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

APPENDICES

(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. REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL MEASURES (RACM) ANALYSIS

I. FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT REQUIREMENTS
2013 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 NOX emissions, vehicle 

population and activity Burden data generated using EMFAC2011 and transportation 

activity forecast data from the 2013/2016 MTIP1. 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 estimated 

VOC and NOX 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 tons per day VOC and 3 tons per day NOX 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 to 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 projections 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 OffRoad 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 OFFROAD2007 (available in electronic format) 

are used. 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 districts and 

CARB. Unlike the VOC and NOX 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 NOX emission 

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 NOX ERC totals were rounded up to 4 tons

per day VOC and 3 tons per day NOX 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 NOX emissions by stationary, area-wide, onroad motor vehicles and other mobile sources major source categories.

Appendix A8 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 NOX inventories, vehicle population, VMT and trips for each EMFAC 

vehicle class category 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 MTIP2. Emissions tables by 

county are available separately 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 A1-2

Appendix A1: 2002 On-Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Inventory - Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area Summary

Version : Emfac2011 (EMFAC 2011 Vehicle Categories) Run Date : 2013/01/18

Scen Year: 2002

Season : Summer

Area : Sacramento Nonattainment Area [El Dorado (MC)+ Placer (SV & MC) + Sacramento + S. Sutter + Yolo + Solano (SV)]

Emissions: Tons Per Day

LDA - GASLDA - 

DSL

LDT1 - GASLDT1 - 

DSL

LDT2 - GASLDT2 - 

DSL

MDV - GASMDV - 

DSL

LHDT1 - GASLHDT1 - 

DSL

LHDT2 - GASLHDT2 - 

DSL

MHDT - GASMHDT - 

DSL

HHDT - GASHHDT - 

DSL

OBUS - GASOBUS - 

DSL

SBUS - GASSBUS - 

DSL

UBUS - GASUBUS - 

DSL

MH - GASMH - 

DSL

MCY - GAS ALL-TOT

Vehicles 654011 4320 126150 308 244156 261 125448 187 14427 8368 4553 5380 4936 17179 711 9358 611 700 286 802 243 509 12742 1361 33254 1270259

VMT/1000 25988 128 4782 8 10881 7 6189 6 696 426 188 272 155 916 30 1276 33 60 12 32 31 66 169 20 225 52595

Trips 4115754 25671 768765 1817 1547180 1525 804161 1104 214936 105264 67833 67679 98753 0 14235 0 27885 0 1142 0 973 2035 1275 136 66501 7934624

Reactive Organic Gas Emissions

Run Exh 6.91 0.02 2.89 0.00 3.04 0.00 1.82 0.00 0.59 0.13 0.36 0.08 0.32 0.70 0.19 1.36 0.02 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.07 0.06 0.26 0.01 0.86 19.86

Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0 0.29 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0.33

Start Ex 4.17 0 1.04 0 1.60 0 0.90 0 0.23 0 0.17 0 0.52 0 0.16 0 0.07 0 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.19 9.04

Total Ex 11.08 0.02 3.93 0.00 4.64 0.00 2.72 0.00 0.83 0.13 0.53 0.08 0.84 0.72 0.35 1.65 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.08 0.06 0.26 0.01 1.05 29.23

Diurnal 2.43 0 0.71 0 0.75 0 0.27 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.01 0 0.32 4.49

Hot Soak 2.26 0 0.70 0 0.71 0 0.25 0 0.05 0 0.05 0 0.11 0 0.02 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.17 4.32

Running 6.00 0 1.92 0 1.91 0 0.62 0 0.16 0 0.14 0 0.31 0 0.09 0 0.03 0 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.70 11.89

Resting 1.23 0 0.37 0 0.38 0 0.14 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.18 2.31

Total 22.99 0.02 7.62 0.00 8.39 0.00 4.00 0.00 1.04 0.13 0.72 0.08 1.27 0.72 0.46 1.65 0.12 0.07 0.08 0.04 0.08 0.06 0.27 0.01 2.42 52.24

Oxides of Nitrogen Emissions 

Run Exh 15.42 0.19 5.24 0.01 10.14 0.01 6.43 0.01 0.86 3.11 0.25 2.03 0.62 12.70 0.44 28.69 0.10 1.11 0.06 0.45 0.11 1.38 0.44 0.26 0.30 90.37

Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.20 0 2.45 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 2.79

Start Ex 2.74 0 0.62 0 1.64 0 0.87 0 0.44 0 0.11 0 0.27 0 0.08 0 0.07 0 0.00 0 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.02 6.87

Total Ex 18.16 0.19 5.86 0.01 11.78 0.01 7.30 0.01 1.30 3.14 0.36 2.05 0.89 12.90 0.51 31.14 0.17 1.15 0.06 0.50 0.12 1.38 0.44 0.26 0.32 100.02

Source: EMFAC2011 (VMT based on EMFAC2011 Default for 2002); Download 1-18-2013 from CARB Website: http://www.arb.ca.gov/jpub/webapp//EMFAC2011WebApp/emsSelectionPage_1.jsp
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 A1-3

Appendix A1: 2014 On-Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Inventory - Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area Summary

Version : Emfac2011 (EMFAC 2011 Vehicle Categories) Run Date : 2013/01/18

Scen Year: 2014

Season : Summer

Area : Sacramento Nonattainment Area [El Dorado (MC)+ Placer (SV & MC) + Sacramento + S. Sutter + Yolo + Solano (SV)]

Emissions: Tons Per Day

LDA - GASLDA - 

DSL

LDT1 - GASLDT1 - 

DSL

LDT2 - GASLDT2 - 

DSL

MDV - GASMDV - 

DSL

LHDT1 - GASLHDT1 - 

DSL

LHDT2 - GASLHDT2 - 

DSL

MHDT - GASMHDT - 

DSL

HHDT - GASHHDT - 

DSL

OBUS - GASOBUS - 

DSL

SBUS - GASSBUS - 

DSL

UBUS - GASUBUS - 

DSL

MH - GASMH - 

DSL

MCY - GAS ALL-TOT

Vehicles 750662 3250 110923 142 269564 125 241542 224 44142 32887 3477 7041 4040 18496 391 10588 1142 731 246 692 295 597 10576 2116 49958 1563845

VMT/1000 29586 118 4141 5 10790 5 9550 9 1869 1404 146 299 183 935 46 1495 58 58 10 26 37 77 142 28 434 61449

Trips 4733510 19304 676518 759 1696181 724 1511533 1307 657656 413674 51797 88566 80825 7820 52171 984 1178 2386 1058 212 99906 10098068

Reactive Organic Gas Emissions

Run Exh 1.42 0.01 0.53 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.99 0.00 0.52 0.40 0.03 0.08 0.07 0.30 0.05 0.51 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.01 1.29 7.03

Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0.17

Start Ex 1.04 0 0.32 0 0.50 0 0.75 0 0.42 0 0.03 0 0.15 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.21 3.51

Total Ex 2.46 0.01 0.86 0.00 1.15 0.00 1.74 0.00 0.97 0.40 0.06 0.08 0.23 0.30 0.09 0.64 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.01 1.50 10.73

Diurnal 1.07 0 0.39 0 0.44 0 0.43 0 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.01 0 0.32 2.66

Hot Soak 1.08 0 0.33 0 0.44 0 0.42 0 0.11 0 0.01 0 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.10 2.52

Running 1.95 0 0.85 0 1.10 0 1.07 0 0.51 0 0.03 0 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.20 5.83

Resting 0.69 0 0.23 0 0.29 0 0.29 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.19 1.68

Total 7.24 0.01 2.65 0.00 3.41 0.00 3.95 0.00 1.59 0.40 0.11 0.08 0.34 0.30 0.11 0.64 0.07 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.01 2.32 23.43

Oxides of Nitrogen Emissions 

Run Exh 3.82 0.08 1.29 0.00 2.53 0.00 3.85 0.00 1.01 6.46 0.06 1.27 0.24 5.65 0.23 12.30 0.07 0.54 0.03 0.28 0.09 0.93 0.14 0.23 0.51 41.63

Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.18 0 1.05 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 1.42

Start Ex 1.00 0 0.25 0 0.70 0 0.94 0 1.31 0 0.10 0 0.18 0.03 0.09 0.00 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.03 4.63

Total Ex 4.82 0.08 1.54 0.00 3.24 0.00 4.79 0.00 2.32 6.55 0.16 1.29 0.42 5.83 0.26 13.35 0.17 0.58 0.03 0.32 0.10 0.93 0.14 0.23 0.54 47.70

Source: ARB (Jon Taylor) e-mail (formally transmitted on December 5, 2012) providing 2014, 2017, 2018 on-road emissions based on VMT forecasts in SACOG's 2013/2016 MTIP provided by SACOG.
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 A1-4

Appendix A1: 2017 On-Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Inventory - Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area Summary

Version : Emfac2011 (EMFAC 2011 Vehicle Categories) Run Date : 2013/01/18

Scen Year: 2017

Season : Summer

Area : Sacramento Nonattainment Area [El Dorado (MC)+ Placer (SV & MC) + Sacramento + S. Sutter + Yolo + Solano (SV)]

Emissions: Tons Per Day

LDA - GASLDA - 

DSL

LDT1 - GASLDT1 - 

DSL

LDT2 - GASLDT2 - 

DSL

MDV - GASMDV - 

DSL

LHDT1 - GASLHDT1 - 

DSL

LHDT2 - GASLHDT2 - 

DSL

MHDT - GASMHDT - 

DSL

HHDT - GASHHDT - 

DSL

OBUS - GASOBUS - 

DSL

SBUS - GASSBUS - 

DSL

UBUS - GASUBUS - 

DSL

MH - GASMH - 

DSL

MCY - GAS ALL-TOT

Vehicles 778401 3373 115026 147 279851 129 250460 232 45725 34102 3606 7309 4169 20330 380 11765 1186 801 251 721 299 608 10906 2190 51751 1623719

VMT/1000 30862 125 4324 5 11315 5 9791 9 1920 1440 150 303 199 1045 52 1704 57 63 11 26 38 78 148 28 453 64152

Trips 4920059 20491 702402 824 1762029 789 1555522 1386 681236 428961 53727 91942 83412 7612 54166 1004 1198 2432 1091 219 103492 10473994

Reactive Organic Gas Emissions

Run Exh 0.85 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.40 0.36 0.02 0.07 0.04 0.21 0.04 0.41 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.01 1.29 5.35

Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0.21

Start Ex 0.67 0 0.23 0 0.34 0 0.62 0 0.37 0 0.02 0 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.21 2.64

