## PM 10 

## IMPLEMENTATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN

AND REDESIGNATION REQUEST

FOR SACRAMENTO COUNTY

OCTOBER 28, 2010 (WITH ERRATA SHEET INCORPORATED)



## SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICTPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Title Page Page i 

## PM 10 

## IMPLEMENTATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN

AND REDESIGNATION REQUEST

FOR SACRAMENTO COUNTY

OCTOBER 28, 2010 (WITH ERRATA SHEET INCORPORATED)

Prepared by:

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Qu ality Management District 777 12 th Street, Third Floor Sacramento, CA 95814-1908 (916) 874-4800 http://www.air quality.org

Principal Authors: Bruce Katayama , Associate Air Quality Planner Janice Lam, Statistician Steven Lau, Associat e Air Quality Planner Hao Quinn, Associate Air Quality Engineer Karen Taylor, Assistan t Air Quality Engineer

Reviewed by: Charles Anderson, Program Coordinator

Approved by: Brigette Tollstrup, Division Manager Larry Greene, Executive Director/APCOPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Table of Contents Page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background Info rmation ................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Health Impac ts ............................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Description of Sacramento County PM 10 Nonattainment Area ....................... 1-3 1.4 Purpose of Plan ............................................................................................. 1-4 1.5 Plan Development and Public Review Pr ocess ............................................. 1-5 1.6 Overview of Plan Contents ............................................................................. 1-6 1.7 References ..................................................................................................... 1-7 2. FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT REQUIREMEN TS .................................................... 2-1 2.1 PM 10 Standards .............................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Nonattainment De signation ............................................................................ 2-1 2.3 Attainment Dete rmination .............................................................................. 2-2 2.4 Clean Air Act PM 10 Planning Requir ements ................................................... 2-2 2.5 State Implementat ion Plan ............................................................................. 2-3 2.6 Clean Data Policy .......................................................................................... 2-5 2.7 Implementation Plan S ubmittal Elem ents ...................................................... 2-6 2.8 Maintenance Plan Re quirement s ................................................................... 2-7 2.9 Redesignation Requ irements ......................................................................... 2-8 2.10 References ..................................................................................................... 2-8 3. PM 10 MONITORING NETWORK AND AIR QUALITY DATA ................................ 3-1 3.1 Introduction to PM 10 Data ............................................................................... 3-1 3.2 PM 10 Monitoring Ne twork ............................................................................... 3-2 3.3 PM 10 Data Tr ends .......................................................................................... 3-6 3.4 PM 10 Seasonality An alysis ............................................................................. 3-8 3.5 PM 10 Speciation An alysis ............................................................................. 3-10 3.6 PM 10 Air Quality Data Conclusion s .............................................................. 3-11 3.7 References ................................................................................................... 3-12 4. EMISSIONS INVEN TORY .................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Introduction to Emissi ons Invent ory ............................................................... 4-1 4.2 Emissions Inventory Requirement s ................................................................ 4-1 4.3 Precursors to PM 10 ......................................................................................... 4-1 4.4 Emissions Inventory S ource Categor ies ........................................................ 4-2 4.5 Base Year Emissions and Foreca sts ............................................................. 4-4 4.6 Analysis of Emissions In ventory Fore casts .................................................... 4-8 4.7 General Conformity and Airpor t Emissions In ventory .................................. 4-10 4.8 Emission Reduction Credits ......................................................................... 4-11 4.9 Emissions Inventory Documentat ion ............................................................ 4-13 4.10 Emissions Inventory Conclusions ................................................................ 4-13 4.11 References ................................................................................................... 4-13 5. CONTROL MEASU RES ....................................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Introduction to Contro l Measures ................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Control Measure Re quirement s ..................................................................... 5-1 5.3 RACM/RACT Eval uation ................................................................................ 5-1PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Table of Contents Page iii 5.4 New Source Review Program ........................................................................ 5-5 5.5 Control Measures Conclusion s ...................................................................... 5-5 5.6 References ..................................................................................................... 5-6 6. MAINTENANCE DEMONSTRATION .................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Introduction to Maintenanc e Demonstrat ion................................................... 6-1 6.2 Maintenance Demonstrat ion Requirem ents ................................................... 6-1 6.3 Maintenance Demonstr ation Anal ysis ............................................................ 6-1 6.4 Results of Maintenance Demonstrat ion ......................................................... 6-5 6.5 Future Monitori ng Networ k ............................................................................. 6-6 6.6 Verification and Tracking the Ma intenance Demons tration ............................ 6-7 6.7 References ..................................................................................................... 6-7 7. MAINTENANCE CONTIN GENCY PLAN .............................................................. 7-1 7.1 Introduction to Cont ingency Pl an ................................................................... 7-1 7.2 Contingency Plan Requirements .................................................................... 7-1 7.3 Maintenance Contin gency Plan ..................................................................... 7-1 7.4 Contingency Plan Co nclusions ...................................................................... 7-2 7.5 References ..................................................................................................... 7-3 8. TRANSPORTATION CONFOR MITY BUDG ETS .................................................. 8-1 8.1 Introduction to Transporta tion Conformi ty ...................................................... 8-1 8.2 Transportation Conformity Requirem ents ...................................................... 8-1 8.3 Latest Planning A ssumptions ......................................................................... 8-1 8.4 SACOG’s MTP 2035 ....................................................................................... 8-2 8.5 Proposed Motor Vehicle Em ission B udgets ................................................... 8-3 8.6 Impact of New Emi ssion Budget s .................................................................. 8-5 8.7 References ..................................................................................................... 8-5 9. REDESIGNATION REQUEST .............................................................................. 9-1 9.1 Introduction to Redesignation and Redesignation Requ irements .................. 9-1 9.2 Evaluation of R edesignatio n .......................................................................... 9-2 9.3 References ..................................................................................................... 9-7 10. SUMMARY AND CONC LUSIONS .................................................................. 10-1 10.1 PM 10 Nonattainment Designatio n ................................................................. 10-1 10.2 PM 10 Air Quality Data ................................................................................... 10-1 10.3 Emissions Inv entory ..................................................................................... 10-1 10.4 Control Meas ures ......................................................................................... 10-1 10.5 Maintenance Dem onstrati on ........................................................................ 10-2 10.6 Contingency Plan ......................................................................................... 10-2 10.7 Transportation Confor mity Budget s ............................................................. 10-2 10.8 Redesignation Re quest ................................................................................ 10-3 10.9 Overall Conclu sions ..................................................................................... 10-3

APPENDICES
A. EMISSIONS INVENTORY

B. CONTROL MEASURES

C. TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY BUDGETSPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Introduction Page 1-1 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background Information

Particulate matter (PM) is the term for the mi xture of solid and liquid particles in the ambient air that we breathe. Be cause particles originate from a variety of activities and processes, their chemical and physical compositions vary widely. Components of PM include nitrates, sulfates, elemental car bon, organic carbon compo unds, acid aerosols, trace metals, and geologic materials. PM can be directly emitted to the air or can be produced by secondary formation in the atmosphere when precursor gaseous pollutants, such as nitrogen ox ides and sulfur oxides, chem ically react with ammonia to form fine aerosol particles.

