2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendices: Title Page 

## SACRAMENTO REGIONAL

8

- HOUR OZONE ATTAINMENT AND

REASONABLE FURTHER PROGRESS PLAN

APPENDI CES

( 2013 SIP REVISIONS )

A. EMISSIONS INVENTORY

B. PHOTOCHEMICAL MODELING

C. PROPOSED CONTROL MEASURES

D. TRANSPORTATION CONTROL MEASURES

E. WEIGHT

- OF

- EVIDENCE ANALYSES

F. MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS AND VMT OFFSET ANALYSIS

G. REASONABLE FURTHER PROGRESS DEMONSTRATIONS

H. REASONABL Y AVAILABLE CONTROL MEASURES (RACM) ANALYSIS

I. FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT REQUIREMENTS2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A: Emissions Inventory

Page A

- 1 

### Appendix A: Emissions Inventory

The 2002, 2014, 2017, and 2018 emission inventories are presented in various formats

and details in this appendix.

Appendix A1 contains the on

- road motor vehicle ROG and NO X 

### emissions, vehicle

population and activity Burden data generated using EMFAC2011 and transportation

activity for ecast data from the 2013/2016 MTIP 1



### . It does not include CARB adjustments

for recently adopted controls through January 2012. The list of adjustments is presented

in Table A5

- 2.

Appendix A2 (available separately in electronic file format) contains the est imated

VOC and NO X 

### stationary, area

- wide and off

- road forecast summaries by EIC emission

categories for the Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area in CEPAM : NORCAL 2012

PM2.5 SIP Baseline Emission Projections, Section a1

– Emission Projections With

External Adjustments. It includes adopted controls through mid

- 2011. It also includes

some ERCs but not the entire 4 t ons per day VOC and 3 tons per day NO X 

### added to the

planning inventory. It does not include newly identified VOC emission sources: Heritage

Dairy (0.1 tpd) and Jepson Prairie Composting (4.1 tpd). It also does not include

reductions from PCAPCD Rule 242

- IC Engines, and Rule 243

- Polyester

Resin/Plastic Product Manufacturing. ERC correction and these additional emissions

and reductions are added t o the inventory as external adjustments as shown in Table

A5

- 1.

Appendix A3 (available separately in electronic file format) contains the growth and

control data used for emission forecasting stationary and area

- wide sources in CARB’s

SIP planning project ions model, CEPAM

.

Appendix A4 (available separately in electronic file format) contains the summary of

In

- Use off

- road equipment emissions, horsepower, population and activity data for the

Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area using data outputs from the 2011 In

- Use Off

Road Equipment model. Also available in electronic format are other off

- road motor

vehicles category specific methods and inventory models from CARB’s website,

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/categories.htm#offroad_motor_vehicles . For those off

- road

emissions categories not updated with new methods and data, such as lawn and

garden equipment, data outputs from OFFROAD 2007 (available in electronic format)

are us ed. These offroad emissions do not include CARB and district adjustments for

recently adopted controls through January 2012. The list of adjustments is presented in

Appendix A5.

Appendix A5 contains recent emission inventory adjustments by the air distric ts and

CARB. Unlike the VOC and NO X 

### inventories presented in Chapter 5, Table 5

- 2 and

1 Final 2013/16 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP), Amendment #1 to the

MTP/SCS 2035, and Air Quality Conformity Analysis. (August 16, 2012), FHWA approval December 14,

2012.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A: Emissions Inventory

Page A

- 2 

### Table 5

- 3, respectively, the inventories presented in Appendices A1 and A2 do not

include CARB and district adjustments in Tables A5

- 1 and A5

- 2. District inventory

adjustments for reductions from unaccounted district rules through mid

- 2011

, for

emission source additions , and for ERC correction are shown in Table A5

- 1. CARB

inventory adjustments for recently adopted controls through January 2012 are

presented in Table A5

- 2. CARB off

- road adjustment factors, which are incorporated into

CEPAM

– Emission Projections With External Adjustments, are available separately in

electronic file format.

Appendix A6 contains a summary description and inventory of VOC and NO X 

### emissi on

reduction credits (ERCs) listed by the individual air districts. Included are: 1) unused

ERCs issued for reductions that occurred prior to the 2002 base year, and 2) future

bankable rice burning ERCs. The VOC and NO X 

### ERC totals were rounded up to 4 tons

per day VOC and 3 tons per day NO X 

### and added to the emission inventory forecast

years in Chapter 5, Table 5

- 2 and Table 5

- 3 , respectively.

Appendix A7 contains the 2019 VOC and NO X 

### emissions by stationary, area

- wide, on

road motor vehicles and other mobi le sources major source categories.

Appendix A 8 contains Tables 5

- 4 and 5

- 5 of “Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan” (2011 SIP Revision, November 10,

2011).2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A1: On

- Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Inventory

Page A1

- 1 

### Appendix A1: On

- Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Inventory

Appendix A1 contains the 2002, 2014, 2017, and 2018 on

- road motor vehicle summer

planning VOC and NO X 

### inventories, vehicle population, VMT and trips for each EMFAC

vehicle class cate gory for the Sacramento federal nonattainment area. These updated

motor vehicle emissions are based on ARB’s EMFA2011 emission factor model and the

latest planning assumptions from SACOG’s 2013/2016 MTIP 2 

### . Emissions tables by

county are available separatel y in electronic file format. It does not include CARB

adjustments for recently adopted controls through January 2012. The list of adjustments

is presented in Table A5

- 2.

2 Final 2013/16 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP), Amendment #1 to the

MTP/SCS 2035, and Air Quality Conformity Analysis. (August 16, 2012), FHWA approval December 14,

2012.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A1: On

- Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Inventory

Page A1

- 22013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A1: On

- Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Inventory

Page A1

- 32013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A1: On

- Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Inventory

Page A1

- 42013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A1: On

- Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Inventory

Page A1

- 52013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A5: Recent Emission Inventory Adjustments

Page A5

- 1 

### Appendix A5: Recent Emission Inventory Adjustments

Emission inventory adjustments presented in this appendix include recent changes by

the air districts and CARB which are not reflected in Appendices A1 and A2. These

emission changes are due to: 1) recently adopted control measures through January

2012 for mobile sources, 2) unaccounted adopted control measures through mid

- 2011

and additional emissions for stationary an d area

- wide sources , and 3) in correct amount

of planning ERCs in CEPAM inventory which is less than the amount of ERCs added to

planning inventory . Tables A5

- 1 and A5

- 2 contain a summary of the district and CARB

emission inventory adjustments, respectively . CARB off

- road adjustment factors, which

are incorporated into CEPAM

– Emission Projections With External Adjustments, are

available separately in electronic file format.

ERC Adjustments

The ERC adjustments in Table A5

- 1 are to account for the differenc e between the

CEPAM ERCs in Appendix A2 and the 4 t ons per day VOC and 3 t ons per day NO X



### ERCs added to the SIP plan . The amount of ERCs in CEPAM inventory (Appendix A2)

is summarized below:

VOC ERCs (in CEPAM),

summer

, t ons per day

2011 2014 2017 2018 2019

SAC 2.13 2.14 2.15 2.16 2.17

YS 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.53 0.53

Placer 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.55 0.55

FR 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06

Total SFNA VOC ERCs in CEPAM 3.26 3.26 3.28 3.29 3.30

N O X 

### ERCs (in CEPAM),

summer

, t ons per day

2011 2014 2017 2018 2019

SAC 1.20 1.19 1.15 1.15 1.14

YS 0.61 0.61 0.58 0.58 0.58

Placer 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40

FR 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06

Total SFNA NO X 

### ERCs in CEPAM 2.29 2.27 2.19 2.19 2.18

The CEPAM ERCs for each pollutant, air district and year are calculated by using ERC

adjustment factors and annual and summer unadjusted inventories (stationary +

areawide).2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A5: Recent Emission Inventory Adjustments

Page A5

- 2 

### The equation for ERC adjustment Factor (pollutant, district

, year) is:

A = ERC adjustment Factor (pollutant, district, year) = (B+C) / B

Where, B = AAI (pollutant, district, year) = annual average unadjusted emissions

(stationary + areawide) by pollutant, district and year generated using

CEPAM Section 1e (Version 1.02).

C = ERC s (pollutant, district) = annual average ERC s by pollutant and

district used by CARB 3



### Annual Average ERC s (tons per day)

used in ERC Adjustment Factor Calculation

Air District NO X 

### VOC

El Dorado 0 0

Placer 0.54 0.62

Sacramento 1.60 2.47

Sutter Use Cheryl

F eather R iver

ERC Adj Factor Use Cheryl

F eather R iver

ERC Adj Factor



### Yolo/Solano 0.60 0.58

The equation for CEPAM ERC s (pollutant, district, year) is:

D = CEPAM ERC s (pollutant, district, year) = (E*A)

– E

Where, E = PI(pollutant, district, year) = summer planning unadjusted emissions

(stationary + areawide) by pollutant, district and year generated using

CEPAM Section 1e (Version 1.02).

Sample Calculation ( for NOx, SMAQMD, 2018)

A = ERC adjustment Factor = (B+C) /B = (6.0445+1.6)/(6.0445) = 1.2647

D = CEPAM ERC s = (E*A)

– E = (4.3293*1.2647)

- 4.3293 = 1.1460

3 CARB. “Re: ERC External Adjustment” Message to Hao Quinn (SM AQMD) 29 August 2013, Email.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A5: Recent Emission Inventory Adjustments

Page A5

- 3 

### The amount ERC adjustments that need to be added to the CEPAM summer inventory

(Appendix A2) so that the entire amount of 4 tpd VOC and 3 tpd NO X 

### ERCs is included

in the SIP plan are presented below:

ERCs, t ons per day

2011 2014 2017 2018 2019

A. VOC ERC in CEPAM

for SFNA 3.256 3.264 3.283 3.290 3.297

B. ERC in Plan

(whole number) 4 4 4 4 4

C. VOC ERC Adjustment

(Line B

- Line A) 0.744 0.736 0.717 0.710 0.703

D. NOx ERC in CEPAM for

SFNA 2.286 2.272 2.194 2.185 2.177

E. ERC in Plan

(whole number) 3 3 3 3 3

F. NOx ERC Adjustment

(Line E

- Line D) 0.714 0.728 0.806 0.815 0.8232013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A5: Recent Emission Inventory Adjustments

Page A5

- 4 

## Table A5

- 1. District Emission Inventory Adjustments in Sacramento Nonattainment Area

District

Rule/Category/Source Adoption

Year Implement

Year VOC Emission Changes* (TPD)

2002 2008 2011 2014 2017 2018 2019

PCAPCD

- 243 Polyester

Resin/Plastic Product

Manufacturing 

### 2003 2003

- 0.177

- 0.194

- 0.210

- 0.222

- 0.228

- 0.232

FRAQMD

- 3.20 Wood Products

Coating 

### 2005 2006 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Added Heritage Dairy (Yolo

Solano) 

### 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.105

Added Jepson Composting

(Yolo

- Solano) 

### 4.110 4.110 4.110 4.110 4.110 4.110 4.110

VOC ERC Adjustment (added to

Subcategory Mfg & Industrial) 

### 0.744 0.736 0.717 0.710 0.703

Total District Adjustments 4.110 4.037 4.765 4.740 4.709 4.697 4.686

District

Rule/Category/Source Adoption

Year Implement

Year NO X 

### Emission Changes* (TPD)

2002 2008 2011 2014 2017 2018 2019

PCAPCD

- 242 IC Engines 

### 2003 2003

- 0.038

- 0.033

- 0.029

- 0.026

- 0.025

- 0.024

NO X ERC Adjustment (added to

Subcategory Mfg & Industrial) 

### 0.714 0.728 0.806 0.815 0.823

Total District Adjustments 0

- 0.038 0.680 0.699 0.779 0.789 0.799

*These changes are included in Chapter 5, Table 5

- 2 and Table 5

- 3. These changes are not included in the detailed inventories

contained in Appendix A2.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A5: Recent Emission Inventory Adjustments

Page A5

- 52013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A6: Emission Reduction Credits

Page A6

- 1 

### Appendix A6: Emission Reduction Credits (ERCs)

Unused ERCs Issued for Reductions That Occurred Prior to 2002 Base Year

Certain pollutant emission reductions due to equipment shutdown or voluntary control

may be converted to emission reduction credits (ERCs) and registered with the air

districts. These ERCs may then be used as “offsets” to compensate for an increase in

emissions from a new or modified major emission source regulated by the air districts.

Unused ERCs are considered as potential future emissions supplemental to the

forecasted emissions inventory.

The amounts of unused ERCs from stationary sources that occurred prior to the 2002

base year are estimated at about 2.6 tons per day of VOC and 1.4 tons per day of NO X



### and are summarized by air district in Table A6

- 1. They are included in the emissions

forecasts to ensure the potential future use of these credits does not interfere with

reasonable further progress and attainment goals.

Future Bankable Rice Burning Emission Reduction Credits

E mission credits from reduction in burning may not be used to comply with offset

requirements at a new major stationary source or a major modification, unless they are

included in an approved attainment demonstration plan. 4 

### Therefore, the impact of

accounting for ERCs from reduction in rice straw burning and other agricultural burning

credits are being included in this 8

- hour ozone attainment and RFP demonstration plan

.

California legislation in 1991 (known as the Connelly bill) required rice farmers to phase

down rice field burning on an annual basis, beginning in 1992. A burn cap of 125,000

acres in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin was established, and growers with 400 acres

or less were granted the option to burn their entire acreage once every four years. Since

the rice burning reductions were mandated by state law, they would ordinarily not be

“surplus” and eligible for banking. However, the Connelly bill included a special

provision declaring that the reductions qualified for banking if they met the State and

local banking rules.

Due to the special consideration in the Connelly bill, potential future rice burning ERCs

could be issued for previous reductions that are eligible for banking. The amounts of

future bankable rice burning ERCs for the Sacramento nonattainment area are

estimated at about 0. 9 tons per day of VOC and 1.0 tons per day of NO X 

### and are listed

by air district in Table A6

- 2. They are included in the emissions forecasts to ensure the

potential future use of these credits does not interfere with reasonable further progress

and attainment goals.

4 Pursuant to EPA correspondence letter dated October 30, 2003.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A6: Emission Reduction Credits

Page A6

- 2 

### Table A6

- 1

Summary of Unused Banked Emission Reduction Credits In the

Sacramento Nonattainment Area for 2002 Baseline

Air District a 

### Avg. Summer Day

VOC (tpd) NO X 

### (tpd)

Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD 2.0 75 1. 141

Yolo

- Solano AQMD 0. 082 0. 137

Placer County APCD 0. 394 0. 0 45

Feather River A QM D (South Sutter) 0 0

Total Unused Banked ERCs 2. 551 1. 323

a There are no ERCs for El Dorado County AQMD.



### Table A 6

- 2

Summary of Future Bankable Rice Burning Emission Reduction Credits

In the Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Air District a 

### Avg. Summer Day

VOC (tpd) NO X 

### (tpd)

Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD 0.1 2 0.1 3

Yolo

- Solano AQMD 0. 32 0. 35

Placer County APCD 0. 18 0. 2 0

Feather River A QM D (South Sutter) 0. 29 0. 32

Total Future Rice Burning ERCs 0

. 9 1 1.0 0

a There are no future bankable rice burning ERCs for El Dorado County AQMD.



### The VOC and NO X 

### ERC totals from Table A6

- 1 and A6

- 2 were rounded up to 4 tons per

day VOC and 3 tons per day NO X 

### and added to the emission inventory forecast years in

Chapter 5, Table 5

- 2 and Table 5

- 3, respectively.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A7: 2019 Emissions Inventori es

Page A7

- 1 

### Appendix A7: 2019 VOC and NO X 

### Emissions Inventories

Table A7

- 1 contains the 2019 VOC and NO X 

### planning inventories. The emissions

inc lude ERCs, recently adopted control measures, Jepson Composting, and Heritage

Dairy. E xcept for on

- road vehicle category, the emissions were generated using

CEPAM: NORCAL 2012 SIP Baseli ne Emission Projections. The 2019 on

- road vehicle

emissions were EMFAC2011 output without adjustments (i.e., Advanced Clean Cars,

Smog Check, RFG, etc.) using VMT activity forecasts in the SACOG 2013/2016 MTIP 5



### .

5 Final 2013/16 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP), Amendment #1 to the

MTP/SCS 2035, and Air Quality Conformity Analysis. (August 16, 2012), F HWA approval December 14,

2012.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A7: 2019 Emissions Inventori es

Page A7

- 22013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A8: 2009 Emissions Inventories

Page A8

- 1 

### Appendix A 8 : Tables 5

- 2 through 5

- 5 of 20 09 SIP Revision

Table 5

- 2

Emissions of VOC a (tons per day)

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

2002 2011 2014 2017 2018

TOTAL EMISSIONS 160 127 121 118 117

STATIONARY 23 23 24 25 25

AREA

- WIDE 31 29 30 31 31

ON

- ROAD MOTOR VEHICLES 64 38 32 28 27

OTHER MOBILE SOURCES 43 38 36 34 34

STATIONARY

Solvent/Coatings 8.1 7.5 7.8 8.1 8.3

Petroleum Production/Marketing 4.9 5.3 5.5 5.8 5.9

Industrial Process 3.6 3.9 4.1 4.4 4.5

Waste Composting 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1

Other 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2

AREA

- WIDE

Consumer Products 14.8 13.8 14.3 14.9 15.1

Architectural Coatings 8.0 7.3 7.6 8.0 8.1

Pesticides 1.8 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3

Livestock Waste 2.8 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9

Ag Burn/Other Managed Burn 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2

Other 2.1 2.3 2.3 2.4 2.4

ON

- ROAD

Automobiles 26.9 12.2 9.4 7.7 7.3

Lt/Med Duty Trucks 24.4 15.1 13.3 11.9 11.6

Heavy Duty Gas Trucks 6.2 3.5 2.9 2.6 2.4

Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks 3.3 3.2 2.6 2.1 2.0

Motorcycles 2.7 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.5

Buses/Motor Homes 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2

OTHER MOBILE

Recreational Boats 19.1 17.2 16.6 16.3 16.2

Equipment (Const/Ind/Farm) 9.4 6.1 4.9 3.9 3.7

Lawn & Garden Equipment 6.4 5.9 5.4 5.0 4.9

Gas Can 3.1 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.4

Trains 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6

Aircraft 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6

Other 3.8 5.4 5.9 6.5 6.7

a Source: CARB CEFS Ve rsion 1.06 Sacramento NAA (Rf#9 80 ), February 28, 2007, for average summer day,

updated to reflect recently adopted control measures, new emission and February 2008 SACOG transportation data.

Emissions from the 2009 Plan revision, Pages 5

- 6 and 5

- 7.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A8: 2009 Emissions Inventories

Page A8

- 2 Table 5

- 3

Emissions of NO X a (tons per day)

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

2002 2011 2014 2017 2018

TOTAL EMISSIONS 196 144 123 106 101

STATIONARY 16 15 15 14 14

AREA

- WIDE 3 3 3 3 3

ON

- ROAD MOTOR VEHICLES 115 78 61 49 45

OTHER MOBILE SOURCES 61 48 44 40 38

STATIONARY

Fuel Combustion 7.5 8.1 8.4 8.6 8.6

Ag Irrigation Pumps 7.9 5.9 5.2 4.5 4.3

Industrial Process 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0

AREA

- WIDE

Residential Fuel Combustion 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.7

Ag Burn/Other Managed Burn 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4

ON

- ROAD

Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks 54.1 46.4 35.3 26.9 24.7

Lt/Med Duty Trucks 30.4 15.0 12.1 9.7 9.1

Automobiles 19.8 7.9 5.9 4.5 4.2

Heavy Duty Gas Trucks 7.4 5.1 4.6 4.3 4.1

Buses/Motor Homes 3.1 2.7 2.4 2.2 2.1

Motorcycles 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9

OTHER MOBILE

Construction & Mining Equip 18.2 13.0 10.9 8.7 8.0

Trains 12.2 8.8 9.1 9.3 9.4

Farm Equipment 13.0 9.0 7.3 5.8 5.3

Boats 6.2 7.3 7.1 7.1 7.1

Comm/Ind Equipment 4.9 3.2 2.7 2.1 1.9

Trans Refrig Units 1.6 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0

Oil Drilling/Workover 2.7 1.7 1.4 1.2 1.1

Aircraft 1.6 2.2 2.4 2.7 2.8

Other 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9

a Source: CARB CEFS Ve rsion 1.06 Sacramento NAA (Rf#9 80 ), February 28, 2007, for average summer day,

updated to reflect recently adopted control measures, new emission and February 2008 SACOG transportation data.

Emissions from the 2009 Plan revision, Pages 5

- 6 and 5

- 7.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A8: 2009 Emissions Inventories

Page A8

- 3 

### Table 5

- 4

VOC Emission Reduction Credits Added to the Emission Inventory Forecasts

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Emissi ons in tons/day 2002 2011 2014 2017 2018

Emission Reduction Credits

--- 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6

Future Bankable Rice Burning

Emission Reduction Credits --- 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9

Total ERCs (rounded up)

--- 4 4 4 4

Emission Inventory Forecasts 160 127 121 118 117

Total 160 131 125 122 121

Table 5

- 5

NO X 

### Emission Reduction Credits Added to the Emission Inventory Forecasts

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Emissions in tons/day 2002 2011 2014 2017 2018

Emission Reduction Credits

--- 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4

Future Bankable Rice Burning

Emission Reduction Credits --- 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Total ERCs (rounded up)

--- 3 3 3 3

Emission Inventory Forecasts 196 144 123 106 101

Total 196 147 126 109 1042013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 1 

### Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

This appendix contains summary information and documentation regarding the photochemical

grid modeling performed by the California Air Resources Board in evaluating and supporting the

attainment demonstration for the federal 8

- hour ozone standard in the Sacramento region.

Included in this appendix are the following specific modeling topics:

Selection and Characterization of Modeling Episodes

................................ ............................. B

- 2

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation

................................ ................................ ............. B

- 7

Air Quality Modeling Results

................................ ................................ ................................ . B

- 3 3

The following California Air Resource Board photochemical modeling documents for the

Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area provide more complete information

. These

documents are available at

http://www.airquality.org/notices/CAPUpdate/8hrAPandEIRWorkshopsSept2008.shtml

for reference

.

A. Volume 1: Model Performance

B. Volume 2: Future Year Design Value and Carrying Capacity Calculations for the

Sacramento Non

- Attainment Area

C. Photochemical Modeling Protocol For Development Strategies to Attain The Federal 8

-

Hour Air Quality Standard in Central California

D. Modeling Emission Inventory

a. Appendix a: Gridded Inventory Coordination Group Minutes

b. Appendix b: Development and Vertical Distributions for Modeling Large Wildfires

in the CCOS Domain

c. Appendix c: Proposed Method to Improve Temporal Distribution Of Gridded On

road Motor Vehicle Emissions

d. Appendix d: Deve lopment Of Version Two Of the California Integrated

Transportation Network (ITN)

e. Appendix e: ARB Letter

f. Appendix f: Draft EMFAC Modeling Change Technical Memo

g. Appendix g: Development of a biogenic hydrocarbon emission inventory for the

Central California Ozone Study domain.

h. Appendix h: Surrogate Cross

- Reference Tables

i. Appendix i: Sacramento Non

- Attainment Area Tabular Summaries

In addition, the California Air Resources Board has established a website for documenting the

technical products used to develop the State Implementation Plan (SIP). This website includes

SIP modeling tools and documentation, and is located at:

http://eos.arb.ca.gov/eos/SIP_Modeling/2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 2 

### Selection and Characterization of Modeling Episodes

Episode Selection 1



### The evaluation of the episode days selected for air quality modeling included many

local, state and federal governmental agencies, consultants, and stakeholder interest

groups that participated in the Central California Ozone Study (CCOS) and other air

quality technical committees formed in support of ozone SIP developments for Central

California. A large body of work was produced by these study groups toward the goal of

determining representative candidate episode periods for use in 8

- hour ozone SIP

modeling for the region. From this collective body of work, the following four episodes

were identified as having the greatest potential for SIP modeling in the region:

 July 7

- 13, 1999 (captured with routine state and local measurements)

 July 29

- August 2, 2000 (CCOS

- studied episode)

 September 17

- 21, 2000 (CCOS

- studied episode)

 August 8

- 1 7

, 2002 (captures with routine state and local measurements)

Due to time constraints and based on model performance issues expressed by study

efforts for the two later episodes, the first two episodes (July 7

- 13, 1999 and July 29

- August 2, 2000) were determined to be the most adequate for the initial round of 8

- hour

ozone SIP attainment planning. Brief summaries of the two episodes selected for SIP

modeling are included in the next section, Characterization of Selected Modeling

Episodes

.

With regard to the two potential episodes that were dropped from consideration, CCOS

sponsored a project that was focused on developing the third episode (September 17

- 21, 2000) while the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

sponsored a project to develop the fourth episode (August 8

- 1 7

, 2002). As indicated

above, achieving adequate model performance for both of these periods was

problematic.

Characterization of Modeling Episodes

The following meteorological characterizations of large

- scale synoptic weather patterns

include two parameters which historically have correlated well with ozone formation in

California. The measurements of 500 mb heights at a fixed location are a general

indicator of behavior showing the sequence of pressure ridges and troughs. The 850 mb

temperature is a measure of large

- scale subsidence which produces stable layers in the

atmosphere and limits vertical dispersion of air pollutants. As an example, at the

Oakland NWS station during June

- September 2000, the 500 mb heights ranged

between 5,650 to 6,000 meters and the 850 mb temperatures ranged between 7 to

1 “Photochemical Modeling Protocol for Developing Strategies to Attain the Federal 8

- Hour Ozone Air

Quality Standard in Central California” (California Air Resources Board, May 22, 2007).2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 3 

### 27 °C

. In general, a strong positive correlation was evident between daily peak ozone

concentrations in Central California and 850 mb temperatures and 500 mb heights. 2



### September 17

- 21, 2000 Ozone Episode

The September 17

- 21, 2000 ozone episode was characterized by a high pressure ridge

moving into the West Coast and joining with the remnants of a persistent Four Corners

high. The 500 mb height peaked at 5,970 m on September 18, and the 850 mb

temperature reached 26 °C on September 19 at the Oakland NWS station. 3 

### Peak 8

- hour

ozone concentrations in the central and southern parts of the San Joaquin Valley

exceeded 100 ppb at many monitoring sites and rose as high as 1 20 ppb during

September 18

- 20. The Bay Area did not experience any ozone exceedances during this

episode, and the Sacramento region measured moderate 8

- hour ozone exceedances

on September 20 at multiple sites with a high of 100 ppb.

This ozone episode was evaluated by a team of modeling consultants headed by Alpine

Geophysics and funded as a CCOS project. They prepared refined emissions,

meteorological, and photochemical model input files and performed a base case

simulation for the episode. There were substantial performance problems with the base

case which included a systematic and large under prediction of ozone concentrations.

Thus, the consultants were unsuccessful in developing a SIP

- quality ozone modeling

episode that met EPA performance goals. 4



### August 8

- 17, 2002 Ozone Episode

This episode is characterized by an Eastern Pacific high. The wind speeds and

directions and surface temperatures at both Bethel Island and Sacramento are

characteristic of more typical summer day values when an Eastern Pacific high is

present. 5 

### The Bay Area experienced only limited ozone exceedances at Livermore

during this episode. However, there were significant widespread 8

- hour ozone

exceedances throughout the Sacramento region and much of the San Joaquin Valley

during most days of this episode. 8

- hour ozone concentrations at Cool peaked at 137

ppb on August 14. San Joaquin Valley 8

- hour ozone values were highest at Merced

with 125 ppb on August 14 and at Arvin with 120 ppb on August 9.

The August 8

- 17, 2002 ozone episode was pursued by the Sacramento Air District

under independent contract with the Desert Research Institute (DRI) 6



### . DRI conducted

2 “Characterization of the CCOS 2000 Measurement Period” (Lehrman, et al., 2003, p. 2

- 1 to 2

- 3).

3 “Characterization of the CCOS 2000 Measurement Period” (Lehrman, et al., 2001) Interim Report.

4 “Evaluation of the 16

- 20 September 2000 Ozone Episode for Use in 1

- Hr SIP Development in the

California Central Valley” (Alpine Geophysics, Tesche et al., February 15, 2004).

5 “Data Analysis and Episode Selection for SIP Modeling” (Desert Research Instit ute, September 9,

2003).

6 “Photochemical Modeling Protocol for Developing Strategies to Attain the Federal 8

- Hour Ozone Air

Quality Standard in Central California” (California Air Resources Board, May 22, 2007).2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 4 

### meteorological analyses which indicated significant potential transport from the Bay

Area into the Sacramento region. 7 

### However, DRI was not able to achieve adequate

model performance with the episode, rendering it unusable for attainment

demonstration modeling. This episode was found not to be representative due to the

large number of wildfires within the domain and an especially large wildfire in southern

Oregon. The smoke and presumably ozone precursors flowed along the coast and

some of the smoke plume penetrated into central California near the San Francisco Bay

Area. 8 

### Undoubtedly, emissions from the wildfire influenced ozone levels at many

monitors, meaning that these days were not reflective of typical summertime high

- ozone

days, when precursor emissions are dominated by anthropogenic emissions. 9



### July 29

- August 2, 2000 Ozone Modeling Episode

The summer 2000 ozone modeling episode includes 5 days from July 29 to August 2.

The start of this episode was characterized by a typical high pressure system centered

over the Four Corners area (Utah, Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico). The relatively

large high pressure ridge slowly migrated west and became centered near Reno,

Nevada by July 31, creating meteorological conditions conducive to high ozone

formation in Central California. The 850 mb temperature reached 27 °C, and the 500 mb

height peaked at 5,970 m at the Oakland NWS station. 10



### The high pressure system resulted in stable atmospheric layers with limited vertical

mixing. Maximum mixing heights of 800

- 1100 meters were estimated from rawinsonde

and ozonesonde data at Granite Bay. 11 

### Relatively calm to light surface daytime winds

varying from the north, west, and southwest were measured in the lowe r Sacramento

Valley region during the beginning and middle of the episode. The surface daytime

winds transitioned to mainly delta breezes from the south and southwest near the end of

the episode. 12 

### Maximum surface temperatures i n Sacramento were hot throughout the

episode and peaked at 40°C (or 104°F) on July 31 (see the following table).

7 “Data Analysis and Episode Selection for SIP Modeling” (Desert Research Institute, September 9,

2003).

8 “State Implementation Plan (SIP) Modeling” (Desert Research Institute, November 15, 2004).

9 California Air Resources Board staff response regarding public comments on episode selection

discus sion. November 2008 correspondence to SMAQMD.

10 “Characterization of the CCOS 2000 Measurement Period” (Lehrman, et al., 2003, p. 2

- 6).

11 Ibid., p. 3

- 67.

12 Surface daytime wind descriptions based on observed wind measurements at Rocklin, Folsom, Auburn,

C ool, Sacramento

- Del Paso Manor, Roseville, Sloughhouse, and Placerville.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 5 

### Table B

- 1

Maximum Surface Temperatures in Sacramento

During the Jul

- Aug 2000 Modeling Episode

Max. Temperature July 29 July 30 July 31 August 1 August 2

Sac. Exec. Airport 37°C

(98°F) 37°C

(99°F) 40°C

(104°F) 39°C

(102°F) 38°C

(100°F)



### Ozone

- conducive conditions were prevalent throughout the episode, but the highest

ozone readings in the Sacramento region occurred on the last two days of the episode.

On August 1, 8

- hour ozone concentrations peaked in the southern part of the

nonattainment area at Sloughhouse (108 ppb). On August 2, the maximum 8

- hour

ozone readings were measured in the northeast part of the region at Auburn (107 ppb)

and Grass Valley (113 ppb). See the following table of selected high ozone sites:

Table B

- 2

Maximum 8

- Hour Ozone in the Sacrament Region

During the Jul

- Aug 2000 Modeling Episode

Max. 8

- Hr Ozone (ppb) July 29 July 30 July 31 August 1 August 2

Auburn (Placer Co.) 86 80 81 95 107

Cool (El Dorado Co.) 94 87 89 99 103

Grass Valley (Nevada Co.) 86 86 73 94 113

Sac

- Del Paso Manor (Sac. Co.) 92 93 74 100 79

Sloughhouse (Sac. Co.) 95 91 82 108 91

Federal 8

- hour ozone exceedances (>84 ppb) in bold

.



### July 9

- 13, 1999 Ozone Modeling Episode

The July 1999 ozone modeling episode includes 5 days from July 9 to 13. This episode

is characterized by a much broader high pressure system than the summer 2000

episode. The high pressure system encompassed the Four Corners area, the Pacific

Northwest region, and the Eastern Pacific Ocean, causing meteorological conditions

conducive to high ozone formation in Central and Northern California. The 850 mb

temperature peaked at 27 °C on July 12, and the 500 mb height reached 5,940

- 5,950 m

o n July 10 to 12 at the Oakland NWS station. 13



### Relatively calm to light surface daytime winds varying mainly from the west and

southwest were measured in the lower Sacramento Valley region during the episode.

Sometimes in the morning, t he surface winds flowed from the northwest direction as

13 “Modeling Protocol

- Development of a Photochemical Modeling System to Support the Bay Area Air

Quality Management District’s 2004 State Implementation Plan” (ENVIRON, et al., 2002, p. 2

- 48).2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 6 

### well

. 14 

### Maximum surface temperatures i n Sacramento rose steadily from July 9, peaking

at 42°C (or 107°F) on July 12 (see the following table).

Table B

- 3

Maximum Surface Temperatures in Sacramento

During the July 1999 Modeling Episode

Max. Temperature July 9 July 10 July 11 July 12 July 13

Sac. Exec. Airport 34°C

(93°F) 36°C

(97°F) 39°C

(102°F) 42°C

(107°F) 35°C

(96°F)



### High surface 8

- hour ozone readings were fairly widespread throughout the Sacramento

region during the episode. On July 9, maximum 8

- hour ozone occurred in the eastern

portion of the nonattainment area at Cool (116 ppb), Placerville (110 ppb), and Folsom

(109 ppb). On July 10, 8

- hour ozone concentrations were high in most of the

Sacramento region at Folsom (129 ppb), Placerville (118 ppb), Cool (113 ppb),

Sacramento

- Del Paso Manor (110 ppb), and Sloughhouse (107 ppb). On July 11, the

same areas continued to monitor 8

- hour ozone exceedances with maximums at Folsom

(123 ppb), Cool (117 ppb), Sloughhouse (113 ppb), and Roseville (113). On July 12,

ozone declined in most of the nonattainment area, but still exceeded the 8

- hour

standard with maximum readings in the southern downwind areas at Jackson (105 ppb)

and Sloughhouse (103 ppb) and in the western are a at Vacaville (106 ppb). On the last

day of the episode, 8

- hour ozone concentrations were recorded just above the federal

standard with a high of 91 ppb at Auburn. See the following table of selected high ozone

sites:

Table B

- 4

Maximum 8

- Hour Ozone in the Sacrament o Region

During the July 1999 Modeling Episode

Max. 8

- Hr Ozone (ppb) July 9 July 10 July 11 July 12 July 13

Auburn (Placer Co.) 104 102 106 90 91

Cool (El Dorado Co.) 116 113 117 98 83

Folsom (Sac. Co.) 109 129 123 101 85

Jackson (Amador Co.) 89 107 101 105 87

Placerville (El Dorado Co.) 110 118 104 96 81

Roseville (Placer Co.) 86 106 113 88 86

Sac

- Del Paso Manor (Sac. Co.) 77 110 107 95 77

Sloughhouse (Sac. Co.) 86 107 113 103 81

Vacaville (Solano Co.) 69 81 102 106 59

Federal 8

- hour ozone exceedances (>84 ppb) in bold

.

14 Surface daytime wind descriptions based on observed wind measurements at Rocklin, Folsom, Elk

Grove, Roseville, Sloughhouse, and Placerville.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 7 

### Base Case Model Performance Evaluation

EPA modeling guidance 1 

### recommends the model performance evaluation should

compare hourly ozone observations and predictions as well as 8

- hour daily maxima

observations and predictions over the episode days (excluding ramp

- up days). The

ozone data should be evaluated for all data pairs in which the observed concentrations

are above 60 ppb, and for all data pairs without any minimum threshold. At a minimum,

statistical calculations should be performed for: 1) mean normalized bias (MNB), 2)

mean normalized gross error (MNGE), and 3) average peak prediction bias and error.

The summary statistics should be calculated for individual days averaged over all sites

and for individual sites averaged over all days, and then aggregated into meaningful

subregions or subperiods.

EPA modeling guidance does not assign an acceptance criteria level that distinguishes

between adequate and inadequate model performance. Instead, EPA recommends that

a qualitative weight

- of

- evidence approach consisting of a variety of performance tests

be used to determine whether a particular modeling application is valid for assessing

the future attainment status of an area.

CARB conducted a model performance analysis of the photochemical modeling used in

support of the attainment demonstration for the federal 8

- hour ozone air quality

standard SIP for Central California. Based on the statistical comparisons between

observed and predicted ozone data, the base case modeling scenarios were

determined to be performing adequately overall in the Sacramento region.

Various summary base case model performance statistics tables, additional base case

model performance evaluations, and modeling documentation are provided in this

appendix.

 Summary of Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Sacramento Region

- Table B

- 5: July 9

– July 13, 1999 1

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 6: July 9

– July 13, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 7: July 29

– August 2, 2000 1

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 8: July 29

– August 2, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone

 Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

- Table B

- 9: July 9, 1999 1

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 10: July 10, 1999 1

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 11: July 11, 1999 1

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 12: July 12, 1999 1

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 13: July 13, 1999 1

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 14: July 9, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 15: July 10, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

1 “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses in Attainment Demonstrations for the 8

- hour

Ozone NAAQS” (EPA, October 2005, p. 96).2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 8 

### - Table B

- 16: July 11, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 17: July 12, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 18: July 13, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 19: July 9

- 13, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 20: July 29, 2000 1

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 21: July 30, 2000 1

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 22: July 31, 2000 1

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 23: August 1, 2000 1

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 24: August 2, 2000 1

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 25: July 29, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 26: July 30, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 27: July 31, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 28: August 1, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 29: August 2, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone

- Table B

- 30: Jul 29

- Aug 2, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 9 

### Table B

- 5

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Sacramento Region

Site Comparisons Between Observed and Modeled 1

- Hour Ozone

July 9

– July 13

, 1999 Episode

Statistical Measure

– All Sites Jul 9 Jul 10 Jul 11 Jul 12 Jul 13

60 ppb observed threshold

Mean Bias (ppb)

- 3

- 9

- 10

- 9

- 5

Mean Gross Error (ppb) 10 15 12 12 13

Mean Normalized Bias (%)

- 3

- 9

- 11

- 10

- 6

Mean Normalized Gross Error (%) 12 16 14 14 17

Observed Peak Site Conc. (ppb) 127 147 137 140 103

Peak Site Prediction Ratio 0.99 0.84 1.01 0.85 1.00

Region Peak Prediction Ratio 1.05 0.94 1.07 0.89 1.17

Number of Values Used (site

- hrs) 157 199 224 218 160

Table B

- 6

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Sacramento Region

Site Comparisons Between Observed and Modeled 8

- Hour Maximum Ozone

July 9

– July 13, 1999 Episode

Statistical Measure

– All Sites Jul 9 Jul 10 Jul 11 Jul 12 Jul 13

60 ppb observed threshold

Mean Bias (ppb) 3

- 6

- 7

- 10 3

Mean Gross Error (ppb) 8 13 10 11 11

Mean Normalized Bias (%) 5

- 5

- 7

- 11 6

Mean Normalized Gross Error (%) 9 13 10 12 14

Observed Peak Site Conc. (ppb) 116 129 124 107 91

Peak Site Prediction Ratio 0.96 0.87 1.02 1.00 1.04

Region Peak Prediction Ratio 1.02 0.93 1.06 1.03 1.12

Number of Values Used (sites) 16 17 17 16 142013 SIP Revisions to the Sacra mento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 10 

### Table B

- 7

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Sacramento Region

Site Comparisons Between Observed and Modeled 1

- Hour Ozone

July 29

– August 2, 2000 Episode

Statistical Measure

– All Sites Jul 29 Jul 30 Jul 31 Aug 1 Aug 2

60 ppb observed threshold

Mean Bias (ppb)

- 6 5 4 5 2

Mean Gross Error (ppb) 11 11 10 11 14

Mean Normalized Bias (%)

- 6 7 6 6 4

Mean Normalized Gross Error (%) 14 15 13 14 17

Observed Peak Site Conc. (ppb) 118 121 103 133 121

Peak Site Prediction Ratio 1.07 1.04 1.19 1.09 1.04

Region Peak Prediction Ratio 1.11 1.09 1.41 1.15 1.07

Number of Values Used (site

- hrs) 135 152 130 141 138

Table B

- 8

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Sacramento Region

Site Comparisons Between Observed and Modeled 8

- Hour Maximum Ozone

July 29

– August 2, 2000 Episode

Statistical Measure

– All Sites Jul 29 Jul 30 Jul 31 Aug 1 Aug 2

60 ppb observed threshold

Mean Bias (ppb)

- 3 8 7 8 9

Mean Gross Error (ppb) 10 10 9 9 12

Mean Normalized Bias (%)

- 2 12 10 10 13

Mean Normalized Gross Error (%) 11 13 12 11 17

Observed Peak Site Conc. (ppb) 97 93 89 109 107

Peak Site Prediction Ratio 1.03 1.15 1.13 1.05 0.98

Region Peak Prediction Ratio 1.07 1.21 1.32 1.09 1.00

Number of Values Used (sites) 15 15 15 15 162013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 11 Table B

- 9

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 9

, 1999 1

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0799_99_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 190 (07/09) 1999

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 157 12.7 19 12.5 16

- 3 0.99

- 0.3 1.0

- 0.03 0.12 0.75

Subregional Peak: 13.3 17

- 2 1.05 (at 84 x120) NSte: 3187; NSPk: 12.4

2123 North Highlands

- Blackf 1 6.6 16 10.1 16 0 1.53 3.5 3.5 0.53 0.53

- 99.00

2143 Davis

- UCD Campus 5 9.2 17 9.2 18 1 1.00 0.9 0.9 0.12 0.12 0.04

2731 Sacramento

- Del Paso Ma 6 10.0 17 9.7 16

- 1 0.97 0.1 1.2 0.03 0.16 0.18

2848 Pleasant Grove

- 4 miles 6 9.6 16 9.3 17 1 0.97 0.7 0.8 0.10 0.11 0.82

2891 Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 20 11.1 19 9.4 18

- 1 0.85

- 1.6 1.6

- 0.19 0.19 0.89

2956 Roseville

- N Sunrise Bl 10 9.7 15 10.4 17 2 1.08 0.6 0.8 0.07 0.09 0.94

2977 Elk Grove

- Bruceville R 7 9.4 16 8.4 16 0 0.90 0.1 0.7 0.02 0.09 0.80

3002 Colfax

- City Hall 16 10.0 19 8.6 18

- 1 0.86

- 0.4 0.5

- 0.05 0.06 0.90

3008 Rocklin

- Rocklin Road 10 10.3 16 10.3 18 2 1.00 0.1 0.6 0.01 0.07 0.86

3011 Sacramento

- T Street 4 8.5 16 8.0 15

- 1 0.94

- 0.7 0.7

- 0.09 0.09 0.11

3017 Placerville

- Gold Nugge 20 12.7 19 12.5 17

- 2 0.98

- 0.5 1.0

- 0.06 0.11 0.87

3155 Vacaville

- Elmira Road 8 7.6 18 8.9 17

- 1 1.18 0.7 1.0 0.09 0.14 0.79

3187 Folsom

- Natoma Street 9 12.7 16 12.5 16 0 0.99

- 0.3 0.6

- 0.03 0.06 0.93

3196 Cool

- Highway 193 16 12.1 15 10.6 18 3 0.88

- 1.6 1.6

- 0.17 0.17 0.92

3209 Sloughhouse 8 10.0 17 9.2 15

- 2 0.92

- 0.2 0.9

- 0.01 0.10 0.59

3223 Sacramento

- 3801 Airpor 5 8.1 16 9.3 15

- 1 1.15 1.2 1.2 0.17 0.17 0.50

3249 Woodland

- Gibson Road 6 9.0 18 9.5 16

- 2 1.07 0.3 0.8 0.04 0.11 0.482013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 12 Table B

- 10

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 10, 1999 1

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0799_99_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 191 (07/10) 1999

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Sit e Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 199 14.7 16 12.4 14

- 2 0.84

- 0.9 1.5

- 0.09 0.16 0.56

Subregional Peak: 13.9 15

- 1 0.94 (at 83 x115) NSte: 3209; NSPk: 12.0

2123 North Highlands

- Blackf 6 8.8 15 9.0 16 1 1.02 0.8 0.9 0.12 0.13

- 0.33

2143 Davis

- UCD Campus 8 10.1 15 10.0 15 0 0.99 0.4 0.5 0.05 0.06 0.86

2731 Sacramento

- Del Paso Ma 10 13.1 14 10.7 17 3 0.81

- 0.5 1.3

- 0.03 0.12 0.74

2848 Pleasant Grove

- 4 miles 7 9.8 14 10.1 18 4 1.03 0.5 1.3 0.09 0.17

- 0.84

2891 Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 21 10.7 15 8.6 14

- 1 0.81

- 1.9 1.9

- 0.22 0.22 0.79

2956 Roseville

- N Sunrise Bl 11 11.7 17 9.1 19 2 0.78

- 1.4 1.6

- 0.13 0.15 0.45

2977 Elk Grove

- Bruceville R 8 11.8 16 10.0 17 1 0.85

- 0.1 1.4 0.03 0.15 0.7 3

3002 Colfax

- City Hall 13 9.7 19 7.8 14

- 5 0.80

- 0.7 0.8

- 0.09 0.09 0.85

3008 Rocklin

- Rocklin Road 13 11.9 18 8.7 12

- 6 0.73

- 1.8 1.8

- 0.19 0.19 0.82

3011 Sacramento

- T Street 8 10.7 14 9.9 16 2 0.93 0.5 0.8 0.08 0.11 0.81

3017 Placerville

- Gold Nugge 22 12.9 19 9.4 16

- 3 0.73

- 2.1 2.1

- 0.20 0.20 0.78

3155 Vacaville

- Elmira Road 9 9.3 15 9.4 14

- 1 1.01

- 0.4 1.1

- 0.05 0.15 0.64

3187 Folsom

- Natoma Street 13 14.7 16 10.6 13

- 3 0.72

- 2.0 2.2

- 0.15 0.18 0.74

3196 Cool

- Highway 193 22 12.4 19 8.8 14

- 5 0 .71

- 2.4 2.4

- 0.26 0.26 0.90

3209 Sloughhouse 12 12.8 14 12.4 14 0 0.97 0.5 0.8 0.07 0.09 0.90

3223 Sacramento

- 3801 Airpor 8 10.0 14 10.6 16 2 1.06 1.3 1.4 0.18 0.19 0.61

3249 Woodland

- Gibson Road 8 9.9 15 10.3 15 0 1.04 0.5 0.5 0.06 0.06 0.872013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 13 Table B

- 11

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 11, 1999 1

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0799_99_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 192 (07/11) 1999

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 224 13.7 16 13.9 16 0 1.01

- 1.0 1.2

- 0.11 0.14 0.78

Subregional Peak: 14.7 15

- 1 1.07 (at 80 x1 17) NSte: 3187; NSPk: 13.8

2123 North Highlands

- Blackf 5 8.3 13 8.3 11

- 2 1.00 0.4 0.5 0.06 0.07 0.79

2143 Davis

- UCD Campus 10 9.7 14 9.1 16 2 0.94

- 0.3 0.7

- 0.02 0.09 0.86

2731 Sacramento

- Del Paso Ma 12 12.1 14 11.3 13

- 1 0.93

- 0.4 0.5

- 0.04 0.05 0.96

2848 Pleasant Grove

- 4 miles 7 8.1 12 7.6 11

- 1 0.93 0.0 0.5 0.01 0.08

- 0.52

2891 Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 20 13.3 18 11.4 19 1 0.86

- 1.5 1.5

- 0.16 0.17 0.84

2956 Roseville

- N Sunrise Bl 17 12.8 15 10.9 18 3 0.85

- 1.8 1.9

- 0.21 0.22 0.80

2977 Elk Grove

- Bruceville R 10 10.1 12 8.7 16 4 0.86

- 1.0 1.1

- 0.10 0.11 0.55

3002 Colfax

- City Hall 12 10.5 20 9.8 20 0 0.94

- 0.1 0.8 0.00 0.10 0.58

3008 Rocklin

- Rocklin Road 13 12.8 15 11.6 18 3 0.91

- 1.3 1.5

- 0.12 0.14 0.70

3011 Sacramento

- T Street 10 9.6 13 8.9 12

- 1 0.93

- 0.4 0.7

- 0.04 0.09 0.87

3017 Placerville

- Gold Nugge 19 11.4 18 11.4 16

- 2 1.00

- 1.5 1.8

- 0.16 0.20 0.59

3155 Vacaville

- Elmira Road 12 12.1 16 9.7 17 1 0.79

- 1.6 1.6

- 0.16 0.17 0.87

3187 Folsom

- Natoma Street 20 13.7 16 13.9 16 0 1.01

- 0.7 1.1

- 0.10 0.14 0.94

3196 Cool

- Highway 193 20 13.5 18 11.4 18 0 0.85

- 1.5 1.6

- 0.15 0.16 0.90

3209 Sloughhouse 18 13.1 14 11.4 16 2 0.87

- 1.2 1.4

- 0.15 0.16 0.88

3223 Sacramento

- 3801 Airpor 8 9.2 13 8.5 12

- 1 0.92

- 0.4 0.7

- 0.04 0.08 0.14

3249 Woodland

- Gibson Road 11 9.4 17 8.3 17 0 0.88

- 0.6 0.6

- 0.06 0.07 0.872013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 14 Table B

- 12

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 12, 1999 1

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0799_99_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 193 (07/12) 1999

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 218 14.0 15 11.9 13

- 2 0.85

- 0.9 1.2

- 0.10 0.14 0.68

Subregional Peak: 12.5 15 0 0.89 (at 67 x107) NSte: 3155; NSPk: 9.7

2123 North Highlands

- Blackf 2 6.9 11 7.1 11 0 1.03 0.4 0.4 0.06 0.06

- 99.00

2143 Davis

- UCD Campus 9 11.7 17 7.9 18 1 0.68

- 1.8 1.9

- 0.18 0.19

- 0.60

2731 Sacramento

- Del Paso Ma 12 11.1 18 8.9 19 1 0.80

- 1.2 1.3

- 0.12 0.14 0.64

2848 Pleasant Grove

- 4 miles 7 8.8 15 7.0 16 1 0.79

- 1.0 1.1

- 0.12 0.14 0.76

2891 Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 21 9.9 17 8.4 16

- 1 0.84

- 1.2 1.2

- 0.15 0.15 0.81

2956 Roseville

- N Sunrise Bl 14 10.8 19 7.8 20 1 0.72

- 1.2 1.3

- 0.14 0.15 0.69

2977 Elk Grove

- Bruceville R 11 10.8 17 10.9 17 0 1.01 0.2 1.0 0.04 0.12 0.48

3002 Colfax

- City Hall 14 8.1 19 8.0 18

- 1 0.99

- 0.1 0.3

- 0.02 0.05 0.89

3008 Rocklin

- Rocklin Road 16 10.4 19 8.1 14

- 5 0.78

- 1.3 1.3

- 0.15 0.15 0.80

3011 Sacramento

- T Street 10 9.7 18 8.4 18 0 0.86

- 0.9 1.3

- 0.10 0.16 0.17

3017 Placerville

- Gold Nugge 18 10.3 16 9.6 17 1 0.93

- 0.6 0.9

- 0.07 0.11 0.82

3155 Vacaville

- Elmira Road 11 14.0 15 9.8 17 2 0.70

- 1.7 2.0

- 0.14 0.19 0.66

3187 Folsom

- Natoma Street 19 11.1 11 9.3 13 2 0.83

- 1.1 1.3

- 0.12 0.14 0.87

3196 Cool

- Highway 193 21 10.5 11 8.9 13 2 0.85

- 1.3 1.3

- 0.16 0.16 0.91

3209 Sloughhouse 14 11.0 15 11.9 13

- 2 1.08 0.2 0.7 0.02 0.08 0.89

3223 Sacramento

- 3801 Airpor 10 9.5 18 8.7 19 1 0.91

- 0.4 0.9

- 0.04 0.12 0.14

3249 Woodland

- Gibson Road 9 11.0 18 7.5 1 7

- 1 0.68

- 1.3 1.5

- 0.12 0.17 0.732013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 15 Table B

- 13

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 13, 1999 1

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0799_99_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 194 (07/13) 1999

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Sit e Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 160 10.3 14 10.3 17 3 1.00

- 0.5 1.3

- 0.06 0.17 0.33

Subregional Peak: 12.1 14 0 1.17 (at 86 x115) NSte: 3017; NSPk: 9.1

2143 Davis

- UCD Campus 5 7.8 14 8.1 14 0 1.04 1.0 1.0 0.14 0.14 0.45

2731 Sacramento

- Del Paso Ma 6 9.2 16 9.9 18 2 1.08 0.8 1.0 0.12 0.13 0.22

2848 Pleasant Grove

- 4 miles 2 6.4 15 7.6 15 0 1.19 1.2 1.2 0.19 0.19

- 99.00

2891 Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 20 9.6 16 7.9 14

- 2 0.83

- 1.6 1.6

- 0.19 0.19 0.46

2956 Roseville

- N Sunrise Bl 11 9.8 14 9.1 18 4 0.93

- 1.0 1.4

- 0.10 0.17 0.21

2977 Elk Grove

- Bruceville R 8 8.6 15 10.1 16 1 1.18 1.0 1.0 0.13 0.13 0.54

3002 Colfax

- City Hall 12 7.3 15 7.7 16 1 1.05 0.1 0.3 0.02 0.05 0.74

3008 Rocklin

- Rocklin Road 13 10.3 14 8.6 18 4 0.84

- 1.4 1.5

- 0.16 0.17 0.61

3011 Sacramento

- T Street 4 7.6 15 9.1 17 2 1.20 1.5 1.5 0.21 0.21

- 0.37

3017 Placerville

- G old Nugge 23 8.9 1 9.1 13 12 1.03

- 1.5 1.7

- 0.20 0.22 0.64

3155 Vacaville

- Elmira Road 4 7.1 15 9.2 13

- 2 1.30 1.8 1.8 0.26 0.26 0.14

3187 Folsom

- Natoma Street 15 9.2 17 9.7 12

- 5 1.06

- 0.5 1.2

- 0.07 0.16 0.70

3196 Cool

- Highway 193 18 8.9 15 8.0 15 0 0.90

- 1.6 1.6

- 0.20 0.20 0.43

3209 Sloughhouse 9 9.2 17 10.3 17 0 1.12 0.8 1.2 0.09 0.16 0.80

3223 Sacramento

- 3801 Airpor 5 8.0 16 9.8 17 1 1.23 1.4 1.4 0.20 0.20 0.34

3249 Woodland

- Gibson Road 5 8.9 15 7.8 17 2 0.88

- 0.5 0.9

- 0. 06 0.11

- 1.002013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 16 Table B

- 14

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 9

, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0799_99_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 190 (07/09) 1999

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm); Averaged over 8 hours

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Descri ption No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 16 11.6 12 11.2 13 1 0.96 0.3 0.8 0.05 0.09

- 42.79

Subregional Peak: 11.8 13 1 1.02 (at 85 x120) NSte: 3017; NSPk: 11.0

2143 Davis

- UCD Campus 1 7.1 12 8.5 13 1 1.21 1.5 1.5 0.21 0.21

2731 Sacramento

- Del Paso Ma 1 7.8 13 8.2 12

- 1 1.05 0.4 0.4 0.05 0.05

2848 Pleasant Grove

- 4 miles 1 7.3 12 8.5 12 0 1.16 1.2 1.2 0.16 0 .16

2891 Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 1 10.5 14 9.0 12

- 2 0.86

- 1.4 1.4

- 0.14 0.14

2956 Roseville

- N Sunrise Bl 1 8.6 12 9.5 12 0 1.10 0.8 0.8 0.10 0.10

2977 Elk Grove

- Bruceville R 1 7.5 12 7.7 12 0 1.03 0.3 0.3 0.03 0.03

3002 Colfax

- City Hall 1 8.9 13 8.3 13 0 0.93

- 0.6 0.6

- 0.07 0.07

3008 Rocklin

- Rocklin Road 1 9.4 13 9.5 12

- 1 1.02 0.2 0.2 0.02 0.02

3011 Sacramento

- T Street 1 6.7 13 7.1 12

- 1 1.05 0.4 0.4 0.05 0.05

3017 Placerville

- Gold Nugge 1 11.0 13 11.2 13 0 1.01 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.01

3155 Va caville

- Elmira Road 1 7.0 13 7.8 12

- 1 1.12 0.8 0.8 0.12 0.12

3187 Folsom

- Natoma Street 1 10.9 13 10.8 12

- 1 0.99

- 0.1 0.1

- 0.01 0.01

3196 Cool

- Highway 193 1 11.6 12 10.0 12 0 0.86

- 1.6 1.6

- 0.14 0.14

3209 Sloughhouse 1 8.7 13 8.5 12

- 1 0.98

- 0.1 0.1

- 0.02 0.02

3223 Sacramento

- 3801 Airpor 1 6.4 13 8.3 12

- 1 1.28 1.8 1.8 0.28 0.28

3249 Woodland

- Gibson Road 1 7.6 12 8.2 12 0 1.09 0.7 0.7 0.09 0.092013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 17 Table B

- 15

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 10, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0799_99_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 191 (07/10) 1999

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm); Averaged over 8 hours

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 17 12.9 11 11.2 12 1 0.87

- 0.6 1.3

- 0.05 0.13

- 76.79

Subregional Peak: 12.1 12 1 0.93 (at 82 x115) NSte: 3209; NSPk: 11.0

2123 North Highlands

- Blackf 1 7.9 11 9.2 12 1 1.16 1.2 1.2 0.16 0.16

2143 Davis

- UCD Campus 1 8.8 12 9.4 11

- 1 1.08 0.7 0.7 0.08 0.08

2731 Sacramento

- Del Paso Ma 1 11.1 12 10.2 12 0 0.92

- 0.9 0.9

- 0.08 0.08

2848 Pleasant Grove

- 4 miles 1 8.1 11 9.0 12 1 1.11 0.9 0.9 0.11 0.11

2891 Auburn

- Dew itt

- C Avenue 1 10.3 14 8.3 12

- 2 0.81

- 2.0 2.0

- 0.19 0.19

2956 Roseville

- N Sunrise Bl 1 10.7 12 8.6 12 0 0.80

- 2.1 2.1

- 0.20 0.20

2977 Elk Grove

- Bruceville R 1 9.3 12 9.2 12 0 0.99

- 0.1 0.1

- 0.01 0.01

3002 Colfax

- City Hall 1 8.6 13 7.7 12

- 1 0.89

- 0.9 0.9

- 0.11 0.11

3008 Rocklin

- Rocklin Road 1 10.7 12 8.5 11

- 1 0.79

- 2.2 2.2

- 0.21 0.21

3011 Sacramento

- T Street 1 8.8 12 9.3 12 0 1.06 0.5 0.5 0.06 0.06

3017 Placerville

- Gold Nugge 1 11.9 13 9.1 12

- 1 0.77

- 2.7 2.7

- 0.23 0.23

3155 Vacaville

- Elmira Road 1 8.2 12 8.4 10

- 2 1.01 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.01

3187 Folsom

- Natoma Street 1 12.9 11 9.8 12 1 0.76

- 3.1 3.1

- 0.24 0.24

3196 Cool

- Highway 193 1 11.4 12 8.5 11

- 1 0.75

- 2.8 2.8

- 0.25 0.25

3209 Sloughhouse 1 10.7 12 11.2 12 0 1.05 0.5 0.5 0.05 0.05

3223 Sacramento

- 3801 Airpor 1 8.5 12 9.8 11

- 1 1.16 1.4 1.4 0.16 0.16

3249 Woodland

- Gibson Road 1 9.0 12 9.6 11

- 1 1.07 0.7 0.7 0.07 0.072013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 18 Table B

- 16

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 11, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0799_99_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 192 (07/11) 1999

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm); Averaged over 8 hours

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 17 12.4 11 12.6 11 0 1.02

- 0.7 1.0

- 0.07 0.10

- 47.81

Subregional Peak: 13.1 11 0 1.06 (at 80 x117) NSte: 3187; NSPk: 12.7

2123 North Highlands

- Blackf 1 6.9 8 8.2 12 4 1.20 1.4 1.4 0.20 0.20

2143 Davis

- UCD Campus 1 9.2 11 8.6 11 0 0.94

- 0.6 0.6

- 0.06 0.06

2731 Sacramento

- Del Paso Ma 1 10.7 11 10.3 11 0 0.96

- 0.5 0.5

- 0.04 0.04

2848 Pleasant Grove

- 4 miles 1 7.2 10 7.5 11 1 1.04 0.3 0.3 0.04 0.04

2891 Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 1 10.6 14 9.0 13

- 1 0.84

- 1.7 1.7

- 0.16 0.16

2956 Roseville

- N Sunrise Bl 1 11.3 12 9.5 12 0 0.83

- 1.9 1.9

- 0.17 0.17

2977 Elk Grove

- Bruceville R 1 9.7 11 8.5 12 1 0.88

- 1.1 1.1

- 0.12 0.12

3002 Colfax

- City Hall 1 8.7 13 8.6 16 3 1.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00

3008 Rocklin

- Rocklin Road 1 11.2 12 9.6 12 0 0.86

- 1.5 1.5

- 0.14 0.14

3011 Sacramento

- T Street 1 8.8 11 8.1 11 0 0.92

- 0.7 0.7

- 0.08 0.08

3017 Placerville

- Gold Nugge 1 10.4 14 9.9 11

- 3 0.95

- 0.5 0.5

- 0.05 0.05

3155 Vacaville

- Elmira Road 1 10.2 11 8.2 12 1 0.80

- 2.1 2.1

- 0.20 0.20

3187 Folsom

- Natoma Street 1 12.4 11 12.6 11 0 1.02 0.3 0.3 0.02 0.02

3196 Cool

- Highway 193 1 11.8 12 9.8 13 1 0.83

- 2.0 2.0

- 0.17 0.17

3209 Sloughhouse 1 11.3 11 10.6 12 1 0.94

- 0.7 0.7

- 0.06 0.06

3223 Sacramento

- 3801 Airpor 1 8.5 10 8.1 11 1 0.96

- 0.4 0.4

- 0.04 0.04

32 49 Woodland

- Gibson Road 1 8.7 11 7.9 11 0 0.91

- 0.8 0.8

- 0.09 0.092013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 19 Table B

- 17

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 12, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0799_99_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 193 (07/12) 1999

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm); Averaged over 8 hours

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 16 10.7 10 10.7 11 1 1.00

- 1.0 1.1

- 0.11 0.12

- 89.01

Subregional Peak: 11.0 12 2 1. 03 (at 82 x112) NSte: 3209; NSPk: 10.7

2143 Davis

- UCD Campus 1 9.2 11 7.3 12 1 0.79

- 1.9 1.9

- 0.21 0.21

2731 Sacramento

- Del Paso Ma 1 9.5 12 8.0 12 0 0.84

- 1.5 1.5

- 0.16 0.16

2848 Pleasant Grove

- 4 miles 1 7.6 10 7.1 13 3 0.95

- 0.4 0.4

- 0.05 0.05

2891 Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 1 9.1 11 7.9 11 0 0.87

- 1.2 1.2

- 0.13 0.13

2956 Roseville

- N Sunrise Bl 1 8.8 12 7.4 13 1 0.84

- 1.4 1.4

- 0.16 0.16

2977 Elk Grove

- Bruceville R 1 9.5 10 9.4 11 1 0.99

- 0.1 0.1

- 0.01 0.01

3002 Colfax

- City Hall 1 7.5 13 7.7 16 3 1.03 0.2 0.2 0.03 0.03

3008 Rocklin

- Rocklin Road 1 9.0 12 7.6 10

- 2 0.85

- 1.4 1.4

- 0.15 0.15

3011 Sacramento

- T Street 1 8.7 11 7.4 12 1 0.85

- 1.3 1.3

- 0.15 0.15

3017 Placervill e

- Gold Nugge 1 9.7 14 9.1 14 0 0.94

- 0.6 0.6

- 0.06 0.06

3155 Vacaville

- Elmira Road 1 10.7 10 8.5 11 1 0.80

- 2.2 2.2

- 0.20 0.20

3187 Folsom

- Natoma Street 1 10.2 10 8.8 10 0 0.86

- 1.4 1.4

- 0.14 0.14

3196 Cool

- Highway 193 1 9.9 11 8.6 11 0 0.87

- 1.3 1.3

- 0.13 0.13

3209 Sloughhouse 1 10.4 11 10.7 11 0 1.03 0.3 0.3 0.03 0.03

3223 Sacramento

- 3801 Airpor 1 8.3 11 7.6 12 1 0.92

- 0.6 0.6

- 0.08 0.08

3249 Woodland

- Gibson Road 1 8.6 12 7.2 12 0 0.83

- 1.5 1.5

- 0.17 0.172013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 20 Table B

- 18

Base Case Model Perf ormance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 13, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0799_99_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 194 (07/13) 1999

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm); Averaged over 8 hours

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 14 9.1 12 9.5 11

- 1 1.04 0.3 1.1 0.06 0.14

- 94.41

Subregional Peak: 10.2 10

- 2 1.12 (at 82 x115) NSte: 3209; NSPk: 9.4

2143 Davis

- UCD Campus 1 6.1 12 7.8 11

- 1 1.27 1.6 1.6 0.27 0.27

2731 Sacramento

- Del Paso Ma 1 7.7 12 8.6 11

- 1 1.12 0.9 0.9 0.12 0.12

2891 Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 1 9.1 12 7.6 11

- 1 0.83

- 1.5 1.5

- 0.17 0.17

2956 Roseville

- N Sunrise Bl 1 8.6 12 7.5 11

- 1 0.87

- 1.1 1.1

- 0.13 0.13

2977 Elk Grove

- Bruceville R 1 7.8 11 8.8 11 0 1.13 1.0 1.0 0.13 0.13

3002 Colfax

- City Hall 1 6.9 11 7.0 10

- 1 1.02 0.1 0.1 0.02 0.02

3008 Rocklin

- Rocklin Road 1 8.9 12 7.5 11

- 1 0.84

- 1.4 1.4

- 0.16 0.16

3011 Sacramento

- T Street 1 6.2 12 8.1 12 0 1.30 1.9 1 .9 0.30 0.30

3017 Placerville

- Gold Nugge 1 8.1 10 7.6 10 0 0.94

- 0.5 0.5

- 0.06 0.06

3187 Folsom

- Natoma Street 1 8.6 12 8.8 11

- 1 1.02 0.2 0.2 0.02 0.02

3196 Cool

- Highway 193 1 8.3 14 7.9 10

- 4 0.94

- 0.5 0.5

- 0.06 0.06

3209 Sloughhouse 1 8.1 12 9.5 11

- 1 1.17 1.4 1.4 0.17 0.17

3223 Sacramento

- 3801 Airpor 1 6.4 11 8.5 12 1 1.33 2.1 2.1 0.33 0.33

3249 Woodland

- Gibson Road 1 7.0 11 7.4 11 0 1.05 0.4 0.4 0.05 0.052013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 21 Table B

- 1 9

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 9

- 13, 1999 8

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0799_99_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Subregion 0006 Spatially Paired Average 8

- Hour Concentrations above 6.0 pphm for DOY 190 through 194

Unpaired Subregional Maximum of 10.6 at Cell 80 x 116

-- Nearest Site: 3209

- - - - - - Observed

- - - - - - - - - - - - Simulated

- - - - - -

Site Site Site DOY DOY DOY DOY DOY DOY Site DOY DOY DOY DOY DOY DOY Avg.