Total Ex 1.52 0.00 0.55 0.00 0.76 0.00 1.41 0.00 0.80 0.37 0.04 0.07 0.15 0.21 0.06 0.59 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.01 1.50 8.22

Diurnal 0.75 0 0.33 0 0.37 0 0.43 0 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.32 2.21

Hot Soak 0.79 0 0.28 0 0.37 0 0.44 0 0.10 0 0.01 0 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.09 2.10

Running 1.45 0 0.72 0 0.92 0 1.10 0 0.51 0 0.03 0 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.17 4.99

Resting 0.51 0 0.19 0 0.25 0 0.30 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.19 1.45

Total 5.02 0.00 2.07 0.00 2.67 0.00 3.68 0.00 1.43 0.37 0.08 0.07 0.23 0.21 0.07 0.59 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.01 2.27 18.98

Oxides of Nitrogen Emissions 

Run Exh 2.86 0.06 0.96 0.00 1.81 0.00 3.11 0.00 0.82 5.38 0.05 1.05 0.17 3.92 0.23 8.66 0.06 0.36 0.02 0.28 0.09 0.91 0.11 0.22 0.52 31.64

Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.16 0 1.27 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 1.62

Start Ex 0.68 0 0.20 0 0.50 0 0.78 0 1.27 0 0.09 0 0.15 0.03 0.09 0.00 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.03 3.83

Total Ex 3.54 0.06 1.16 0.00 2.31 0.00 3.89 0.00 2.09 5.47 0.14 1.08 0.32 4.08 0.26 9.93 0.14 0.39 0.03 0.32 0.10 0.91 0.11 0.22 0.55 37.12

Source: ARB (Jon Taylor) e-mail (formally transmitted on December 5, 2012) providing 2014, 2017, 2018 on-road emissions based on VMT forecasts in SACOG's 2013/2016 MTIP provided by SACOG.
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 A1-5

Appendix A1: 2018 On-Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Inventory - Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area Summary

Version : Emfac2011 (EMFAC 2011 Vehicle Categories) Run Date : 2013/01/18

Scen Year: 2018

Season : Summer

Area : Sacramento Nonattainment Area [El Dorado (MC)+ Placer (SV & MC) + Sacramento + S. Sutter + Yolo + Solano (SV)]

Emissions: Tons Per Day

LDA - GASLDA - 

DSL

LDT1 - GASLDT1 - 

DSL

LDT2 - GASLDT2 - 

DSL

MDV - GASMDV - 

DSL

LHDT1 - GASLHDT1 - 

DSL

LHDT2 - GASLHDT2 - 

DSL

MHDT - GASMHDT - 

DSL

HHDT - GASHHDT - 

DSL

OBUS - GASOBUS - 

DSL

SBUS - GASSBUS - 

DSL

UBUS - GASUBUS - 

DSL

MH - GASMH - 

DSL

MCY - GAS ALL-TOT

Vehicles 784409 3399 115871 149 282080 131 252325 233 46047 34328 3637 7367 4199 20485 377 11904 1196 805 252 717 301 611 10973 2205 52191 1636194

VMT/1000 31123 126 4356 5 11426 5 9853 9 1932 1449 151 305 204 1060 54 1740 56 64 11 26 38 79 149 29 458 64709

Trips 4961476 20767 707705 842 1776589 806 1564013 1406 686027 431809 54185 92671 84020 7541 54615 1009 1203 2444 1098 221 104372 10554817

Reactive Organic Gas Emissions

Run Exh 0.71 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.36 0.34 0.01 0.07 0.04 0.19 0.03 0.41 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.01 1.29 4.94

Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0.22

Start Ex 0.58 0 0.21 0 0.30 0 0.58 0 0.36 0 0.02 0 0.09 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.21 2.40

Total Ex 1.29 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.66 0.00 1.30 0.00 0.74 0.35 0.04 0.07 0.13 0.20 0.05 0.59 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.01 1.50 7.57

Diurnal 0.67 0 0.30 0 0.35 0 0.43 0 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.32 2.09

Hot Soak 0.71 0 0.26 0 0.35 0 0.44 0 0.10 0 0.01 0 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.09 1.97

Running 1.32 0 0.68 0 0.87 0 1.09 0 0.51 0 0.03 0 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.16 4.73

Resting 0.46 0 0.18 0 0.24 0 0.30 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.19 1.38

Total 4.43 0.00 1.90 0.00 2.47 0.00 3.56 0.00 1.37 0.35 0.08 0.07 0.19 0.20 0.06 0.59 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.01 2.26 17.75

Oxides of Nitrogen Emissions 

Run Exh 2.62 0.06 0.88 0.00 1.63 0.00 2.89 0.00 0.76 5.01 0.04 0.98 0.15 3.50 0.23 7.87 0.05 0.32 0.02 0.25 0.09 0.89 0.10 0.21 0.52 29.09

Idle Exh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.15 0 1.30 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 1.65

Start Ex 0.60 0 0.18 0 0.44 0 0.73 0 1.25 0 0.09 0 0.15 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.01 0 0.00 0 0.03 3.59

Total Ex 3.23 0.06 1.06 0.00 2.07 0.00 3.61 0.00 2.01 5.11 0.14 1.00 0.30 3.66 0.26 9.17 0.13 0.35 0.03 0.29 0.10 0.89 0.10 0.21 0.56 34.34

Source: ARB (Jon Taylor) e-mail (formally transmitted on December 5, 2012) providing 2014, 2017, 2018 on-road emissions based on VMT forecasts in SACOG's 2013/2016 MTIP provided by SACOG.
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 A5-1

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 and area-wide sources, and 3) incorrect 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 difference between the 

CEPAM ERCs in Appendix A2 and the 4 tons per day VOC and 3 tons per day NOX

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

is summarized below:

VOC ERCs (in CEPAM), 

summer, tons 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

NOX ERCs (in CEPAM), 

summer, tons 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 NOX 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 = ERCs (pollutant, district) = annual average ERCs by pollutant and 

district used by CARB3

Annual Average ERCs (tons per day)

used in ERC Adjustment Factor Calculation

Air District NOX VOC

El Dorado 0 0

Placer 0.54 0.62

Sacramento 1.60 2.47

Sutter

Use Cheryl 

Feather River

ERC Adj Factor

Use Cheryl 

Feather River

ERC Adj Factor

Yolo/Solano 0.60 0.58

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

D = CEPAM ERCs (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 ERCs = (E*A) – E = (4.3293*1.2647)-4.3293 = 1.1460

 

3 CARB. “Re: ERC External Adjustment” Message to Hao Quinn (SMAQMD) 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 NOX ERCs is included 

in the SIP plan are presented below:

ERCs, tons 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 0.823
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 A5-4

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 (YoloSolano) 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

NOX 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

NOX 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 A5-5

2014 2017 2018

RFG -1.87 -1.47 -1.31

Prop 1B 0.00 0.00 0.00

Moyer 0.00 0.00 0.00

AB1493 -0.11 -0.21 -0.25

Smog Check -0.64 -0.57 -0.55

ACC 0.00 -0.12 -0.15

Carl Moyer -0.19 -0.03 -0.01

Summary -2.82 -2.40 -2.27

2014 2017 2018

RFG 0.00 0.00 0.00

Prop 1B -1.70 0.00 0.00

Moyer -0.08 -0.04 -0.05

AB1493 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01

Smog Check -0.37 -0.37 -0.33

ACC 0.00 -0.18 -0.28

Carl Moyer -1.64 -0.38 -0.42

Prop 1-B -0.07 -0.07 -0.07

Summary -3.86 -1.05 -1.15

*These changes, which include recently adopted control measures up to January 2012, are included in 

Chapter 5, Table 5-2 and Table 5-3. These changes are not included in the detailed inventories contained in 

Appendix A1 for on-road and Appendices A2 and A4 for off-road.

Table A5-2. CARB Emission Inventory Adjustments in Sacramento Nonattainment Area

On-Road Emission Inventory

Off-Road Emission Inventory

On-Road Emission Inventory

Off-Road Emission Inventory

CARB Rule/Category NOx Emission Changes* (TPD)

CARB Rule/Category VOC Emission Changes* (TPD)
2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento 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 NOX

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

Emission 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.4Therefore, 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 NOX 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 Sacramento 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) NOX (tpd)

Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD 2.075 1.141

Yolo-Solano AQMD 0.082 0.137

Placer County APCD 0.394 0.045

Feather River AQMD (South Sutter) 0 0

Total Unused Banked ERCs 2.551 1.323

a

There are no ERCs for El Dorado County AQMD.

Table A6-2

Summary of Future Bankable Rice Burning Emission Reduction Credits

In the Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Air District a Avg. Summer Day

VOC (tpd) NOX (tpd)

Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD 0.12 0.13

Yolo-Solano AQMD 0.32 0.35

Placer County APCD 0.18 0.20

Feather River AQMD (South Sutter) 0.29 0.32

Total Future Rice Burning ERCs 0.91 1.00

a

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

The VOC and NOX ERC totals from Table A6-1 and A6-2 were rounded up to 4 tons per 

day VOC and 3 tons per day NOX and added to the emission inventory forecast years in 

Chapter 5, Table 5-2 and Table 5-3, respectively.
2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A7: 2019 Emissions Inventories

Page A7-1

Appendix A7: 2019 VOC and NOX Emissions Inventories

Table A7-1 contains the 2019 VOC and NOX planning inventories. The emissions 

include ERCs, recently adopted control measures, Jepson Composting, and Heritage 

Dairy. Except for on-road vehicle category, the emissions were generated using 

CEPAM: NORCAL 2012 SIP Baseline 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 MTIP5.