Sources of PM are mainly due to human (anthropogenic) acti vities, such as residential fuel combustion smoke and soot, entrained road dust, motor vehicle exhaust precursor pollutants, and dust emissions from construction and farming activities. PM can also be generated from natural sources such as windblown dust and wildfires.

For air quality monitoring purposes, PM is measured and expressed as the mass of particles in micrograms per cubic meter ( μ g/m 3 ) of air. Ambient PM concentrations can build up in the Sacramento region due to its valley geography, stagnant wintertime meteorology, and urban emission sources. PM may eventually be removed from the atmosphere by gravitational se ttling or deposition, rainout (attaching to water droplets as they fall to the ground), and washout ( being absorbed by water molecules in clouds and later falling to the ground with rain).

Ambient air quality standards for particulate ma tter focus on the smaller particle sizes that are responsible for adverse health effect s because of their ability to reach the lower regions of the resp iratory tract. PM 10 standards established to protect human health refer to the air pollutant that consists of par ticles ten microns or le ss in diameter (about one seventh the width of a human hair). PM 10 standards are also designed to protect visibility and prevent vegetation damage.

1.2 Health Impacts

In developing the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for PM 10 exposure, the major emphasis has been placed upon comm unity epidemiological studies, along with additional toxicologica l and controlled human exposu re studies. These studies show that exposure to elevated levels of particulate matter causes adverse human health effects, including reduced lung func tions, increased respiratory complications, cardiovascular disease, lowering the body's defense against infections, injury to lung tissue, nonfatal heart atta cks, increased risk of cancer and, in extreme cases, premature death. People most s ensitive to the effects of PM 10 are those with influenza, asthma and other chronic lung and heart disease, as well as the elderly, young children, and exercising adults.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Introduction Page 1-2 PM 10 is likely to penetrate deep into the lung tissue and lodge in the al veoli, the small air sacs in the lung where the essential oxygen transfer occurs. PM 10 is too small for the natural filtering process of the human body (small hairs and mucous throughout the nasal and lung passage) to remove. Researcher s studied health effects from short-term and long-term exposure to particulate matter concentrations in the air.

Short-Term PM 10 Exposure Studies

In developing a short-term (24- hour) health-based standard for PM 10 , EPA examined the acute health effects in reported studies , including mortality (death) and various morbidity (illness) indicators such as reduc ed lung function, the rates of upper and lower respiratory illness, and related hospital admissions. Studies cited by EPA showed a decrease in lung function following particu late pollution occurrences (Dockery, 1982) (Dassen, 1986).

Some children, particularly asthmati cs, showed higher effects to PM 10 indicating that they may be a more vulnerable subgroup in the population. Respiratory illness is particularly important in child ren since many studies have indicated that respiratory illness events (mostly viral) during childhood are important determinant s for future risk of chronic respiratory symptoms in adult life.

Based on mortality data exam ined, EPA concluded there is evidence that elevated particulate levels may increase the risk of death. A large share of the acute-exposure mortality and hospitalization occurrences are within the elderly population. These studies indicate the most susceptible p opulation segment for mortality risk from particulate exposure consists of elderly in dividuals with preexisting cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, such as caused by smoking.

Long-Term PM 10 Exposure Studies

In initially developing a more long-term (annual average period) health-based standard for PM 10 , EPA considered chronic health effects for both mortality and morbidity related to elevated particulate levels. EPA cited several studies which noted a correlation between mortality rates and long-term particula te pollution levels (EPA, 1986). These studies raised concerns for possible prem ature death resulting from particulate pollution, and their results were considered part of the determination of the margin of safety for the standard.

However, in 2006, after evaluating more recent long-term PM 10 exposure research studies, EPA concluded that the long-term heal th impacts were mainly related to exposure to fine-sized particles 2.5 microns or less in diameter (71 FR 61198). The annual PM 10 standard was no longer warranted with the annual PM 2.5 standard in place. In addition, EPA mentioned that the 24-hour PM 10 standard “that woul d reduce 24-hour exposures would also likely reduce long-te rm average exposures, thus providing somePM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Introduction Page 1-3 margin of safety against the possibility of health effects associated with long-term exposures.”

Economic and Social Costs

Adverse health effects related to ambient pa rticulate matter exposure result in a number of economic costs and social consequences. These include increased medical costs, hospital admissions, work loss days, school absences, caregiver burdens, and premature deaths. The economic valuation esti mates for the health impacts associated with particulate matter exposures are in t he billions of dollars per year for the Sacramento region, mainly due to premature deaths.

1.3 Description of Sacramento County PM 10 Nonattainment Area

Physical Geography (SMAQMD, 2004)

Sacramento County encompasses approximately 994 square miles and is located at the southern end of the Sacramento Valley, which is in the northern portion of California’s Central Valley (see Figure 1. 1). It is bounded by the Coas t and Diablo ranges on the west and the Sierra Nevada on the east.

The prevailing wind is from the southwest, primarily because of marine breezes through the San Francisco Bay Delta, although during winter, the sea breezes diminish and winds from the north occur more frequently. Be tween late spring and early fall, a layer of warm air often overlays a layer of cool air fr om the San Francisco Ba y Delta, resulting in an inversion. Typical winter inversions ar e formed when the sun heats the upper layers of air, trapping below them air that has been cooled by contact with th e colder surface of the earth during the night. Calm condition s and poor ventilation allow for increased ambient air pollution concentrations (CARB, 1994).