ID Description Avg. 190 191 192 193 194 195 Avg. 190 191 192 193 194 195 Ratio

---- ------------------------ --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ----

2123 North Highlands

- Blackf 7.4 5.3 7.9 6.9 4.9 3.3 8.4 9.1 9.2 8.2 7.5 8.0 1.13

2143 Davis

- UCD Campus 8.1 7.1 8.8 9.2 9.2 6.1 8.3 8.5 9.4 8.6 7.3 7.8 1.03

2731 Sacramento

- Del Paso Ma 9.4 7.8 11.1 10.7 9.5 7.7 9.0 8.2 10.2 10.3 8.0 8.6 0.97

2848 Pleasant Grove

- 4 miles 7.6 7.3 8.1 7.2 7.6 5.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 7.5 7.1 7.8 1.06

2891 Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 9.9 10.5 10.3 10.6 9.1 9.1 8.4 9.0 8.3 9.0 7.9 7.6 0.84

2956 Roseville

- N Sunrise Bl 9.6 8.6 10.7 11.3 8.8 8.6 8.5 9.5 8.6 9.5 7.4 7.5 0.88

2977 Elk Grove

- Bruceville R 8.7 7.5 9.3 9.7 9.5 7.8 8.7 7.7 9.2 8.5 9.4 8.8 1.00

3002 Colfax

- City Hall 8.1 8.9 8.6 8.7 7.5 6.9 7.9 8.3 7.7 8.6 7.7 7.0 0.97

3008 Rocklin

- Rocklin Road 9.8 9.4 10.7 11.2 9.0 8.9 8.6 9.5 8.5 9.6 7.6 7.5 0.87

3011 Sacramento

- T Street 7.8 6.7 8.8 8.8 8.7 6.2 8.0 7.1 9.3 8.1 7.4 8.1 1.02

3017 Placerville

- Gold Nugge 10.2 11.0 11.9 10.4 9.7 8.1 9.4 11.2 9.1 9.9 9.1 7.6 0.92

3155 Vacaville

- Elmira Road 9.0 7.0 8.2 10.2 10.7 6.0 8.2 7.8 8.4 8.2 8.5 8.0 0.90

3187 Folsom

- Natoma Street 11.0 10.9 12.9 12.4 10.2 8.6 10.1 10.8 9.8 12.6 8.8 8.8 0.92

3196 Cool

- Highway 193 10.6 11.6 11.4 11.8 9.9 8.3 9.0 10.0 8.5 9.8 8.6 7.9 0.85

3209 Sloughhouse 9.8 8.7 10.7 11.3 10.4 8.1 10.1 8.5 11.2 10.6 10.7 9.5 1.03

3223 Sacramento

- 3801 Airpor 7.6 6.4 8.5 8.5 8.3 6.4 8.5 8.3 9.8 8.1 7.6 8.5 1.11

3249 Woodland

- Gibson Road 8.2 7.6 9.0 8.7 8.6 7.0 8.1 8.2 9.6 7.9 7.2 7.4 0.992013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 22 Table B

- 20

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 29, 2000 1

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0700_00_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 211 (07/29) 2000

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 135 11.8 14 12.6 14 0 1.07

- 0.6 1.1

- 0.06 0.14 0.56

Subregional Peak: 13.2 15 1 1. 11 (at 81 x115) NSte: SLU ; NSPk: 12.5

CUS Cool Stn (1400 American 13 10.9 12 7.9 13 1 0.73

- 1.3 1.3

- 0.14 0.14 0.78

DVS Davis/UCD Campus Stn 6 9.2 14 9.8 14 0 1.07 0.6 0.6 0.08 0.08 0.64

ELK Elk Grove Stn (Brucevil 5 7.7 14 8.8 14 0 1.14 1.3 1.3 0.20 0.20

- 0.26

FLN Folsom Stn (Natoma St.) 7 8.4 17 10.2 17 0 1.22 1.9 1.9 0.26 0.26 0.97

NAT Sacramento/Natoma Stn ( 7 9.5 15 8.5 17 2 0.90 0.0 0.7 0.01 0.08 0.65

PGN Placerville Stn (Gold N 17 10.5 18 8.7 18 0 0.83

- 1.4 1.4

- 0.16 0.16 0.88

PGV Pleasant Grove Stn (4 S 8 8.7 15 8.6 17 2 0.98

- 0.1 1.1 0.01 0.15

- 0.32

ROC Rocklin Stn (5000 Rockl 11 9.7 18 8.0 17

- 1 0.82

- 1.2 1.2

- 0.15 0.16 0.60

ROS Roseville Stn (151 N Su 9 10.6 17 8.5 17 0 0.81

- 1.4 1.4

- 0.16 0.16 0.81

S13 Sacramento Stn (1309 T 5 8.8 14 8.1 14 0 0.92

- 0.5 0.6

- 0.06 0.07 0.50

SDP Sacramento Stn (Del Pas 9 11.0 15 9.8 14

- 1 0.89

- 0.9 1.0

- 0.10 0.11 0.92

SLU Sloughouse Rd. Stn 10 11.8 14 12.6 14 0 1.07 0.3 0.5 0.02 0.06 0.98

WLN Woodland Stn 7 10.0 14 9.1 16 2 0.91

- 0.1 0.5 0.00 0.06 0.80

GNBY Granite Bay Stn 11 11.5 17 9.0 17 0 0.78

- 1.9 1.9

- 0.22 0.22 0.86

SNH Sacramento

- North Highla 10 9.8 15 8.8 17 2 0.89

- 0.9 0.9

- 0.10 0.10 0.862013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 23 Table B

- 21

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 30, 2000 1

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0700_00_ca mx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 212 (07/30) 2000

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 152 12.1 15 12.5 16 1 1.04 0.5 1.1 0. 07 0.15 0.38

Subregional Peak: 13.2 16 1 1.09 (at 76 x116) NSte: SDP ; NSPk: 13.1

AUBD Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 16 8.4 15 8.4 15 0 1.00

- 0.4 0.5

- 0.06 0.07 0.94

CUS Cool Stn (1400 American 12 8.9 15 9.0 16 1 1.01

- 0.2 0.3

- 0.03 0.04 0.92

DVS Davis/UCD Campus Stn 7 9.3 14 9.8 15 1 1.05 0.8 0.9 0.10 0.11 0.38

ELK Elk Grove Stn (Brucevil 2 6.3 16 9.5 17 1 1.50 3.0 3.0 0.49 0.49

- 99.00

FLN Folsom Stn (Natoma St.) 8 7.4 13 10.7 15 2 1.45 3.4 3.4 0.53 0.53

- 0.11

NAT Sacramento/Natoma Stn ( 7 8.3 17 10. 3 17 0 1.25 1.7 1.7 0.22 0.22

- 0.24

PGN Placerville Stn (Gold N 19 9.4 17 9.3 16

- 1 0.99

- 0.4 1.0

- 0.04 0.13 0.40

PGV Pleasant Grove Stn (4 S 8 8.1 14 9.7 18 4 1.20 1.2 1.2 0.17 0.17

- 0.03

ROC Rocklin Stn (5000 Rockl 11 8.6 12 8.6 16 4 1.00 0.2 0.9 0.03 0.12 0.44

ROS Roseville Stn (151 N Su 9 9.2 12 9.0 18 6 0.97

- 0.3 0.9

- 0.04 0.11

- 0.13

S13 Sacramento Stn (1309 T 7 8.4 14 11.2 15 1 1.34 2.3 2.3 0.32 0.32 0.44

SDP Sacramento Stn (Del Pas 9 9.9 17 12.5 16

- 1 1.27 1.2 1.5 0.13 0.16 0.84

SLU Sloughouse Rd. Stn 7 12.1 15 10.5 16 1 0.87

- 0.5 0.9

- 0.04 0.08 0.81

WLN Woodland Stn 7 8.0 14 9.2 16 2 1.15 0.9 0.9 0.12 0.12 0.87

GNBY Granite Bay Stn 13 10. 2 12 9.3 18 6 0.91

- 0.5 1.0

- 0.06 0.13 0.70

SNH Sacramento

- North Highla 10 8.4 16 10.1 18 2 1.20 0.3 0.9 0.04 0.11 0.782013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 24 Table B

- 22

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 31, 2000 1

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0700_00_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 213 (07/31) 2000

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparison s with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 130 10.3 14 12.2 14 0 1.19 0.4 1.0 0.06 0.13 0.27

Subregional Peak: 14.5 15 1 1.41 (at 79 x110) NSte: ELK ; NSPk: 11.4

AUBD Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 12 8.9 17 8.1 15

- 2 0.91

- 0.9 0.9

- 0.11 0.12 0.42

CUS Cool Stn (1400 American 10 9.9 11 8.8 15 4 0.89

- 1.2 1.3

- 0.13 0.14 0.30

DVS Davis/UCD Campus Stn 8 10.3 14 9.8 13

- 1 0.95

- 0.1 0.6 0.00 0.07 0.66

ELK Elk Grove Stn (Brucevil 6 7.3 15 11.4 15 0 1.56 3.6 3.6 0.53 0.53 0.40

NAT Sacramento/Natoma Stn ( 8 8.7 13 9.2 12

- 1 1.05 0.7 0.7 0.10 0.11 0.47

PGN Placerville Stn (Gold N 14 8.7 13 9.2 17 4 1.05

- 0.1 0.8

- 0.02 0.10 0.78

PGV Pleasant Grove Stn (4 S 8 7.8 15 8.2 15 0 1.05 0.6 0.6 0.08 0.08 0.58

ROC Rocklin Stn (5000 Rockl 8 7.8 13 8.7 15 2 1.12 1.0 1.0 0.13 0.13 0.51

ROS Roseville Stn (151 N Su 8 8.0 13 8.6 16 3 1.07 1.2 1.2 0.17 0.17 0.21

S13 Sacramento Stn (1309 T 7 8.5 14 9.7 13

- 1 1.14 0.4 0.8 0.06 0.11 0.34

SDP Sacramento Stn (Del Pa s 9 8.1 13 9.5 13 0 1.18 0.8 1.4 0.10 0.19 0.54

SLU Sloughouse Rd. Stn 8 10.0 14 12.2 14 0 1.22 1.2 1.3 0.15 0.16 0.90

WLN Woodland Stn 8 8.0 12 7.8 13 1 0.97

- 0.2 0.6

- 0.03 0.07

- 0.09

GNBY Granite Bay Stn 9 8.5 13 8.7 16 3 1.03 0.3 0.4 0.04 0.05 0.78

SNH Sacramento

- North Highla 7 8.1 12 8.6 16 4 1.06 0.6 0.7 0.09 0.09

- 0.112013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 25 Table B

- 23

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

August 1, 2000 1

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0700_00_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 214 (08/01) 2000

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 141 1 3.3 15 14.5 15 0 1.09 0.5 1.1 0.06 0.14 0.68

Subregional Peak: 15.3 16 1 1.15 (at 82 x114) NSte: SLU ; NSPk: 14.3

AUBD Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 12 10.3 15 10.0 15 0 0.97

- 0.1 0.4 0.00 0.05 0.91

CUS Cool Stn (1400 American 12 12.0 16 10.0 14

- 2 0.83

- 0.6 1.1

- 0.06 0.11 0.66

DVS Davis/UCD Campus Stn 6 9.5 15 9.5 13

- 2 1.01 0.7 0.8 0.09 0.11 0.41

ELK Elk Grove Stn (Brucevil 6 7.8 17 10.8 17 0 1.39 3.1 3.1 0.45 0.45 0.50

NAT Sacramento/Natoma Stn ( 7 9.9 16 10.4 13

- 3 1.05 0.5 0.9 0.06 0.10

- 0.2 3

PGN Placerville Stn (Gold N 14 10.2 18 9.5 18 0 0.93

- 0.8 1.1

- 0.10 0.14 0.58

PGV Pleasant Grove Stn (4 S 9 10.1 15 10.3 15 0 1.02 0.2 0.8 0.03 0.09 0.69

ROC Rocklin Stn (5000 Rockl 9 10.3 15 11.8 15 0 1.15 1.7 1.7 0.21 0.21 0.96

ROS Roseville Stn (151 N Su 9 11.5 15 12.3 14

- 1 1.07 1.4 1.4 0.17 0.17 0.92

S13 Sacramento Stn (1309 T 7 9.6 15 10.5 13

- 2 1.10 1.8 1.8 0.25 0.25 0.51

SDP Sacramento Stn (Del Pas 10 11.5 15 13.0 14

- 1 1.13 0.4 1.1 0.04 0.13 0.83

SLU Sloughouse Rd. Stn 11 13.3 15 14.5 15 0 1.09 0.2 0.8 0.02 0.09 0.95

WLN Woodland Stn 7 10.0 15 9.7 15 0 0.97 0.1 1.0 0.02 0.12 0.36

GNBY Granite Bay Stn 12 11.5 16 12.3 15

- 1 1.07 0.5 0.8 0. 05 0.09 0.93

SNH Sacramento

- North Highla 10 12.0 15 12.0 13

- 2 1.00 0.5 1.1 0.06 0.13 0.672013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 26 Table B

- 24

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

August 2, 2000 1

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0700_00_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 215 (08/02) 2000

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm)

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 138 12.1 15 12.6 16 1 1.04 0.2 1.4 0.04 0.17 0.58

Subregional Peak: 13.0 14

- 1 1.07 (at 78 x1 23) NSte: ROC ; NSPk: 11.9

AUBD Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 13 11.5 18 12.6 16

- 2 1.10

- 0.6 1.1

- 0.06 0.11 0.85

CUS Cool Stn (1400 American 13 11.6 18 11.0 16

- 2 0.95

- 0.3 0.9

- 0.03 0.10 0.77

DVS Davis/UCD Campus Stn 5 8.2 13 10.7 15 2 1.31 2.2 2.2 0.31 0.31 0.36

ELK Elk Grove Stn (Brucevil 4 7.2 14 11.3 15 1 1.56 3.3 3.3 0.48 0.48

- 0.10

FLN Folsom Stn (Natoma St.) 8 11.1 15 10.6 18 3 0.96

- 0.8 1.5

- 0.09 0.19 0.75

NAT Sacramento/Natoma Stn ( 7 9.6 14 11.2 16 2 1.17 1.3 1.7 0.18 0.25 0.39

PGN Placerville Stn (Gold N 15 9.5 17 8.6 17 0 0.90

- 0.5 0.8

- 0.06 0.10 0.72

PGV Pleasant Grove Stn (4 S 4 8.8 14 10.4 16 2 1.19 2.0 2.0 0.26 0.26

- 0.86

ROC Rocklin Stn (5000 Rockl 10 11.0 16 11.6 14

- 2 1.05 0.4 0.9 0.05 0.10 0.76

ROS Roseville Stn (151 N Su 9 11.2 15 11.4 13

- 2 1.02 0.3 1.1 0.04 0.12 0.57

S13 Sacramento Stn (1309 T 4 8.0 14 9.4 15 1 1.17 1.0 1.0 0.15 0.15 0.71

SDP Sacramento Stn (Del Pas 8 10.2 14 10.6 17 3 1.04 0.3 1.9 0.04 0.27 0.46

SLU Sloughouse Rd. Stn 11 10.3 16 11.0 17 1 1.07

- 0.8 1.4

- 0.10 0.18 0.75

WLN Woodland Stn 6 9.0 14 9.9 16 2 1.10 1.5 1.5 0.21 0.21 0.51

GNBY Granite Bay Stn 13 12.1 15 10.8 18 3 0.89

- 0.8 1.3

- 0.09 0.15 0.82

SNH Sacramento

- North Highla 8 10.8 15 11.7 13

- 2 1.08 1.3 1.5 0.16 0.18 0.642013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 27 Table B

- 25

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 29, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0700_00_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 211 (07/29) 2000

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm); Averaged over 8 hours

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 15 9.7 12 10.0 11

- 1 1.03

- 0.3 1.0

- 0.02 0.11

- 101.56

Subregional Peak: 10.4 12 0 1.07 (at 82 x114) NSte: SLU ; NSPk: 9.9

CUS Cool Stn (1400 American 1 9.4 11 7.7 12 1 0.81

- 1.8 1.8

- 0.19 0.19

DVS Davis/UCD Campus Stn 1 7.7 11 8.4 11 0 1.09 0.7 0.7 0.09 0.09

ELK Elk Grove Stn (Brucevil 1 6.4 12 8.2 12 0 1.28 1.8 1.8 0.28 0.28

FLN Folsom Stn (Natoma St.) 1 7.0 12 8.8 11

- 1 1.26 1.8 1.8 0.26 0.26

NAT Sacramento/Natoma Stn ( 1 8.0 12 8.2 12 0 1.02 0.1 0.1 0.02 0.02

PGN Placerville Stn (Gold N 1 9.7 12 8.2 12 0 0.84

- 1.6 1.6

- 0.16 0.16

PGV Pleasant Grove Stn (4 S 1 7.7 11 7.7 12 1 1.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00

ROC Roc klin Stn (5000 Rockl 1 8.5 12 7.5 11

- 1 0.88

- 1.0 1.0

- 0.12 0.12

ROS Roseville Stn (151 N Su 1 9.0 12 7.6 11

- 1 0.84

- 1.4 1.4

- 0.16 0.16

S13 Sacramento Stn (1309 T 1 7.2 12 7.1 12 0 0.98

- 0.1 0.1

- 0.02 0.02

SDP Sacramento Stn (Del Pas 1 9.2 12 8.4 11

- 1 0.91

- 0.8 0.8

- 0.09 0.09

SLU Sloughouse Rd. Stn 1 9.6 12 10.0 11

- 1 1.05 0.5 0.5 0.05 0.05

WLN Woodland Stn 1 8.1 11 8.1 11 0 1.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00

GNBY Granite Bay Stn 1 9.7 12 8.0 11

- 1 0.83

- 1.7 1.7

- 0.17 0.17

SNH Sacramento

- North H ighla 1 8.9 11 7.9 12 1 0.89

- 0.9 0.9

- 0.11 0.112013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 28 Table B

- 26

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 30, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0700_00_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 212 (07/30) 2000

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm); Averaged over 8 hours

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 15 9.3 11 10.7 12 1 1.15 0.8 1.0 0.12 0.13

- 139.05

Subregional Peak: 11.3 12 1 1.21 (at 77 x117) NSte: SDP ; NSPk: 10.9

AUBD Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 1 8.0 11 8.0 12 1 0.99

- 0.1 0.1

- 0.01 0.01

CUS Cool Stn (1400 American 1 8.7 11 8.5 12 1 0.98

- 0.2 0.2

- 0.02 0.02

DVS Davis/UCD Campus Stn 1 8 .0 11 9.0 12 1 1.12 1.0 1.0 0.12 0.12

FLN Folsom Stn (Natoma St.) 1 6.6 12 10.0 12 0 1.52 3.4 3.4 0.52 0.52

NAT Sacramento/Natoma Stn ( 1 7.6 11 9.4 12 1 1.25 1.9 1.9 0.25 0.25

PGN Placerville Stn (Gold N 1 8.6 15 8.8 12

- 3 1.02 0.2 0.2 0.02 0.02

PGV Pleasant Grove Stn (4 S 1 7.4 12 8.7 13 1 1.18 1.3 1.3 0.18 0.18

ROC Rocklin Stn (5000 Rockl 1 7.9 11 8.3 12 1 1.05 0.4 0.4 0.05 0.05

ROS Roseville Stn (151 N Su 1 8.5 10 8.5 12 2 1.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00

S13 Sacramento Stn (1309 T 1 7.2 11 9.4 12 1 1.30 2.2 2.2 0.30 0.30

SDP Sacramento Stn (Del Pas 1 9.3 11 10.7 12 1 1.15 1.4 1.4 0.15 0.15

SLU Sloughouse Rd. Stn 1 9.1 12 8.8 12 0 0.97

- 0.3 0.3

- 0.03 0.03

WLN Woodland Stn 1 7.3 11 8.3 12 1 1.15 1.1 1.1 0.15 0.15

GNBY Granite Bay Stn 1 9.2 11 9.0 12 1 0.97

- 0.2 0.2

- 0.03 0.03

SNH Sacramento

- North Highla 1 8.1 12 8.8 12 0 1.09 0.7 0.7 0.09 0.092013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 29 Table B

- 27

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 31, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0700_00_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 213 (07/31) 2000

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm); Averaged over 8 hours

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 15 8.9 11 10.1 12 1 1.13 0.7 0.9 0.10 0.12

- 128.73

Subregional Peak: 11.8 12 1 1.32 (at 81 x108) NSte: ELK ; NSPk: 10.1

AU BD Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 1 8.2 13 7.5 11

- 2 0.91

- 0.7 0.7

- 0.09 0.09

CUS Cool Stn (1400 American 1 8.9 11 7.9 11 0 0.88

- 1.1 1.1

- 0.12 0.12

DVS Davis/UCD Campus Stn 1 8.9 11 9.0 12 1 1.01 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.01

ELK Elk Grove Stn (Brucevil 1 6.4 12 10.1 12 0 1.57 3.7 3.7 0.57 0.57

NAT Sacramento/Natoma Stn ( 1 7.6 11 8.3 11 0 1.09 0.7 0.7 0.09 0.09

PGN Placerville Stn (Gold N 1 8.1 13 8.5 12

- 1 1.06 0.5 0.5 0.06 0.06

PGV Pleasant Grove Stn (4 S 1 7.3 11 7.9 11 0 1.08 0.6 0.6 0.08 0.08

ROC Rocklin Stn (5000 Rockl 1 7.3 11 8.2 12 1 1.13 1.0 1.0 0.13 0.13

ROS Roseville Stn (151 N Su 1 7.0 11 8.2 11 0 1.17 1.2 1.2 0.17 0.17

S13 Sacramento Stn (1309 T 1 7.4 12 7.9 11

- 1 1.07 0.5 0.5 0.07 0.07

SDP Sacramento Stn (Del Pas 1 7.4 12 8.6 11

- 1 1.16 1.2 1.2 0.16 0.16

SLU Sloughouse Rd. Stn 1 8.3 12 10.1 12 0 1.22 1.8 1.8 0.22 0.22

WLN Woodland Stn 1 7.6 12 7.5 11

- 1 0.98

- 0.1 0.1

- 0.02 0.02

GNBY Granite Bay Stn 1 8.0 11 8.3 11 0 1.04 0.3 0.3 0.04 0.04

SNH Sacramento

- North Highla 1 7.7 10 8.2 11 1 1.06 0.5 0.5 0.06 0.062013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 30 Table B

- 28

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

August 1, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0700_00_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 214 (08/01) 2000

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm); Averaged over 8 hours

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 15 10.9 12 11.4 12 0 1.05 0.8 0.9 0.10 0.11

- 105.27

Subregional Peak: 11.8 12 0 1.09 (at 80 x116) NSte: SLU ; NSPk: 11.3

AU BD Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 1 9.5 12 9.5 12 0 1.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00

CUS Cool Stn (1400 American 1 9.9 13 9.3 12

- 1 0.94

- 0.6 0.6

- 0.06 0.06

DVS Davis/UCD Campus Stn 1 8.1 9 9.0 11 2 1.11 0.9 0.9 0.11 0.11

ELK Elk Grove Stn (Brucevil 1 6.6 12 9.7 11

- 1 1.48 3.2 3.2 0.48 0.48

NAT Sacramento/Natoma Stn ( 1 9.0 11 9.7 11 0 1.08 0.7 0.7 0.08 0.08

PGN Placerville Stn (Gold N 1 8.9 14 8.6 13

- 1 0.96

- 0.3 0.3

- 0.04 0.04

PGV Pleasant Grove Stn (4 S 1 9.3 12 9.4 11

- 1 1.01 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.01

ROC Rocklin Stn (5000 Rockl 1 8.9 11 10.5 11 0 1.19 1.7 1.7 0.19 0.19

ROS Roseville Stn (151 N Su 1 9.3 11 10.7 11 0 1.16 1.5 1.5 0.16 0.16

S13 Sacramento Stn (1309 T 1 7.6 12 9.5 11

- 1 1.25 1.9 1.9 0.25 0.25

SDP Sacramento Stn (Del Pas 1 10.1 12 10.7 11

- 1 1.07 0.7 0.7 0.07 0.07

SLU Sloughouse Rd. Stn 1 10.9 12 11.4 12 0 1.05 0.5 0.5 0.05 0.05

WLN Woodland Stn 1 8.4 12 8.7 11

- 1 1.03 0.3 0.3 0.03 0.03

GNBY Granite Bay Stn 1 9.9 12 10.6 11

- 1 1.07 0.7 0.7 0.07 0.07

SNH Sacramento

- North Highla 1 10.0 12 10.5 11

- 1 1.05 0.5 0.5 0.05 0.052013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 31 Table B

- 29

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

August 2, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0700_00_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Statistics were calculated for the 24

- hour period of DOY 215 (08/02) 2000

Included were data

- pairs with observed concentrations above a threshold of 6.0 (pphm); Averaged over 8 hours

------- Peak Concentrations

-------- --- Comparisons with Observations

---

Observed Predicted Time Peak Mean Mean Normalized

Site Description No Value Time Value Time Lag Ratio Bias Error Bias Error (r)

---- ------------------------ ---- ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --------

0006 SubRegion 16 10.7 12 10.5 12 0 0.98 0.9 1.2 0.13 0.17

- 72.44

Subregional Peak: 10.8 12 0 1.00 (at 79 x124) NSte: ROC ; NSPk: 10.3

AU BD Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 1 10.7 12 10.5 12 0 0.98

- 0.2 0.2

- 0.02 0.02

CUS Cool Stn (1400 American 1 10.4 13 10.0 12

- 1 0.97

- 0.3 0.3

- 0.03 0.03

DVS Davis/UCD Campus Stn 1 6.7 12 8.7 11

- 1 1.30 2.0 2.0 0.30 0.30

ELK Elk Grove Stn (Brucevil 1 6.3 12 8.7 11

- 1 1.39 2.4 2.4 0.39 0.39

FLN Folsom Stn (Natoma St.) 1 9.5 12 9.1 11

- 1 0.96

- 0.4 0.4

- 0.04 0.04

NAT Sacramento/Natoma Stn ( 1 7.5 12 9.2 11

- 1 1.24 1.8 1.8 0.24 0.24

PGN Placerville Stn (Gold N 1 8.7 14 8.1 12

- 2 0.92

- 0.7 0.7

- 0.08 0.08

PGV Pleasant Grove Stn (4 S 1 6.6 11 9.8 11 0 1.48 3.2 3.2 0.48 0.48

ROC Rocklin Stn (5000 Rockl 1 9.8 11 10.2 11 0 1.04 0.4 0.4 0.04 0.04

ROS Roseville Stn (151 N Su 1 9.7 11 10.1 11 0 1.04 0.4 0.4 0.04 0.04

S13 Sacramento Stn (1309 T 1 6.3 13 8.4 11

- 2 1.32 2.0 2.0 0.32 0.32

SDP Sacramento Stn (Del Pas 1 8.0 12 9.2 11

- 1 1.16 1.3 1.3 0.16 0.16

SLU Sloughouse Rd. Stn 1 9.1 12 8.8 11

- 1 0.96

- 0.4 0.4

- 0.04 0.04

WLN Woodland Stn 1 7.0 12 8.8 11

- 1 1.26 1.8 1.8 0.26 0.26

GNBY Granite Bay Stn 1 10.3 11 9.6 11 0 0.94

- 0.6 0.6

- 0.06 0.06

SNH Sacramento

- North Highla 1 8.7 10 10.4 11 1 1.19 1.7 1.7 0.19 0.192013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B : Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 32 Table B

- 30

Base Case Model Performance Evaluation for Individual Sites in Sacramento Region

July 29

- August 2, 2000 8

- Hour Ozone

* * * Model Performance Evaluation * * *

Pollutant: O3 (pphm) Project: arb_050c_0700_00_camx Simulation ID: 050c

Subregion 0006 Spatially Paired Average 8

- Hour Concentrations above 6.0 pphm for DOY 211 through 215

Unpaired Subregional Maximum of 10.0 at Cell 78 x 117

-- Nearest Site: SDP

- - - - - - Observed

- - - - - - - - - - - - Simulated

- - - - - -

Site Site Site DOY DOY DOY DOY DOY DOY Site DOY DOY DOY DOY DOY DOY Avg.

ID Description Avg. 211 212 213 214 215 216 Avg. 211 212 213 214 215 216 Ratio

---- ------------------------ --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ----

AUBD Auburn

- Dewitt

- C Avenue 9.1

- 99.0 8.0 8.2 9.5 10.7 8.5 7.2 8.0 7.5 9.5 10.5 0.94

CUS Cool Stn (1400 American 9.5 9.4 8.7 8.9 9.9 10.4 8.7 7.7 8.5 7.9 9.3 10.0 0.92

DVS Davis/UCD Campus Stn 7.9 7.7 8.0 8.9 8.1 6.7 8.8 8.4 9.0 9.0 9.0 8.7 1.12

ELK Elk Grove Stn (Brucevil 6.4 6.4 5.0 6.4 6.6 6.3 9.1 8.2 8.7 10.1 9.7 8.7 1.42

FLN Folsom Stn (Natoma St.) 7.7 7.0 6.6 1.9

- 99.0 9.5 9.5 8.8 10.0 8.6 10.8 9.1 1.23

NAT Sacramento/Natoma Stn ( 7.9 8.0 7.6 7.6 9.0 7.5 9.0 8.2 9.4 8.3 9.7 9.2 1.13

PGN Placerville Stn (Gold N 8.8 9.7 8.6 8.1 8.9 8.7 8.4 8.2 8.8 8.5 8.6 8.1 0.96

PGV Pleasant Grove Stn (4 S 7.7 7.7 7.4 7.3 9.3 6.6 8.7 7.7 8.7 7.9 9.4 9.8 1.13

ROC Rocklin Stn (5000 Rockl 8.5 8.5 7.9 7.3 8.9 9.8 9.0 7.5 8.3 8.2 10.5 10.2 1.06

ROS Roseville Stn (151 N Su 8.7 9.0 8.5 7.0 9.3 9.7 9.0 7.6 8.5 8.2 10.7 10.1 1.04

S13 Sacramento Stn (1309 T 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.4 7.6 6.3 8.4 7.1 9.4 7.9 9.5 8.4 1.18

SDP Sacramento Stn (Del Pas 8.8 9.2 9.3 7.4 10.1 8.0 9.5 8.4 10.7 8.6 10.7 9.2 1.08

SLU Sloughouse Rd. Stn 9.4 9.6 9.1 8.3 10.9 9.1 9.8 10.0 8.8 10.1 11.4 8.8 1.05

WLN Woodland Stn 7.7 8.1 7.3 7.6 8.4 7.0 8.3 8.1 8.3 7.5 8.7 8.8 1.08

GNBY Granite Bay Stn 9.4 9.7 9.2 8.0 9.9 10.3 9.1 8.0 9.0 8.3 10.6 9.6 0.97

SNH Sacramento

- North Highla 8.7 8.9 8.1 7.7 10.0 8.7 9.1 7.9 8.8 8.2 10.5 10.4 1.052013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 33 

### Air Quality Modeling Results

This section of Appendix B provides a summary of the air quality modeling analysis

process and includes additional information and graphs on the air quality modeling

results described in Chapters 6 and 8 of the main report. The model runs summarized in

this appendix were prepared in 200 9 Plan, using the emissions inventory developed for

use in that Plan. Table B

- 31 provides a comparison of the inventories used in the 2 00 9

Plan and this 2013 update.

Air Quality Modeling Runs Performed

After the photochemical modeling base case episodes were shown to perform

adequately, the modeling was used for assessing attainment of the federal ozone

standard. First, t he air quality model was run with 2002 baseline year emissions to

provide baseline year ozone concentrations

. Next, model runs with emissions forecasts

(including ERCs and existing control strategies ) for 2018 were conducted to e stimate

the future ozone concentrations

. The relative decline between modeled baseline and

future year ozone concentrations at each ozone nonattainment monitor ing site was

calculated. This relative reduction factor was applied to baseline ozone design values to

predict a future ozone design value for each monitoring site and then compared to the

federal ozone standard

. Based on the photochemical modeling results

, attainment was

predicted at all ozone monitors in 2018, except for two sites (Cool and Folsom) located

in the eastern part of the Sacramento region. Therefore, supplemental modeling runs

were done to estimate the additional emission reductions needed to demonstrate

attainment of the 8

- hour ozone NAAQS.

Development of Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs

Systematic reductions in all anthropogenic VOC and/or NO X 

### emissions were simulated

to characterize the change in the resulting ozone concentrations. For each individual

modeling run, domain

- wide (including areas outside of the Sacramento nonattainment

area) emissions for NO X 

### - only, VOC

- only, or both VOC and NO X 

### are scaled by factors

ranging from 100% to 8 0% in increments of 5 %. As a result, forecasted ozone

concentrations were determined for 25 different combinations of varying VOC and/or

NO X 

### emission reductions. For example, one modeling run scaled VOC emissions by

95 % and NO X 

### emissions by 85 %, and then another run scaled VOC emissions by 85 %

and NO X 

### emissions by 95 %.

The forecasted ozone concentration data (in ppb) associated with each of the 25

emission reduction modeling scenarios were used to calculate the future ozone design

values, which were plotted on a graph for an individual monitoring site. These diagrams

show the pattern of ozone responses to varying combinations in VOC and NO X



### emission reductions. This exercise was performed for the 2018 attainment

demonstration year, and evaluated at each of the nonattainment air monitoring sites.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 34 

### 2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs for Peak Ozone Site and Other

Nonattainment Sites

The 2018 ozone/emission reduction graph for the peak ozone site at Cool is provided in

Figure B

- 1. The 2018 ozone/emission reduction graphs for other nonattainment ozone

monitoring sites (Auburn, Colfax, Folsom, Grass Valley, North Highlands, Placerville,

Roseville, Sacramento

- Del Paso Manor, and S loughhouse) in the Sacramento region

are presented in Figures B

- 2 through B

- 10. See Figure B

- 1 1 for a map of the location of

the ozone monitoring stations.

The graph for the peak ozone design value site in the Sacramento region will generally

determine the extent of additional emission reductions needed for attainment.

Some general conclusions can be drawn based on the 2018 modeling results of

forecasted emissions and the additional across

- the

- board percent emission reduction

scenarios. The air quality modeling analysis shows that attainment can be reached by

2018 with different combinations of VOC and NO X 

### control. The modeling results indicate

that both VOC and NO X 

### reductions provide ozone benefits in the Sacramento region,

but on a ton for ton basis NO X 

### reductions provide greater ozone benefits than VOC

reductions.

EPA modeling guidance states that the modeled attainment test is conducted using the

predicted future ozone design value concentrations (truncated to whole ppb). All

modeled ozone concentrations are truncated to integers for purposes of determining

attainment. Following EPA guidance, for example, and truncating all numbers to the

whole number, 84.99 would be truncated to 84 ppb.

Figure B

- 1 contains the ozone and pollutant emission reduction graph for the 2018 peak

ozone design value site at Cool in the Sacramento region. The x and y axes represent

fractional emissions reductions from the forecasted 2018 planning emissions inventory

(without new control measures): 121 tpd of ROG and 104 tpd of NO X



### . The whole

numbers on the graph represent predicted ozone design value concentrations

(truncated to whole ppb), based on modeling results for fractional VOC and NO X



### reductions at 5% increments. For example, t he upper right corner truncated integer (88

ppb) represents the predicted 2018 ozone design value at Cool with existing control

strategies and no additional fractional emission reductions.

Because planning commitments to specific emissions reduction projections may not be

one of the exact modeled reduction scenarios reflected on the ozone/emission reduction

graph, contours are drawn to estimate a continuum of reductions between the modeled

points with the same ozone concentration (called isopleths). Because of the truncation

policy, t hese contours would be more accurately characterized as bands, than lines.

However, for simplicity the contours are drawn as lines.

T he CARB modeling results for predicted ozone design value concentrations were

provided to the districts as truncated integers at a resolution of 5% emission reduction2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 35 

### increment s. Therefore, i n an effort to better characterize the ozone modeling results and

the relative benefits of VOC and NO X 

### emissions reduction strategies, District staff

obtained ozone modeling output files which provided 5% increment modeled ozone

values rounded to the tenth of a ppb

. Staff interpolated whole ppb results to establish

the ozone concentration contour lines in Figure B

- 1

. The 85 ppb ozone cont our line lies

just below the CARB truncated 85 ppb concentrations and has a slope that illustrates

the relative benefit of VOC strategies to NO X 

### strategies

. Looking at the relative ozone

benefit from a 20 percent reduction in anthropogenic emissions of VOC and NO X 

### suggests that overall a 1 ton per day reduction in NO X 

### is equivalent to a 7 ton per day

reduction in VOC.

Attainment Demonstration Evaluation

Attainment of the 8

- hour ozone NAAQS is evaluated for a 2018 “severe” classification

scenario, based on modeling results for the peak ozone site (Cool) in the Sacramento

region. The 2018 ozone/emission reduction graph for the peak ozone site at Cool

(Figur e B

- 1) shows the various combinations of percent emission reduction attainment

levels below the 85 ppb contour line. There are number of potential VOC and NO X 

### reduction combinations that could provide for attainment. The combined reductions from

new state and federal control measures and from new regional and local proposed

control measures contained in this plan are used to assess future 2018 attainment.

Attainment is evaluated for the 2018 emission reductions from all new local, regional,

state and federal control measure committals. The total benefits from measures

identified in this Plan that have not yet been adopted are estimated to be 8 tpd of VOC

and 1 tpd of NO X 

### in 2018, although, it is anticipated that attainment would be achieved

by the 2018 deadline even if there is a reduction in these emission benefits.

Attainment Demonstration Results

The combination of emission reductions from new control measures were converted to

percent emission reductions of the forecasted 2018 planning emissions inventory

(without new control measures): 121 tpd of ROG and 104 tpd of NO X



### . The combination

of percent emission reductions w as plotted on the graph in Figure B

- 1 to demonstrate

attainment of the 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone standard ( 8 4 ppb )

. Attainment

demonstration results are given for:

1) the 2018 emission reductions from all new local, regional, state and federal control

measure committal s ( 11.6% of VOC and 1 6 .3% of NO X 

### , designated at Point A )

. These reductions are more than the percent reduction attainment targets for

attaining the 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone standard by 2018

, and so will provide

reductions for accelerated progress

.

2) the 2018 emission reductions from only the new local, regional, state and federal

control measures adopted by the end of 2008 ( 3.3% of VOC and 12.5% of NO X 

### , designated at Point B )

. These levels also provide for attainment (just below the 85

ppb ozone contour line)

.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 36 

### Emission Inventory Improvements for the Sacramento Region

Nature of Emissions Update

The Air Districts within the Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area (SFNA) initially

adopted the 2009 Sacramento Regional 8

- hour ozone Attainment and Reasonable

Further Progress Plan (Plan) in February 2009. At that time, the Plan reflected the best

availab le emissions inventory estimates, technical calculations, and air quality modeling

to meet federal air quality planning requirements.

Since the Plan was adopted, both ARB and the SFNA Districts have continued to

evaluate and update emission inventory cate gories under their respective authority.

ARB has identified emissions inventory improvements through the recent rulemaking

process for trucks, in

- use off

- road equipment, ocean

- going vessels, and cargo handling

equipment. The SFNA Districts have also identi fied emissions inventory and forecasting

method improvements subsequent to the adoption of the 2009 Plan.

The SFNA District’s improvements include the use of the most recent transportation

activity data provided by Sacramento Area Council of Governments (S ACOG) and

updates to several categories subject to recent District rulemaking. ARB staff undertook

a thorough review of the off

- road mobile source inventory methodology, and updated

many key factors used in estimating emissions from off

- road vehicles. This included

new population and activity data reported to ARB, as well as new published studies and

other data that evaluated emissions from off

- road vehicles. Staff also evaluated new

data that showed that the previous inventory overestimated how much and ho w hard

off

- road vehicles work. This review has resulted in the 33 percent reduction in off

- road

baseline NO X 

### emissions and a 17 percent reduction in off

- road baseline VOC

emissions.

In aggregate, the emission estimates based on C ARB and SFNA Districts ’

imp rovements show a 16 percent reduction in baseline NO X 

### emissions and 9 percent

reduction in regional baseline VOC emissions for 2002. The revised combined emission

estimates for NO X 

### and VOC are shown in Table B

- 31

.

Relationship to SIP Emissions Targets

The SIP attainment demonstration shows how the 2018 emissions targets will be met

through a combination of adopted measures and new SIP measures. The SIP emission

targets represent the emission carrying capacities, or the maximum allowable emission

levels that the nonattainment area can accommodate while attaining the standard. The

attainment demonstration in the 2009 Plan was based on air quality modeling which

used procedures set by EPA. Developing new SIP modeling and revisiting the adopted

attainment de monstration would be a multi

- year process. However, the planning effort

to address the 2008 8

- hour ozone standard will include new air quality modeling using

more current inventory and air quality data. This modeling can also be used to assess

progress tow ards attainment of the 1997 8

- hour ozone standard that is the subject of

this plan.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 37 

### Review of SIP Modeling Results

In accordance with U.S. EPA procedures, air quality models are used to predict the

relative response to reductions in ozone

- forming emission s for each site in the region.

Two model runs are conducted. The first model run is for the reference year (in this case

2002) using estimates of ozone

- forming emissions in that year. The second model run is

for a future year (in this case 2018) using fore casted emissions that include activity

growth factors and the benefits of adopted controls, but no new SIP measures. This

provides modeled ozone concentrations on a gridded basis for 2002 and 2018. The

ratio of these two concentrations at each grid point i s termed a relative reduction factor

(RRF). Each RRF reflects the modeled decrease in ozone levels between 2002 and

2018. The RRF is then applied to an observed baseline ozone level calculated

according to U.S. EPA guidance to project the expected ozone le vel in the attainment

year. In the SFNA this projected ozone level was above the federal 8

- hour ozone

standard, indicating additional emission reductions were needed.

Since the modeling analyses forecasted the Cool monitoring site to have the highest

ozone levels in the SFNA, the Cool site was designated as the design site for

attainment of the federal 8

- hour ozone standard. An ozone response diagram was

developed for the Cool site to determine the additional reductions needed beyond the

2018 baseline emiss ion forecast, shown in Figure B

- 0. To develop this diagram, further

modeling simulations were conducted, using incremental reductions of 20, 40, and 60

percent from the projected uncontrolled 2018 emissions levels. The resulting diagram,

shown in Figure B

- 0, provides the percent reduction needed to achieve an ozone

concentration that meets the standard. This procedure established the SIP emission

targets for the 2009 Plan.

Because photochemical modeling is a time and resource intensive process, the revised

emission targets used in this update were developed utilizing an alternative analysis

method. The RRFs developed in the 2009 plan show that ozone concentrations

decrease more rapidly as we approach the lower levels of the NO X 

### inventory: as overall

NO X 

### emis sion decrease, each new ton of NO X 

### reductions will have an incrementally

greater ozone benefit. The 2009 Plan attainment demonstration was made by showing

the reduction in the 2018 inventory from new controls was reduced by the percent

reductions needed us ing Figure B

- 0 , Cool 2018 Ozone Response diagram. Because the

updated inventories changed both the baseline and attainment year inventories, and

some of the new controls are reflected in the 2018 inventory projections, the same

demonstration method is not possible. Instead this analysis determines whether the

region attains by determining whether the percent emissions reductions from the

baseline year are achieved using the existing modeling results. An analysis of the

percent NO X 

### emissions reductions from the 2002 baseline year to the 2018 attainment

year inventory shows the region will achieve roughly the same percentage of emissions

reductions by 2018 that the existing modeling indicates will result in attainment. As a

result, the existing modeling supports the conclusion that adopted controls will result in

attainment by 2018.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 38 

### Table B

- 31

Comparison of Original and Revised NO X 

### and VOC Emission Estimates in the

Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area

NO X 

### (tpd) VOC(t pd)

2009 SIP

Emissions CEPAM 2012

Emissions 2009 SIP

Emissions CEPAM 2012

Emissions

2002 Baseline

Emission

Inventory 196 a 

### 165 c 

### 160 a 

### 147

2018 Projected

Emission

Inventory 104 a 

### 7 4 c 

### 121 a 

### 9 8 c



### Reductions

needed for

attainment 13 b



### - 4 b



### -

MVEB Safety

Margin 0 3 0 1

2018 Attainment

inventory d 

### 91 7 7 117 9 9

Percent Change

Between 2002

and 2018 54% 5 3 % 27% 33%

a See Table s 5

- 4 and 5

- 5 in Appendix A8

b 12.5% of NO X and 3.3% of VOC from the 2018 projected emissions using Figure B

- 0

c See Table 5

- 3

d 2009 SIP Emissions columns represent emission targets for attainment; CEPAM2012 Emissions

columns represent projected emissions with adopted controls.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 39 

### Figure B

- 0

Cool 2018 Ozone Response Diagram2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 40 

### Figure B

- 1

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graph for the Cool Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

With RRFs, Offset

= 40 ppb

Ozone Design Values (ppb)

1. The upper right corner point designates the predicted 2018 peak ozone design value (88 ppb) based

on the forecasted 2018 planning emissions inventory used in the Plan as adopted in 2009 (without

new control measures): 121 tpd of VOC and 104 tpd of NO X

. 2. The x and y axes represent fractional emissions reductions from the forecasted 2018 planning

emissions inventory used in the Plan as adopted in 2009

. 3. The whole numbers on the graph represent predicted ozone design value concentrations (truncated to

whole ppb), based on modeling results for fractional VOC and NO X reductions at 5% increments.

V alues be low 85 ppb represent attainment of the federal 8

- hour ozone standard.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 41 4. The horizontal contour line s represent the District’s interpolated ppb 8

- hour ozone concentrations

based on 5% increment modeled ozone values rounded to the tenth of a ppb

. 5

. Point A identifies the percentage emission reductions (3.3% VOC and 12.5% NO X ) from 2018

emissions projected without new controls) that would have been achieved with the control strategy

identified in the plan as adopted by local districts in 2009. Point A is below 85 ppb, demonstrating that

this percentage o f reductions would result in attainment of the standard at the Cool monitoring site.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 42 

### Figure B

- 2

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs

– Auburn Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

20182013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 43 

### Figure B

- 3

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs

– Colfax Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

20182013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 44 

### Figure B

- 4

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs

– Folsom Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

20182013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 45 

### Figure B

- 5

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs

– Grass Valley Monitoring Site *

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

2018

* Grass Valley monitoring site is outside the Sacramento nonattainment area, but is a nearby

downwind site.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 46 

### Figure B

- 6

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs

– North Highlands Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

20182013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 47 

### Figure B

- 7

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs

– Placerville Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

20182013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 48 

### Figure B

- 8

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs

– Roseville Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

20182013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 49 

### Figure B

- 9

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs

– Sacramento DPM Monitor Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

20182013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 50 

### Figure B

- 10

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs

– Sloughhouse Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

20182013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix B: Photochemical Modeling

Page B

- 51 

### Figure B

- 1 1

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Ozone Monitoring Stations

2008 Ozone Monitoring Sites (County)

Sacramento Nonattainment Area Sites

1. Auburn (Placer Co.) 11. Sacramento

– Airport Rd. (Sac. Co.)

2. Colfax (Placer Co.) 12. Sacramento

– Del Paso Manor (Sac. Co.)

3. Cool (El Dorado Co.) 13. Sacramento

– T Street (Sac. Co.)

4. Davis (Yolo Co.) 14. Sloughhouse (Sac. Co.)

5. Echo Summit (El Dorado Co.) 15. Vacaville (Solano Co.)

6. Elk Grove (Sac. Co.) 16. Woodland (Yolo Co.)

7. Folsom (Sac. Co.)

8. North Highlands (Sac. Co.) Other Sites

9. Placerville (El Dorado Co.) 17. Grass Valley* (Nevada Co.)

10. Roseville (Placer Co.) 18. Jackson** (Amador Co.)

*Grass Valley site : 2007 ozone design value

= 95 ppb

, and modeling analysis is applied for 2018.

**Jackson site informational only: 2007 ozone design value

= 81 ppb, and modeling analysis is not applied.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Table of Contents

Page C

- 1 

### Appendix C: Proposed Control Measures

Appendix C contains a summary table of emission reductions by control measure and a

summary table of emission reductions by air district. This appendix also includes more

detailed information on the individual proposed control measures. The non

- regulatory

control measures are listed first and include various regional measures (on

- road and

off

- road mobile incentive programs, and an emerging/voluntary urban forest

development program) . These are followed by the regulatory control measures, which

include a variety of stationary and area

- wide source control measures. The stationary

and area

- wide source measures include write

- ups for individual air districts in the

Sacramento nonattainmen t area. The final section includes a description of further study

measures. Information on transportation control measures is included in Appendix D.

Summary Table of Emission Reductions by Control Measure

............................... C

- 4

Summary Table of Emission Reductions by Air D istrict

................................ ......... C

- 6

Summary Table of Emission Reductions for Adopted New Local Control Measures

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. C

- 7

NON

- REGULATORY CONTROL MEASURES

Regional Mobile Measures

All Mobile Source Incentive Programs

................................ .............................. C

- 9

Regional Urban Forest Control Measures

SMAQMD

- 1 Urban Forest Ai r Quality Development Program

........................ C

- 15

REGULATORY CONTROL MEASURES

Stationary and Area

- wide Source Control Measures

VOC Control Measures

Architectural Coatings

................................ ................................ .................... C

- 56

SMAQMD

- 442

EDCAQMD

- 215

FRAQMD

- 3.15

PCAPCD

- 218

YSAQMD

- 2.14

Automotive Refinishing

................................ ................................ ................... C

- 81

SMAQMD

- 459

FRAQMD

- 3.19

PCAPCD

- 234

YSAQMD

- 2.262013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Table of Contents

Page C

- 2 

### Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning

................................ ................................ ......... C

- 90

FRAQMD

- 3.14

YSAQMD

- 2.24/2.31

Graphic Arts

................................ ................................ ................................ .... C

- 97

YSAQMD

- 2.29

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products

................................ ...................... C

- 100

PCAPCD

- CM3

Natural Gas Production and Processing

................................ ....................... C

- 103

SMAQMD

- 461

NO X 

### Control Measures

Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters

................................ ........ C

- 107

YSAQMD

- 2.27

IC Engines

................................ ................................ ................................ .... C

- 110

FRAQMD

- 3.22

Water Heaters

................................ ................................ .............................. C

- 113

EDCAQMD

- 239

FRAQMD

- 3.23

PCAPCD

- CM2

YSAQMD

- 2.37

Further Study Measures

Urban Heat Island

................................ ................................ ......................... C

- 123

Alternative Energy

................................ ................................ ........................ C

- 125

Energy Efficency

................................ ................................ ........................... C

- 127

Gasoline Transfer Phase I/II



### ................................ ................................ ............. C

- 128

Lubricants

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... C

- 131

Episodic Controls

................................ ................................ .......................... C

- 1332013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary Table of Emission Reductions by Control Measure

Page C

- 3 

### Summary Table of Emission Reductions by Control Measure

Measure Name Emission

Reductions (TPD)

2018

VOC NO X

Non

- regulatory Measures

Regional Mobile Incentive Program

– On

- road 0. 0 32 0.50

Regional Mobile Incentive Program

– Off

- road 0.005 0.013

Spare The Air Program 0.059 0.046

SACOG Transportation Control Measures tbd tbd

Urban Forest Development Program 0

- 0.18

-

Total Non

- regulatory Measures 0. 10 0.56

Regulatory Measures

Stationary and Area

- wide Source Measures

Architectural Coating

SMAQMD

- 442 0.913

- EDCAQMD

- 215 0.186

- FRAQMD

- 3.15 0.004

-

PCAPCD

- 218 0.201

- YSAQMD

- 2.14 0.214

- Total Architectural Coating 1.52

Automotive Refinishing

SMAQMD

- 459 0.113

- FRAQMD

- 3.19 0.001

-

PCAPCD

- 234 0.045

- YSAQMD

- 2.26 0.058

-

Total Automotive Refinishing 0.22

Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning

FRAQMD

- 3.14 0.001

- YSAQMD

- 2.24/2.31 0.762

- Total Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning 0.76

Graphic Arts

YSAQMD

- 2.29

--- - Total Graphic Arts

---

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products

PCAPCD

- CM3 0.014

-

Total Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products 0.01

Natural Gas Production and Processing

SMAQMD

- 461 0.116

- Total Natural Gas Production and Processing 0.12

-2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary Table of Emission Reductions by Control Measure

Page C

- 4 Measure Name Emission

Reductions (TPD)

2018

VOC NO X Boilers, Steam Gen. and Process Heaters

YSAQMD

- 2.27

- 0.288

Total Boilers, Steam Gen. and Process Heaters 0.29

IC Engines

FRAQMD

- 3.22

- 0.004

Total IC Engines 0.00

Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers

EDCAQMD

- 239

- 0.003

FRAQMD

- 3.23

- 0.000

PCAPCD

- CM2

- 0.030

YSAQMD

- 2.37

- 0.240

Total Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers 0.27

Total Stationary and Area Source Measures 2.6 3 0.56

Total Regulatory Measures 2.6 3 0.56

Total Reductions 2.7 3 1.12

tbd = to be determined2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary Table of Emission Reductions by Air District

Page C

- 5 

### Summary Table of Emission Reductions by Air District

Air District

Control Measure Name (Rule No.) Emission Reductions

(TPD)

2018

VOC NO X

Stationary and Area Source Measures

Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD

Architectural Coating (SMAQMD

- 442) 0.913

-

Automotive Refinishing (SMAQMD

- 459) 0.113

- Natural Gas Production and Processing (SMAQMD

- 461) 0.116

- Total Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD 1.14 0.00

El Dorado County AQMD

Architectural Coating (EDCAQMD

- 215) 0.186

-

Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers (EDCAQMD

- 239)

- 0.003

Total El Dorado County AQMD 0. 17 0.00

Feather River AQMD

Architectural Coating (FRAQMD

- 3.15) 0.004

-

Automotive Refinishing (FRAQMD

- 3.19) 0.001

-

Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning (FRAQMD

- 3.14) 0.001

-

IC Engines (FRAQMD

- 3.22)

- 0.004

Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers (FRAQMD

- 3.23)

- 0.000

Total Feather River AQMD 0.01 0.00

Placer County APCD

Architectural Coating (PCAPCD

- 218) 0.201

-

Automotive Refinishing (PCAPCD

- 234) 0.045

-

Misc. Metal Parts and Products (PCAPCD

- CM3) 0.014

-

Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers (PCAPCD

- CM2)

- 0.030

Total Placer County APCD 0.26 0.03

Yolo

- Solano AQMD

Architectural Coating (YSAQMD

- 2.14) 0.214

-

Automotive Refinishing (YSAQMD

- 2.26) 0.058

-

Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning (YSAQMD

- 2.24/2.31) 0.762

-

Graphic Arts (YSAQMD

- 2.29)

--- -

Boilers, Steam Gen. & Process Heaters (YSAQMD

- 2.27)

- 0.288

Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers (YSAQMD

- 2.37)

- 0.240

Total Yolo

- Solano AQMD 1.03 0.53

Total Stationary and Area

- wide Source Measures 2.63 0.562013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Non

- regulatory Control Measures

Page C

- 6 

# Non

- regulatory Control Measures2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

All Mobile Source Incentive Programs

Page C

- 7 CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: Regional Mobile Measures

Control Measure Title: All Mobile Source Incentive Programs

Evaluation Date: July 29 , 2008

Control Measure Description



### Mobile sources such as trucks, automobiles, trains, boats, construction and farm

equipment are by far the largest sources of ozone precursors in the Sacramento

nonattainment area. Included under this major source category are all non

- stationary

sources from lawn mowers to jumbo jets. Th e air districts do not have authority to

directly regulate mobile source emissions through emission standards; however, the air

district incentive programs may complement state and federal regulatory efforts in

reducing mobile source emissions. These regio nal mobile source incentive measures

are implemented in all or parts of the Sacramento nonattainment area by the air

districts.

The estimated emission reductions from these proposed regional mobile incentive

measures are summarized for all mobile source i ncentive programs and disaggregated

by reductions for the on

- road mobile and off

- road mobile control measures.

Because many of the incentive measures in the categories below target the same

vehicles or engines, it is difficult to predict in advance what p ortion of the benefits

should be assigned to each of the individual strategies. Therefore, the benefits from the

collection of measures have been estimated, and all or any portion of the measures

may be implemented to achieve those benefits. Some measures noted may likewise not

be implemented if cost effective reductions are not available. However, for purposes of

establishing motor vehicle emission budgets in each of the milestone years for

transportation conformity, an explicit commitment is made to the r eductions associated

with the on

- road mobile source incentive program.

The incentive program measures noted below rely on funding provided according to

existing laws and policies. The funding sources for 2008

- 2018 include SECAT program

($33.0M) and local district Department of Motor Vehicle fees ($13.0M).

Individual Measure Descriptions

Implement a variety of incentive programs for on

- road vehicles and off

- road equipment. The

programs include:

ONMS

- LD

- 1 (ONMS

- LD

- 2). Light Duty Early Retirement

- Impleme nt an incentive based light

duty vehicle early retirement program. The program is focused on accelerating retirement of

non

- OBD

- II vehicles.

ONMS

- HD

- 1 (ONMS

- HD

- 5). SECAT

- Like Program

- The measure implements an incentive

program for NO X reduction in heavy

- duty vehicles similar to that created by the Sacramento

Emergency Clean Air Transportation (SECAT) program.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

All Mobile Source Incentive Programs

Page C

- 8 SMAQMD OFMS

- SI

- 1. Zero Emission Lawn and Garden Incentive (Residential)

- This

measure implements a year

- round continuous incentive program for the replacement of

residential spark ignited gasoline

- powered mowers with electric or zero emission alternatives in

2008

- 2018.

SMAQMD OFMS

- HD

- 1. Off

- road CI Incentive Program

- This measure implements an

incentive program for NO X r eductions through aftertreatment retrofits, engine replacement and

fleet modernization in off

- road heavy

- duty compression ignition (CI) equipment.

Control Measure Funding and Sources

There are a number of funding sources available to the Sacramento regi on for reducing

emissions. These funding sources include the Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards

Attainment Program (Carl Moyer), the Sacramento Emergency Clean Air and Transportation

Program (SECAT) and the Goods Movement Emission Reduction Program (GMERP). The

California Air Resources Board (CARB) develops guidelines and provides the funding for the

Moyer and GMERP Programs 1

. The guidelines for the SECAT Program are developed by the

Sacramento Air District (District) and approved by the boards of bo th the District and the

Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG). The funding for the SECAT Program is

provided by SACOG from federal transportation funds. The district also collects fees on vehicles

registered in Sacramento County. Two dollars of that fee is used to fund local match for the

Moyer Program and for funding school bus projects. The table below summarizes these funding

sources from 2008 to 2018.

Description Funding Sources

ONMS

- LD

- 1

AB923

- $1,000,000 annually (’09

- ’14)

SECAT

- $3,000,000 annually (‘08

- ‘18); ONMS

- HD

- 1

OFMS

- SI

- 1 DMV, AB923

– $1,000,000 annually (‘08

- ‘14)

OFMS

- HD

- 1

Targeted EIC Categories and Plann ing Inventory

The emissions reductions and percentages were also broken out for the on

- road and off

- road

segments. On

- road segments in EIC codes 710, 722, and 723. Off

- road segments include EIC

codes 860 and 870. The impact on various part of the EIC categories differ based on difference

between old and new vehicle emissions rates. Evaporative EIC categories will have different

percent effectiveness than exhaust categories.

1 We have assumed that the ARB will take credit for all Moyer and GMERP emission reductions so no District Moyer

or GMERP funding or emissions were included.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

All Mobile Source Incentive Programs

Page C

- 9 EIC

codes Description Non

- Attainment Planning Inventory

2014 2017 2018

NO X (tpd) ROG

(tpd) NO X

(tpd) ROG

(tpd) NO X (tpd) ROG

(tpd)

710 LIGHT DUTY

PASSENGER (LDA) 4.69 6.41 3.51 4.38 3.16 3.85

722 LIGHT DUTY

TRUCKS

- 1 (LDT1) 1.42 2.36 1.14 1.81 1.04 1.66

723 LIGHT DUTY

TRUCKS

- 2 (LDT2) 3.11 2.99 2.28 2.31 2.03 2.13

744 MEDIUM HEAVY

DUTY DIESEL

TRUCKS (MHDV) 5.58 0.30 4.05 0.21 3.63 0.20

746 HEAVY HEAVY

DUTY DIESEL

TRUCKS (HHDV) 12.68 0.63 9.74 0.57 8.99 0.58

860 OFF

- ROAD

EQUIPMENT 7.26 7.31 7.58 6.76 6.88 6.58

870 AGRICULTURAL

EQUIPMENT 7.33 1.41 5.80 1.09 5.32 0.99

Total 42.08 21.41 34.10 17.13 31.06 15.98

Emission Reductions

The emission reductions are based on a variety of actions taken for all on

- and off

- road

applications. The table below provides aggregate emission reductions and percentages for all

milestone years and the compliance year 2018.

Total

Year NO X ROG

Tpd % Tpd %

2014 0.634 1.51% 0.138 1.59%

2017 0.438 1.28% 0.045 0.58%

2018 0.505 1.63% 0.037 0.49%

On

- road Measures

Year NO X ROG

Tpd % Tpd %

2014 0. 529 1.93% 0.097 0.77%

2017 0.407 1.96% 0.033 0.36%

2018 0.492 2.61% 0.032 0.39%2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

All Mobile Source Incentive Programs

Page C

- 10 Off

- road Measures

Year NO X ROG

Tpd % Tpd %

2014 0.105 0.72% 0.041 0.47%

2017 0.031 0.23% 0.012 0.15%

2018 0.013 0.11% 0.005 0.07%

Needed Resources and Authority:

Potential Implementing

Agency Agency

Type Authority Origin

Air Districts Regional All Air Districts: California Health and Safety Code 44299.50

-

44299.55

SMAQMD Only: California Health and Safety Code 41014,

41062, 41081, 41082,

Other Air Districts: California Health and Safety Code: 44220

et. seq.

References:

ONMS

- LD

- 1:

TIAX. “Revised Scrappage Memo.” Memo to SMAQMD staff. May 2005.

Bureau of Automotive Repair Website: www.smogcheck.ca.gov

.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District Website: www.baaqmd.gov

Bay Area Air Quality Management District Vehicle Buy Back Program Annual Report, July 1,

2004

Consumer Assistance Program (CAP) Background Information Fact Sheet

(http://www.breatheeasier.ca.gov/be_capbackground.pdf)

Consumer Assistance Program (CAP) retirement application

(http://smogcheck.ca.gov/ftp/pdfforms/cap_app.pdf)

Vanessa Mongeon, Vehicle Buy Back program manager, BAAQMD.

ONMS

- HD

- 1:

“Currently Verified Technologies”, California Air Resources Board,

http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/verifiedtechnologies/cvt.htm , accessed on 6 July 2006.

Johnson

- Matthey EGRT Data Sheet, accessed at http://ect.jmcatalysts.com/pdf/EGRT.pdf on 7

July 2006.

Cleaire website, accessed at http://www.cleaire.com/ on 7 July 2006.

Appendix C: Cost Effectiveness Methodology, Public Fleet Rule, ARB.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

All Mobile Source Incentive Programs

Page C

- 11 Bureau of Economic, Analysis, US Department of Commerce.

http://www.bea.gov/bea/an/0797fr/table3.htm

.

“SECAT Fast Track Request 6/28/06” (e

- mail), Mike Neuenberg, 28 June 2006.

SCRT System Diesel Retrofit Emissions Control Solutions, Johnson Matthey w ebsite, accessed

17 July 2007, www.jmcatalysts.com

“Proposed New SIP Measures

– Descriptions” Chapter 5, 2007 State Implementation Plan,

CARB, April 26, 2007

-- http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2007sip/2007sip.htm

“The Carl Moyer Guidelines, Proposed 2008 Revisions “, adopted March 27, 2008

-- http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/moyer/2008gui deline_updates.htm

OFMS

- HD

- 1:

“Currently Verified Technologies”, California Air Resources Board,

http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/verifiedtechnologies/cvt.htm , accessed on 6 July 2006.

US EPA letter, 3 December 2004, http://enginecontrolsystems.com/pdf/verif_letter

- ecs2.pdf

, accessed on 10 July 2006.

Bureau of Economic, Analysis, US Department of C ommerce. http://www.bea.gov/bea/an/0797fr/table3.htm

.

Electronic communication, Richard Carlson, 19 July 2006.

“Off

- road Construction Equipment Diesel Emission Reduction Technologies, Tier 1

- 4

Implementation Schedule”

TIAX. Presentation to CAPCOA Workshop, July 2004.

“Public Workshop to Discuss Diesel Off

- Road Equipment Measure”, California Air Resources

Board pr esentation, 24 January 2006.

CARB's mail

- out # 99

- 32, Appendix B.

“Rulemaking to Consider the Final Adoption of a Proposed Regulation For In

- Use Off

- road

Diesel Vehicles”, CARB April 6, 2007

– http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/ordiesl07/ordiesl07.htm

“ Proposed New SIP Measures

– Descriptions” Chapter 5, 2007 State Implementation Plan,

CARB, April 26, 2007

-- http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2007sip/2007sip.htm

OFMS

- SI

- 1:

“Report to the Board on the Potential Electrification Programs for Small Off

- Roa d Engines”, ARB

Staff Report, 2 April 2004.

Lifetime considerations. Charlene McGhee, SMAQMD. (Mow Down Air Pollution Control Studies

through 2007)2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 12 

### Control Measure Number: SMAQMD

- 1

Control Measure Title: Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Control Measure Summary

The regional urban forest is populated by 7 million trees from over 100 different species. Each

of these tree species can be categorized as low, medium, and high biogenic volatile organic

compound (BVOC) emitting trees. Currently, 61% of the trees are considered as low emitting

trees, 28% as medium emitting trees, and 11% as high emitting trees. This control measure

proposes a targeted urban forest manage ment program to reduce total urban forest BVOC

emissions 1 by favoring the planting of low emitting trees rather than medium and high emitting

trees in the next 10 years 2

Through a combination of community education and governmental policy change over the n ext

10 years, this control measure calls for a minimum 390,000 low emitting trees to be planted that

otherwise would have been medium or high emitting trees. This tree planting strategy change

will reduce BVOC emissions by up to 0.84 tpd. The total estimat ed project cost is $1.71 million.

Although the duration of the project is 10 years, the actual benefit will last many years. To be

conservative we assume a 25 years planning period and the cost effectiveness of the BVOC

reduction is $1,291 per ton or $0.65 per pound.



### Control Measure Description

Our region, which includes the Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area, has succeeded

in creating a renowned urban forest. Our forest evolved over many years, with each generation

of our community adding trees th at met the needs of their day. In earlier years, urban trees were

planted for comfort cooling and public health benefits. More recently, the Sacramento Municipal

Utility District (SMUD) has invested millions of dollars in the strategic planting of an energ y

saving urban forest. Today we have a pressing need to improve the purity of the region’s air.

While our urban trees make a major contribution to air quality, they were not planted with this in

mind and so do not do as much as they could.

We enjoy the ben efits of 7 million trees in the urban areas of our region. These trees shade

between 12% and 14% of our urban area (McPherson 1998 and STF UFORE 2007). The

variety of threats that urban trees confront (mortality, diseases, and natural disasters) reduces

th eir average life to 40 years. Consequently, just to maintain our current canopy level, the region

will collectively need to plant 1.75 million replacement trees over the next 10 years. To optimize

the benefits of these trees for air quality, care must be t aken to select trees that will not only

grow well in Sacramento’s climate but that will also emit low levels of BVOCs.