 

5

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 A7: 2019 Emissions Inventories

Page A7-2

CATEGORY VOC CATEGORY Nox

TOTAL EMISSIONS 99 TOTAL EMISSIONS 71

STATIONARY 27 STATIONARY 12

AREA-WIDE 31 AREA-WIDE 3

ON-ROAD MOTOR VEHICLES 17 ON-ROAD MOTOR VEHICLES 32

OTHER MOBILE SOURCES 24 OTHER MOBILE SOURCES 24

STATIONARY STATIONARY

Solvent/Coatings 9.3 Fuel Combustion 9.9

Petroleum Production/Marketing 6.5 Ag Irrigation Pumps 1.0

Industrial Process 4.6 Industrial Process 0.9

Waste Composting 4.4

Other 2.5

AREA-WIDE AREA-WIDE

Consumer Products 13.3 Residential Fuel Combustion 2.4

Architectural Coatings 9.4 Ag Burn/Other Managed Burn 0.6

Pesticides/Fertilizers 1.2

Livestock Waste 2.9

Ag Burn/Other Managed Burn 1.0

Other 3.2

ON-ROAD ON-ROAD

Automobiles 4.0 Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks 17.6

Lt/Med Duty Trucks 7.5 Lt/Med Duty Trucks 6.3

Heavy Duty Gas Trucks 1.6 Automobiles 3.0

Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks 1.3 Heavy Duty Gas Trucks 2.6

Motorcycles 2.2 Buses/Motor Homes 2.1

Buses/Motor Homes 0.2 Motorcycles 0.6

OTHER MOBILE OTHER MOBILE

Recreational Boats 11.5 Construction & Mining Equip 3.3

Equipment (Const/Ind/Farm) 2.3 Trains 6.9

Lawn & Garden Equipment 5.0 Farm Equipment 4.9

Gas Can 1.3 Boats (Rec/Ships/Harbor Craft) 3.2

Off-Road Recreational Vehicles 2.5 Comm/Ind Equipment 1.2

Trains 0.3 Aircraft 2.9

Aircraft 0.6 Oil Drilling/Workover 0.5

Ocean Vessels & Harbor Craft 0.1 Other 0.9

Trans Refrig Units 0.5

Table A7-1. 2019 VOC and NOX Emissions, Tons/Day

Source: (CARB 2012), includes ERCs and emission inventory adjustments as shown in Appendix A5. Emissions, 

except for non-road vehicle category, were generated using CEPAM:NORCAL 2012 SIP Baseline Emission 

Projections. The 2019 on-road vehicle emissions were EMFAC2011 output without adjustments (i.e., Advance 

Clean Cars, Smog Check, etc.) using VMT activity forecasts in the SACOG 2013/2016.
2013 SIP Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Appendix A8: 2009 Emissions Inventories

Page A8-1

Appendix A8: Tables 5-2 through 5-5 of 2009 SIP Revision

Table 5-2

Emissions of VOCa(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 Version 1.06 Sacramento NAA (Rf#980), 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 Sacramento 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 NOX

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 Version 1.06 Sacramento NAA (Rf#980), 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 Sacramento 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

Emissions 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

NOX 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 196 147 126 109 104
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-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-33

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 Onroad Motor Vehicle Emissions

d. Appendix d: Development 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 Sacramento 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 Selection1

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 8-17, 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 8-17, 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 Sacramento 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 120 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.5The 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 Institute, 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 Sacramento 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 lower 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 in 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 

discussion. 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, 

Cool, Sacramento-Del Paso Manor, Roseville, Sloughhouse, and Placerville.
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-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

on 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, the 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 Sacramento 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 in 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 area 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 Sacramento 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 Sacramento 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 guidance1recommends 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 Sacramento 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 Ozone
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-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 14
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-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 16
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-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 0.48
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-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

Site 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 0.73

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 0.87
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-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 x117) 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 0.87
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-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 17 -1 0.68 -1.3 1.5 -0.12 0.17 0.73
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-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

Site 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-Gold 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 -1.00
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-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 Description 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 Vacaville-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 0.09
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-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-Dewitt-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 0.07
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-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

3249 Woodland-Gibson Road 1 8.7 11 7.9 11 0 0.91 -0.8 0.8 -0.09 0.09
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-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 Placerville-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 0.17
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-20

Table B-18

Base Case Model Performance 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 0.05
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-21

Table B-19

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 0.99 
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-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 0.86
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-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_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)

 ------- 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 0.78
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-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 -------- --- 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 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 Pas 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 -0.11
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-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 13.3 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 -0.23

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 0.67
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-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 x123) 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 0.64
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-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 Rocklin 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 Highla 1 8.9 11 7.9 12 1 0.89 -0.9 0.9 -0.11 0.11
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-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 0.09
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-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

AUBD 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 0.06
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-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

AUBD 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 0.05
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-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

AUBD 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 0.19
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-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 1.05 
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-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 2009 Plan, using the emissions inventory developed for 

use in that Plan. Table B-31 provides a comparison of the inventories used in the 2009

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, the 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 estimate

the future ozone concentrations. The relative decline between modeled baseline and

future year ozone concentrations at each ozone nonattainment monitoring 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 NOX 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 NOX-only, VOC-only, or both VOC and NOX are scaled by factors

ranging from 100% to 80% in increments of 5%. As a result, forecasted ozone

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

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

95% and NOX emissions by 85%, and then another run scaled VOC emissions by 85%

and NOX 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 NOX

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 Sloughhouse) in the Sacramento region

are presented in Figures B-2 through B-10. See Figure B-11 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 NOX control. The modeling results indicate

that both VOC and NOX reductions provide ozone benefits in the Sacramento region,

but on a ton for ton basis NOX 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 NOX. The whole

numbers on the graph represent predicted ozone design value concentrations

(truncated to whole ppb), based on modeling results for fractional VOC and NOX

reductions at 5% increments. For example, the 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, these contours would be more accurately characterized as bands, than lines.

However, for simplicity the contours are drawn as lines.

The CARB modeling results for predicted ozone design value concentrations were

provided to the districts as truncated integers at a resolution of 5% emission reduction
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-35

increments. Therefore, in an effort to better characterize the ozone modeling results and

the relative benefits of VOC and NOX 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 contour line lies

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

the relative benefit of VOC strategies to NOX strategies. Looking at the relative ozone

benefit from a 20 percent reduction in anthropogenic emissions of VOC and NOX

suggests that overall a 1 ton per day reduction in NOX 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 

(Figure 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 NOX

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 NOX 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 NOX. The combination

of percent emission reductions was plotted on the graph in Figure B-1 to demonstrate

attainment of the 1997 federal 8-hour ozone standard (84 ppb). Attainment

demonstration results are given for:

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

measure committals (11.6% of VOC and 16.3% of NOX, 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 NOX,

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 

available 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 categories 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 identified 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 (SACOG) 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 how hard 

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

baseline NOX emissions and a 17 percent reduction in off-road baseline VOC 

emissions.

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

improvements show a 16 percent reduction in baseline NOX emissions and 9 percent 

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

estimates for NOX 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 demonstration 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 towards 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 emissions 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 forecasted 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 is 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 level 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 emission 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 NOX inventory: as overall 

NOX emission decrease, each new ton of NOX 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 using 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 NOX 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 NOX and VOC Emission Estimates in the 

Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area

NOX (tpd) VOC(tpd)

2009 SIP 

Emissions 

CEPAM 2012 

Emissions

2009 SIP 

Emissions 

CEPAM 2012 

Emissions

2002 Baseline 

Emission 

Inventory

196a165c160a147

2018 Projected 

Emission 

Inventory

104a74

c

121a98

c

Reductions 

needed for 

attainment

13b- 4

b

-

MVEB Safety 

Margin 0 3 0 1

2018 Attainment 

inventoryd 91 77 117 99

Percent Change 

Between 2002 

and 2018

54% 53% 27% 33%

a See Tables 5-4 and 5-5 in Appendix A8

b 12.5% of NOX 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 Diagram
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-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 NOX.

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 NOX reductions at 5% increments.

Values below 85 ppb represent attainment of the federal 8-hour ozone standard.

88

87

85

84

82

88

86

85

84

82

88

86

85

83

82

87

86

85

83

82

87

86

85

83

82

A

B

83 83

84 84

84

85 85

85

86

86

86

87 87

87

0.80 0.82 0.84 0.86 0.88 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1.00

VOC

0.80

0.82

0.84

0.86

0.88

0.90

0.92

0.94

0.96

0.98

1.00

NOx

A
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 lines 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% NOX) 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 of 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

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-43

Figure B-3

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs – Colfax Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

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-44

Figure B-4

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs – Folsom Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

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-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

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-47

Figure B-7

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs – Placerville Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

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-48

Figure B-8

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs – Roseville Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

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-49

Figure B-9

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs – Sacramento DPM Monitor Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

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-50

Figure B-10

2018 Ozone/Emission Reduction Graphs – Sloughhouse Monitoring Site

Based on Photochemical Modeling Results

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-51

Figure B-11

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 nonattainment 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 District......................................... 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 Air 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-2.26
2013 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

NOX 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-133
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-3

Summary Table of Emission Reductions by Control Measure

Measure Name

Emission 

Reductions (TPD)

2018

VOC NOX

Non-regulatory Measures

Regional Mobile Incentive Program – On-road 0.032 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 NOX

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 2.63 0.56

Total Regulatory Measures 2.63 0.56

Total Reductions 2.73 1.12

tbd = to be determined
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 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 NOX

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 0.56
2013 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 Measures
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-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. The 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 regional 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 incentive 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 portion 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 reductions 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 - Implement an incentive based lightduty 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 NOX 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 NOX reductions 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 region 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 Programs1. The guidelines for the SECAT Program are developed by the 

Sacramento Air District (District) and approved by the boards of both 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)

ONMS SECAT - $3,000,000 annually (‘08-‘18); -HD-1

OFMS-SI-1

DMV, AB923 –

$1,000,000 annually (‘08-‘14)

OFMS-HD-1

Targeted EIC Categories and Planning 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

NOX (tpd) ROG 

(tpd)

NOX

(tpd)

ROG 

(tpd) NOX (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 NOX 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 NOX 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 NOX 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 website, 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/2008guideline_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 Commerce. 

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 presentation, 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-Road 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 management program to reduce total urban forest BVOC 

emissions1by favoring the planting of low emitting trees rather than medium and high emitting 

trees in the next 10 years2

Through a combination of community education and governmental policy change over the next 

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 estimated 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 that 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 energysaving 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 benefits 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 

their 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 taken 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/mediumemitting trees (Simpson 2007). This traditional 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, monoterpenes, 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 similar 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 change 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 development 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 planting 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 will 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 planting 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 

information systems available. This is consistent with EPA policy1for 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 limit2,3of 6 percent of the total amount of 

emission reductions necessary to demonstrate attainment. For this region, the 6% level limits 

this measure to 0.18 tpd of VOC reductions. A detailed 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 percent 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 supplement 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 organizations 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 estimating 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 and 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 continues 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 grow 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 urban 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 canopy 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 for 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 studies 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 the 
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-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 

canopy 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 reductions 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 secure the emission reductions claimed in this 

control measure. 