Sacramento County hosts an arra y of habitat types, which include annual grasslands and croplands, valley-foothill riparian habita t, valley-foothill woodlands, freshwater emergent wetlands, and riverine habitat. Su rface water resources in Sacramento County include the Sacramento, American, Cosumnes, and Mokelumne Rivers, all of which flow to the Sacr amento-San Joaquin Delta.

Population and Economy

The region has experienced tremendous growth in populatio n over the past twenty years. From 1990–2009, Sacram ento County’s population gr ew from approximately 1,041,000 to 1,433,000 (Cal ifornia Department of Finance, 2009). A broad spectrum of land uses characterizes the developed land s. The Sacramento C ounty infrastructure has a well-established and comprehensive transportation system, which is dominated by highways and freeways. Down town Sacramento has high-ri se office buildings and high density housing, surrounded by suburban development.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Introduction Page 1-4 The major economic activity in the area is government services and retail trade, along with significant agricultural, industrial, and construction indus tries. The agricultural lands in Sacramento County are dominat ed by crop lands in the va lley and rangelands in the foothills and produce a wi de variety of crops.

Figure 1.1: Location of Sacramento County

1.4 Purpose of Plan

The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Qualit y Management District (SMAQMD) has prepared this plan in compliance with the feder al Clean Air Act requirements pertaining to PM 10 nonattainment areas. In 2002, EPA offi cially determined that Sacramento County had attained the PM 10 NAAQS by the attainment deadline (67 FR 7082). The purpose of this plan is to fulfill the requi rements for EPA to redesignate Sacramento County from nonattainment to attainment of the PM 10 NAAQS by preparing the following plan elements and tasks:

 Document the extent of the PM 10 problem in Sa cramento County.

 Determine the emission inventory sources contributing to the PM 10 problem.

 Identify the appropriate control measures that achieved attainment of the PM 10 NAAQS.

 Demonstrate maintenance of the PM 10 NAAQS.

 Request formal redesignation to attainment of the PM 10 NAAQS.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Introduction Page 1-5 1.5 Plan Development and Public Review Process

The SMAQMD is a local governm ent air quality regulatory agen cy for the jurisdiction of Sacramento County. This PM 10 plan is developed for the Sacramento County nonattainment area by the SMAQMD staff wit h participation from the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) and the Ca lifornia Air Resources Board (CARB). SACOG is the Metropolitan Pla nning Organization (MPO) fo r the Sacramento region, representing six counties and over 20 member cities . SACOG develops regional transportation and land use development plans and acts as a forum for governmental and public input on regional issues.

Because of recent changes in the r egional travel demand model data used in transportation plans, SACOG was a key contri butor in the prepar ation of the updated motor vehicle emissions inventory and trans portation emissions budgets. CARB staff also provided information regarding mobile and area-wide emissions inventory category estimates, state and federal control measures, and PM 10 air quality data analysis.

Existing public working groups are used to disseminate information and seek input from a wide variety of key community stakehol ders during the devel opment and review process of the draft plan. SACOG’s Regional Planning Part nership is an advisory committee with close to 100 representatives fr om local, regional, state, federal, and tribal governments, as well as representatives of busine ss, environmental, and minority organizations and associati ons (SACOG, 2010). This venue, which includes local, regional, state, and federal air quality and government agencies, serves as the interagency consultation process to provi de comments on transportation conformity budgets and issues.

A minimum of 30 days for a public hearing noti ce and review period is needed to solicit comments on the proposed PM 10 plan. This outreach includes publishing a public notice in the Sacramento Bee newspap er and mailing a notice to several thousand interested parties and over 2,000 e-mail addresses. T he Board of Directors for the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District is required to hold a public hearing prior to considering approval of the PM 10 plan, which is scheduled for October 28, 2010.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Introduction Page 1-6 1.6 Overview of Plan Contents

This document includes the information and analyses to fulfill the federal PM 10 air quality implementation, maintenance, and redesignation pl anning requirements for the Sacramento County nonattainment area. The following chart contains a brief description of each chapter in this plan.

Chapter 1 Provides an introduction that contains background information on PM 10 air pollution, health impacts, Sacramento County nonattainment area, purpose and development of the plan. Chapter 2 Explains the current PM 10 nonattainment status and defines federal Clean Air Act PM 10 requirements for implementation, maintenance and redesignation to attainment. Chapter 3 Analyzes PM 10 air quality data and trends in Sacramento County. Chapter 4 Presents the PM 10 and precursor pollutants baseline emissions inventory and the emission forecasts that are based on existing control strategies and growth assumptions. Chapter 5 Describes control measure requirements and identifies the appropriate control measures that achieved attainment and will provide for maintenance of the PM 10 NAAQS. Chapter 6 Includes the data analysis and provisions for a maintenance demonstration. Chapter 7 Discusses the maintenance contingency plan. Chapter 8 Assesses the motor vehicle emissions budgets for transportation conformity purposes. Chapter 9 Evaluates the fulfillment of the redesignation requirements. Chapter 10 Summarizes the key points and major conclusions of this report.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Introduction Page 1-7 1.7 References

CARB. California Surface Wind Climatology , Aerometric Data Division, CA: California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA [1994.] p. 13.

California Department of Finance, Revised Historical City, C ounty and State Population Estimates . CA: California Department of Finance, Sacramento, CA [2009.]

Dassen, W., et al, Decline in Children’s Pulmonary Function During an Air Pollution Episode . Journal of Air Pollution Contro l Associations, 36:1223-1227, [1986.]

Dockery, D.W., et al. Change in pulmonary function in children associated with air pollution episodes . Journal of Air Pollution C ontrol Associations, 32:937-942, 1982.

SACOG. Regional Planning Partnersh ip and list of attendees. Sacramento, CA: Sacramento Area Council of Governm ents, Sacramento, CA. Web: 21 September 2010 <http://www.sacog.org/about/> and <http://www.sacog.org/ calendar/2010/07/28/rpp/>

SMAQMD. Initial Study for Sacramento Ar ea Regional Federal Ozone State Implementation Plan Update . Sacramento, CA: Sacr amento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, Sacr amento, CA [2004.] p. 7-8.

USEPA. Second Addendum to Air Q uality Criteria for Part iculate Matter and Sulfur Oxides: Assessment of Newly Avai lable Health Effect Information . EPA-600/8- 86-020F, [1986.]