Historically, the trees planted in our region have been 61% low

- emitting and 39% high/medium

emitting trees (Simpson 2007). This traditio nal tree selection, defined as the ‘current mix,’

determines the emission profile for the current urban forest. By emphasizing low

- emitter planting

1 BVOC emissions from trees largely consist of isoprene, monot erpenes, and methlybutenol (MBO).

However a host of other compounds are emitted in smaller quantities, referred to here as other VOCs

(OVOCs). No MBO emissions were assumed since they only occur only with a few species of pine not

used. The approach are s imilar to that used by the California Air Resources Board to account for OVOCs

(Klaus Scott, Emission Inventory Analysis Section, personal communication, 7/28/2006), which is to

estimate OVOCs as 30% of the total emissions of isoprene + monoterpenes + MBO. More information in

the Phase 1a report (Simpson 2007)

2 STF is currently working on providing tree lists for each emitter category for different jurisdictions and

will be provided by SIP submittal date to EPA.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 13 without considering the additional urban growth in the next 10 years, this control measure will at

minimum c hange the future mix to be 66% low

- emitting and 34% high/medium

- emitting trees.

To achieve this change, the control measure proposes an education program for community

and landscape industry leaders in conjunction with local government policy changes. The

planting assumptions are spelled out in the References of this measure (McPherson 1998,

Simpson 2006, Simpson 2007).

Four groups within our region

-- local governments, community groups, property owners, and

developers, either by themselves or through their landscapers

— plant almost all trees. Local

governments plant trees directly on land they control, such as parks or streets. Through the

ordinances and policies that they create, local government also influence the planting of a great

many more trees. The de velopment community plants a large number of trees for this reason.

Six tree non

- profits in our region are major tree planters and a large number of community

service groups occasionally host tree

- planting projects. Private property owners, apart from any

activities of the not

- for

- profits or local governments, are significant tree planters.

One of the requirements of a SIP control measure is that the emission reductions be verified.

This requirement presents a special challenge for a tree measure. Tree plan ting is broadly

dispersed and undertaken by a large number of individuals and organizations. There are few

reporting mechanisms and almost no tracking requirements. It is not possible today to predict

who specifically will plant the millions of trees we wi ll need or where they will be planted. It is

infeasible to strictly account for each tree planted and then to verify the planting and survival of

a statistically valid number of individual trees. These difficulties in quantification have historically

kept trees out of air quality attainment plans.

In September 2004, USEPA issued guidance giving states the opportunity to include a small

number of projects that do not have the same high level of certainty as traditional control

measures (USEPA 2004). Tree pla nting measure is specifically included as an option under this

policy. The policy guidance is clear that these non

- traditional, voluntary measure, or emerging

measures, as they have become known, still require verification and tracking with best

informatio n systems available. This is consistent with EPA policy 1 for incorporating emerging

and voluntary measures in a SIP but limiting the amount of emission reductions allowed due to

the uncertainty and untested nature of the control mechanisms. For total emerging and

voluntary measures, EPA has adopted a presumptive limit 2

, 3 of 6 percent of the total amount of

emission reduction s necessary to demonstrate attainment

. For this region, the 6% level limits

this measure to 0.18 tpd of VOC reductions. A detail ed calculation of claimable emission

reductions is described in Appendix 9.

To meet the verification requirement, the Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program will

use a system of field surveys to measure actual planting activity, tree survival and growth. This

survey system is named the Urban Forest Effects model (UFORE) and was developed by the

US Forest Service. When this survey system is employed, sample plots are established

throughout the urban forest and detailed information is collected that can be used to

characterize the entire forest. Periodic re

- sampling at milestone years will track urban forest

changes during the life of the project and demonstrate that low emitting trees are planted at a

higher rate. In addition to the UFORE system , the Urban Forest Air Quality Program will ask

participating jurisdictions and retailers to keep a comprehensive database of any tree planting or

1 “Incorporating Emerging and Voluntary Measures in a State Implementation Plan (SIP)” (OAQPS, EPA,

September 2004).

2 Ibid., p. 9.

3 The limit is presumptive in that the USEPA believes it may approve measure into a SIP in excess of the

presumptive 6 percen t where a clear and convincing justification is made by the State for a higher limit.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 14 tree sales through 2018. This will aid in quantifying and verifying planting efforts in the region

and supple ment the UFORE survey results. A more detailed description of the UFORE system

and how the tree database will aid if jurisdictions meet planting goals is presented in

Appendices 4, 5 and 6 of this measure.

At least one and perhaps several agencies and orga nizations will be responsible for the timely

completion of the activities of the control measure. In this measure, local governments will

formally guarantee by resolution the tree species composition changes needed to complete this

measure.



### Emissions estim ating and validation

To calculate emissions reductions, forest canopy emissions were estimated in two ways. The

first estimate is derived from the business

- as

- usual (BAU) scenario. In the BAU scenario, we

assumed that the current urban forest

— its species a nd size distribution of trees

-- would be

maintained and planted between now and 2018. The second estimate is the control measure

scenario (CMS). To create the CMS, we changed the mix of tree species planted to favor lower

emitting trees over higher emitting trees and recalculated emissions. The emission reduction

claim of the control measure is the difference between these two scenarios.

The reduction calculation requires much more detail, beginning with the business

- as

- usual

scenario. We had to contend with a variety of issues. The existing forest continues to grow and

expand. Trees are planted and die. Smaller trees have different effects than larger trees. Each

species of tree has a different effect on air quality. The urbanized area of the region continue s to

expand into undeveloped areas. During this transformation, pre

- development trees are often

replaced with very different urban trees. At first, the canopy cover of urbanizing areas often

drops as land is cleared for development but soon young trees gro w to create a much greater

cover.

To address these issues, the Sacramento Urban Forest Ecosystem Study (McPherson, 1998)

and the Benefit Cost Analysis of Modesto’s Municipal Urban Forest (McPherson et al, 1999)

were used to characterize current regional ur ban forest. These studies conclude that the

regional canopy is 14% in developed areas and 5% in undeveloped areas slated for

development. Tree species, size, age and health distributions documented in these studies

were applied to the Sacramento region’s c anopy coverage figures to characterize the current

urban forest. To estimate the business

- as

- usual canopy of 2018, the same ratios were applied

to the future forest. As the community expands, as trees are planted and as they grow, the BAU

scenario assumes that emitter category distribution of the urban forest remains constant.

Calculating the actual BVOC emissions of the current and projected urban forests is not

straightforward. Of the hundreds of species of trees that exist in the Sacramento region, only

handfuls have had their emissions measured. Biogenic VOC emissions are species

- specific,

and strongly dependent on the amount of leaf mass and environmental conditions such as

available sunlight. Field sampling has found large variation in BVOC emissions f or a particular

species of tree from region

- to

- region, day

- to

- day and even hour

- to

- hour. To simplify the

calculation and create a manageable data set for analysis, the 100+ tree species present in the

Sacramento regional urban forest were consolidated into eleven categories or families that have

reasonably well

- known emission profiles. Total emissions were then calculated considering the

number and size of these trees today and in 2018 (Simpson, McPherson, 2007).

The CMS was created using the same base stud ies and assumptions used in the BAU scenario

with one key difference. Since there are 7 million trees in the urban forest (61% low emitters,

28% medium, and 11% high emitters), approximately 1.75 million trees will be planted to

replace trees that die. The BAU scenario assumes that replacements trees will follow the2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 15 current mix profile. The initial study (Simpson 2007) of the control measure estimated that 1.75

million trees will be needed to be replaced over the next 10 years to maintain the current tree

c anopy cover due to the natural death of trees, tree diseases, or natural disasters. Preliminary

photochemical modeling indicated that a total of 12tpd of VOC emissions was needed to

demonstrate attainment in 2018. This established the limit of claimable re ductions of 0.84tpd 1

Therefore it was determined that the minimum number of trees needed to be diverted from the

number of 1.75 million replacement trees would be 390,000. Any future trees planted in the

region using the CMS tree species profile will secu re the emission reductions claimed in this

control measure.

In addition to tree replacement, new trees will be planted in the new developed area s to

maintain the region’s traditional urban tree canopy cover in the urban area; these may include

both suburb s and in

- fills. However, there is a degree of uncertainty on the number of additional

trees that will be planted in the Sacramento Region for the next 10 years, so the total number of

trees in 2018 will be variable (n 2018 ). These figures are summarized in Table 2.

1 EPA has a presumptive limit of 6% of the total amount of emission reduction necessary to achieve the

planning requirement for attainment demonstration purposes. The 0.8 4 was based on preliminary

modeling results. Final modeling and claimable reduction calculation details are provided in Appendix 9.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 16 

### Table 1: 2018 Business

- as

- usual forest populations

2018 Business

- as

- usual forest canopy

Tree to maintain target urban tree canopy

Units: millions Low emitting trees Medium Emitting trees High emitting trees Total

Trees

(1) 2008 trees

remaining in

2018 3.20 1.47 0.58 5.25

(2)

Replacement

Trees 1.07 0.48 0.20 1.75

(3) New Trees 0.61(n 2018 - 7) 0.28(n 2018 - 7) 0.11(n 2018 - 7) N 2018 - 7

(4) Resulting

Total 0.61n 2018 0.28n 2018 0.11n 2018 n 2018



### Table 2: Control measure results anticipated in 2018 1



### 2018 Control Measure Scenario

Trees to maintain target urban tree canopy

Units:

millions Low emitting trees Medium Emitting trees High emitting trees Total

Trees

(1) 2008

trees

remaining in

2018 3.20 (61%) 1.47 (28%) 0.58 (11%) 5.25

(100%)

(2)

Replacement

Trees 1.45 (83%) 0.21 (12%) 0.09 (5%) 1.75

(100%)

(3) New

Trees (n 2018 - 7) × 83% (83%) (n 2018 - 7) × 12% (12%) (n 2018 - 7) × 5% (5%) N 2018 - 7

(4) Resulting

Total 0.83n 2018 - 1.16 0.12n 2018 +0.84 0.05n 2018 +0.32 n 2018

(5) Emission

category, all

2018 trees 100%

For discussion purposes, these trees are moved from high and medium emitter category to a

low emitter category and are defined as ‘diverted trees 2 .’ Table 3 summarizes this change.

1 n 2018 is the total number of trees in the Sacramento Region in 2018.

2 Diverted Trees are a subset of Replacement Trees. T rees that are moved from high and medium emitter

category to a low emitter category.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 17 

### Table 3: Comparison of tree planting results in different scenarios

Units: millions Low emitting trees Medium Emitting

trees High emitting trees Total Trees

BAU tree plantings

(Minimum # of

trees) 1.07 0.48 0.20 1.75

CMS tree plantings

(Minimum # of

trees) 1.45 0.21 0.09 1.75

Diverted trees 0.39

- 0.28

- 0.11 0.00

The emission reduction claim of this control measure is entirely the result of the lowered

emission rates of 390,000 diverted trees. By 2018, the urban forest control measure is expected

to reduce BVOC emissions by at least 0.84 tpd.



### Table 4: Summary of emission reduction estimation

Emission Reduction Estimate

Units: millions Low emitting trees Medium Emitting trees High emitting trees Total Trees

Business As

Usual (BAU) 0.61n 2018 0.28n 2018 0.11n 2018 n 2018

Control Measure

Scenario (CMS) n 2018,low_emitter n 2018,medium_emitter n 2018,high_emitter n 2018

Difference in

number of trees

between BAU

and CMS Δ low_emitter =0.61n 2018 -

n 2018,low emitter Δ medium_emitter =0.28n 2018 -

n 2018,medium_emitter Δ high_emitter =0.11n 2018 -

n 2018,high_emitter

Emission factor 1

(grams/tree/day) 0.24 1.32 4.44

Emission

changes

(grams/day) ΔE 1 = 0.24 ×Δ low_emitter ΔE 2 = 1.32 ×Δ medium_emitter ΔE 3 = 4.44 ×Δ high_emitter ΔE 1 +

ΔE 2 +ΔE 3

Again, the actual number of trees in 2018 is assumed to be n 2018 . Emission per tree per day is

the product of emission rate, leaf weight, and hours of emission per day. Conservative values

assumed for the emission rates are 1, 6, and 19 for low, medium, high emitters respectively.

These emission rates are the averages of the trees from the analysis perf ormed by Simpson

and McPherson 2006 and 2007. Low emitters are defined at 1 or less, medium 1

- 10, and high is

1 Emission rates of 1,6, and 19μg per gram dry leaf weight per hour for low, medium, and high emitters

respectively were conservative estimates which used a weighted aver age based on the species present

from the 2007 UFORE study, emissions for the species in the region, and a study by Benjamin 1995,

Benjamin 1997.These emission rates are then multiplied by the estimated 40kg of dry leaf weight and 6

hours per day of emissi ons.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 18 anything over 10. The unit of the emission rate is micrograms per gram leaf per hour. The leaf

weight 1 is assumed to be on average 40 kg per tree and the hour of emission per day is 6 hours.

The net benefit of a tree moved to a lower emission category can be represented with the

following equation:



### =

=

=

Table 4 is a representation of the modeling effort used to calculate the benefits of this control

measure. It is presented as an aid to understanding the key changes that will be created by this

control measure. The actual analysis supports the conclusions which also take into account the

air temperature relationships to BVOC performed by Jim Simpson and Greg McPherson of the

US Forest Service Center for Urban Forest Research (CUFR)



### . For a detailed explanation of the

development of these claims, please refe r to Simpson and McPherson 2006 and 2007.

1 Leaf weight is used rather than the typical Leaf area index (LAI) used for emission from vegetation. The

flux of a BVOC (μg hr - 1 m - 2 [land surface area]) from a vegetative canopy is often expressed as a function

of its emission factor (μg g - 1 [dry leaf weight] hr - 1 ) and foliar density (g [dry leaf weight] m - 2 [land surface

area]. Alternatively, foliar density can be replaced with the product of species specific leaf weight (SLW, g

[dry leaf weight] m - 2 leaf area) and LAI (m - 2 leaf area/ m - 2 la nd area) in the flux equation, as done in the

Biogenic Emission Inventory GIS (BEIGIS) model developed by the California Air Resources Board.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 19 Table 5: Planning Emission Inventory and Emission Reductions

2002 2007 2018

Planning emission

inventory (tpd) for

BAU Case 69 75 83

Planning emission

inventory (tpd) for

CMS Case 69 75 82

Emission Reduction

(tpd) 0.00 0.00 0.84 1

Table 5 is the planning emission inventory and the emission reductions benefits from the tree

program. The Business

- As

- Usual case would yield a VOC inventory of 83tpd, while the Control

Measure Scenario with the emission reductions of 0.84tpd from the tree program will result in

82tpd of VOC. Although it may seem as though BVOC emissions has increased from 2002 to

2018, the increase in emissions is due to the natural growth of the urban forest and the

appropriate comparison is betwee n the planning inventory between the BAU case and the CMS

case.

Other Air Quality Benefits

It is noteworthy that the benefits of trees planted under this control measure will not cease after

the completion of the project. Trees will continue to grow and with each year create larger

emission reductions. Also of note, this analysis only examines o ne aspect of trees, BVOC

emissions, because the emissions are quantifiable by the most current science. Trees affect air

chemistry in many direct and indirect ways: pollutant absorption, temperature reduction, carbon

sequestration, and particle scrubbing. These are significant benefits of the urban forest.

Unfortunately, scientific understanding of these tree effects is not sufficient to include them in

the air quality attainment plan at this time. As the science evolves, we can look forward to trees

playin g an increasingly vital part of our region’s air quality attainment plans. The current

estimation of the NO X (Nitrogen Oxides) air quality benefits is 0.048 tpd, Ozone absorption is

0.2tpd, and Particulate Matter 2 (PM) emission reduction is 0.24 tpd, which does not currently

include avoided evaporative emissions from cooling vehicles. Until the scientific understanding

of the NO X , direct Ozone absorption and PM effects of trees becomes more complete, this

control measure is only taking the BVOC reduction cl aim.

1 This control measure is considered as an emerging and voluntary measure. The USEPA set a percent

limitation of 6 % for the emerging and voluntary measure emission reduction claims. Therefore, the

maximum emissions reduction claim of the urban forest measure is 0. 18 tpd. Appendix 9 shows the

detailed calculation for the percentage limitation of this control measure. T he range for emission

reductions for this control measure is 0

- 0.18 tpd. Because the measure requires commitments that have

not been secured the minimum benefit is 0 if no jurisdictions commit.

2 Particulate Matter , also known as particle pollution or PM, is a complex mixture of extremely small

particles and liquid droplets. Particle pollution is made up of a number of components, including acids

(such as nitrates and sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, and soil or dust particles.2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 20 Adoption year

201 4 . This control measure relies on commitments from local jurisdictions. SMAQMD is working

with the STF to identify the jurisdictions in the region that are interested in making this

commitment and to secure their approval. The final plan will identify the jurisdictions and the

adoption schedule. Currently STF anticipates several counties and cities in the region will adopt

an air quality friendly tree list which should help the region achieve emission reductions from the

tree me asure. The minimum emission benefits are set at 0 if no jurisdictions approve a formal

commitment as required by EPA guidance.

Implementation year

Planting began in 2008 and will continue through 2018. The urban forest tree compositions and

profile are pre sented in the Appendix 1 of this control measure as reference.

Cost Effectiveness

Based only on BVOC reductions, the cost effectiveness of the measure is $1,291 per ton or

$0.65 per pound. The derivation of this value is explained in Appendix 2.

Authority

This project will rely on the general police power of cities and counties to adopt policies and

ordinances that are not in conflict with general laws and that are for the protection of the general

welfare (Cal. Const. art X1, section 7.) Under this measure , each jurisdiction will create a list of

preferred low emitting trees and commit to a total number of trees by resolution and encourage

tree planting by developers or municipalities to trees on that list to be diverted to the low

emitting category. The su m of all diverted trees by all jurisdictions will total more than 390,000.

A sample report and resolution are included in Appendix 3.

Funding

The Sacramento Tree Foundation (STF) will be the lead organization responsible for

accomplishing the goals of this control measure. STF has been in the tree business for 26 years

and has an annual budget of $2.7 million. The Sacramento Tree Foundation receives its funding

from membership, partner agencies, grants and stipends, and private donations. STF efforts

have grown steadily over the years and there is every expectation that it will continue to grow in

the foreseeable future. STF intends to seek grant funding to complete this project but will use

existing resources from its operations if no additional funding ca n be secured. The estimated

budget for the project is $1.71 million during the next 10 years, about $171,000 per year. In STF

current operations, they dedicate $475,000 per year to various education projects, $85,000 per

year to advocacy and $700, 000 per y ear to tree planting. A letter from STF to commit the

necessary funds and resources from its operations can be found in Appendix 6.

Implementation

To achieve the objectives of this control measure, STF will develop an education program for

community organi zations, local governments, tree not

- for

- profits, landscape industry

professionals and retail tree distributors. The education program will continue for the life of the

control measure and will result in a reduction in the planting rate of medium and high emitting

trees.

District’s Role

– Oversight Agency

The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District will oversee and review

milestone reports, emission reduction calculations, conclusions and recommendations set forth

by the Sacramento Tree Fou ndation to ensure that the tree program is making progress and will2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 21 meet its emission reductions targets. STF will report to SMAQMD as information are collected

and analyzed. SMAQMD is currently working to make available a program evaluation document

that describes the administrative details associated with the process and informational

requirements the district will use to assess the success of the control measure. The program

evaluation document will be included in the final Sacramento Regional 8

- hour Ozo ne Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan.

Verification and Tracking

There will be two methods used to demonstrate that this control measure has been successfully

completed. The primary effort will utilize the urban forest assessment tool develope d by the US

Forest Service known as UFORE. This tool will follow changes in the forest population and will

allow changes in emissions to be calculated. Additional steps will be taken to verify the results

of the UFORE analysis. The most significant of thes e steps will be to use high

- resolution aerial

images to verify regional forest canopy coverage.

In conjunction with the education program, the STF will collect both historical and current

planting and sales information from a variety of sources in the reg ion. These will demonstrate

that relative planting species distributions have changed from the pre

- project species

distributions, that the 390,000 diverted trees have been planted and that the BVOC reductions

needed have been reached. The number of diverte d trees will be calculated by applying the

ratios of pre

- and post

- project planting rates of the three emission categories to the actual

number of trees planted.

Although the measure only commits to achieve reductions by the attainment year, 2018, to

monit or progress the STF established reasonable planting rates. To monitor progress and

validate the emission reductions, the STF will conduct a UFORE analysis supplemented with

the Tree Counting analysis for every milestone year and the attainment year, 2018. The results

from the UFORE analysis in conjunction with methods used in CUFR’s Phase 1a report will be

used to compare with emission reduction estimates. The details of the verification and tracking

are described in Appendices 4, 5 and 6.

Enforcement

Local governments electing to participate in this measure will adopt binding commitments to

reach planting goals within their jurisdictions and to specify a tree list that contains

preponderance of low emitting trees. Field surveys will substantiate the accompl ishments within

the jurisdiction of participating agencies and the region as a whole. STF will notify jurisdictions if

they are not meeting milestone targets. Jurisdictions are then responsible to committing to

potentially take corrective actions, and use additional resources to reach their goals.

Remedying Emission Credit Shortfall

Because of the uncertainties associated with implementation and validation of this urban forest

measure, if this strategy falls short of its emission reduction target, the reductions will be

backstopped and replaced by the other strategies that provide reductions surplus to those

required to demonstrate attainment.

References:

Benjamin, Michael, Low

- Emitting Urban Forests: A Taxonomic Methodology for Assigning

Isoprene and Monoterpene Emission Rates, September 19952013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 22 Benjamin, Michael, Estimating the Ozone

- Forming Potential of Urban Trees and Shrubs, Oct

1997

California Air Resources Board, Methods to Find the Cost

- Effectiveness of Funding Air Quality

Projects, May 2005

Ca lifornia Air Resources Board, California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality

- 2006 Edition,

pg. 479.

McPherson, Greg, Structure and Sustainability of Sacramento’s Urban Forest, Journal of

Arboriculture, July 1998.

Mendes, Celso and Reed, Daniel, Monitori ng Large Systems via Statistical Sampling, University

of Illinois, September, 2002.

Sacramento Shade Program by the Sacramento Municipal Utility District.

http://www.smud.org/residen tial/saving/trees/index.html

Sacramento Tree Foundation, UFORE Field Collection Packet, June 2007.

Sacramento Tree Foundation, UFORE Random Plot Definitions,

ftp://69.62.222.149/RandomPlot.kml, June 2007.

Simpson, Jim and McPherson, Greg, Air Quality Effects of a Regional Urban Tree Planting

Program for use in an Urban Forestry

- based SIP Measure. Center for Urban Forest Research,

PSW, USDA Forest Service, October 2006.

ftp://69.62.222.149/UFFCA Phase1A AQ Report SMAQMD, final, 10

- 12

- 06.pdf

Simpson, Ji m and McPherson, Greg, Preliminary evaluation of potential air quality benefits of

trees within SIP guidelines: Revisions to Phase 1. Center for Urban Forest Research, PSW,

USDA Forest Service, May 2007.

ftp://69.62.222.149/2007

- 009Phase1aPrelimEval.pdf

US Environmental Protection Agency, Incorporating Emerging and Voluntary Measure in a State

Implementation Plan (SIP), September 2004

US Forest Service UFORE Project. http://www.ufore.org/ , 2000

UFORE Report for Atlanta, Georgia, US Forest Service,

http://www.fs.fed.us/ne/syracuse/Data/State/data_GA_atl_ufore.htm, 1997.

UFORE Report for Brooklyn, New York, US Forest Service,

ftp://69.62.222.149/Brook lynUFOREReport,gtrne290.pdf, September, 2000.

UFORE Report for Houston, Texas, US Forest Service,

ftp://69.62.222.149/HoustonTFSReport.pdf, September, 2005.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone t Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 23 

## Appendix 1: Forest Composition and Tree Profile

This table presents the minimum number of trees and tree compositions expected in the urban forest for the business as usual and control measure scenarios.

The determination of growth, death, and expansion of the urban forest is a very complicated science. This table does not represent a SIP commitment. It should

only be used as a guide for planning purposes. We assume that a quarter of the trees in the current forest will be removed du e to mortality and/or other reasons.

The numbers for the interim years are linearly interpolated between 2007 and 2018.

Program

Year Year Business

- As

- Usual Minimum

Tree Planting Control Measure Program

Minimum Tree Planting

Units: million Low

- E Medium

- E High

- E Low

- E Medium

- E High

- E

0 2007 4.27 1.96 0.77 4.27 1.96 0.77

1 2008 4.27 1.96 0.77 4.31 1.93 0.76

2 2009 4.27 1.96 0.77 4.34 1.91 0.75

3 2010 4.27 1.96 0.77 4.38 1.88 0.74

4 2011 4.27 1.96 0.77 4.41 1.86 0.73

5 2012 4.27 1.96 0.77 4.45 1.83 0.72

6 2013 4.27 1.96 0.77 4.48 1.81 0.71

7 2014 4.27 1.96 0.77 4.52 1.78 0.70

8 2015 4.27 1.96 0.77 4.55 1.76 0.69

9 2016 4.27 1.96 0.77 4.59 1.73 0.68

10 2017 4.27 1.96 0.77 4.62 1.71 0.67

11 2018 4.27 1.96 0.77 4.66 1.68 0.67

Program

Year Year Business

- As

- Usual Minimum

Tree Planting Control Measure Program

Minimum Tree Planting

Units:% Low

- E Medium

- E High

- E Low

- E Medium

- E High

- E

0 2007 61.0 28.0 11.0 61.0 28.0 11.0

1 2008 61.0 28.0 11.0 61.5 27.6 10.9

2 2009 61.0 28.0 11.0 62.0 27.3 10.7

3 2010 61.0 28.0 11.0 62.5 26.9 10.6

4 2011 61.0 28.0 11.0 63.0 26.5 10.5

5 2012 61.0 28.0 11.0 63.5 26.2 10.3

6 2013 61.0 28.0 11.0 64.0 25.8 10.2

7 2014 61.0 28.0 11.0 64.5 25.5 10.0

8 2015 61.0 28.0 11.0 65.0 25.1 9.9

9 2016 61.0 28.0 11.0 65.5 24.7 9.8

10 2017 61.0 28.0 11.0 66.0 24.4 9.6

11 2018 61.0 28.0 11.0 66.5 24.0 9.52013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 24 

## Appendix 2: Cost Effectiveness Estimates

As living organisms, the air quality effects of trees are always changing. Trees grow, air

temperature varies, sunlight changes, and soil moisture fluctuates, leaves come and go with the

seasons. Three quantities are necessary to calculate the cost effectiveness of a tree SIP

measure. This Appendix examines the derivation of values for annual emissions reduction,

project cost and life of the improvem ents. These values are then used in the standard CARB

mobile source equation to determine the cost effectiveness of the measure.

The following table presents four cases for consideration. In each case, controlling parameters

for cost effectiveness are vari ed within a range of values deemed reasonable for this control

measure. Case 2 has been selected as the most reasonable.

Table 2.1 Cost Effectiveness Scenarios

Emissions Inventory for Cost Effectiveness

Emissions reductions, shown as Pollutants in the table, were developed by the Center for Urban

Forest Research (Simpson and McPherson 2006, 2007) and are described in detail in the body

of the control measure. These represent the peak values obtained during a year. To determine

the cost effectiveness of the measure, we had to decide what pollutants to include in the total

reductions.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 25 This control measure makes claims for BVOC reductions but the measure will also reduce NO X and particulate matter. Table 2.1 presents the full BVOC reduction estimated both with and

without the addition of the other criteria pollutants.

Annualizing Emissions Reductions

The cost effectiveness is based on the annual emission reduction. For a typical control

measure, this is the daily emission reduction multiplied by the number of days of operation

during a year. This straightforward approach does not properly characterize this control

measure. Biogenic emission reductions are not the same all year. The reductions are related to

photosynthesis, leaf area and ambient temperature. The reductions from this control measure

peak during the summer ozone season and fall to near zero during the winter because many

trees lose their leaves during the winter and due to higher temperatures during the summer

ozone season the emission benefits are the greatest during this time. If we calculate the cost

effectiveness using the strict annual sum, the effect of trees during summer ozone season is

lost. On the other hand, if we apply the peak summer reduction across the entire year, the cost

effecti veness is dramatically over

- stated when compared to other measures.

The following chart is adapted from the California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality. It

represents the changes in statewide biogenic emissions during a typical year.

Figure 2.1 Month ly Biogenic Emissions

To determine the cost effectiveness of a variable reduction, we assumed that emission

reduction was proportional to emission generation as presented in this chart. From this, the

average annual reduction would be 37% of the peak valu e. To incorporate the significance of

ozone season reductions, we also examined the average May through September reduction,2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 26 which is 69% of the peak value. We decided that the most accurate comparison was to use the

lower 37% figure to annualize the peak reductions. This percentage appears in the Cost

Effectiveness Scenarios table as the Annualizing Factor. The annual tonnage used for

comparison purposes is the peak daily tonnage reduction multiplied by the annualizing factor

and multiplied by 365.

Projec t Cost

Several aspects of the project cost are summarized in the following table.

Table 2.2 Project cost

Table 2.2 estimates both the direct cost of the control measure. We assume that tree planting is

not a project cost because this control measure is not committing to plant additional trees to

expand the urban forest. Also, planting low emitters does not co st more than medium or high

emitters. The total expenditures necessary to complete this control measure are estimated to be

$1.71 million. These costs include local government costs required to update current ordinances

to specify low

- emitting trees, the c ost to secure commitments from tree retail sales outlets to

emphasize the sale of low emitting trees, field survey inspections, an extensive community and

landscape industry education program as well as general program management.

Cost Effectiveness Calc ulation

The formula provided by the California Air Resources Board for emission reduction cost

effectiveness (CARB 2005) is:2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 27 CRF, the capital recovery factor, is used to annualize the cost of a long

- term project. Longer

lived projects have lower recovery factors. The capital recovery factor is calculated with this

equation:

where i is the discount rate and n is project life.

For this control measure, the discount rate, i, is 7% and improvement life, n, is the 25

- year average tree life. The resulting value is $1,291 per ton or $0.65 per pound, assuming that NO X

and PM 10 reductions are 0.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 28 

## Appendix 3: Sample Report and Resolution for Local Governments

November 2008

ADOPT REGIONAL AIR Q UALITY CONTROL MEASU RE THAT INCLUDES URBAN

FORESTS TO ATTAIN AI R QUALITY GOALS

ISSUE:

The regional air quality board has included trees in the State Implementation Plan control

measure to improve air quality. The City/County of _______ is requested to adopt measures

recommended by t he Sacramento Tree Foundation to contribute to the overall improvement of

the region’s air quality. By managing the number and types of trees planted in our jurisdiction,

we can reduce the formation of ozone and improve air quality. Minimum participation i ncludes

adopting a best tree list for our jurisdiction and agreeing to numerical tree planting goals.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve a resolution adopting the preferred air quality control measures that include planting an

agreed upon number and type of trees an d utilizing a tree list to guide species composition and

diversity.

DISCUSSION:

Our region is remarkably well suited to capture the benefits trees provide. Our hot summers and

cool winters enable us to maximize the benefits of shade trees through energy savings, air

quality improvement, storm water runoff retention, and community enhancement.

In 2006, City/County of _______________ passed the resolution to adopt the regional

Greenprint, a four decade program of incremental investments in our community tr ees, that will

double the regional tree canopy and result in more livable communities through the best urban

forest.

One key objective of the Greenprint is to reduce the costs and increase the benefits of tree

ownership by strategically placing trees tha t are well

- suited to our climate, soil and site

conditions in locations where they can best reduce energy consumption, shade infrastructure,

and improve water quality.

Our region has the challenge of unhealthful levels of ozone pollution. The U.S. Forest Service

Center of Urban Forest Research (CUFR) and Sacramento Tree Foundation (Tree Foundation)

conducted a study about the effects of trees on ozone air pollution and found that urban forestry

can be an important part of our air quality attainment strateg y. This study was sponsored by the

regional Air Quality Districts and funded with the grant from Sacramento Area Council of

Governments (SACOG) and California Department of Transportation (CalTrans).

The scientific community generally agrees that trees improve air quality. It has been measured

that some trees

- because of leaf canopy size, pollen, amount of time leaves are present on the

trees and levels of biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOC’s)

- provide more benefits than

others. The net effect d epends on the species, location and ultimate size of the trees chosen.

For this reason, our jurisdiction can encourage the planting of the best suited trees for our

climate combined with the best air quality characteristics to improve local and regional ai r

quality.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 29 In several important ways, air quality attainment plans are predictive. In adopting the plans, the

air districts, and by extension the member jurisdictions, must estimate the air quality

improvement steps that will be taken in the future. These estimates are then used to predict air

quality progress. In areas where continued air quality improvement has been difficult, the

estimates tend to evolve into goals and in situations with severe air quality, may evolve into

mandates.

To know the net effe ct of the new trees on regional air quality, accurate estimates of number

and type of trees planted in our jurisdiction must be known. Our jurisdiction is being asked to

commit to the best tree profiles and a minimum number of trees that will be planted in the

jurisdiction on both public and private property during the next decade. It is important to note

that the best trees commitment includes both public and private tree planting. As this

commitment will become part of a federally mandated regional air qu ality attainment plan,

regional partners agreeing to the ratio are expected to be successful.

To prepare for this planting program, council / board authorization is requested to participate

with our regional partners and adopt the list of tree species tha t will grow well in our jurisdiction

and be the most capable of air quality improvement. This list will serve as our recommended

tree list to be used by staff for making decisions on species selection where trees within the

City/County are specified.

Staf f and the Tree Foundation have estimated that the managed planting of trees within the

jurisdiction over the next ten years will allow us to meet the air quality control measure target.

The best trees list may be amended as appropriate over time to include new species and

research that enhances our choices for planting the best trees.

Limited exposure is present as is the case with other Council/Board decisions. After adoption,

potential enforcement may be initiated by citizens and or/EPA if project goals a re not met

pursuant to the Clean Air Act (42USCA Section 7413 and 7604).

As we have the numbers of trees to plant (February 09?) : The Council/Board has adopted the regional Greenprint Initiative to double the regional tree

canopy over the next four decade s. The regional goal to meet this effort is to plant 5 million

trees by 2025, increasing in our regional canopy from about 12% to 25%. The 2009 Tree

Foundation study reveals that our jurisdiction has the capacity to plant ___ trees. Staff has

concluded tha t the Council/Board can confidently commit to the planting of ___ trees (__ % of

capacity) in our jurisdiction. Of the trees planted by the fall of 2018 the species composition will

meet the list of best trees for air quality control measure compliance.

EN VIRONMENTAL CONSIDER ATIONS:

Action in adopting this resolution is exempt from CEQA as it does not specifically result in a

project. This decision will be re

- visited at such time as a project as defined by CEQA is

considered.

RECOMMENDATION APPRO VED BY:



### Ex ecutive __________________________

Title _______________________________

Key Staff:___________________________2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 30 

### DRAFT SAMPLE RESOLUTION FOR AIR QUALITY CONTROL MEASURE



## RESOLUTION NO

.

_____ ADOPTED BY

________________

On Date of ________________

RESOLUTION SUPPORTIN G LOCAL COMPONENT OF THE REGIONAL URBAN F OREST

TO ATTAIN REGIONAL S TATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AIR QUALITY CON TROL

MEASURES GOALS

WHEREAS , the City/County of __________ recognizes the importance of tree canopies and

their contributions to clean air and water, stormwater runoff reduction, energy conservation,

improved public health, and increased property values; and

WHEREAS , the City/County of ______ have adopted the regional Greenprint initiative to

optimize the tree canopy and benefits of trees in our region; and

WHEREAS , current science concludes that our enhanced urban forest will improve both local

and regional air quality; and

WHEREAS , the species composition and number of trees planted during the coming years will

determine the ne t air quality improvement our region can expect; and

WHEREAS , a select group of tree species are best suited to the climate and soils of our

jurisdiction; and

WHEREAS , a list has been created of the best trees for our climate and air quality for both

pub lic and private trees that will be planted in our jurisdiction; and

WHEREAS, we recognize that by participating in the regional urban forest control measure

through the fall of 2018 to attain air quality goals that we are expected to succeed and potential

enforcement can be initiated by citizens and or/EPA if project goals are not met pursuant to the

Clean Air Act (42USCA Section 7413 and 7604).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE I T RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL/BOARD OF THE CITY/COUNTY

OF :

The Council/Board hereby authorizes the City Manager/County Executive to create a policy to

regulate the planting of an agreed upon number of trees of certain species composition and use

the preferred list of best trees suitable for climate and air quality to require specific tree planting

associated with permitted projects on both public and private properties within our jurisdiction;

and,

Hereby authorizes the City Manager/County Executive to implement the best tree list where

appropriate within the operations of the jurisdiction; and,2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 31 Hereby expects all persons planting trees within the jurisdiction to choose an appropriate tree

from this best tree list; and,

Hereby commits that the trees be planted within the jurisdiction prior to the fall of 2018 will be in

accordance with the Urban Forest Air Quality Control Measure as part of our region’s federal air

quality attainment plans. (; and,)

As the numbers of trees to plant by jurisdiction after February 09

– Hereby commits that ___ trees will be planted in within the jurisdiction by 202 5 to meet the

Greenprint goal of doubling the regional tree canopy.

Passed and Adopted by the Council/Board of the City/County of _________ at a regular

meeting thereof held on the ___________by the following roll call votes:

__________________________ ________ 

### Presiding Officer

ATTEST:

__________________________________ Clerk______________________________2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 32 

## Agenda Notice:

Item # _______

- Local Component of the Regional Urban Forest Project to Attain Air Quality

Conformity

Authorize creation and implementation of a recommended list of tree species2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 33 

### Appendix 4: Verification and Tracking

This control measure proposes to gradually change the percentages of the different tree species

that make up the urban forest of the Sacramento region. Consequently, to gauge the success of

the control measure, an inventory of the urban forest needs to be created and maintained.

Changes in the tree inventory over time will demonstrate the success of this control measure.

It is also important to track curr ent conditions of the urban forest. To create this SIP measure,

we based emissions calculations on the best information that we have today. This information is

several years old and, in some cases, was derived for an urban forest of our neighboring region.

To assure decision

- makers that the estimates are reliable, an updated canopy inventory must

be created.

Counting tree plantings is a tempting short cut to estimating change in a forest canopy, but

necessary to quantify jurisdictional efforts and private o wner planting behaviors. Therefore

counting trees will be used as a supplement to the UFORE Survey System to verify the order of

magnitude of tree planting efforts. Unfortunately, planting rates are only one aspect of canopy

change. Survival, maintenance a nd growth are also key factors that can often out

- weigh the

impact of young tree planting.

The urban forest has many parameters that need to be tracked. On a per tree basis, it is

important to know t ree species, size, location, and health. This informatio n is used to predict the

future growth rate, survival, and leaf area of the tree. By accumulating this information for all

trees in the forest, the species distribution and average age, size, health, and total leaf area can

be determined. This composite in formation can then be used to determine the air quality, energy

reduction, water purification, and real estate value effects of the forest. This information needs

to be regularly updated to understand how the forest is changing as a result of this measure.

UFORE Survey System

By current estimate, there are 7 million trees in the region’s urban forest. Measuring each of

these trees would be a monumental undertaking. Recognizing this impracticality, the US Forest

Service has developed an information system th at accurately assesses an urban forest by

sampling a limited number of locations throughout the forest. The system is named the Urban

Forest Effects model (UFORE).

UFORE is a forest

- modeling and inventory suite that allows users to calculate urban forest d ata,

including estimates of the ecosystem services and emissions. The results are based on the tree

and site information collected from 300 field survey plots selected randomly throughout the

region. Each field survey plot is 1/10 acre in size. A detailed, structured data collection protocol

is used to ensure the field information can be statistically employed to determine the make

- up of

the entire forest from this relatively small sample. UFORE calculates species and age

distribution of the urban forest an d also estimates the monetized benefits of the forest. The

species and forest structure information are used to calculate emissions changes. The

additional information that UFORE produces will be used to calculate costs and benefits of

maintaining the urba n forest. UFORE is currently in use and has produced satisfactory peer

reviewed results in several communities in North America including Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston,

Calgary, Houston, Jersey City, New York City, Philadelphia, Syracuse, and Toronto. Links t o online reports for Atlanta, New York City and Houston are listed in the References of this control

measure.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 34 The survey area of the assessment is the urbanized area of each of the cities and counties in

the non

- attainment area with the addition of the res pective spheres of influence. The spheres

are included to allow changes to be tracked as urbanization grows. Sample plots are assigned

within this large area using a random generator supplied by the US Forest Service. It is critical

to the accuracy of the results that the plot assignment be completely random. Any thoughtful

relocation of the plots will invalidate the results of the assessment.

This randomness can be unsettling. The first UFORE assessment has been started and the

plots have been located. Man y plots are located in places that intuitively make sense, like front

yards, parks and golf courses. Other plots have landed in areas that are very unlikely to have

any trees ever, like freeways, runways or in Folsom Lake . Taken as a whole though, these pl ots

average out the variety of land uses that comprise our region and will give an accurate

assessment of the urban forest. A Keyhole Markup Language (KML) layer file is provided in the

References so that reviewers can examine the plot locations using a ge o

- referenced imaging

system, in this case, Google Earth.

It should be noted that UFORE algorithms used to estimate BVOC emissions are standard but

estimates of biomass are based on leaf area and fresh weight to dry weight relationships may

not be character istic of trees in this region. Local tree biomass data will be used in conjunction

with the UFORE survey system to provide the most accurate information and emission

reduction calculations.

UFORE results compared to previous SUFES results

An initial UFORE study was conducted in 2007 to define the initial conditions of the region’s

urban forest. In comparison with the 1998 SUFES study, results are comparable. The SUFES

(Sacramento Urban Forest Ecosystem Study) was the first attempt to unders tand and estimate

the tree species distribution and canopy cover of the region. There are several minor differences

between two studies but their results and conclusion are similar. The SUFES (1998) found that

the urban area tree canopy cover was 13

- 15% an d six million trees in the urban area of the

Sacramento region. It also found that the leading two species are live oak and valley oak. These

two species accounted for 8.2% and 7.2% of trees in the urban forest. The UFORE study (2007)

found that tree canop y was 12.1% and seven million trees in the region, while valley oak (10%)

and live oak (6.7%) were the leading species in the Sacramento urban forest.

Field Surveys

The Sacramento Tree Foundation (STF), working with the tree organizations throughout the

r egion, will lead the regional UFORE assessment. Seventy

- five volunteers have been recruited

from the six

- county region. Each volunteer has undergone five hours of training before starting

field survey work. The training covers each of more than 40 paramete rs that are recorded at

every plot during tree species identification and the plot assessment process.

The volunteers are organized into three member teams and then each team is assigned

approximately 10 plots located close to each other. Teams find the pl ot locations using a

combination of aerial photographs and GPS coordinates. Teams complete their plot

assessments over four weeks. All information is recorded on field data sheets that are collected

by the STF.

Each plot measures 1/10 acre. A map of the UF ORE study area is included in Appendix 10.

Teams collect six separate types of information from each plot, including square footage of each

ground cover type, buildings, impervious surfaces, shade, shrubs and the location information of

reference objects s o that re

- sampling can be completed accurately. A drawing is created of2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 35 each plot. Following this, each tree on the plot is located, measured and 10 data points of

information are collected about the size, species, health, and leaf area.

Teams spend an av erage of 2 hours per plot measuring, drawing and recording the data. To

complete a plot assessment, the team will first locate the center of the plot. The center is

marked and then a scale drawing is made. The actual land use category of the site is record ed.

Next the ground cover areas are drawn to scale. The angle and distance to reference objects

are recorded on the drawing. Each tree on the site is then carefully located on the drawing. The

next step is to record the various tree parameters on a tree da ta sheet. A separate tree data

sheet is filled out for each tree. Once all the tree information is obtained, the areas of shade

canopy are also recorded on the plot drawing. Finally, the actual areas of each classification are

calculated and recorded on th e data sheets. Field data sheets are presented in Appendices 5, 6

and 7.

The plot drawings are necessary so that the results can be verified. To ensure the accuracy of

the field collection data, a limited number of re

- surveys are conducted by trained staff from STF.

Each team will have at least one plot inspected. If the re

- inspection finds that errors have been

made, all of the team’s work will be re

- inspected. Sample plot data collection forms are included

with this proposal.

As the plot survey informatio n is returned to the STF, it is first reviewed for completeness and

cross

- checked to catch errors that may have been made. The data is then imported to an

electronic database. Once all plot information has been entered, the data is presented to the US

Fore st Service who analyzes the information and creates the statistical report on forest

composition and monetized benefits. The results will then be returned to the STF and used to

calculate BVOC changes.

The STF completed the initial 300 plot survey during s ummer 2007. The entire survey will be

repeated on the same 300 plots in 2011, 2014 and 2017. The data from subsequent surveys will

be compared with earlier surveys to monitor progress of this control measure. The Sacramento

Tree Foundation will report on p rogress and post the report on its Sacramento Tree Foundation

website and air district websites. Information will be available to the public during milestone

years and attainment year.

This control measure proposes additional information collection and ana lysis as a cross check

of the UFORE results. Historical and future sales data from tree retailers and tree wholesalers

will be collected. Local governments and tree planting groups will also be asked to report as

much information as possible about historic al and future tree species and planting locations.

STF will use this information to calculate changes in tree planting activities. Historical species

and planting activities will establish the Business

- as

- usual case for each entity. As new data

arrives, the calculations will be repeated based on the new information. A difference should

slowly accumulate that demonstrates the successful implementation of the control measure

education program.

County and State level agricultural agencies will also be polled for information. Individual

property owners will be encouraged to record their tree planting activities on a website

developed to encourage participation in the regional planting goal. While this expanded net of

information collection is extensive, it wil l never, as a voluntary, convenience sample, have the

statistical accuracy needed to demonstrate performance of the control measure. It will, however,2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 36 be a meaningful way to double

- check the accuracy of the field survey effort and should alert

reviewers to problems with the effort in time to correct them prior to 2018.

As a final step of data collection, high

- resolution satellite imagery will also be employed to

ensure the accuracy of the field sample information. The science of aerial tree sampling is

rapi dly evolving. It may be possible during the life of this control measure to replace some

components of data collection with aerial survey image processing.

Tree Counting

In addition to using UFORE as a tool to measure the change in the tree canopy, tree c ounting

will be used to support and verify the results we obtain from the UFORE Survey Studies.

Realizing that planting rates are only one aspect of tree canopy change, tree counting can

support quantifying regional efforts. It will also aid participating jurisdictions in measuring and

verifying their implementation strategies and planting activities through 2018.

Jurisdictions will keep an extensive database of their tree plantings which will include

information such as the number of trees, species, locat ion, age, and whether or not it is a new

or a replacement tree.

Data collected from the tree retailers and nurseries in the region will provide information about

private owner tree planting behaviors, such as the number of trees planted by private owners

and if a shift from historical planting rates occurred.

The information collected from jurisdictions, and retailers will be used to supplement the UFORE

study, verifying tree planting rates and order of magnitudes of the tree species changes. Figure

A

- 4a shows a sample flow chart to track planting efforts by participating jurisdictions and private

owners. The control measure recognizes that there is uncertainty whether or not trees sold by

the retailers were actually planted within the region or whether or not the trees were even sold

by the retailers in the region, but since it is used only to verifying orders of magnitude to

supplement the UFORE study, the assumption is that all of these trees will be planted within the

region. Attempts will be made to ve rify and collect information from private owner tree plantings

by providing avenues to register the tree purchase with the Sacramento Tree Foundation.

Data Collection Budget

The budget for monitoring activity and for all remaining project management is $32 0,000 over

the project life.

Application of Collected Information

The information collected during the UFORE effort will be used to create a profile of the urban

forest. This snapshot will reveal the region’s canopy cover percentage, the number, size, and

types of trees that make up the urban forest. This forest composition information will be

analyzed using the models that were the basis of this control measure (Simpson & McPherson,

2006 and 2007). The models will yield an emission profile for this snapsho t of the forest.

Over the years, trees will be planted and removed. Mostly low emitting trees will be planted but

some medium and high emitting trees will also be planted. If the control measure is being2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 37 successfully implemented, each iteration of the UFOR E analysis will show that low emitting

trees are becoming a higher percentage of the forest population. Gridded emission inventory

modeling of the air basin using the updated tree species information will at first show a slight

change in BVOC emissions. Wi th each new canopy assessment, a larger difference between

the current forest and the unaltered forest will appear. This difference will be the measure of the

success of the control measure.

Potential Issues

It usually takes time for the UFORE tracking sys tem to make intuitive sense to reviewers, given

the small sampling frequency of the survey. The area of the plots totals 30 acres and the

urbanized area of the region totals more than 300,000 acres. This means that only 1/10,000 of

the region is being samp led. Fortunately, in random sample statistical analysis, the error bounds

of the result are a function of the deviation of the samples and the number of samples taken and

not dependent on the size of population (Mendes 2002). For the UFORE analysis, the sa mpling

fraction of 300 plots will provide an uncertainty in the results of 7.5% with a 99% confidence.

This accuracy changes very little for a broad range of sampling fractions as shown on the

following chart.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 38 Figure A

- 4a Tree Planting Verification Flow Chart2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 39 This system will only produce this accuracy for the entire urban forest, taken as a whole. The

results for smaller stratifications, or sub

- areas within the larger sample area, can be extracted

from the data, but the accuracy will be lower as there will be fewer plots in the subdivision. A

sample size of 30 will produce results of 24% uncertainty, 100 samples yield 13% accuracy.

From the data collected, stratified results will be used to inform each participating local

governmental jurisdiction of its progress in reaching the canopy goals it has adopted.

A second concern is typically raised about the accuracy of the field measurements. We intend to

minimize these errors through volunteer training and re

- surveying a samp le of each team’s

work. The large number of people involved in the study also tends to reduce magnitude of

systematic measurement errors. When a judgment is required, in the case of leaf area for

example, a range of estimates always results. Each estimator will have a bias, sometimes

higher and sometimes lower, than the actual value. Since many estimators are involved, the

bias is averaged out of the final result. This is a practical application of the Law of Large

Numbers.

Tree species identification is di fficult. As correct tree species identification is critical to the

results of the study, teams are encouraged to collect leaf samples from any unknown trees for

review by urban foresters. Tree datasheets will be amended based on the decision of the

foreste r.

The final major concern that needs to be addressed arises from use of defined, long

- term

reference plots. There are reasonable concerns that non

- random changes will occur in

reference plots because of the presence of the sampling teams and the public in formation that

is distributed. In other words, property owners may decide to plant or maintain trees just

because they realize that their land is part of a reference plot. This activity would not be random

and so the plot would no longer represent the enti re region. We plan to examine this possibility

during re

- sampling. Testing will be completed to determine if new random plots need to be

created or if the original plots continue to accurately reflect the regional value.

1 10 100 1000 10000 100000

1 6 11 16 21 26 31 Samples

Uncertainty, % (99% confidence) Samples vs Uncertainty2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 40 

### Appendix 5: Tree Surve y Sheet2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 41 

### Appendix 6: Funding Agreement Letter2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 42 

### Appendix 7: Contingency Tree Measure Strategies

This control measure proposes, in a general sense, that participating groups can plant hundreds

of thousands of trees during a few short years as a result improved community education and

strategic changes to the policies of local governments. If a participating group is falling behind

on its tree planting commitments, there are many additional tools an d practices from the urban

forest community that can be implemented to assist in reaching the goals. A sampling of tools

includes:

Tree planting contests with quality prizes for the most successful groups:

o Individuals

o Neighborhoods

o Business districts

o Organ ization

Sponsor tree plantings in communities and on public land:

o Parks, roadways and near building

o Homes of seniors

o Tree removal mitigation planting

Free or reduced cost trees:

o Partner with electric utilities for planting free energy saving trees: SMUD and now

PG&E

o Offer rebate coupons for purchasing low emitting trees

Reduce cost of tree establishment:

o Offer utility rebates for tree planting based on reducing long

- term water consumption

o Host tree planting, pruning and maintenance clinics to improve cano py health

Reduce demand for medium and high emitting trees:

o Work with the landscape design industry to change specifications

o Communicate with residents about the better trees

Restrict the availability of medium and high emitting trees:

o Work with local tree suppliers to reduce or eliminate stocking of medium and high

emitting trees

o Work with the county agricultural commissioner to quarantine very high emitting

species

o Seek State action to prohibit the sale of selected very high emitting tree species

within t he geographic area2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 43 

### Appendix 8: Field Data Sheet



## Section 1: Site and Team Info 1



### Location 2



### Plot ID 3



### Field Land Use 1 4



### Field Land Use 2 5 

### Group 6 

### :

Year 7 

### Date: 8



### FLU1 (Squares) 9



### FLU2 (Squares) 1 0



## Section 2: Plot/Contact Information 11



### Address: 1 2



### __________________________ Resident: 1 3



### __________________________ Phone: 1 4



### ___________________________ Notes: 1 5



### ____________________________ 

## Section 3: GPS Coordinates / Photograph 16



### GPS X: 17



### GPS Y: 18 

### GPS Z: 1 9



### Photo ID #: 2 0



## Section 4: Reference Object Designation (skip if there are 3 trees/plot)

ID 2 1 

### Description 22 

### Direction from

center (angle) 2 3 

### Distance from

cent er (feet) 2 4 

### Notes and

Comments 2 5



### 1

2



## Section 5: Ground Covers (show abbreviations on drawing; count squares) 26

Building (B) 27 Concrete

(C) 28 Asphalt

(A) 29 (OI) Other

Impervious 30 Maintained

Grass (MG) 31 Unmaintained

Grass (UG) 32 Water

(W) 33

Duff & Mulch

(M) 34 Bare Soil

(BS) 35 Seedlings

(S) 36 Herbs & Ivy

(HI) 37 Agricultural

Crops (AC) 38 Pervious Rock

(PR) 39 Shrub

(SH) 40



## Section 6: Summary of Plot Areas (in Squares from drawing) 41



### Tree Cover 42



### Shrub Area 4 3



### Plantable Space 442013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 44 Below is a description of each of the terms used on the Field Data Collection sheet.

1 Site and Team Info: This section of the data describes where the plot site is located, how to find i t again

later and who did the site review.

2 Location: The general area of the plot

3 Plot ID: The identification number assigned to the plot

4 Field Land Use 1: This is the land use that exists on the plot. It doesn’t always agree with the

government database and so needs to be corrected in the field.



## Land Use Types Land Use Types

Residential Agriculture

Multi

- Family Residential Vacant

Commercial/Industrial Institutional

Park Transportation

Cemetery Utility

Golf Course Water/Wetland

5 Field Land Use 2: If the plot falls on two substantially different land uses, indicate the second class of

land use. An example is when plot falls on a house next to a supermarket. This is rarely a substantial

issue. You should not count a backyard garden as agricultural or the road in front of a home as

transportation.

6 Group: Your group number.

7 Year: the year of the field survey

8 Date: the date the field survey is completed

9 FLU1 (Squares): In this box, record the Field Land Use 1 area in squares on the plot drawing

1 0 FLU2 (Squares): In this box, record the Field Land Use 2 area in squares on the plot drawing

1 1 Plot/Contact Information: This is the contact information for the plot owner

1 2 Address: the address of the plot, if available

1 3 Resident: the name of the person/s living on the plot

1 4 Phone: the phone number of the resident

1 5 Notes: general information about the plot location, owner or resident2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 45 1 6 GPS Coordinates / Photograph: this section has the precise location of the center point of the plot.

1 7 GPS X: this is the GPS longitude of the plot location. The units are decimal degrees

1 8 GPS Y: this is the GPS latitude of the plot location. The units are decimal degrees

1 9 GPS Z: this is the altitude of the plot. The units are feet.

2 0 Photo ID #: If you take a picture of the site, enter the file name of the picture here.

2 1 ID: the number of the reference item. Also show on plot drawing.

2 2 Description: the name of the object, li ke “fire hydrant.”

2 3 Direction from center: this is the direction in degrees from the plot center. Use the markings on the

center marker to figure out the angle. 0 degrees is North, 90 degrees is East.

2 4 Distance from center: this is the distance from th e center of the plot to the nearest edge of the

reference object

2 5 Note and Comments: anything noteworthy about the reference item.

2 6 Ground Covers (in squares): this section is used to describe all of the different ground covers that are

on the plot. Fr om the plot drawing that you make, roughly count the number of squares of each type.

Enter the number in the adjacent box to the cover type. Put an “R” for “Remainder” in the box of the most

extensive cover. For example, if a plot falls in an asphalt parki ng lot, enter R under Asphalt and then the

number of squares in each of the other types present. The abbreviations for the cover types are shown in

parentheses with each type.

2 7 Building (B): this is for any structure. Only count the floor area of the bui lding. Don’t include any

awnings or gables or the like.

28 Concrete (C): The standard material for sidewalks, curbs and gutters, the concrete designation also

includes the colored, stamped driveways and walkways that are becoming more common.

2 9 Asphalt (A ): this is for any tar covered surface except roofs. Roads, parking lots, most basketball courts

fit here.

3 0 Other Impervious (OI): Any surface that doesn’t allow water penetration. An example of this is brick.

3 1 Maintained Grass (MG): grass that is mowed, lawns. Include here lawns that need mowing.

3 2 Unmaintained Grass (UG): natural grass areas. These could be natural areas of native grasses or

pastures that don’t normally get mowed and irrigated

3 3 Water (W): Any area of water including fountains, ponds, lakes and streams

3 4 Duff & Mulch (M): any ground cover composed of decaying plant materials

3 5 Bare Soil (BS): soil that has few or no plants growing in it.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 46 3 6 Seedlings (S): areas with small trees too numerous to count.

3 7 Herbs & Ivy (HI): any lo w growing ground cover that can’t easily be distinguished as individual plants

3 8 Agricultural Crops (AC): Crops grown on commercial farms. This doesn’t include backyard gardens

39 Pervious Rock (PR): gravel, cobbles, boulders that generally allow water to reach the ground beneath

rather than forcing it to run off the site

4 0 Shrub (SH): leafy plant that does not count as a tree. Do not double count for ground cover under the

shrub.

4 1 Summary of Plot Areas (in Squares): this section is used to give an over all summary of the key

coverage areas on the site. The units are squares taken from the plot drawing.

4 2 Tree Cover: the total area in squares that is beneath all the trees on the plot. Take this number from the

drawing and record in squares. Also include the shade canopy from branches that come from trees

outside of the plot

4 3 Shrub Area: the total area in squares that is generally occupied by shrubs. Take this number from the

drawing and record in squares.

4 4 Plantable Space: a rough approximation of the number of squares that could have a tree planted in

them. Don’t assume that construction work will be done to create a planting area.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 47 

### Appendix 9: 6% Cap Calculations for Tree Measure Emission Reductions

The methodology for calculating the estimated maximum limit on emission reductions from the

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program for the Sacramento region is summarized

below. This is consistent with EPA policy 1 for incorporating emerging and voluntary measures in

a SIP that limits t he amount of emission reductions allowed due to the uncertainty and untested

nature of the control mechanisms. For total emerging and voluntary measures, EPA has a

presumptive limit 2 of 6 percent of the total amount of emission reduction necessary to achie ve

the planning requirement for attainment demonstration purposes.

Methodology to Calculate VOC Reduction Limit for Tree Measure

Figure A9

- 1 contains the 2018 ozone/emission reduction graph for the peak ozone design value

site at Cool in the Sacramento r egion. This diagram shows the pattern of ozone responses to

varying combinations in domain

- wide VOC and NO X emission reductions. The air quality

modeling analysis for 2018 shows that attainment can be reached with different percent

combinations of VOC and NO X control. Assuming the combination of percent reductions from

only new VOC and NO X control measures adopted by the end of 2008 , the 1997 federal 8

- hour

ozone standard could be attained by reducing 2018 modeled emissions by about 3.3 % VOC

and 12.5% NO X ( shown as Point B on Figure A9

- 1) This emission reduction target represents

the attainment shortfall)

.

The cap on eligible emission reductions from emerging and voluntary measures is 6 percent of

the VOC attainment shortfall. Since the 6 percent cap applie s to all emerging and voluntary

measures, the maximum reduction limit available for the Tree Measure needs to subtract out

any reductions from other emerging or voluntary measures, such as “Spare The Air” Program 3

.

Six Percent Reduction Calculations

The 2002 base year emission level (planning inventory) of the Sacramento Federal Ozone

Nonattainment Area is 160 tpd of VOC and 196 tpd of NO X

. Without any new emission control

measures, the 2018 emission inventory is forecasted to be 121 tpd of VOC and 10 4 tpd of NO X

. Based on the 2018 attainment shortfall analysis

, 3.3 % of the VOC and 1 2.5 % of NO X emissions

must be reduced to achieve the attainment standards. This means that VOC emissions must be

reduced to 11 7 tpd and NO X emissions must be reduced to 9 1 tpd. The attainment shortfall for

VOC is 4 tpd and NO X is 1 3 tpd. The Urban Forest for Clean Air Demonstration Program claims

BVOC reduction s only. By applying the 6 percent cap on the VOC shortfall, this measure and

the Spare The Air Program have a limit of 0. 24 tpd of VOC emission reductions. Since t he

Spare The Air Program will claim 0.06 tpd of VOC emission reduction credit, th e tree program is

capped at 0. 18 tpd of BVOC reduction as an emerging and voluntary measure

.

1 “Incorporating Emergi ng and Voluntary Measures in a State Implementation Plan (SIP)” (OAQPS, EPA,

September 2004).

2 Ibid., p. 9.

3 Spare The Air Program (TCM

- ONMS

- ED

- 1) is a voluntary measure to inform and encourage the public

to reduce vehicle trips, especially during foreca sted high ozone days.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 48 

### Figure A9

- 1

Ozone/Emission Reduction Graph

2018 Cool Peak Ozone Design Value Site

1. X and Y Axes: fractional emission reductions of VOC and NO X from the forecasted 2018

planning emission inventory used in the Plan as adopted in 2009

. 2. Whole (Red) Numbers: predicted ozone design value concentrations (truncated) based on

modeling results for fractional VOC and NO X reductions at 5% increments.

3. Horizontal Contour Lines : District interpolated whole ppb ozone contour lines based on 5%

increment modeled ozone valu es rounded to the tenth of a ppb

. 4. Point A designates the 2018 emission reductions (3.3% VOC and 12.5% NO X ) from only the new

local, regional, state and federal control measures adopted by the end of 2008. These levels

represent percent emission reduction targets for attainment (just below 85 ppb)

.

Using the combination of emission reduction levels from only new control measures adopted by

the end of 2008, attainment of the 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone standard (84 ppb) could be

achieved by reducing 2018 mode led VOC and NO X emissions by about 3.3 % for VOC and

1 2.5 % for NO X (Point B)

. Since ozone design values are truncated to the whole ppb, ozone

design values between 84 to <85 ppb are truncated to 84 ppb.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Page C

- 49 

### Appendix 10 : UFORE Study Area2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Regulatory Control Measures

Page C

- 50 

# Regulatory Control Measures2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Stationary and Area Source Control Measures

Page C

- 51 

# Stationary and Area

- wide Source

Control Measures

Emission inventories by EIC based on CARB CEFS Version 1.06 Sacramento NAA (Rf#980),

February 28. 20072013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

VOC Control Measures

Page C

- 52 

# VOC

Control Measures2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings

Page C

- 53 

# Architectural Coatings2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings SMAQMD

- 442

Page C

- 54 

### Control Measure Number: SMAQMD

- 442

Control Measure Title: Architectural Coatings

Date: May 8, 2008

Control Measure Description

This control measure regulates the volatile organic compound (VOC) content in

coatings applied to stationary structures and their appurtenances (e.g., general use

flats, general use non

- flats, and specialty coatings such as industrial maintenance

coatings, lacquers, floor coatings, roof coatings, stains, etc.). The strategy also

reg ulates the sale of coatings within the district by prohibiting manufacturers and

suppliers of coatings from selling coatings that do not comply with the strategy.

The SMAQMD’s architectural coating rule (Rule 442) was originally adopted in 1978

and has be en amended seven times with the most recent amendment occurring in May

2001. The amendment in May 2001 adopted CARB’s 2000 SCM for this category. On

October 25, 2007, CARB adopted a new SCM for Architectural Coatings that

established lower VOC limits for s ome coating categories.