In addition to tree replacement, new trees will be planted in the new developed areas to 

maintain the region’s traditional urban tree canopy cover in the urban area; these may include 

both suburbs 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 (n2018). 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 0.84 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(n2018-7) 0.28(n2018-7) 0.11(n2018-7) N2018-7

(4) Resulting 

Total 0.61n2018 0.28n2018 0.11n2018 n2018

Table 2: Control measure results anticipated in 20181

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 (n2018-7)×83% (83%) (n2018-7)×12% (12%) (n2018-7)×5% (5%) N2018-7

(4) Resulting 

Total 0.83n2018-1.16 0.12n2018+0.84 0.05n2018+0.32 n2018

(5) Emission 

category, all 

2018 trees

100%

n

0.83n 1.16

2018

2018 



100%

n

0.12n 0.84

2018

2018 



100%

n

0.05n 0.32

2018

2018 



100%

For discussion purposes, these trees are moved from high and medium emitter category to a 

low emitter category and are defined as ‘diverted trees2.’ Table 3 summarizes this change.

 

1

n2018 is the total number of trees in the Sacramento Region in 2018.

2 Diverted Trees are a subset of Replacement Trees. Trees 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) 0.61n2018 0.28n2018 0.11n2018 n2018

Control Measure 

Scenario (CMS) n2018,low_emitter n2018,medium_emitter n2018,high_emitter n2018

Difference in 

number of trees 

between BAU 

and CMS

Δlow_emitter=0.61n2018-

n2018,low emitter

Δmedium_emitter=0.28n2018-

n2018,medium_emitter

Δhigh_emitter=0.11n2018-

n2018,high_emitter

Emission factor1

(grams/tree/day) 0.24 1.32 4.44

Emission 

changes 

(grams/day)

ΔE1=0.24×Δlow_emitter ΔE2=1.32×Δmedium_emitter ΔE3=4.44×Δhigh_emitter

ΔE1+ 

ΔE2+ΔE3

Again, the actual number of trees in 2018 is assumed to be n2018. 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 performed 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 average 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 emissions. 
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 

weight1is 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:

]

day tree

tons EmissionChange[



= 













 grams

tons

907,185

1

]

day tree

grams EmissionChange[

= 











  



grams

tons

907,185

1

]

day tree

grams EmissionChange [

highemitter

mediumemitter,

i low emitter,

i

=   









































   



grams

tons

907,185

1

tree day

grams # o f treesi nBAU # o f treesi nCMS EmissionFactor

highemitter

mediumemitter,

i low emitter,

i i i

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 refer 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-2leaf area) and LAI (m-2leaf area/ m-2land 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 0.841

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 between 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 one 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 

playing an increasingly vital part of our region’s air quality attainment plans. The current 

estimation of the NOX (Nitrogen Oxides) air quality benefits is 0.048 tpd, Ozone absorption is 

0.2tpd, and Particulate Matter2(PM) emission reduction is 0.24 tpd, which does not currently 

include avoided evaporative emissions from cooling vehicles. Until the scientific understanding 

of the NOX, direct Ozone absorption and PM effects of trees becomes more complete, this 

control measure is only taking the BVOC reduction claim.

 

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. The 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

2014. 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 measure. 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 presented 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 sum 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 can 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 year 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 organizations, 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 Foundation to ensure that the tree program is making progress and will 
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-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 Ozone 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 developed 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 these 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 region. 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 diverted 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 

monitor 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 accomplishments 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 1995
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-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

California 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, Monitoring Large Systems via Statistical Sampling, University 

of Illinois, September, 2002.

Sacramento Shade Program by the Sacramento Municipal Utility District. 

http://www.smud.org/residential/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, Jim 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/BrooklynUFOREReport,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 due 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 MinimumTree 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 9.5
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-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 improvements. 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 varied 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. 

Case 1 2 3 4

Year of Evaluation 2018 2018 2028 2028

Conditions Control Measure, 

BVOC Only

Control Measure, 

Criteria pollutants

Control Measure, 

BVOC Only, 

Additional growth

Control Measure, 

Criteria pollutants, 

Additional growth

Pollutants

BVOC 0.84 0.84 1.29 1.29

NOx 0.048 0.144

Particulates 0.244 0.728

Total 0.84 1.13 1.29 2.16 tons/day

Annualizing factor 37% 37% 37% 37%

Pollutant reduction 113 153 174 292 tons/year

Annual pollutant reduction 226755 305580 348231 583625 lbs/year

Project recovery period 25 25 25 25 years

Discount rate 7% 7% 7% 7%

Cost Recovery Factor 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.086

Project Cost, unadjusted $ 1,706,000 $ 1,706,000 $ 1,706,000 $ 1,706,000

Cost Effectiveness $ 1,291 $ 958 $ 841 $ 502 $/ton-yr

Cost Effectiveness $ 0.65 $ 0.48 $ 0.42 $ 0.25 $/lb-yr

Cost Effectiveness Scenarios
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 NOX

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 

effectiveness 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 Monthly 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 value. To incorporate the significance of 

ozone season reductions, we also examined the average May through September reduction, 

Monthly Biogenic Emissions

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Month

Fraction of Peak 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.

Project 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 cost 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 cost 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 Calculation

The formula provided by the California Air Resources Board for emission reduction cost 

effectiveness (CARB 2005) is: 

$/lb

Δ(ROG NO PM )(lb/year)

(CRF Funding )($) Cost Effectiveness

X 1 0

Present Value



 





Total Cost

Community Group Outreach

Program implementation $ 10,000 per year $ 110,000

Government Directed Planting

Program implementation $ 21,000 per year $ 231,000

Tree Seller Outreach

Program implementation $ 35,000 per year $ 385,000

Landscape Industy Outreach

Program implementation $ 50,000 per year $ 550,000

Program management $ 25,000 per year $ 275,000

Education materials $ 10,000 per year $ 110,000

Field Survey $ 15,000 per survey $ 45,000

Total $ 1,706,000

Project Cost
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:

 

CRF 0.089

(1 7%) 1

7%(1 7%) CRF

(1 i) 1

i 1 i

CRF

25

25

n

n



 





 





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 NOX

and PM10 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 QUALITY CONTROL MEASURE THAT INCLUDES URBAN 

FORESTS TO ATTAIN AIR 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 the 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 includes 

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 and 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 trees, 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 that 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 strategy. 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 depends 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 air 

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 effect 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 quality 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 that 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.

Staff 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 are 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 decades. 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 that 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.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:

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 APPROVED BY:

Executive __________________________

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 SUPPORTING LOCAL COMPONENT OF THE REGIONAL URBAN FOREST 

TO ATTAIN REGIONAL STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AIR QUALITY CONTROL 

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 net 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 

public 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 IT 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 2025 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 species
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-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 current 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 owner 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 and 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 tree species, size, location, and health. This information 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 information 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 that 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 data, 

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 and 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 urban forest. UFORE is currently in use and has produced satisfactory peerreviewed results in several communities in North America including Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, 

Calgary, Houston, Jersey City, New York City, Philadelphia, Syracuse, and Toronto. Links to 

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 respective 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. Many 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 plots 

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 geo-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 characteristic 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 understand 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% and 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 canopy 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 

region, 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 parameters 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 plot 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 UFORE 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 so that re-sampling can be completed accurately. A drawing is created of 
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-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 average 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 recorded. 

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 data 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 the 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 information 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 

Forest 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 summer 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 progress 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 analysis 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 historical 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 will 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 

rapidly 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 counting 

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, location, 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 verify 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 $320,000 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 snapshot 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 being 
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-37

successfully implemented, each iteration of the UFORE 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. With 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 system 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 sampled. 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 sampling 

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 Chart

Category (Local Jurisdiction or Private Planting) Local Jurisdiction (LJ)* Private Planting (PP)** Determine total # of LJ Trees planted (Replacement & New)

Determine Species Distribution of Trees from LJ

What is the % difference between required and current tree planting rates. (Find # of LJ Short Fall Trees)

Determine total # of PP Trees planted

Determine Species Distribution of Trees from PP Does the Species Distribution Meet Minimum requirements? 83% LE, 12% ME, 5% HE

Determine if there are enough “Extra” Trees from the PP category that can be substituted in for the LJ Short Fall. (Is PP Extra Trees >= LJ Short Fall Trees?)  Determine if there are “Extra” Trees from the LJ category that can be substituted in for the PP Short Fall (Is LJ Extra Trees >= PP Short Fall Trees?)** * Find new minimum planting rate in order to meet goal by 2018 (Tree Foundation)

Is it still feasible to reach emission reductions by 2018 attainment year? (Considering contingency tree strategies***** )

What is the % difference between required and current tree planting rates. (Find # of PP Short Fall Trees) Recommend continuing current Tree planting rates for future years.

Does the Species Distribution Meet Minimum requirements? 83% LE, 12% ME, 5% HE

Find # of “Extra” Trees (if any) in LE or ME category. *** (LJ Extra Trees)

Tree Planting Program Short Falls Go back to Jurisdictions and recommend new planting rates, and suggest contingency tree strategies to compensate for temp. short fall (Repeat process for every milestone year and at the end of the project period) Implement Contingency Measures for Tree measure Program * Local Jurisdictions Trees may include trees from Green print , trees planted in new developments, and other planting efforts. ***Any # of Trees over min requirement in that category is considered to be “Extra” Tree for that category. Calculated by subtracting Min Requirement Rate for each category from Current Rate for each Category.  Only a lower or equal BVOC tree can be used to substitute in and counted as an extra tree. For example, HE can not act as a substitute for a ME or a LE, but LE can be a substituted in for a ME or HE, and ME can only act as a substitute for a HE.

Tree Planting Verification Flow Chart

YES YES NO

NO NO

YES YES

Find # of “Extra” Trees (if any) in LE or ME category.** * (PP Extra Trees)

NO

NO YES

Data Collected

**Private Planting may include trees from retailers and nursery information in the area ***** Suggested Contingency Tree Strategies can be found in Appendix 7.
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-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 sample 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 difficult. 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 

forester.

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 information 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 entire 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 Uncertainty
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-40

Appendix 5: Tree Survey Sheet 

Tree Information Sheet

Plot ID #___________

1. Tree Number 

(Each tree has own number, start at North and move clockwise; 

please number each one on drawing)

2. Tree Species 

3. Direction from Plot Center 

4. Distance from Plot Center

5. Circumference @ 4.5 ft. 

 (use tape)

 

6. Tree Height (protractor angle)

 

7. Height to your eyes

7.a. Distance from tree to you

8. Protractor angle to live top 

(only if dead branches form top of canopy)

(maintain same distance and direction as tree height)

9. Ground to first branch (estimate)

10. Crown width

 (use rope)

11. % Missing

 (circle a 

 percentage)

12. % Dieback

 (circle a

 percentage)

13. # squares impervious material under tree

 (use drawing)

14. # squares shrub under tree

 (use drawing)

15. Crown Light Exposure (1-5 sides)

16. Closest building distance and

 location (use drawing) 

Trunk#1 inches @ ft.