USEPA. Designation of Areas for Ai r Quality Planning Purposes , Federal Register, Volume 58, December 21, 1993, p. 67334.

USEPA. Clean Air Act Attainment Finding; Bullhead City and Payson Nonattainment Areas, AZ; Sacramento and San Ber nardino Nonattainment Areas, CA; Particulate Matter of 10 Microns or Less (PM-10) , Federal Register, Volume 67, February 15, 2002, p. 7082-7085.

USEPA, National Ambient Air Quality St andards for Particulate Matter , Federal Register, Volume 71, October 17, 2006, p. 61198.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Federal Clean Air Act Requirements Page 2-1 2. FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT REQUIREMENTS

2.1 PM 10 Standards

On July 1, 1987, EPA revised the NAAQ S for particulate matter with a new PM 10 indicator as the basis for the standards (5 2 FR 24634). The level of the federal PM 10 standards was set at 150 μ g/m 3 for a 24-hour average concentration 1 and 50 μ g/m 3 for an annual average concentration. The new PM 10 standards replaced the previous standards for total suspended particulates (TSP less than 30 microns in diameter). The change from the TSP standards to PM 10 was in response to updated information from health officials indicating adverse hum an health effects from the smaller PM 10 penetrating deep into the lower respiratory tract and lung tissue.

In 1997, EPA retained the existing 24-hour and annual PM 10 standards after reviewing the PM NAAQS. However, EPA expanded the PM N AAQS by adding new PM 2.5 standards based on updated human health research impacts from fine-sized particles 2.5 microns or less in diameter. PM 2.5 standards were set at 65 μ g/m 3 for a 24-hour average concentration and 15 μ g/m 3 for an annual average concentration (62 FR 38652).

In 2006, EPA reaffirmed the 24-hour PM 10 standard after reviewing the air quality criteria and PM NAAQS again. EPA concluded that the resear ch “evidence continues to support a 24-hour averaging time for a coarse particulate standard, based primarily on evidence suggestive of associations bet ween short-term (24-hour) exposure and morbidity effects and, to a lesser degree, mort ality” (71 FR 61198). However, effective December 18, 2006, EPA revoked the annual average PM 10 standard based on the more recent studies indicating long-term h ealth impacts were mainly related to PM 2.5 exposure. EPA also tightened the 24-hour average PM 2.5 standard by lowering the concentration level from 65 μ g/m 3 to 35 μ g/m 3 (71 FR 61202).

2.2 Nonattainment Designation

Upon enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Ac t Amendments, Sacr amento County was designated as unclassifiable for PM 10 pursuant to Section 107(d)(4)(B)(iii) of the Clean Air Act. However, during 1989 and 1990, two different SMAQMD PM 10 monitors (Del Paso Manor and Stockton Boulevard site s) exceeded and violated the 24-hour PM 10 standard. A violation at a monitoring site occurs if the expecte d number of 24-hour NAAQS exceedance days per ca lendar year is greater t han 1.0 averaged over 3 consecutive years of represent ative data (40 CFR 50, App endix K). Effective January 20, 1994, EPA took final action to redesig nate Sacramento County as a “moderate” nonattainment area for the PM 10 NAAQS (58 FR 67334). Monitoring sites in Sacramento County have not violated the annual PM 10 NAAQS.

1 When comparing a 24-hour average PM 10 concentration to the federal standard of 150 μ g/m 3 , the concentration value is rounded to the nearest 10 μ g/m 3 . Therefore, the minimum concentration exceeding the 24-hour standard is 155 μ g/m 3 , which rounds to 160 μ g/m 3

.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Federal Clean Air Act Requirements Page 2-2 Areas designated as nonattainment afte r the enactment of the 1990 CAAA and classified as moderate must attain the PM 10 NAAQS “as expeditiously as practicable but no later than the end of the sixth calendar year after the area's designation as nonattainment” (CAA Section 188( c)(1)). Therefore, Sacramento County’s attainment deadline for the PM 10 NAAQS was established as December 31, 2000.

2.3 Attainment Determination

Effective March 18, 2002, EPA officially determined that Sacramento County had attained the PM 10 NAAQS by the attain ment deadline based on PM 10 air quality monitoring data recorded during 1998 to 2000 (67 FR 7082). The attainment determination was based on the following tabl e which summarizes the one-in-six day PM 10 data collected at five moni toring sites in Sacramento County and reported to EPA. The PM 10 concentrations showed no meas ured exceedances of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS or violations of the annual standard betw een 1998 and 2000. Sinc e then, the air monitoring network includes six PM 10 stations throughout Sa cramento County, and there have not been any meas ured violations of the PM 10 NAAQS. However, this determination of attainment by itself does not redesignate Sa cramento County to attainment for PM 10 and additional planning requirements need to be fulfilled.

Table 2.1: Summary of PM 10 Air Quality Data – Sacramento County 1998-2000

Monitoring site Highest 24 hour concentration ( μ g/m 3 ) Annual average ( μ g/m 3 ) 3-year annual average ( μ g /m 3 ) 1998 1999 2000 1998 1999 2000 North Highlands 73 73 82 22 26 23 24 Del Paso Manor 104 141 58 22 27 21 23 Sacramento – Health Center 79 88 86 23 25 31 26 Sacramento – Branch Center Rd 81 86 56 27 33 27 29 Sacramento – T Street 75 99 64 23 29 25 26

2.4 Clean Air Act PM 10 Planning Requirements

Various federal Clean Air Act pl anning requirements apply to PM 10 moderate nonattainment areas. Key sections of the Clean Air Act that relate to nonattainment planning requirements for t he preparation of this PM 10 plan include:

 Section 110(a) and Section 172 of the Clean Air Act contain general nonattainment planning provisions, regarding the public revi ew, adoption, submittal, and content of implementation plans.

 Section 189 of the Clean Air Act specifies additional plan provisions for particulate matter nonattainment areas.

 Section 175A of the Clean Air Act pertain s to the submittal of maintenance plans.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Federal Clean Air Act Requirements Page 2-3  Section 107(d)(3) includes requirements fo r redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment.

 General Preamble for the Im plementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 provides a detailed discussion of EPA’s interpretation of the Title I requirements (57 FR 13498).