The table below shows a comparison between the VOC limits in the current Rule 442

and the new SCM; coating categories that do not have lower VOC limits are not

included.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings SMAQMD

- 442

Page C

- 55 Category SMAQMD Rule 442 CARB SCM

(g/l) (g/l)

Flat Coating 100 50

Nonflat Coating 150 100

Nonflat

- High Gloss 250 150

Antenna Coating 530 250

Antifouling Coatings 400 250

Bituminous Roof Coatings 300 50

Clear Wood Coatings:

Clear Brushing Lacquer

Lacquers (including lacquer sanding sealers)

Sanding Sealers (other than lacquer sanding

sealers)

Varnishes 550

550

350

350 275

Concrete/Masonry Sealer (was Waterproofing

Concrete/Masonry Sealer

Reactive Penetrating Sealer 400

400 100

350

Dry Fog Coatings 400 150

Fire Retardant Coatings:

Clear

Opaque 650

350 350

Floor Coatings 250 100

Flow Coatings 420 250

Mastic Texture Coatings 300 100

Primers, Sealers, and Undercoaters 200 100

Quick Dry Enamels 250 150

Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, Undercoaters 200 100

Roof Coatings 250 50

Rust Preventative Coatings 400 250

Specialty Primers, Sealers, Undercoaters 350 100

Temperature

- Indicator Safety Coating 550 420

Traffic Marking Coatings 150 100



### Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description ROG Planning

Inventory

Tons/day

2018

520

- 520

- 9100

- 0000 Oil

- Based (Organic Solvent Based) Coatings (Unspecified) 0.085 0

520

- 520

- 9105

- 0000 Oil

- Based Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.1614

520

- 520

- 9106

- 0000 Oil

- Based Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0958

520

- 520

- 9108

- 0000 Oil

- Based Specialty Primer, Sealer, And Undercoaters 0.005 0

520

- 520

- 9109

- 0000 Oil

- Based Bituminous Roof Primer 0.016 0

520

- 520

- 9113

- 0000 Oil

- Based Waterproofing Sealers 0.0744

520

- 520

- 9118

- 0000 Oil

- Based Waterproofing Concrete/Masonry Sealers 0.0525

520

- 520

- 9122

- 0000 Oil

- Based Faux Finishing 0.0016

520

- 520

- 9124

- 0000 Oil

- Based Mastic Texture 0.0232

520

- 520

- 9126

- 0000 Oil

- Based Rust Preventative 0.037 0

520

- 520

- 9131

- 0000 Oil

- Based Stains

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.2948

520

- 520

- 9136

- 0000 Oil

- Based Stains

– Opaque 0.0278

520

- 520

- 9141

- 0000 Oil

- Based Varnish

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.1957

520

- 520

- 9153

- 0000 Oil

- Based Quick Dry Enamel Coatings 0.0672

520

- 520

- 9157

- 0000 Oil

- Based Lacquers (Unspecified) 0.0727

520

- 520

- 9159

- 0000 Oil

- Based Flat Coatings 0.0026

520

- 520

- 9160

- 0000 Oil

- Based Nonflat

- Low Gloss/Medium Gloss 0.1081

520

- 520

- 9161

- 0000 Oil

- Based High Gloss Nonflat Coatings 0.1171

520

- 520

- 9164

- 0000 Oil

- Based Bituminous Coatings 0.22062013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings SMAQMD

- 442

Page C

- 56 EIC Code EIC Description ROG Planning

Inventory

Tons/day

2018

520

- 520

- 9165

- 0000 Oil

- Based Concrete Curing Compounds 0.0042

520

- 520

- 9166

- 0000 Oil

- Based Dry Fog Coatings 0.0437

520

- 520

- 9169

- 0000 Oil

- Based Floor Coatings 0.0121

520

- 520

- 9170

- 0000 Oil

- Based Form Release Coatings 0.031 0

520

- 520

- 9172

- 0000 Oil

- Based Industrial Maintenance Coatings 0.4144

520

- 520

- 9173

- 0000 Oil

- Based Metallic Pigmented Coatings 0.141 0

520

- 520

- 9174

- 0000 Oil

- Based Roof Coatings 0.0107

520

- 520

- 9176

- 0000 Oil

- Based Traffic Coatings 0.0383

520

- 520

- 9177

- 0000 Oil

- Based Wood Preservatives 0.0348

520

- 520

- 9200

- 0000 Water

- Based Coatings (Unspecified) 0.0112

520

- 520

- 9205

- 0000 Water

- Based Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.1707

520

- 520

- 9206

- 0000 Water

- Based Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0135

520

- 520

- 9208

- 0000 Water

- Based Specialty Primer, Sealer, And Undercoaters 0.0107

520

- 520

- 9209

- 0000 Water

- Based Bituminous Roof Primer 0.0027

520

- 520

- 9213

- 0000 Water

- Based Waterproofing Sealers 0.0098

520

- 520

- 9218

- 0000 Water

- Based Waterproofing Concrete/Masonry Sealers 0.0141

520

- 520

- 9222

- 0000 Water

- Based Faux Finishing 0.0094

520

- 520

- 9223

- 0000 Water

- Based Form Release Compounds 0.0003

520

- 520

- 9224

- 0000 Water

- Based Mastic Texture 0.0116

520

- 520

- 9226

- 0000 Water

- Based Rust Preventative 0.0014

520

- 520

- 9231

- 0000 Water

- Based Stains

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0167

520

- 520

- 9236

- 0000 Water

- Based Stains

- Opaque 0.0259

520

- 520

- 9241

- 0000 Water

- Based Varnishes

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0261

520

- 520

- 9257

- 0000 Water

- Based Lacquers (Unspecified) 0.0051

520

- 520

- 9259

- 0000 Water

- Based Flat Coatings 0.6747

520

- 520

- 9260

- 0000 Water

- Based Nonflat

- Low Gloss/Medium Gloss 0.7753

520

- 520

- 9261

- 0000 Water

- Based High Gloss Nonflat Coatings 0.0701

520

- 520

- 9264

- 0000 Water

- Based Bituminous Coatings 0.0013

520

- 520

- 9265

- 0000 Water

- Based Concrete Curing Compounds 0.0148

520

- 520

- 9266

- 0000 Water

- Based Dry Fog Coatings 0.0126

520

- 520

- 9269

- 0000 Water

- Based Floor Coatings 0.0325

520

- 520

- 9272

- 0000 Water

- Based Industrial Maintenance Coatings 0.0326

520

- 520

- 9273

- 0000 Water

- Based Metallic Pigmented Coatings 0.0033

520

- 520

- 9274

- 0000 Water

- Based Roof Coatings 0.0185

520

- 520

- 9276

- 0000 Water

- Based Traffic Coatings 0.117

520

- 520

- 9277

- 0000 Water

- Based Wood Preservatives 0.0003

Total 4.4709



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption

date Implementation Date ROG Emission Reduction

Tons/day

2018

Architectural Coating

Categories 2014 2016 0. 91382013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings SMAQMD

- 442

Page C

- 57 

### Cost Effectiveness

The cost effectiveness calculations were based upon economic analyses conducted by

the South Coast Air Quality Management District for amendments to Rule 1113. The

specific economic analyses used are listed below:

 December 6, 2002 Amendments (based on vacated May 14, 1999 Amendments)

(1998 economic data)

– industrial maintenance coatings; rust preventative coatings;

floor coatings; non

- flats; primers, sealers, and undercoate rs; quick

- dry primers,

sealers, and undercoaters; and quick

- dry enamels.

 December 5, 2003 Amendments (2003 economic data)

– clear wood finishes

(including sanding sealers and varnish); roof coatings; stains; and waterproofing

sealers (including concrete an d masonry sealers). Range of cost effectiveness was

$4,229

- $11,405/ton.

 June 9, 2006 Amendments (2006 economic data)

– concrete

- curing compounds;

dry

- fog coatings; and traffic coatings. Range of cost effectiveness was $4,882/ton.

It was assumed that the economic relationships between Sacramento and South Coast

suppliers and users of architectural coatings do not differ significantly. Therefore, the

estimated South Coast cost effectiveness values were assumed to be transferable to

Sacramento.

The cost effectiveness values calculated from the December 6, 2002 and December 5,

2003 amendments were adjusted to 2006 dollars (from 1998 and 2003 dollars,

respectively) using the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Price Index for West

Urban consumers. The esti mated overall cost effectiveness for this proposed measure

is estimated to be $10,485/ton

Authority

Authority to implement this control measure by the SMAQMD is in accordance with

California Health and Safety Code, Sections 40000, 40001, and 41010.

Impl ementation

The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District is the implementing

agency.

References

1. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, Rule 442 (Architectural

Coatings). Amended May 24, 2001.

2. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings).

Amended June 9, 2006.

3. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Staff Report for Proposed Amended

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). May 14, 1999.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings SMAQMD

- 442

Page C

- 58 

### 4. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Sta ff Report for Proposed Amended

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). December 6, 2002.

5. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Staff Report for Proposed Amended

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). December 5, 2003.

6. South Coast Air Quality Management Dis trict, Staff Report for Proposed Amended

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). June 9, 2006.

7. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index 1996

-

2006.

8. CARB Ozone SIP Planning Inventory, Version 1.06, Sacramento NAA (RF#980),

Novem ber 16, 2006

9. California Air Resources Board Suggested Control Measure for Architectural

Coatings, October 25, 2007

10. Control Measure, SMAQMD

- 442, November 28, 2006

11. Control Measure 442 Calculation Spreadsheet, SMAQMD, May 14, 20082013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings EDCAQMD

- 215

Page C

- 59 

### Control Measure Number : EDCAQMD

- 215

Control Measure Title: Architectural Coatings

Date: May 12, 2008

Control Measure Description

This control measure regulates the volatile organic compound (VOC) content in

coatings applied to stationary structures and their appurtenances (e.g., general use

flats, general use non

- flats, and specialty coatings such as industrial maintenance

coatings, lacquers, floor coatings, roof coatings, stains, etc.). The strategy also

reg ulates the sale of coatings within the district by prohibiting manufacturers and

suppliers of coatings from selling coatings that do not comply with the strategy.

The existing Rule 215

- Architectural Coatings was adopted on September 8, 1994 and

subsequent ly amended on September 27, 1994. In 2000, the California Air Resources

Board (CARB) adopted the Suggested Control Measures (SCM) for Architectural

Coatings. This SCM established VOC limits that obtained about a 20% overall reduction

for this category. On October 25, 2007, CARB adopted a new SCM for Architectural

Coatings that established lower VOC limits for some coating categories.

The table below shows a comparison between the VOC limits in the current rule and the

limits in the new SCM; coating categor ies that do not have lower VOC limits are not

included.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings EDCAQMD

- 215

Page C

- 60 Category EDCAQMD Rule 215 CARB SCM

(g/l) (g/l)

Flat Coating

Specialty Flat 100

400 50

Nonflat Coating 250 100

Nonflat

- High Gloss 250 150

Antenna Coating 530 250

Antifouling Coatings 400 250

Bituminous Roof Coatings 300 50

Clear Wood Coatings:

Clear Brushing Lacquer

Lacquers (including lacquer sanding sealers)

Sanding Sealers (other than lacquer sanding

sealers)

Varnishes 680

680

350

350 275

Concrete/Masonry Sealer (was Waterproofing

Concrete/Masonry Sealer

Reactive Penetrating Sealer 400

400 100

350

Dry Fog Coatings 400 150

Fire Retardant Coatings:

Clear

Opaque 650

350 350

Floor Coatings 250 100

Flow Coatings 420 250

Industrial Maintenance

High temp

Antigraffiti 420

340 250

Mastic Texture Coatings 300 100

Multi

- color 420 250

Pretreatment Wash Primers 675 420

Primers, Sealers, and Undercoaters 350 100

Quick Dry Enamels 400 150

Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, Undercoaters 350 100

Roof Coatings 300 50

Rust Preventative Coatings 420 250

Specialty Primers, Sealers, Undercoaters 350 100

Stains 350 250

Swimming Pool Repair and Maintenance 650 340

Temperature

- Indicator Safety Coating 550 420

Traffic Marking Coatings 250 100

Water proofing Sealers 400 250



### Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description ROG

Planning

Inventory

Tons/day

2018

520

- 520

- 9100

- 0000 Oil

- Based (Organic Solvent Based) Coatings (Unspecified) 0.0092

520

- 520

- 9105

- 0000 Oil

- Based Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0278

520

- 520

- 9106

- 0000 Oil

- Based Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0335

520

- 520

- 9108

- 0000 Oil

- Based Specialty Primer, Sealer, And Undercoaters 0.0005

520

- 520

- 9109

- 0000 Oil

- Based Bituminous Roof Primer 0.0016

520

- 520

- 9113

- 0000 Oil

- Based Waterproofing Sealers 0.0089

520

- 520

- 9118

- 0000 Oil

- Based Waterproofing Concrete/Masonry Sealers 0.0055

520

- 520

- 9122

- 0000 Oil

- Based Faux Finishing 0.0002

520

- 520

- 9124

- 0000 Oil

- Based Mastic Texture 0.0024

520

- 520

- 9126

- 0000 Oil

- Based Rust Preventative 0.00392013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings EDCAQMD

- 215

Page C

- 6 1 EIC Code EIC Description ROG

Planning

Inventory

Tons/day

2018

520

- 520

- 9131

- 0000 Oil

- Based Stains

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0402

520

- 520

- 9136

- 0000 Oil

- Based Stains

– Opaque 0.0045

520

- 520

- 9141

- 0000 Oil

- Based Varnish

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0205

520

- 520

- 9153

- 0000 Oil

- Based Quick Dry Enamel Coatings 0.0133

520

- 520

- 9157

- 0000 Oil

- Based Lacquers (Unspecified) 0.0129

520

- 520

- 9159

- 0000 Oil

- Based Flat Coatings 0.0003

520

- 520

- 9160

- 0000 Oil

- Based Nonflat

- Low Gloss/Medium Gloss 0.0119

520

- 520

- 9161

- 0000 Oil

- Based High Gloss Nonflat Coatings 0.0123

520

- 520

- 9164

- 0000 Oil

- Based Bituminous Coatings 0.0231

520

- 520

- 9165

- 0000 Oil

- Based Concrete Curing Compounds 0.0005

520

- 520

- 9166

- 0000 Oil

- Based Dry Fog Coatings 0.0046

520

- 520

- 9169

- 0000 Oil

- Based Floor Coatings 0.0013

520

- 520

- 9170

- 0000 Oil

- Based Form Release Coatings 0.0033

520

- 520

- 9172

- 0000 Oil

- Based Industrial Maintenance Coatings 0.0719

520

- 520

- 9173

- 0000 Oil

- Based Metallic Pigmented Coatings 0.0148

520

- 520

- 9174

- 0000 Oil

- Based Roof Coatings 0.0012

520

- 520

- 9176

- 0000 Oil

- Based Traffic Coatings 0.004

520

- 520

- 9177

- 0000 Oil

- Based Wood Preservatives 0.0037

520

- 520

- 9200

- 0000 Water

- Based Coatings (Unspecified) 0.0012

520

- 520

- 9205

- 0000 Water

- Based Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0182

520

- 520

- 9206

- 0000 Water

- Based Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0014

520

- 520

- 9208

- 0000 Water

- Based Specialty Primer, Sealer, And Undercoaters 0.0011

520

- 520

- 9209

- 0000 Water

- Based Bituminous Roof Primer 0.0003

520

- 520

- 9213

- 0000 Water

- Based Waterproofing Sealers 0.0014

520

- 520

- 9218

- 0000 Water

- Based Waterproofing Concrete/M asonry Sealers 0.0015

520

- 520

- 9222

- 0000 Water

- Based Faux Finishing 0.001

520

- 520

- 9223

- 0000 Water

- Based Form Release Compounds 0

520

- 520

- 9224

- 0000 Water

- Based Mastic Texture 0.0012

520

- 520

- 9226

- 0000 Water

- Based Rust Preventative 0.0002

520

- 520

- 9231

- 0000 Water

- Based Stains

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0021

520

- 520

- 9236

- 0000 Water

- Based Stains

- Opaque 0.0028

520

- 520

- 9241

- 0000 Water

- Based Varnishes

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0027

520

- 520

- 9257

- 0000 Water

- Based Lacquers (Unspecified) 0.0005

520

- 520

- 9259

- 0000 Water

- Based Flat Coatings 0.0895

520

- 520

- 9260

- 0000 Water

- Based Nonflat

- Low Gloss/Medium Gloss 0.0937

520

- 520

- 9261

- 0000 Water

- Based High Gloss Nonflat Coatings 0.0074

520

- 520

- 9264

- 0000 Water

- Based Bituminous Coatings 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9265

- 0000 Water

- Based Concrete Curing Compounds 0.0016

520

- 520

- 9266

- 0000 Water

- Based Dry Fog Coatings 0.0013

520

- 520

- 9269

- 0000 Water

- Based Floor Coatings 0.0034

520

- 520

- 9272

- 0000 Water

- Based Industrial Maintenance Coatings 0.0037

520

- 520

- 9273

- 0000 Water

- Based Metallic Pigmented Coatings 0.0003

520

- 520

- 9274

- 0000 Water

- Based Roof Coatings 0.0019

520

- 520

- 9276

- 0000 Water

- Based Traffic Coatings 0.0123

520

- 520

- 9277

- 0000 Water

- Based Wood Preservatives 0

Total 0.58862013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings EDCAQMD

- 215

Page C

- 62 

### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption date Implementation

Date ROG Emission Reduction

Tons/day

2018

Architectural Coating Categories 201 3 201 5 0. 1862



### Cost Effectiveness

The proposed VOC limits from the SCM are already in place in a number of air districts.

When the SCM was adopted, the cost effectiveness was determined to be an average

of $3.20 per pound ($6400 per ton) of ROG reduced. The proposed SCM VOC limits

were ide ntified by SCAQMD and are already in place in there. Based on the 1999

Socioeconomic impact assessment used in the socioeconomic analysis for the Rule

1113 amendments, the cost effectiveness was estimated to be $8.50 per pound

($16,996 per ton) of ROG redu ced. These cost

- effectiveness estimates will be used as

representative of the economic relationships of suppliers and users within El Dorado

County.

Authority

The above control measure will be implemented by amendment to the existing Rule 215

Architectu ral Coatings. The El Dorado Air Quality Management District has the authority

to propose rules and regulations to the District Board for adoption under HSC 40001.

Implementation

The implementation of this proposed control measure does not involve any oth er agency other than the El Dorado County Air Quality Management District.

References

1. CARB Ozone SIP Planning Inventory, Version 1.0 6 , Sacramento NAA (RF#9 80

November 16, 2006)

2. California ARB Staff Report for the Proposed Suggested Control Measure for

Architectural Coating, Released June 6, 2000

3. South Coast AQMD Staff Report for Proposed Amended Rule 1113

- Architectural

Coating, dated December 6, 2002

4. South Coast AQMD Preliminary Draft Staff Report for Proposed Amended Rule

1113

- Architectural Coating, da ted April 1, 2001

5. Control Measure 215 Calculation Spreadsheet, SMAQMD, May 15, 2008

6. Control Measure EDCAQMD

- 215, January 30, 2007

7. California Air Resources Board Suggested Control Measure for Architectural

Coatings, October 25, 20072013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings FRAQMD

- 3.15

Page C

- 63 

### Control Measure Number: FRAQMD

- 3.15

Control Measure Title: Architectural Coatings

Date: May 20, 2008

Control Measure Description

This control measure regulates the volatile organic compound (VOC) con tent in

coatings applied to stationary structures and their appurtenances (e.g., general use

flats, general use non

- flats, and specialty coatings such as industrial maintenance

coatings, lacquers, floor coatings, roof coatings, stains, etc.). The strategy also

regulates the sale of coatings within the district by prohibiting manufacturers and

suppliers of coatings from selling coatings that do not comply with the strategy.

The existing Rule 3.15

- Architectural Coatings was adopted in June, 1991 and

subsequently amended on May 6, 1996 and November 13, 2002. The amendment in

November 2002 adopted CARB’s 2000 SCM for this category. On October 25, 2007,

CARB adopted a new SCM for Architectural Coatings that established lower VOC limits

for some coating categories.

The table below shows a comparison between the VOC limits in the current Rule 3.15

and the new SCM; coating categories that do not have lower VOC limits are not

include d.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings FRAQMD

- 3.15

Page C

- 64 Category FRAQMD Rule 3.15 CARB SCM

(g/l) (g/l)

Flat Coating 100 50

Nonflat Coating 150 100

Nonflat

- High Gloss 250 150

Antenna Coating 530 250

Antifouling Coatings 400 250

Bituminous Roof Coatings 300 50

Clear Wood Coatings:

Clear Brushing Lacquer

Lacquers (including lacquer sanding sealers)

Sanding Sealers (other than lacquer sanding

sealers)

Varnishes 680

550

350

350 275

Concrete/Masonry Sealer (was Waterproofing

Concrete/Masonry Sealer

Reactive Penetrating Sealer 400

400 100

350

Dry Fog Coatings 400 150

Fire Retardant Coatings:

Clear

Opaque 650

350 350

Floor Coatings 250 100

Flow Coatings 420 250

Mastic Texture Coatings 300 100

Primers, Sealers, and Undercoaters 200 100

Quick Dry Enamels 250 150

Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, Undercoaters 200 100

Roof Coatings 250 50

Rust Preventative Coatings 400 250

Specialty Primers, Sealers, Undercoaters 350 100

Temperature

- Indicator Safety Coating 550 420

Traffic Marking Coatings 150 100



### Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description ROG Planning Inventory Tons/day

2018

520

- 520

- 9100

- 0000 Oil

- Based (Organic Solvent Based) Coatings (Unspecified) 0.0004

520

- 520

- 9105

- 0000 Oil

- Based Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0008

520

- 520

- 9106

- 0000 Oil

- Based Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0005

520

- 520

- 9108

- 0000 Oil

- Based Specialty Primer, Sealer, And Undercoaters 0

520

- 520

- 9109

- 0000 Oil

- Based Bituminous Roof Primer 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9113

- 0000 Oil

- Based Waterproofing Sealers 0.0004

520

- 520

- 9118

- 0000 Oil

- Based Waterproofing Concrete/Masonry Sealers 0.0003

520

- 520

- 9122

- 0000 Oil

- Based Faux Finishing 0

520

- 520

- 9124

- 0000 Oil

- Based Mastic Texture 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9126

- 0000 Oil

- Based Rust Preventative 0.0002

520

- 520

- 9131

- 0000 Oil

- Based Stains

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0013

520

- 520

- 9136

- 0000 Oil

- Based Stains

– Opaque 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9141

- 0000 Oil

- Based Varnish

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0009

520

- 520

- 9153

- 0000 Oil

- Based Quick Dry Enamel Coatings 0.0003

520

- 520

- 9157

- 0000 Oil

- Based Lacquers (Unspecified) 0.0004

520

- 520

- 9159

- 0000 Oil

- Based Flat Coatings 0

520

- 520

- 9160

- 0000 Oil

- Based Nonflat

- Low Gloss/Medium Gloss 0.0005

520

- 520

- 9161

- 0000 Oil

- Based High Gloss Nonflat Coatings 0.0006

520

- 520

- 9164

- 0000 Oil

- Based Bituminous Coatings 0.001

520

- 520

- 9165

- 0000 Oil

- Based Concrete Curing Compounds 0

520

- 520

- 9166

- 0000 Oil

- Based Dry Fog Coatings 0.00022013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings FRAQMD

- 3.15

Page C

- 65 EIC Code EIC Description ROG Planning Inventory Tons/day

2018

520

- 520

- 9169

- 0000 Oil

- Based Floor Coatings 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9170

- 0000 Oil

- Based Form Release Coatings 0.0002

520

- 520

- 9172

- 0000 Oil

- Based Industrial Maintenance Coatings 0.0016

520

- 520

- 9173

- 0000 Oil

- Based Metallic Pigmented Coatings 0.0007

520

- 520

- 9174

- 0000 Oil

- Based Roof Coatings 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9176

- 0000 Oil

- Based Traffic Coatings 0.0002

520

- 520

- 9177

- 0000 Oil

- Based Wood Preservatives 0.0002

520

- 520

- 9200

- 0000 Water

- Based Coatings (Unspecified) 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9205

- 0000 Water

- Based Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0008

520

- 520

- 9206

- 0000 Water

- Based Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, And

Undercoaters 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9208

- 0000 Water

- Based Specialty Primer, Sealer, And Undercoaters 0

520

- 520

- 9209

- 0000 Water

- Based Bituminous Roof Primer 0

520

- 520

- 9213

- 0000 Water

- Based Waterproofing Sealers 0

520

- 520

- 9218

- 0000 Water

- Based Waterproofing Concrete/Masonry Sealers 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9222

- 0000 Water

- Based Faux Finishing 0

520

- 520

- 9223

- 0000 Water

- Based Form Release Compounds 0

520

- 520

- 9224

- 0000 Water

- Based Mastic Texture 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9226

- 0000 Water

- Based Rust Preventative 0

520

- 520

- 9231

- 0000 Water

- Based Stains

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9236

- 0000 Water

- Based Stains

- Opaque 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9241

- 0000 Water

- Based Varnishes

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9257

- 0000 Water

- Based Lacquers (Unspecified) 0

520

- 520

- 9259

- 0000 Water

- Based Flat Coatings 0.0028

520

- 520

- 9260

- 0000 Water

- Based Nonflat

- Low Gloss/Medium Gloss 0.0036

520

- 520

- 9261

- 0000 Water

- Based High Gloss Nonflat Coatings 0.0003

520

- 520

- 9264

- 0000 Water

- Based Bituminous Coatings 0

520

- 520

- 9265

- 0000 Water

- Based Concrete Curing Compounds 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9266

- 0000 Water

- Based Dry Fog Coatings 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9269

- 0000 Water

- Based Floor Coatings 0.0002

520

- 520

- 9272

- 0000 Water

- Based Industrial Maintenance Coatings 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9273

- 0000 Water

- Based Metallic Pigmented Coatings 0

520

- 520

- 9274

- 0000 Water

- Based Roof Coatings 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9276

- 0000 Water

- Based Traffic Coatings 0.0005

520

- 520

- 9277

- 0000 Water

- Based Wood Preservatives 0

Total 0.0205



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption

date Implementation

Date ROG Emission Reduction Tons/day

2018

Architectural Coating

Categories 2014 2014 0. 0044



### Cost Effectiveness

The cost effectiveness calculations were based upon economic analyses conducted by

the South Coast Air Quality Management District for amendments to Rule 1113. The

specific economic analyses used are listed below:

 December 6, 2002 Amendments (based on vacated May 14, 1999 Amendments)

(1998 economic data)

– industrial maintenance coatings; rust preventative coatings;2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings FRAQMD

- 3.15

Page C

- 66 

### floor coatings; non

- flats; primers, sealers, and u ndercoaters; quick

- dry primers,

sealers, and undercoaters; and quick

- dry enamels.

 December 5, 2003 Amendments (2003 economic data)

– clear wood finishes

(including sanding sealers and varnish); roof coatings; stains; and waterproofing

sealers (including co ncrete and masonry sealers). Range of cost effectiveness was

$4,229

- $11,405/ton.

 June 9, 2006 Amendments (2006 economic data)

– concrete

- curing compounds;

dry

- fog coatings; and traffic coatings. Range of cost effectiveness was $4,882/ton.

It was assumed that the economic relationships between Sacramento and South Coast

suppliers and users of architectural coatings do not differ significantly. Therefore, the

estimated South Coast cost effectiveness values were assumed to be transferable to

Sacramento.

T he cost effectiveness values calculated from the December 6, 2002 and December 5,

2003 amendments were adjusted to 2006 dollars (from 1998 and 2003 dollars,

respectively) using the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Price Index for West

Urban consumers. The estimated overall cost effectiveness for this proposed measure

is $1 0,133 /ton

Authority

Authority to implement this control measure by the FRAQMD is in accordance with

California Health and Safety Code, Sections 40000, 40001, and 41010.

I mplementation

The FRAQMD is the implementing agency.

References

1. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings).

Amended June 9, 2006.

2. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Staff Report for Proposed Amended

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). May 14, 1999.

3. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Staff Report for Proposed Amended

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). December 6, 2002.

4. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Staff Report for Proposed Amended

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). December 5, 2003.

5. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Staff Report for Proposed Amended

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). June 9, 2006.

6. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Ind ex 1996

-

2006.

7. CARB Ozone SIP Planning Inventory, Version 1.0 6 , Sacramento NAA (RF#9 80 ),

November 16 , 2006

8. Control Measure 3.15 calculation spre adsheet, SMAQMD, May 19, 20082013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings FRAQMD

- 3.15

Page C

- 67 

### 9. Control Measure, FRAQMD 3.15, dated February 1, 2007

10. California Air Resources Board Suggested Control Measure for Architectural

Coatings, October 25, 20072013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings PCAPCD

- 218

Page C

- 68 

### Control Measure Number: PCAPCD

- 218

Control Measure Title: Architectural Coating

Date: May 20, 2008

Control Measure Description

This control measure regulates the volatile organic compound (VOC) content in

coatings applied to stationary structures and their appurtenances (e.g., general use

flats, general use non

- flats, and specialty coatings such as industrial maintenance

coatings, lacquers, floor coatings, roof coatings, stains, etc.). The strategy also

regulates the sale of coatings within the district by prohibiting manufacturers and

suppliers of coatings from selling coatings that do not comply with the stra tegy.

The PCAPCD’s architectural coating rule (Rule 218) was originally adopted in 1983 and

has been amended several times with the most recent amendment occurring in

December 2001. The amendment in December 2001 adopted CARB’s 2000 SCM for

this category. On October 25, 2007, CARB adopted a new SCM for Architectural

Coatings that established lower VOC limits for some coating categories.

The table below shows a comparison between the VOC limits in the current Rule 218

and the new SCM; coating categories th at do not have lower VOC limits are not

included.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings PCAPCD

- 218

Page C

- 69 Category PCAPCD Rule 218 CARB SCM

(g/l) (g/l)

Flat Coating 100 50

Nonflat Coating 150 100

Nonflat

- High Gloss 250 150

Antenna Coating 530 250

Antifouling Coatings 400 250

Bituminous Roof Coatings 300 50

Clear Wood Coatings:

Clear Brushing Lacquer

Lacquers (including lacquer sanding sealers)

Sanding Sealers (other than lacquer sanding

sealers)

Varnishes 550

550

350

350 275

Concrete/Masonry Sealer (was Waterproofing

Concrete/Masonry Sealer

Reactive Penetrating Sealer 400

400 100

350

Dry Fog Coatings 400 150

Fire Retardant Coatings:

Clear

Opaque 650

350 350

Floor Coatings 250 100

Flow Coatings 420 250

Mastic Texture Coatings 300 100

Primers, Sealers, and Undercoaters 200 100

Quick Dry Enamels 250 150

Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, Undercoaters 200 100

Roof Coatings 250 50

Rust Preventative Coatings 400 250

Specialty Primers, Sealers, Undercoaters 350 100

Temperature

- Indicator Safety Coating 550 420

Traffic Marking Coatings 150 100



### Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description ROG Planning Inventory Tons/day

2018

520

- 520

- 9100

- 0000 Oil

- Based (Organic Solvent Based) Coatings

(Unspecified) 0.0192

520

- 520

- 9105

- 0000 Oil

- Based Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0364

520

- 520

- 9106

- 0000 Oil

- Based Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0216

520

- 520

- 9108

- 0000 Oil

- Based Specialty Primer, Sealer, And Undercoaters 0.0012

520

- 520

- 9109

- 0000 Oil

- Based Bituminous Roof Primer 0.0037

520

- 520

- 9113

- 0000 Oil

- Based Waterproofing Sealers 0.0167

520

- 520

- 9118

- 0000 Oil

- Based Waterproofing Concrete/Masonry Sealers 0.012 0

520

- 520

- 9122

- 0000 Oil

- Based Faux Finishing 0.0004

520

- 520

- 9124

- 0000 Oil

- Based Mastic Texture 0.0052

520

- 520

- 9126

- 0000 Oil

- Based Rust Preventative 0.0084

520

- 520

- 9131

- 0000 Oil

- Based Stains

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0667

520

- 520

- 9136

- 0000 Oil

- Based Stains

– Opaque 0.0063

520

- 520

- 9141

- 0000 Oil

- Based Varnish

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0442

520

- 520

- 9153

- 0000 Oil

- Based Quick Dry Enamel Coatings 0.0152

520

- 520

- 9157

- 0000 Oil

- Based Lacquers (Unspecified) 0.0164

520

- 520

- 9159

- 0000 Oil

- Based Flat Coatings 0.0007

520

- 520

- 9160

- 0000 Oil

- Based Nonflat

- Low Gloss/Medium Gloss 0.0245

520

- 520

- 9161

- 0000 Oil

- Based High Gloss Nonflat Coatings 0.0265

520

- 520

- 9164

- 0000 Oil

- Based Bituminous Coatings 0.0498

520

- 520

- 9165

- 0000 Oil

- Based Concrete Curing Compounds 0.0012013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings PCAPCD

- 218

Page C

- 70 EIC Code EIC Description ROG Planning Inventory Tons/day

2018

520

- 520

- 9166

- 0000 Oil

- Based Dry Fog Coatings 0.01

520

- 520

- 9169

- 0000 Oil

- Based Floor Coatings 0.0028

520

- 520

- 9170

- 0000 Oil

- Based Form Release Coatings 0.0071

520

- 520

- 9172

- 0000 Oil

- Based Industrial Maintenance Coatings 0.0847

520

- 520

- 9173

- 0000 Oil

- Based Metallic Pigmented Coatings 0.0319

520

- 520

- 9174

- 0000 Oil

- Based Roof Coatings 0.0024

520

- 520

- 9176

- 0000 Oil

- Based Traffic Coatings 0.0086

520

- 520

- 9177

- 0000 Oil

- Based Wood Preservatives 0.0079

520

- 520

- 9200

- 0000 Water

- Based Coatings (Unspecified) 0.0025

520

- 520

- 9205

- 0000 Water

- Based Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0385

520

- 520

- 9206

- 0000 Water

- Based Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, And

Undercoaters 0.0031

520

- 520

- 9208

- 0000 Water

- Based Specialty Primer, Sealer, And Undercoaters 0.0024

520

- 520

- 9209

- 0000 Water

- Based Bituminous Roof Primer 0.0007

520

- 520

- 9213

- 0000 Water

- Based Waterproofing Sealers 0.0022

520

- 520

- 9218

- 0000 Water

- Based Waterproofing Concrete/Masonry Sealers 0.0032

520

- 520

- 9222

- 0000 Water

- Based Faux Finishing 0.0021

520

- 520

- 9223

- 0000 Water

- Based Form Release Compounds 0.0001

520

- 520

- 9224

- 0000 Water

- Based Mastic Texture 0.0026

520

- 520

- 9226

- 0000 Water

- Based Rust Preventative 0.0003

520

- 520

- 9231

- 0000 Water

- Based Stains

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0038

520

- 520

- 9236

- 0000 Water

- Based Stains

- Opaque 0.0058

520

- 520

- 9241

- 0000 Water

- Based Varnishes

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0059

520

- 520

- 9257

- 0000 Water

- Based Lacquers (Unspecified) 0.0011

520

- 520

- 9259

- 0000 Water

- Based Flat Coatings 0.1312

520

- 520

- 9260

- 0000 Water

- Based Nonflat

- Low Gloss/Medium Gloss 0.1752

520

- 520

- 9261

- 0000 Water

- Based High Gloss Nonflat Coatings 0.0159

520

- 520

- 9264

- 0000 Water

- Based Bituminous Coatings 0.0003

520

- 520

- 9265

- 0000 Water

- Based Concrete Curing Compounds 0.0033

520

- 520

- 9266

- 0000 Water

- Based Dry Fog Coatings 0.0029

520

- 520

- 9269

- 0000 Water

- Based Floor Coatings 0.0074

520

- 520

- 9272

- 0000 Water

- Based Industrial Maintenance Coatings 0.0068

520

- 520

- 9273

- 0000 Water

- Based Metallic Pigmented Coatings 0.0008

520

- 520

- 9274

- 0000 Water

- Based Roof Coatings 0.0042

520

- 520

- 9276

- 0000 Water

- Based Traffic Coatings 0.0265

520

- 520

- 9277

- 0000 Water

- Based Wood Preservatives 0.0001

Total 0.9804



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption date Implementation

Date ROG Emission Reduction Tons/day

2018

Architectural Coating Categories 2012 2013 0.201 4



### Cost Effectiveness

The cost effectiveness calculations were based upon economic analyses conducted by

the South Coast Air Quality Management District for amendments to Rule 1113. The

specific economic analyses used are listed below:

 December 6, 2002 Amendments (based on vacated May 14, 1999 Amendments)

(1998 economic data)

– industrial maintenance coatings; rust preventative coatings;2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings PCAPCD

- 218

Page C

- 71 

### floor coatings; non

- flats; primers, sealers, and undercoaters; quick

- dry primers,

sealers, and undercoaters; and quick

- dry enamels.

 December 5, 2003 Amendments (2003 economic data)

– clear wood finishes

(in cluding sanding sealers and varnish); roof coatings; stains; and waterproofing

sealers (including concrete and masonry sealers). Range of cost effectiveness was

$4,229

- $11,405/ton.

 June 9, 2006 Amendments (2006 economic data)

– concrete

- curing compounds;

dry

- fog coatings; and traffic coatings. Range of cost effectiveness was $4,882/ton.

It was assumed that the economic relationships between Placer and South Coast

suppliers and users of architectural coatings do not differ significantly. Therefore, the

es timated South Coast cost effectiveness values were assumed to be transferable to

Sacramento.

The cost effectiveness values calculated from the December 6, 2002 and December 5,

2003 amendments were adjusted to 2006 dollars (from 1998 and 2003 dollars,

res pectively) using the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Price Index for West

Urban consumers. The estimated overall cost effectiveness for this proposed measure

is $1 0,119 /ton.

Authority

Authority to implement this control measure by the PCAPCD is in a ccordance with

California Health and Safety Code, Sections 40000, 40001, and 41010.

Implementation

The PCAPCD is the implementing agency.

References

1. South Coast AQMD Staff Report for Proposed Amended Rule 1113

- Architectural

Coating, dated December6, 2002.

2. South Coast AQMD Preliminary Draft Staff Report for Proposed Amended Rule

1113

– Architectural Coating, dated August 15, 2003

3. Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Staff Report for Rule 442

– Architectural Coating,

Dated April 21 st 

### , 2001

4. ARB For e casted Emissions by Summary Category Ozone SIP Planning Projections

v1.0 6 RF #9 80

. November 16 , 2006.

5. Control Measure 218 calculation spreadsheet, SMAQMD, May 20, 2008

6. Control Measure, PCAPCD 218, February 5, 2007

7. California Air Resources Board Suggested Control Measure for Architectural

Coatings, October 25, 20072013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings YSAQMD

- 2.14

Page C

- 72 

### Control Measure Number: YSAQMD

– 2.14

Control Measure Title: Architectural Coatings

Date: February 2, 2007

Control Measure Description

This control measure regulates the volatile organic compound (VOC) content in

coatings applied to stationary structures and their appurtenances (e.g., general use

flats, general use non

- flats, and specialty coatings such as industrial maintena nce

coatings, lacquers, floor coatings, roof coatings, stains, etc.). The strategy also

regulates the sale of coatings within the district by prohibiting manufacturers and

suppliers of coatings from selling coatings that do not comply with the strategy.

T he YSAQMD’s architectural coating rule (Rule 2.14) was originally adopted in 1979

and with the most recent amendment occurring in November 2001. The amendment in

November 2001 adopted CARB’s 2000 SCM for this category. On October 25, 2007,

CARB adopted a n ew SCM for Architectural Coatings that established lower VOC limits

for some coating categories.

The table below shows a comparison between the VOC limits in the current Rule 2.14

and the new SCM; coating categories that do not have lower VOC limits are not

included.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings YSAQMD

- 2.14

Page C

- 73 Category YSAQMD Rule 2.14 CARB SCM

(g/l) (g/l)

Flat Coating 100 50

Nonflat Coating 150 100

Nonflat

- High Gloss 250 150

Antenna Coating 530 250

Antifouling Coatings 400 250

Bituminous Roof Coatings 300 50

Clear Wood Coatings:

Clear Brushing Lacquer

Lacquers (including lacquer sanding sealers)

Sanding Sealers (other than lacquer sanding

sealers)

Varnishes 550

550

350

350 275

Concrete/Masonry Sealer (was Waterproofing

Concrete/Masonry Sealer

Reactive Penetrating Sealer 400

400 100

350

Dry Fog Coatings 400 150

Fire Retardant Coatings:

Clear

Opaque 650

350 350

Floor Coatings 250 100

Flow Coatings 420 250

Mastic Texture Coatings 300 100

Primers, Sealers, and Undercoaters 200 100

Quick Dry Enamels 250 150

Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, Undercoaters 200 100

Roof Coatings 250 50

Rust Preventative Coatings 400 250

Specialty Primers, Sealers, Undercoaters 350 100

Temperature

- Indicator Safety Coating 550 420

Traffic Marking Coatings 150 100



### Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description ROG Planning Inventory Tons/day

2018

520

- 520

- 9100

- 0000 Oil

- Based (Organic Solvent Based) Coatings (Unspecified) 0.0201

520

- 520

- 9105

- 0000 Oil

- Based Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0382

520

- 520

- 9106

- 0000 Oil

- Based Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0226

520

- 520

- 9108

- 0000 Oil

- Based Specialty Primer, Sealer, And Undercoaters 0.0012

520

- 520

- 9109

- 0000 Oil

- Based Bituminous Roof Primer 0.0037

520

- 520

- 9113

- 0000 Oil

- Based Waterproofing Sealers 0.0176

520

- 520

- 9118

- 0000 Oil

- Based Waterproofing Concrete/Masonry Sealers 0.0123

520

- 520

- 9122

- 0000 Oil

- Based Faux Finishing 0.0004

520

- 520

- 9124

- 0000 Oil

- Based Mastic Texture 0.0054

520

- 520

- 9126

- 0000 Oil

- Based Rust Preventative 0.0088

520

- 520

- 9131

- 0000 Oil

- Based Stains

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0696

520

- 520

- 9136

- 0000 Oil

- Based Stains

– Opaque 0.0066

520

- 520

- 9141

- 0000 Oil

- Based Varnish

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0463

520

- 520

- 9153

- 0000 Oil

- Based Quick Dry Enamel Coatings 0.0159

520

- 520

- 9157

- 0000 Oil

- Based Lacquers (Unspecified) 0.0172

520

- 520

- 9159

- 0000 Oil

- Based Flat Coatings 0.0006

520

- 520

- 9160

- 0000 Oil

- Based Nonflat

- Low Gloss/Medium Gloss 0.0256

520

- 520

- 9161

- 0000 Oil

- Based High Gloss Nonflat Coatings 0.0276

520

- 520

- 9164

- 0000 Oil

- Based Bituminous Coatings 0.0521

520

- 520

- 9165

- 0000 Oil

- Based Concrete Curing Compounds 0.0011

520

- 520

- 9166

- 0000 Oil

- Based Dry Fog Coatings 0.01032013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings YSAQMD

- 2.14

Page C

- 74 520

- 520

- 9169

- 0000 Oil

- Based Floor Coatings 0.0029

520

- 520

- 9170

- 0000 Oil

- Based Form Release Coatings 0.0073

520

- 520

- 9172

- 0000 Oil

- Based Industrial Maintenance Coatings 0.1067

520

- 520

- 9173

- 0000 Oil

- Based Metallic Pigmented Coatings 0.0333

520

- 520

- 9174

- 0000 Oil

- Based Roof Coatings 0.0025

520

- 520

- 9176

- 0000 Oil

- Based Traffic Coatings 0.0091

520

- 520

- 9177

- 0000 Oil

- Based Wood Preservatives 0.0083

520

- 520

- 9200

- 0000 Water

- Based Coatings (Unspecified) 0.0026

520

- 520

- 9205

- 0000 Water

- Based Primers, Sealers, And Undercoaters 0.0403

520

- 520

- 9206

- 0000 Water

- Based Quick Dry Primers, Sealers, And

Undercoaters 0.0031

520

- 520

- 9208

- 0000 Water

- Based Specialty Primer, Sealer, And Undercoaters 0.0025

520

- 520

- 9209

- 0000 Water

- Based Bituminous Roof Primer 0.0006

520

- 520

- 9213

- 0000 Water

- Based Waterproofing Sealers 0.0023

520

- 520

- 9218

- 0000 Water

- Based Waterproofing Concrete/M asonry Sealers 0.0033

520

- 520

- 9222

- 0000 Water

- Based Faux Finishing 0.0022

520

- 520

- 9223

- 0000 Water

- Based Form Release Compounds 0

520

- 520

- 9224

- 0000 Water

- Based Mastic Texture 0.0028

520

- 520

- 9226

- 0000 Water

- Based Rust Preventative 0.0003

520

- 520

- 9231

- 0000 Water

- Based Stains

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0039

520

- 520

- 9236

- 0000 Water

- Based Stains

- Opaque 0.0061

520

- 520

- 9241

- 0000 Water

- Based Varnishes

- Clear/Semitransparent 0.0062

520

- 520

- 9257

- 0000 Water

- Based Lacquers (Unspecified) 0.0012

520

- 520

- 9259

- 0000 Water

- Based Flat Coatings 0.1538

520

- 520

- 9260

- 0000 Water

- Based Nonflat

- Low Gloss/Medium Gloss 0.1832

520

- 520

- 9261

- 0000 Water

- Based High Gloss Nonflat Coatings 0.0166

520

- 520

- 9264

- 0000 Water

- Based Bituminous Coatings 0.0003

520

- 520

- 9265

- 0000 Water

- Based Concrete Curing Compounds 0.0035

520

- 520

- 9266

- 0000 Water

- Based Dry Fog Coatings 0.003

520

- 520

- 9269

- 0000 Water

- Based Floor Coatings 0.0077

520

- 520

- 9272

- 0000 Water

- Based Industrial Maintenance Coatings 0.0087

520

- 520

- 9273

- 0000 Water

- Based Metallic Pigmented Coatings 0.0008

520

- 520

- 9274

- 0000 Water

- Based Roof Coatings 0.0044

520

- 520

- 9276

- 0000 Water

- Based Traffic Coatings 0.0276

520

- 520

- 9277

- 0000 Water

- Based Wood Preservatives 0

Total 1.0603



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption Date Implementation

Date ROG Emission Reduction Tons/day

2018

Architectural Coating Categories 2014 2016 0. 2144



### Cost Effectiveness

The cost effectiveness calculations were based upon economic analyses conducted by

the South Coast Air Quality Management District for amendments to Rule 1113. The

specific economic analyses used are listed below:

 December 6, 2002 Amendments (based on vacated May 14, 1999 Amendments)

(1998 economic data)

– industrial mainte nance coatings; rust preventative coatings;

floor coatings; non

- flats; primers, sealers, and undercoaters; quick

- dry primers,

sealers, and undercoaters; and quick

- dry enamels.

 December 5, 2003 Amendments (2003 economic data)

– clear wood finishes

(including sanding sealers and varnish); roof coatings; stains; and waterproofing2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings YSAQMD

- 2.14

Page C

- 75 

### sealers (including concrete and masonry sealers). Range of cost effectiveness was

$4,229

- $11,405/ton.

 June 9, 2006 Amendments (2006 economic data)

– concrete

- curing compoun ds;

dry

- fog coatings; and traffic coatings. Range of cost effectiveness was $4,882/ton.

It was assumed that the economic relationships between Yolo/Solano and South Coast

suppliers and users of architectural coatings do not differ significantly. Therefore, the

estimated South Coast cost effectiveness values were assumed to be transferable to

Sacramento.

The cost effectiveness values calculated from the December 6, 2002 and December 5,

2003 amendments were adjusted to 2006 dollars (from 1998 and 2003 dollars,

respectively) using the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Price Index for West

Urban consumers. The estimated overall cost effectiveness for this proposed measure

is $1 0,387 /ton

.

Authority

Authority to implement this control measure by t he YSAQMD is in accordance with

California Health and Safety Code, Sections 40000, 40001, and 41010.

Implementation

The YSAQMD is the implementing agency.

References

1. Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management District, Rule 2.14, Architectural Coatings ;

Nov ember 14, 2001.

2. California Environmental Protection Agency

– Air Resources Board, Suggested

Control Measure for Architectural Coatings , June 22, 2000.

3. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1113, Architectural Coatings ;

June 9, 2006.

4. Ca lifornia Environmental Protection Agency

– Air Resources Board, Forecasted

Emissions by Summary Category Ozone SIP Planning Projections

- V1.06 RF#980 ; Date Of Last Update: November 16, 2006.

5. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Staff Report for Proposed Amended

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). May 14, 1999.

6. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Staff Report for Proposed Amended

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). December 6, 2002.

7. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Staff Report for Proposed Amended

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). December 5, 2003.

8. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Staff Report for Proposed Amended

Rule 1113 (Architectural Coat ings). June 9, 2006.

9. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index 1996

-

2006.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Architectural Coatings YSAQMD

- 2.14

Page C

- 76 

### 10. Control Measure, YSAQMD

– 2.14, February 2, 2007

11. California Air Resources Board Suggested Control Measure for Architectural

Coatings, October 25, 2007

12. Control Measure 2.14 Calculation Spreadsheet, SMAQMD, May 20, 20082013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

A utomotive Refinishing

Page C

- 77 

# Automotive Refinishing2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

A utomotive Refinishing SMAQMD

- 4 59

Page C

- 78 

### Control Measure Number: SMAQMD

- 459

Control Measure Title: Automotive Coatings

Date: December 8, 2006

Control Measure Description

Automotive refinishing coatings are used on motor vehicles and other mobile

equipment, primarily by auto body repair and paint shops and automotive dealerships.

VOC emissions from the surface coating operations result from the evaporation of the

organic solvents used in the coatings. These emissions occur in a number of places

during the operation, including surface preparation and cleanup, application of the

coating, drying of the parts, and cleanup of the application equipment.

On October 20, 2005, CARB adopted a Suggested Control Measure (SCM) for

automotive coatings. The SCM would introduce several significant changes into

SMAQMD Rule 4 59, Automotive, Truck, and Heavy Equipment Refinishing Operations,

such as:

 Consolidation of limits for Group I and Group II vehicles

 Consolidation of the precoats, primers, primer sealers, and primer surfacers

categories

 Deletion of the multi

- stage topco ats category, and replacement with separate

limits for color coats and clear coats

 Elimination of the specialty coatings category, with specific limits for each type of

coating, and a general limit applicable to all other coatings.

 Lower VOC limits for mos t coating categories.

The proposed control measure will evaluate the information from CARB’s SCM and

propose amendments to Rule 459.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

A utomotive Refinishing SMAQMD

- 4 59

Page C

- 79 

### Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description VOC Planning Inventory

(tpd)

2018

230

- 218

- 9000

- 0000 Automobile Refinish Coatings, Unspecified 0.861 0

510

- 500

- 9021

- 0000 Aerosol Coatings, Auto Body Primers 0.0077

510

- 500

- 9082

- 0000 Aerosol Coatings, Auto Bumper and Trim Coatings 0.0068

510

- 500

- 9083

- 0000 Aerosol Coatings

, Exact Match Engine Enamel 0.0065

510

- 500

- 9084

- 0000 Aerosol Coatings, Exact Match Automotive Coatings 0.0117

510

- 506

- 6558

- 0000 Consumer Products, Automotive Undercoating, Aerosol 0.0243

510

- 506

- 6559

- 0000 Consumer Products, Automotive Undercoating, Non

- Aerosol 0.0018

Total 0.9198



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption Date Implementation Date VOC Emission Reduction (tpd)

2018

Automotive Refinishing 2011 2012 0.1130



### Cost Effectiveness

CARB estimated the overall, statewide cost effectiveness of the SCM to be $1.43 per

pound of VOC reduced. However, this takes into account reductions in districts with a

wide range of stringency in their existing rules. Statewide, CARB estimated a 65%

reduction in emissions from automotive refinish coatings. Based on our existing rule

li mits, District staff has estimated that within the SMAQMD, only a 16.4% reduction in

VOC emissions will occur if the SCM is adopted in place of current limits. A large portion

of the costs for compliance is based on retrofitting existing facilities to be c ompatible

with water

- borne coatings. Compliance costs for the SMAQMD will be similar to the

statewide estimates, but the emission reductions in SMAQMD are expected to be lower

than the statewide average by a factor of 3.96. Therefore, the cost effectivenes s for the

measure in the SMAQMD is estimated to be 3.96 times higher than the statewide

average, or $5.66 per pound ($11,326 per ton) of VOC reduced.

Authority

The District is authorized to adopt and amend rules and regulations by Health and

Safety Code Sections 40001, 40702, and 41010.

Implementation

This control measure will be implemented by the SMAQMD through Rule 459.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

A utomotive Refinishing SMAQMD

- 4 59

Page C

- 80 

### References

1. CARB Ozone SIP Planning Inventory, Version 1.0 6 , Sacramento NAA (Rf#9 80 ),

November 16 , 2006

2. Control Measure, SMAQMD

- 459

, December 8, 2006

3. CARB, Staff Report for the Proposed Suggested Control Measure for Automotive

Coatings, October 2005.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

A utomotive Refinishing FRAQMD

- 3.19

Page C

- 81 

### Control Measure Number: FRAQMD

- 3.19

Control Measure Title: V ehicle and M obile E quipment C oating O perations

Date: February 2, 2007

Control Measure Description

Automotive refinishing coatings are used on motor vehicles and other mobile

equipment, primarily by auto body repair and paint shops and automotive dealerships.

VOC emissions from the surface coating operations result from the evaporation of the

organic solvents used in the coatings. These emissions occur in a number of places

during the operation, including surface preparation and cleanup, applicatio n of the

coating, drying of the parts, and cleanup of the application equipment.

On October 20, 2005, CARB adopted a Suggested Control Measure (SCM) for

automotive coatings. The SCM would introduce several significant changes into

FRAQMD Rule 3.19, Vehicl e and Motor Equipment Coating Operations, such as:

 Consolidation of limits for Group I and Group II vehicles

 Consolidation of the primers, primer sealers, and primer surfacer categories

 Deletion of the multi

- stage topcoats category, and replacement with s eparate

limits for color coats and clear coats

 Elimination of the specialty coatings category, with specific limits for each type of

coating, and a general limit applicable to all other coatings.

 Lower VOC limits for most coating categories.

The proposed control measure will evaluate the information from CARB’s SCM and

propose amendments to Rule 3.19.

Emission Inventory

– 2018

The population growth rate in South Sutter is purely based on the current Sutter County

population growth rate projected by SACOG . The potential growth of proposed South

Sutter Specific Plan (now called Sutter Pointe Specific Plan) is not factored in.

EIC Code EIC Description VOC Planning Inventory (tpd)

2018

230

- 218

- 9000

- 0000 Automobile Refinish

Coatings, Unspecified 0.0035

Total 0.00352013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

A utomotive Refinishing FRAQMD

- 3.19

Page C

- 82 

### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption Date Implementation

Date VOC Emission Reduction (tpd)

2018

Automotive

Refinishing 2016 2017 0.0008



### Cost Effectiveness

The cost effectiveness is expected to range between $5,560 and $77,300 per ton of

ROG reduced.

Authority

The Feather River Air Quality Management District has the authority to propose rules

and regulations to the District Board for adoption under HSC 40 001.

Implementation

The implementation of this control measure does not involve any other agency other

than the Feather River Air Quality Management District.

References

1. El Dorado County AQMD Rule 230, Adopted September 27, 1994.

2. Feather River AQMD Rule 3.19, Adopted August 6, 1998.

3. Placer County APCD Rule 234, Revised April 9, 1998.

4. Sacramento Metro AQMD Rule 459, Revised October 2, 1997.

5. Yolo

- Solano AQMD Rule 2.26, Revised August 13, 1997.

6. Draft Staff Report, Rule 459, SMAQMD, August 2001.

7. Rule ado ption files, Rule 459, SMAQMD.

8. California Air Resources Board, Staff Report for The Proposed Suggested Control

Measures Automotive Coatings, October 2005

9. California ARB Forecasted Emissions by Summary Category, Ozone SIP

Sacramento NAA Projections (v1.0 6 _R F9 80 )

www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/03sip/fcemssumcat_03v1.06.php

. November 16 , 2006

10. Control Measure, FRAQMD

– 3.19, February 2, 20072013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

A utomotive Refinishing PCAPCD

- 234

Page C

- 83 

### Control Measure Number: PCAPCD

- 234

Control Measure Title: Automotive Refinishing Operations

Date: February 5, 2007

Control Measure Description

Automotive refinishing coatings are used on motor vehicles and other mobile

equipm ent, primarily by auto body repair and paint shops and automotive dealerships.

VOC emissions from the surface coating operations result from the evaporation of the

organic solvents used in the coatings. These emissions occur in a number of places

during th e operation, including surface preparation and cleanup, application of the

coating, drying of the parts, and cleanup of the application equipment.

On October 20, 2005, CARB adopted a Suggested Control Measure (SCM) for

automotive coatings. The SCM would i ntroduce several significant changes into

PCAPCD Rule 234, such as:

 Consolidation of limits for Group I and Group II vehicles

 Consolidation of the precoats, primers, primer sealers, and primer surfacers

categories

 Deletion of the multi

- stage topcoats cate gory, and replacement with separate

limits for color coats and clear coats

 Elimination of the specialty coatings category, with specific limits for each type of

coating, and a general limit applicable to all other coatings.

 Lower VOC limits for most coating categories.

The proposed control measure will evaluate the information from CARB’s SCM and

propose amendments to Rule 234.

Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description VOC Planning Inventory (tpd)

2018

230

- 218

- 9000

- 0000 Automobile Refinish Coatings,

Unspecified 0.1836



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption

Date Implementation

date VOC Emission Reduction (tpd)

2018

Automobile Refinish

Coatings 2015 2017 0.0452013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

A utomotive Refinishing PCAPCD

- 234

Page C

- 84 

### Cost Effectiveness

CARB estimated the overall, statewide cost effectiveness of the SCM to be $1.43 per

pound of VOC reduced

. The annual cost for this measure is approximately $57,229/yr.

Authority

California Health and Safety Code, Sections 40000, 40001, and 40702

Implementation

This control measure will be implemented by the PCAPCD through Rule 234.

References

1. El Dorado County AQMD Rule 230, Adopted September 27, 1994.

2. Feather River AQMD Rule 3.19, Adopted August 6, 1998.

3. Placer County APCD Rule 234, Revised April 9, 1998.

4. Sacramento Metro AQMD Rule 459, Revised October 2, 1997.

5. Yolo

- Solano AQMD Rule 2.26, Revised August 13, 1997.

6. Draft Staff Report, Rule 459, SMAQMD, August 2001.

7. Rule adoption files, Rule 459, SMAQMD.

8. Staff Report for the Proposed Suggested Control Measure for Automotive Coating,

CARB, Oc tober 2005.

9. “ARB For e casted Emissions by Summary Category Ozone SIP Planning

Projections v1.0 6 RF #9 80 ”. November 16 , 2006.

10. Control Measure, PCAPCD 234, February 5, 20072013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

A utomotive Refinishing YSAQMD

- 2.26

Page C

- 85 

### Control Measure Number: YSAQMD

– 2.26

Control Measure Title: Automotive Refinishing

Date: February 5, 2007

Control Measure Description

Automotive refinishing coatings are used on motor vehicles and other mobile

equipment, primarily by auto body repair and paint shops and automotive dealerships.

VOC emissions from the surface coating operations result from the evaporation of the

organic solvents used in the coatings. These emissions occur in a number of places

during the operation, including surface preparation and clea nup, application of the

coating, drying of the parts, and cleanup of the application equipment.

On October 20, 2005, CARB adopted a Suggested Control Measure (SCM) for

automotive coatings. The SCM would introduce several significant changes into

YSAQMD Ru le 2.26, Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operation :

 Consolidation of limits for Group I and Group II vehicles

 Consolidation of the precoats, primers, primer sealers, and primer surfacers

categories

 Deletion of the multi

- stage topcoats category, and replacement with separate

limits for color coats and clear coats

 Elimination of the specialty coatings category, with specific limits for each type of

coating, and a general limit applicable to all other coatings.

 Lower VOC limits for most coating cat egories.

The proposed control measure will evaluate the information from CARB’s SCM and

propose amendments to Rule 2.26.

Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description VOC Planning Inventory (tpd)

2018

230

- 218

- 9000

- 0000 Coatings 0.0907

230

- 218

- 9050

- 0000 Topcoats 0.0809

230

- 240

- 8300

- 0000 Thinning and Cleanup Solvents 0.0169

Total 0.1885



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption

Date Implementation

Date VOC Emission Reduction (tpd)

2018

Automotive Refinishing 2008 2009

- 2010 0.05812013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

A utomotive Refinishing YSAQMD

- 2.26

Page C

- 86 

### Cost Effectiveness

The SCM staff report calculates that the annualized cost to for facilities with a single

booth with no heater and an annual revenue less than $1 million, to be $1,648 (Page C

5). The cost includes upgrades to existing air moving/heating equipment, the purchasing

of new application equipment, and worker training. This cost has been annualized over

15 years for major non

- recurring costs, over 5 years for all other costs, and then

adjusted for capital cost recovery. The SCM es timates the recurring costs of equipment

operation and maintenance, and the increased coating costs, to be $533 per year.

Therefore, the total annual cost to facilities is estimated to be $2,181. Adjusting for

inflation in 2008, the annual cost becomes $2, 344.58. Currently there are 80 permitted

sources that will be affected by this proposed control measure. The annual ROG

emission reductions have been calculated using the emission inventory estimates over

a 5 day per week and 52 weeks per year operational schedule.

Year 2018

Lifetime Cost Effectiveness ($/ton)

ROG $11,643



### Total Cost: $2,637,647 over 15 years (2008)

Authority

The District is authorized to adopt and amend rules and regulations by Health and

Safety Code Sections 40001, 40702, and 41010.

Implementation

This control measure will be implemented by the YSAQMD.

References

1. California Environmental Protection Agency

– Air Resources Board, Staff Report for

the Proposed Suggested Control Measure for Automotive Coatings ; October 2005.

2. Fo recasted Emissions by Summary Category Ozone SIP Planning Projections

- v1.06 RF#980; Date of Last Update: November 16, 2006.

3. Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management District, Rule 2.26, Motor Vehicle and Mobile

Equipment Coating Operation; August 13, 1997.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning

Page C

- 87 

# Degreasing/ Solvent Cleaning2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning EDCAQMD

- 225/235

Page C

- 882013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning FRAQMD

- 3.14

Page C

- 89 

### Control Measure Number: FRAQMD

- 3.14

Control Measure Title: Solvent Degreasing

Date: February 2, 2007

Control Measure Description

Degreasing and solvent cleaning operations are performed by many commercial and

industrial facilities. Solvents are used for surface preparation for further processing and

cleaning after manufacturing. Degreasing is widely used by automotive repair and

mai ntenance facilities and by electric apparatus and electronic component

manufacturing or repair, construction trades, printing shops, metal parts and products,

can coating, and other types of commercial and manufacturing facilities. Solvents are

also used b y coating operations for cleaning of coating application equipment such as

spray guns and brushes

.

The existing Rule 3.14

- Solvent Degreasing was adopted in June 1991. Both Placer

County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) and Sacramento Metropolitan Air

Quality Management District (SMAQMD) have revised their degreasing and surface

preparation and cleanup rules in recent years to replace general solvent cleaning with

aqueous cleaners or exempt solvent cleaners. This control measure will evaluate

implem enting similar limits in Sutter and Yuba Counties if they are feasible and cost

effective.

Emission Inventory

– 2018

The population growth rate in South Sutter is purely based on the current Sutter County

population growth rate projected by SACOG. The pot ential growth of proposed South

Sutter Specific Plan (now called Sutter Pointe Specific Plan) is not factored in.

EIC Code EIC Description ROG Planning Inventory (Tons/day)

2018

220

- 204

- 0500

- 0000 Cold Cleaning

– Petroleum Nap h tha 0.0069

220

- 208

- 0500

- 0000 Handwiping

– Petroleum Naphtha 0.0007

Total 0.0076



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption

Date Implementation

Date ROG Emission reductions (Tons/day)

2018

Degreasing/Solvent

Cleaning 2011 2011 0.00062013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning FRAQMD

- 3.14

Page C

- 90 

### Cost Effectiveness

Based on the Placer County Air Pollution Control District staff report for Rule 216

- Organic Solvent Cleaning and Degreasing Operations, the cost impact of changing from

solvent based cleaners to aqueous based cleaners is minimal.

Authority

The above con trol measure will be implemented by amendment to the existing Rule

3.14 Solvent Degreasing. The Feather River Air Quality Management District has the

authority to propose rules and regulations to the District Board for adoption under HSC

40001.

Implementa tion

The implementation of this proposed control measure does not involve any other

agency other than the Feather River Air Quality Management District.

References

1. California ARB Forecasted Emissions by Summary Category, Ozone SIP

Sacramento NAA Projections (v1.06_RF980)

www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/03sip/fcemssumcat_03v1.06.php . November 16, 2006

2. Placer County Air Pollution Control District Staff Report for Rule 216, Dec ember 11,

2003

3. Control Measure, FRAQMD 3.14, February 2, 20072013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Degreasing/Sol vent Cleaning YSAQMD

- 2.24/2.31

Page C

- 91 

### Control Measure Number: YSAQMD

– 2.24/2.31

Control Measure Title: General Surface Preparation/Cleanup and Degreasing

Date: February 5, 2007

Control Measure Description

Degreasing and solvent cleaning operations are performed by many commercial and

industrial facilities. Solvents are used for surface preparation for further processing and

cleaning after manufacturing. D egreasing is widely used by automotive repair and

maintenance facilities and by electric apparatus and electronic component

manufacturing or repair, construction trades, printing shops, metal parts and products,

can coating, and other types of commercial a nd manufacturing facilities. Solvents are

also used by coating operations for cleaning of coating application equipment such as

spray guns and brushes

.

The proposed control measure consists of the District revising the ROG limits of Rule

2.13 1 

### (Organic So lvents), Rule 2.24 2 

### (Solvent Cleaning Operations

- Degreasing), and

Rule 2.31 3 

### (Surface Preparation and Cleanup) to match the ROG limits currently

feasible and required by South Coast AQMD’s Rule 1122 4 

### (Solvent Degreasers) and

Rule 1171 5 

### (Solvent Cleaning Operations). It is expected that most of the ROG

- content

limits will be reduced to 25 grams per liter (g/L).

Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description ROG Planning Inventory (Tons/day)

2018

22020405000000 0500

- Petroleum Naphtha 0.4243

22020430220000 3022

- Alcohols (Unspecified) 0.0089

22020430830000 3083

- Chlorofluorocarbons (Unspecified) 0.0006

22020431760000 3176

- Glycol Ethers (Unspecified) 0.0008

22020432040000 3204

- Ketones (Unspecified) 0.0003

22020433330000 3333

- Terpenes (Unspecified) 0.0035

22020481060000 8106

- Degreasing Solvents

- Blends

(Unspecified) 0.0265

22020630830000 3083

- Chlorofluorocarbons (Unspecified) 0.0005

22020633460000 3346

- Trichloroethylene (Tce) 0.0004

22020805000000 0500

- Petroleum Naphtha 0.0359

22020830220000 3022

- Alcohols (Unspecified) 0.0193

22020830830000 3083

- Chlorofluorocarbons (Unspecified) 0.0000

22020831760000 3176

- Glycol Ethers (Unspecified) 0.0039

22020832040000 3204

- Ketones (Unspecified) 0.0145

22020833390000 3339

- Toluene/xylene 0.0035

22020833460000 3346

- Trichloroethylene (Tce) 0.0004

22020881040000 8104

- Degreasing Solvents

- Pure (Unspecified) 0.0029

22020881060000 8106

- Degreasing Solvents

- Blends

(Unspecified) 0.0087

Total 0.55492013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Degreasing/Sol vent Cleaning YSAQMD

- 2.24/2.31

Page C

- 92 

### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption

Date Implementation

Date ROG E mission R eduction (tpd)

2018

Degreasing/Solvent

Cleaning 2008 2009 0.762



### Cost Effectiveness

The cost effectiveness for this control method varies depending on the type of cleaning

being performed. Cost analysis was performed for each solvent cleaning application

(e.g., electrical parts, architectural coatings application equipment). Switching to

cleaners with lower VOC content would result in either cost decreases or increases,

depending on the particula r application. The costs are expected to range from a cost

savings to $6.60/lb across the different applications. The overall cost effectiveness for

this proposal is estimated at $2,398 per ton of VOC reduced.

Authority

The District is authorized to adop t and amend rules and regulations by Health and

Safety Code Sections 40001, 40702, and 41010.

Implementation

This control measure will be implemented by the YSAQMD.

References

1. Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management District, Rule 2.13, Organic Solvents ; May 25,

1994.

2.

..., Rule 2.24, Solvent Cleaning Operations (Degreasing) ; August 13, 1997.

3.

..., Rule 2.31, Surface Preparation and Cleanup ; August 13 , 1997

. 4. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1122, Solvent Degreasers ;

October 1, 2004.

5.

..., Rule 1171 , Solvent Cleaning Operations ; May 6, 2005.

6. California Environmental Protection Agency

– Air Resources Board, Forecasted

Emissions by Summary Category Ozone SIP Planning Projections

- v1.06 RF#980 ;

Date of Last Update: November 16, 2006.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Graphic Arts

Page C

- 93 

# Graphic Arts2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Graphic Arts YSAQMD

- 2.29

Page C

- 94 

### Control Measure Number: YSAQMD

– 2.29

Control Measure Title: Graphic Arts

Date: February 7, 2007

Control Measure Description

VOC emissions from graphic art operations result from the evaporation of organic

solvents in the inks, fountain solutions, and solvents used in the various types of printing

processes. These operations produce a wide variety of printed products that include

b ooks, magazines, newspapers, fliers, posters, and packaging materials. These various

types of products require that facilities use very specific materials and printing methods.

The different types of printing methods include lithography, flexography, gravu re, and

letterpress. Although the District’s graphic arts rule (Rule 2.29) contains specific screen

printing requirements, for the purposes of the SIP, the screen printing category will be

grouped into the paper, fabric, and film coating category.

For cer tain lithographic and flexographic printing operations heatset inks are used.

These viscous inks are cured using indirect hot air dryers that evaporate the ink

solvents immediately after printing. In the Yolo

- Solano AQMD, smaller heatset presses

are equipp ed with electric hot air or UV light dryers. However, the larger heatset

presses are equipped with natural gas fired dryers. Currently, only a single flexographic

printing facility is permitted to use a Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer (RTO) to control the

RO G emissions from its operation. Because no additional NO X 

### controls are currently

available for combustion devices being used as air pollution control equipment, NO X 

### reductions associated with graphic arts operations will not be addressed in this control

st rategy.