Trunk#2 inches @ ft.

Trunk#3 inches @ ft.

 degrees

 

feet

 feet degrees 

Trunk-north end: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

North-South feet inches

East-West feet inches

Trunk-north end: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Trunk-south end: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Trunk-east end: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 %

Trunk-west end: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 %

 degrees

 feet

Trunk#4 inches @ ft.

Trunk#5 inches @ ft.

 feet inches

 feet 

feet

Trunk-south end: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Trunk-east end: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 %

Trunk-west end: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 %

 feet degrees 

 feet degrees 

 feet inches
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-41

Appendix 6: Funding Agreement Letter
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-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 and 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 Organization

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 canopy 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 the geographic 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-43

Appendix 8: Field Data Sheet

Section 1: Site and Team Info1

Location2

Plot ID3

Field Land Use 14

Field Land Use 25

Group6: 

Year7 Date:8

FLU1 (Squares)9

FLU2 (Squares)10

Section 2: Plot/Contact Information11

Address:12

__________________________

Resident:13

__________________________

Phone:14

___________________________

Notes:15

____________________________

Section 3: GPS Coordinates / Photograph16

GPS X:17

GPS Y:18

GPS Z:19

Photo ID #:20

Section 4: Reference Object Designation (skip if there are 3 trees/plot) 

ID21 Description22 Direction from 

center (angle)23

Distance from 

center (feet)24

Notes and 

Comments25

1

2

Section 5: Ground Covers (show abbreviations on drawing; count squares)26

Building (B)27 Concrete 

(C)28

Asphalt

(A)29

(OI) Other 

Impervious30

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 Cover42

Shrub Area43

Plantable Space44
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-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 it 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

10

FLU2 (Squares): In this box, record the Field Land Use 2 area in squares on the plot drawing

11

Plot/Contact Information: This is the contact information for the plot owner

12

Address: the address of the plot, if available

13 Resident: the name of the person/s living on the plot

14

Phone: the phone number of the resident

15 Notes: general information about the plot location, owner or resident
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-45

16 GPS Coordinates / Photograph: this section has the precise location of the center point of the plot. 

17 GPS X: this is the GPS longitude of the plot location. The units are decimal degrees

18 GPS Y: this is the GPS latitude of the plot location. The units are decimal degrees

19 GPS Z: this is the altitude of the plot. The units are feet.

20

Photo ID #: If you take a picture of the site, enter the file name of the picture here.

21

ID: the number of the reference item. Also show on plot drawing.

22 Description: the name of the object, like “fire hydrant.”

23 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.

24 Distance from center: this is the distance from the center of the plot to the nearest edge of the 

reference object

25 Note and Comments: anything noteworthy about the reference item.

26 Ground Covers (in squares): this section is used to describe all of the different ground covers that are 

on the plot. From 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 parking 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.

27

Building (B): this is for any structure. Only count the floor area of the building. 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.

29

Asphalt (A): this is for any tar covered surface except roofs. Roads, parking lots, most basketball courts 

fit here.

30 Other Impervious (OI): Any surface that doesn’t allow water penetration. An example of this is brick.

31 Maintained Grass (MG): grass that is mowed, lawns. Include here lawns that need mowing.

32 Unmaintained Grass (UG): natural grass areas. These could be natural areas of native grasses or 

pastures that don’t normally get mowed and irrigated

33 Water (W): Any area of water including fountains, ponds, lakes and streams

34 Duff & Mulch (M): any ground cover composed of decaying plant materials

35

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

36

Seedlings (S): areas with small trees too numerous to count.

3

7 Herbs & Ivy (HI): any low growing ground cover that can’t easily be distinguished as individual plants

38

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

40

Shrub (SH): leafy plant that does not count as a tree. Do not double count for ground cover under the 

shrub.

41

Summary of Plot Areas (in Squares): this section is used to give an overall summary of the key 

coverage areas on the site. The units are squares taken from the plot drawing.

42

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

43

Shrub Area: the total area in squares that is generally occupied by shrubs. Take this number from the 

drawing and record in squares.

44

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 policy1for incorporating emerging and voluntary measures in 

a SIP that limits 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 a 

presumptive limit2of 6 percent of the total amount of emission reduction necessary to achieve 

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 region. This diagram shows the pattern of ozone responses to 

varying combinations in domain-wide VOC and NOX emission reductions. The air quality 

modeling analysis for 2018 shows that attainment can be reached with different percent 

combinations of VOC and NOX control. Assuming the combination of percent reductions from 

only new VOC and NOX 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% NOX (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 applies 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” Program3.

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 NOX. Without any new emission control 

measures, the 2018 emission inventory is forecasted to be 121 tpd of VOC and 104 tpd of NOX. 

Based on the 2018 attainment shortfall analysis, 3.3% of the VOC and 12.5% of NOX emissions 

must be reduced to achieve the attainment standards. This means that VOC emissions must be 

reduced to 117 tpd and NOX emissions must be reduced to 91 tpd. The attainment shortfall for 

VOC is 4 tpd and NOX is 13 tpd. The Urban Forest for Clean Air Demonstration Program claims 

BVOC reductions 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 the 

Spare The Air Program will claim 0.06 tpd of VOC emission reduction credit, the tree program is 

capped at 0.18 tpd of BVOC reduction as an emerging and voluntary measure.

 

1

“Incorporating Emerging 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 forecasted 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 NOX 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 NOX reductions at 5% increments.

3. Horizontal Contour Lines: District interpolated whole ppb ozone contour lines based on 5% 

increment modeled ozone values rounded to the tenth of a ppb.

4. Point A designates the 2018 emission reductions (3.3% VOC and 12.5% NOX) 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 modeled VOC and NOX emissions by about 3.3% for VOC and 

12.5% for NOX (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.

88

87

85

84

82

88

86

85

84

82

88

86

85

83

82

87

86

85

83

82

87

86

85

83

82

A

B

83 83

84 84

84

85 85

85

86

86

86

87 87

87

0.80 0.82 0.84 0.86 0.88 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1.00

VOC

0.80

0.82

0.84

0.86

0.88

0.90

0.92

0.94

0.96

0.98

1.00

NOx

A
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 Area

Placer County

El Dorado County

Yolo County

Yuba County

Sutter County

Sacramento County

Sacramento

Elk Grove

Roseville

Folsom

Lincoln

Rocklin

Rancho Cordova

Davis

yuba City

Woodland

Galt

Loomis

Citrus Heights

Placerville

West Sacramento

South Lake Tahoe

Auburn

Marysville

Winters

Live Oak

Colfax

Woodland

Galt

Winters

Wheatland

Auburn

Isleton

Colfax

Isleton

0 30,500 61,000 122,000 Feet

4

Legend

Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area UFORE Study Area UFORE Study Area

Prepared by: The Sacramento Tree Foundation, July 24th 2008 Data Sources: Sacramento Area Council of Governments Projection: NAD 1983 State Plane California II FIPS 0402 Feet

The UFORE study area was derived from the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG's) most recent GIS layer of urbanized areas. This layer created in 2005 includes SACOG member cities, their spheres of influence, and the urban service areas of SACOG member counties. While Solano County 

jurisdictions are within the Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area, they are outside of the SACOG and consequently are not part of the UFORE study area. All UFORE plots were randomly chosen within the bounds of the 2005 urbanized areas data set.
2013 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 Measures
2013 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. 2007
2013 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 Measures
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

Page C-53

Architectural 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 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 

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 SMAQMD’s architectural coating rule (Rule 442) was originally adopted in 1978 

and has been 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 some 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) 0.0850

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 0.0050

520-520-9109-0000 Oil-Based Bituminous Roof Primer 0.0160

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 0.0370

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 0.2206
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-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 0.0310

520-520-9172-0000 Oil-Based Industrial Maintenance Coatings 0.4144

520-520-9173-0000 Oil-Based Metallic Pigmented Coatings 0.1410

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 0.9138
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-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 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 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 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 estimated 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.

Implementation

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, Staff 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 District, 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), 

November 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, 2008
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-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 

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 215-Architectural Coatings was adopted on September 8, 1994 and 

subsequently 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 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 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 0.0039
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-61

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/Masonry 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 0.5886
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-62

Emission Reductions 

EIC Description Adoption date Implementation 

Date

ROG Emission Reduction 

Tons/day

2018

Architectural Coating Categories 2013 2015 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 identified 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 reduced. 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 

Architectural 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 other 

agency other than the El Dorado County Air Quality Management District.

References

1. CARB Ozone SIP Planning Inventory, Version 1.06, Sacramento NAA (RF#980

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, dated 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, 2007
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-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) 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 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 

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 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 0.0002
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-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 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 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 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 estimated overall cost effectiveness for this proposed measure 

is $10,133/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.

Implementation

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 Index 1996-

2006.

7. CARB Ozone SIP Planning Inventory, Version 1.06, Sacramento NAA (RF#980), 

November 16, 2006

8. Control Measure 3.15 calculation spreadsheet, SMAQMD, May 19, 2008
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-67

9. Control Measure, FRAQMD 3.15, dated February 1, 2007

10.California Air Resources Board Suggested Control Measure for Architectural 

Coatings, October 25, 2007
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-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 strategy.

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 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 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 0.0120

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 0.001
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-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 0.2014

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 

(including 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 

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 $10,119/ton.

Authority

Authority to implement this control measure by the PCAPCD is in accordance 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 21st, 2001

4. ARB Forecasted Emissions by Summary Category Ozone SIP Planning Projections 

v1.06 RF #980. 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, 2007
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-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 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 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 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 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 0.0103
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-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/Masonry 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 maintenance 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 waterproofing 
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-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 compounds; 

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 $10,387/ton.

Authority

Authority to implement this control measure by the 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; 

November 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. 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.

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 Coatings). 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, 2008
2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Appendix C - Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Automotive Refinishing

Page C-77

Automotive Refinishing
2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Appendix C - Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Automotive Refinishing SMAQMD-459

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 459, 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 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 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

Automotive Refinishing SMAQMD-459

Page C-79

Emission Inventory – 2018

EIC Code EIC Description

VOC Planning Inventory 

(tpd)

2018

230-218-9000-0000 Automobile Refinish Coatings, Unspecified 0.8610

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 

limits, 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 compatible 

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 effectiveness 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

Automotive Refinishing SMAQMD-459

Page C-80

References

1. CARB Ozone SIP Planning Inventory, Version 1.06, Sacramento NAA (Rf#980), 

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

Automotive Refinishing FRAQMD-3.19

Page C-81

Control Measure Number: FRAQMD - 3.19

Control Measure Title: Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operations

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, 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 

FRAQMD Rule 3.19, Vehicle 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 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 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 0.0035
2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Appendix C - Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Automotive 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 40001.