2.5 State Implementation Plan

State and air district commitments for attain ing and maintaining t he NAAQS are outlined in a planning document known as the state implem entation plan (SIP). The purpose of a SIP is to identify a comprehensive stra tegy needed to achieve the NAAQS by the mandated deadline and r equirements. The rules and pr ograms in a SIP are then implemented over time to reduce the emissions that go into the ai r, reducing unhealthful concentrations of air pollut ants and helping areas reach f ederal air quality standards. The following SIP elements are briefly described:

Emissions Inventory

The SIP must include, “a comprehensive, accurate, curr ent inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutant or pollu tants in such area, including such periodic revisions as the [EPA] may determine necessary to assure that the requirements of this part are met.” [CAA Section 172(c)(3)]

The SIP needs to “identify and quantify the emissions, if any, of any such pollutant or pollutants which will be allowed, in accor dance with [Section 173(a)(1)(B) of the Clean Air Act], from the construction and operation of major new or m odified stationary sources in each such area.” T he SIP needs to “demonstrate to the satisfaction of the [EPA] that the emissions qua ntified for this purpose will be consistent with the achievement of reasonable further progress and will not interfere with attainment of the applicable national ambi ent air quality standard by the applicable attainment date.” [CAA Section 172(c)(4)]

Control Measures

The SIP must “provide for the implementa tion of all reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as practicable (i ncluding such reductions in emissions from existing sources...through the adopt ion, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology)”. [CAA Section 172(c)(1)]

“Such plan provisions shal l include enforceable emission limitations, and such other control measures, means or techniques (inc luding economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions of emissi on rights), as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to provide for attainment...by the applicable attainm ent date”. [CAA Section 172(c)(6)]PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Federal Clean Air Act Requirements Page 2-4 Attainment Demonstration

The SIP needs to include a demonstration (i ncluding air quality modeling) that will provide for attainment of the national am bient air quality standar ds by the applicable attainment date, or a demonstrat ion that attainment by such date is impracticable. [CAA Section 189(a)(1)(B)]

Reasonable Further Progress

The SIP is required to contai n quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every 3 years until the area is redesignated to attainment and which demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) in emission reductions toward attainment by the applicable date. [CAA Section 172(c)(2) and Section 189(c)(1)]

Contingency Measures

The SIP needs to include “specific measures to be undertaken if the area fails to make reasonable further progress, or to attain the national primar y ambient air quality standard by the [applicable] attainment date”. Contingency measures are to “take effect in any such case without further action by the State or the [EPA].” [CAA Section 172(c)(9)]

Permits for New and Modified Major Stat ionary Sources (New Source Review)

The SIP needs to include provisions for a permit program to requi re permits for the construction and operation of new or modified major stationary sources anywhere in the nonattainment area, in accordance with Section 173, Permit Requirements. [CAA Section 172(c)(5) and Se ction 189(a)(1)(A)]

In addition, the SIP must include provisions to ensure that the control requirements applicable to “major stat ionary sources of PM 10 shall also apply to major stationary sources of PM 10 precursors, except where the [EPA ] determines that such sources do not contribute significantly to PM 10 levels which exceed the [NAAQS] in the area.” [CAA Section 189(e)]

After EPA redesignates Sacramento C ounty to attainment for the PM 10 NAAQS, major stationary sources will be subjec t to the prevention of signi ficant deterioration (PSD) requirements under Section 160 et seq. of the Clean Air Act, rather than the new source review (NSR) nonattainment area provisions of Section 173 (Calcagni, 1992, p. 6).

Milestone Progress Reports

After an RFP milestone date occurs as specif ied in the implementat ion plan, a progress tracking report must be submitted to EPA t hat demonstrates all appl icable measures inPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Federal Clean Air Act Requirements Page 2-5 the plan have been implemented and the RFP emission reduction target has been met. [CAA Section 189(c)(2)]

2.6 Clean Data Policy

EPA issued a Clean Data Policy on May 10, 1995, which describes the process by which EPA will determine that an area has a ttained the ozone standard and that certain SIP planning requir ements will not apply so long as the area re mains in attainment (Seitz, 1995). The area must continue to operate an appropriate air quality monitoring network to verify its attainment status. Th is policy is a determinat ion that certain SIP requirements are written so as to be applicabl e only if the area is not attaining the standard. EPA interprets that th is Clean Data Policy is applic able to the SIP provisions of the CAA with regard to:

 Attainment demonstrations,

 Rate of progress plans or reas onable further progress demonstrations,

 Contingency measures (related to meeting attainment and RFP),

 Reasonably available contro l measures (RACM) analysis,

 Milestone progress reports, and

 Sanction clocks that had been started for fa ilure to meet related SIP submittal requirements.

In addition, the Clean Data Policy states, “The issuance of a determination pursuant to this policy will have no immediate impact on the way conformity is demonstrated. Areas will continue to demonstrate conformity us ing the build/no-build test and [no-greater]- than-1990 test...(and attainment/R FP SIP, if one wit h a budget has been submitted).” Since areas that are subject to a clean data determination ar e not required to submit an RFP or attainment demonstr ation SIP, those areas wil l not generally have approved budgets until a maintenance plan is approved as part of the approval of a redesignation request. Areas must still produce a basic emi ssions inventory, and the applicable tests for general conformity still apply.

EPA’s Clean Data Policy interpretations of the Clean Air Act were init ially set forth in its General Preamble discussions of the relevant provisions of Title I, Part D. EPA incorporated the statutory interpretation set fo rth in the Clean Data Policy in a final rule, 40 CFR 51.918, to implement the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (70 FR 71644). On December 14, 2004, EPA issued a memo randum that applied the Clea n Data Policy to fine particulate matter NAAQS (Page, 2004). EPA also incorporated the statutory interpretation set forth in th e Clean Data Policy in a final rule, 40 CFR 51.1004(c), to implement the PM 2.5 NAAQS (72 FR 20603).

In addition, EPA has applied the Clean Data Policy to the PM 10 NAAQS and stated, “Our interpretation that an area that is atta ining the standards is relieved of obligations to demonstrate RFP and to provide an a ttainment demonstration and contingency measures pursuant to part D of the CAA, pertains whether the standard is PM 10 , ozone,PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Federal Clean Air Act Requirements Page 2-6 or PM 2.5 ” (71 FR 13024). Furthermore, EPA interp rets “that RACM requirements are a component of an area’s attainment demonstr ation. Thus, for the same reason the attainment demonstration no longer applie s...the requirement for RACM no longer applies” (71 FR 6354).