The first proposed control measure in reducing the ROG emissions would be to lower

the District’s current rule exemption limit from 400 pounds per month to 60 pounds per

month. The second proposed control measure is to revise the Districts' variou s cleaning

solvent ROG limits to match the current Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD standards.

The District’s ROG emission exemption is contained in Rule 2.29, Graphic Arts Printing

Operations, while the allowable solvent limits are contained in District Rule 2.31,

Solvent Preparation and Cleanup.

Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description ROG Inventory for Control Measures (tpd)

2018

24099580000000 Solvent 0.1252013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Graphic Arts YSAQMD

- 2.29

Page C

- 95 

### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption

Date Implementation

Date ROG E mission R eduction (tpd)

2018

Solvent 2016 2018 Not available

Yolo Solano Air Quality Management District does not have enough data to quantify the

emission reduction.



### Cost Effectiveness

Because of the various types of solvents currently used in this wide source category

and the unavailability of specific usage data, the District cannot perform a cost

effectiveness calculation for this control measure. However, it is expected that because

of the availability of the compliant products in the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality

Management District, the added costs associated with purchasing and disposing of the

ROG compliant materials will not greatly differ from the cost of the currently com pliant

ROG products.

Authority

The District is authorized to adopt and amend rules and regulations by Health and

Safety Code Sections 40001, 40702, and 41010.

Implementation

This control measure will be implemented by the YSAQMD.

References

1. California Environmental Protection Agency

– Air Resources Board, Forecasted

Emissions by Summary Category Ozone SIP Planning Projections

- V1.06 RF#980 ;

Date of Last Update: November 16, 2006.

2. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, Rule 450, Graphic Arts

Operations ; March 24, 2000.

3. Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management District, Rule 2.29, Graphic Arts Printing

Operations ; August 13, 1997.

4. Rule 2.31, Solvent Preparation and Cleanup ; August 13, 1997.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products

Page C

- 96 

# Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Pro ducts2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products PCAPCD

- CM3

Page C

- 97 

### Control Measure Number: PCAPCD

- C M3

Control Measure Title: Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products

Date: February 5, 2007

Control Measure Description

This category is comprised of VOC emissions from the coating of miscellaneous metal

parts and products including signs, storage and trash containers, door frames, window

frames, panels, metal cabinets, caskets and various other metal coating operations.

VO C emissions from the surface coating operations result from the evaporation of the

organic solvents used in the coatings. These emissions occur in a number of places

during the operation, including surface preparation and cleanup, application of the

coatin g, drying of the parts, and cleanup of the application equipment. This control

measure will only address the VOC emissions from the coating process. The surface

preparation and cleanup VOC emissions are addressed under other measures.

Staff evaluated the miscellaneous metal parts and products VOC limits that are included

in EPA’s Control Technique Guideline for Metal Parts and Products.

Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description VOC Planning Inventory (tpd)

2018

230

- 230

- 9000

- 0000 Metal Parts And Products

Coating 0.0405



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption Date Implementation

Date VOC Emission Reductions (tpd)

2018

Metal Parts And

Products Coating 2009 2009 0.014



### Cost Effectiveness

The cost effectiveness for this measure has not been determined. Other VOC rules

within the nonattainment area have ranged in cost effectiveness from $110

- $8,330 per

ton of VOC reduced.

Authority

The Placer County Air pollution Control District has the authority to propose rules and

regulations to the District Board for adoption under HSC 40001.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products PCAPCD

- CM3

Page C

- 98 

### Implementation

The implementation of this proposed control measure does not involve any other

agency other than the Placer County Air pollution Control District.

References

1. California ARB Forecasted Emissions by Summary Category, Ozone SIP

Sacramento NAA Projections (v1.06_RF980)

www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/03sip/fcemssumcat_03v1.06.php . November 1 6, 2006

2. CARB’s Areawide Source Methodologies, Industrial Coatings, Updated February

1990; Reissued October 1997

3. Control Measure, PCAPCD CM3, February 5, 20072013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Natural Gas Production and Processing

Page C

- 99 

# Natural Gas Production and Processing2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Natural Gas Production and Processing SMAQMD

- 461

Page C

- 100 

### Control Measure Number: SMAQMD

- 461

Control Measure Title: Natural Gas Production and Processing

Date: December 8, 2006

Control Measure Description

There are several natural gas production fields within Sacramento County. Fugitive

emissions of VOC from natural gas production occur from equipment leaks in valves,

pumps, compressors, pressure relief devices, flanges, and threaded connections at gas

well s and associated transmission systems. The proposed control measure would

establish inspection and repair requirements for leaking components or other

requirements to achieve similar results.

Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description VOC Planning

Inventory (tpd )

2018

310

- 302

- 1600

- 0000 Oil and Gas Production Fugitive Losses

- Valves 0.3279

310

- 304

- 1600

- 0000 Oil and Gas Production Fugitive Losses

- Fittings 0.1348

310

- 306

- 1600

- 0000 Oil and Gas Production Fugitive Losses

- Pumps 0.0005

310

- 308

- 1600

- 0000 Oil and Gas Production Fugitive Losses

- Compressors 0.0014

Total 0.4646



### Note: The inventory in the above table is based on the current CARB planning

inventory. However, the District conducted a survey of natural gas producers in 2004

that produced an emission estimate of only 0.161 tons/day from fugitive components.

Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption

Date Implementation

Date VOC Emission Reduction

(tpd)

2018

Fugitive Emissions

– Oil and Gas

Production 2014 2015 0.116

- 0.334



### Cost Effectiveness

The cost effectiveness of the leak detections and repair program was estimated by

CARB in the 1993 RACT determination document at $3.70 per pound in 1989 dollars.

Adjusted for inflation, this is equivalent to $11,900 per ton in 2006 dollars.

Authority

The District is authorized to adopt and amend rules and regulations by Health and

Safety Code Sections 40001, 40702, and 41010.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Natural Gas Production and Processing SMAQMD

- 461

Page C

- 101 

### Implementation

This control measure will be implemented by the SMAQMD.

References

1. CARB Ozon e SIP Planning Inventory, Version 1.06, Sacramento NAA (Rf#980),

November 16, 2006

2. Protocol for Equipment Leak Emission Estimates, EPA

- 453/R

- 95

- 017, U.S. EPA,

November 1995.

3. Determination of Reasonably Available Control Technology for the Control of

Fugiti ve Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds from Oil and Gas Production and

Processing Facilities, Refineries, Chemical Plants, and Pipeline Transfer Stations,

California Air Resources Board, December 1993.

4. Control Measure, SMAQMD

– 461, December 8, 20062013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

NO X Control Measures

Page C

- 102 

# NO X 

# Control Measures2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters

Page C



### - 103 

# Boilers

, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters YSAQMD

- 2.27

Page C



### - 104 

### Control Measure Number: YSAQMD

– 2.27

Control Measure Title: Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters/Space

Heaters

Date: February 6, 2007

Control Measure Description

Boilers and steam generators are used to provide hot water and steam for a variety of

industrial and commercial applications. These applications include space heating, food

processing, garment laundering , and equipment sterilization. Manufacturing operations

use process heaters to heat materials or equipment during the manufacturing process.

The equipment burners can be fired on solid, liquid or gaseous fuels. A unit’s maximum

input rating can be calculated from the fuel heat input value over an hour’s time and is

reported in British Thermal Units per hour (MMBTU/hr). Per regulatory convention, the

emissions from these types of units are reported in parts per million (ppm) corrected to

3% oxygen (O 2 

### ).

The proposed control measure consists of the District amending Rule 2.27 (Industrial,

Institution al, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters) to

incorporate a multi

- tiered NO X 

### emission limit.

Emission Inventory

- 2018

EIC Code EIC Description NO X Planning Inventory (tpd)

2018

5000501100000 Manufacturing and Industrial Boilers, Natural Gas Fuel 0.0302

5001001100000 Manufacturing and Industrial Boilers, Propane Fuel 0.0068

5099501100000 Manufacturing and Industrial Process Heaters, Natural Gas

Fuel 0.8936

5200501100000 Manufacturing and Industrial Process Heaters, Distillate Oil

Fuel 0.141

5201001100000 Manufacturing and Industrial Oven Heaters (Forced Drying

Surface Coatings), Natural Gas Fuel 0.0217

6000501100000 Manufacturing and Industrial, Other, Natural Gas Fuel 0.1428

6001001100000 Manufacturing and Indust rial, Other, LPG Fuel 0.0078

6099501100000 Food and Agricultural Process Boilers, Natural Gas Fuel 0.6945

31035601100000 Food and Agricultural Process Heaters, Natural Gas Fuel 0.0099

Total 1.9483



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption D ate Implementation

Date NO X Emission Reduction Tons/day

2018

Boilers 2016 2018 0.28832013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters YSAQMD

- 2.27

Page C



### - 105 

### Cost Effectiveness

From an analysis performed by the Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD in 2003 2 

### , the cost

for boiler retrofits will vary on the size, the type, and the age of an individual unit. It is

expected that some of the older units that have reached the end of their service lives

may be replaced instead of being retrofitted with low

- NO X 

### equipment or post

combustion controls. Based on this analysis, the cost of equipm ent modifications

ranged from $12,664

- $23,359 per ton of NO X 

### reduced. Adjusted for inflation, the

expected cost in 2007 will be $13,934

- $25,718.

Total Cost: $17,924,227

- $33,061,593 over a 15 year equipment useful life (2007).

Authority

The Distri ct is authorized to adopt and amend rules and regulations by Health and

Safety Code Sections 40001, 40702, and 41010.

Implementation

This control measure will be implemented by the YSAQMD through Rule 2.27.

References

1. California Environmental Protection Agency

– Air Resources Board, Forecasted

Emissions by Summary Category Ozone SIP Planning Projections

- v1.06 RF#980 ;

Date of Last Update: November 16, 2006.

2. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, Fi nal Draft

– Sacramento

Off

- Road Measures : Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters/Space

Heaters , October 14, 2003.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

IC Engines

Page C



### - 106 

# IC Engines2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

IC Engines FRAQMD

- 3.22

Page C



### - 107 

### Control Measure Number: FRAQMD

- 3.22

Control Measure Title: Stationary Internal Combustion Engines (Non

- Agricultural)

Date: February 5, 2007

Control Measure Description

Internal combustion (IC) engines are in place at a wide variety of stationary sources.

Use times range from a few hours a month for emergency standby engines to full

- time

for engines that are used as prime power. Standby engines tend to have small

horsepower ratings (under 300) and may be in place to operate f ire pumps or to provide

backup power in case of an electrical outage, while engines that provide prime power

are larger (often over 600 hp) and usage may be constant.

The most common fuel type for emergency standby engines is diesel, and for prime

power e ngines, natural gas. Other fuels such as propane, gasoline, and landfill gas are

also used occasionally, depending on the engine application. Many of the natural gas

engines are in remote locations and used to compress natural gas from natural gas

wells. T hese engines can be either lean burn or rich burn. The pollutants of primary

concern that result from the combustion process are NO X 

### and CO; however, recent

rulemaking efforts at the statewide level have focused on diesel PM, which has been

identified as a carcinogen and a toxic air contaminant. SO X 

### and ROG also result from

the combustion process.

The proposed control measure would establish emission standards for non

- agricultural

stationary IC engines.

EIC Emission Inventory:

The population growth rate in South Sutter is purely based on the current Sutter County

population growth rate projected by SACOG. The potential growth of proposed South

Sutter Specific Plan (now called Sutter Pointe Specific Plan) is not factored in.

Emission Inventory

- 2018

EIC Code EIC Description NO X Inventory for Control Measures (tpd)

2018

060

- 995

- 1220

- 0000 Service and Commercial, Other,

Distillate 0.002

099

- 995

- 0000

- 0000 Fuel Combustion (other) 0.018

Total 0.0202013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

IC Engines FRAQMD

- 3.22

Page C



### - 108 

### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption Date Implementation

Date NO X Emission Reductions (tpd)

2018

IC Engines 2010 2011 0.0045



### Cost Effectiveness

The cost effectiveness is estimated to be $11,500 per ton of NO X 

### reduced.

Implementation

The Feather River Air Quality Management District proposes to implement this rule in

2011.

Authority

Feather River Air Quality Management District has the authority to regulating stationary

internal combustion engines is within provisions of the Califor nia Health and Safety

Code.

References

1. Placer County Air Pollution Control District Rule 242 Internal Combustion Engines

2. South Coast AQMD Rule 1110.2, Emissions from Gaseous and Liquid

- Fueled

Engines

3. San Joaquin 2002 and 2005 Rate of Progress Plan

4. Draft Final Sacramento Off

- road Measures, Control Measure D

- 20, Cogeneration/IC

Engines , Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD, October 14, 2003.

5. “ARB Forecasted Emissions by Summary Category Ozone SIP Planning Projections

v1.06 RF #980”. www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/0#sip/fcemssumcat_0#v106.php

. November 16, 2006.

6. Control Measure, FRAQMD 3.22, February 2, 20072013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Water Heaters

Page C



### - 109 

# Water Heaters2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Water Heaters EDCAQMD

- 239

Page C



### - 110 

### Control Measure Number : EDCAQMD

- 239

Control Measure Title: Natural Gas

- Fired Water Heaters

Date: January 31, 2007

Control Measure Description

This control measure will evaluate low NO X 

### limits for all new boilers and water heaters

within a heat input range of less than 1,000,000 Btu/hr. At the current time, El Dorado

County Air Quality Management District (EDCAQMD) Rule 239 (Natural Gas

- Fired

Water Heaters) sets NO X 

### emission standards fo r water heaters with rated capacities of

less than 75,000 Btu/hr.

The heat input range addressed by this control measure generally applies to small

commercial/industrial boilers and hot water heaters that predominantly burn natural gas

and are used to hea t water and generate steam. These units are used in a variety of

applications, including in restaurants, retail stores, schools, hotels and office buildings.

The smaller units in this heat input range (i.e., <300,000 Btu/hr) use the natural draft

created b y combustion of natural gas and air to transfer heat to the confined water and

do not rely on fans or blowers to transport either air or combustion gases. These

combustion units are known as “atmospheric” and are rather simple in their operation.

The large r units in this heat input range (i.e., >300,000 Btu/hr) usually resemble small

boilers because water circulates through a series of water tubes or water jackets close

to the flow of hot gases and are heated as the gases flow around them. Burners on

these units can be either atmospheric or forced draft.

Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description NO X Inventory for Control Measures (tpd)

2018

060

- 995

- 0110

- 0000 Service and Commercial (Other) 0.011

610

- 608

- 0110

- 0000 Residential Natural Gas Water

Heating 0.017

Total 0.028



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption Date Implementation Date NO X Emission

Reductions (tpd)

2018

Water Heaters 2015 2016 0.0035



### Cost Effectiveness

Based on the May 5, 2006 South Coast Air Quality Management District Staff Report for

Rule 1146.2 Measures, the cost effectiveness ranges from $2400

- $16,000/ton of NO X



### reduced.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Water Heaters EDCAQMD

- 239

Page C



### - 111 

### Authority

The above control measure will be implemented by amendment to the e xisting Rule 239

Natural Gas

- Fired Residential Water Heaters. The El Dorado Air Quality Management

District has the authority to propose rules and regulations to the District Board for

adoption under HSC 40001.

Implementation

The implementation of this p roposed control measure does not involve any other

agency other than the El Dorado County Air Quality Management District.

References

1. California ARB Forecasted Emissions by Summary Category, Ozone SIP

Sacramento NAA Projections (v1.06_RF980)

www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/03sip/fcemssumcat_03v1.06.php . November 16, 2006

2. South Coast Air Quality Management District Staff Report for Rule 1146.2, May 5,

2006

3. Control Measure, E DCAQMD 239, January 31, 20072013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Water Heaters FRAQMD

- 3.23

Page C



### - 112 

### Control Measure Number: FRAQMD

- 3.23

Control Measure Title: Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers

Date: February 5, 2007

Control Measure Description

This control measure will evaluate low NO X 

### limits for all new boilers and water heaters

within the heat input range of 75,000 to 1,000,000 Btu/hr. This category includes small

commercial/industrial boilers and hot water heaters that predominately burn natu ral gas

and are used to heat water and generate steam. These units are used to heat water or

create steam for a variety of purposes. Users of these units include restaurants, retail

stores, schools, hotels and office buildings. The smaller units in this si ze range (<300,000 Btu/hr) use the natural draft created by combustion of natural gas and air to

transfer heat to the confined water and do not rely on fans or blowers to transport either

air or combustion gases. These combustion units are known as “atmosp heric” and are

rather simple in their operation. Units with heat inputs larger than 300,000 Btu/hr usually

resemble small boilers because water circulates through a series of water tubes or

water jackets close to the flow of hot gases and are heated as the gases flow around

them. Burners on these units can be either atmospheric or forced draft. Currently

Sacramento, Yolo/Solano, and El Dorado all have rules for natural gas fired water

heaters that apply to units with a heat input of less than 75,000 Btu/hr but do not have a

rule for larger units in the size range for this measure.

Emission Inventory

– 2018

The population growth rate in south Sutter is purely based on the current Sutter County

population growth rate projected by SACOG. The potential growth of proposed South

Sutter Specific Plan (now called Sutter Pointe Spe cific Plan) is not factored in.

EIC Code EIC Description NO X Inventory for Control Measures (tpd)

2018

610

- 608

- 0110

- 0000 Residential Natural Gas Water

Heating 0.0041



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption Date Implementation Date NO X Emission

Reductions (tpd)

2018

Water Heaters 2016 2017 0.0001



### Cost Effectiveness

Cost effectiveness is expected to range between $9,000 and $21,308 per ton of NO X



### reduced.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Water Heaters FRAQMD

- 3.23

Page C



### - 113 

### Authority

Feather River Air Quality Management District has the authority to regulating stationary

internal combustion engines is within provisions of the California Health and Safety

Code.

References

1. Sonoma Technology Method Summary for Commercial Gas Fuel Usage and

Emissions, September 16, 2002

2. California Energy Commission 2000 natural gas database by natural gas usage and

number of accounts by county and SIC code.

3. Staff Report, Rule 1146.2, Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Large Water

Heaters and Small Boilers, South Coast Air Quality Management District, January

9, 1998

4. Staff Report, Rule 74.11.1, Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers, Ventura County

Air Pollution Control District, August 31, 1999

5. Staff Report, Rule 360, Emissions of Oxides of Ni trogen from Large Water Heaters

and Small Boilers, Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, October 17,

2002.

6. California ARB Forecasted Emissions by Summary Category, Ozone SIP

Sacramento NAA Projections (v1.06_RF980)

www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/03sip/fcemssumcat_03v1.06.php . November 16, 2006

7. Control Measure, FRAQMD 3.23, February 5, 20072013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Water Heaters PCAPCD

- CM2

Page C



### - 114 

### Control Measure N umber: PCAPCD

- CM2

Control Measure Title: Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers

Date: February 5, 2007

Control Measure Description

This control measure will evaluate low NO X 

### limits for all new boilers and water heaters

within the heat input range of 75,000 to 1,000,000 Btu/hr. This category includes small

commercial/industrial boilers and hot water heaters that predominately burn natural gas

and are used to heat water and gen erate steam. These units are used to heat water or

create steam for a variety of purposes. Users of these units include restaurants, retail

stores, schools, hotels and office buildings. The smaller units in this size range

(<300,000 Btu/hr) use the natural draft created by combustion of natural gas and air to

transfer heat to the confined water and do not rely on fans or blowers to transport either

air or combustion gases. These combustion units are known as “atmospheric” and are

rather simple in their oper ation. Units with heat inputs larger than 300,000 Btu/hr usually

resemble small boilers because water circulates through a series of water tubes or

water jackets close to the flow of hot gases and are heated as the gases flow around

them. Burners on these units can be either atmospheric or forced draft. Currently

Sacramento, Yolo/Solano, and El Dorado all have rules for natural gas fired water

heaters that apply to units with a heat input of less than 75,000 Btu/hr but do not have a

rule for larger units in the size range for this measure.

Emission Inventory

– 2018

EIC Code EIC Description NO X Inventory for Control Measures (tpd)

2018

060

- 995

- 0110

- 0000 Service and Commercial (Other) 0.7827

610

- 608

- 0110

- 0000 Residential Natural Gas Water

Heating 0.2055

Total 0.9882



### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption Date Implementation Date NO X Emission

Reductions (tpd)

2018

Residential Natural Gas

Water Heating 2015 2017 0.030



### Cost Effectiveness

The estimated cost effectiveness of this measure is $2,300

- $21,309/ton of NO X



### reduced.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Water Heaters PCAPCD

- CM2

Page C



### - 115 

### Authority

California Health and Safety Code, Sections 40000, 40001, and 40702

Implementation

The Placer County Air Pollution Control District is the implementing agency.

References

1. SMAQMD Method Summary for natural gas consumption by commercial gas

combustion categories by Hao Quinn, November 12, 2002.

2. Sonoma Technology Method Summary for Commercial Gas Fuel Usage and

Emissions, September 16, 2002

3. California Energy Commission 2000 natural gas database by natural gas usage and

number of accounts by county and SIC code.

4. Database query of stationary fuel combustion and residential combustion from 7

-

15

- 03 CEFS forecast output (provided by Larry Hunsaker, CARB).

5. Co mmunication with Ali Mohamad of the SMAQMD on July 24, 2003 to discuss

SMAQMD staff report on Rule 411, Boiler NO X



### . 6. Communication with Hao Quinn of the SMAQMD on July 29, 2003 to determine

estimated fuel use and number of sources for large water heaters an d small boilers.

7. Staff Report, Rule 1146.2, Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Large Water

Heaters and Small Boilers, South Coast Air Quality Management District, January

9, 1998

8. Staff Report, Rule 74.11.1, Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers, Ventura County

Air Pollution Control District, August 31, 1999

9. Staff Report, Rule 360, Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Large Water Heaters

and Small Boilers, Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, October 17,

2002.

10. Staff Report, Rule 411, NO X 

### fr om Boilers, Process Heaters and Steam Generators,

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Pollution Control District, October 27, 2005.

11. CARB Ozone SIP Planning Inventory, Version 1.06, Sacramento NAA (Rf#980),

November 16, 2006.

12. Control Measure, PCAPCD CM2, February 5 , 20072013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Water Heaters YSAQMD

- 2.37

Page C



### - 116 

### Control Measure Number: YSAQMD

– 2.37

Control Measure Title: Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers

Date: February 1, 2007

Control Measure Description

This control measure will evaluate low NO X 

### limits for all new boilers and water heaters

within the heat input range of 75,000 to 1,000,000 Btu/hr. At the current time, Yolo

Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD) Rule 2.37 (Natural Gas Fired

Reside ntial Water Heaters) sets NO X 

### emission standards for water heaters with rated

capacities of less than 75,000 Btu/hr. This control measure addresses boilers and water

heaters that fall between the heat capacity ranges of 75,000 to 1,000,000 Btu/hr.

The hea t input range addressed by this control measure generally applies to small

commercial/industrial boilers and hot water heaters that predominantly burn natural gas

and are used to heat water and generate steam. These units are used in a variety of

applicati ons, including in restaurants, retail stores, schools, hotels and office buildings.

The smaller units in this heat input range (i.e., <300,000 Btu/hr) use the natural draft

created by combustion of natural gas and air to transfer heat to the confined water and

do not rely on fans or blowers to transport either air or combustion gases. These

combustion units are known as “atmospheric” and are rather simple in their operation.

The larger units in this heat input range (i.e., >300,000 Btu/hr) usually resemble small

boilers because water circulates through a series of water tubes or water jackets close

to the flow of hot gases and are heated as the gases flow around them. Burners on

these units can be either atmospheric or forced draft.

Emission Inventory

– 2018

The Yolo

- Solano planning emission inventory for water heaters is presented below for

NO X 

### and VOC, although this control measure pertains to NO X 

### emissions, only.

EIC Code EIC Description NO X Inventory for Control

Measures (tpd)

2018

052

- 005

- 0110

- 0000 Food and Agricultural Processing

- Boilers 0.141

052

- 010

- 0110

- 0000 Food and Agricultural Processing

- Process

Heaters 0.0217

060

- 005

- 0110

- 0000 Service and Commercial

- Boilers 0.1428

060

- 010

- 0110

- 0000 Service and Commercial

- Process Heaters 0.0078

060

- 995

- 0110

- 0000 Service and Commercial

- Other 0.6945

310

- 356

- 0110

- 0000 Oil and Gas Production

- Natural Gas Production 0.0099

610

- 608

- 0110

- 0000 Residential Fuel Combustion

- Fuel Combustion

- Water Heating 0.2322

610

- 995

- 0110

- 0000 Residential Fuel Combustion

- Other 0.0419

Total 1.29182013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Water Heaters YSAQMD

- 2.37

Page C



### - 117 

### Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption Date Implementation Date NO X Emission

Reductions (tpd)

2018

Water Heaters 2009 2010 0.2403



### Cost Effectiveness

Cost effectiveness was estimated based upon economic analyses conducted by the

SCAQMD for a similar measure.

It was assumed that the economic conditions for equipment dealers in the Yolo

- Solano

area do not differ significantly than the economic conditions for equipment dealers in the

South Coast area; therefore, the estimated South Coast cost effectiveness values were

assumed to be appropriate for Yolo

- Solano. SCAQMD Rule 1121 and 1146.2

amendments are not considered to be technology forcing and compliant heate rs are

already being manufactured and sold in the current consumer market.

Based on cost effectiveness information from the SCAQMD rules, the overall cost

effectiveness for the proposed measure is estimated to be $9,903/ton.

Authority

Authority to imple ment this control measure by the SMAQMD is in accordance with

California Health and Safety Code, Sections 40000, 40001, and 41010.

Implementation

The Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management District is the implementing agency.

References

1. California Environmental Protection Agency

– Air Resources Board, Forecasted

Emissions by Summary Category Ozone SIP Planning Projections

- v1.06 RF#980 ;

Date of Last Update: November 16, 2006.

2. Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management District, Rule 2.37, Natural Gas

- Fired

Residential Water Heaters , November 9, 1994.

3. South Coast Air Quality Management District; Rule 1146.2, Emissions of Oxides of

Nitrogen from Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers and Process Heaters , Mat 5,

2006.

4. Sacramento Metropol itan Air Quality Management District, Final Draft

– Sacramento

Off

- Road Measures : Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers , October 14, 2003.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Further Study Measures

Page C



### - 118 

# Further Study Measure s2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Further Study Measures

Page C



### - 119 Further Study Measures

Further study measures are measures for which insufficient information was available during the

development of the control strategy to allow the region to commit to them as control measures.

The adoption of further study measures requires full evaluations of emission data, cost

effectiveness, technolog ical feasibility, and authorit y for implementation

. If the evaluations show

that the measures are viable control measures, they will be considered for adoption and

implementation

.

This section includes the description of six further study measures. These measures are

evaluated qualitatively for environmental impacts in this State Implementation Plan and will be

evaluated quantitatively for the actual emission benefits and feasibility in the fu ture. These

further study measures are: 1) Heat Island Mitigation, 2) Alternative Energy, 3) Energy

efficiency, 4) Gasoline Transfer Phase I/II, 5) Lubricants, and 6) Ep isodic Controls.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Heat Island

Page C



### - 120 Control Measure Number: Further Study

– 1

Control Measure Title: Urban Heat Island

Control Measure Description:

The purpose of this control measure is to encourage activities that would lower ambient

temperatures in urban areas. This control measure focuses on encouraging activities such as

using lighter, more reflective surface materials and increased tree planting.

This further study measure will evaluate the potential to develop programs that promote the use

of light colored roofing and pavement materials, solar roofing membranes, and increased tree

planting. Also programs to promote use of more reflective pavement and tree planting could be

a required element for new sources, or could be included as recommendations th rough the

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Handbook. Sources such as builders,

utilities, cities and local government agencies, and private citizens, etc. that promote the use of

lighter colored materials and increased tree planting could be eligible for an emission credit.

Emission credits could be issued based on types of surface materials used or numbers of trees

per unit or area that meet or exceed a specified benchmark.

There are a variety of potential techniques that can be imp lemented to reduce urban

temperatures and increase the albedo of roofs, pavements, and building surfaces. Most of these

techniques can be implemented during the maintenance or modification of existing structures or

during the building stages of new structu res.

Emission Inventory

- 2018

The air d istrict s do not have sufficient information to calculate the inventory for this potential

control measure at this time.

Emissions Reductions

The air d istrict s are not able to calculate the potential emission reductions from this control

measure because the emission inventory is unknown. The amount of emission reductions will

be determined during implementation of this control measure.

Cost Effectiveness

The air d istrict s do not have sufficient information to calculate the cost effectiveness of this

control measure. The air d istrict s will continue to monitor the progress made on a similar control

measure for urban heat islands proposed in both the SJVUAPCD 2007 Oz one Plan and

SCAQMD Final 2007 AQMP and determine at a later date if the control measure is feasible and

cost effective.

Authority

The implementing agencies could include the air d istrict s and local governments.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Urban Heat Island

Page C



### - 121 Recommendation

This control measure requ ires additional information and further study and is not recommended

at this time. The air d istrict s will continue to monitor the progress made on the control measure

for urban heat islands proposed in SJVUAPCD and SCAQMD.

References

2007 Ozone Plan, Chapter 8: Innovative Strategies and Programs: 8.2.4, San Joaquin Valley Air

Pollution Control District, April 30, 2007.

Final 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV

- A: CM#2007MCS

- 03, South Coast Air Quality Management

District, June 2007.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Alternative Energy

Page C



### - 122 Control Measure Number: Further Study

– 2

Control Measure Title: Alternative Energy

Control Measure Description:

The use of alternative energy sources either in transportation or stationary applications can

reduce ozone precursors. This further study measure looks at reductions possible in the

stationary sector of the Sacramento region. This source category includes facilities or

operations that have VOC

- containing byproducts that can be converted to electric energy by

ut ilizing currently available technology or other byproducts such as biomass waste, from which

energy could also be derived. The electricity produced may be used for internal facility needs or

metered back and sold to utility companies.

This further study m easure will evaluate potential opportunities to convert green waste, dairy

manure, and other forms of biomass into usable energy for electricity generation. The converted

fuel depending on the type could be used in fuel cells, internal combustion (IC) engi nes or mini

turbines.

The San Joaquin APCD proposed in their 2007 Ozone Plan a measure very similar to this one

and has also committed to study this measure further.

Emission Inventory

- 2018

There is no specific inventory attributable to this source c ategory, since it can include any

application for which there is technology that can produce energy without using fossil

- based

materials.

Emissions Reductions

The air d istrict s do not have sufficient information to calculate the potential emission reductions

from this control measure.

Cost Effectiveness

The air d istrict s do not have sufficient information to calculate the cost effectiveness of this

control measure. The air d istrict s will continue to monitor the progress made on a similar control

measure for alternative energy proposed in SJVUAPCD and determine at a later date if the

control measure is feasible and cost effective.

Authority

The implementing agencies still need to be determined.

Recommendation

This control measure requires additional information and further studies and is not

recommended at this time. The air d istrict s will continue to monitor the progress made on the

control measure for alternative energy proposed in the SJVUAPCD.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Alternative Energy

Page C



### - 123 References

2007 Ozone Plan, Chapter 8: Innovative Strategies and Programs: 8.2.5, San Joaquin Valley Air

Pollution Control District, April 30, 2007.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Energy Efficiency

Page C



### - 124 Control Measure Number: Further Study

– 3

Control Measure Title: Energy Efficiency

Control Measure Description:

The purpose of this further study measure is to look at possible sources of emissions in the

region that could reduce ozone precursors by reducing energy consumption.

This future study measure will evaluate energy efficiency projects and practices that have a

demonstrable benefit to air quality, such as energy efficient water pumps, solar water heater s, reduced agricultural field passes, use of GPS in agricultural operations, and other conservation

management practices that simultaneously reduce PM and ozone precursors. In addition, this

further study measure will examine green certification of energy efficient homes, offices, and

commercial and industrial facilities that utilized green building practices.

Emission Inventory

- 2018

There is inadequate information to calculate the emission inventory from these projects at this

time.

Emissions Reductio ns

There is inadequate information to calculate the potential emission reductions. The air d istrict s

will monitor the development of a similar control measure in the SCAQMD and SJVUAPCD and

determine the potential emission reductions once more information becomes available.

Cost Effectiveness

The air d istrict s do not have sufficient information to calculate the cost effectiveness of this

control measure. The air d istrict s will continue to monitor the progress made on a similar control

measure for altern ative energy proposed in SCAQMD and determine at a later date if the control

measure is feasible and cost effective.

Authority

The implementing agencies could include the air d istrict s and local governments.

Recommendation

This control measure requires additional information and further studies and is not

recommended at this time. The air d istrict s will continue to monitor the progress made on the

control measure for energy efficiency proposed in the SCAQMD.

References

Final 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV

- A: C M#2007MCS

- 03, South Coast Air Quality Management

District, June 2007.

2007 Ozone Plan, Chapter 8: Innovative Strategies and Programs: 8.2.4, San Joaquin Valley Air

Pollution Control District, April 30, 2007.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Gasoline Transfer Phase I/II

Page C



### - 125 Control Measure Number: Further Study

– 4

Control Measure Title: Gasoline Transfer Phase I/II

Control Measure Description

The purpose of this control measure is to reduce VOC and toxic emissions from gasoline

dispensing facilities (GDFs) by improving implementation of the Enhanced Vapor Recovery

(EVR) Regulation.

The EVR includes testing and certification procedures to improve the performance and

specification of both Phase I and Phase II vapor recovery systems. The EVR for Phase I

inclu de s the improvements of the spill containment and cover, rotatable product and vapor

adaptors, overfill prevention device, and pressure vacuum vent gauges. The EVR for Phase II

includes, but is not limited to, the onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) an d the in

- stat ion

diagnostic (ISD). The ORVR routes gasoline vapor displaced during vehicle fueling to the

onboard canister on the vehicle. The ISD is designed to provide continuous real

- time monitoring

of vapor collection and containment efficiencies, aler t the GDF operator when a failure mode is

detected so that corrective action can be taken, shut down the dispensers if repairs are ignored

and provide compliance records.

Currently, emissions from GDFs are regulated by the EVR regulation of the California Air

Resources Board (CARB) and local air district rules

.

This control measure will evaluate methods to improve the functions of the ISD. Some

improvements may include pr oviding earlier warning signal, changing both the warning and

gross failure alerting ranges, disallowing the use of the reset button, or installing a “shut down”

sensor or mechanism on the dispenser to stop fueling if the fuel filters are blocked and the

f ueling flow rate drops below the system certification standards.

In addition, this control measure will explore the option to require controls for mobile refuelers if

a district rule has not established such requirements.

Emission Inventory

SMAQMD

– 2 002 Baseline Emission Inventory (Summer)

EIC Code EIC Description VOC/ROG

(tpd)

330

- 374

- 1100

- 0000 FUEL DISPENSING TANKS

- WORKING

LOSSES 0.1404

330

- 376

- 1100

- 0000 FUEL DISPENSING TANKS

- BREATHING LOSSES 0.1072

330

- 378

- 1100

- 0000 VEHICLE REFUELING

- VAPOR

DISPLACEMENT LOSSES 0.8888

330

- 380

- 1100

- 0000 VEHICLE REFUELING

- SPILLAGE 0.1473

Total 1.28372013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Gasoline Transfer Phase I/II

Page C



### - 126 PCAPCD

– 2002 Baseline Emission Inventory (Summer)

EIC Code EIC Description VOC/ROG

(tpd)

330

- 374

- 1100

- 0000 FUEL DISPENSING TANKS

- WORKING

LOSSES 0.0518

330

- 376

- 1100

- 0000 FUEL DISPENSING TANKS

- BREATHING LOSSES 0.0251

330

- 378

- 1100

- 0000 VEHICLE REFUELING

– VAPOR

DISPLACEMENT LOSSES 0.21

330

- 380

- 1100

- 0000 VEHICLE REFUELING

- SPILLAGE 0.035

Total 0.3219

YSAQMD

– 2002 Baseline Emission Inventory (Summer)

EIC Code EIC Description VOC/ROG

(tpd)

330

- 374

- 1100

- 0000 FUEL DISPENSING TANKS

- WORKING

LOSSES 0.2431

330

- 376

- 1100

- 0000 FUEL DISPENSING TANKS

- BREATHING LOSSES 0.1657

330

- 378

- 1100

- 0000 VEHICLE REFUELING

– VAPOR

DISPLACEMENT LOSSES 1.3848

330

- 380

- 1100

- 0000 VEHICLE REFUELING

- SPILLAGE 0.2293

Total 2.0229

Emission Reductions

There is inadequate information to calculate the potential emission reductions. The air d istrict s

will monitor the development of a similar control measure in SCAQMD and determine the

potential emission reductions once more information becomes available.

Cost Effectiveness

The air d istrict s will continue to monitor the progress made on the similar control measure

proposed in SCAQMD and determine at a later date if the control measure is feasible and cost

effective.

Authority

The air d istrict s are authorized to adopt and amend rules and regulations by Health and Safety

Code Sections 40001 and 40702

.

Recommendation

This control measure requires additional information and further studies, and is not

recommended at this time. The air d istrict s will continue to monitor the developments of the

enhanced detection warnings by SCAQMD and determine the fea sibility of this control measure

once more information becomes available.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Gasoline Transfer Phase I/II

Page C



### - 127 References

Final 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV

- A: CM#2007FUG

- 02, South Coast Air Quality Management

District, June 2007.

2007 Ozone Plan, Appendix I: Candidate Control Measures, S

- PET

- 2. San Joaquin Valley

Unified Air Pollution Control District, April 30, 2007.

CARB Ozone SIP Planning Inventory, Version 1.06, Sacramento NAA (Rf#980), August 26,

20082013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Lubricants

Page C



### - 128 Control Measure Number: Further Study

– 5

Control Measure Title: Lubricants

Control Measure Description

The proposed control measure seeks to reduce VOC emissions from the use of lubricants that

are utilized by a variety of different industries and new facility processes. Lubricants include

product such as coolants in manufacturing processes, stamping fluids, vanishing oils, and

cutting, forming, and honing oils, and are used by various companies in the region including, but

not limited to machine shops, auto rebuilders, an d auto part manufacturers. Many lubricants and

their additives, such as rus t and corrosive inhibitors, are at least 50 percent VOC solvents and

are believed to emit a significant amount of VOCs. In addition, mineral spirits and kerosene

used to dilute lubr icants contain traces of benzene, toluene, and xylene, which are all classified

as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) by the EPA and Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) by the

state of California.

Currently, there are no regulations or emission restrictions speci fically concerned with industrial

lubricants in place at the local, state or federal levels. However, South Coast proposed in their

Final 2007 AQMP to refine the emission inventory for this category and seek alternatives to

high

- VOC lubricants. SCAQMD also proposes to develop rules to further seek emission

reductions. This control measure proposes to look at further reduc ing source emissions by

either placing an overall emission limit by source, or by limiting VOC content in lubricant

formulations at the po int of sale and/or use.

Emission Inventory

- 2018

The emission inventory for this source category is unknown because this source category does

not have a specific Emission Inventory Code. Lubricants may be categorized under coating

and/or solvent operati ons.

Emission Reductions

The air d istrict s are not able to calculate the potential emission reductions from this control

measure because the emission inventory is unknown

.

Cost Effectiveness

The air d istrict s do not have sufficient information to calc ulate the cost effectiveness of this

control measure. The District will continue to monitor the progress made on a similar control

measure for lubricants proposed in SCAQMD and determine at a later date if the control

measure is feasible and cost effective

.

Authority

The air d istrict s ha ve the authority to regulate VOC emissions from industrial coating s and

solvent operations, under which industrial lubricants are categorized.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Lubricants

Page C



### - 129 Recommendation

This control measure requires additional information and further studies and is not

recommended at this time. The air d istrict s will continue to monitor the progress made on the

control measure for lubricants proposed in SCAQMD.

References

Final 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV

- A: CM#2007CTS

- 01, South Coast Air Quality Management

District, June 2007.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix C: Proposed Control Measures

Page C

- 130 Control Measure Number: Further Study

– 6

Control Measure Title: Episodic Controls

(Combination of OFMS

- 8, OFMS13, OFMS16, OFMS19, OFMS20, OFMS21, OFMS24,

OFMS42)

Control Measure Description:

There are various emission reduction strategies that could potentially be implemented on an

episodic basis when meteorological conditions would normally result in ozone exceedances.

This further study measure will evaluate the feasibility of banning or reducing the use of a

variety of types of equipment on high ozone days such as construction equipment, pleasure

craft or other recreational vehicles; and lawn and landscaping equipment. As part of this

evaluation the potential emission reductio ns, cost effectiveness, technical feasibility and the

authority to implement these measures would be analyzed.

SJVUAPCD has a similar control measure included in their Innovative Technologies section of

their plan, but has not ascribed any specific emissi on reduction commitments to this innovative

measure.

Emission Inventory

- 2018

Each of these different approaches would affect a different inventory category or different

categories.

Emissions Reductions

The air districts are not able to calculate the potential emission reductions from these potential

control measures because the mechanisms for achieving the banning or reductions in use have

not been identified.

Cost Effectiveness

The air districts do not have sufficient information to calculate the cost effectiveness of any of

these potential control measures.

Authority

The implementing agencies would need to be determined for each of the potential control

measures.

Recommendation

This control measure requires additional information and further studies and is not

recommended at this time. The air districts will continue to monitor the progress made by

SJVUAPCD on similar episodic controls that are included in their plan and determine at a later

date if this control measure is feasible and cost ef fective.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 1 

### Appendix D: Transportation Control Measures

The following section outlines the development process, selection criteria, and analysis

procedures used by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) in

identifying potential transportation control measures (TCMs)

. Based on this analysis,

measures were either: i) included in the 8

- hour ozone a ttainment p lan

, ii) rejected as

infeasible, or iii) rejected and referred to the air district for its determination on whether

the measures, as well as all other feasible rejected measures, would advance the

attainment date by one or more years

. The purpose of this analysis is to ensure that the

Sacramento Region is implementing all reasonably available control measures (RACM)

,

as required to demonstrate attainment of the 8

- hour ozone standard as expeditiously as

practicable.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 2 

### Regional Transportation Control Measures

Background

Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are defined as strategies that adjust trip

patterns or otherwise modify vehicle use in ways that reduce air pollutant emissions,

and which are specifically identified and committed to in the most recently approved Air

Quality Management Plan or State Implementation Plan (AQMP/SIP). TCMs are

included in the SIP as part of the overall control strategy to demonstrate the region’s

ability to come into attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

(NAAQS). Historically, the majority of emission reductions from mobile sources have

come from technological improvements in vehicle engines and fuel, which are stipulated

by U.S. EPA and CARB. However, by law, and according to the Transportation

Conformity Rule, vehicle technology

- based, fuel chemistry

- based and fleet

maintenance

- based measures cannot be considered as TCMs for timely implementation

purposes.

A definition of TCMs is provided in EPA’s Transportation Conformity Rule

- 40 CFR

Parts 51 and 93:

Transportation control measure (TCM) is any measure that is specifically identified and

committed to in the applicable implementation plan that is either one of the types listed

in §108 of the CAA, or any other measure for the purpose of reducing emissions or

concentrations of air pollutants from transportation sources by reducing vehicle use or

changing traffic flow or congestion conditions. Notwithstanding the above, vehicle

technology

- based, fuel

- based, and maintenance

- based measures which control the

emissions from vehicles under fixed traffic conditions are not TCMs for the purposes of

this subpart.

The Rule also defines the criteria and procedures for timely implementation of TCMs as

follows:

§93.113 Criteria and procedures: Timely Implementation of TCMs

(c) For TIPs, this criterion is satisfied if the following conditions are met:

(1) An examination of the specific steps and funding source(s) needed to fully

implement each TCM indicates that TCMs which are eligible for funding under title 23

U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Laws are on or ahead of the schedule established in the

applicable implementation plan, or, if such TCMs are behind the schedule established in

the applicable implementation plan, the MPO an d DOT have determined that past

obstacles to implementation of the TCMs have been identified and have been or are

being overcome, and that all State and local agencies with influence over approvals or

funding for TCMs are giving maximum priority to approval or funding of TCMs over other

projects within their control, including projects in locations outside the nonattainment or

maintenance area.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 3 

### (2) If TCMs in the applicable implementation plan have previously been programmed for

Federal funding but the funds have not been obligated and the TCMs are behind the

schedule in the implementation plan, then the TIP cannot be found to conform if the

funds intended for those TCMs are reallocated to projects in the TIP other than TCMs,

or if there are no other TCMs in the TIP, if the funds are reallocated to projects in the

TIP other than projects which are eligible for Federal funding intended for air quality

improvement projects, e.g. the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement

Program.

(3) Nothing in the TIP may interfere with the implementation of any TCM in the

applicable implementation plan.

CAA Section 108(f)(1)(A)6 lists the following sixteen categories as illustrative of TCMs.

i. Programs for improved use of public transit;

ii. Restriction of certain roads or lanes to, or construction of such roads or lanes for

use by, passenger buses or high occupancy vehicles;

iii. Employer

- based transportation management plans, including incentives;

iv. Trip

- reduction ordinances;

v. Traffic flow improvement programs tha t achieve emission reductions;

vi. Fringe and transportation corridor parking facilities, serving multiple occupancy

vehicle programs or transit service;

vii. Programs to limit or restrict vehicle use in downtown areas or other areas of

emission concentration, particularly during periods of peak use;

viii. Programs for the provision of all forms of high

- occupancy, shared

- ride services,

such as the pooled use of vans;

ix. Programs to limit portions of road surfaces or certain sections of the metropolitan

area to the use of non

- motorized vehicles or pedestrian use, both as to time and

place;

x. Programs for secure bicycle storage facilities and other facilities, including

bicycle lanes, for the convenience and protection of bicyclists, in both public and

private areas;

xi. Programs to control extended idling of vehicles;

xii. Programs to reduce motor vehicle emissions, consistent with Title II of the Clean

Air Act, which are caused by extreme cold start conditions;

xiii. Employer

- sponsored programs to permit flexible work schedules;

xiv. Programs and ordinances to facilitate non

- automobile travel, provision and

utilization of mass transit, and to generally reduce the need for single

- occupant

vehicle travel, as part of transportation planning and development efforts of a

locality, including programs and ordinances applicable to new shopping centers,

special events, and other centers of vehicle activity;

xv. Programs for new construction and major reconstruction of paths, tracks or areas

solely for the use by pedestrian or other non

- motorized means of transportation,

when economically feasible and in the public interest; and2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 4 

### xvi. Programs to encourage the voluntary removal from use and the marketplace of

pre

- 1980 model year light duty vehicles and pre

- 1980 model light duty trucks.

In addition to the measu res listed above, other measures may be considered as TCMs if

they reduce emissions or concentrations of air pollutants from transportation sources by

modifying vehicle use, changing traffic flow, or mitigating traffic congestion conditions.

TCMs may be voluntary programs, incentive

- based programs, regulatory programs, as

well as market

- or pricing

- based programs.

Based on suggestions received from interagency consultation and discussions with

transportation and air quality stakeholders via the Regional Planning Partnership (RPP),

SACOG formally refines the types of projects to be included as TCMs as appropriate

during the SIP and/or Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) and

MTIP Guidelines development process. During the regular update cycle for each of the

listed documents, SACOG, in coordination with the RPP, will refine and revise TCM

descriptions and definitions in order to clarify the general TCM process as well as

resolve specific implementation issues. It is SACOG’s aim to work wi th the project

implementing agencies, air quality stakeholders, and any other interested parties,

primarily through the RPP, to facilitate the TCM process and implement TCMs

appropriately.

It is SACOG’s responsibility to ensure that TCM strategies are funded in a manner

consistent with the implementation schedule established in the MTIP at the time a

project is identified as a committed TCM. The transportation conformity process is

designed to ensure timely implementation of TCM strategies. If the implementation of a

TCM strategy is delayed, or if a TCM strategy is only partially implemented, the

emission reduction shortfall must be made up by either substituting a new TCM strategy

or by enhancing other control measures through the substitution process described in

this Appendix.

TCM Enforceability and Monitoring

The TCM strategies contained in the SIP are expected to be real, quantifiable, and

enforceable. The region’s long

- range transportation plan (the previously triennial and

now quadrennial Metropolitan Transportation Plan, or MTP) and the shorter

- term

programming used to fund the improvements (the MTIP) together form the foundation

and the keystone for improving transportation system performance while at the same

time assuring th e timely attainment of air quality goals within the region.

Assessing the consistency of emissions deriving from these mobility strategies against

the corresponding mobile source emission budgets contained in the applicable SIP

serves as the basis for determining conformity to the SIP. The MTIP provides the

information needed in assuring the timely implementation of TCM strategies described

in this document. The projects and programs that make up the MTP and MTIP form the

basis for assuring an enforceable commitment for each TCM. Federal law requires that2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 5 

### funding priority be given to TCMs in developing the MTIP. Therefore, the report on the

timely implementation of TCMs will continue to serve as one of the methods of

monitoring the air quality impacts of transportation system improvements.

Developing a List of Potential Transportation Control Measures

Assumptions and Approach

SACOG is now working with the region’s air districts on the development of a new SIP

designed to meet the 1997 8

- hour ozone standard. The inclusion of TCMs in the SIP

sends a clear signal that SACOG is serious about doing its part in helping to attain the

federal air quality standards.

The Clean Air Act defines a list of sixteen potential TCM categories (see previous

section). Essentially a TCM can be any measure that is focused on reducing vehicle use

or traffic/congestion.

Risks

There are some risks with designating projects as transportation control measures, and

they are significant. Every time SACOG makes a confo rmity determination to

accompany a new Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP), a new Metropolitan

Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) or an amendment to either document, we

must demonstrate that all TCMs are still on track to be implemented in a timely fashion.

Implications

If a TCM does not stay on schedule or experiences a funding shortfall, SACOG must

show that “all State and local agencies with influence over approvals or funding for

TCMs are giving maximum priority to approval or funding of TCMs over other projects

within their control...” (40CFR 93.113 (c) 1). If the TCMs are shown to be falling behind

the schedule shown in the SIP or are not fully funded, “then the TIP cannot be found to

conform.” In other words, SACOG may not be able to demonstrate conformity on a new

or amend ed MTP or MTIP if a TCM is failing. SACOG and any other responsible

agencies would have to either ensure that the TCM is able to get back on schedule and

demonstrate that it is fully

- funded, or begin the TCM substitution process if that is not

feasible.

Specific Situations:

Example: Regional Rideshare Program

Several years ago, the State cut funding for ridesharing programs. The SACOG Board

wanted to eliminate the program. However, since the Regional Rideshare Program is a

TCM, it could not be eliminated.

Example: The Bay Area’s Transit Ridership Increase TCM

The San Francisco Bay Area adopted a TCM that called for an increase in transit

ridership of 15% over five years. When the region failed to meet that benchmark, the2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 6 

### MPO was sued and the region went into a conformity lapse. Eventually a substitute

TCM was adopted, a settlement was reached and the region came out of the lapse.

Substitution Process

A standardized TCM substitution process was established a s part of the Federal

transportation bill

, SAFETEA

- LU ( Section 6011(d)) 37



### . The TCM substitution process will

allow SACOG and the Air District to substitute TCMs that either are unable to be

delivered, are no longer feasible or otherwise are no longer desired as TCMs. Prior to

the changes implemented as part of SAFETEA

- LU, a SIP revision and a conformity

determination were required. These actions are no longer required. The following is an

outline of the general requirements:

For a TCM in an approved SIP to be removed and replaced with an alternate TCM

, SAFETEA

- LU requires that:

 

### the substitute TCM(s) must achieve equal or greater emission reductions;

 

### the substitute TCM(s) must be implemented on a schedule that is consistent with

the schedule for the TCM(s) being removed from the SIP; or, if the

implementation date has passed for the TCM(s) being replaced, the replacement

TCM must be implemented as soon as practicable but not later than the date on

which emission reductions from the TCM(s)are n ecessary to achieve the purpose

of the implementation plan;

 

### the substitute TCM(s) must be accompanied by evidence of adequate personnel,

and funding and authority under state or local law to implement, monitor and

enforce the TCM(s);

 

### the substitute TCM(s) must be developed through a collaborative process that

includes participation by all affected jurisdictions (state and local air pollution

control agencies and state and local transportation agencies such as the MPO,

state and city DOTs, and transit providers); consultation with EPA; and

reasonable notice and opportunity for public comment; and

 

### the equivalency of the substitute TCM(s) must be concurred on by the MPO, the

state air pollution control agency and EPA.

A full description of this process is outlined in A ttachment A

- 1 for information.

Preliminary Analysis of the Projects

The projects selected for inclusion in this list of potential TCMs was based on several

criteria. TCMs chosen were to provide air quality benefits, while at the same time

leaving as much flexibility as possible for implementation. Projects likely to experience

delays or cost overruns were avoided. Nearly all the TCMs have the following

37 Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Section 6011(d))

amended Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7506(c)) by adding Substitution of Transportation

Control Measures as para graph (8).2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 7 

### characteristics: early completion dates (most are almost done or will be soon),

reasonable costs, fully committed funding, and projects of small or moderate

- sized

scope. Big projects were seen to represent too big a cost commitment and also likely to

experience overruns and delays. SACOG also avoided projects such as HOV lanes

where t he science for estimating the air quality benefits is uncertain at best. For some

categories, we grouped individual projects altogether. This has the benefit of a smaller

number of projects to track and more flexibility of selecting the ‘right project at the right

time.’ In all cases, funding levels have been kept at a reasonable and conservative level

in the event that future funding sources are reduced or unavailable. Emissions reduction

calculations are included for projects where that data exists. Most of the emission

reduction figures were produced using the California Air Resources Board “ Automated

Methods to Find the Cost

- Effectiveness of Funding Air Quality Projects". These are

provided only as information and would be used if a TCM substitution were required. All

of the TCMs were included in the travel modeling that was used to prepare the motor

vehicle emissions inventory. Therefore, the emissions benefits from the TCMs are

included in this SIP emissions inventory projections and motor vehicle emissions

budgets.

New and Continuing Projects

All of the projects chosen were selected because they had early completion dates, costs

were reasonable

, funding was already committed and delivery appeared to be likely.

Given the serious consequences with TCM failures, these projects were specifically

chosen to maximize the potential for timely TCM implementation

.

Individual Projects

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Projects

ITS projects use advanced technology to help improve the operating efficiency of the

existing infrastructure by increasing traffic flow, providing real

- time information on traffic

conditions, and coordinating operations at local traffic centers. Examples of ITS

technology and tools are freeway ramp meters, dynamic message signs, and traffic

signal timing.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 8 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: ITS

- 1

TCM ID: ITS

- 1

Control Measure Title: Arden Way “Smart Corridor”

Control Measure Description

Construct improvements on Arden Way from Del Paso Boulevard to Watt Avenue.

Project includes the following intelligent transportation system (ITS) elements:

 A fiber optic trunk line

 Closed circuit television cameras

 Transit signal priority

 Changeable message signs, and

 Count stations

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2008.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $2,627,794

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Sacramento Department of Transportation

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (v)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 9 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: ITS

- 2

TCM ID: ITS

- 2

Control Measure Title: Sacramento Traffic Operations Center

Control Measure Description

This project will evaluate and implement on downtown and other major corridors,

Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) elements and infrastructure necessary to

provide traffic responsive/coordinated signal timing and communications to the Traffic

Operation Center.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for th is measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2009.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $1,130,000

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Sacramento Department of Transportation

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (v)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 10 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: ITS

- 4

TCM ID: ITS

- 4

Control Measure Title: STARNET Implementation

Control Measure Description

The Sacramento Transportation Area Network, or STARNET, is an information

exchange network and operations coordination framework that will be used by the

operators of transportation facilities and emergency responders in the Sacramento

region of California. STARNET will enable the real

- time sharing of data and live video,

and refinement of joint pro cedures pertaining to the operation of roadways and public

transit, and public safety activities. It will also provide more information for travelers via

the region’s 511 web site and interactive telephone service (dial 511).

The goals of STARNET are:

 Make travel easier and safer

 Gather and disseminate more and better real

- time travel information

 Better travel decisions

– time, mode, route

 Provide transportation system managers and emergency responders with more

and better real

- time information

 Including information from other agencies

 Better operational decisions and actions

 Allow shared use of field devices when appropriate

 Better use of resources and better operation

STARNET will build upon the previous Intelligent Transportation System (ITS)

investments by using, with little to no modifications, the existing field infrastructure

(cameras, changeable message signs, traffic signals, vehicle location systems, etc. )

and central systems (freeway management systems, traffic signal systems, transit

management systems, computer aided dispatch systems, etc. ) already operated by

each agency. As part of the STARNET implementation, interfaces will be developed to

these existing systems to enable them to share data and video with each other, provide

data and video to the public via the 511 regional travel information system, and provide

operations and emergency response personnel with a map

- based regional

transportation management display.

STARNET was identified as a high priority project for the Sacramento area in the

region’s Intelligent Transportation Systems Strategic Deployment Plan.

During 2006, the involved agencies are preparing a concept of operations, system

requirements, and a request for proposals for system integration. The system is

expected to be operational in 2008.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 11 

### Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2009.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $3,260,000

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Area Council of Governments

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (v)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 12 

### Park and Ride Lots / Transit Centers

CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TF

- 1

TCM ID: TF

- 1

Control Measure Title: El Dorado Central Park and Ride Facility

Control Measure Description

In Diamond Springs, on Commerce Way at State Route 49: Construct Central Transfer

Facility and Park & Ride with capacity for 95 spaces. This property is adjacent to El

Dorado Transit’s office and maintenance facility.

The location of this facility is approximately 42 miles from downtown Sacramento, and

thus has the potential of reducing passenger vehicle travel by 2,000,000 miles per year.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2009.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $550,574.

Needed Resources and Authority

El Dorado County Transit Authority

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (vi)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 13 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TF

- 2

TCM ID: TF

- 2

Control Measure Title: Improvements to Loomis Multimodal Center

Control Measure Description

Design and construct pedestrian and landscaping improvements at the multimodal

center including a Class I bike facility adjacent to Taylor Rd. from downtown Loomis to

Sierra College Blvd. Specific improvements include:

 Construct pedestrian walkways up to Taylor Road and around the depot

 Install bike parking equipment

 Install landscaping and other transit and pedestrian amenities

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is estimated to be completed in 2010.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $659,225

Needed Resources and Authority

Town of Loomis Department of Public Works

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (xv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 14 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TF

- 3

TCM ID: TF

- 3

Control Measure Title: 13 th 

### and 16 th 

### Street Light Rail Station Improvements

Control Measure Description

RT, in partnership with the Capitol Area Development Authority (CADA) and the City of

Sacramento, is improving the 13th & 16th Street light rail stations. This project is to

renovate and improve connectivity to the 13th Street and 16th Street light rail stations,

which are within the R Street Corridor redevelopment area. The total project cost is

estimated at $1,883,000. The project will be implemented by RT (for the portion

comprising the light rail stations and bus stops) and the City of Sacramento (for the

portions within City rights

- of

- way). RT's portion of the project cost is estimated at

$988,000.

RT, in partnership with the Capitol Area Development Authority (CADA) and the City of

Sacramento, has applied for and received a grant of $1,693,000 from the SACOG

Community Development Grants program. The grant is administered by the California

Transportation Commission (CTC) and the California Department of Transportation

(Caltrans). Of the $190,000 local match, $90,000 is coming from CADA tax increment

revenues, and $100,000 is being contributed by RT from Measure A funds.

Scope of Work (revised 7/30/07)

13th Street Station:

 Mini

- high shelters on ramps

 Cosmetic improvements to existing shelter

 Cosmetic improvements to existing walls

 Additional light poles

 New seating

 Miscellaneous plant replacements

 Miscellaneous tree and shrub pruning

 Repainting

16th Street Station:

 New mini

- high ramp and removal of existing vertical lift

 Mini

- high Shelters on ramps

 Replace existing shelter canopy

 Additional light poles

 New seating

 Cosmetic improvements to walls on north side

 Increase sitting/standing pavement area on south side2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 15 

###  Planting screen on garage face

 Miscellaneous plant replacements

 Miscellaneous tree and shrub pruning

 Repainting

Both stations will also receive sidewalk improvements and directional signage within a

1

- block radius, as well as other improvements to be constructed by the City.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is estimated to be completed in 200 9

.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $988,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Regional Transit District

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (xv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 16 

### Funding Programs

Transit Service

Investment in transit is one of the cornerstones of the MTP for 2035. The overall

philosophy followed in the MTP for 2035 seeks to increase transit service significantly,

aimed at:

 improving service for the transit dependent,

 attracting riders who could otherwise choose to drive,

 extending rail where it can be cost effective considering surrounding housing and

employment densities, and

 setting up new bus or rail services on corridors connecting suburban activity centers.

In that context, SACOG through the MTP gives primary priority to transit expansion, with

the objective of an effective transit system that both serves those who rely on transit

and attracts riders who also have the choice to drive. The MTP proposes to invest the

maximum feasible share of the region’s flexible capital funding into transit expansion,

commensurate with funding to operate and need for road capacity for transit to run on.

This investment approximately triples the amount of transit available in 2035 compared

to today. There are no funds available to operate more service beyond that level, and a

modest amount of flexible funds must be invested in road improvements so that transit

can move effectively through areas of congested traffic.

Travel by transit is of great interest in the Sacramento region for several reasons. First,

transit provides an opportunity for substantially reducing VMT, through shifts from low

occupancy modes like driving alone to a very high occupancy mode of travel. Second,

for commute trips, which tend to occur at peak periods of travel demand when

congestion is highest, transit can provide substantial congestion relief. Finally, high

quality transit service can provide necessary mobility to residents and employees in

higher density, mixed

- use areas, where auto travel can be impractical. For these

reasons, SACOG proposes making a commitment to maintain existing levels of transit

service through the following TCMs:2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 17 

### Transit Vehicle Acquisitions (TR

- 1)

List of bus replacement projects include:

TCM

ID SACOG ID Measure Title Cost

TR

- 1 PLA25223 Auburn Transit Bus Replacement $225,000

PLA25371 Roseville Transit Bus Purchase $2,300,000

PLA25322 Roseville Transit Bus Replacement $375,000

SAC24365 Replacement Neighborhood Ride Buses $255,000

SAC24418 E

- Tran Replacement Buses $1,400,000

REG17924 SRTD Neighborhood Ride Vehicle

Replacement $3,600,000

YST10418 Yuba Sutter Transit Bus Expansion $1,500,000

YCT18176 YCTD Bus Replacement $1,700,0002013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 18 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 1A

TCM ID: TR

- 1A

Control Measure Title: Auburn Transit Bus Replacement

Control Measure Description

Replacement of 1 CNG bus for Auburn Transit.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is estimated to be completed in 2008.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $225,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Auburn Department of Public Works

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 19 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 1B

TCM ID: TR

- 1B

Control Measure Title: Roseville Transit Bus Purchase

Control Measure Description

Purchase 3 30' replacement fixed route buses, 3 30' expansion fixed route buses, and 1

40' replacement commuter bus

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is estimated to be completed in 2009.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $2,300,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Roseville Department of Public Works

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 20 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 1C

TCM ID: TR

- 1C

Control Measure Title: Roseville Transit Bus Replacement

Control Measure Description

Replace five (5) cutaway buses.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2008.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $375,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Roseville Department of Public Works

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 21 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 1D

TCM ID: TR

- 1D

Control Measure Title: Replacement Neighborhood Ride Buses

Control Measure Description

Replace three diesel cutaways that are used for neighborhood ride routes and

paratransit service.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2012.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $255,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Elk Grove

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 22 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 1E

TCM ID: TR

- 1E

Control Measure Title: E

- Tran Replacement Buses

Control Measure Description

Purchase six CNG replacement buses for the City of Elk Grove's E

- Tran bus transit

buses. The CNG buses replace six CNG and diesel buses that are beyond their useful

life. Later, programming team moved $1,070,000 from 2010 back to 2009.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2010.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $1,400,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Elk Grove

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 23 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 1F

TCM ID: TR

- 1F

Control Measure Title: SRTD Neighborhood Ride Vehicle Replacement

Control Measure Description

Purchase 14 Neighborhood Ride Vehicles to replace vehicles which have surpassed

their useful lives. 17 are needed, but 3 will be funded from an alternate source. RT

assumes $110,000 per vehicle and a 5

- year life.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2010.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $3,600,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Regional Transit District

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 24 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 1G

TCM ID: TR

- 1G

Control Measure Title: Yuba Sutter Transit Bus Expansion

Control Measure Description

Purchase three specially equipped, heavy

- duty clean diesel commuter buses with a

seating capacity of 45 or more to expand the current fleet of commuter buses from 11 to

14. These three commuter buses will be 40' to 45' in length.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is estimated to be completed in 2010.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $1,500,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Yuba Sutter Transit

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 25 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 1H

TCM ID: TR

- 1H

Control Measure Title: YCTD Bus Replacement

Control Measure Description

This project will replace 4 40

- ft 1993 CNG transit buses.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2010.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $1,700,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Yolo County Transportation District

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 26 

### Transit Operations (TR

- 2)

For these control measures, transit operations consist of ‘transit operating assistance’

for public transit operators. The operating assistance funds the difference between the

costs of operating an eligible public transportation service and the revenues derived

from system operations. Operating assistance funds can be used by public transit

operators for any transit service that is open to the general public (i.e. it cannot be used

for school bus or charter services). These funds can be used for fixed route transit

service as well as for dial

- a

- ride or paratransit service. Some transit operators also use

these funds for preventive maintenance of their transit vehicles.

List of funded transit operations include:

TCM

ID SACOG ID Measure Title Cost

TR

- 2 ELD19267 El Dorado Transit Operating Assistance $580,000

PLA25215 Roseville Operating Assistance $145,000

SAC24060 Elk Grove Operating Assistance $1,800,000

SAC24061 Folsom Operating Assistance $745,000

PAR10002 Paratransit Operating Assistance $350,000

SAC24173 Sacramento County Operating

Assistance $59,000

REG16670 Regional Transit Operating Assistance $364,000,000

YCT18094 YCTD Operating Assistance $1,100,0002013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 27 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 2A

TCM ID: TR

- 2A

Control Measure Title: El Dorado Transit Operating Assistance

Control Measure Description

Operating Assistance (FTA 5311 Cycle 26)

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2009.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $580,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

El Dorado County Transit

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 28 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 2B

TCM ID: TR

- 2B

Control Measure Title: Roseville Operating Assistance

Control Measure Description

The City of Roseville Transit is applying for $71,514 in JARC funds in order to extend

their weekday revenue hours on core fixed routes, as well as an extension of the hours

on their Dial

- A

- Ride (DAR) services (and operate DAR on 3 current non

- service

holidays) to provide transportation to employees getting off work in the evening. The

additional hours will also allow employees to connect with Placer County Transit and

Sacramento Regional Transit in the evening.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This measure will be in effect through 2012

.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $145,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Roseville Department of Public Works

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 29 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 2C

TCM ID: TR

- 2C

Control Measure Title: Elk Grove Operating Assistance

Control Measure Description

In Elk Grove, preventive maintenance for Elk Grove transit operations.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This measure will be in effect through 2011.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $1,800,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Elk Grove

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 30 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 2D

TCM ID: TR

- 2D

Control Measure Title: Folsom Operating Assistance

Control Measure Description

In Folsom, provide operating assistance for Folsom Stage Lines.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This measure will be in effect through 2011.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $745,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Folsom Department of Public Works

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 31 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 2E

TCM ID: TR

- 2E

Control Measure Title: Paratransit Operating Assistance

Control Measure Description

Paratransit, Inc. is asking for FFY 2006 JARC funds to continue to provide much

needed and currently limited transportation options between low

- income residential

areas, and employment & job training centers, especially in the Point West area, in the

retail areas around Arden Fair Mall, as well as other parts of Sacramento County.

[Contains FFY 06 and 07 operating funds]

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This measure will be in effect through 2008.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $350,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Paratransit, Inc.