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 adoption 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 (v1.06_RF980)

www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/03sip/fcemssumcat_03v1.06.php. November 16, 2006

10. Control Measure, FRAQMD – 3.19, February 2, 2007
2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Appendix C - Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Automotive 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 

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 

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 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 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 0.045
2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Appendix C - Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Automotive 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, October 2005.

9. “ARB Forecasted Emissions by Summary Category Ozone SIP Planning 

Projections v1.06 RF #980”. November 16, 2006.

10. Control Measure, PCAPCD 234, February 5, 2007
2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Appendix C - Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Automotive 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 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 

YSAQMD Rule 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 categories.

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 0.0581
2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Appendix C - Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Automotive 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 C5). 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 estimates 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. Forecasted 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 Cleaning
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 EDCAQMD-225/235

Page C-88
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 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 

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 and manufacturing facilities. Solvents are 

also used by 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 

implementing 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 potential 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 Naphtha 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 0.0006
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 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 control 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.

Implementation

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, December 11, 

2003

3. Control Measure, FRAQMD 3.14, February 2, 2007
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 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. Degreasing 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 and 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 

2.131(Organic Solvents), Rule 2.242(Solvent Cleaning Operations - Degreasing), and 

Rule 2.313(Surface Preparation and Cleanup) to match the ROG limits currently 

feasible and required by South Coast AQMD’s Rule 11224(Solvent Degreasers) and 

Rule 11715(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 0.5549
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 YSAQMD-2.24/2.31

Page C-92

Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption 

Date

Implementation 

Date

ROG Emission Reduction (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 particular 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 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. 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 Arts
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 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 

books, 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, gravure, 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 certain 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 equipped 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 

ROG emissions from its operation. Because no additional NOX controls are currently 

available for combustion devices being used as air pollution control equipment, NOX

reductions associated with graphic arts operations will not be addressed in this control 

strategy.

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' various 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 0.125
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 YSAQMD-2.29

Page C-95

Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption 

Date

Implementation 

Date

ROG Emission Reduction (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 compliant 

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 Products
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-97

Control Measure Number: PCAPCD - CM3

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. 

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. 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 16, 2006

2. CARB’s Areawide Source Methodologies, Industrial Coatings, Updated February 

1990; Reissued October 1997

3. Control Measure, PCAPCD CM3, February 5, 2007
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

Page C-99

Natural Gas Production and Processing
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-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 

wells 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 Ozone 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 

Fugitive 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, 2006
2013 Revision to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Appendix C - Proposed Control Measures

Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

NOX Control Measures

Page C-102

NOX 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

Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters

Page C-103

Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters
2013 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 (O2).

The proposed control measure consists of the District amending Rule 2.27 (Industrial, 

Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters) to 

incorporate a multi-tiered NOX emission limit.

Emission Inventory - 2018

EIC Code EIC Description NOX 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 Industrial, 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 Date Implementation 

Date

NOX Emission Reduction Tons/day

2018

Boilers 2016 2018 0.2883
2013 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 20032, 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-NOX equipment or postcombustion controls. Based on this analysis, the cost of equipment modifications 

ranged from $12,664 - $23,359 per ton of NOX 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 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 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, Final 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 Engines
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 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 fire 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 engines, 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. These engines can be either lean burn or rich burn. The pollutants of primary 

concern that result from the combustion process are NOX 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. SOX 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

NOX 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 0.020
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 FRAQMD-3.22

Page C-108

Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption Date Implementation Date

NOX Emission Reductions (tpd)

2018

IC Engines 2010 2011 0.0045

Cost Effectiveness

The cost effectiveness is estimated to be $11,500 per ton of NOX 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 California 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, 2007
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

Page C-109

Water Heaters
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-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 NOX 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 NOX emission standards for 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 heat 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 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

EIC Code EIC Description

NOX 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

NOX 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 NOX

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 existing 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 proposed 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, EDCAQMD 239, January 31, 2007
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-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 NOX 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 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 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 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 Specific Plan) is not factored in.

EIC Code EIC Description

NOX 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

NOX 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 NOX

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 Nitrogen 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, 2007
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-114

Control Measure Number: PCAPCD - CM2

Control Measure Title: Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers

Date: February 5, 2007

Control Measure Description

This control measure will evaluate low NOX 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 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 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 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

EIC Code EIC Description

NOX 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

NOX 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 NOX

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. Communication with Ali Mohamad of the SMAQMD on July 24, 2003 to discuss 

SMAQMD staff report on Rule 411, Boiler NOX.

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 and 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, NOX from 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, 2007
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 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 NOX 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, YoloSolano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD) Rule 2.37 (Natural Gas Fired 

Residential Water Heaters) sets NOX 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 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 heat 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 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 

NOX and VOC, although this control measure pertains to NOX emissions, only.

EIC Code EIC Description

NOX 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 1.2918
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 YSAQMD-2.37

Page C-117

Emission Reductions

EIC Description Adoption Date Implementation Date

NOX 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 heaters 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 implement 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 Metropolitan 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 Measures
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-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, technological feasibility, and authority 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 future. 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) Episodic 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 through 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 implemented 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 structures.

Emission Inventory - 2018

The air districts do not have sufficient information to calculate the inventory for this potential 

control measure at this time.

Emissions Reductions

The air districts 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 districts do not have sufficient information to calculate the cost effectiveness of this 

control measure. The air districts will continue to monitor the progress made on a similar control 

measure for urban heat islands proposed in both the SJVUAPCD 2007 Ozone 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 districts 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 requires additional information and further study and is not recommended 

at this time. The air districts 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 

utilizing 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 measure 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) engines or miniturbines.

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 category, since it can include any 

application for which there is technology that can produce energy without using fossil-based 

materials.

Emissions Reductions

The air districts do not have sufficient information to calculate the potential emission reductions 

from this control measure.

Cost Effectiveness

The air districts do not have sufficient information to calculate the cost effectiveness of this 

control measure. The air districts 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 districts 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 heaters, 

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 Reductions

There is inadequate information to calculate the potential emission reductions. The air districts

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 districts do not have sufficient information to calculate the cost effectiveness of this 

control measure. The air districts will continue to monitor the progress made on a similar control 

measure for alternative 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 districts and local governments.

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 on the 

control measure for energy efficiency proposed in the SCAQMD.

References

Final 2007 AQMP, Appendix IV-A: CM#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 

includes 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) and the in-station 

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, alert 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 providing 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 

fueling 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 – 2002 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 1.2837
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-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 districts

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 districts 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 districts are authorized to adopt and amend rules and regulations by Health and Safety 

Code Sections 40001and 40702.

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 developments of the 

enhanced detection warnings by SCAQMD and determine the feasibility 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, 

2008
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-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, and auto part manufacturers. Many lubricants and 

their additives, such as rust 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 lubricants 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 specifically 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 reducing source emissions by 

either placing an overall emission limit by source, or by limiting VOC content in lubricant 

formulations at the point 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 operations.

Emission Reductions

The air districts are not able to calculate the potential emission reductions from this control 

measure because the emission inventory is unknown.

Cost Effectiveness

The air districts do not have sufficient information to calculate 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 districts have the authority to regulate VOC emissions from industrial coatings 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 districts 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 reductions, 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 emission 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 effective.
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 attainment plan, 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 and 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 that 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; and
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

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 measures 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 with 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 the 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 that
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-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 conformity 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 amended 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, the
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-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 as 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 necessary 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 Attachment 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 paragraph (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 the 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 this 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 procedures 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: 13th and 16th 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 side
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-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 2009.

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 lowoccupancy 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 $1,700,000
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-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 $1,100,000
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-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

CONTROL 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 freeways 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 the
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-36

required 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 ozone standard.

Emission Reductions

Total emission reductions taken for this measure will be:

NOX: 0.91 tons per day

ROG: 0.06 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

reduction 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, 7237641210,

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

NOX (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 conducting
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-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

NOX 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)

NOX $ 1,293,071

ROG $ 1,007,279

NOX + 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 costeffective 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 $67,500
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-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-48

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 VAR56025 SACOG Regional Rideshare Program

$1,200,000 annually

through 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-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 $2,600,000
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-52

CONTROL MEASURE NUMBER: FP-4A

TCM ID: FP-4A

Control Measure Title: City of Marysville: East 10th 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.

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 $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

NOX: 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 Program
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-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 FormBased 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 efforts, 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 $1,000,000
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-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-PLACE3S 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 and 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

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-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 development, 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 “onethird” 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 multipleoccupancy 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 singleoccupant 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 plan with

alternate or additional transportation control measureso "(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 local 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; and
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-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 state 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 process 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

requireo "(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 of 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 the 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. (YSAQMD, 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-verifiable 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 Joaquin 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, and are documented in

Attachment A-2.

RACM Determination and Analysis Results

Attachment 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

Attachment 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

13th and 16th Light Rail Station

Improvements

Expected to be completed in

2009

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 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-77

AQ-2

Sacramento Emergency Clean Air &

Transportation (SECAT) Program Implemented in 2008 to 2018

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 divided 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 2018

FP-4 Community Design Funding Program This task divided into 4

components. See below.

FP-4A

City of Marysville: East 10th Street and

Ramirez Street Intersection

Improvement

Expected to be completed in

2011

FP-4B City of Rancho Cordova: Folsom Blvd.

Enhancements & SR2S Phase 2

Expected to be completed in

2012

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

2009

RP-1

Blueprint implementation and Planning

Technical Assistance

Expected to be completed in

2012

RP-2

Development Rural-Urban Connections

Strategy and Create Best Practices

Toolkit

Expected to be completed in

2012

RP-3

Research a Transportation Pricing

Policy

Expected to be completed in

2012

RP-4

Research a Regional Parking

Regulation to Provide Incentives for Use

of Alternative Modes

Expected to be completed in

2012

RP-5 Adopt “Complete Streets” Policy Expected to be completed in

2012

RP-6

Initiate a “Complete Streets” Technical

Assistance Program

Expected to be completed in

2012

RP-7

Adopt a Safe Routes to School Policy

and Implement Pilot Program

Expected 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-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 NOX 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 Reductions
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-79

Other Control Measures Considered – Episodic Control Measures

TCM-104 Reduce Work-Related Trips

Not Recommended – No

authority to implement; 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 implement; 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-123; to be

implemented through TCM FP-3.