Therefore, under EPA’s Clean Data Policy, the following implement ation plan elements are not applicable for an ar ea that has already attai ned the NAAQS and are not included in this PM 10 plan:

 Attainment demonstration,

 Rate of progress plan or reasonabl e further progress demonstrations,

 Contingency measures (related to meeting attainment and RFP),

 Reasonably available contro l measures (RACM) analysis.

The Clean Data Policy is the approach being pursued for Sacramento County’s PM 10 planning requirements. Any requi rements solely related to des ignation or classification, such as new source review, remain in effect until the area is redesignated to attainment. Prevention of significant deterioration r equirements will apply to Sacramento County after redesignation.

2.7 Implementation Plan Submittal Elements

The following implementation plan elements have been fulfilled and are included or verified in this PM 10 plan:

1. The area must continue to operate an appropriate PM 10 air quality monitoring network in order to verify its attainment status.

Chapter 3 of this PM 10 plan includes and documents a description of the current PM 10 air quality monitoring network in Sacramento County in a ccordance with 40 CFR 58 – Ambient Air Quality Surveillance.

2. A comprehensive, accurate, current inventor y of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutants must be completed for the area.

Chapter 4 of this PM 10 plan includes and documents a comprehensive updated inventory of actual emissions from all sources of PM 10 and nitrogen oxides (NO X ), a precursor pollutant of PM 10 in Sacramento County.

3. The control measures for the area, which were responsible for bringing the area into attainment, must be approved by EPA as meeting reasonably available control measures (RACM) and reasonably avai lable control technology (RACT) requirements.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Federal Clean Air Act Requirements Page 2-7 Chapter 5 of this PM 10 plan includes and describes the PM 10 and applicable PM 10 precursor control measures implement ed in Sacramento County, which were responsible for bringing the area into attain ment. It is anticipat ed that EPA will approve these measures as meeting RACM and RACT requirements.

4. Provide for a permit program to require permits for the construction and operation of new or modified major stationary sources of PM 10 and applicable PM 10 precursors (new source review) anywher e in the nonattainment area.

Chapter 5 of this PM 10 plan includes and describes the new source review permit program to require permits for the construc tion and operation of new or modified major stationary sources of PM 10 and applicable PM 10 precursors.

2.8 Maintenance Plan Requirements

Section 175A of the Clean Air Act contai ns planning requirements pertaining to the general framework of a maintena nce plan. A maintenance plan is a SIP revision that is submitted after a nonattainment area attains the applicable national primary ambient air quality standard in order to dem onstrate future compliance. An approved maintenance plan is one of the requirements for redesig nating a nonattainment area to attainment. CAA Section 175A requires a maintenance plan to:

 Provide for maintenance of the NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation is approved by EPA.

 Contain such additional measures, if any , as may be necessary to ensure such maintenance.

 Include contingency provisions to ensure pr ompt correction of an y violation of the standard after redesignation.

 Provide a contingency measur e to implement all control measures contained in the nonattainment SIP.

CAA requirements also specif y that a subsequent maintenance plan is required 8 years after redesignation. This se cond plan must provide for ma intenance of the NAAQS for 10 more years after expiration of t he first 10-year maintenance period.

In 1992, EPA issued additional discussion, clarif ication and guidanc e on requirements for redesignation requests and maintenanc e plans (Calcagni, 1992). This Calcagni memorandum includes the foll owing additional provisions needed in a maintenance plan:

 Attainment emissions inventory to identify the level of emissions in the area sufficient to attain the NAAQS.

 Maintenance demonstration of the NAAQS either by show ing that future emissions will not exceed the attainment level or by modeling to show future emissions will not cause a violation of the standard.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Federal Clean Air Act Requirements Page 2-8  Verification of continued attainment th rough operation of an ap propriate air quality monitoring network.

 Tracking the progress of the maintenance demonstration by a periodic review or update of the factors and assumptions used in the maintenance demonstration.

2.9 Redesignation Requirements

Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act contains the ap plicable provisions for approving a redesignation request to attainm ent. EPA must determine that the following redesignation requirements have been met for an area:

1. Attained the applicable NAAQS without any further violations. 2. Has a fully approved applicable implem entation plan under C AA Section 110(k). 3. Demonstrate that the ai r quality improvement is due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions. 4. Has a fully approved maintenance plan, including a contingency plan, for the area pursuant to CAA Section 175A. 5. Met all relevant requirem ents under CAA Secti on 110 and Part D, including Section 172(c) nonattainment plan requirements and Section 176(c)(4) SIP conformity criteria and procedures.

For an area for which an attainment determi nation has been made, the SIP submissions discussed and suspended under the Clean Data Policy would not be required for the area’s redesignation request to be approved since they would no longer be considered applicable requirements under C AA Section 107(d)(3)(E).

Upon redesignation to attainment for the PM 10 NAAQS, new source review permitting requirements for major stationary sources would no longer apply and prevention of significant deterioration requi rements would be in effect as required by SMAQMD Rule 203 – Prevention of Signifi cant Deterioration.

2.10 References

Calcagni, John. Procedures for Processing Reques ts to Redesignate Areas to Attainment , Air Quality Management Divisio n, EPA, September 4, 1992.

Page, Stephen D. Clean Data Policy for the Fine Partic le National Ambient Air Quality Standards , OAQPS, EPA, December 14, 2004.

Seitz, John S. Reasonable Further Progress, Attain ment Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard , OAQPS, EPA, May 10, 1995.

U.S. Code of Federal Regul ations, Title 40, Appendix K to Part 50, referenced November 17, 2009.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Federal Clean Air Act Requirements Page 2-9 USEPA. Revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standar ds for Particulate Matter

, Federal Register, Volume 52, July 1, 1987, p. 24634.

USEPA. General Preamble for the Implementati on of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 . Federal Register, Volume 57, April 16, 1992, p. 13498.

USEPA. Designation of Areas for Ai r Quality Planning Purposes , Federal Register, Volume 58, December 21, 1993, p. 67334.

USEPA. National Ambient Air Quality St andards for Particulate Matter , Federal Register, Volume 62, July 18, 1997, p. 38652-38760.

USEPA. Clean Air Act Attainment Finding; Bullhead City and Payson Nonattainment Areas, AZ; Sacramento and San Ber nardino Nonattainment Areas, CA; Particulate Matter of 10 Microns or Less (PM-10) , Federal Register, Volume 67, February 15, 2002, p. 7082-7085.