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 32 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 2F

TCM ID: TR

- 2F

Control Measure Title: Sacramento County Operating Assistance

Control Measure Description

Expand the South County Transit/Link Highway 99 bus services between the City of

Lodi in San Joaquin County, Galt, Elk Grove, and the Regional Transit Transfer Center

at Florin Mall. This route provides connections to the South County Transit Galt and

Delta routes, Elk Grove Transit (e

- TRAN), Sacramento Regional Transit, Lodi Grapeline

transit service, and the San Joaquin Regional Transit District.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This measure will be in effect through 2008.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $59,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento County Department of Transportation

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 33 

### C ONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 2G

TCM ID: TR

- 2G

Control Measure Title: Regional Transit Operating Assistance

Control Measure Description

Continued operation and maintenance of bus, light rail, and paratransit services.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This measure will be in effect through 2010.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $364,000,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Regional Transit District

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 34 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TR

- 2H

TCM ID: TR

- 2H

Control Measure Title: YCTD Operating Assistance

Control Measure Description

YCTD FY 08 Operating Assistance for ADA Paratransit Service

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This measure will be in effect through 2008.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $1,100,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Yolo County Transportation District

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (i)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 35 

### Air Quality Programs

CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: AQ

- 1

TCM ID: AQ

- 1

Control Measure Title: Freeway Service Patrol

Control Measure Description

The Freeway Service Patrol (FSP) is a program which reduces freeway congestion by

quickly finding and removing minor incidents from the freeway. Minor incidents include

stalled cars and "fender

- bender" accidents which, in total, account for more than half of

all non

- recurrent freeway congestion.

FSP's special team of tow truck drivers patrols the Sacramento freewa ys during the

times when they are the busiest (the two peak commute periods, one in the morning

and the other in the late afternoon). FSP drivers assist stranded motorists by helping

them change a flat tire, providing a gallon of fuel, jump

- starting their car, or making

other minor repairs as needed. If FSP cannot quickly get the vehicle running, it is towed

to a CHP

- approved location off the freeway away from the fast

- moving traffic and where

the motorist can arrange for towing and/or repair.

The efforts of FSP to quickly remove minor freeway incidents during peak commute

periods saves Sacramento motorists over 2 million wasted hours every year

. The Freeway Service Patrol program operates on the following Sacramento Freeways:

 Highway 99

- Grant Line Road to the Hwy 99/50 Interchange

 Capital City Freeway (Business 80)

- Hwy 99/50 Interchange to the I

- 80

Interchange

 Interstate 5

- Elk Grove Blvd to the Highway 99 Interchange

 Highway 50

- Interstate 5 to Scott Road

 Interstate 80

- Interstate 5 to the Placer County Line; in Yolo County from Mace

Blvd. to Jefferson Blvd.

The Freeway Service Patrol operates from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 6:30

p.m. Monday through Friday (except holidays).

FSP is coordinated by the STA, California Highway Patrol, and Caltrans. Major funding

is provided by the State of California and the Sacramento Area Council of Governments

(SACOG). There is absolutely no charge to motorists for FSP services.

Most of the funding for our FSP Program comes from the State of California through the

State Highway Account and from the Sacramento Area Council of Governments

(SACOG) which staffs and manages the Capitol Valley Regional Service Authority for

Freeways and Expressways (SAFE). The SAFE monies from SACOG serves as the2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 36 

### re quired by the local match obligation attached to the State monies. STA administration

funds are also used to supplement funding.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This measure is implemented continuously through 2018.

Cost

The annual budget for this measure is $1,400,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Transportation Authority

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (v)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 37 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: AQ

- 2

TCM ID: AQ

- 2

Control Measure Title: SECAT

Control Measure Description

The Sacramento Emergency Clean Air & Transportation (SECAT) Program is a

partnership between the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

(SMAQMD) and the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG). The

Program's goal is to reduce harmful emissions from on

- road heavy

- duty vehicles

operating in the Sacramento region. This program was originally created by California

Assembly Bill (AB) 2511 to help assure that the Sacramento region meet its

commitments under the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality attainment. The

goal of the program is to reduce the nitrogen oxide emissions in our air from heavy

- duty

vehicles to meet the 2018 federal 8

- hour ozon e standard.

Emission Reductions

Total emission reductions taken for this measure will be:

NO X 

### : 0

. 9 1 tons per day

ROG: 0. 0 6 tons per day

Note: The reductions noted here include benefits from other funding streams.

Timeframe

This measure is implemented continuously through 2018.

Cost

The annual budget for this measure is $3,000,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (xvi)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 38 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: TCM

- ONMS

- ED

- 1 (AQ

- 3)

Control Measure Title: Notification for Spare the Air Days

Control Measure Description

The “Spare the Air” program is a year

- round public education program with an episodic

ozone reduction element during the summer ozone season, plus general awareness

throughout the rest of the year. It is designed to inform people when air quality is

unhealthy and achieve voluntary emission reductions by encouraging them to reduce

vehicle trips. The Spare the Air program has operated in the Sacramento region since

1995 and has been funded largely by Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality funds.

The program includes but is not limited to a Web site ( www.SpareTheAir.com ), daily

regional air quality forecasting, mapping of real time air quality data, production and

airing of television and radio commercials, free Air Alert notifications, brochures and

other printed materials distributed to the public & business community, elementary

school assemblies, participation in community events throughout the region. This

measure also commits to perform an annual awareness survey to judge the program's

effectiveness.

This control measure seeks to reduce vehicle activity. The current Spare the Air

program is included in the most recent approved MTP. This program currently costs

approximately $600,000 per year and will require adjustments to account for inflationary

cost increases. This measure is to continue the program funding and achieve at least

the same effectiveness as today's program.

This is a transportation control measure (TCM) measure with its primary goal being to

reduce passenger car VMT, trips, or both.

Targeted EIC Categories and Planning Inventory

This measure discourages vehicle use for light

- duty vehicles. These 10

- digit codes have

been summarized into 3

- digit EIC summary codes where most sub

- codes are equally

affected by the measure. The resting and diurnal evaporative emissions categories are

not affected by the measure to the same degree. However, due to the small size of this

portion of the inventory, the inclusion of EICs from the third column (reflecting resting

and diurnal evaporative emissions) is unlikely to reduce the accuracy of the emission

reduct ion results.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 39 

### 3

- digit

EIC 10

- digit EICs equally affected by the measure 10

- digit

EICs

excluded

710 7107011100, 7107061100, 7107081100, 7107121100,

7107141100, 7107180248, 7107205410, 7107311100,

7107341100, 7107361100, 7107401100, 7107421100,

7107440248, 7107465410, 7107611210, 7107641210,

7107660248, 7107685410 7107101100,

7107381100

722 7227011100, 7227061100, 7227081100, 7227121100,

7227141100, 7227180248, 7227205410, 7227311100,

7227341100, 7227361100, 7227401100, 7227421100,

7227440248, 7227465410, 7227611210, 7227641210,

7227660248, 7227685410 7227101100,

7227381100

723 7237011100, 7237061100, 7237081100, 7237121100,

7237141100, 7237180248, 7237205410, 7237311100,

7237341100, 7237361100, 7237401100, 7237421100,

7237440248, 7237465410, 7237611210, 7 237641210,

7237660248, 7237685410 7237101100,

7237381100

750 7507011100, 7507061100, 7507081100, 7507121100,

7507141100, 7507180248, 7507205410, 7507311100,

7507341100, 7507361100, 7507401100, 7507421100,

7507440248, 7507465410, 7507611210, 7507641210,

7507660248, 7507685410 7507101100,

7507381100

2018

EIC Code EIC Description Fuel Nonattainment

Planning Inventory

NO X 

### (tpd) ROG (tpd)

710 Light Duty

Passenger All 4.16 7.27

722 Light Duty Truck 1 All 1.82 2.89

723 Light Duty Truck 2 All 4.36 5.72

750 Motorcycle All 0.93 3.53

Total 11.27 19.40

Emission Reductions

The current program (as surveyed in 2005) resulted in 1% of drivers decreasing their

activity by 3.0 trips each due to outreach. The assessment of the benefits is made using

the quantification methodology developed in consultation with the California Air

Resources Board. This analysis uses public opinion surveys to estimate the number of

drivers who purposefully reduced driving as a result of this program. The reductions

here use survey results from 2005. We expect that the program will generate the same

level of activity reduction in the future as the effectiveness noted above is consistent

with the effectiveness in the 6 years prior to 2005. A formal methodology for conducting2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 40 

### the surveys and quantifying the emission benefits is expected to be subject to public

review in 2009 and submitted as part of the State Implementation Plan.

From the California Highway Patrol website and the census bureau, the number of

licensed drivers in the SFNA counties and partial counties was determined. The number

of licensed drivers in SFNA is approximately 1,400,000 in 2004 based on CHP county

estimates and apportioned counties in SFNA. Knowing the number of trips avoided,

percent of drivers participating, and total number of drivers in the SFNA, we can

calculate the number of trips avoided under the current program.

Year Number of Licensed

Drivers in SFNA Avoided Trips

under Current

Program

2018 1, 847,503 55,425

The emissions benefits are estimated based on the program's total avoided trips

compared to total trips in each year and applying this ratio to the appropriate emission

events (such as hot starts). Emission reductions are shown below for 2018 for light duty

passenger vehicles, light duty trucks 1, light duty trucks 2, and motorcycles.

2018

EIC Code NO X 

### ROG

Tpd % Tpd %

710 0.017 0.40% 0.021 0.29%

722 0.007 0.40% 0.009 0.31%

723 0.018 0.40% 0.018 0.31%

750 0.004 0.40% 0.011 0.31%

TOTAL 0.046 0.40% 0.059 0.30%

Timeframe

Measure is implemented 2008

- 2018.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 41 

### Cost and Cost Effectiveness

The cost effectiveness of the current program was estimated based on the 2006 budget

of approximately $600,000.

2018

X

Pollutant Lifetime Cost

Effectiveness ($/ton)

NO X 

### $ 1,293,071

ROG $ 1,007,279

NO X 

### + ROG $ 566,211

Note that this cost effectiveness is much higher than would generally be acceptable. This measure provides other

valuable benefits including; 1) education to motivate behavior changes which result in longer term benefits that aren't

quantified here 2) protection of public health by providing tools to media, businesses, and individuals to take action

during high pollution episodes, and 3) building and maintaining public support for other emission

- reducing measures

such as Blueprint, rules and ordinances that air district Boards, the SACOG Board, and local jurisdictions will

consider to fulfill their SIP obligations.



### Needed Resources and Authority

Potential Implementing

Agency Agency

Type Authority Origin

SMAQMD Local Coordinates the program on behalf of the air

districts in the SFNA.

§ 41014. Programs or projects to control

transportation emission The Sacramento

district may conduct public education,

marketing, demonstration, monitoring,

research, and evaluation programs or

projects with respect to transportation

emission control measures.

www.arb.ca.gov/bluebook/bb06/hea41014/he

a_41014.htm

All SFNA districts and

SACOG Local/Regio

nal These agencies provide funding for the

program. SACOG is the regional agency that

coordinates flow of federal transportation

funding (currently Congestion Management

and Air Quality) that supports this program.

Air districts provide the local match funding

required by the funding source.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 42 

### References

Lori Kobza, SMAQMD staff. August 2006.

CA CHP. 2004 Annual Report of Fatal and Injury Motor Vehicle Traffic Collisions:

Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS).

http://www.chp.ca.gov/switrs/#section3. Viewed July 2006.

"Sacramento Region Air Quality Basin: "Spare the Air" Campaign 2005 Evaluation Final

Research Report", Aurora Research Group 2006.

U.S. Census Bureau Data.

Sacramento MTP 2006 List of Projects.

Cleaner Air Partnership letter, "Test Comparison of ARB and CAP Method for

Quantifying Emission Reductions from Spare the Air Program, Jude Lamare, February

5, 2003.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 43 

### Regional Funding Programs

In July 2002, SACOG adopted the Metropolitan Transportation Plan for 2025 (MTP

2025). This 23

- year, $22 billion plan for the region included four federally funded

programs to be used for regional transportation and related priorities that implement the

goals of the MTP. The four programs, with 23

- year funding amounts are:

 Air Quality $180 million

 Bicycle and Pedestrian $350 million

 Transportation Demand Management $ 44 million

 Community Design $500 million

When the MTP 2025 was adopted, it was the intent of SACOG to continue these four

regional funding programs into the foreseeable future in each successive MTP. Since

the adoption of the MTP 2025, SACOG has adopted several other MTPs, and the

funding programs have been continued.

Air Quality Funding Program (FP

- 1)

The SACOG region is within a non

- attainment area for ozone under federal air quality

laws. Because the region must meet stringent federal air quality requirements in the

Rate of Progress SIP, SACOG will place highest priority on the selection of cost

effective transportation projects that contribute the most to reaching attainment.

This air quality funding program includes funding air quality programs: Freeway Service

Patrol, SECAT, and Spare The Air.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 44 

### Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Program (FP

- 2)

The purpose of this funding program is to provide facilities for walking and biking in the

cities and towns of the region, or to provide connections between them. Bicycle and

pedestrian facilities in new developments are expected to be paid for by developers in

cooperation with cities and counties. Facilities that serve strictly recreational trips or

equestrians are also expected to obtain other funding.

List of projects include:

TCM

ID SACOG

ID Measure Title Cost

FP

- 2 Adopted Projects from SACOG's Regional Bike/Pedestrian Funding

Program

6 City of Sacramento: I

- 80 Bike/Ped

Bridge at the West Canal $ 6,600 ,000

12 City of Folsom Bikestation and "Bikelink"

On

- Demand Long

- Term Class I Bike

Parking at Transit Stations $ 178 ,000

14 City of Elk Grove: Elk Grove Creek

Bike/Ped Bridge Crossing at SR 99 $ 5,600 ,000

13 Retrofit Yolobus bus fleet with higher

capacity bike racks $ 67,5002013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 45 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: FP

- 2A

TCM ID: FP

- 2A

Control Measure Title: I

- 80 Bike/Ped Bridge at the West Canal

Control Measure Description

Construct bike/pedestrian bridge across I

- 80 at the West Canal, as well as across the

West Canal.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2012.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $6,600,000

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Sacramento Department of Transportation

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (x & xv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 46 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: FP

- 2B

TCM ID: FP

- 2B

Control Measure Title: City of Folsom Bikestation and “Bikelink” On

- Demand

Long

- Term Class I Bike Parking at Transit Stations

Control Measure Description

To retrofit and install on

- demand long

- term bike parking at Folsom Light Rail stations

and new parking garage.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2010.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $178,000

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Folsom Department of Public Works

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (x & xv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 47 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: FP

- 2C

TCM ID: FP

- 2C

Control Measure Title: City of Elk Grove: Elk Grove Creek Bike/Ped Bridge

Crossing at SR 99

Control Measure Description

Extend the existing Class I bikeway from Laguna Springs Dr cross over W. Stockton

Blvd/SR

- 99 and E Stockton Blvd and connect to Emerald Park Drive. Project includes a

bike/pedestrian overcrossing at State Route 99.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2014

.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $5,600,000

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Elk Grove

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (x & xv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 4 8 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: FP

- 2D

TCM ID: FP

- 2D

Control Measure Title: Retrofit Yolobus bus fleet with higher capacity bike

racks.

Control Measure Description

Replace bike racks with higher capacity (3 bicycle) bike racks on 40

- 45 buses; plus a

slide out double bike rack on up to two over

- the

- road coaches.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2011.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $67,500

Needed Resources and Authority

Yolo County Transportation District

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (x & xv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 49 

### Transportation Demand Management Funding Program (FP

- 3)

Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is composed of strategies that can lower

the demands made on the road and highway system and improve air quality by

encouraging the use of carpooling, vanpooling, public transit, bicycling and walking.

SACOG currently operates the regional ridesharing database and performs a number of

marketing activities that publicize TDM strategies to the general public. SACOG also

sponsors the TDM Task Force, a group of Transportation Management Associations

(TMAs) and other organizations that perform or promote TDM services for employers

and residents of the region.

The goal of this funding program is to reduce single

- occupant vehicle trips in the

Sacramento region using TDM strategies and measure the effects of these strategies.

List of projects include:

TCM

ID SACOG

ID Measure Title Cost

FP

- 3 VAR560 25 SACOG Regional Rideshare Program $ 1,200 ,000 annually

through 201 82013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 50 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: FP

- 3

TCM ID: FP

- 3

Control Measure Title: SACOG Regional Rideshare Program

Control Measure Description

Provide ride matching services for the Sacramento metropolitan area; cooperate with

local agencies in El Dorado and Placer counties on outreach efforts; manage regional

programs supporting alternatives to driving alone; provide funding for 12 Transportation

Management Organizations (TMOs) in region through grants.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This measure is implemented continuously through 2018.

Cost

$1,200,000 per year through 2018.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Area Council of Governments

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (vii & xiv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 51 

### Community Design Funding Programs (FP

- 4)

The overall purpose of the Community Design program is to provide support for

planning and capital development projects that promote the Blueprint Project principles.

The Community Design Program supports implementation of the Blueprint Project with

financial incentives to local governments. Grants are awarded to projects sponsored by

qualified public agencies in the SACOG region. These projects must support specific

development or planning projects that conform to the seven Blueprint Principles:

 Transportation choices;

 Housing diversity;

 Compact development;

 Mixed land uses;

 Use of existing assets;

 Natural resource protection; and

 Quality design.

The MTP for 2025 authorized the program through 2025. The intent of the Community

Design program is to use regional transportation funding to promote the construction of

land use developments (or land use and projects) that lead to fewer vehicle miles

traveled and more walking, biking and transit usage. The program results from the

recognition that land use influences travel behavior and can be a powerful tool to

improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the regional transportation system. If it is

convenient for people to travel to common destinations by walking, biking, or public

transit, we can reap air quality and congestion

- relief benefits at the local and regional

scale.

List of projects include:

TCM

ID SACOG ID Measure Title Cost

FP

- 4 Adopted Projects from SACOG's Regional Community Design Funding Program

5 City of Marysville: East 10th Street and

Ramirez Street Intersection Improvement $ 510 ,000

6 City of Rancho Cordova: Folsom Boulevard

Complete Streets $ 12,200 ,000

11 Sacramento County: Complete Streets for

Freedom Park Drive and North Watt

Avenue $ 6,400 ,000

16 City of Woodland: Lemen, North, East

Streets Intersection Realignment $ 2,600 ,0002013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 52 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: FP

- 4A

TCM ID: FP

- 4A

Control Measure Title: City of Marysville: East 10 th 

### Street and Ramirez Street

Intersection Improvement

Control Measure Description

Install a new traffic signal, complete pedestrian improvements and landscaping

improvements (community design portion), complete a road rehabilitation in and

adjacent to the intersection and complete channelization changes to the East 10th and

Ramirez Intersection in Marysville.

Emis sion Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2011.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $510,000

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Marysville Department of Public Works

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (x & xv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 53 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: FP

- 4B

TCM ID: FP

- 4B

Control Measure Title: City of Rancho Cordova: Folsom Blvd. Enhancements &

SR2S Phase 2

Control Measure Description

Safe Routes to School (SR2S) Install landscaping and streetscaping on Folsom Blvd.,

between Rod Beaudry Dr. and Sunrise Blvd.: to provide safe bicycle and pedestrian

access to transit from Bradshaw Road to Rio Del Oro Parkway. The CMAQ and RSTP

funding in 2009/10 is to provide complete street improvements at the east end of

Folsom Blvd accommodating Kinney High School and the light rail station.

Improvements include bicycle lanes and pedestrian facilities.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2012.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $12,200,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Rancho Cordova

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (x & xv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 54 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: FP

- 4C

TCM ID: FP

- 4C

Control Measure Title: Sacramento County: Complete Streets for Freedom Park

Drive and North Watt Avenue

Control Measure Description

In Sacramento County, Freedom Park Drive, from 32nd St. to Watt Ave and Watt Ave,

from Don Julio Blvd to Karl Dr on the west side of the roadway in the community of

North Highlands. Construct pedestrian and streetscape improvements to serve as a

gateway into adjacent McClellan Park.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2013

.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $6,400,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento County Department of Transportation

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (x & xv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 55 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: FP

- 4D

TCM ID: FP

- 4D

Control Measure Title: City of Woodland: Lemen, North, East Streets

Intersection Realignment

Control Measure Description

In Woodland, Lemen Avenue and North Street at East Street: realign Lemen Avenue to

connect with North Street at East Street (Phase 1).

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2012

.

Cost

The total budget for this project is $2,600,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

City of Woodland Department of Public Works

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (x & xv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 56 

### Miscellaneous

CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: M

- 2

TCM ID: M

- 2

Control Measure Title: Light Rail Grade Separation at Watt Avenue and Folsom

Boulevard

Control Measure Description

In Sacramento County, Regional Transit Light Rail tracks south of Folsom Blvd on Watt

Ave, grade separate the rail tracks over Watt Ave.

Emissions Reductions

ROG: 8,203 lbs per year

NO X 

### : 2,958 lbs per year

Cost Effectiveness: $12 per lb

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 2009.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $25,149,715.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento County Department of Transportation

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (v)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 57 

### Research and Policy Development Further Study Measures

These studies are included as TCMs because they are expected to eventually result in

policies that are likely to help improve the region’s air quality. Exactly what those

policies will be or to what extent they will lead to improved air quality is unknown at this

time. Because of this, and since these are included as studies only, no associated

emissions reduction benefits are included as part of this SIP. Emissions reductions for

future adopted policies would be accounted for in future SIPs. The only Research and

Policy Development TCMs intended to be implemented as policies for the purposes of

the SIP are those that identify “adopting” a policy. The following are the recommended

research and policy development TCMs:

 Blueprint Implementation & Planning Technical Assistance

 Develop Rural

- Urban Connections Strategy & Best Practices Toolkit

 Research a Transportation Pricing Policy

 Research a Regional Parking Regulation Policy to Provide Incentives for Use of

Alternative Modes

 Adopt a Complete Streets Policy

 Initiate a Complete Streets Technical Assistance Program

 Adopt a Safe Routes to School Policy and Implement Pilot Program2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 58 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: RP

- 1

TCM ID: RP

- 1

Control Measure Title: Blueprint Implementation & Planning Technical

Assistance

Control Measure Description

SACOG has no land use authority and cannot directly affect the pattern that future land

uses will take. However, it can strive to implement the Blueprint Vision through existing

and new programs. SACOG will continue to fund the regional Community Design Grant

Program which funds transportation projects that are part of mixed

- use, higher density

developments. The Community Design component of the MTP for 2035 could

encourage growth patterns that promote alternatives to the automobile by creating

mixed

- use developments that would include residences, shops, parks, and civic

institutions linked to pedestrian

- and

- bicycle friendly public transportation centers.

Projects would be awarded a Community Design grant if they incorporate design

features such as improved street connectivity, public amenities, and a concentration of

residences and jobs in proximity to transit routes. Implementation of this strategy could

result in more balanced land use conditions throughout the region and less land

converted to urban uses due to the higher

- density, infill focus of the grant program.

SACOG’s other Blueprint Implementation Programs include development of a Form

Based Code handbook, Blueprint Development Reviews, and Technical Assistance to

Local Governments.

 Form

- Based Code Handbook. Form

- based zoning codes are an approach to

regulate development through the use of graphics and standards to define the

form and scale of new development, while at the same time making the uses

allowed in any given area much more flexible than a typical zoning code. This is

in contrast to conventional development regulations, which primarily utilize only

narrative descriptions. Form

- based codes (FBCs) typically provide for significant

public input during their creation. The handbook will assist local jurisdictions in

implementing form

- based codes in areas where they are trying to encourage

Smart Growth development (mixed

- use, compact development with high street

connectivity).

 Blueprint Development Review. At the request of a local government SACOG will

evaluate a proposed development project for its consistency with the Blueprint

Principles and Vision Map.

 Technical Assistance to Local Governments. At the request of a local

government, SACOG will provide technical planning assistance in the

development or update of general plans, community plans, specific plans, etc.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 59 

### This assistance can include analysis of the Blueprint Vision map or training in

use of modeling tools.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is estimated to be completed in 2012.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $450,000

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Area Council of Governments

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (xiv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 60 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: RP

- 2

TCM ID: RP

- 2

Control Measure Title: Rural Urban Connections Strategy & Best Practices

Toolkit

Control Measure Description

Within 3 years of adoption of the MTP 2035, SACOG will develop a Rural

- Urban

Connections Strategy, to expand on and help to support implementation of, the

Blueprint growth strategy and the MTP. The Rural

- Urban Connections Strategy will

utilize state

- of

- the

- practice data collection, modeling, research and participation

practices to develop a toolkit of best practices to promote land use practices in rural

areas that are economically viable for land owners and local governments and

environmentally sustainable. Issues to be addressed include, but are not limited, to:

agricultural practices, natural resource protection, development practices that support

agricultural and natural resource values, infrastructure needs in rural areas, energy

production, and methods to promote jobs

- housing balance (with a specific emphasis on

effective jobs

- generating practices in appropriate areas.) The toolkit of best practices

will include assessment of vehicle miles traveled and air emissions, including

greenhouse gases. Building on local conservation ef forts, the strategy will identify areas

where mitigation for development should be directed to maximize the benefit of such

acquisitions. It is also expected that this project will result in programs that will help

reduce the need for single

- occupant vehicle travel, relative to commuting in particular.

Another important outcome will be the identification of environmental services, such as

flood control, groundwater recharge, and carbon sequestration, which are enhanced

through a comprehensive approach to urban and rural planning. It is anticipated that the

Rural

- Urban Connections Strategy effort will be completed within 3 years.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is estimated to be completed by 2012.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $1,000,0002013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 61 

### Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Area Council of Governments

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (xiv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 62 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: RP

- 3

TCM ID: RP

- 3

Control Measure Title: Research a Transportation Pricing Policy

Control Measure Description

SACOG will prepare an analysis on the impacts and viability of using pricing policies

with the transit system and selected portions of the road network to encourage people

to drive less and use transit, walking and bicycling modes more. This study will identify

strategies to reduce emissions that will include, but are not limited to, free or reduced

transit fares during “spare the air” days; fare

- free zones on the transit system; transit

vouchers; days on which transit is free; congestion pricing options for portions of the

road system, such as tolls on freeways and highways; and congestion

- pricing to enter

certain high

- traffic areas served by public transit (e.g., downtown Sacramento).

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is estimated to be completed by 2012.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $300,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Area Council of Governments

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (vii)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 63 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: RP

- 4

TCM ID: RP

- 4

Control Measure Title: Research a Regional Parking Regulation Policy to

Provide Incentives for Use of Alternative Modes

Control Measure Description

SACOG will prepare an analysis and perform travel modeling and air emissions analysis

to identify a range of alternatives for local governments to use to modify current parking

regulations to create incentives for people to use available transit, walking and biking

options and neighborhood electric vehicles. The analysis will address impacts of parking

maximum and minimum requirements, shared parking systems, and parking pricing on

travel behavior and air emissions. The study will also include the potential for

application of alternative energy technologies, such as solar shading and power

generation, at both structured and surface parking facilities. The I

- PLACE 3 

### S energy

module will be used to support this research. This study will be conducted cooperatively

with key partners such as the air districts and local governments within the region.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is estimated to be completed in 2012.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $350,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Area Council of Governments

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (vi)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 64 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: RP

- 5

TCM ID: RP

- 5

Control Measure Title: Adopt a “Complete Streets” Policy

Control Measure Description

SACOG will adopt a “Complete Streets” policy to require that applicants for SACOG

regional funding programs demonstrate that the planning, design, construction and

maintenance of roadway and transit facilities include the needs of all transportation

users

– pedestrians, bicyclists, the disabled, transit users, and motorists. Examples

include facilities (sidewalks, bike lanes, etc.) that allow for safe walking, biking and

wheelchair access along roadways. Through its Complete Streets policy, SACOG will

require that applicants for local funding programs administered by SACOG demonstrate

that their project is multi

- modal an d will consider the needs of bicyclists, pedestrians

and disabled travelers. SACOG’s policy will be consistent with current, adopted regional

and local plans, and in accordance with locally adopted policies such as Sacramento

County’s Measure A program that earmarks funds for multi

- modal improvements

(highway, street, and road construction; highway, street, and road maintenance; bus

and light rail capital and operations; improved transportation services for elderly and

handicapped persons; and transportation

- related air quality programs). In the absence

of such plans, federal, state, and local standards and guidelines should be used to

determine appropriate accommodations for pedestrians, bicyclists, and disabled

travelers.

The policy will also require applicants for State funding programs to ensure that projects

are consistent with Caltrans Directive 64

, which states that the California Department of

Transportation, "fully considers the needs of non

- motorized travelers (including

pedestrians, bicyclists and persons with disabilities) in all programming, planning,

maintenance, construction, operations and project development activities and products."

The policy will also require that applicants for federal funding programs ensure that

projects are consistent with the United States Department of Transportation Policy

Statement on “Accommodating Bicyclists and Pedestrians in Transportation Projects”.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is estimated to be completed in 2012.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 65 

### Cost

The total budget for this measure is $50,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Area Council of Governments

E ligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (x)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 66 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: RP

- 6

TCM ID: RP

- 6

Control Measure Title: Initiate a “Complete Streets” Technical Assistance

Program

Control Measure Description

To implement the Complete Streets policy, SACOG will review and analyze the

practices of local governments within the SACOG region and around the nation to

identify appropriate “Best Practices” for complete street design within the SACOG

region. “Complete Streets” means design of the right

- of

- way for all relevant modes of

travel, including pedestrian, bicyclists and transit as well as automobiles. The best

practices will address the functional needs of different types of streets, including

arterials, major and minor collectors, and local streets. SACOG will develop a

curriculum, conduct educational seminars/workshops to disseminate the best practices

information and provide technical assistance for local governments (public works and

planning staff, planning commissioners and elected officials) and members of the

private land use developm ent, planning, engineering and design communities to assist

the design and construction of “Complete Streets” throughout the MTP Plan Area.

SACOG will also provide technical assistance to local governments on a case

- by

- case

basis, as requested, to help them to successfully implement this concept.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is estimated to be completed in 2012.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $100,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Area Council of Governments

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (x)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 67 

### CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: RP

- 7

TCM ID: RP

- 7

Control Measure Title: Adopt a “Safe Routes to School” Policy and Implement

a Pilot Program

Control Measure Description

Within 3 years from the adoption of the MTP 2035, SACOG will adopt a Safe Routes to

Schools (SRTS) policy to promote the practice of safe bicycling and walking to and from

schools throughout the MTP Plan Area in order to reduce traffic congestion, improve air

quality, and enhance neighborhood safety. There are both federal and state funding

programs for SRTS. As a regional agency, SACOG is an eligible applicant under the

Federal program for both infrastructure and non

- infrastructure projects. Under the state

program, only cities and counties are eligible applicants for infrastructure projects

(Caltrans, 2007). With the passage of the Safe Routes to School bill (AB 1475), a “one

third” distribution formula for federal safety funds to be allocated in equal amounts to:

state highways, local roads, and Safe Routes to School (SRTS) construction program

was established.

SACOG will also join the Safe Routes to School National Partnership, a network of

more than 300 nonprofit organizations, government agencies, schools, and

professionals working together to advance the Safe Routes to School movement in the

United States.

In addition, SACOG will host a regional workshop for all cities, counties, school districts

and transit operators within the region to identify other potential opportunities for

collaboration that would reduce greenhouse gas impacts. At a minimum, the issues

discussed will include the findings from the Safe Routes to School activities described

above, opportunities to increase the number of students with bus or other transit options

to get to and from school, and integrating school siting practices with goals of promoting

walkable neighborhoods with a wide range of easily accessible services. This workshop

will be patterned after the “Stretching Community Dollars Guidebook” and workshop

series that the SACOG Executive Director wrote for the California City, County, Schools

(CCS) Partnership (a non

- profit organization of the League of California Cities,

California State Association of Counties and California School Boards Association).

That workshop series is specifically designed to help these three local government

entities to take maximum advantage of opportunities for collaboration. SACOG will ask

the CCS Partnership to co

- host the event, and offer to make the materials prepared for

the event available to the CCS Partnership for use in its on

- going workshop series

around the state.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 68 

### Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is estimated to be completed in 2012.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $200,000.

Needed Resources and Authority

Sacramento Area Council of Governments

The federal Safe Routes to School program (SRTS) was authorized by Section 1404 of

the SAFETEA

- LU (the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act:

A Legacy for Users ). SACOG will also obtain federal funds from the Federal Highway

Administration through Caltrans to implement at least one SRTS pilot program within

the MTP Plan Area.

The State

- legislated Safe Routes to School program (SR2S) is contained in Streets &

Highways Code Section 2330

- 2334. SACOG will encourage its member agencies to

apply for funds available through the State Highway Safety Improvement fund for

eligible infrastructure projects in order to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety for

schoolchildren.

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (xiv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 69 

### Attachment A

Potential Transportation Control Measures

Clean Air Act, Section 108 (f)

i) Programs for improved public transit;

ii) Restriction of certain roads or lanes to, or construction of such roads or lanes

for use by, passenger buses or high

- occupancy vehicles (HOV);

iii) Employer

- based transportation management plans, including incentives;

iv) Trip

- reduction ordinances;

v) Traffic flow improvement programs that achieve emissions reductions;

vi) Fringe and transportation corridor parking facilities serving multiple

occupancy vehicle programs or transit service;

vii) Programs to limit or restrict vehicle use in downtown areas or other areas of

emissions concentration particularly during periods of peak use;

viii) Programs for the provision of all forms of high

- occupancy, shared

- rides;

ix) Programs to limit portions of road surfaces or certain sections of the

metropolitan area to the use of non

- motorized vehicles or pedestrian use,

both as to time and place;

x) Programs for secure bicycle storage facilities and other facilities, including

bicycle lanes, for the convenience and protection of bicyclists, in both public

and private areas;

xi) Programs to control extended idling of vehicles;

xii) Reducing emissions from extreme cold

- start conditions;

xiii) Employer

- sponsored programs to permit flexible work schedules;

xiv) Programs and ordinances to facilitate non

- automobile travel, provision and

utilization of mass transit, and to generally reduce the need for single

occupant vehicle travel, as part of transportation planning and development

efforts of a locality, including programs and ordinances applicable to new

shopping centers, special events, and other centers of vehicle activity;

xv) Programs for new construction and major reconstruction of paths, tracks, or

areas solely for use by pedestrian or other non

- motorized means of

transportation when economically feasible and in the public interest. For

purposes of this clause, the Administrator shall also consult with the

Secretary of the Interior; and

xvi) Programs to encourage removal of pre

- 1980 vehicles.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 70 

### Attachment A

- 1

Substitution of Transportation Control Measures

SAFETEA

- LU section 6011(d) reads as follows:

(d) Substitution of Transportation Control Measures.

-- Section 176(c) of the Clean Air

Act (42 U.S.C. 7506(c)) (as amended by subsection (c)) is amended by inserting after

paragraph (7) the following:

"(8) Substitution of transportation control measures.

—

 "(A) In general.

-- Transportation control measures that are specified in an

implementation plan may be replaced or added to the implementation p lan with

alternate or additional transportation control measures

o "(i) if the substitute measures achieve equivalent or greater emissions

reductions than the control measure to be replaced, as demonstrated with

an emissions impact analysis that is consistent with the current

methodology used for evaluating the replaced control measure in the

implementation plan;

"(ii) if the substitute control measures are implemented

-

 "(I) in accordance with a schedule that is consistent with the

schedule provided for control measures in the implementation

plan; or

"(II) if the implementation plan date for implementation of the

control measure to be replaced has passed, as soon as

practicable after the implementation plan date but not later than

the date on which emission reductions are necessary to achieve

the purpose of the implementation plan;

"(iii) if the substitute and additional control measures are accompanied

with evidence of adequate personnel and funding and authority under

State or local law to implement, monitor, and enforce the control

measures;

"(iv) if the substitute and additional control measures were developed

through a collaborative process that included

-

 "(I) participation by representatives of all affected jurisdictions

(including loca l air pollution control agencies, the State air

pollution control agency, and State and local transportation

agencies);

"(II) consultation with the Administrator; and

"(III) reasonable public notice and opportunity for comment; and2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 71 

### "(v) if the metropolitan planning organization, State air pollution control

agency, and the Administrator concur with the equivalency of the

substitute or additional control measures.

 "(B) Adoption.

-

o " (i) Concurrence by the metropolitan planning organization, State air

pollution control agency and the Administrator as required by

subparagraph (A)(v) shall constitute adoption of the substitute or additional

control measures so long as the requirements of subparagraphs (A)(i),

(A)(ii), (A)(iii) and (A)(iv) are met.

" (ii) Once adopted, the substitute or additional control measures become,

by operation of law, part of the s tate implementation plan and become

federally enforceable.

"(iii) Within 90 days of its concurrence under subparagraph (A)(v), the

State air pollution control agency shall submit the substitute or additional

control measure to the Administrator for incorporation in the codification of

the applicable implementation plan. Notwithstanding any other provision of

this Act, no additional State proces s shall be necessary to support such

revision to the applicable plan.

 "(C) No requirement for express permission.

-- The substitution or addition of a

transportation control measure in accordance with this paragraph and the funding

or approval of such a control measure shall not be contingent on the existence of

any provision in the applicable implementation plan that expressly permits such a

substitution or addition.

 "(D) No requirement for new conformity determination.

-- The substitution or addition

of a transportation control measure in accordance with this paragraph shall not

require

o "(i) a new conformity determination for the transportation plan; or

"(ii) a revision of the implementation plan.

 "(E) Continuation of control measure being replaced.

-- A control measure that is

being replaced by a substitute control measure under this paragraph shall remain

in effect until the substitute control measure is adopted by the State pursuant to

subparagraph (B).

 "(F) Effect of adoption.

-- Adoption o f a substitute control measure shall constitute

rescission of the previously applicable control measure."2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 72 

### Reasonably Available Control Measure (RACM) Analysis

Background

The Sacramento region has been designated by the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) as a non

- attainment area under the federal 8

- hour ozone standard. The

region is currently in the process of preparing a new state implementation plan (SIP) to

demonstrate how it will reach attainment of the 8

- hour ozone standard. Section 172

(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act requires that state implementations plans include an analysis

of what are known as reasonably available control measures (RACM). The purpose of

this analysis is to ensure that the Sacramento Region is implementing all reasonably

available control measures, as required to demonstrate attainment of the 8

- hour ozone

standard as expeditiously as practicable. The Sacramento Area Council of

Governments (SACOG) conducted this RACM analysis in conjunction with the

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD). 38



### RACM Analysis Overview and Criteria

In its 1992 General Preamble for implementation of the 1990 Clean Air Act

Amendments, EPA explains that it interprets Section 172 (c)(1) as a requirement that

states incorporate in a SIP all reasonably available control measures that would

advance a region’s attainment date. However, regions are obligated to adopt only those

measures that are reasonably available for implementation in light of local

circumstances. In t he Preamble, EPA laid out guidelines to help states determine which

measures should be considered reasonably available

. These guidelines are

summarized in the sections that follow.

Implementation Date

Implementation of a measure or a group of measures is typically expected to assist the

region in advancing the date of attainment at least one year. With the current attainment

demonstration year set at 2018, this would require a reduction in ozone levels by 2017.

Enforceability

Once a transportation control measure is added to a SIP, it becomes legally binding. If

the state or local government does not have the authority necessary to implement or

enforce a measure, the measure is not creditable in the SIP and therefore cannot be

declared a RACM. A measure is considered enforceable when all state or local

government agencies responsible for funding, implementation and enforcement of the

measure have committed in writing to its implementation and enforcement.

38 Yolo

- Solano AQMD staff consulted with the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) to identify

any TCMs that might be implemented in the YSAQMD portion of Solano County, and determined that

ABAG is not committing to any TCMs in that area. (Y SAQMD, Matt Jones e

- mail 12

- 10

- 08)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 73 

### Technological Feasibility

All technology

- based control measures must include technologies that have been

verified by EPA. The region cannot take SIP credit for technologies that do not produce

EPA

- verifi able results.

Economic Feasibility and Cost Effectiveness

Another key RACM test is whether or not the measures are economically feasible. This

test analyzes both the cost

- effectiveness of the proposed measure, as well as the

overall availability of funding to fully implement the measure as proposed. In many

cases, a finding of “not economically feasible” is a result of insufficient resources to fully

implement the measure as proposed. The Transportation Research Board in recent

research set a range of $10,000

- $20,000 per ton of pollution reduced (in 2000 dollars),

below which measures can be considered to be economically feasible. 39 

### The

Washington D.C. Metropolitan Area set a threshold of $3,500

- $5,000 per ton as part of

their 2007 RACM analysis. The Sacramento Area Metropolitan Air Quality Management

District has imposed a variety of rules whose cost

- effectiveness has ranged from

$2,000

- $34,000 per ton. For the purposes of this RACM analysis, $34,000 per ton will

be used as the cost

- effectiveness threshold.

Substantial and Widespread Adverse Impacts

The potential exists for some candidate control measures to cause substantial and

widespread adverse impacts to a particular social group or sector of the economy. From

an environmental justice standpoint, any measures that are found to cause substantial

or widespread adverse impacts will not be considered RACM.

Advancing the Attainment Date

Another test is whether or not the collective total of available regional and local control

measures that are considered but not proposed to be adopted (including stationary,

area, land use, and mobile source measures) would be sufficient to advance the

attainment date by one year (one full ozone season earlier than expected). This

analysis was conducted by the air districts using information supplied by SACOG staff.

If the test results would not advance the attainment date, then the measures not being

proposed for adoption would not be considered RACM.

39 Transportation Research Board: The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program,

Assessing 10 Years of Experience, Special Report 264. TRB, National Research Council, Washington

D.C., 2002.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 74 

### Intensive and Costly Effort

Considered altogether, the cost of implementing the proposed measures cannot exceed

the resources available to the region. 40



### Analysis Methodology

SACOG and the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD)

have jointly compiled a list of potential control measures from the following sources:

 Clean Air Act Section 108(f) measures

 Measures considered in the San Francisco Bay Area, San Joaquin Valley and

South Coast Air Quality Management District RACM analyses

 Air District Workshop

 The MTP 2035 Draft Project List

TCM Development Process

The first step was to develop a list of transportation control measures for possible

consideration. This list was developed from a variety of sources: prior Sacramento Area

RACM processes, TCM

- eligible projects from the draft MTP for 2035, other regions’

SIPs and measures suggested by partner agencies and the public through the

interagency consultation process. SACOG staff reviewed over 1,400 projects from the

draft MTP 2035 project list and considered those that met the CAA TCM eligibility

requirements as part of the potential list of TCMs.

In addition, other area’s 8

- hour ozone SIPs were reviewed and cross

- referenced against

measures already on the list. The other 8

- hour ozone SIPs reviewed includes the

following:

2005 Bay Area Ozone Strategy

2007 South Coast 8

- Hour Ozone Plan

2007 San Joaq uin Valley 8

- Hour Ozone Plan

2007 San Diego County 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment Plan

2007 Metropolitan Washington 8

- Hour Ozone SIP

2007 Cecil County MD 8

- Hour Ozone SIP

The TCM development process and draft lists of potential TCMs were presented at

public meetings on ten different dates from September 10, 2007

– March 6, 2008.

These included discussions at SACOG’s Regional Planning Partnership (RPP), Land

Use, Housing and Air Quality Committee (subsequently the Climate and Air Quality

Committee), the Transportation Committee, the Flood Management Committee and the

Government Relations and Public Affairs Committee, as well as the SACOG Board of

40 RACM Analysis for Four Serious Areas Designated Nonattainment for 1

- hr Ozone NAAQS. U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park,

and Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Ann Arbor. October 12, 2000.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 75 

### Directors. This process resulted in a thorough list of control measures for consideration

as potential TCMs, which could be considered as a Reasonably Available Control

Measure or RACM.

These measures were evaluated using the criteria noted above, an d are documented in

A ttachment A

- 2

.

RACM Determination and Analysis Results

A ttachment A

- 2 lists the potential control measures, organized by category, and notes

whether they are considered RACM, and if not, the reasons they were not found to be

RACM. The measures that have been determined to be RACM will be included in the

SIP as TCMs

.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 76 

### A ttachment A

- 2

Control Measure

Number Control Measure Title and

Strategy Type Conclusions, Comments,

and Status

Recommended and Proposed Transportation Control Measures

ITS

- 1 Arden Way “Smart Corridor” from Del

Paso to Watt Expected to be completed in

2008

ITS

- 2 Sacramento Traffic Operations Center Expected to be completed in

2009

ITS

- 4 Sacramento Transportation Area

Network (STARNET) Implementation Expected to be operational in

2008 and be completed in 2009

TF

- 1 El Dorado Central Park and Ride

Facility Expected to be completed in

2009

TF

- 2 Improvements to Loomis Multimodal

Center Expected to be completed in

2010

TF

- 3 13 th and 16 th Light Rail Station

Improvements Expected to be completed in

200 9

TR

- 1 Transit Vehicle Acquisitions

– Bus

Replacement This task divided into 8

components

. See below.

TR

- 1A Auburn Transit Bus Replacement Expected to be completed in

2008

TR

- 1B Roseville Transit Bus Purchase Expected to be completed in

2009

TR

- 1C Roseville Transit Bus Replacement Expected to be completed in

2008

TR

- 1D Replacement Neighborhood Ride Buses Expected to be completed in

2012

TR

- 1E E

- Tran Replacement Buses Expected to be completed in

2010

TR

- 1F SRTD Neighborhood Ride Vehicle

Replacement Expected to be completed in

2010

TR

- 1G Yuba Sutter Transit Bus Expansion Expected to be completed in

2010

TR

- 1H YCTD Bus Replacement Expected to be completed in

2010

TR

- 2 Transit Operations

– Fund Transit

operators This task divided into 8

components

. See below.

TR

- 2A El Dorado Transit Operating Assistance Expected to be completed in

2009

TR

- 2B Roseville Operating Assistance Implemented in 2012

TR

- 2C Elk Grove Operating Assistance Implemented in 2011

TR

- 2D Folsom Operating Assistance Implemented in 2011

TR

- 2E Paratransit Operating Assistance Implemented in 2008

TR

- 2F Sacramento County Operating

Assistance Implemented in 2008

TR

- 2G Regional Transit Operating Assistance Implemented in 2010

TR

- 2H YCTD Operating Assistance Implemented in 2008

AQ

- 1 Freeway Service Patrol

– provide

motorist assistance and towing for

disable vehicles during peak hours Implemented in 2008 to 201 82013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 77 AQ

- 2 Sacramento Emergency Clean Air &

Transportation (SECAT) Program Implemented in 2008 to 201 8

TCM

- ONMS

- ED

- 1

(AQ

- 3) Notification of Spare The Air Implemented in 2008 to 2108

FP

- 1 Air Quality Funding Program Fund AQ

- 1, AQ

- 2, and AQ

- 3

FP

- 2 Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding

Program This task divi ded into 4

components

. See below.

FP

- 2A I

- 80 Bike/Ped Bridge at the West Canal Expected to be completed in

2012

FP

- 2B City of Folsom Bikestation and

“Bikelink” On

- Demand Long

- Term Class

I Bike Parking at Transit Stations Expected to be completed in

2010

FP

- 2C City of Elk Grove: Elk Grove Creek

Bike/Ped Bridge Expected to be completed in

2014

FP

- 2D Retrofit Yolobus bus fleet with higher

capacity bike racks Expected to be completed in

2011

FP

- 3 Transportation Demand Management

Funding Program Implemented in 2008 to 201 8

FP

- 4 Community Design Funding Program This task divi ded into 4

components

. See below.

FP

- 4A City of Marysville: East 10 th Street and

Ramirez Street Intersection

Improvement Expected to be completed in

201 1

FP

- 4B City of Rancho Cordova: Folsom Blvd.

Enhancements & SR2S Phase 2 Expected to be completed in

201 2

FP

- 4C Sacramento County: Complete Streets

for Freedom Park Drive and North Watt

Avenue Expected to be completed in

2013

FP

- 4D City of Woodland: Lemen, North, East

Streets Intersection Realignment Expected to be completed in

2012

M

- 2 Light Rail Grade Separation at Watt and

Folsom Boulevard Expected to be completed in

20 0 9

RP

- 1 Blueprint implementation and Planning

Technical Assistance Expected to be completed in

201 2

RP

- 2 Development Rural

- Urban Connections

Strategy and Create Best Practices

Toolkit Expected to be completed in

201 2

RP

- 3 Research a Transportation Pricing

Policy Expected to be completed in

201 2

RP

- 4 Research a Regional Parking

Regulation to Provide Incentives for Use

of Alternative Modes Expected to be completed in

201 2

RP

- 5 Adopt “Complete Streets” Policy Expected to be completed in

201 2

RP

- 6 Initiate a “Complete Streets” Technical

Assistance Program Expected to be completed in

201 2

RP

- 7 Adopt a Safe Routes to School Policy

and Implement Pilot Program Expected to be completed in

201 22013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 78 Other Control Measures Considered

– Bike/Walk Communities Control Measure

TCM

- 201 Increase Bike/Walk Trips Not Recommended

– Not

economically feasible; some

implementation will occur through

TCM FP

- 2 and TCMs RP

- 5, RP

- 6

and RP

- 7.

TCM

- 15 Increased Walk

- to

- School Programs Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 177 Bicycle stations Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 217 Expanded Pedestrian and Bicycle

Infrastructure Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 22 Bike Access at Transit Stations Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 276 More Bike Parking Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 277 Wide Road Shoulders and Narrow

Gutters Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 284 Minimize Bollards Use Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 286 Debris

- free Roads

– swept bikeway

frequently Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 292 Underground Utilizes

– Place utilities

close to street centerline Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 315 Require More Bike Trips Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 318 Showers and Lockers at Work Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 319 More River and Railroad Crossings Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 320 More Freeway Crossings and Modified

Interchange Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 323 Bicycle

- friendly Streets Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 324 Increase Funding of Cycling Programs Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 327 Treatment of Cyclists with Respect Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 280 Police Enforcement of Bike Law Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 283 Motorists Share Roads Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 285 Promote Cycling Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 288 Universal Bike Education Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 289 Minimize Traffic Lanes Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 296 Cycling Incentives like for Carpoolers or

Transit Users Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 298 Increase Bike Deliveries Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 301 Bike Cars on Train Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 317 Info on Bike Access Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 330 Bike Use by Government Employees Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 88 Walking and Bicycling Events Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 329 Education of Road Users Subset of TCM

- 201

TCM

- 314 Subsidize Purchase of Bike Accessories Subset of TCM

- 201

Other Control Measures Considered

– Educational/Voluntary Control Measures

TCM

- 113 Displaying air quality data on billboards Not Recommended

– Minimal

Emissions Reductions

TCM

- 145 Public Education on NO X and ROG

sources in Schools and Small

Businesses Not Recommended

– Minimal

Emissions Reductions

TCM

- 153 Public Education to School Subset of TCM

- 145

TCM

- 166 Increase outreach efforts to small

businesses Subset of TCM

- 145

TCM

- 195 Public Information about the total costs

of gasoline use Not Recommended

– Minimal

Emissions Reductions2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 79 Other Control Measures Considered

– Episodic Control Measures

TCM

- 104 Reduce Work

- Related Trips Not Recommended

– No

authority to im p lement; not

economically feasible.

TCM

- 205 More Episodic Controls Subset of TCM

- 104

TCM

- 97 Increase fees for parking garages and

meters during episodes Not Recommended

– No

authority to im p lement; not

economically feasible. Some

elements of this considered

measure will be analyzed as part

of TCM RP

- 4.

TCM

- 86 Provide free public transit during

episodes Not Recommended

– Not

economically feasible.

Other Control Measures Considered

– HOV Lane Control Measures

TCM

- 107 Dedicated Bus Lanes Not Recommended

– Not

economically feasible.

Other Control Measures Considered

– Work Related Trip Reduction Control Measures

TCM

- 123 Work

- Related Trip Reduction Program Partially Implemented (See

below)

TCM

- 184 Regional Guaranteed Ride Home Subset of TCM

- 1 23 ; to be

i mplemented through TCM FP

- 3.

TCM

- 297 Bike Use at Businesses Subset of TCM

- 1 23

Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement.

TCM

- 302 Government Staff Dedicate to Cycling Subset of TCM

- 1 23

Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement.

TCM

- 373 Carpool program Subset of TCM

- 1 23 ; to be

i mplemented through TCM FP

- 3.

TCM

- 124 Tele work /Alternative Work Schedule Subset of TCM

- 1 23

Not Recommended

– Not

Enforceable

TCM

- 186 Increase telecommuting Subset of TCM

- 1 23

Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement.

TCM

- 229 Various Traffic Reduction Strategies

–

Address the transportation to the public

and reduce emissions from automobile

by encouraging and supporting carpool

and use of public transportation Subset of TCMs

- 123 and 174 ; to

be partially i mplemented through

TCM FP

- 3

.

TCM

- 100 Reduce business/government hours of

operation Subset of TCM

- 123 ; n o authority

to implement.

TCM

- 94 Close Government on Pollution Days Subset of TCMs

- 100 and 123 ; no

authority to implement.

TCM

- 174 Regional Rideshare Program Implemented as TCM FP

- 3.

TCM

- 208 Regional alternatives work schedules Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement.

TCM

- 143 Stagger work schedules Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 80 Other Control Measures Considered

– Traffic Information Control Measure

TCM

- 179 Enhance real time traffic information to

allow drivers to make better decisions

about when and where to travel Not Recommended

– Not

economically feasible; to be

partially implemented through

TCMs ITS

- 1 through 4.

TCM

- 273 Road Hazard Reporting Subset of TCM

- 179 ; not

economically feasible.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 81 Other Control Measures Considered

– Parking Control Measures

TCM

- 199 Reduce the number of public parking

spaces in the City of Sacramento by

25% Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement and not

economically feasible. Some

elements of this considered

measure will be analyzed as part

of TCM RP

- 4.

TCM

- 306 Parking Cash Out Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement and not

economically feasible. Some

elements of this considered

measure will be analyzed as part

of TCM RP

- 4.

TCM

- 310 Charge City

- owned parking garage

pass

- holders a fee for more than one

entrance and exit each day Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement and not

economically feasible. Some

elements of this considered

measure will be analyzed as part

of TCM RP

- 4.

TCM

- 311 Refunds to Parking Garage Pass

Holders Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement and not

economically feasible. Some

elements of this considered

measure will be analyzed as part

of TCM RP

- 4.

TCM

- 316 Eliminate Timed Parking Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement and not

economically feasible. Some

elements of this considered

measure will be analyzed as part

of TCM RP

- 4.

TCM

- 76 Extended the Parking Cash

- Out law to

employer

- owned parking spaces Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement and not

economically feasible. Some

elements of this considered

measure will be analyzed as part

of TCM RP

- 4.

Other Control Measures Considered

– Pay to Pollute Control Measures

TCM

- 57 Require passenger vehicles not meeting

the standards of passenger cars to pay

an annual fee and/or a fee upon

purchase Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement.

TCM

- 247 Tax on Inefficient Vehicles Subset of TCM

- 57

TCM

- 261 Tax SUVs Subset of TCM

- 57

TCM

- 359 Pricing strategies to affect Consumer

Demand Subset of TCM

- 57

TCM

- 118 Increase Vehicle Registration Fee and

Traffic and Parking Violation Fines Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement.

TCM

- 196 Ticket Surcharges Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement.

TCM

- 157 Require a surcharge to be paid by

drivers during the summer season

based on the number of driving miles Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 82 TCM

- 78 Emission

- based registration fees Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement.

TCM

- 192 Tailpipe emissions Subset of TCM

- 78

TCM

- 36 Vehicle Smog Impact Fee Subset of TCM

- 78

TCM

- 56 Increase gasoline sales tax in the

Sacramento Federal Nonattainment

Area Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement.

TCM

- 200 Increase Gasoline Subset of TCM

- 56

TCM

- 241 Fuel Tax During Summer Months Subset of TCM

- 56

TCM

- 304 Increase the price of gasoline to pay for

damage of pollutions, cost of global

warming, and cost of petroleum

dependency Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement; not

economically feasible.

TCM

- 39 Sell Clean Air License Plates to fund air

quality programs Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement.

Other Control Measures Considered

– Traffic Calming Control Measures

TCM

- 294 Implement traffic calming measures to

reduce vehicle speed and encourage

bicycle and pedestrian activity Not Recommended

– Not

economically feasible.

TCM

- 169 Install traffic circles at intersections Not Recommended

– Not

economically feasible.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 83 Other Control Measures Considered

– Traffic Expansion Control Measures

TCM

- 111 Improve safety and security on public

transit Not Recommended

– Not

economically feasible.

TM

- 154 Implement public transit discounts and

incentives for employees Not Recommended

– Not

economically feasible.

TCM

- 185 Community

- based shuttle system Not Recommended

– Not

economically feasible.

TCM

- 187 Bus Traffic

- Signal Pre

- emption Not Recommended

– Not

economically feasible.

TCM

- 368 Light Rail Access to Airport Not Recommended

– Not

economically feasible.

TCM

- 84 Provide free public transit Not Recommended

– Not

economically feasible.

TCM

- 146 Special RT fares for certain groups Subset of TCM

- 84

TCM

- 89 Employers provide free transit passes to

all employees Subset of TCM

- 84

Other Control Measures Considered

– Airport Control Measures

TCM

- 83 Eliminate government employee airport

parking reimbursement Not Recommended

– No

authority to implement; not

economically feasible; Regional

Parking Regulation and

incentives will be further analyzed

through implementation of TCM

RP

- 4.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Page D

- 84 

### Addendum to Transportation Control Measures

Substitute Control Measure

CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER:

TCM ID:

Control Measure Title: Dry Creek Parkway Trail, Phase 1

Control Measure Description

In Sacramento County, Rio Linda

- Dry Creek Parkway, from Dry Creek Road at Dry

Creek Ranch to the Cherry Island Soccer Complex: Construct a 3

- mile Class I shared

use bicycle/pedestrian trail.

Emission Reductions

No emission reductions are being claimed for this measure in the SIP.

Timeframe

This project is expected to be completed in 201 1

.

Cost

The total budget for this measure is $ 1,110,099.26

.

Needed Resources and Authority

County of Sacramento

Eligible per the Clean Air Act as Amended, Section 108 (f) (x & xv)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 1 

### Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Attainment demonstrations based on photochemical modeling can be strengthened by

supplemental evidence from additional modeling analyses and from considering

modeling outputs other than the attainment test results. More diverse non

- modeling and

observational methods analyzing air quality, meteorological, and emissions data can

also be used to corroborate the modeling predictions. EPA guidance 41 

### specifies that a

comprehensive weight

- of

- evidence approach should be undertaken to support the

modeled attainment demonstration.

The following information f or the weight

- of

- evidence analyses in this appendix was

provided by CARB and w as summarized in Chapter 1 0

– Weight

- of

- Evidence

Determination.

SACRAMENTO METRO AREA: OZONE

Introduction

The Sacramento Metro Area 42 

### is currently classified as a Serious nonattainment area

for the federal 8

- hour ozone standard and has a nominal attainment date of June 15,

2013. ARB staff completed photochemical modeling indicating the area will not attain

the standard by the 2013 deadline. However, results show the area could reach

attainment in 2018 with additional NO X 

### emissions reductions resulting from State and

local measures. Therefore, on February 14, 2008, ARB forwarded to U.S. EPA a

request to reclassify the area from Serious to Severe

- 15, with an attainment date of

June 15, 2019, as allowed by U.S. EPA. This action was approved by the governing

boards of the five air districts, and U.S. EPA is expected to approve the request. The

following sections contain the supplemental air quality and emissions analyses

supporting the overall conclusion that Sacramento will attain the federal 8

- hour standard

by the 2019 deadline for Severe

- 15 ozone nonattainment areas.

U.S. EPA Attainment Demonstration Requirements

The attainment demonstration portion of a SIP consists of the analyses used to

determine whether a proposed control strategy provides the reductions necessary to

meet the federal standard by the attainment year. This attainment demonstration

includes photochem ical modeling, which predicts that projected new controls will result

in an 8

- hour ozone design value of less than 0.08 5 parts per million (ppm) for the

Sacramento Metro Area in 2018. (note: because the design value is based on a

three

- year average, an area must have a design value that meets the standard at the

41 “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals

for Ozone, PM 2.5 , and Regional Haze” (EPA, April 2007, p. 98

- 109).

42 Sacramento Metro Area is the same region as the Sacramento federal nonattainment area as shown in

Figure 1.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 2 

### end of the year prior to the attainment year; for examp le, if an area has an attainment

date of June 15, 2019, it must have a design value that meets the standard at the end of

2018 ). Because of the uncertainties inherent in photochemical modeling, the U.S. EPA

allows states to supplement the modeling results with a “Weight of Evidence” (WOE)

demonstration if the model predicts ozone levels of 0.082 ppm to 0.087 ppm.

The WOE assessment provides a set of complementary analyses that supplement the

SIP

- required modeling. These analyses can include consideration of measured air

quality, emissions, and meteorological data, evaluation of other air quality indicators,

and additional air quality modeling. Because all analysis methods have inherent

strengths and weaknesses, examining an air quality problem in a variety of ways helps

offset the limitations and uncertainties that are inherent in any particular method.

The scope of the WOE analysis is different for each nonattainment area. The level of

detail appropriate for each area depends upon the complexity of the air quality problem,

how far into the future the attainment deadline is, and the amount of data and modeling

available. T his document summarizes the analyses that comprise the WOE assessment

for the Sacramento Metro Area.

Physical Context

The Sacramento Metro Area comprises all of Sacramento and Yolo counties, the

eastern portion of Solano County, the southern portion of Sutter County, and the

portions of El Dorado and Placer counties that are not part of the Lake Tahoe Air Basin.

Geographically, the area occupies the southern portion of the Sacramento Valley,

extending from the foothills of the Coast Ranges in the west to the Sierra Nevada in the

east and from the Sacramento River delta in the south to the northern borders of Yolo

and Placer counties.

There are no large emissions sources in the Sacramento Metro Area. Instead, the

region is characterized by a number of smaller emissions sources that are widespread

throughout the area. On

- road motor vehicles and other mobile sources account for the

majority of the area’s ozone precursor emissions. To simplify the following analyses and

better characterize ozone air quality, the Sacramento Metro Area is divided into three

subregions: the “western” subregion, the “central” subregion, and the “eastern”

subregion. Each subregion shares similar ozone air quality, source

- receptor

relationships, and geography (refer to Figure 1)

.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 3 

### Figur e 1: Sacramento Metro Area Subregions

As shown in Figure 1, the western subregion includes Yolo and Solano counties and the

downtown Sacramento area. While ozone concentrations are low in the western

subregion, prevailing winds during the summer ozone season generally flow from the

south/southwest to the north/northeast. As a result, ozone and ozone precursor

emissions from the western subregion can be transported to the other two subregions,

contributing to problems in these areas.

The central subregion includes the suburban areas of Sacramento County that are east

of downtown Sacramento, as well as the urbanized portions of Placer County. This area

has experienced rapid growth over the last decade. In the central subregion, local

emissions combine with emissions and pollutants transported from the western

subregion to produce higher ozone concentrations.

Finally, the eastern subregion comprises the eastern portion of the Sacramento Metro

Area and the areas to the north and south of the central subregion. The eastern

subregion includes the Placer and El Dorado county foothill communities of Auburn,

Cool, and Placerville, as well as the area around Sloughouse in southeastern

Sacramento County. While not urban in nature, these communities a re closely linked to

downtown Sacramento by employment, housing, and travel patterns. In addition, the2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 4 

### eastern subregion is impacted by pollutants and emissions from both the western and

central subregions. As a result, sites in this area generally have more severe ozone

problems.

Historical Perspective

Ozone concentrations in the Sacramento Metro Area have posed a persistent problem

over the years. However, evaluating historical progress is difficult, because long

- term

monitoring data are not available for several high sites. While long

- term data for the

high sites are not available, there are long

- term data available for other sites

representing the different subregions of the Sacramento Metro Area. Figures 2 and 3

show exceedance days and design values for four sites with long

- term data:

Sacramento

- Del Paso Manor, Sacramento

- T Street, and Folsom in Sacramento County,

as well as Placerville in El Dorado County. The T Street site is located in downtown

Sacramento, while the other three sites are located east of downtown (in the central and

eastern subregions) where higher ozone concentrations typically occur.

The graphs in Figures 2 and 3 show three

- year averages, because the annual values

are quite variable, making it difficult to determine the general overall trends. Like many

other areas of the State, the number of exceedance days at sites in the Sacramento

Metro Area has decreased more rapidly than the design value. Overall, since the early

1990s, the number of exceedance days decreased about 60 percent at Del Paso

Manor, 35 percent at Folsom, and 30 percent at Placerville (since 1994). The decrease

at T Street, a site that meets the federal 8

- hour standard, was much smaller (about 10

percent). In contrast, the decreases in design value have been more modest, between

about 2 and 12 percent at all four sites. It is important to note that sites in the western

subregion of the Sacramento Metro Area now meet the federal 8

- hour standard, while

sites in the central and eastern subregions still pose air quality challenges.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 5 

### Figure 2: Federal 8

- Hour Ozone Exceedance Days for Selected Long

- Term Sacramento

Metro Area Sites 1990 to 2006

Figure 3: Federal 8

- Hour Ozone Design Values for Selected Long

- Term Sacramento

Metro Area Sites 1990 to 2006

0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Ozone Concentration (ppm)

Year Federal 8

- Hour Ozone Design Values

3

- Year Averages

-- 1990 to 2006

Folsom-3yr Avg Placerville-3yr Avg Del Paso Manor-3yr Avg T Street-3yr Avg2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 6 

### Assessment of Recent Air Quality Trends

General Areawide Perspective

Although a number of sites in the Sacramento Metro Area show long

- term progress,

many sites show progress over the more recent years, as well. When assessing air

quality trends, it is important to include data for the high sites in an area. Until recently

(2005 through 2007), the Cool site in El Dorado County had the highest design value in

the Sacramento Metro Area. Therefore, it is important to include this site in any trends

evaluation. Ozone monitoring began at Cool in 1996, and the site had its first valid

design value in 1998, after three years of operation. Given this, as well as consideration

of the completeness of data records for other sites in the Sacramento Metro Area, ARB

staff selected 1999 as the start year for the evaluation of recent air quality trends.

Figure 4 shows ozone trends for the Sacramento Metro Area for 1999 through 2006.

The graph includes four air quality indicators: maximum 8

- hour concentration, federal

8

- hour design value, mean of the Top 30 concentrations each year, and number of

federal 8

- hour exceedance days. Over the last eight years, the decrease in the number

of exceedance days has been similar to the decrease in the maximum concentration (a

little more than 10 percent reduction in each). Because these two statistics reflect

values for individual years, the trend lines are variable, reflecting year

- to

- year changes

in meteorology. In contrast, the other two indicators, the mean of the Top 30 and the

design value, are less variable because they are more robust. These more stable

indicators show less change over the eight

- year period, although they reflect modest

reductions of about 3 to 6 percent from 1999 to 2006.

Figure 4: Sacramento Metro Area Ozone Indicators 1999 to 20062013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 7 

### The trend lines in Figure 4 all show some improvement. Another measure of

improvement is that although a number of sites still exceed the standard in the central

and eastern areas, more than 50 percent of the region’s population lives in areas that

have design values meeting the standard. This compares favorably to 1990, when only

35 percent of the people lived in clean areas. However, despite this progress in

reducing population exposure, the overall rate of progress in reducing the design value

has been modest. The current (2007) design value of 0.098 ppm is still about 15

percent above the level of the federal standard

.

