (in large part becausethey are tied to state and federalfunding cycles for transportation 

### project^).^ Stationary source reductionsare referencedon a tonslday basis 12119/02 12R0101

4 This statement primarily reflects mobile source measures for which the District has authority to implement or assist in implementation. Mobile source measures for which ARB is responsible 3/21/02 5/16/02 4/25/02

SJVUAPCD Chapter 8

## - California CleanAir Act Triennial Progress ReportandPlan Revision Operations 

## 1 0.04 0.2 9.6 Commercial Charbroiling Bakery Ovens Stationary Gas Turbines 0.03 0.2 5.4 VOC VOC NOx

# . I EXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
because they are cumulative in that they continue to occur day after day, year after year, from the same source. The control measures continue to generate reductions as long as the controlled source is operating. Due to the nature of mobile source emissions control measures, quantifying the actual years in which reductions will occur is not possible. For some projects, reductions may be limitedor tied to a set number of years. For others, emission reductions may occur over a set number of years. 

### 8.5.2.2 District Committed Measures The District is continuingto work with the Transportation Planning Agencies (TPAs) in implementing previously-committed TCMs and in developing new TCMs for SIP submittals. The Memorandumof Understanding (MOU) among the District and the eight county TPAs is still in effect. The 2000 Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision mentioned several 9000-series rules that were no longer being pursued due to state action; these rules are still inactive. District and TPA staffs are working on specific actions and programs to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) or to reduce emissions through other activities. Local governments in the SJVAB have committed to hundreds of Reasonably Available Control Measures in the period 2000-2002. The reader is referred to the 

### Amended 

### 2002 and

### 2005 Rate of Progress Plan for San Joaquin Valley Ozone for more information. The document is available on the District'swebsite at www.vallevair.org. Descriptionsof specific control measures are available in hardcopy at the District office in Fresno, at ARB'Soffice in Sacramento, or at EPA Region 9's office in San Francisco. In addition, The District isworking on a number of rules involving mobile sources. As shown in Chapter4 of this 

### Extreme OADP,the rule making schedule includes a school Bus Fleet Rule and lndirect Source Rules. Each of these rules is directed at reducing emissionsfrom mobile sources. *The lndirect Source Rules represent a major rule development activity. lndirect Source Mitigation is aimed at controlling secondary emissions from development that attracts or generates motor vehicle trips. The District is currently evaluating rules to implement the lndirect Source Mitigation measure that would require mitigation measures and/or emission based fees to fund projects that reduce emissions. Developers would have the option for mitigating emissions on-site through project design and location, credit for the installationof infrastructure and equipment at the project site that would reduce vehicle trips or emissions, and/or the payment of a fee. During the 2000-2002 period, the District began the

address motor vehicle technology changes and are quantifiable in amount of reductions andtime period in which reductionsoccur. SJVUAPCD Chapter8

### - California CleanAirAct TriennialProgress Repott and Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05
process of revisiting prior rule development activities in this area (that did not result in development of indirect source rules). The 2003 

### PMlO Plan and state legislation signed into law in 2003 (SB 700 series) are driving the District to adopt indirect source rules in the late 2004learly 2005 time frame. 

### 8.5.2.3 Voluntary Programs The District continued to implement several successful voluntary mobile source en~ission reduction programs in the 2000-2002 time frame. These programs are described below. During the 2000-2002 time frame covered by this report, the REduce Motor Vehicle Emissions (REMOVE) Program utilized a portion of a $4 motor vehicle registration surcharge fee allowed by State legislation for nonattainment areas for District-operated planning, monitoring, enforcement, technical studies, and emission reduction projects necessary to implement the California Clean Air Act (CCAA). The REMOVE Program funded projects that reduce motor vehicle emissions within the Valley through a competitive request for proposal (RFP) process. Duringthe 2000-2001 funding cycle (2 years were treated as one cycle) and 2001-2002 funding cycles, the District continued to implement the REMOVE Program; projects funded at a cost of almost $3,633,389 resulted in an estimated 460 tons of emissions reduction over the lifetime of the projects. The REMOVE Program is no longer in existence as of JLIIY2004, but the District plans to replace it later in 2004 with a similar program. During 2000, 2001 and 2002, the District received 5,997 calls or report slips regarding smoking vehicles, with about a 17 percent response rate from individuals receiving a "Smoking Vehicle'' letter. This voluntary program reduces motor vehicle emissions by encouraging owners of smoking vehicles to have repairs madeto correct problems of high emissions. The Heavy Duty Vehicle Emission Reduction Program provides financial incentivesto municipalities, companies, fleet operators and individuals who purchase new heavy-duty, low-emission on-road vehicles from original equipment manufacturers (OEM); new OEM heavy-duty, low-emission engines for replacements; or retrofit technologies for heavy-duty on-road and nor]-road vehicles meeting criteria guidelines. The District isfunding its Heavy Duty Vehicle Emission Reduction Programwith Carl Moyer funds, provided through state legislative action. Since 1999,The District has received $18,308,227 on Carl Moyer Programfunding. The District has provided additional match funding inthe amount of $7,658,671. To date, the District has obligated all Moyer Program funds for years one, two and three (CMI, CMll and CMIII) and approximately 30% of funds for year four (CMIV).
SJVUAPCD Chapter