USEPA. Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard – Phase 2 , Federal Register, Volume 70, November 29, 2005, p. 71644-71646.

USEPA. Approval and Promulgation of Implement ation Plans; Designat ion of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes ; State of Arizona; Findi ng of Attainment for Ajo Particulate Matter of 10 Microns or Less (PM 10 ) Nonattainment Area; Determination Regarding Applicability of Certain Clean Air Act Requirements

, Federal Register, Volume 71, February 8, 2006, p. 6352-6356.

USEPA. Approval and Promulgation of Implement ation Plans; Designat ion of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Arizona; Pa rticulate Matter of 10 Microns or Less; Finding of Attainment for Yu ma Nonattainment Area; Determination Regarding Applicability of Certai n Clean Air Act Requirements , Federal Register, Volume 71, March 14, 2006, p. 13021-13025.

USEPA. National Ambient Air Quality St andards for Particulate Matter , Federal Register, Volume 71, October 17, 2006, p. 61198.

USEPA. National Ambient Air Quality St andards for Particulate Matter , Federal Register, Volume 71, October 17, 2006, p. 61202.

USEPA. Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule , Federal Register, Volume 72, April 25, 2007, p. 20586-20667.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

PM 10 Monitoring Network and Air Quality Data Page 3-1 3. PM 10 MONITORING NETWOR K AND AIR QUALITY DATA

3.1 Introduction to PM 10 Data

Particulate matter is the term fo r solid or liquid parti cles found in the air. Some particles are large or dark enough to be seen with the naked eye and can take the form as soot or smoke. Others are so small they can be detected only with an electron microscope. Because particles originate from a variet y of sources (cars, buses, diesel trucks (mobile), fireplaces, woodstoves, power pl ants (stationary), construction demolition, wind blown dust, etc.), their c hemical and physical compositions vary widely. Particulate matter can be directly emitted or can be formed in the atmo sphere when gaseous pollutants such as sulfur dioxide (SO 2) and nitrogen oxides (NO X ) react to form fine particles.

In 1987, EPA replaced the earlier total su spended particulate (TSP) air quality standard with a PM 10 standard. TSP is an outmoded regu latory measure of the mass concentration of particulate matter (PM) in community air. It was defined by the (unintended) size-selectivity of the inlet to the filter that collect ed the particles. Under windy conditions the mass t ended to be dominated by large win d-blown soil particles of relatively low toxicity.

The PM 10 standard focuses on smaller particles t hat are likely responsible for adverse health effects because of their ability to reac h the lower regions of the respiratory tract. The PM 10 standard includes particles with a diameter of 10 micr ometers or less (0.0004 inches or one-sixth the widt h of a human hair – Figure 3. 1). EPA's health-based national ambient air quality standards for PM 10 were set at 50 μg/m 3 (measured as an annual mean) and 150 μg/m 3 (measured as a daily concentration). However, effective December 18, 2006, EPA revo ked the annual average PM 10 standard based on more recent studies indicating long-term health impacts were mainly related to PM 2.5 exposure.

Figure 3.1: Human Hair DiameterPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

PM 10 Monitoring Network and Air Quality Data Page 3-2 Table 3.1 below shows the sta ndard set forth by EPA for PM 10

Pollutant Primary Standard Averaging Times Secondary Standard
Particulate Matter (PM 10 ) Revoked Annual (Arith. Mean) 150 μ g/m 3 24-hour Same as Primary

EPA determined that the Sacramento PM 10 nonattainment area attained the PM 10 NAAQS as of Decem ber 31, 2000. The PM 10 concentrations reported at the time included five different monitoring sites, which showed no measured exceedances of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS between 1998 and 2 000. There are currently six monitoring sites in Sacramento County that collect PM 10 data. Although the area has not been officially re-designated, it has not violated these standards sinc e the 2000 attainment determination.

3.2 PM 10 Monitoring Network

The District operates a network of PM monitors for use in air quality planning and to meet federal requir ements. Federal regulations require PM 10 monitoring networks to meet basic objectives:

 Monitoring the highest concentration of a pollutant

 Monitoring representative concentrati ons in areas of high population density

 Monitoring the impact of major pollutant sources

 Monitoring pollutant background concentrations

“Network Design Criteria for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring,” 2 Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Appendix D to Part 58 defines minimum moni toring requirements based on the population of the Metropolit an Statistical Area (MSA) and the design value for each NAAQS. Sacramento County is within the Sacramento-Arden Arcade-Roseville MSA. The minimum number of monitors for each pol lutant is based on t he MSA population as described in 40 CFR 58 Ap pendix D. Currently, the Sacramento-Arden ArcadeRoseville MSA has a population of 2.1 million. The monitori ng network within the MSA exceeds the minimum monitoring requirements for all criteria pollutants. Section 3.0 of the 2010 Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan for Sacramento County submitted to EPA July 19, 2010 discusses the minimum required monitors for PM 10 which is two to four monitors.

There are two types of PM 10 monitors used throughout the monitoring network: 1) the Federal Reference Method (FR M) filter-based high-volume size-selective inlet sampler (hi-vols or SSI), and 2) the Federal Equivalent Me thod (FEM) tapered element oscillating microbalance (T EOM), which measures PM 10 on a continuous basis. The

2 “ Network Design Criteria for Ambient Air Quality Moni toring,” Federal Register 40 Appendix D to Part 58PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

PM 10 Monitoring Network and Air Quality Data Page 3-3 schedule for PM 10 sample collection is one in six days for the FRM f ilter-based highvolume samplers, while the FEM TEOM mo nitors operate on a daily 24-hour schedule.

There are currently six PM 10 monitoring sites within Sacr amento County. The District operates five of the monitoring sites (Goldenland Court, Nort h Highlands, Del Paso Manor Site, Branch Center Rd #2, and Sto ckton Blvd). The California Air Resources Board operates the T Street monitoring site. FRM filte r-based high-volume samplers are located at all of the six sites listed above for PM 10 . Del Paso Manor and the Stockton Blvd operate both the FRM filter-based samp lers and FEM TEOM monitors. Table 3.2 provides a summary of the monitoring si tes in Sacramento County, and Figure 3.2 shows a map of the locations of Sa cramento County monitoring stations.