Ozone air quality during 2007 showed some improvement over 2006. Although the

maximum concentration was slightly higher (0.122 ppm in 2007 compared with 0.115

ppm in 2006), the design value is comparable during both years (0.098 ppm in 2007

compared with 0.097 ppm in 2006). The largest change was in the number of

exceedance days. During 2006, there were 42 areawide exceedance days, but only 16

during 2007. Despite the small increase in maximum concentration and design value,

ozone indicator values for 2007 were still lower than during the early 2000s. While some

portions of the Sacramento Metro Area already attain the standard, additional emissions

reductions will be needed to attain the federal 8

- hour ozone standard throughout the

area.

Spatial Ozone Trends

The trends described above represent an areawide perspective, and they generally

reflect the worst sites in the Sacramento Metro Area. As a result, they do not show how

air quality varies throughout the region. One way to assess the spatial change in ozone

air quality is to look at the change in the spatial extent of the ozone problem. The maps

in Figure 5 provide an estimate of the number of exceedance days, based on available

monitoring data. They show contour maps of federal 8

- hour exceedance days in the

Sacramento Metro Area during two different years

-- 1999 and 2005. During this time

period, the spatial extent of the “clean” areas increased substantially, while the size of

the areas with the worst air quality decreased.

During 1999, about a third of the Sacramento Metro Area had five or fewer federal

8

- hour exceedance days. These relatively clean areas were generally restricted to the

northern portion of the western subregion (Yolo and southern Sutter counties and the

central Sacramento downtown area), along with the mountainous portion of the eastern

subregi on that extends to the Lake Tahoe Air Basin. About half of the Sacramento

Metro Area had at least 11 exceedance days. Finally, less than a fourth of the area had

more than 21 exceedance days, with 35 days at Cool, the worst site in the region. The

areas with the highest counts were located in the eastern subregion of the Sacramento

Metro Area.

In contrast to the 1999 map, the 2005 map shows a fair amount of improvement. While

most areas show improvement, the rate of improvement differs. The clean areas (those

with five or fewer days) now cover a much larger extent. Although the clean area in the2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 8 

### far eastern portion of the region is not much different in size, the clean area to the west

now covers all of the western subregion, including Solano County. The maps show that

the number of exceedance days in the central and eastern subregions also decreased,

and the areas with the highest number of exceedance days now fall in the range of 11

to 20 days per year, compared with 21 to 50 days in 1999.

Figure 5: Sacramento Metro Area Change in Federal Exceedance Days 1999 to 20052013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 9 

### Regional Analysis

As described previously, the Sacramento Metro Area can be divided into three

subregions: the western subregion

, the central subregion, and the eastern subregion

(refer to Figure 1). The western subregion includes sites in Vacaville, Davis, Woodland,

Elk Grove, and downtown Sacramento. Ozone air quality at all of these sites is relatively

clean, and 2006 design values are below the federal standard

. A diurnal plot of hourly

ozone concentrations at the Sacramento

- T Street site shows a typical bell

- shaped

pattern, with concentrations peaking in the early afternoon (refer to Figure 6). This type

of pattern is typical of sites in urban areas that are located close to emissions sources.

The central subregion lies to the east of downtown Sacramento and generally includes

the suburban portions of Sacramento County and the urbanized portions of Placer

County. Sites in this area include Del Paso Manor, North Highlands, Ros eville, and

Folsom. 2006 design values for sites in this area were generally above the federal

8

- hour standard, and the number of exceedance days ranged from 9 to 25, with an

average of 14 days. Much of this subregion has seen substantial growth over the last

decade, especially the Roseville/Rocklin and Folsom areas. Similar to the western

subregion, hourly ozone concentrations for the central subregion show a bell

- shaped

diurnal pattern, but with a slightly longer duration of the peaks (refer to Figure 6).

Figure 6: Diurnal Plot of Hourly Ozone Concentrations

The eastern subregion of the Sacramento Metro Area includes sites in the foothill

communities of Auburn, Colfax, Cool, Placerville, and Sloughouse, along with the Echo

Summit site, which is located on the crest of the mountains separating the Sacramento

Metro Area and the Lake Tahoe Air Basin. Ozone design values at all sites in the

eastern subregion except Echo Summit are above the federal 8

- hour standard. As 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Ozone Concentration (ppm)

Hour Diurnal Plot of Hourly Ozone Concentrations

Averaged Over Top 30 Days During 2003 to 2005

Placerville (Eastern) Sacramento- Del Paso (Central) Sacramento-T St (Western)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 10 

### shown in Figure 6, the hourly ozone concentrations in this subregion have a diurnal

pattern that is characteristic of transport

- impacted sites. Compared with the other two

subregions, the 24

- hour profile for the eastern subregion site (Placerville) shows a

longer duration of high concentrations with the peak occurring later in the day. In

addition, the overnight ozone concentrations remain elevated.

Figure 7 shows the number of federal 8

- hour ozone exceedance days for each of the

three subregions in the Sacramento Metro Area durin g 1999 and 2006. The graph is

based on exceedance days during the May through October ozone season and uses

three

- year averages to help even out some of the year

- to

- year variation caused by

meteorology. The high sites of Folsom and Cool are plotted separately, and values for

these sites are not included in the subregional totals, which represent a composite of all

other sites in the respective areas. Although ozone data for the Sacramento Metro Area

generally show considerable year

- to

- year variability, the area has made progress in

reducing the number of exceedance days.

The greatest amount of progress occurred in the western subregion, where the number

of exceedance days decreased 25 percent between 1999 and 2006. Sites in this

subregion were relatively clean during 1999 and are even cleaner now. During 2006

and 2007, all sites in the western subregion had design values that met the standard.

Figure 7: Sacramento Metro Area Change in Number of Federal 8

- Hour Exceedance

Days by Subregion 1999 to 2006

There was also moderate improvement in the central region, with sites other than

Folsom showing an overall decrease of 10 percent. In contrast, sites other than Cool in

the eastern subregion showed little change, with about 30 exceedances during both 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Western Region Central Region Eastern Region Folsom Cool Number of Days Sacramento Metro Area Change in Federal 8

- Hour Ozone Exceedance Days

by Subregion (May

- October)

1997-1999 2004-20062013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 11 

### years. Looking at the two high sites in the central and eastern subregions shows some

difference between values for 1999 and 2006. Folsom, located at the eastern edge of

the central subregion, continues to be the high site in that subregion and shows only a

slight improvement when comparing 1999 and 2006. Given its location and growth rates

in the central subregion over the last decade, the Folsom site is likely the most impacted

by emissions within the central subregion, as well as by emissions and pollutants

transported from the western subregion. The improvement at Cool was more

substantial, with a 15 percent decrease in exceedance days from 1999 to 2006.

Like exceedance days, other ozone air quality indicators such as the mean of the Top

30, the 4 th 

### high concentration, and the design value show generally similar trends.

Between 1999 and 2006, ozone air quality improved in the western subregion, although

there is some year

- to

- year variability in the indicator values. As mentioned previously,

design values for sites in this subregion continue to be lower than the federal standard.

In contrast, ozone indicators for the central subregion, including Folsom, have been

relatively flat or show a slight increase since 1999. The eastern subregion, including

Cool, still presents a substantial challenge, despite some improvement since 1999. At

almost all sites in the Sacramento Metro Area, ozone indicators increased in 2005,

following unusually low values in 2004. Many showed additional increases in 2006 and

2007. However, values for the last two years are still below levels during the early

2000s. Without additional analyses related to the amounts, as well as the spatial and

temporal patterns of emissions, the mix of available precursor emissions, and

meteorological conditions, it is difficult to evaluate the direction of the overall trend

during the last several years. However, on a regional level, there has been progress.

In general, the modest improvement in ozone air quality in the Sacramento M etro Area

since 1999 is accompanied by large year

- to

- year variations which reflect fluctuations in

meteorological conditions. Most of the improvement in the ozone indicators has

occurred since 2002. The areawide trend lines would appear to suggest that ozone has

gotten worse over the last couple of years, but it is important to recognize that

concentrations were uncharacteristically low during 2004. Although values for some

indicators for 2005, 2006, and 2007 are higher when compared with the 2004 values,

they are still generally lower than values for 2002 and 2003. Because ozone

concentrations in the Sacramento Metro Area are much closer to the level of the federal

standard than in other areas of the State such as the South Coast or San Joaquin

Valley air basins, small changes in meteorology can result in substantial year

- to

- year

changes in the air quality indicators. The next section examines trends after accounting

for meteorological variability.

Meteorology and Air Quality Trends

Ozone in the ambient air is the result of several factors, two of the most important being

pollutant emissions and meteorology. The meteorological and photochemical processes

leading to ozone formation are complex, involving interactions both at the surface and in

the upper air. However, they can be characterized in very general terms. In general,2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 12 

### strong sunlight and weak dispersion generate relatively high ozone levels, while weak

sunlight and strong dispersion generate relatively low ozone levels. Meteorology, or

weather conditions, can vary widely, and these day

- to

- day conditions strongly influence

ambient ozone concentrations.

The previous trends discussion looked at air quality as measured at ambient monitoring

sites, without any consideration of or adjustment for meteorological variability. The

following discussions consider trends that account in varying degrees for the

meteorological conditions affecting ozone concentrations. These analyses advance our

understanding of the impact of meteorology on ozone air quality and our ability to track

ozone improvements attributable to emissions reductions. Another goal of these

analyses is to determine the role meteorology has played in the Sacramento Metro

Area, where ozone improvement has been more modest than in other areas of the

State. The following analyses show that after accounting for meteorological variability,

real progress has occurred.

The analyses described below are based on air quality and meteorological data for

1996 through 2005. The meteorologica l data were drawn from the same statewide

dataset used in the WOE analyses for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley air

basins. Although it would have been desirable to include data for 2006 and 2007, these

data are still preliminary, and therefore not available for the analysis.

High Ozone Forming Potential

As one approach to help understand the types of meteorological conditions leading to

high ozone concentrations, ARB staff completed an analysis of ozone and meteorology

using Classification and Regression Tree (CART) techniques. The CART analysis

determined rules that separated days into 14 groups with varying degrees of ozone

forming potential (OFP), or the degree to which weather conditions favor ozone

formation in the Sacramento Metro Area. The CART rules used daily data for surface air

temperature, air temperature at 1500 meters 43



### , the speed and direction of surface

winds, and other factors related to daily maximum 8

- hour ozone concentrations. Three

years, 2000 through 2002, were used to prepare the classification rules and determine

the rate (percent) of exceedance days within each of the 14 groups. For the group with

the lowest ozone forming potential (OFP), the rate of exceedance days was 0 percent.

For the group with the highest OFP, the rate was 100 percent. On that basis, ARB staff

calculated the expected number of days exceeding the federal 8

- hour ozone standard

for each year from 1996 through 2005. While this method is somewhat different from

that used in the WOE analyses for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley air basins,

ARB staff believes it improves on the previous method.

The Sacramento Metro Area analysis, presented in Figure 8, shows the expected

number and the observed number of days exceeding the federal 8

- hour ozone standard

43 Above sea level2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 13 

### each year (three

- year moving averages). The changes in exceedance days relative to

changes in high OFP days helps distinguish the changes due to meteorology from

changes due to other factors, such as emissions reductions. Progress is shown when

the number of exceedance days decreases in relation to the number of high OFP days.

Figure 8: Sacramento Metro Area Analysis of Observed and Expected* Exceedance

Days (moving three

- year means)

The two lines in Figure 8 generally track each other, indicating that year

- to

- year

changes in exceedance days have been largely attributable to year

- to

- year changes in

weather, rather than changes in emissions. The observed mean for 1996 to 1998

includes an extremely low value for 1997, especially with respect to the expected value

-- 19 observed compared with 34 expected (refer to the annual values plotted in Figure

9). As a result, the beginning point on Figure 8 is questionable. It is important to note

that Sloughouse, one of the high exceedance day sites in the Sacramento Metro Area,

operated only during a portion of 1997, and this may explain, in part, the low 1997

value. Another possible reason for the low 1997 value is that it was an El Niño year,

with likely greater than normal cloud cover and thus less solar radiation and solar

heating, resulting in lower ozone concentrations. Regardless of the reason, because the

1997 observed value is questionable, we will focus our evaluation of trends on the 1998

through 2004 timeframe.

Although the subsequent changes (from 1998 through 2004) are not large, two patterns

shown in Figure 8 are worth noting. From 1998 through 2002, observed exceedances

increased by 10 (from 33 to 43), while expected exceedances increased by 8 (from 32

to 40). During the se years, the observed increase generally coincides with the expected

increase. However, from 2002 to 2004, observed exceedances decreased by 9 (from 432013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 14 

### to 34), while expected exceedances decreased by only 3 (from 40 to 37). During these

years, the decrease in the observed exceedances is greater than the improved

meteorology would lead one to expect, suggesting the improvement in ozone is

attributable to emissions reductions. However, the difference is modest (only 6 days, 9

expected days versus 3 observed days).

Figure 9 shows the same trends as Figure 8, graphed as annual values, rather than

three

- year moving averages. It is interesting to note that the observed exceedances

average 1.7 days more than expected from 1996 to 2003, but average 10.1 days less

than expected for 2004 and 2005. Although ARB staff has not yet formally integrated

2006 and 2007 ozone and meteorological data, preliminary results indicate that the

observed exceedances increased to 42 in 2006 before dropping to a new low of 16 in

2007. If these two years continue the recent trend of observed exceedances being

lower than expected exceedances, it would more firmly establish a pattern of progress

in the Sacramento Metro Area.

Figure 9: Sacramento Metro Area Analysis of Observed and Expected* Exceedance

Days (annual values)

Meteorologically Adjusted Trends

As discussed above, meteorological parameters such as temperature and wind speed

are correlated with sunlight and dispersion, which play a large role in determining daily

ozone levels. As a second method to address the effects of meteorology on ozone, a

statistical model that predicts daily maximum ozone on the basis of daily meteorological

data was used to adjust daily ozone observations. Specifically, the model was used to

predict daily maximum 8

- hour ozone concentrations and then adjust the observed

ozone concentrations to compensate for differences between the predicted values and

a standard baseline for expected ozone levels throughout the ozone season.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 15 

### First, a clust ering procedure was used to assign days from the May through October

ozone season for the years 1996 to 2005 to separate groups based on the daily speed

and direction of surface winds at 14 stations in and around the Sacramento Metro Area.

Three groups of days were created. These three groups accounted for all but two of the

1840 days in the trend period. Figure 10 shows that the first group of days (Cluster #1)

was weighted toward the months of September and October. The second group

(Cluster #2) was weighted towards May and June. The third group (Cluster #4) was the

most common throughout the ozone season, but was most prevalent for July and

August (note that Cluster #3, which is not shown in Figure 10, accounted only 2 of the

1840 days, and therefore, was not significant to the analysis). Each of the clusters

shown in Figure 10 represents different general source

- receptor scenarios, based on

wind summaries. 44



### Figure 10: Sacramento Metro Area Analysis of Clusters by Month (1996 to 2005)

For each of the three clusters, ARB staff used data from 2000 through 2002 to calibrate

a within

- group model to predict daily maximum 8

- hour ozone from daily weather data. A

limited span of years was used for calibration so that when the model was applied to the

meteorological data for all days from 1996 through 2005, it would provide a level playing

field for meteorological effects, apart from the influence of changes in emissions.

44 North and east components of daily surface winds were averaged by subregion in and around the

Sacramento Metro Area. The wind summaries show that the three different clusters shown in Figure 10

represent differen ces in generalized source

- receptor scenarios.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 16 

### Figure 11 shows observed and met

- adjusted trends for the annual mean of the 30

highest daily maximum 8

- hour ozone values (Top30; the top 16 percent). 45 

### Figure 12

shows the same trends as Figure 11, smoothed using a three

- year moving average

because the process of met

- adjustment does not remove all meteorological effects

perfectly, and other factors may affect the year

- to

- year changes. Similar to the air

quality trends discussed previously, the met

- adjusted trend is downward since 2002.

Although maximum concentrations and design values generally increased in 2007,

compared with 2006, the mean of the Top 30, as well as the number of exceedance

days, decreased. With respect to the met

- adjusted analysis, which is based on the

mean of the Top 30 ozone concentrations, the combined response for 2006 and 2007

would seem to be a net downturn in ozone concentrations. Therefore, results of these

analyses suggest that the Sacramento Metro Area has made a moderate amount of

progress over the last several years, and this progress should continue, given continued

emissions reductions.

Figure 11: Sacramento Metro Area Analysis of Observed and Met

- Adjusted Trends for

the Mean of the Top 30 Concentrations (annual values)*

* see footnote under Figure 12.

45 The May

– October ozone season has 184 days, of which 30 is 16%.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 17 

### Figure 12: Sacramento Metro Area Analysis of Observed and Met

- Adjusted Trends for

the Mean of the Top 30 Concentrations (3

- year moving averages)*

*As indicated on the graphs, Figures 11 and 12 are based on “first principles modeling” of the relationship

between ozone and meteorology. A common alternative is to use stepwise model building methods in which

the data during the calibration period determine which parameters are included and which are excluded. The

ARB staff chose to work with 18 models, one for each combination of cluster and month (May

- Oct). Each

model was based on scientific first principles to determine its content. Therefore, temperatures at the

surface and aloft were represented by linear and quadratic terms, with the inverse of the wind speed

included as a linear term. When a cluster

- month combination lacked sufficient data to fit a model reliably, a

generic model for the ozone season was applied. In addition, additive offsets for Saturday and Sunday were

included to account for potential “ozone weekend effects.” The overall performance of this approach

achieved an R 2 value greater than 80 percent.



### Emissions and Precursor Trends

Reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen ( NO X 

### ) are precursors to ozone.

Emissions controls have substantially reduced the amounts of these precursors in the

ambient air, despite increases in population and the number of vehicle miles traveled

each year. These reductions have resulted in improved ozone air quality. The following

sections describe the ROG and NO X 

### emissions trends in the Sacramento Metro Area

since 1994, as well as the amounts of these precursors measured in the ambient air.

Emissions Trends

Population numbers have been increasing steadily in every county of the Sacramento

Metro Area. With the exception of Placer County, the percent growth in each individual

county ranges from 20 to 30 percent between 1994 and 2006. For example, the total

population in Sacramento County increased from about 1.1 million in 1994 to about 1.4

million in 2006 (a 25 percent increase over the 13 years). The growth rate in Placer2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 18 

### County was about twice the general rate

– a 60 percent increase between 1994 and

2006. Furthermore, close to 95 percent of that growth occurred in the western portion of

Placer County (in the central subregion), which is east of the Sacramento urban area.

Despite the rapid growth in population, ozone precursor emissions in the Sacramento

Metro Area decreased from 1994 to 2006. Figure 13 shows the estimated areawide

precursor emissions for an average summer day from 1994 to 2006. It is important to

note that the ROG estimates include both anthropogenic (man

- made) and biogenic

emissions. While the anthropogenic portion changes from year

- to

- year, the biogenic

portion is constant over the entire time period (194 tons/day during each year). On a

percentage basis, biogenic emissions account for about 45 percent of the ROG

emissions during 1994, increasing to about 60 percent in 2006. Based on the estimates

in Figure 13, ROG emissions from anthropogenic and biogenic sources decreased 20

percent between 1994 and 2006 (for comparison, the reduction in only the

anthropogenic portion of the ROG emissions was 40 percent). During the same time

period, NO X 

### emissions decreased about 25 percent. These ROG and NO X 

### reductions

occurred in all counties of the Sacramento Metro Area except Placer County, where

ROG decreased over the time period, but there was little change in NO X



### . The ratio of

total ROG to NO X 

### is relatively constant over the entire time period, varying between 1.8

and 1.9. While ROG and NO X 

### reductions are generally distributed throughout the

Sacramento Metro Area, the anthropogenic emissions are dominated by sources in

Sacramento County.

Figure 13: Sacramento Metro Area ROG and NO X 

### Emissions Estimates 1994 to 20062013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 19 

### Precursor Trends

The decreases seen in the estimated emissions trends are supported by the ambient

trends, as well. Figure 14 shows average levels of ROG and NO X 

### measured in the

ambient air at Sacramento

- Del Paso Manor and Folsom

- Natoma Street, two sites with

relatively complete long

- term measurement records for both precursors. The data

plotted were collected from the Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations or

PAMS sites, and they reflect measurements collected from 5 a.m. to 8 a.m. during July

and August. The trend lines for both sites show overall reductions of about 40 percent,

consistent with the decrease in estimated anthropogenic ROG emissions. Although not

plotted, ROG reactivity also dropped over the time period, with a 50 percent decrease at

each site. Ambient NO X 

### at Folsom

- Natoma Street also decreased 50 percent. In

contrast, ambient NO X 

### concentrations at Sacramento

- Del Paso Manor show little

change. Because the spatial and temporal scales of the trends are very dissimilar, it is

difficult to resolve th e differences between the emissions estimates and the ambient

PAMS measurements. The important point is that the emissions trends and the ambient

trends generally indicate that ROG and NO X 

### precursors have decreased over time, and

these decreases have resulted in improved ozone air quality.

Figure 14: Summer Morning Average ROG and NO X 

### Measurements from

Sacramento Metro Area PAMS Network Stations

Modeling Results

The ozone modeling domain for the Sacramento Metro Area is the same as that used

for the San Joaquin Valley and is based on the domain defined for the year 2000

Central California Ozone Study or CCOS. This domain includes not only the Central

Valley, but the San Francisco Bay area, as well. It comprises a grid measuring 185 by

185 cells, with a horizontal resolution of four kilometers. The required meteorological2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 20 

### fields were generated using the MM5 prognostic meteorological model, and the required

emissions inventories were developed by ARB staff. The ozone air quality modeling

utilized th e Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions (CAMx) air quality model,

with initial and boundary conditions based on estimates of clean

- air concentrations.

To support modeling for the Sacramento Metro Area and the San Joaquin Valley, ARB

staff completed ozone modeling for two episode periods: one during July 1999 and the

other during July/August 2000. During these episodes, 8

- hour ozone concentrations

exceeding the federal standard occurred throughout the region. Analysis of the model

outputs included the estimation of 1

- hour and 8

- hour ozone concentrations for each

ozone monitoring site within the domain, as well as statistical measures comparing

observed and simulated ozone concentrations. These analyses were used to evaluate

model performance by subregion within the domain.

As required by U.S. EPA guidance, a relative reduction factor (RRF) approach was

used in projecting future year design values. The RRF reflects the ratio between the

future year model prediction (in this case the end of 2018) and the reference year model

prediction (in this case 2002). A reference year design value is then multiplied by the

RRF to project a future year design value.

Results of the modeling analyses indicate that NO X 

### reductions will be more effective

than ROG reductions in reducing ozone concentrations in the Sacramento Metro Area.

Because the magnitude of the ozone problem varies throughout the Sacramento Metro

Area, the amounts of emissions reductions needed to reach attainment also vary.

Overall, t he attainment strategy relies on a 10 percent or more reduction in NO X 

### that will

bring the worst

- case site, Cool, down to a level of less than 0.08 5 ppm at the end of

2018. Modeling results show Folsom, which had the highest design value in 2007, at a

level of less than 0.083 ppm at the end of 2018, with the same level of control.

Summary

As allowed by U.S. EPA guidance, this weight of evidence (WOE) package comprises a

set of complementary analyses that supplement the SIP

- required modeling, thereby

providing additional support for the attainment demonstration. Currently, the

Sacramento Metro Area is classified as a Serious ozone nonattainment area with an

attainment date of June 15, 2013. Photochemical modeling results indicate that

reducing NO X 

### emissions will be the most effective strategy for bringing the Sacramento

Metro Area into attainment. These reductions will not be in place by the 2013 deadline.

However, they should be implemented by 2018. Therefore, districts in the Sacramento

Metro Area have approved reclassification, and ARB has requested that U.S. EPA

reclassify the Sacramento Metro Area as Severe

- 15, with a required attainment date of

June 15, 2019.

The ARB staff’s modeling results indicate that NO X 

### emissions reductions will be critical

for bringing sites in the Sacramento Metro Area into attainment. Given the timeframe2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 21 

### over which these reductions are expected to occur, the Sacramento Metro Area should

be attainment by June 15, 2019, with a 10 percent or more reduction in NO X 

### emi ssions.

Based on modeling, as well as supporting analyses included in this WOE evaluation,

attainment by 2019 is anticipated because of the following factors:

 Since 1999, the number of areawide exceedance days decreased a

little more than 10 percent. The maximum concentration and design

value show more modest reductions, with decreases of about 10 and

5 percent, respectively, from 1999 to 2006. Because these are

areawide numbers, they reflect the “worst case” sites. Although 2007

data show a slightly higher maximum concentration and a design

value comparable with 2006, they show the number of areawide

exceedance days at an all

- time low of 16 days for the entire year.

 While the amount of progress varies on a subregional basis, there

has been a substantial reduction in the number of exceedance days

in the western subregion. Since 1999, exceedance days decreased

25 percent, and all sites in this subregion now attain the federal

8

- hour ozone standard.

 Between 1999 and 2006, the central subregion shows a 10 percent

decrease in the three

- year average of exceedance days at all sites

but Folsom, which shows only a slight reduction in days. Although

progress at Folsom appears to have slowed over the last several

years, the central subregion has demonstrated long

- term progress.

Sites with long

- term data, including Folsom, show a 35 to 50 percent

decrease in exceedance days since 1990, based on three

- year

averages. The decrease in design values has been more modest,

averaging about 5 percent since 1990.

 Although sites in the eastern subregion still have some of the highest

ozone concentrations, the three

- year average of exceedance days at

Cool, the worst site in this area, decreased about 15 percent between

1999 and 2006. Other sites in the subregion showed little change in

the average number of exceedance days between 1999 and 2006.

 During the late

- 1990s, the ozone problem was more widespread

throughout the Sacramento Metro Area. Since then, all areas have

improved, although at differing rates. All of the western subregion

and the easternmost portion of the eastern region now meet the

federal standard. The ozone problem is now confined to the central

subregion and the more urbanized portions of the eastern subregion.

However, even at the worst sites in these subregions (Cool and

Folsom ), 60 to 65 percent of the days during the 2006 ozone season

were below the more stringent State 8

- hour ozone standard.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix E: Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

Page E

- 22 

###  Ozone indicator values for many sites in the Sacramento Metro Area

were higher for 2005, 2006, and 2007 than for 2004. However, the

2004 values were uncharacteristically low. When compared with

values for 2002 and 2003, the values for 2005 through 2007 are

generally lower, indicating progress. The Sacramento Metro Area is

much closer to attainment than other areas of the State, such as the

South Coast and San Joaquin Valley air basins. Because the

Sacramento Metro Area values are closer to the standard, small

variations in meteorology can result in relatively large year

- to

- year

changes in the trends. These variations can make it difficult to

interpret the trends. However, in the Sacramento Metro Area, it

appears there has been overall improvement, despite this variability.

 Analyses suggest that recent ozone improvements are linked to

emissions reductions. The decline in the number of exceedance days

relative to the number of days with a high potential for ozone

formation indicates that the modest improvements in ozone over the

last few years were related to emissions reductions rather than

favorable meteorological conditions. A more detailed adjustment of

ozone trends for the annual mean of the Top 30 produced similar

results. Results of these analyses also indicate that increasingly

adverse meteorological conditions are now needed to create ozone

levels exceeding the federal 8

- hour standard.

 Estimated ROG and NO X 

### emissions trends, as well as ambient

measurements, indicate reductions in both precursors since the

mid

- 1990s. These reductions have resulted in modest ozone

improvements. Emissions estimates indicate a continuing decline in

ROG and NO X 

### emissions. However, photochemical modeling results

show that NO X 

### reductions will be critical to attainment. As a result, a

control strategy relying on a 10 percent or more reduction in NO X



### emissions is proposed as the most efficient path to attainment by

June 15, 2019.

 Photochemical modeling results show a design value of less than

0.085 ppm with proposed new controls for the Sacramento Metro

Area by the end of 2018. Many sites will reach attainment before this

date. Coupled with the analyses completed for the WOE, it is

reasonable to conclude that the entire Sacramento Metro Area will

reach attainment within this timeframe, consistent with the June 15,

2019, attainment deadline.

Taken together, all of these factors indicate that the Sacramento Metro Area can expect

to attain the federal 8

- hour ozone standard by June 15, 2019, the required attainment

date for a Severe

- 15 ozone nonattainment area.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 1 

### Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets and Vehicle Miles Traveled Offset

Analysis

The motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEB) for VOC and NO X 

### were calculated for

reasonable further progress (RFP) milestone years (201 4, and 2017) and the 2018

attainment demonstration year. On

- road motor vehicle emission estimates were

developed using the latest available transportation data and California’s EMFAC2011

model. The forecasted vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and speed distribu tions used are

based on the Sacramento region’s 2013/2016 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement

Plan (2013/16 MTIP) 46 

### and the Plan Bay Area Preferred Land Use

Scenario/Transportation Investment Strategy 47 

### . The latest adjustments for recent ARB

baseline con trols were subtracted from the EMFAC2011 emissions. Finally, reductions

from proposed new regional incentive measures affecting on

- road motor vehicle

emissions were subtracted. Additionally, the transportation budgets incorporate a

“safety margin” needed p rimarily to allow flexibility to adjust f or uncertainties in rate of

growth and other factors that may affect actual emission estimates. The resulting SIP

control forecasted motor vehicle emissions were rounded up to whole numbers to get

the MVEB.

Tables F

- 1, F

- 2, and F

- 3 document the MVEB calculations for 2014, 2017, and 2018,

respectively. Table F

- 4 contains the SACOG and Bay Area’s Association of Bay Area

Governments (ABAG) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) planning

assumptions for human p opulation forecasts and vehicle miles traveled by county areas

that were used to derive motor vehicle emissions.

46 Final 2013/16 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP), Amendment #1 to the

MTP/SCS 2035, and Air Quality Conformity Analysis. (August 16, 2012), FHWA approval December 14,

2012.

47 Joint MTC Planning/ABAG Administrative Committees, Plan Bay Area Preferred Land Use and

Transportation Investment Str a tegy . Oakland, CA: Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

[May 11, 2012.]2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 2 

### Table F

- 1

Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area

Transportation Conformity Budgets for 8

- hour Ozone

Summer Planning Emissions in Tons per Day

2014

ROG NO X

On

- Road Emissions from EMFAC 2011 23.43 47.70

Adjustments to Baseline*

- 0 2.63

- 2.15

Regional Strategy Reductions

- 0.1 0

- 0.53

Net Inventory 20.7 0 45.0 2

Safety Margin 2 3

Conformity Budget** 23 49

* Reductions from adopted rules not reflected in EMFAC

.

** Budget is obtained by rounding up to the nearest ton.



### Table F

- 2

Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area

Transportation Conformity Budgets for 8

- hour Ozone

Summer Planning Emissions in Tons per Day

2017

ROG NO X

On

- Road Emissions from EMFAC 2011 18.98 37.12

Adjustments to Baseline*

- 2.37

- 0.60

Regional Strategy Reductions

- 0.03

- 0.41

Net Inventory 16.58 36.11

Safety Margin 1 2

Conformity Budget** 18 39

* Reductions from adopted rules not reflected in EMFAC

.

** Budget is obtained by rounding up to the nearest ton

.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 3 

### Table F

- 3

Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area

Transportation Conformity Budgets for 8

- hour Ozone

Summer Planning Emissions in Tons per Day

2018

ROG NO X

On

- Road Emissions from EMFAC 2011 17.75 34.34

Adjustments to Baseline*

- 2.26

- 0.66

Regional Strategy Reductions

- 0.03

- 0.49

Net Inventory 15.4 6 33.1 9

Safety Margin 1 3

Conformity Budget** 17 37

* Reductions from adopted rules not reflected in EMFAC

.

** Budget is obtained by rounding up to the nearest ton.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 4 Table F

- 5

Population and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Forecasts

Sacramento Region

Population (Household only) 2002 2014 2017 2018 2035

El Dorado County (MC) 138,432 156,493 159,180 160,086 187,843

Placer County (SV and MC) 272,187 366,440 382,575 388,110 500,957

Sacramento County 1,284,789 1,459,969 1,503,352 1,518,097 1,888,375

South Sutter 4,914 3,200 3,200 3,200 12,879

Yolo County 177,179 206,282 215,243 218,316 277,086

Solano (SV) 118,900 133,560 136,820 137,980 161,100

Regional Total 1,996,402 2,325,944 2,400,370 2,425,789 3,028,240

Notes:

1. SACOG household population forecasts based on MTP/SCS2035 (adopted on 4

- 19

- 2012) are

from SACOG's Tina Glover 1

- 15

- 2013 email.

2. El Dorado County and Placer County population data exclude the Tahoe Basin.

3. 2002 population is from CEPAM growth database and is based on DOF data.

4. Solano population for all years is from CEPAM growth database and is based on DOF data

and forecast.

5. SV = Sacramento Valley portion, MC = Mountain Counties portion

6. Sacramento Nonattainment Area fraction for South Sutter is estimated at 6% of Sutter Coun ty.

7. Regional Total represents the Sacramento Nonattainment Area.

Daily VMT (1000) 2002 2014 2017 2018

El Dorado (MC) 3,541 3,853 4,025 4,022

Placer (MC) 1,215 1,589 1,690 1,700

Placer (SV) 6,101 8,656 9,247 9,398

Sacramento County 31,598 35,861 37,340 37,644

South Sutter 495 666 684 680

Yolo County 4,733 5,996 6,263 6,338

Solano (SV) 4,913 4,829 4,902 4,927

Regional Total 52,595 61,449 64,152 64,709

Notes:

1. 2014, 2017, 2018 VMT data (except Solano) are based on SACOG's 2013/2016 MTIP (August

16, 2012), transmitted to SMAQMD on 12/5/2012.

2. 2014, 2017, 2018 VMT Solano VMT data are based on Plan Bay Area Preferred Land Use

Scenario/ Transportation Investment Strategy (May 11, 2012), transmitted to SACOG in May

2012.

3. 2011 VMT is extrapolated using 2014, 2017 and 2018 VMT activities.

4. 2002 VM T is default 2002 VMT in EMFAC2011 model.

5. Sacramento Nonattainment Area VMT fraction for South Sutter is estimated at 30% of Sutter

County.

6. SV = Sacramento Valley portion, MC = Mountain Counties portion2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 5 7. Unlike 2011 Revision, 2035 VMT is not presented because it not used in the plan.

8. Regional Total represents the Sacramento Nonattainment Area.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 6 

### Appendix F

- 1: Vehicle Miles Travelled Offset Demonstration

Introduction

CAA Section 182(d)(1)(A) applies to areas classified as severe or extreme

nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. The

Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area is currently designated as Severe

- 15,

and is subject to this requirement. This demonstration is included as part of the 2013

update to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further

Progress Plan to address the requirements of Section 182(d)(1)(A).

CAA Section 182(d)(1)(A) states that

“ Within 2 years after November 15, 1990, the State shall submit a revision [to

their state implementation plans (SIPs)] that identifies and adopts specific

enforceable transportation control strategies and transportation control measure

to offset any growth in emissions from growth in vehicle miles traveled or

numbers of vehicle trips in such area and to attain reduction in motor vehicle

emissions as necessary, in combination with other emission reduction

requirements of this subpart, to comply with the requ irements of subsection

(b)(2)(B) and (c)(2)(B) of this section (pertaining to periodic emissions reduction

requirements). The State shall consider measures specified in section 108(f) of

this title, and choose from among and implement such measures as nece ssary to

demonstrate attainment with the national ambient air quality standards; in

considering such measures, the State should ensure adequate access to

downtown, other commercial and residential areas and should avoid measures

that increase or relocate e missions and congestion rather than reduce them.“

This vehicle miles travelled (VMT) emissions offset demonstration was prepared in

accordance with U.S. EPA’s August 2012 guidance entitled “Implementing Clean Air Act

Section 182(d)(1)(A): Transportation Control Measures and Transportation Control

Strategi es to Offset Growth in Emissions Due to Growth in Vehicle Miles Travelled.”

U.S. EPA updated the guidance in response to a decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of

Appeals in Association of Irritated Residents v EPA, (9th Cir. 2011, reprinted as

amended on J anuary 27, 2012, 632 F. 3d 584, at 596

- 597) which required severe and

extreme nonattainment regions to resubmit the VMT emissions offset demonstrations in

their ozone State Implementation Plans (SIPs or plans).

In 2009, CARB submitted the 8

- hour ozone reas onable further progress plan for the

Sacramento region, as required by the 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act. The

2009 plan addressed the requirements of Section 182(d)(1)(A) according to EPA’s

longstanding interpretation that “no further TCMs are neces sary if aggregate motor

vehicle emissions are projected to decline each year from the base year of the plan to

the attainment year.”2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 7 

### In early 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that EPA should have required

regions to offset any growth in emiss ions resulting from increased VMT. This ruling

effectively requires regions, including Sacramento, to resubmit the VMT offset

demonstrations.

In August 2012, EPA released guidance in response to the Court Opinion . This

guidance indicates that technology im provements such as vehicle technology

improvements, motor vehicle fuels, and other control strategies that are transportation

related could be used to offset increases in emissions due to VMT. This guidance also

sets out a methodology for demonstrating ach ievement of the VMT offset requirement.

The projected attainment year emissions, assuming no new control measures and no

VMT growth, are compared with projected actual attainment year emissions that include

new control measures and VMT growth. If the latte r number is smaller than the former,

no additional transportation control measures or transportation control strategies would

be required.

The first step is identifying the base year. The guidance recommends that areas use the

same base year used in the a ttainment demonstration. But the guidance does not

address which attainment demonstration should be used. This analysis uses two base

years. 1990 is used since Section 182(d)(1)(A) was part of the 1990 Amendments and

clearly contemplated the use of 1990 as a base year. However, for the 8

- hour

attainment demonstration, 2002 is the base year as provided in the 2009 SIP. Since

U.S. EPA’s guidance is not specific, two analyses are provided, one using 1990, and a

second alternative using 2002 as the base year.

T ransportation Control Strategies And Transportation Control Measures

By listing them separately, the Clean Air Act [CAA §182(d)(1)(A)] differentiates between

transportation control strategies (TCS) and transportation control measures (TCM), and

thus provid es for a wide range of strategies and measures as options to offset

increased emissions from growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Based on the

provisions in Section 182(d)(1)(A) and the clarifications provided in the U.S. EPA

guidance, any combination o f transportation control strategies and TCMs may be used

to meet the requirement to offset growth in emissions resulting from VMT growth. Since

1990 when this requirement was established, California has adopted a substantial

number of enforceable transport ation strategies

– more than enough to meet the

requirement to offset the growth in emissions from VMT growth. A list of the state’s

mobile source control program adopted since 1990 is provided in Attachment F

- 1. This

list is as complete as possible and in cludes strategies that may have only a marginal

impact on ozone. SACOG has also developed a number of TCMs to provide emission

reductions; a list of SACOG TCMs implemented in the Sacramento Ozone

Nonattainment Area is provided in Attachment F

- 2.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 8 

### Methodolog y

The following calculations are based on the U.S. EPA guidance. As discussed above,

two sets of calculations are provided. The first set uses 1990 as the base year, and a

second alternative analysis is presented using 2002 as the base year. In both analyses,

the attainment year is 2018, as specified in the 8

- hour ozone attainment demonstration.

Analysis Using 1990 as the Base Year

Step 1. Provide the emissions levels for the base year.

The base year assumed for the demonstration is 1990. The following table shows the

ROG and NO X 

### emissions for calendar year 1990 from the EMFAC2011 model.

Emissions

Description VMT

(miles/day) ROG

(tons/day) NO X

(tons/day)

1990 Data 38,997,622 163 142



### Step 2. Calculate three emissions levels in the attainment year.

For the attainment year of 2018,

Calculation 1: calculate emissions levels with the motor vehicle control program frozen

at 1990 levels and with projected VMT in the attainment year. This represents what the

emissions in the attainment year would have been if transportation control strate gies

and TCMs had not been implemented after 1990;

Calculation 2: calculate emission levels with the motor vehicle control program frozen at

1990 levels and assuming VMT do not increase; and

Calculation 3: calculate an emissions level that represents emis sions with full

implementation of all transportation control strategies and TCMs since 1990 and growth

in VMT at levels projected for 2018. This represents the projected future year baseline

emissions inventory in the attainment year.

Step 3. Compare emiss ion levels

Compare calculation 2 results to calculation 3 results. If the emission results in

calculation 3 are lower than calculation 2, then the growth in emissions from growth in

VMT has been offset, and the area has met the requirements in 182 (d)(1)(A).

Calculation 1: Calculate the emissions in the attainment year assuming no new

measures since the base year with growth in VMT

To perform this calculation, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) staff identified

the on

- road motor vehicle contr ol programs adopted since 1990 and adjusted the

EMFAC2011 to reflect the ROG and NO X 

### emissions levels in 2018 without the benefits2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 9 

### of the post

- 1990 control programs. The projected ROG and NO X 

### emissions are 115 and

159 tons/day, respectively.

Calculation 2: Calculate the emissions with no new measures and no growth in

VMT

For this calculation, EMFAC 2011 was run for calendar year 2018 with the 1990 VMT

level of 38,997,622 miles per day. The ROG and NO X 

### emissions associated with the

1990 VMT level are 102 and 99 tons/day, respectively.

Calculation 3: Calculate emission reductions with full implementation of

Transportation Control Strategies and TCMs and projected VMT growth

The ROG and NO X 

### emission levels for 2018 assuming the benefits of the post

- 1990

motor vehicle control program and the projected VMT levels in 2018 are calculated

using EMFAC2011. The projected ROG and NO X 

### emissions levels are 18 and 34

tons/day, respectively.

ROG and NO X 

### emissions for the three sets of calculations described above are

provided in the following table.

Emissions

Calculation Description VMT

(miles/day) ROG

(tons/day) NO X

(tons/day)

1 Motor Vehicle Control

Program Frozen at 1990 Levels (VMT

at 2018 Projected Levels) 65,438,841 115 159

2 Motor Vehicle Control

Program Frozen at 1990 Levels (VMT

at 1990 Levels) 38,997,622 102 99

3 Full Motor Vehicle

Control Program in Place (VMT at

2018 Projected Levels) 65,438,841 18 34



### As provided in the U.S. EPA guidance, to determine compliance with the provisions of

Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the federal Clean Air Act, the emissions levels in Calculation 3

should be less than the emissions levels in Calculation 2:

ROG: 18 < 102 tons/day

NO X 

### : 34 < 99 tons/day2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 10 

### Analys is Using 2002 as the Base Year

This alternative analysis is for the base year of 2002.

Step 1. Provide the emissions levels for the base year.

The following table shows the ROG and NO X 

### emissions for calendar year 2002 from the

EMFAC2011 model.



### Emissions

Description VMT

(miles/day) ROG

(tons/day) NO X

(tons/day)

2002 Data 52,594,743 52 100



### Step 2. Calculate three emissions levels in the attainment year.

For the attainment year of 2018,

Calculation 1: calculate emissions levels with the motor vehicle control program frozen

at 2002 levels and with projected VMT in the attainment year. This represents what the

emissions in the attainment year would have been if transportation control strategies

and TCMs had not been implemented after 2002;

Calculation 2: calculate emission levels with the motor vehicle control program frozen at

2002 levels and assuming VMT do not increase; and

Calculation 3: calculate an emissions level that represents emissions with full

implementation of all transportation control strategies and TCMs since 2002. This

represents the projected future year baseline emissions inventory in the attainment

year.

Step 3. Compare emission levels



### Compare calculation 2 results to calculation 3 results. If the emission results in

calculation 3 are lower than calculation 2, then the growth in emissions from

growth in VMT has been offset, and the area has met the requirements in 182

(d)(1)(A).

Calculation 1. Calculate the emissions in the attainment year assuming no new

measures since the base yea r with growth in VMT

To perform this calculation, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) staff identified

the on

- road motor vehicle control programs adopted since 2002 and adjusted the

EMFAC2011 output to reflect the ROG and NO X 

### emissions levels in 2018 without the

benefits of the post

- 2002 control programs. The projected ROG and NO X 

### emissions are

33 and 93 tons/day, respectively.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 11 

### Calculation 2. Calculate the emissions with no new measures and no growth in

VMT

EMFAC2011 allows the user to input different vehicle miles travelled. As such, for this

calculation, EMFAC 2011 was run for calendar year 2018 with the 2002 VMT level of

52,594,743 miles per day. The ROG and NO X 

### emissions associated with the 2002 VMT

level are 31 and 79 tons/day, respectively.

Calculation 3. Calculate emission reductions with full implementation of

Transportation Control Strategies & TCMs and projected VMT growth

The ROG and NO X 

### emission levels for 2018 assuming the benefits of the post

- 200 2

motor vehicle control program and the projected VMT levels in 2018 are calculated

using EMFAC2011. The projected ROG and NO X 

### emissions levels are 18 and 34

tons/day, respectively. ROG and NO X 

### emissions for the three sets of calculations

described above a re provided in the following tables.

Description VMT

(miles/day) ROG

(tons/day) NO X

(tons/day)

1 Motor Vehicle Control Program Frozen

at 2002 Levels (VMT at 2018 Projected

Levels) 65,440,841 33 93

2 Motor Vehicle Control Program Frozen

at 2002 Levels (VMT at 2002 Levels) 52,594,743 31 79

3 Full Motor Vehicle Control Program in

Place (VMT at 2018 Projected Levels) 65,440,841 18 34



### As provided in the U.S. EPA guidance, to determine compliance with the provisions of

Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the federal Clean Air Act, the emissions levels in Calculation 3

should be less than the emissions levels in Calculation 2:



### ROG: 18 < 31 tons/day

NOX : 34 < 79 tons/day

Summary

The previous sections provide an analysis to demonstrate compliance with the

provisions of Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the federal Clean Air Act. To further illustrate the

demonstration, Figures F

- 1 and F

- 2 below graphically display the emissions benefits of

t he motor vehicle control programs in offsetting ROG and NO X 

### emissions due to VMT

increases in the Sacramento Ozone Nonattainment Area.

 Purple Bar: Shows the emissions associated with the base year (1990 or 2002)

VMT;

The three sets of bars on the right in each figure show: the emission levels in 2018

 Red Bar: Shows the emission levels if there were no further motor vehicle

controls after 1990 and with projected VMT increases2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 12 

###  Green Bar: Shows the emissions if VMT does not increase from 1990 levels and

there are no transportation control strategies or TCMs after 1990

 Blue Bar: Shows the emission levels with the post

- 1990 motor vehicle control

program in place and with projected VMT growth

Based on the U.S. EPA guidance, if the blue bar is lower than the green bar, then the

identified transportation control strategies and TCMs are sufficient to offset the growth in

emissions.

163

115

102

18

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

1990 Base Year 2018 Attainment Year 

# Figure F

- 1: Base Year 1990 (1990 Controls)

SACOG 2013 MTIP ROG Emissions (tons per day)

Base Year Emissions

Emissions with Projected VMT

Growth and No New Measures

Emissions with No Projected VMT

Growth and No New Measures

Emissions with Projected VMT

Growth and New Measures

(includes Advanced Clean Cars

Regulation)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 13 

### A similar set of calculations are made using 2002 as the base year. Figures F

- 3 and F

- 4

illustrate the results of the calculation for ROG and NO X 

### , respectively. As with the first

analysis, the blue bar is lower than the green bar, the identified transportation control

strategies and TCMs are sufficient to offset the growth in emissions.

142 159

99

34

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

1990 Base Year 2018 Attainment Year 

# Figure F

- 2: Base Year 1990 (1990 Controls)

SACOG 2013 MTIP NOx Emissions (tons per day)

Base Year Emissions

Emissions with Projected VMT

Growth and No New Measures

Emissions with No Projected VMT

Growth and No New Measures

Emissions with Projected VMT

Growth and New Measures

(includes Advanced Clean Cars

Regulation)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 14 52

33

31

18

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

2002 Base Year 2018 Attainment Year 

# Figure F

- 3: Base Year 2002 (2002 Controls)

SACOG 2013 MTIP ROG Emissions (tons per day)

Base Year Emissions

Emissions with Projected VMT

Growth and No New Measures

Emissions with No Projected VMT

Growth and No New Measures

Emissions with Projected VMT

Growth and New Measures

(includes Advanced Clean Cars

Regulation)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 1 5 

### In both analyses, there are sufficient transpo rtation control strategies and TCMs to

offset the emissions increase due to growth in VMT. This demonstrates compliance with

the requirements of Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the federal Clean Air Act.

100

93

79

34

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

2002 Base Year 2018 Attainment Year 

# Figure F

- 4: Base Year 2002 (2002 Controls)

SACOG 2013 MTIP NOx Emissions (tons per day)

Base Year Emissions

Emissions with Projected VMT

Growth and No New Measures

Emissions with No Projected VMT

Growth and No New Measures

Emissions with Projected VMT

Growth and New Measures

(includes Advanced Clean Cars

Regulation)2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 16 

### Attachment F

- 1 State of California Motor Vehicle Control Program (1990

- Present)

Table F

- 6 : Transportation Control Strategies Adopted by the California Air Resources Board

since 1990

Measure Hearing

Date Category

Emission Control System Warranty. T 13, CCR, 2035

- 2041, 1977 12/14/89 On

- road

Certification Procedure for Aftermarket Parts. VC 27156 & 38391 02/08/90 On

- road

Emission Standards for Medium Duty Vehicles. T 13, CCR, 1900,

1956.8, 1960.1, 1968.1, 2061, 2112, 2139 06/14/90 On

- road

Wintertime Limits for Sulfur in Diesel Fuel. T 13, CCR, 2255

06/21/90 Fuels

Evaporative Emission Standards. T 13,CCR, 1976 08/09/90 On

- road

California Reformulated Gasoline (CaRFG), Phase I. T 13, CCR,

2251.5 09/27/90 Fuels

Low Emission Vehicles and Clean Fuels. T 13, CCR, 1900, 1904,

1956.8, 1960.1, 1960.1.5, 1960.5 and 2111, 2112, 2125, and

2139, 2061. 09/28/90 On

- road

Heavy Duty Diesel Smoke Emission Testing. T 13, CCR, 2180

-

2187 11/08/90 On

- road

Limit on Aromatic Content of Diesel Fuel. T 13, CCR, 2256 12/13/90 Fuels

Onboard Diagnostics for Light

- Duty Trucks and Light & Medium

Duty Motor Vehicles. T 13, CCR, 1977, 1968.1 09/12/91 On

- road

Onboard Diagnostic, Phase II. T 13, CCR, 1968.1, 1977 11/12/91 On

- road

Low Emission Vehicles amendments revising reactivity

adjustment factor (RAF) provisi ons and adopting a RAF for M85

transitional low emission vehicles. T 13, CCR, 1960.1 11/14/91 On

- road

California Reformulated Gasoline, Phase II. T 13, CCR, 2250,

2255.1, 2252, 2260

- 2272, 2295 11/21/91 Fuels

Wintertime Gasoline Program. T 13, CCR, 2258, 2298, 2251.5,

2296 11/21/91 Fuels

Specifications for Alternative Motor Vehicle Fuel. T 13, & 26,

CCR, 2290, 2291, 2292.1, 2292.2, 2292.3, 2292.5, 2292.6,

2292.7, 1960.1(k), 1956.8(b), 1956.8(d) 12/12/91 Fuels

Specifications for Alternative Motor Ve hicle Fuels. T 13, & 26,

CCR, 2290

- 2292.7, 1960.1(k), 1956.8(b), 1956.8(d) 03/12/92 On

- road

Standards and Test Procedures for Alternative Fuel Retrofit

Systems. T 13, CCR, 2030, 2031 05/14/92 On

- road

Phase 2 RFG certification fuel specifications. T 13, CCR, 1960.1,

1956.8(d) 08/13/92 On

- road2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 17 Table F

- 6 : Transportation Control Strategies Adopted by the California Air Resources Board

since 1990

Measure Hearing

Date Category

Substitute Fuel or Clean Fuel Incorporated Test Procedures. T

13, CCR, 1960.1(k), 2317 11/12/92 On

- road

Smoke Self Inspection Program for Heavy Duty Diesel &

Gasoline Engines. T 13, CCR, 21902194, 2180

- 2187, 1956.8 (b) 12/10/92 On

- road

Certification Requirements for Low Emission Passenger Cars,

Light

- Duty Trucks & Medium Duty Vehicles. T 13, CCR, 1960.1,

1976, 2061, 1900 01/14/93 On

- road

Urban Transit Buses. T 13, CCR, 1956.8, 1965, 2112 06/10/93 On

- road

Onboard Diagnostic, Phase II. T 13, CCR, 1968.1 07/09/93 O n

- road

Wintertime Oxygenate Program. T 13, CCR, 2258, 2251.5,

2263(b), 2267, 2298, 2259, 2283, 2293.5 09/09/93 Fuels

Diesel Fuel Regulations

- Emergency. T 13, CCR, 2281(h),

2282(1) 10/15/93 Fuels

Evaporative Emission Standards and Test Procedures. T 13,

CCR, 1976 02/10/94 On

- road

Predictive Model for Phase II CaRFG. T13, CCR, 2261, 2262

-

2270 06/09/94 Fuels

Small Refiner Diesel. T 13, CCR, 2282(e)(1) 07/24/94 Fuels

Diesel Fuel Certification. T 13 , CCR,1956.8(b)&(d), 1960.1(k),

2292.6 09/22/94 Fue ls

Self Inspection Program for Heavy Duty Diesel & Gasoline

Engines. T 13, CCR, 2190

- 2194, 21802187, 1956.8(b) 11/09/94 On

- road

Onboard Diagnostics, Phase II. T 13, CCR,1963.1, & Certification

Procedures 12/08/94 On

- road

Periodic Smoke Inspection Program. T 13, CCR, 2190 12/08/94 On

- road

Specification for Alternative Motor Vehicle Fuels (M100). T 13

CCR, 2292.1 12/08/94 Fuels

Heavy Duty Vehicle Exhaust Emission Standards. T 13, CCR,

1956.8 and incorporate test procedures. 06/29/95 On

- road

Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery Standards. T 13, CCR,

1976, 1978 and incorporate test procedures 06/29/95 On

- road

Test Method for Oxygen in Gasoline. T 13, CCR, 2251.5(c),

2258(c), 2263(b) 06/29/95 Fuels

Re trofit Emission Standards. T 13, CCR, 1956.9, 2030, 2031,

and incorporate test procedures 07/27/95 On

- road

Low Emission Vehicle Standards 3 (LEV 3). T 13, CCR, 1956.8,

1960.1, 1965, 2101, 2061, 2062, and incorporate test procedures 09/28/95 On

- road2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 18 Table F

- 6 : Transportation Control Strategies Adopted by the California Air Resources Board

since 1990

Measure Hearing

Date Category

Test Methods for CaRFG 13, CCR, 2263(b) 10/26/95 Fuels

Required Additives in Gasoline (Deposit Control Additives). T 13,

CCR, 2257 and incorporates testing procedures. 11/16/95 Fuels

CaRFG Housekeeping & CARBOB. T 13, CCR, 2263.7, 2266.5,

2260, 2262.5, 2264, 2265, 2272 12/14/95 Fuels

Exemption of Military Tactical Vehicles. T13, CCR, 1905, 2400,

2420 12/14/95 On Road/Off

Road

CaRFG Variance Requirements. T 13, CCR, 2271 (Emergency) 01/25/96 Fuels

Postpone Zero Emission Vehicle Requirements. T 13, CCR,

1900, 1960.1, 1976 03/28/96 On

- road

Regulation Improvements and Repeals (fuel additives). T 13,

CCR, 2201, 2202 05/30/96 Fuels

Diesel Fuel Certification Test Methods . T13, CCR, 1956.8(b),

1960.1(k), 2281(c), 2282(b), (c) and (g) 10/24/96 Fuels

Diesel Fuel Test Methods. T 13, CCR, 1956.8(b), 1960.1(k),

2281(c), 2282(b), (c) and (g) 10/24/96 Fuels

Onboard Diagnostics, Phase II, Technical Status. T 13, CCR,

1968.1, 2030, 2031 12/12/96 On

- road

Liquefied Petroleum Gas Propane Limit Specification Delay. T

13, C CR, 2292.6 03/27/97 Fuels

Postpone Enhanced Evaporative Emission Requirements for

Ultra

- Small Volume Vehicle Manufacturers. T 13, CCR, 1976 and

incorporate test procedures 05/22/97 On

- road

Off

- Cycle Emissions Supplemental Federal Test Procedures

(SFTPs). T 13, CCR, 1960.1, 2101 and incorporate test

procedures 07/24/97 On

- road

Heavy Duty Vehicle Smoke Inspection Program/Periodic Smoke

Inspection Program. T 13, CCR, 2180

- 2188 and 2190

- 2194 12/11/97 On

- road

Heavy Duty Vehicle Regulations: 2004 Standards. T 13, CCR,

1956.8, 1965, 2036, 2112 and test procedures 04/23/98 On

- road

Cleaner Burning Gasoline Model Flexibility. T 13, CCR, Sections

2260, 2262.1, 2262.3, 2262.4, 2262.5, 2262.6, 2262.7 and 2265 08/27/98 Fuels

Gasoline Vapor Recovery Systems. T 17, CCR, 94010

- 94015

and 94150, 94156, 94157, 94158, 94159, 94160, 94162 08/27/98 Vapor

Recovery

Gasoline Deposit Control Additive Regulation. T 13, CCR, 2257,

and incorporating test procedures 09/24/98 Fuels2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 19 Table F

- 6 : Transportation Control Strategies Adopted by the California Air Resources Board

since 1990

Measure Hearing

Date Category

Low Emission Vehicles Standards (LEV 2) and Compl iance

Assurance Program (CAP 2000). T 13, CCR,1961 & 1962 (both

new); 1900, 1960.1, 1965, 1968.1, 1976, 1978, 2037, 2038,

2062, 2101, 2106, 2107, 2110, 2112, 2114, 2119, 2130, 2137

- 2140, 2143

- 2148 11/05/98 On

- road

Exhaust Standards for (On

- Road) Motorcycles. T 13, CCR, 1958 12/10/98 On

- road

Voluntary Accelerated Light Duty Vehicle Retirement

Regulations. T 13, CCR, 2600

- 2610 12/10/98 On

- road

Cleaner Burning Gasoline (Increasing the Oxygen Content). T

13, CCR, sections 2262.5(b) and 2265(a)(2) 12 /11/98 Fuel

Specifications for Liquid Petroleum Gas Used as a Motor Vehicle

Fuel. T 13, CCR, 2292.6 12/11/98 Fuels

Cleaner Burning Gasoline, Oxygen Requirement for Wintertime

In Lake Tahoe Area/Gas Pump Labeling for MTBE. T 13, CCR,

2262.5, and 2273 06/24/99 Fuels

Clean Fuels Regulation Requirements. T13, CCR, sections 2300

- 2317, and 2303.5, 2311.5 07/22/99 On

- road

CaRFG Phase 3 Amendments (Phase out of MTBE, standards,

predictive model). T 13, CCR, 2260, 2261, 2262.1, 2262.5, 2263,

2264, 2264.2, 22 65, 2266 etc... 12/09/99 Fuels

Transit Bus Standards. T 13, CCR, 1956.1, 1956.2, 1956.3,

1956.4, 1956.8, 1965 02/24/00 On

- road

CaRFG Phase 3 Follow

- up Amendments. T 13, CCR, sections

2260, 2261, 2262.3, 2262.5, 2263, 2264, 2265, 2266, 2266.5,

2270, 2272, 2273, 2282, 2296, 2297, 2262.9 and incorporated

test procedures 11/16/00 Fuels

CaRFG Phase 3 Test Methods. T 13, CCR, sections 2263(b) 11/16/00 Fuels

Heavy Duty Diesel Engines "Not

- to

- Exceed (NTE)" Test

Procedures. T 13 CCR, 1956.8, 2065 12/07/00 On

- road

Light

- and Medium Duty Low Emission Vehicle Alignment with

Federal Standards. Exhaust Emission Standards for Heavy Duty

Gas Engines. T 13, CCR, 1956.8 &1961 12/07/00 On

- road

Zero Emission Vehicle Regulation Update. T 13, CCR, 1900,

1960.1(k), 1961, 1962 & incorporated Test Procedure 01/25/01 On

- road

Zero Emission Vehicle Infrastructure and Standardization of

Electric Vehicle Charging Equipment. T 13, CCR, 1900(b),

1962(b) 1962.1 06/28/01 On

- road2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 20 Table F

- 6 : Transportation Control Strategies Adopted by the California Air Resources Board

since 1990

Measure Hearing

Date Category

Heavy Duty Diesel Engine Standards for 2007 and Later. T 1 3,

CCR, 1956.8 and incorporated test procedures 10/25/01 On

- road

Low Emission Vehicle Regulations. T 13, CCR, 1960.1,1960.5,

1961, 1962 and incorporate test procedures and guidelines 11/15/01 On

- road

California Motor Vehicle Service Information Rule. T 13&17,

CCR, 1969 & 60060.1

- 60060.7 12/13/01 On

- road

Voluntary Accelerated Light Duty Vehicle Retirement

Regulations. T 13, CCR, 2601

- 2605, 2606 & appendices C & D,

and 2607

- 2610 02/21/02 On

- road

On

- Board Diagnostic II Review Amendments. T 13, CCR,

1968. 1, 1968.2, 1968.5 04/25/02 On

- road

Diesel Retrofit Verification Procedure, Warranty and In

- Use

Compliance Requirements. T 13, CCR, 2700

- 2710 05/16/02 On

- road

Revision to Transit Bus Regulations Amendments. T 13, CCR,

1956.1, 1956.2, 1956.4,1956.8, and 2112, & documents

incorporated by reference 10/24/02 On

- road

Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Diesel Particulate from

School Bus Idling. T13, CCR, 2480 12/12/02 On

- road

Low Emission Vehicles II. Align Heavy Duty Gas Engine

Standards with Federal Standa rds; minor administrative changes.

T 13, CCR, 1961, 1965, 1956.8, 1956.1, 1978, 2065 and

documents incorporated by reference 12/12/02 On

- road

Zero Emission Vehicle Amendments for 2003. T 13, CCR,

1960.1(k), 1961(a) and (d), 1900, 1962, and documents

incorporated by reference 03/25/03 On

- road

Solid Waste Collection Vehicles. T 13, CCR, 2020, 2021, 2021.1,

2021.2 09/24/03 On

- road

Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Diesel Particulate for

Transport Refrigeration Units. T 13, CCR, 2022 & 2477 12/11/03 On

- road

Diesel Retrofit Verification Procedure, Warranty and In

- Use

Compliance Requirements (Amendments). T 13, CCR, 2701

-

2707 & 2709 12/11/03 On

- road

CA Motor Vehicle Service Information Rule. T 13, CCR, 1969 01/22/04 On

- road

Heavy Duty Diesel Engine

- Chip Re

- flash. T 13, CCR, 2011,

2180.1, 2181, 2184, 2185, 2186, 2192, and 2194 03/27/04 On

- road

Engine Manufacturer Diagnostic System Requirements for 2007

and Subsequent Model Heavy Duty Engines. T 13, CCR, 1971 05/20/04 On

- road2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 21 Table F

- 6 : Transportation Control Strategies Adopted by the California Air Resources Board

since 1990

Measure Hearing

Date Category

Urban Bus Engines/Fleet Rule for Transit Agencies. T 13, CCR,

1956.1, 1956.2, 1956.3, and 1956.4, 06/24/04 On

- road

Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Diesel Particulate from Diesel

Fueled Commercial Vehicle Idling. T 13, CCR, 2485 07/22/04 On

- road

Greenhouse Gas. T 13, CCR, 1961.1, 1900, 1961 and

Incorporated Test Procedures 09/23/04 On

- road

California Reformulated Gasoline, Phase 3. T 13, CCR, 2260,

2262, 2262.4, 2262.5, 2262.6, 2262.9, 2263, 2265 (and the

incorporated “California Procedures”), and 2266.5 11/18/0 4 Fuels

Diesel Fuel Standards for Harbor

- craft & Locomotives. T 13,

CCR, 2299, 2281, 2282, and 2284, and T 17, CCR, 93117 11/18/04 Fuels

Emergency Regulation for Temporary Delay of Diesel Fuel

Lubricity Standard. T 13, CCR, 2284 11/24/04 Fuels

Transit Fleet Rule. T 13, CCR, 2023, 2023.1, 2023.2, 2023.3,

2023.4, 1956.1, 2020, 2021, repeal 1956.2, 1956.3, 1956.4 02/24/05 On

- road

On

- Board Diagnostic System Requirements for 2010 and

Subsequent Model

- Year Heavy

- Duty Engines (HD OBD). T 13,

CCR, 1971.1 07/21 /05 On

- road

2007

- 2009 Model

- Year Heavy Duty Urban Bus Engines and the

Fleet Rule for Transit Agencies. T 13, CCR, 1956.1, 1956.2, and

1956.8 09/15/05 On

- road

Requirements to Reduce Idling Emissions from New and In

- Use

Trucks, Beginning in 2008. T 13, CCR section1956.8 and the

incorporated document 10/20/05 On

- road

Diesel Particulate Matter Control Measure for On

- Road Heavy

Duty Diesel

- Fueled Vehicles Owned or Operated by Public

Agencies and Utilities. T 13, CCR, 2022 and 2022.1 12/08/05 On

- road

AB1009 Heavy

- Duty Vehicle Smoke Inspection Program. T 13,

CCR, 2180, 2180.1, 2181, 2182, 2183, 2184, 2185, 2186, 2187,

and 2188, 2189 01/26/06 On

- road

Diesel Verification Procedure, Warranty & In

- Use. T 13, CCR,

2702, 2703, 2704, 2706, 2707, and 2709. 03/23/06 On

- road

Technical Amendments to Evaporative Exhaust and Evaporative

Emissions Test Procedures. T 13, CCR, 1961,1976 and 1978. 05/25/06 On

- road

California Motor Vehicle Service Information Rule. T 13, CCR,

1969 and incorporated documents 06/22/06 On

- road

Heavy

- Duty In

- Use Compliance Regulation. T 13, CCR, 1956.1,

1956.8, and documents incorporated by reference 09/28/06 On

- road2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 22 Table F

- 6 : Transportation Control Strategies Adopted by the California Air Resources Board

since 1990

Measure Hearing

Date Category

On

- Board Diagnostic II. T 13, CCR, 1968.2, 1968.5, 2035, 2037

and 2038 09/28/06 On

- road

Zero Emission Bus Regulation. T13, CCR, 2023.1, 2023.3, &

2023.4 10/19/06 On

- road

Voluntary Accelerated Retirement Regulation. T 13, CCR, 2601

-

2610 and appendices A

- D 12/07/06 On

- road

Phase 3 Reformulated Gasoline (Ethanol Permeation) T 13,

CCR, 2260, 2261, 2262, 2263, 2264, 2265, 2266, 2270, 2271,

and 2273 06/14/07 On

- road

Aftermarket Catalytic Converters and Used Catalytic Converters

T 13, CCR, 2222 10/25/07 On

- road

Port Truck Modernization T 13, CCR, 2027 12/07/07 On

- road

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks T 13, CCR, 2025 12/11/08 On

- road

Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program (formerly “Expanded

Vehicle Retirement Program”) T 13, CCR, 2620, 2621, 2622,

2623, 2624, 2625, 2626, 2627, 2628, 2629, and 2630 06/26/09 On

- road

Advanced Clean Cars T 13, CCR, 1900, 1956, 1960, 1961, 1962,

1965, 1968, 1976, 1978, 2037, 2038, 2062,2112, 2139, 2140,

2145, 2147, 2235, 2300, 2302, 2303, 2304, 2306, 2307, 2308,

2309, 2310, 2311, 2312, 2313, 2314, 2315, 2316, 2317, and

2318 01/27/12 On

- road2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 23 

### Attachment F

- 2 Transportation Control Measures Adopted

SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Transportation control measures (TCMs) are strategies for reducing vehicle trips,

vehicle use, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle idling, or traffic congestion for the purpose of

reducing motor vehicle emissions. The Sacramento Area Council of Governments

(SACOG) is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the greater Sacramento

region (includes Sacramento, Yolo, Placer, El Dorado, Sutter, and Yuba counties).