### 8 

### - California CleanAirAct TriennialProgress ReportandPlan Revision, ,I 3 EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 Implementation has been successful, particularly with the agricultural community. The District has provided Moyer Program incentive funds for projects including agricultural pump engines, refuse haulers, street sweepers, tractors, grape harvesters, delivery trucks, and almond sweepers. Approximately $25,000,000 in Moyer Programfunds and matching funds has been awarded to fund over 1,300 cleaner burning engines. Approximately 9,500 tons of NOx reductions have resulted from Moyer Program projects. Additionally, in 1996,the District began a 

### Spare the Air Program. This voluntary program is designed to encourage ridesharing and discourage use of equipment and products that emit ozone precursors during the ozone season. The program is directed both to employers and the general public. In 1996, 75 employers were enrolled in the employer component. By Septerr~ber 1997,the employer component had increasedto nearly 500 participants, while in 1998 and 1999,the employer component ran about 730. The focus of the program in 1999 was increasing the active participation of employers already enrolled in the program rather than increasing the number of employers in the program. Between 2000- 2002, the employer corr~ponent grew from 710 to 749. 

### 8.5.3 Land Use Programs Land use programs contain three basic elements: District CEQA review of projects in the SJVAB, District 

### Guidelines for Assessing and Mitigation Air Quality Impacts,and District

### Air Quality Guidelinesfor GeneralPlans. In the CEQA Program, the District reviews projects each year from nearly all local planning agencies in the San Joaquin Valley. Localjurisdictions routinely include air quality mitigation measures recommended by the District in development projects. Forthe period 2000-2002, the District reviewed almost 4000 projects of varying complexity throughout the 8-county region. In addition, the District is increasingly functioning as lead on CEQA documents due to its discretionary action of permit issuance. For the period 2000-2002, the District reviewed and updated the 

### Guide for Assessing and MitigatingAir QualityImpacts (SJVUAPCD 2002) to further assist local jurisdictions in analyzing and mitigating impacts, and issued a revisedversion on January 10, 2002. The District is preparing another update in 2004. In the District's program to encourage air quality elements in city and county general plans, District staff provides assistanceto cities and counties via its

### Air Quality Guidelines for General Plans (AQGGP) [SJVUAPCD 19941and by reviewing general plans as they are updated. The AQGGP has beenvery well accepted. Nearly all cities and counties in the Districtthat have prepared general plan updates have used the AQGGP since its approval in 1994. In 2002 the

SJVUAPCD Chapter8

### - California Clean Air Act Triennial Progress Report and Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONEATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05 District began updating the AQGGP, and expects to issue a revised version in 2004. Also in 2002, the District began developing a manual entitled 

### Internal CEQA Guidelines forDistrict Staff When completed, this manual will guide District staff on how to comply with CEQA for the range of District activities, which include serving as lead agency on development projects. Other activities related to land use include Indirect Source Rules discussed above under Mobile Sources. 

### 8.6 PLAN REVISION 8.6.1 Introduction The California Clean Air Act requires the District to establish a strategy that will achieve an annual average five percent reduction in ozone precursor emissions, or alternatively, to commit to taking all feasible measures to reduce emissions within its boundaries in an expeditious time frame. The District's adopted strategy is based on the latter alternative. Duringthe 2000-2002 period, the District continued to implement its original control strategy of adopting rules to fulfill the District's SIP commitment and then to address additional measures needed for attainment of the California ozone standard. The District met all of its federally required emission reduction rates (three percent per year for every three year period post 1996 until attainment) for 

### I -hr ozone precursors for the 2000-2002 period addressed by this report. During the 2003-2005 planning cycle, the Districtwill continue its efforts to improve its emissions inventory. This will consist of both in-house efforts, joint effortswith ARB, and contracting with consultants for updating or developing inventories for specific sources. The District will also cor~tinue to participate with ARB and other districts on analyzing CCOS data and developing modelingtools to improve ozone standard attainment planning. In particular, work in 2003-2005 will focus on developing modeling tools for 8-hour ozone. 