TCM-297 Bike Use at Businesses

Subset of TCM-123

Not Recommended – No

authority to implement.

TCM-302 Government Staff Dedicate to Cycling

Subset of TCM-123

Not Recommended – No

authority to implement.

TCM-373 Carpool program

Subset of TCM-123; to be

implemented through TCM FP-3.

TCM-124 Telework/Alternative Work Schedule

Subset of TCM-123

Not Recommended – Not

Enforceable

TCM-186 Increase telecommuting

Subset of TCM-123

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 implemented through

TCM FP-3.

TCM-100 Reduce business/government hours of

operation

Subset of TCM-123; no 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 PassHolders

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 shareduse 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 2011.

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 guidance41 specifies that a

comprehensive weight-of-evidence approach should be undertaken to support the

modeled attainment demonstration.

The following information for the weight-of-evidence analyses in this appendix was

provided by CARB and was summarized in Chapter 10 – Weight-of-Evidence

Determination.

SACRAMENTO METRO AREA: OZONE

Introduction

The Sacramento Metro Area42 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 NOX 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 photochemical modeling, which predicts that projected new controls will result

in an 8-hour ozone design value of less than 0.085 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, PM2.5, 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 example, 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. This 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

Figure 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 are closely linked to

downtown Sacramento by employment, housing, and travel patterns. In addition, the
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-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

Federal 8-Hour Ozone Exceedance Days

3-Year Averages -- 1990 to 2006

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year Number of Days

Folsom-3yr Avg Placerville-3yr Avg Del Paso Manor-3yr Avg T Street-3yr Avg

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 Avg
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-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 2006

Sacramento Metro Area Ozone Indicators 

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year Ozone (ppm)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90 Number of Days

Maximum Concentration Design Value Mean Top 30 Concentrations Exceedance Days
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-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

subregion 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 the
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-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 2005
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-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, Roseville, 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 during 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 2004-2006
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-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 Metro 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 meteorological 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 meters43, 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 level
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-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 these years, the observed increase generally coincides with the expected

increase. However, from 2002 to 2004, observed exceedances decreased by 9 (from 43

Sacramento Metro Area Ozone Trends

(Federal 8-Hour Exceedance Days and "High OPF" Days)*

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year

Number of Days (3-year moving averages)

Expected Observed

* "Expected" counts based on meteorology for the year and emissions at 2000-2002 levels
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-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.

Sacramento Metro Area Ozone Trends

(Federal 8-Hour Exceedance Days and "High OPF" Days)*

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year Number of Days (annual values)

Expected Observed

* "Expected" counts based on meteorology for the year and emissions at 2000-2002 levels
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 clustering 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 differences in generalized source-receptor scenarios.

Analysis of Clusters by Month

(Clusters based on surface wind patterns for May-Oct 1996 to 2005)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

5 6 7 8 9 10

Month

Count of Days

Cluster#1 Cluster#2 Cluster#4
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%.

Sacramento Metro Area

Trends for Top 30 Areawide Daily Maximum 8-Hour Ozone With and Without Adjustment for Meteorological Conditions

0.08

0.09

0.10

0.11

0.12

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year Mean Ozone (ppm) Annual Values

Observed Top30 Adjusted Top30

Calibration years = 2000 - 2002

First principles modeling
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 (NOX) 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 NOX 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 Placer

Sacramento Metro Area

Trends for Top 30 Areawide Daily Maximum 8-Hour Ozone With and Without Adjustment for Meteorological Conditions

0.08

0.09

0.10

0.11

0.12

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year

Mean Ozone (ppm) 3-Year Moving Average

Observed Top30 Adjusted Top30

Calibration years = 2000 - 2002

First principles modeling
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-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, NOX emissions decreased about 25 percent. These ROG and NOX 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 NOX. The ratio of

total ROG to NOX is relatively constant over the entire time period, varying between 1.8

and 1.9. While ROG and NOX 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 NOX Emissions Estimates 1994 to 2006

Sacramento Metro Area ROG and NOx Emissions 1994 to 2006

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year

Emissions (Tons/Day)

ROG NOx
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-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 NOX 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 NOX at Folsom-Natoma Street also decreased 50 percent. In

contrast, ambient NOX 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 the 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 NOX precursors have decreased over time, and

these decreases have resulted in improved ozone air quality.

Figure 14: Summer Morning Average ROG and NOX 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 meteorological

July-August Average Ambient PAMS ROG and NOx at 

Sacramento Metro Area PAMS Stations (5-8am)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year

ppbC or ppbN

Folsom-ROG Sacramento-ROG Folsom-NOx Sacramento-NOx
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-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 the 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 NOX 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, the attainment strategy relies on a 10 percent or more reduction in NOX that will

bring the worst-case site, Cool, down to a level of less than 0.085 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 NOX 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 NOX emissions reductions will be critical

for bringing sites in the Sacramento Metro Area into attainment. Given the timeframe
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-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 NOX emissions.

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 NOX 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 NOX emissions. However, photochemical modeling results

show that NOX reductions will be critical to attainment. As a result, a

control strategy relying on a 10 percent or more reduction in NOX

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 NOX were calculated for 

reasonable further progress (RFP) milestone years (2014, 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 distributions 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 Strategy47. The latest adjustments for recent ARB 

baseline controls 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 primarily to allow flexibility to adjust for 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 population 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 Strategy. 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 NOX

On-Road Emissions from EMFAC2011 23.43 47.70

Adjustments to Baseline* -02.63 -2.15

Regional Strategy Reductions -0.10 -0.53

Net Inventory 20.70 45.02

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 NOX

On-Road Emissions from EMFAC2011 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 NOX

On-Road Emissions from EMFAC2011 17.75 34.34

Adjustments to Baseline* -2.26 -0.66

Regional Strategy Reductions -0.03 -0.49

Net Inventory 15.46 33.19

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 County.

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 VMT 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 portion
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-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 requirements 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 necessary 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 emissions 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 

Strategies 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 January 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 reasonable 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 necessary 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 emissions 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 improvements such as vehicle technology 

improvements, motor vehicle fuels, and other control strategies that are transportationrelated could be used to offset increases in emissions due to VMT. This guidance also 

sets out a methodology for demonstrating achievement 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 latter 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 attainment 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.

Transportation 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 provides 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 of 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 transportation 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 includes 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

Methodology

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 NOX emissions for calendar year 1990 from the EMFAC2011 model. 

Emissions

Description VMT

(miles/day)

ROG

(tons/day)

NOX

(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 strategies 

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 emissions 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 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 year 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 1990 and adjusted the 

EMFAC2011 to reflect the ROG and NOX emissions levels in 2018 without the benefits 
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-9

of the post-1990 control programs. The projected ROG and NOX 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 NOX 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 NOX 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 NOX emissions levels are 18 and 34 

tons/day, respectively.

ROG and NOX emissions for the three sets of calculations described above are 

provided in the following table.

Emissions

Calculation Description VMT

(miles/day)

ROG

(tons/day)

NOX

(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

NOX: 34 < 99 tons/day
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-10

Analysis 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 NOX emissions for calendar year 2002 from the 

EMFAC2011 model.

Emissions

Description VMT

(miles/day)

ROG

(tons/day)

NOX

(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 year 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 NOX emissions levels in 2018 without the 

benefits of the post-2002 control programs. The projected ROG and NOX 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 NOX 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 NOX emission levels for 2018 assuming the benefits of the post-2002 

motor vehicle control program and the projected VMT levels in 2018 are calculated 

using EMFAC2011. The projected ROG and NOX emissions levels are 18 and 34 

tons/day, respectively. ROG and NOX emissions for the three sets of calculations 

described above are provided in the following tables.

Description VMT

(miles/day)

ROG

(tons/day)

NOX

(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 

the motor vehicle control programs in offsetting ROG and NOX 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 increases
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-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 NOX, 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-15

In both analyses, there are sufficient transportation 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 & MediumDuty 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) provisions 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 Vehicle 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-road
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-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 On-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 Fuels

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

Retrofit 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-road
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-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, CCR, 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 Fuels
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-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 Compliance 

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, 2265, 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-road
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-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 13, 

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 Standards; 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-road
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-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

11/18/04 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 HeavyDuty 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-road
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-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-road
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-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 region. 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 implementing 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

13th and 16th St :Light Rail Station Improvements 

(TF-3) Sac Regional Transit District 2009
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-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 Through2018

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 Program
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-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 they

existed in 1990. States are required to adjust for the benefits of these federal programs 

in RFP calculations.

Over the years, various methods have been used to estimate the benefits of the pre1990 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 rule. 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 standards 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 

ongoing 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. EPA 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 accounting, 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 pre1990 motor vehicle 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, NOX, 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 13-1

Line VOC Emission Calculations - Tons/Day 2002 2014 2017 2018 Description

A Baseline VOC

146.7 106.0 99.9 98.7

Total summer season daily VOC emissions in SFNA. 

Total includes befnefits from control measures adopted as 

of January 2012 for mobile sources and mid-2011 for 

stationary/area-wide sources. It includes motor vehicle 

"safety margin" added to transportion conformity budget.

B Non-Creditable FMVCP/RVP Adjustment 0.0 10.9 11.9 12.2

The reductions from the pre-1990 FMVCP/RVP for on-road 

that must be excluded in the RFP calculation. 

C RACT Corrections 0 0 0 0

D Adjusted 2002 Baseline VOC in milestone year

146.7 135.8 134.8 134.5

Line A (2002) - Line B(current milestone year)

E

RFP commitment for VOC reductions from new 

measures

0 0 0 0

F

Future Year VOC with existing and proposed 

measures

106.0 99.9 98.7 Line A

G

Required % change since previous milestone 

year (VOC or NOx) compared to 2002 9% 9% 3%

40 CFR 51.910(a)(1)(ii)(B) requires a 18% reduction 

between 2002 base year and the first milestone year of 

H Target VOC levels 91.5 82.3 79.5

For the 2008 RFP target VOC level, the required 18% RFP 

emission reduction is applied to the adjusted 2002 baseline 

for 2008 milestone year. For the subsequent 

I Apparent shortfall in VOC 14.5 17.6 19.2 Line F - Line H

J Apparent shortfall in VOC, % 10.7% 13.0% 14.3% Line I / Line D * 100%

K

VOC shortfall previously provided by NOx 

substitution, % 0.0% 10.7% 13.0% Sum of Line U from 2002 to current milestone year.