SACOG provides transportation planning and funding for the reg ion. SACOG, local

governments, and the air districts have worked together over the years to develop and

implement TCMs. These TCMs were included in the 2009 Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour

Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan.

Summary of SACOG New and Continuing TCM Projects and Funding Programs

Table F

- 7 contains a summary of SACOG new and continuing transportation control

measure (TCM) projects and funding programs that are being included in the federal 8

-

hour ozone plan. Also listed are the i mplementing agencies, the predicted

implementation, or completion dates.

Table F

- 7 Summary of SACOG Transportation Control Measures New and Continuing

Projects and Funding Programs

TCM Name and (ID) Implementing Agency Implement

or

Completion

Date

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Projects

Arden Way Smart Corridor (ITS

- 1) City of Sac

- Dept. of Transportation 2008

Sacramento Traffic Operations Center (ITS

- 2) City of Sac

- Dept. of Transportation 2009

Watt Ave Phase 3 Smart Corridor (ITS

- 3) Sac County

- Dept. of Transportation 2009

STARNET Implementation (ITS

- 4) SACOG 2009

Park and Ride Lots / Transit Centers

El Dorado Central Park and Ride Facility (TF

- 1) El Dorado County Transit 2009

Improvements to Loomis Multimodal Center (TF

- 2) Town of Loomis

– Dept. of Public

Works 2010

13 th and 16 th St :Light Rail Station Improvements

(TF

- 3) Sac Regional Transit District 20092013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix F: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Page F

- 24 Transit Service Funding Programs

Transit Vehicle Acquisitions (TR

- 1) Various Agencies Various

Dates

Transit Operations (TR

- 2) Various Agencies Various

Dates

Other Specific Funding Programs

Freeway Service Patrol (AQ

- 1) Sac Transportation Authority Through

2018

SECAT Program (AQ

- 2) SMAQMD Through

2018

Spare The Air Program (AQ

- 3) SMAQMD Through

2018

MTP Regional Funding Programs

Air Quality Funding Program (FP

- 1) Various Agencies Through

2018

Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Program (FP

- 2) Various Agencies Through

2018

Transportation Demand Management Funding

Program (FP

- 3) Various Agencies Through

2018

Community Design Funding Program (FP

- 4) Various Agencies Through

2018

Miscellaneous Projects

Light Rail Grade Separation at Watt Ave and

Folsom Blvd (M

- 2) Sac County

– Dept. of Transportation 2009

Total Emission Reductions



### Research and Policy Development TCMs

The research efforts listed below are included as TCMs in the 2009 Sacramento

Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan because

they are expected to result in policies that will help improve the region’s air quality.

The following Table F

- 8 lists the recommended research and policy development TCMs:

Table F

- 8 Summary of SACOG Transportation Control Measures Research and

Policy Development Studies

1 Blueprint Implementation & Planning Technical Assistance

2 Develop Rural

- Urban Connections Strategy & Best Practices Toolkit

3 Research a Transportation Pricing Policy

4 Research a Regional Parking Regulation Policy

5 Adopt a Complete Streets Policy

6 Initiate a Complete Streets Technical Assistance Program

7 Adopt a Safe Routes to School Policy and Implement a Pilot Program2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix G: Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations

Page G

- 1 

### Appendix G: Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations

Pre

- 1990 Motor Vehicle Control Program Adjustments

Section 182(b)(1)(D) of the Clean Air Act stipulates that emission reductions stemming

from the federal on

- road motor vehicle control program as it existed in 1990 may not be

used to help meet minimum emission reduction requirements for reasonable further

progress (RFP) purposes. The Clean Air Act also prohibits states from taking credit for

emission reductions resulting from using gasoline with a Reid vapor pressure limit

specified by 1990. This precludes states from demonstrating satisfactory progress for

ozone simply on the merit of the federal motor vehicle and fuels programs as t hey

existed in 1990. States are required to adjust for the benefits of these federal programs

in RFP calculations.

Over the years, various methods hav e been used to estimate the benefits of the pre

1990 federal motor vehicle program. In 2005, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(U.S. EPA) released guidance on this subject in Appendix A to the preamble to Phase 2

of the 8

- hour ozone implementation r ule

. Appendix A was written for all 50 states and

explains how to calculate the benefits of the 49

- state pre

- 1990 program.

The one

- size

- fits

- all approach found in Appendix A is problematic for California.

California’s pioneering efforts to set emission st andards from motor vehicles resulted in

nationwide emission standards adopted by U.S. EPA. In general, California’s auto

emission standards have been, and still are, more stringent than federal standards,

particularly for passenger vehicles. California Air Resources Board (ARB) staff has held

ongoin g discussions with U.S. EPA staff about the most appropriate way to calculate

the benefits of the motor vehicle and fuels control program as it existed in 1990. It was

clear to ARB staff that U.S. E PA guidance in Appendix A did not recognize the maturity

of California ’s program in 1990 or provide California a workable means to estimate the

benefits of the pre

- 1990 motor vehicle program.

In September 2007 , in response to issues raised by ARB staff, U.S. EPA staff proposed

an alternative calculation methodology specifically for use in California

. This alternative

would allow calculating the benefits from the pre

- 1990 California program in lieu of

those from the pre

- 1990 49

- state federal program. By ARB staff’s accou nting, using the

alternative U.S. EPA method would still result in an underestimation of the progress

produced by California’s program, although to a lesser extent than would Appendix A.

This is due to an overestimation of the residual benefits of the pre

- 1990 California motor

vehicle program. Nevertheless, ARB staff has estimated the benefits of California’s pre

1990 motor v ehicle program for the Sacramento Metro nonattainment area according to

the U.S. EPA

- approved alternative methodology.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix G: Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations

Page G

- 2 

### Benefits of California’s Pre

- 1990 Motor Vehicles and Fuels Programs

Within the Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area

1990 Technology Fractions

1990 I/M

2002 Population by Vehicle Class

7.8 psi Fuel RVP

1990 Fuels (gasoline + diesel)

Pre

- 1990 Program Benefits from 2002 levels, VOC, tons per day

Year Statewide Sacramento

2008 103.18 6.5

2011 143.15 9.1

2014 171.20 10.9

2017 186.98 11.9

2018 192.84 12.2

Pre

- 1990 Program Benefits from 2002 levels, NO X 

### , tons per day

Year Statewide Sacramento

2008 125.62 7.8

2011 152.68 9.5

2014 167.61 10.4

2017 177.20 11.0

2018 180.65 11.2

Data source: Pre

- 1990 Motor Vehicle Control Program Adjustments provided by CARB.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix G: Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations

Page G

- 3 

### RFP Demonstration Calculation in Table 13

- 12013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 1 

### Appendix H : Reasonabl y Available Control Measure Analysis

RACM requirements

Section 172(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act requires a nonattainment plan to:

“provide for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures as

expeditiously as practicable (including such reductions in emissions from existing

sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a mi nimum, of

reasonably available control technology) and shall provide for attainment of the national

primary ambient air quality standards.”

In addition, EPA’s final 8

- hour ozone implementation rule in 40 CFR 51.912(d) pursuant

to section 172(c)(1) of the CAA requires the attainment SIP submittal to include “a SIP

revision demonstrating that it has adopted all RACM necessary to demonstrate

attainment as expeditiously as practicable and to meet any RFP requirements.”

EPA’s RACM policy 48

, 49 

### indicates that areas should consider all candidate measures

that are potentially reasonably available. Sources of potentially reasonable measures

include measures adopted in other nonattainment areas, measures that the EPA has

identified in guidelines or other documents, and any measures that have been

suggested for the particular nonattainment area during a public comment period.

Areas should consider all reasonably available measures for implementation in light of

local circumstances. However, areas need only to adopt measures if they are both

economically and technologically feasible and cumulatively will advance the attainment

date (by one year or more) or are necessary for RFP. “EPA does not believe that

Congress intended the RACM requirement to compel the adoption o f measures that are

absurd, unenforceable, or impracticable.” 50



### Process of identifying RACM

To identify all RACM, district staff conducted internal reviews, consulted with California

Air Resources Board staff, solicited ideas from technical consultants and, attended a

technology forum summit at the South Coast Air Quality Management District. In

addition, district staff reviewed the following documents:

 "Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan", South Coast Air Quality Management

District, June 2007

48 “Final Rule to Implement the 8

- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard

– Phase 2” (Federal

Register, November 29, 2005, p. 71659

- 71661).

49 “Guidance on the Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Requirement and Attainment

Demonstration Su bmissions for Ozone Nonattainment Areas” (EPA, December 1999).

50 ”General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990” (57 FR

13498, April 16, 1992).2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 2 

###  "2007 Ozone Plan", San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution control District, April 30, 2007

 "Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strategy

- Appendix C, Stationary and Mobile Source Control

Measure Descriptions", Bay Area Air Quality Management District, January 4, 2006

District staff compared adopted rules in the following air districts to requirements in

place in the Sacramento region; South Coast Air Quality Management District, Bay Area

Air Quality Management District, Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, and San

Joa quin Valley Air Pollution control District. Each of the five air districts was responsible

for preparing the RACM analysis for the stationary measures in its jurisdiction. The

regional mobile source and land use measures were evaluated by technical consultants

for the Sacramento Air District on behalf of the region.

From these analyses, staff compiled the proposed control measures, "Sacramento

Regional 8

- hour Ozone Attainment Plan

- Control Measures:, Draft, October 2006.

District staff conducted public workshops at four locations throughout the Sacramento

region. The purposes of the workshops were:

1. 

### to solicit comments on the proposed control measures, and

2. 

### to solicit ideas for additional control measures to be considered.

Feather River Air Quality Management District

Yuba City, CA

- October 31, 2006

Sacramento Metropolitan and Yolo Solano Air Quality Management Districts

West Sacramento, CA

- October 31, 2006

Placer County Air Pollution Control District

Auburn, CA

- November 1, 2006

El Dorado County Air Quality Management District

Placerville, CA

- November 1, 2006

Following the public workshops, staff evaluated public comments and suggestions,

reviewed the final plan documents noted above, and compiled the proposed control

measures included in this plan.

Conclusion

The following is a summary of the districts staff's findings:

1. 

### District staff has evaluated and analyzed all reasonable control measures that were

currently available for inclusion in this plan.

2. 

### District staff has identified new or amended stationary control measures, and mobile

source and land use control measures that are included in this plan.

3. 

### This plan includes all RACM provided by the public and experts.

4. 

### The available control measures that are not included collectively would not advance

the attainment date or contribute to RFP for the Sacramento region because of the2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 3 

### insignificant or non

- quantifiable amount of emissions reductions that they may

potentially generate. Tables H

- 1 through H

- 6 contain a list of the measures and a

brief discussion of the conclusions.

5. 

### The RACM demonstration for transportation control measures was prepared by the

Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) and is discussed separately in

Appendix D

– Transportation Control Measures.2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 4 

### Regional

Mobile/Land Use Source Control Measure RACM Analysis2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 5 Table H

- 1

Mobile and Land Use Control Measures Considered

Control Measure

Number Control Measure Title and Strategy

Type Conclusion

IS

- 1 Construction Mitigation Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment Advancement

IS

- 2 Operational Indirect Source Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment Advancement

MISC

- 31 Use emulsified diesel fuel in all diesel

burning heavy duty vehicles Not Recommended

– Technolog y is no

longer available

MISC

- 51 Education to Improve Fueling Practices Not Recommended

– High cost

M

- TRAN

- 1 Employer Based Trip Reduction Not Recommended

– No authority and

high cost

OFMS12 Pre conditioning of diesel engines to

eliminate engine cold start emissions Not Recommended

– Ev aluated for

Attainment Advancement

OFMS13 Limiting pleasure watercraft and off

- road

vehicle use during spare the air days Further Study

– Combined in Episodic

Controls Further Study Measure

OFMS16 Restricted use of diesel agricultural water

pumps to nighttime on Spare The Air

Days Further Study

– Combined in Episodic

Controls Further Study Measure

OFMS19 Restrict Use of HD Off

- Road

Construction Equipment

-- > 50hp to 4

hours per day Further Study

– Combined in Episodic

Controls Further Study Measure

OFMS20 Restrict use of portable engines on

Spare The Air Days Further Study

– Combined in Episodic

Controls Further Study Measure

OFMS21 Ban or restrict use of recreational

vehicles on Spare The Air Days Further Study

– Combined in Episodic

Controls Further Study Measure

OFMS24 Limiting pleasure craft/vehicle use on

days where the temperature is above

100 ° F Further Study

– Combined in Episodic

Controls Further Study Measure

OFMS32 Reduced idling for Locomotive Emission

Reductions Not Recommended

– No Authority,

Federally Regulated Source.

Implemented as incentive and ARB

MOU.

OFMS39 Prohibit 2

- stroke off

- road engines Not Recommended

– High Cost

OFMS42 Lawn and garden care restrictions

– ban

commercial mowing on Spare The Air

days Further Study

– Combined in Episodic

Controls Further Study Measure

OFMS45 Identify and offer incentives for

applications where on

- road engines can

be used in place of off

- road certified

engines Not Recommended

– N o enforceable

reductions due to differences in

certification procedures

OFMS48 Raise fuel prices Not Recommended

– High Cost, No

Authority2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 6 Table H

- 1

Mobile and Land Use Control Measures Considered

Control Measure

Number Control Measure Title and Strategy

Type Conclusion

OFMS66 Encourage faster turnover of locomotive

engines to lower emitting engines under

new US Tier 0 standards Control Measure

- part of SMAQMD

OFMS

- HD

- 1 and State SIP

OFMS68 Require r etrofits

– NO X Control

Technologies

– Locomotives Not Recommended

– No Authority

OFMS8 Ban all off

- road construction equipment

on spare the air days Further Study

– Combined in Episodic

Controls Further Study Measure

OFMS

- 92 Change existing landscaping to

xeriscaping and promotes the installation

of xeriscaping in new developments Not Recommended

– High c ost

ONMS

- 176 Develop a station car/low emission

vehicle share program. Not Recommended

– High Cost

ONMS

- 181 Develop and fund a program for

neighborhood electric vehicle Not Recommended

– High Cost

ONMS

- 38 Use remote sensors and license plate

photos to identify smoking vehicles Not Recommended

– Evaluated for

Attainment Advancement

ONMS

- 69 Provide free replacement caps to light

and medium duty vehicle owners at

special events, county fairs, etc. Not Recommended

- Already required

as part of SMOG Check program

SMAQMD OFMS

- HD

- 1 Off

- road CI Incentive Program Control Measure

SMAQMD OFMS

- SI

- 1 Zero Emission Lawn and Garden

Incentive (Residential) Control Measure

SMAQMD ONMS

- HD

- 1 SECAT Like Program Control Measure

SMAQMD ONMS

- LD

- 1 Light Duty Early Retirement Control Measure

SMAQMD

- 1 Urban Forest Air Quality Development

Program Control Measure

State SOON Program Retrofits, repowers, and fleet

modernization for off road equipment Not Recommended

– Equivalent or

better requirements in place

TCM

- ONMS

- ED

- 1 Spare The Air Program

– Notification for

Spare The Air Days Control Measure

Further Study

- 1 Urban Heat Island Mitigation Further Study

Further Study

- 2 Alternative Energy Further S tudy

Further Study

- 3 Energy Conservation Further S tudy2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 7 Table H

- 1

Mobile and Land Use Control Measures Considered

Control Measure

Number Control Measure Title and Strategy

Type Conclusion

Further Study

- 6 Episodic Controls

(Combination of OFMS8, OFMS13,

OFMS16, OFMS19, OFMS20, OFMS21,

OFMS24, OFMS42 ) Further Study2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 8 

### Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

Stationary/Area Source Control Measure Control Measures Considered2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 9 Table H

- 2

SMAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

460 Adhesives and

Sealants VOC limits on adhesives and

sealants Reduce VOC limits on

adhesives and sealants

to limits used in

SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

442 Architectural

Coatings VOC limits on coatings Reduce the VOC limits

on the coatings

consistent with the SCM Control Measure

454/466 Degreasing/

Solvent

Cleaning VOC limits on solvents Reduce the VOC limits

on the solvents to limits

adopted by SCAQMD.

Including all coating rules

with solvent limits. Control Measure

440 Unspecified

Coatings None Establish VOC limits on

coatings. Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

459 Automotive

Refinishing VOC limits on coatings Reduce the VOC limits

on the coatings

consistent with the SCM Control Measure

Paper, Fabric,

and Film

Coating None Establish VOC limits on

coatings. Not Recommended

- No sources

411 Boilers and

Steam

Generators NO X limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 1 mmBtu/hr or greater;

1

- 5 mmBTU/hr 30 ppm, 5

- 20

mmBTU/hr 15 ppm, >20

mmBTU/hr 9 ppm Already adopted Control Measure

411 Boilers and

Steam

Generators NO X limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 1 mmBtu/hr or greater;

1

- 5 mmBTU/hr 30 ppm, 5

- 20

mmBTU/hr 15 ppm, >20 9 ppm Reduce N O X limit to 6

ppm for >20 mmBTU/hr Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

412 IC Engines NO X limits on IC Engines located

at major stationary source Require NO X limits all IC

Engines, not just those at

major stationary sources

of NO X

. Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

446 Storage Tanks Requires use of a pressure tank or

use of tank with vapor loss control

device Lower applicability

threshold; additional

control on fixed roof tank Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Cap and Trade None Establish CAP and Trade

Emission Reduction

Program similar to

SCAQMD's RECLAIM

Program Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

418 Commercial

Cooking None Establish standards to

control VOC emissions

for Commercial Cooking

(i.e. char boilers) Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

496 Livestock

Waste Implement several practice from a

list Lower applicability

threshold; Increase

number of practices and

control efficiency Control Measure

496 Livestock

Waste Implement several practices from

a list Lower applicability

threshold; Increase

number of practices and Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 10 Table H

- 2

SMAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

control efficiency Advancement

Wineries None Establish standards to

reduce evaporative VOC

emissions from the

fermentation process at

wineries Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

463 Wood Products

Coatings VOC limits on coatings and

strippers Reduce VOC limits for

high solid stains, sealers,

strippers and lower the

applicability limit to 20

gal/year Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

461 Natural Gas

Production and

Processing None Establish requirements

to inspect and maintain

equipment to reduce

fugitive VOC emissions Control Measure

471 Asphalted

Concrete None Require limits for NO X

emissions similar to a

control measure adopted

by SJVUAPCD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Dryers and

Ovens None Require limits for NO X

emissions that achieve

50

- 75% reduction

similar to proposed

measure in SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

465 Polyester

Resin/Plastic

Product

Manufacturing Limits monomer content and use

of vapor suppressants Reduce monomer limits

to standards adopted by

SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

485 Landfills Collect and control ROG

emissions from landfills containing

approximately 4 million tons of

waste or more Lower applicability

threshold to landfills

containing approximately

0.5 million tons of waste

or more Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

414 Water Heaters NO X limits on water heaters with

rated heat input capacity less than

75,000 Btu/hr Require NO X limits on

water heaters/boilers

with rated heat input

capacity between 75,000

Btu/hr and 1,000,000

Btu/hr, and reduce

current NO X limits from

55 ppm to 15 ppm. Control Measure

Roofing Kettles None Establish VOC limits

from roofing kettles Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Reactivity

Based

Standards None Require VOC limit of

coatings to be based on

a reactivity limit instead

of a mass

- balance limit Not Recommended

- Overlaps with

Control Measure

442

Using Greener

Consumer

Products None Promote the use of Low

VOC Consumer Product

especially on Spare

- the

Air Day Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 11 Table H

- 2

SMAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Semiconductor

Manufacturing None Establish VOC limits for

semiconductor

manufacturing Not Recommended

- No sources

452 Can Coating VOC limits on coatings Reduce VOC limits to be

as stringent as

SJVUAPCD Not Recommended

- Equivalent or

better requirements

in place

456 Aerospace

Assembly and

Component VOC limits on coatings Require VOC limits on

additional coating

categories associated

with Aerospace Coating Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

444 Petroleum Dry

Cleaning VOC limits on solvents used or

use of emission control device Remove applicability

threshold to include all

dry cleaning solvents

except for

perchloroethylene and

ban the use of open

transfer systems Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

451 Metal Parts and

Products

Coating VOC limits on coatings, strippers

and solvent cleaner Reduce VOC limits for

coatings used in some

"baked" applications and

coatings considered

"specialty coatings" Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

450 Graphic Arts VOC limits on inks, coatings,

adhesives or use of emission

control system Reduce VOC limits for

ink categories in

flexographic for porous

substrate, extreme

performance, and

metallic ink to be as

stringent as SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

413 Gas Turbines NO X limits on stationary gas

turbines; 0.3

- 2.9 MW 42 ppmv,

>= 2.9 and <877 hours 42 ppmv,

2.9

- 10 MW and >= 877 hours, 25

ppmv, >=10 MW with no SCR and

>= 877 hours 15 ppmv, >=10 MW

with SCR and >= hours 9 ppmv Reduce NO X limits to be

as stringent as

SCAQMD; 0.3

- 2.9 MW

25 ppmv, 2.9

- 10 MW 9

ppmv, 2.9

- 10 MW with

no scar 15 ppmv, 10 MW

and over 9 ppmv

, 10

MW and over with no

SCR 12 ppmv Not Recommended

- Equivalent or

better requirements

in place

408 Incinerators Multiple

- chamber incinerator or

APCO

- approved equipment Require all incinerators

demonstrate NO X

emissions of less than 60

lb/mmscf Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Food and Ag

Processing None Require VOC limits to be

as stringent as a rule

adopted in SCAQMD

which required the use of

low

- VOC sterilizing

products or controlled by

an emission control

device Not Recommended

- Overlaps with

Control Measure

454/466

458 Bakeries Control efficiency of at least 95% Lower applicability

threshold Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 12 Table H

- 2

SMAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

447 Organic Liquid

Loading VOC limits from loading of organic

liquids Require VOC limits to be

as stringent as

BAAQMD; require leak

inspection requirement

and repair time

requirement similar to

the requirements

adopted in SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

448/449 G asoline

Transfer

-

Phase I/II Phase I requires submerged fill

pipe & ARB certified systems,

pressure relief valve. Phase II

requires ARB certified system,

periodic self maintenance, periodic

inspection Evaluate SJV proposal Not Recommended

- Already

implemented

Further

Study

- 4 Gasoline

Transfer Phase

I/II Phase I requires submerged fill

pipe & ARB certified systems,

pressure relief valve. Phase II

requires ARB certified system,

periodic self maintenance, periodic

inspection Improve compliance

rates by requiring ISD to

provide earlier warning

signal at lower

degradation rate; change

ISD warning and gross

failure rates; disallow

ISD reset button until

fixed; require installation

of shut down sensor Further Study

Needed

- Current

info inadequate

Storage Tank

Degassing Maintenance/replacement not

allowed May

- October Reduce emissions by

requiring enhanced

control technology,

increased control

efficiency, establishing

concentration limits Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Aviation Fuel

Transfer None Reduce VOC from

spillage and vapor

displacement during

Phase 1 operations and

from venting through

relief valves Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Marine

Coatings None Establish VOC limits for

marine coa tings. Not Recommended

- No sources

Enhanced

Compliance None Evaluate permit program

change to assess

opportunities for further

emission reductions;

include adjusting permit

exemption level, conduct

additional inspections

and survey to identify

potential sources, adding

conditions to non

- Title V

Sources and improving

accuracy and

enforceability of existing

permit Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Flares None Establish standard of

NO X emissions for flares Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 13 Table H

- 2

SMAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Polystyrene/

Poly Foam

Blowing/Other None Require reduction of

VOC emission from EPS

molding by vented the

emissions to an emission

control device such as a

thermal oxidizer Not Recommended

- No sources

Production of

Wood/paper

products None Require VOC limits for

manufacturing

wood/paper products. Not Recommended

- No sources

Industrial

Wastewater None Require VOC limits and

control system from

wastewater system Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Wastewater at

Sewage

Treatment

Plants None Require VOC limits and

control system for

wastewater sewage

treatment plant Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

201 Lower permit

exemption Permit exemptions and thresholds Lower permit threshold

to bring more sources

and equipment under

permit program Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Green Waste

Composting None Establish VOC limits

similar to the rule

adopted by SJVUAPCD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Co

- Composting

and Biosolids None Establish VOC reducing

requirements equivalent

to SJVUAPCD/SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Glass Furnaces None Establish NO X limits for

glass furnaces Not Recommended

- No sources

Central

Furnaces None Establish NO X limits for

central furnaces Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS

- 1 ISR

Construction None Implement construction

mitigation rule to reduce

off

- road construction

NO X emissions

associated with new land

use development Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS

- 1 ISR

Construction None Implement construction

mitigation rule to reduce

off

- road construction

VOC emissions

associated with new land

use development Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS

- 2 ISR

Operational None Mitigate increased

emissions associated

with new land

use/development

projects Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

501 Agricultural

Burning/Open

Burning Conditions under which burning

must be conducted, when allowed,

to minimize smoke; Burning is not

allowed on days declared No

- Burn

Day Prohibit burning of waste Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 14 Table H

- 2

SMAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Glycol

Dehydration

Systems None Control VOC emissions

from glycol regenerator

vents used in natural gas

production to remove

water vapor Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Further

Study

- 5 Lubricants None Establish VOC limits for

lubricant formulations Further Study

Needed

- Current

info inadequate

Facility

Modernization None

- new equipment with PTE

greater than 10 lbs/day install

BACT Establish a pre

determined life span of

when equipment would

need to be replaced and

would then trigger BACT

limits Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 15 

### El Dorado County Air Quality Management District

Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 16 Table H

- 3

EDCAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

236 Adhesives and

Sealants VOC limits on coatings Reduce VOC limits on

adhesives and sealants

to limits used in

SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

215 Architectural

Coatings VOC limits on coatings Reduce the VOC limits

on the coatings

consistent with the SCM Control measure

225/235 Degreasing/

Solvent

Cleaning VOC limits on solvents Reduce the VOC limits

on the solvents Control measure

Unspecified

Coatings None Establish VOC limits on

coatings. Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

230 Automotive

Refinishing VOC limits on coatings Reduce the VOC limits

on the coatings

consistent with the SCM Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Paper, Fabric,

and Film

Coating None Establish VOC limits on

coatings. Not Recommended

- No sources

229 Boilers and

Steam

Generators NO X limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 5,000,000 Btu/hr o r

greater; 30 ppm, Lower NO X limits on

boiler/steam generators

with rated heat input

capacity of 1,000,000

Btu/hr or greater; 1

- 5

mmBTU/hr 30 ppm, 5

- 20

mmBTU/hr 15 ppm, >20

mmBTU/hr 9 ppm Not Recommended

- High Cost

231, 232,

233, 241 Boilers and

Steam

Generators NO X limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 5,000,000 Btu/hr or

greater; 30 ppm, Reduce NO X limit to 6

- 8

ppm for >20 mmBTU/hr Not Recommended

- High Cost

233 IC Engines NO X limits on internal combustion

engines Reduce NO X limit Not Recommended

- High Cost

244 Storage Tanks Work practices Lower applicability

threshold: additional

control on fixed roof tank Not Recommended

- No sources

Cap and Trade None Establish CAP and Trade

Emission Reduction

Program similar to

SCAQMD's RECLAIM

Program Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Commercial

Cooking None Establish standards to

control VOC emissions

for Commercial Cooking

(i.e. char boilers) Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Livestock

Waste None Lower applicability

threshold: increase

number of practices and

control efficiency Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Wineries None Establish standards to

reduce evaporative VOC

emissions from the

fermentation process at

wineries Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 17 Table H

- 3

EDCAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

237 Wood Products

Coatings VOC limits on coatings Reduce VOC limits for

high solid stains, sealers,

strippers and lower the

applicability limit to 20

gal/year Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Natural Gas

Production and

Processing None Establish requirements

to inspect and maintain

equipment to reduce

fugitive VOC emissions Not Recommended

- No sources

Asphaltic

Concrete None Require limits for NO X

emissions similar to a

control measure adopted

by SJVUAPCD Not Recommended

- No sources

Other Dryers

and Ovens None Require limits for NO X

emissions that achieve

50

- 75% reduction

similar to proposed

measure in SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Polyester

Resin/Plastic

Product

Manufacturing None Reduce monomer limits

to standards adopted by

SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Landfills None Establish rule for landfills Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

239 Water Heaters NO X limits on water heaters with

rated heat input capacity less than

75,000 Btu/hr Require NO X limits on

water heaters/boilers

with rated heat input

capacity between 75,000

Btu/hr and 1,000,000

Btu/hr, and reduce

current NO X limits from

55 ppm to 15 ppm. Control measure

Roofing Kettles None Establish VOC limits

from roofing kettles Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Reactivity

Based

Standards None Require VOC limit of

coatings to be based on

a reactivity limit instead

of a mass

- balance limit Not Recommended

- Overlaps with

Control Measure

218

Using Greener

Consumer

Products None Promote the use of Low

VOC Consumer Product

especially on Spare

- the

Air Day Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Semiconductor

Manufacturing None Establish VOC limits for

semiconductor

manufacturing. Not Recommended

- No sources

Can Coating None Establish VOC limits Not Recommended

- No sources

Aerospace

Coating None Establish VOC limits Not Recommended

- No sources

Petroleum Dry

Cleaning None Establish VOC limits on

solvents used or require

use of an emission

control device Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 18 Table H

- 3

EDCAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

246 Metal Parts and

Products None Establish VOC limits Control measure

231 Graphic Arts VOC limits on graphic arts

materials Require VOC limits for

ink products in

flexographic for porous

substrate, extreme

performance, and

metallic ink to be as

stringent as SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Gas Turbines None Reduce NO X limits to be

as stringent as

SCAQMD; 0.3

- 2.9 MW

25 ppmv, 2.9

- 10 MW 9

ppmv, 2.9

- 10 MW with

no scar 15 ppmv, 10 MW

and over 9 ppmv

, 10

MW and over with no

SCR 12 ppmv Not Recommended

- No sources

Incinerators None Require all incinerators

demonstrate NO X

emissions of less than 60

lb/mmscf Not Recommended

- No sources

Food and Ag

Processing None Require VOC limits to be

as stringent as a rule

adopted in SCAQMD

which required the use of

low

- VOC sterilizing

products or controlled by

an emission control

device Not Recommended

- No sources

Bakeries None Establish VOC limits for

bakeries Not Recommended

- No sources

Terminal/Bulk

Plants VOC limits from loading of organic

liquids Require VOC limits to be

as stringent as

BAAQMD; require leak

inspection requirement

and repair time

requirement similar to

the requirements

adopted in SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

238/244 Gasoline

Dispensing

Phase I/II Phase I requires submerged fill

pipe & ARB certified systems,

pressure relief valve. Phase II

requires ARB certified system,

periodic self maintenance, periodic

inspection Evaluate SJV proposal to

include mobile fuelers,

increase inspection

frequency, lower

allowable vapor leak

threshold Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

238/244 Gasoline

Dispensing

Phase I/II Phase I requires submerged fill

pipe & ARB certified systems,

pressure relief valve. Phase II

requires ARB certified system,

periodic self maintenance, periodic

inspection Improve compliance

rates by requiring ISD to

provide earlier warning

signal at lower

degradation rate; change

ISD warning and gross

failure rates; disallow

ISD reset button until

fixed; require installation

of shut down sensor Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 19 Table H

- 3

EDCAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Storage Tank

Degassing None Reduce emissions by

requiring enhanced

control technology,

increased control

efficiency, establishing

concentration limits Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Aviation Fuel

Transfer None Reduce VOC from

spillage and vapor

displacement during

Phase 1 operations and

from venting through

relief valves Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Marine

Coatings None Establish VOC limits for

marine coatings. Not Recommended

- No sources

Enhanced

Compliance None Evaluate permit program

change to assess

opportunities for further

emission reductions;

include adjusting permit

exemption level, conduct

additional inspections

and survey to identify

potential sources, adding

conditions to non

- Title V

Sources and improving

accuracy and

enforceability of existing

permit Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Flares None Establish standard of

NO X emissions for flares Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Polystyrene/

Poly Foam

Blowing/Other None Require reduction of

VOC emission from EPS

molding by vented the

emissions to an emission

control device such as a

thermal oxidizer Not Recommended

- No sources

Production of

Wood/paper

products None Require VOC limits for

manufacturing

wood/paper products. Not Recommended

- No sources

Industrial

Wastewater None Require VOC limits and

control system from

wastewater system Not Recommended

- No sources

Wastewater

Sewage

Treatment None Require VOC limits and

control system for

wastewater sewage

treatment plant Not Recommended

- No sources

Lower permit

exemption None Lower permit threshold

to bring more sources

and equipment under

permit program Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Composting

Green Waste None Establish VOC limits

similar to the rule

adopted by SJVUAPCD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 20 Table H

- 3

EDCAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Composting

and Biosolids None Establish VOC reducing

requirements equivalent

to SJVUAPCD/SCAQMD Not Recommended

- No sources

Glass Furnaces None Establish NO X limits for

glass furnaces Not Recommended

- No sources

Central

Furnaces None Establish NO X limits for

central furnaces Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS

- 1 ISR

Construction None Implement construction

mitigation rule to reduce

off

- road construction

emissions associated

with new land use

development Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS

- 2 ISR

Operational None Mitigate increased

emissions associated

with new land

use/development

projects Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

300 Agricultural

Burning/Open

Burning Conditions under which burning

must be conducted, when allowed,

to minimize smoke; Burning is not

allowed on days declared No

- Burn

Day Prohibit burning of waste Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Glycol

Dehydration

Systems None Control VOC emissions

from glycol re generator

vents used in natural gas

production to remove

water vapor Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Lubricants None Establish VOC limits for

lubricant formulations Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Facility

Modernization None Establish a pre

determined life span of

when equipment would

need to be replaced and

would then trigger BACT

limits Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 21 

### Feather River Air Quality Management District

Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 22 Table H

- 4

FRAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

1 Adhesives and

Sealants None Establish VOC limits on

adhesives and sealants

similar to limits used in

SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

3.15 Architectural

Coatings VOC limits on coatings Reduce the VOC limits

on the coatings

consistent with the SCM Control Measure

3.14 Degreasing/

Solvent

Cleaning Keep lid close on tanks greater

than 55 gallons. Require VOC limits on degreasing/solvent

cleaning process. Control Measure

2 Unspecified

Coatings None Establish VOC limits on

coatings that have not

been established in

another rule. Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

3.19 Automotive

Refinishing VOC limits on coatings Reduce the VOC limits

on the coatings

consistent with the SCM Control Measure

Paper, Fabric,

and Film

Coating None Establish VOC limits on

coatings. Not Recommended

- No sources

3.21 Boilers and

Steam

Generators NO X limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 1 mmBtu/hr or greater;

1

- 5 mmBTU/hr Annual Tune Up,

>5 mmBTU/hr using gaseous fuel

30 ppm, >5 mmBTU/hr using non

gaseous fuel 40 ppm Require NO X limits for

boiler between 1

- 5

mmBtu/hr, and reduce

NO X limit for boiler >5

mmBtu/hr Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

3.21 Boilers and

Steam

Generators NO X limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 1 mmBtu/hr or greater;

1

- 5 mmBTU/hr Annual Tune Up,

>5 mmBTU/hr using gaseous fuel

30 ppm, >5 mmBTU/hr using non

gaseous fuel 40 ppm Reduce NO X limit to 6

ppm for >20 mmBTU/hr Not Recommended

– No Sources

3.22 IC Engines None Establish NO X limits on

engines. Control Measure

3.8/3.9 Storage Tanks Requires use of a floating roof or

vapor loss control device Lower applicability

threshold Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Cap and Trade None Establish CAP and Trade

Emission Reduction

Program similar to

SCAQMD's RECLAIM

Program Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Commercial

Cooking None Establish standards to

control VOC emissions

for Commercial Cooking

(i.e. char boilers) Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Livestock

Waste None Lower applicability

threshold Not Recommended

– No Sources

Wineries None Establish standards to

reduce evaporative VOC

emissions from the

fermentation process at

wineries Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 23 Table H

- 4

FRAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

3.20 Wood Products

Coatings VOC limits on coatings and

strippers Reduce VOC limits for

high solid stains, sealers,

strippers and lower the

applicability limit to 20

gal/year Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Natural Gas

Production and

Processing None Establish requirements

to inspect and maintain

equipment to reduce

fugitive VOC emissions Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Asphaltic

Concrete None Require limits for NO X

emissions Not Recommended

- No sources

Other Dryers

and Ovens None Require limits for NO X

emissions that achieve

50

- 75% reduction

similar to proposed

measure in SCAQMD Not Recommended

– No Sources

Polyester

Resin/Plastic

Product

Manufacturing None Require monomer

content limit and use of

vapor suppressant Not Recommended

- No sources

3.18 Landfills Collect and control ROG

emissions from landfills Lower applicability

threshold to landfills

containing approximately

0.5 million tons of waste

or more Not Recommended

- No sources

3.23 Water Heaters None Require limits for NO X

emissions for water

heaters < 1 mmBtu/hr Control Measure

Roofing Kettles None Establish VOC limits

from roofing kettles Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Reactivity

Based

Standards None Require VOC limit of

coatings to be based on

a reactivity limit instead

of a mass

- balance limit Not Recommended

- Overlaps with

Control Measure

3.15

Using Greener

Consumer

Products None Promote the use of Low

VOC Consumer Product

especially on Spare

- the

Air Day Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Semiconductor

Manufacturing None Establish VOC limits for

semiconductor

manufacturing Not Recommended

- No sources

Can Coating None Establish VOC limits for

can coating Not Recommended

- No sources

Aerospace

Coating None Establish VOC limits for

aerospace coating Not Recommended

- No sources

Petroleum Dry

Cleaning None Establish VOC limits on

solvents used or use of

control device Not Recommended

- No sources

Metal Parts and

Products None Require VOC limits on

coatings for metal parts

and products Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 24 Table H

- 4

FRAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Graphic Arts None Require VOC limits on

inks, coatings, adhesives

or use of emission

control system Not Recommended

- No sources

Gas Turbines None Establish NO X limits on

stationary gas turbines Not Recommended

- No sources

Incinerators None Establish NO X limits on

incinerators Not Recommended

- No sources

Food and Ag

Processing None Require VOC limits to be

as stringent as a rule

adopted in SCAQMD

which required the use of

low

- VOC sterilizing

products or controlled by

an emission control

device Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Bakeries None Require control device

with efficiency of at least

95% Not Recommended

- No sources

Terminal/Bulk

Plants None Require VOC limits from

loading of organic liquids Not Recommended

- No sources

3.8/3.12 Gasoline

Transfer

-

Phase I/II Phase I requires submerged fill

pipe & ARB certified systems.

Phase II requires ARB certified

system, periodic self maintenance,

periodic inspection Evaluate SJV proposal to

inc l ude mobile fuelers,

increase inspection

frequency, lower

allowable vapor leak

threshold Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

3.8/3.12 Gasoline

Transfer

-

Phase I/II Phase I requires submerged fill

pipe & ARB certified systems.

Phase II requires ARB certified

system, periodic self maintenance,

periodic inspection Improve compliance

rates by requiring ISD to

provide earlier warning

signal at lower

degradation rate; change

ISD warning and gross

failure rates; disallow

ISD reset button until

fixed; require installation

of shut down sensor Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Storage Tank

Degassing None Reduce emissions by

requiring enhanced

control technology,

increased control

efficiency, establishing

concentration limits Not Recommended

- No sources

Aviation Fuel

Transfer None Reduce VOC from

spillage and vapor

displacement during

Phase 1 operations and

from venting through

relief valves Not Recommended

- No sources

Marine

Coatings None Establish VOC limits for

marine coatings. Not Recommended

- No sources2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 25 Table H

- 4

FRAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Enhanced

Compliance None Evaluate permit program

change to assess

opportunities for further

emission reductions;

include adjusting permit

exemption level, conduct

additional inspections

and survey to identify

potential sources, adding

conditions to non

- Title V

Sources and improving

accuracy and

enforceability of existing

permit Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Flares None Establish standard of

NO X emissions for flares Not Recommended

- No sources

Polystyrene/

Poly Foam

Blowing/Other None Require reduction of

VOC emission from EPS

molding by vented the

emissions to an emission

control device such as a

thermal oxidizer Not Recommended

- No sources

Production of

Wood/paper

products None Require VOC limits for

manufacturing

wood/paper products. Not Recommended

- No sources

Industrial

Wastewater None Require VOC limits and

control system from

wastewater system Not Recommended

- No sources

Wastewater

Sewage

Treatment None Require VOC limits and

control system for

wastewater sewage

treatment plant Not Recommended

- No sources

4.3 Lower permit

exemption Permit exemptions and thresholds Lower permit threshold

to bring more sources

and equipment under

permit program Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Composting

G reen Waste None Establish VOC limits Not Recommended

- No sources

Composting

and Biosolids None Establish VOC reducing

requirements equivalent

to SJVUAPCD/SCAQMD Not Recommended

- No sources

Glass Furnaces None Establish NO X limits for

glass furnaces Not Recommended

- No sources

Central

Furnaces None Establish NO X limits for

central furnaces Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS

- 1 ISR

Construction None Implement construction

mitigation rule to reduce

off

- road construction

NO X emissions

associated with new land

use development Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 26 Table H

- 4

FRAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

IS

- 1 ISR

Construction None Implement construction

mitigation rule to reduce

off

- road construction

VOC emissions

associated with new land

use development Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS

- 2 ISR

Operational None Mitigate increased

emissions associated

with new land

use/development

projects Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

2.0 Agricultural

Burning/Open

Burning Conditions under which burning

must be conducted, when allowed,

to minimize smoke; Burning is not

allowed on days declared No

- Burn

Day Prohibit burning of waste Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Glycol

Dehydration

Systems None Control VOC emissions

from glycol regenerator

vents used in natural gas

production to remove

water vapor Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Lubricants None Establish VOC limits for

lubricant formulations Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Facility

Modernization None

- new equipment with PTE

greater than 10 lbs/day install

BACT Establish a pre

determined life span of

when equipment would

need to be replaced and

would then trigger BACT

limits Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 27 

### Placer County Air Pollution Control District

Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 28 Table H

- 5

PCAPCD Station a ry/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

235 Adhesives and

Sealants VOC limits on adhesives and

sealants Reduce VOC limits on

adhesives and sealants

to limits used in

SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

218 Architectural

Coatings VOC limits on coatings Reduce the VOC limits

on the coatings

consistent with the SCM Control Measure

216, 240 Degreasing/

Solvent

Cleaning VOC limits on solvent Reduce the VOC limits

on the solvents to limits

adopted by SCAQMD.

Including all coating rules

with solvent limits. Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Unspecified

Coatings None Establish VOC limits on

coatings. Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

234 Automotive

Refinishing VOC limits on coatings Reduce the VOC limits

on the coatings

consistent with the SCM Control Measure

Paper, Fabric,

and Film

Coating None Establish VOC limits on

coatings. Not Recommended

- No sources

231, 232,

233, 241 Boilers and

Steam

Generators Required NO X limits 30 ppm on

boiler/steam generators with rated

heat input capacity of 5MMBtu/hr

or greater; Lower NO X limits on

boiler/steam generators

with rated heat input

capacity of 1,000,000

Btu/hr or greater; 1

- 5

mmBTU/hr 30 ppm, 5

- 20

mmBTU/hr 15 ppm, >20

mmBTU/hr 9 ppm Not Recommended

- High Cost due to

the portion of

boilers >5

mmBtu/hr in the

county

231, 232,

233, 241 Boilers and

Steam

Generators Required NO X limits 30 ppm on

boiler/steam generators with rated

heat input capacity of 5,000,000

Btu/hr or greater; Reduce NO X limit to 6

- 8

ppm for >20 mmBTU/hr Not Recommended

- High cost due to

the portion of

boilers > 5

mmBtu/hr in the

county

242 IC Engines NO X limits on IC Engines located

at stationary sources Lower NO X limits on all

non

- ag stationary

engines 25 ppm for rich

burn, 65 ppm for lean

burn, 80 ppm for diesel Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

212 Storage Tanks Requires use of a pressure tank or

use of tank with vapor loss control

device Lower applicability

threshold; additional

control on fixed roof tank Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Cap and Trade None Establish CAP and Trade

Emission Reduction

Program similar to

SCAQMD's RECLAIM

Program Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Commercial

Cooking None Establish standards to

control VOC emissions

for Commercial Cooking

(i.e. char boilers) Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 29 Table H

- 5

PCAPCD Station a ry/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Livestock

Waste None Lower applicability

thres hold; Increase

number of practices and

control efficiency Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Wineries None Establish standards to

reduce evaporative VOC

emissions from the

fermentation process at

wineries Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

236 Wood Products

Coatings VOC limits on coatings and

strippers Reduce VOC limits for

high solid stains, sealers,

strippers and lower the

applicability limit to 20

gal/year Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Natural Gas

Production and

Processing None Establish requirements

to inspect and maintain

equipment to reduce

fugitive VOC emissions Not Recommended

- No sources

CM1 Asphaltic

Concrete None Require limits for NO X

emissions similar to a

control measure adopted

by SJVUAPCD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Other Dryers

and Ovens None Require limits for NO X

emissions that achieve

50

- 75% reduction

similar to proposed

measure in SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

243 Polyester

Resin/Plastic

Product

Manufacturing Limits monomer content and use

of vapor suppressants Reduce monomer limits

to standards adopted by

SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

237 Landfills Collect and control ROG

emissions from landfills containing

approximately 2.75 million tons of

waste or more Lower applicability

threshold to landfills

containing approximately

0.5 million tons of waste

or more Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

CM2/246 Water Heaters NO X limits on water heaters with

rated heat input capacity less than

75,000 Btu/hr Require NO X limits on

water heaters/boilers

with rated heat input

capacity between 75,000

Btu/hr and 1,000,000

Btu/hr, and reduce

current NO X limits from

55 ppm to 15 ppm. Control Measure

Roofing Kettles None Establish VOC limits

from roofing kettles Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Reactivity

Based

Standards None Require VOC limit of

coatings to be based on

a reactivity limit instead

of a mass

- balance limit Not Recommended

- Overlaps with

Control Measure

218

Using Greener

Consumer

Products None Promote the use of Low

VOC Consumer Product

especially on Spare

- the

Air Day Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 30 Table H

- 5

PCAPCD Station a ry/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

244 Semiconductor

Manufacturing Limit VOC emissions from

negative photoresist operations

and solvent cleaning processes Establish VOC limits for

semiconductor

manufacturing Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

233 Can Coating Limit VOC emissions form coating Reduce VOC limits to be

as stringent as

SJVUAPCD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Aerospace

Coating None Establish VOC limits Not Recommended

- No sources

227 Petroleum Dry

Cleaning VOC limits on solvents used or

use of emission control device Remove applicability

threshold to include all

dry cleaning solvents

except for

perchloroethylene and

ban the use of open

transfer systems Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

CM3/245 Metal Parts and

Products None Establish VOC limits Control Measure

239 Graphic Arts VOC limits on inks, coatings,

adhesives or use of emission

control system Reduce VOC limits for

ink categories in

flexographic for porous

substrate, extreme

performance, and

metallic ink to be as

stringent as SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

250 Gas Turbines NO X limits on stationary gas

turbines; 0.3

- 2.9 MW 42 ppmv,

>= 2.9 and <877 hours 42 ppmv,

2.9

- 10 MW and >= 877 hours, 25

ppmv, >=10 MW with no SCR and

>= 877 hours 15 ppmv, >=10 MW

with SCR and >= hours 9 ppmv Reduce NO X limits to be

as stringent as

SCAQMD; 0.3

- 2.9 MW

25 ppmv, 2.9

- 10 MW 9

ppmv, 2.9

- 10 MW with

no scar 15 ppmv, 10 MW

and over 9 ppmv

, 10

MW and over with no

SCR 12 ppmv Not Recommended

- Already

implemented

206 Incinerators Limit NO X

, SO2, CO, PM, THC,

and HCL emissions from an

incinerator Require all incinerators

demonstrate NO X

emissions of less than 60

lb/mmscf Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Food and Ag

Processing None Require VOC limits to be

as stringent as a rule

adopted in SCAQMD

which required the use of

low

- VOC sterilizing

products or controlled by

an emission control

device Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Bakeries None Lower applicability

threshold Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 31 Table H

- 5

PCAPCD Station a ry/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

213, 215 Terminal/Bulk

Plants VOC limits from loading of organic

liquids Require VOC limits to be

as stringent as

BAAQMD; require leak

inspection requirement

and repair time

requirement similar to

the requirements

adopted in SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Further

Study

– 4 Gasoline

Dispensing

Phase I/II Require new and existing retail

service stations being in

compliance with State ATCM by

its deadline Evaluate SJV proposal to

include mobile fuelers,

increase inspection

frequency, lower

allowable vapor leak

threshold Further Study

- Current information

inadequate to

quality benefits and

cost effectiveness

Further

Study

– 4 Gasoline

Dispensing

Phase I/II Require new and existing retail

service stations being in

compliance with State ATCM by

its deadline Improve compliance

rates by requiring ISD to

provide earlier warning

signal at lower

degradation rate; change

ISD warning and gross

failure rates; disallow

ISD reset button until

fixed; require installation

of shut down sensor Further Study

- Current information

inadequate to

quality benefits and

cost effectiveness

Storage Tank

Degassing None Reduce emissions by

requiring enhanced

control technology,

increased control

efficiency, establishing

concentration limits Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Aviation Fuel

Transfer None Reduce VOC from

spillage and vapor

displacement during

Phase 1 operations and

from venting through

relief valves Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Marine

Coatings None Establish VOC limits for

marine coatings. Not Recommended

- No sources

Enhanced

Compliance None Evaluate permit program

change to assess

opportunities for further

emission reductions;

include adjusting permit

exemption level, conduct

additional inspections

and survey to identify

potential sources, adding

conditions to non

- Title V

Sources and improving

accuracy and

enforceability of existing

permit Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Flares None Establish standard of

NO X emissions for flares Not Recommended

- No sources2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 32 Table H

- 5

PCAPCD Station a ry/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Polystyrene/

Poly Foam

Blowing/Other None Require reduction of

VOC emission from EPS

molding by vented the

emissions to an emission

control device such as a

thermal oxidizer Not Recommended

- No sources

229, 238 Production of

Wood/paper

products Limit coatings and inks which

contain 250 grams or less of VOC

per liter Require VOC limits for

manufacturing

wood/paper products. Not recommended

- already

implemented

Industrial

Wastewater None Require VOC limits and

control system from

wastewater system Not Recommended

- No sources

Wastewater

Sewage

Treatment None Require VOC limits and

control system for

wastewater sewage

treatment plant Not Recommended

- No sources

Lower permit

exemption Permit exemptions and thresholds Lower permit threshold

to bring more sources

and equipment under

permit program Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Composting

Green Waste None Establish VOC limits

similar to the rule

adopted by SJVUAPCD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Composting

and Biosolids None Establish VOC reducing

requirements equivalent

to SJVUAPCD/SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Glass Furnaces None Establish NO X limits for

glass furnaces Not Recommended

- No sources

Central

Furnaces None Establish NO X limits for

central furnaces Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS

- 1 ISR

Construction None Implement construction

mitigation rule to reduce

off

- road construction

NO X emissions

associated with new land

use development Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS

- 1 ISR

Construction None Implement construction

mitigation rule to reduce

off

- road construction

emissions associated

with new land use

development Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS

- 2 ISR

Operational None Mitigate increased

emissions associated

with new land

use/development

projects Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 33 Table H

- 5

PCAPCD Station a ry/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Agricultural

Burning/Open

Burning Conditions under which burning

must be conducted, when allowed,

to minimize smoke; Burning is not

allowed on days declared No

- Burn

Day, Areas may have more

restricted controls based on its

Municipal Advisory Councils

decision Prohibit burning of waste Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Glycol

Dehydration

Systems None Control VOC emissions

from glycol regenerator

vents used in natural gas

production to remove

water vapor Not Recommended

- No sources

Further

Study

– 5 Lubricants None Establish VOC limits for

lubricant formulations Further Study

- Current information

incomplete to

qua nt i f y benefits

and cost

effectiveness

Facility

Modernization None Establish a pre

determined life span of

when equipment would

need to be replaced and

would then trigger BACT

limits Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 34 

### Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management District

Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 35 Table H

- 6

YSAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Adhesives and

Sealants VOC limits on adhesives and

sealants Reduce VOC limits on

adhesives and sealants

to limits used in

SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

2.14 Architectural

Coatings VOC limits on coatings Reduce the VOC limits

on the coatings

consistent with the SCM Control Measure

2.24/2.31 Degreasing/

Solvent

Cleaning VOC limits on solvents Reduce the VOC limits

on the solvents to limits

adopted by SCAQMD. Control measure

Unspecified

Coatings None Establish VOC limits on

coatings. Not Recommended

- No sources

2.26 Automotive

Refinishing VOC limits on coatings Reduce the VOC limits

on the coatings

consistent with the SCM Control measure

Paper, Fabric,

and Film

Coating None Establish VOC limits on

coatings. Not Recommended

- No sources

Boilers and

Steam

Generators,

<5.0 mmBTU/hr NO X limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 1 mmBTU/hr 30 ppm Establish NO X limits on

boiler/steam generators

with rated heat input

capacity of 1

- 5

mmBTU/hr 30 ppm Not Recommended

- High cost

2.27 Boilers and

Steam

Generators,

>4.9 mmBTU/hr NO X limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 1 mmBTU/hr 30 ppm Lower NO X limits on

boiler/steam generators

with rated heat input

capacity of 5

- 20

mmBTU/hr and >20

mmBTU/hr Control Measure

231, 232,

233, 241 Boilers and

Steam

Generators NO X limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 1 mmBTU/hr 30 ppm Reduce NO X limit to 6

- 8

ppm for >20 mmBTU/hr Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

2.32 IC Engines Rich burn N O X limit at 90 ppm.

Lean burn N O X limit for engines >

100 BHP at 150 ppm and N O X

limit for engines > 100 BHP at 300

ppm Reduce NO X emission

limit for rich burn, lean

burn > 100 BHP, and

lean burn engines < 100

BHP. Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

2.21 Storage Tanks Requires use of a pressure tank or

use of tank with vapor loss control

device Lower applicability

threshold; additional

control on fixed roof tank Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Cap and Trade None Establish CAP and Trade

Emission Reduction

Program similar to

SCAQMD's RECLAIM

Program Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Commercial

Cooking None Establish standards to

control VOC emissions

for Commercial Cooking

(i.e. char boilers) Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Livestock

Waste Best Available Control Technology Lower applicability

threshold; Increase

number of practices to

control emissions and

improve control

efficiency Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 36 Table H

- 6

YSAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Wineries None Establish standards to

reduce evaporative VOC

emissions from the

fermentation process at

wineries Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Wood Products

Coatings VOC limits on wood coatings,

application equipment

requirements Reduce VOC limits for

high solid stains, sealers,

strippers and lower the

applicability limit to 20

gal/year Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Natural Gas

Production and

Processing Inspections of seals and pressure

relief devices, control of fugitive

emissions Establish requirements

to inspect and maintain

equipment to reduce

fugitive VOC emissions Not recommended

- Already

implemented

Asphaltic

Concrete None Require limits for NO X

emissions similar to a

control measure adopted

by SJVUAPCD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Other Dryers

and Ovens None Require limits for NO X

emissions that achieve

50

- 75% reduction

similar to proposed

measure in SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Polyester

Resin/Plastic

Product

Manufacturing VOC limits on polyester resin

materials, requirements for

application equipment Reduce monomer limits

to standards adopted by

SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Landfills Compliance with EPA

requirements Lower applicability

threshold to landfills

containing approximately

0.5 million tons of waste

or more Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

2.37 Water Heaters 40 nanogram N O X limit for natural

gas

- fired water heaters Require rating specific

NO X limits on water

heaters/boilers with rated

heat input capacity

between 75,000 BTU/hr

and 1,000,000 BTU/hr Control measure

Roofing Kettles None Establish VOC limits

from roofing kettles Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Reactivity

Based

Standards None Require VOC limit of

coatings to be based on

a reactivity limit instead

of a mass

- balance limit Not recommended

- Overlaps with

Control Measure

2.14

Using Greener

Consumer

Products None Promote the use of Low

VOC Consumer Product

especially on Spare

- the

Air Day Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Semiconductor

Manufacturing None Establish VOC limits for

semiconductor

manufacturing Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Can Coating None Reduce VOC limits to be

as stringent as

SJVUAPCD Not Recommended

- No sources2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 37 Table H

- 6

YSAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Aerospace

Coating None Establish VOC limits Not Recommended

- No sources

Petroleum Dry

Cleaning VOC limits on solvents used or

use of emission control device Remove applicability

threshold to include all

dry cleaning solvents

except for

perchloroethylene and

ban the use of open

transfer systems Not Recommended

- No sources

Metal Parts and

Products VOC limits on metal parts

coatings, application methods Reduce VOC limits for

coatings used in some

"baked" applications and

coatings considered

"specialty coatings" Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

2.29 Graphic Arts VOC limits on graphic arts

products Lower rule exemption

limit to 60 pounds per

month. Revise cleaning

solvent ROG limits to

match current SMAQMD

standards. Control Measure

Gas Turbines NO X limits on gas turbines Reduce NO X limits to be

as stringent as

SCAQMD; 0.3

- 2.9 MW

25 ppmv, 2.9

- 10 MW 9

ppmv, 2.9

- 10 MW with

no scar 15 ppmv, 10 MW

and over 9 ppmv

, 10

MW and over with no

SCR 12 ppmv Not Recommended

- Already

implemented

Incinerators Require all incinerators

demonstrate NO X

emissions of less than 60

lb/mmscf Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Food and Ag

Processing None Require VOC limits to be

as stringent as a rule

adopted in SCAQMD

which required the use of

low

- VOC sterilizing

products or controlled by

an emission control

device Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Bakeries None Lower applicability

threshold Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Terminal/Bulk

Plants Pressure tank or vapor

- loss

control device required Require VOC limits to be

as stringent as

BAAQMD; require leak

inspection requirement

and repair time

requirement similar to

the requirements

adopted in SCAQMD Not Recommended

- Already

implemented2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 38 Table H

- 6

YSAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Gasoline

Dispensing

Phase I/II Phase I requires submerged fill

pipe and ARB certified systems.

Phase II requires ARB certified

system, replacement of balance

system nozzle boots once per

year Evaluate SJV proposal to

include mobile fuelers,

increase inspection

frequency, lower

allowable vapor leak

threshold Not recommended

- Already

implemented

Further

Study

– 4 Gasoline

Dispensing

Phase I/II Phase I requires submerged fill

pipe and ARB certified systems.

Phase II requires ARB certified

system, replacement of balance

system nozzle boots once per

year Improve compliance

rates by requiring ISD to

provide earlier warning

signal at lower

degradation rate; change

ISD warning and gross

failure rates; disallow

ISD reset button until

fixed; require installation

of shut down sensor Further Study

Needed

- Current

information

inadequate to

quantify benefits or

assess cost/feasibility

Storage Tank

Degassing Reduce emissions by

requiring enhanced

control technology,

increased control

e fficiency, establishing

concentration limits Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Aviation Fuel

Transfer None Reduce VOC from

spillage and vapor

displacement during

Phase 1 operations and

from venting through

relief valves Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Marine

Coatings None Establish VOC limits for

marine coatings. Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Enhanced

Compliance None Evaluate permit program

change to assess

opportunities for further

emission reductions;

include adjusting permit

exemption level, conduct

additional inspections

and survey to identify

potential sources, adding

conditions to non

- Title V

Sources and improving

accuracy and

enforceability of existing

permit Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Flares None Establish standard of

NO X emissions for flares Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Polystyrene/

Poly Foam

Blowing/Other None Require reduction of

VOC emission from EPS

molding by vented the

emissions to an emission

control device such as a

thermal oxidizer Not Recommended

- Equivalent or

better requirements

in place2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 39 Table H

- 6

YSAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Production of

Wood/paper

products None Require VOC limits for

manufacturing of

wood/paper products Not Recommended

- No sources

Industrial

Wastewater None Require VOC limits and

control system from

wastewater system Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Wastewater

Sewage

Treatment None Require VOC limits and

control system for

wastewater sewage

treatment plant Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Lower permit

exemption None Lower permit threshold

to bring more sources

and equipment under

permit program Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Composting

Green Waste None Establish VOC limits

similar to the rule

adopted by SJVUAPCD Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Composting

and Biosolids None Establish VOC reducing

requirements equivalent

to SJVUAPCD/SCAQMD Not Recommended

- No sources

Glass Furnaces None Establish NO X limits for

glass furnaces Not Recommended

- No sources

Central

Furnaces None Establish NO X limits for

central furnaces Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS

– 1 ISR

Construction None Implement construction

mitigation rule to reduce

off

- road construction

emissions associated

with new land use

development Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS

– 2 ISR

Operational None Mitigate increased

emissions associated

with new land

use/development

projects Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Agricultural

Burning/Open

Burning Burning dependent of

meteorology, no burning allowed

on no

- burn days Prohibit burning of waste Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Glycol

Dehydration

Systems None Control VOC emissions

from glycol regenerator

vents used in natural gas

production to remove

water vapor Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Further

Study

– 5 Lubricants None Establish VOC limits for

lubricant formulations Further Study

Needed

- Current

information

inadequate to

quantify benefits or

assess

cost/feasibility2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Appendix C

- Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix H: Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

Page H

- 40 Table H

- 6

YSAQMD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

Facility

Modernization New equipment with PTE > 10

lbs/day install BACT Establish a pre

determined life span of

when equipment would

need to be replaced and

would then trigger BACT

limits Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix I: Federal Clean Air Act Requirements

Page I

- 1 

### Appendix I : Federal Clean Air Act Requirements

Table I

- 1

General Nonattainment Plan Requirements

Required Plan Element Description Location in Plan

Reasonably Available Control

Measures (RAC M )

[Section 172(c)(1) The plan should provide for the implementation of all

reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as

p ractica ble, including reduction in emissions from existing

sources through the adoption of reasonably available control

technology. Chapter 7 (proposed control

measures)

Appendix H (RACM analysis)

Reasonable Further Progress

[Section 172(c)(2)] The plan requires reasonable further progress in emission

reduction. Chapter 13 (RFP demonstration)

Inventory

[Section 172(c)(3)] The plan should include a comprehensive, accurate, current

inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant

pollutant or pollutants in such area, including periodic

revisions as the Administrator may determine necessary to

assure that the requirements of this part are met. Chapter 5 (emissions inventory)

Appendix A (emissions inventory)

Identification and Quantification

[Section 172(c)(4)] The plan should identify and quantify the emissions, if any,

of any such pollutant or pollutants, which will be allowed, in

accordance with section 173(a)(1)(B), from the construction

and operation of major new or modified stationary sources in

each such area. The plan shall demonstrate to the

satisfaction of the EPA that the emissions quantified for this

purpose will be consistent with the achievement of

reasonable further progress and will not interfere with

attainment of the applicable national ambient air quality

standard by the applicable attainment date. Chapter 5

, Sections 5.5 and 5.6

(emission s forecasts)

Chapter 8 (attainment demonstration)

Chapter13 (RFP demonstration)

Permits for new and modified

stationary sources

[Section 172(c)(5)] Such plan provisions shall require permits for the

construction and operation of new or modified major

stationary sources anywhere in the nonattainment area, in

accordance with section 173. Chapter 3

, Section 3 .3 (NSR

permitting requirements)2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix I: Federal Clean Air Act Requirements

Page I

- 2 

### Table I

- 1 (cont.)

General Nonattainment Plan Requirements

Required Plan Element Description Location in Plan

Other Measures

[Section 172(c)(6)] Such plan provisions shall include enforceable emission

limitations, and such other control measures, means or

techniques (including economic incentives such as fees,

marketable permits, and auctions of emission rights), as well

as schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be

necessary or appropriate to provide for attainment by the

applicable date. Chapter 7 (proposed control

measures)

Compliance with Section 110(a)(2)

[Section 172(c)(7)] Compliance with section 110(a)(2).

- Such plan provisions

shall also meet the applicable provisions of section

110(a)(2). Section 110(a)(2)

– includes reaso nable notice

and public hearing requirements for plan adoptions. Chapters 2, 4, 6, 7, 8

Equivalent Techniques

[Section 172(c)(8)] Upon application by any St ate, the EPA may allow the use of

equivalent modeling, emission inventory, and planning

procedures, unless the EPA determines that the proposed

techniques are, in the aggregate, less effective than the

methods specified by the EPA. Chapter 5 (emissions inventory)

Chapter 6 (air quality modeling)

Contingency Measures

[Section 172(c)(9)] The plan should include 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 applicable attainment. Such measures shall be included

in the plan revision as contingency measures to take effect

in any such case without further action by the State or the

EPA Chapter 7, Section 7. 20 (contingency

measures)

Chapter 8, Section 8.4

Chapter 13, Section 13.32013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix I: Federal Clean Air Act Requirements

Page I

- 3 

### Table I

- 2

Severe Area Plan Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas

Required Plan Element Description Location in Plan

Inventory

[Section 182(a)(1)] Submit a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual

emissions from all sources

. Chapter 5 (emissions inventory)

Appendix A (emissions inventory)

General Offset requirements

[Section 182(d)(2)] The ratio of total emission reductions of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) to total increased emissions of such air

pollutant shall be at least 1.3 to 1, except that if the State plan

requires all existing major sources in a nonattainment area to

use best available control technology for the control of VOCs,

the ratio shall be at least 1.2 to 1. Chapter 3

, Section 3 .3 (NSR

permitting requirements)

Reasonably available control

technology [Section 182(b)(2)] Implementation of control technologies for VOC sources covered

by control technique guidelines (CTG) documents and all other

major stationary sources of VOCs that are located in the area

. Chapter 3

, Section 3

. 4 (RACT

requirements)

Attainment demonstration [Section

172(c)(1) and 182(c)(2)(A)] A demonstration that the plan will provide for attainment of the

national ambient air quality standard as expeditiously as

practicable by the applicable attainment date. The demonstration

must be based on photochemical grid modeling. Chapter 6 (air quality modeling)

Chapter 8 (attainment demonstration)

Appendix B (photochemical modeling)

Reasonable Further Progress

(RFP) demonstration [Section

182(c)(2)(B) and (C)] A demonstration that the plan will result in VOC emissions

(and/or NO X emissions) reductions from the baseline emissions

of an average of at least three percent each year

. Chapter 13 (RFP demonstration)

Enhanced vehicle inspection and

maintenance program [Section

182(c)(3)] The State shall provide for an enhanced program to reduce

hydrocarbon emissions and NO X emissions from in

- use motor

vehicles registered in each urbanized area Chapter 5, Section 5.3.3 (on

- road

motor vehicle emissions EMFAC2007)

Contingency Provisions [Section

182(c)(9)] The plan shall provide for the implementation of specific

measures to be undertaken if the area fails to meet any

applicable milestone. Such measures shall take effect without

further action by the State or the EPA upon a failure to meet the

applicable milestone. Chapter 7, Section 7. 20 (contingency

measures)

Chapter 8, Section 8.4

Chapter 13, Section 13.3

Vehicle Miles Traveled [Section

182(d)(1)] Transportation control strategies/Transportation c ontrol

measures

. Chapter 7, Section 7.9 (TCMs)

Appendix D (TCMs)

Vehicle Miles Traveled Offset

[Section 182(d)(1)(A)] The Plan shall identif y and adopt specific enforceable

transportation control strategies and transportation control

measures to offset any growth in emissions from growth in

vehicle miles traveled or numbers of vehicle tri ps. Chapter 11, Section 8 (VMT Offset)

and Appendix F (VM T Offset)2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix I: Federal Clean Air Act Requirements

Page I

- 4 

### Required Plan Element Description Location in Plan

Milestones [Section 182(g)] Provide a report every three years after the designation to

determine whether the nonattainment area has achieved a

reduction in emissions during the preceding interval equivalent

to the total emission reductions required to be achieved by the

attainment date given in the plan. Chapter 14, Section 14.13 (milestone

reports)