### 8.6.2 Control Strategy The District's control strategy to reduce ozone pollution is largely driven at present by emissions reductions needed to attain the federal 

### I -hour ozone standards and neededto attain the federal PMIO standards. The District is implementing an intense rule development schedule to meet commitments in the 

### Amended 2002 and 2005 Rate ofProgressplan for San Joaquin Valley Ozone (which includes control measures though 2005) and in the 2003 

### PMIO Plan (which contains control measures for PMIO and its precursors, includingthe VOC and NOx outto the year 2010). For ozone rate of progress, the District has demonstrated a 33% reduction in ozone precursor emissions over the period SJVUAPCD Chapter 8

## - California CleanAirAct TriennialProgress Report and Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10R0/05
1990-2002 by a large margin, thus exceeding federal requirements for ozone precursor emissions reductions. The 2003 PMlO Plan calls for a total annual NOx reduction of 45.3 tonslday and a total annual VOC reduction of 20.8 tonslday by 2010. Table 8-5 presents the District's 2003-2005 rulemaking schedule. Beyond 2005, the District's rulemaking schedule becomes even more intense. The PMlO Plan identifies NOx,VOC and PMlOdirect emissions controls through 2010. This plan will be revised and resubmitted to EPA in March 2006, so a significant evaluation of the control measure commitments will occur in 2005. This Extreme OADPidentifies control measure commitments through 2010 for VOC and NOx. In 2007, the District must develop and submit to EPA an OADP for the 8-hour ozone standard, which is expected to call for even more emissions reductions than have been identified to date for PMlOand the 1-hour ozone standard. By early 2008, the District must develop and submit to EPA plans for attaining the PM2.5 standard and the regional haze standard. These plans will also include control measure commitments for ozone precursor emissions. The District will continue to pursue emissions reductions for VOC and NOx unless and until gridded photocherr~ical modeling results indicate air quality benefits from controlling emissions of one precursor morethan the other. The District also intends to continue its strategy of regional control measures and rules; no new rules, nor exemptions to existing rules, are being considered for specific subregions within the SJVAB. All of these future federal planning activities will be addressed in future Triennial Progress Reports and Plan Revisions. The reader is referred to the Amended 2002 and 2005 Rate ofProgress Plan for San Joaguin Valley Ozone,to the 2003 PMlO Plan; both documents are available on the District's website atwww.vallevair.org. Table 4-1 of this Extreme OADP includes measuresfor the 2005 to 2007 time frame. The previous Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision (SJVUAPCD 2001) referredto a number of requirements relatedto classification of the SJVAB as severe nonattainmentfor the federal 1-hourozone standard. EPA eliminated these requirements upon the effective date of the reclassification to extreme nonattainment (69 FR 20550).

SJVUAPCD Chapter8

### - California CleanAir Act Triennial Progress Report and Plan RevisionEXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05

Table 

### 8-5 Rule Making Schedule for 

### 2003-2005 Rule



### 4604 4409 New 

### 4455 New Control Measure

Lime Kilns Adopt1 Reason Amend 

# 1

Date 

# 1

2W03 RACTIRACM 

### 1Q-2003 Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters Stationary IC Engines
Can and Coil Coating Oil and Gas Fuaitives 

### Indirect Source Mitigation 

# 1 4Q 

### - 2005 

# 1 EOADP (cW 

### 3Q 

### - 2003
3Q 

### - 2003



# - Refinery & Chemical Fuaitives Sanction ClocWFixup1RACM Sanction ClocWFixup1RACM 

### 1Q 

### - 2004 2Q 

### - 2005

I I I 

# 1 4694 

### New 

# I Wineries 

### - Fermentation and 

# 1 40- 2005 

# 1 EOADP (Ch. 4) 

# 1 RACM EOADP fCh. 

### 41 2Q 

## - 2005

Small Boilers, Process Heaters, Steam Generators, 2.0 - 5.0 

### MMBtuIhr


## I I Storaae 

## I I 'I -~ - EOADP (Ch. 

### 4)

4Q 

## - 2005

I \ /I

Source : SJVAPCD2002; EOADP Ch.4, Table 4-1 'Control measures shown as deleted were moved intothe post-2005 time frame and thus are beyondthe scope of this Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision, they will be addressed inthe next Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision Note: BoldText indicates that the control measure has been adopted. 