L Actual VOC shortfall, % 10.7% 2.3% 1.2% Line J - Line K

Line NOX Emission Calculations - Tons/Day 2002 2014 2017 2018 Description

M Baseline NOx

164.8 92.6 80.0 76.9

Total summer season daily NOx emissions in SFNA. Total 

includes befnefits from control measures adopted as of 

January 2012 for mobile sources and mid-2011 for 

stationary/area-wide sources. It includes motor vehicle 

"safety margin" added to transportion conformity budget.

N CA MVCP Adjustment 0.0 10.4 11.0 11.2 The reductions from the pre-1990 FMVCP/RVP for on-road 

that must be excluded in the RFP calculation. 

O Adjusted 2002 Baseline NOx in milestone year 164.8 154.4 153.8 153.6 Line M (2002) - Line N(current milestone year)

P

RFP commitment for NOx reductions from new 

measures

0 0 0 0

Q Change in NOx since 2002 61.8 73.8 76.7 Line O - Line M + Line P

R Change in NOx since 2002, % 40.0% 48.0% 49.9% Line Q / Line O * 100%

S

NOx reductions since 2002 already used for 

RFP substitution and contingency through last 

milestone year, %

0.0% 13.7% 16.0% Sum (Line S + Line U + Line V) from previous milestone 

year.

T

NOx reductions since 2002 available for RFP 

substitution and contingency in this milestone 

year, %

40.0% 34.3% 33.9%

Line R - Line S

U

Change in NOx since 2002 used for ROG 

substitution in this milestone year, % 10.7% 2.3% 1.2% Line L

V

Change in NOx since 2002 available for 

contingency in this milestone year, % 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%

W

Change in NOx since 2002 surplus after 

meeting substitution and contingency needs in 

this milestone year, %

26.3% 31.9% 32.6% For 2014, Line T - Line U - Line V. For 2017 and 2018, 

Line T - Line U.

X RFP Met? YES YES YES

Y Contingency Met? YES YES YES
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-1

Appendix H: Reasonably 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 minimum, 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 policy48,49 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 of 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 Submissions 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

Joaquin 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 the
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-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 Analysis
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-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 dieselburning heavy duty vehicles

Not Recommended – Technology 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 Preconditioning of diesel engines to

eliminate engine cold start emissions

Not Recommended – Evaluated 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 – No enforceable

reductions due to differences in

certification procedures

OFMS48 Raise fuel prices Not Recommended – High Cost, No

Authority
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-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 retrofits – NOX 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 cost

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 Study

Further Study-3 Energy Conservation Further Study
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-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 Study
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-8

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

Stationary/Area Source Control Measure Control Measures Considered
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-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 oncoatings.

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

NOX 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

NOX 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 NOX limit to 6

ppm for >20 mmBTU/hr

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

412 IC Engines NOX limits on IC Engines located

at major stationary source

Require NOX limits all IC

Engines, not just those at

major stationary sources

of NOX.

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

Attainment
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-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 NOX

emissions similar to a

control measure adopted

by SJVUAPCD

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Dryers and

Ovens None

Require limits for NOX

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

NOX limits on water heaters with

rated heat input capacity less than

75,000 Btu/hr

Require NOX limits on

water heaters/boilers

with rated heat input

capacity between 75,000

Btu/hr and 1,000,000

Btu/hr, and reduce

current NOX 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 LowVOC Consumer Product

especially on Spare-theAir Day

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement
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-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

NOX 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 NOX 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 NOX

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

Advancement
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-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

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

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 formarine 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

NOX emissions for flares

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement
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-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 NOX limits for

glass furnaces

Not Recommended

- No sources

Central

Furnaces None Establish NOX limits forcentral furnaces

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS-1

ISR

Construction None

Implement construction

mitigation rule to reduce

off-road construction

NOX 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

Advancement
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-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 predetermined life span of

when equipment would

need to be replaced and

would then trigger BACT

limits

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement
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-15

El Dorado County Air Quality Management District

Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered
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-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 oncoatings.

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

NOX limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 5,000,000 Btu/hr or

greater; 30 ppm,

Lower NOX 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

NOX limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 5,000,000 Btu/hr or

greater; 30 ppm,

Reduce NOX limit to 6-8

ppm for >20 mmBTU/hr

Not Recommended

- High Cost

233 IC Engines NOX limits on internal combustion

engines Reduce NOX 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

Advancement
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-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 NOX

emissions similar to a

control measure adopted

by SJVUAPCD

Not Recommended

- No sources

Other Dryers

and Ovens None

Require limits for NOX

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

NOX limits on water heaters with

rated heat input capacity less than

75,000 Btu/hr

Require NOX limits on

water heaters/boilers

with rated heat input

capacity between 75,000

Btu/hr and 1,000,000

Btu/hr, and reduce

current NOX 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 LowVOC Consumer Product

especially on Spare-theAir 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

Advancement
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-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 NOX 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 NOX

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

Advancement
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-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 formarine 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

NOX 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

Advancement
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-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 NOX limits for

glass furnaces

Not Recommended

- No sources

Central

Furnaces None Establish NOX limits forcentral 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 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

Establish a predetermined life span of

when equipment would

need to be replaced and

would then trigger BACT

limits

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement
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-21

Feather River Air Quality Management District

Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered
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-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

NOX 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 nongaseous fuel 40 ppm

Require NOX limits for

boiler between 1-5

mmBtu/hr, and reduce

NOX limit for boiler >5

mmBtu/hr

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

3.21

Boilers and

Steam

Generators

NOX 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 nongaseous fuel 40 ppm

Reduce NOX limit to 6

ppm for >20 mmBTU/hr

Not Recommended

– No Sources

3.22 IC Engines None Establish NOX 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 applicabilitythreshold

Not Recommended

– No Sources

Wineries None

Establish standards to

reduce evaporative VOC

emissions from the

fermentation process at

wineries

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement
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-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 NOXemissions

Not Recommended

- No sources

Other Dryers

and Ovens None

Require limits for NOX

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 NOX

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 LowVOC Consumer Product

especially on Spare-theAir 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 foraerospace 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

Advancement
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-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 NOX limits on

stationary gas turbines

Not Recommended

- No sources

Incinerators None Establish NOX 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 fromloading 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

include 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 formarine coatings.

Not Recommended

- No sources
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-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

NOX 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

Green 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 NOX limits for

glass furnaces

Not Recommended

- No sources

Central

Furnaces None Establish NOX limits forcentral furnaces

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS-1

ISR

Construction None

Implement construction

mitigation rule to reduce

off-road construction

NOX emissions

associated with new land

use development

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement
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-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 predetermined life span of

when equipment would

need to be replaced and

would then trigger BACT

limits

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement
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-27

Placer County Air Pollution Control District

Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered
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-28

Table H-5

PCAPCD Stationary/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 oncoatings.

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 NOX limits 30 ppm on

boiler/steam generators with rated

heat input capacity of 5MMBtu/hr

or greater;

Lower NOX 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 NOX limits 30 ppm on

boiler/steam generators with rated

heat input capacity of 5,000,000

Btu/hr or greater;

Reduce NOX 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 NOX limits on IC Engines located

at stationary sources

Lower NOX 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

Advancement
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-29

Table H-5

PCAPCD Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered

Measure

No. Title Current Requirements

Opportunity for

Strengthening Conclusion

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

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 NOX

emissions similar to a

control measure adopted

by SJVUAPCD

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Other Dryers

and Ovens None

Require limits for NOX

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

NOX limits on water heaters with

rated heat input capacity less than

75,000 Btu/hr

Require NOX limits on

water heaters/boilers

with rated heat input

capacity between 75,000

Btu/hr and 1,000,000

Btu/hr, and reduce

current NOX 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 LowVOC Consumer Product

especially on Spare-theAir Day

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement
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-30

Table H-5

PCAPCD Stationary/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

NOX 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 NOX 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 NOX, SO2, CO, PM, THC,

and HCL emissions from an

incinerator

Require all incinerators

demonstrate NOX

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
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-31

Table H-5

PCAPCD Stationary/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 formarine 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

NOX emissions for flares

Not Recommended

- No sources
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-32

Table H-5

PCAPCD 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

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 NOX limits for

glass furnaces

Not Recommended

- No sources

Central

Furnaces None Establish NOX limits forcentral furnaces

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

IS-1

ISR

Construction None

Implement construction

mitigation rule to reduce

off-road construction

NOX 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

Advancement
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-33

Table H-5

PCAPCD Stationary/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

quantify benefits

and cost

effectiveness

Facility

Modernization None

Establish a predetermined life span of

when equipment would

need to be replaced and

would then trigger BACT

limits

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement
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-34

Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District

Stationary/Area Source Control Measures Considered
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-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 oncoatings.

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

NOX limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 1 mmBTU/hr 30 ppm

Establish NOX 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

NOX limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 1 mmBTU/hr 30 ppm

Lower NOX 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

NOX limits on boiler/steam

generators with rated heat input

capacity of 1 mmBTU/hr 30 ppm

Reduce NOX limit to 6-8

ppm for >20 mmBTU/hr

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

2.32 IC Engines

Rich burn NOX limit at 90 ppm.

Lean burn NOX limit for engines >

100 BHP at 150 ppm and NOX

limit for engines > 100 BHP at 300

ppm

Reduce NOX 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

Advancement
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-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 NOX

emissions similar to a

control measure adopted

by SJVUAPCD

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement

Other Dryers

and Ovens None

Require limits for NOX

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 NOX limit for natural

gas-fired water heaters

Require rating specific

NOX 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 LowVOC Consumer Product

especially on Spare-theAir 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 sources
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-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 NOX limits on gas turbines

Reduce NOX 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 NOX

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

implemented
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-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 balancesystem 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 balancesystem 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

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 formarine 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

NOX 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 place
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-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 NOX limits for

glass furnaces

Not Recommended

- No sources

Central

Furnaces None Establish NOX limits forcentral 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/feasibility
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-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 predetermined life span of

when equipment would

need to be replaced and

would then trigger BACT

limits

Not Recommended

- Evaluated for

Attainment

Advancement
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-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 (RACM)

[Section 172(c)(1)

The plan should provide for the implementation of all

reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as

practicable, 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

(emissions 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 reasonable notice

and public hearing requirements for plan adoptions.

Chapters 2, 4, 6, 7, 8

Equivalent Techniques

[Section 172(c)(8)]

Upon application by any State, 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 13.3
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-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 NOX 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 NOX 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 control

measures.

Chapter 7, Section 7.9 (TCMs)

Appendix D (TCMs)

Vehicle Miles Traveled Offset 

[Section 182(d)(1)(A)]

The Plan shall identify 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 trips.

Chapter 11, Section 8 (VMT Offset)

and Appendix F (VMT 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)