### EOADP (Ch. 4)



### 4702 4309 

### New



### 8.6.3 Updated Strategy & Expected Reductions 

### As requested by ARB in the 2003 

### "Triennial Assessment and Plan Revisions" Stationary IC Engines 

### Commercial Dwers

guidance, the district has included projections of the planning inventory out to the year 2020. 

### Table 8-6 presentsthe requestedyears of 2010, 2015 

### and 2020 

### by primary source sector of stationary, area, and mobile sources to provide a longterm view of how emissions are expected to change inthe future inthe SJVAB. Table 8-6 shows thatARB projectsthe SJVAB emissions to decline over the long term. Trends for all three pollutantsshow a downward trend, with the exception
SJVUAPCD Chapter 8 

### - California CleanAirAct TriennialProgress ReportandPlan Revision 

### 2Q 

## - 2005 4Q 

### - 2005 EOADP (Ch. 

### 4) EOADP (Ch. 4)EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONPLAN Revised 10/20/05 of VOC, which slightly increasesfrom 2010 to 2020, primarily due to area sources (but also stationary sources). This increase is most likely due to population growth outstripping the ability of area source emission controls in the out years. Also of note is a significant downward trend in NOx emissions for onroad and off-road mobile sources, reflectingstate and federal emissions controls on engines. Table 8-6 Planning Emissions Inventories (summer,tons/day)*

Represents direct inventory output, CCOS Version 2.11-RF932PEI; no local or state line item adjustments made. Also may not matchTable 3-1due to changes inVersion 2.11 over time. 8.6.4 Further Study Measures 81.8
291.4

Furtherstudy measuresare measures that need to be researched in orderto determine itsfeasibility as 

### a control measure inthe future. The District identified several emission source categories that appearto havethe potentialfor emission reductions, but they have highly 1.1ncertainemission inventoriesor estimates of control measure effectiveness. Forthose sources, the District proposesfurther study to enable an informed decision on whether to pursue a control measure and to deterrr~ine a realistic emission reduction estimate. The District's "Further Study Measures"are presented in Section 4.2 of this Extreme OADP. Notethat Chapters 4, 5, and 

### 7 of this Extreme OADPidentify and evaluate state and Districtozone precursor emission control measuresthat would be adopted outsidethe time frame of the California Clean Air Act Plan Revision,and are therefore not mentioned inthis Chapter. Other Mobile Total

SJVUAPCD 376.3
1131.6

Chapter 8 

### - California CleanAir Act Triennial Progress ReportandPlanRevision 41.5
364.7 118.5
398.3 35.4
356.8 96.0
332.5 371.5
1246.0 32 0
358.2 380.2
1444.8EXTREME OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION PLAN Revised 10/20/05


### 8.7 

### REFERENCES ARB 1990 California Air Resources Board, 

### Assessment and Mitigation of the Impacts of Transported Pollutants on Ozone Concentrations within California, June 1990, CARB, Sacramento, California. ARB 2001 California Air Resources Board, 

### Ozone Transport: 2001 Review,California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, California,April 2001. ARB 2004a Califorl-liaAir Resources Board, EPCD Data Sacramento, California. ARB 2004b The 

### 2004 California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality, CaliforrliaAir Resources Board, Sacramento, California. SJVAPCD 1992 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 

### 1991 Air QualityAftainment Plan,January 1 992, SJVUAPCD, Fresno, California. SJVAPCD 1994 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District,

### Air Quality Guidelinesfor General Plans, SJVUAPCD, Fresno, California, October 20, 1 994. d SJVAPCD 1998 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 

### California Clean AirAct Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision 1995-1997(1997 Triennial Update), 1998, SJVUAPCD, Fresno, California. Approved byARB October 1999. SJVAPCD 2001 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 

### California CleanAirAct Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision 1997-1999(2000 Triennial Update), SJVUAPCD, Fresno, California, 2001. SJVAPCD 2002a San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 

### Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts, SJVUAPCD, Fresno, California,January 10, 2002 revision (originally adopted August 20, 1998). SJVAPCD 2002b San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District,

### Amended 2002 and2005 Rate of Progress Plan for San Joaquin Valley Ozone,SJVUAPCD, Fresno, California, December 19,2002 revision. SJVUAPCD Chapter 8

## - California CleanAirAct Triennial Progress Reportand Plan Revision