The District plans for modifications to the o peration of its air quality monitoring network for PM 10 are presented in the 20 10 Annual Air Monitoring Netw ork Plan. The District is evaluating relocating the PM 10 TEOM monitor at the Del Paso Manor site to the Goldenland Court site. The District is also c onsidering the possibili ty of shutting down the PM 10 SSI and PM 10 TEOM monitors at the Stockton Blvd site. This site’s PM 10 SSI monitor is not required, and TE OM data is not usable for fo recasting or analysis due to potential inaccuracies during the winter ti me when there is wood combustion. The SMAQMD older model TEOM monitors cont ain a heater for reducing moisture, which can remove volatile compounds from ambi ent air samples (such as those in wood smoke). In addition, the District is evaluat ing the possibility of shutting down the PM 10 SSI monitors at the Goldenl and Court and the North Highl ands sites as they are not required. The maintenance plan commits to continue to maintain and operate a PM 10 ambient monitoring network in Sacramento County that meet s or exceeds the minimum monitoring requirements.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

PM 10 Monitoring Network and Air Quality Data Page 3-4 Table 3.2: Summary of Monito ring Sites in Sacramento County

List of Monitoring Sites Within Sacramento County Site Name Purpose AQS ID Pollutants/Parameters Monitored 3

Branch Center Rd #2 3847 Branch Center Road SLAMS 06-067-0284 PM 10 -SSI

Elk Grove - Bruceville Road 12490 Bruceville Road SLAMS/ PAMS 06-067-0011 O 3 ,NO 2 ,Total NMHC, Speciated VOC, BAM PM 2.5 , Ambient Temp., Wind Direction, Wind Speed, Relative Humidity , Barometric Pressure, Precipitation, Ultraviolet Radiation, Solar Radiation, Upper Level Meteorology (Wind Dir., Wind Speed, Virtual Temp.)

Del Paso Manor 2701 Avalon Drive SLAMS/ PAMS/ STN/ SPM 06-067-0006 O 3 ,CO,NO 2 , SO 2 ,Total NMHC, Speciated VOC, Carbonyl, BAM PM 2.5 , TEOM PM 10 , PM 2.5 -FRM (main & collocated), PM 10 -SSI (main & collocated), Speciated PM 2.5 (SASS), Black Carbon, Scattering Coeff., Ambient Temp., Wind Direction, Wind Speed, Relative Humidity, Solar Radiation El Camino – Watt 3535 El Camino SLAMS 06-067-0007 CO

Folsom-50 Natoma 50 Natoma Street SLAMS/ PAMS 06-067-0012 O 3 ,NO 2 ,Total NMHC, Speciated VOC, BAM PM 2.5 , Ambient Temp., Wind Direction, Wind

Speed, Relative Humidity, Solar Radiation

Goldenland Court SLAMS/PAMS 06-067-0014 O 3, CO, NO 2 , Total NMHC, PM 10 -SSI, Ambient Temp, Wind Direction, Wind Speed, Relative Humility, Solar Radiation North Highlands 7823 Blackfoot Way SLAMS/ SPM 06-067-0002 O 3 ,CO,NO 2, SO 2 ,PM 10 -SSI

Stockton Blvd 2221 Stockton Blvd SLAMS 06-067-4001 PM 2.5 -FRM, TEOM PM 10 , PM 10 -SSI Sloughhouse Road 7250 Sloughhouse Road SPM 06-067-5003 O 3, Wind Direction, Wind Speed, PM 2.5 (E-BAM, winter PM 2.5 SPM study)

T Street 1309 T Street SLAMS 06-067-0010 O 3 , NO 2 , PM 10 -SSI, BAM PM 2.5 , PM 2.5 -FRM, Speciated PM 2.5 (SASS), Ambient Temp., Wind Direction, Wind Speed, Relative Humidity, Barometric Pressure

Walnut Grove Tower Upper AirResearch (nonSLAMS site) N/A, nonSLAMS site Upper level ozone, Wind Direction, Wind Speed, Ambient Temp

Rancho Seco SPM (nonSLAMS site) N/A, nonSLAMS site PM 2.5 (E-BAM, winter PM 2.5 SPM study)

3 Definition of SLAMS – State and Local Monitoring St ations; NAMS – National Air Monitoring Station; PAMS – Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stati ons; STN – Speciation Trends Network, SPM – Suspended Particulate Matter; FRM – Federal Reference Method; BAM – Beta Attenuation Method; NMHC – Non-Methane Hydrocarbon; SSI – Size Selective Inlet; VOC – Volatile Organic CompoundPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

PM 10 Monitoring Network and Air Quality Data Page 3-5 Figure 3.2: Sacramento C ounty Monitoring StationsPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

PM 10 Monitoring Network and Air Quality Data Page 3-6 3.3 PM 10 Data Trends

Sacramento County was designated as nonattainment for PM 10 effective on January 20, 1994 (58 FR 67334). The PM 10 monitoring data showed that Sacramento County violated the 150 μ g/m 3 federal standard three days betw een the years of 1989 to 1991. Table 3.3 lists the 24-hour PM 10 exceedances.

Table 3.3: Sacramento County Exceedances Violating 24-Hour PM 10 Standard

Monitoring Site Date 24-Hour PM 10 Conc. Stockton Blvd. November 18, 1989 155 μ g/m 3 Stockton Blvd. December 18, 1989 158 μ g/m 3 Del Paso Manor December 25, 1990 187 μ g/m 3

Table 3.4 shows the historic al maximum 24-hour average PM 10 concentrations for the monitoring sites in Sacramento County fo r the years 1989-2009 collected by PM 10 SSI monitors. The highest 24-hour average value of 187 μ g/m 3 was from the nonattainment designation period in 1990. The lowest peak 24-hour PM 10 value of 58 μ g/m 3 was monitored in 2004. T he annual peak monitoring site changes from year to year throughout the 21-year period, which s uggests the potential for elevated PM 10 concentrations is mainly caused by em issions from area-wide and mobile source activities in the Sacrament o area. The peak 1999 24-hour PM 10 concentration of 141 μ g/m 3 occurred on July 5 th at the Del Paso Manor m onitoring site, and was likely impacted by emissions from F ourth of July fireworks.

Table 3.4: PM 10 Historical Maximum 24-Hour Average Concentrations ( μ g/m 3 ) for Sacramento County Monito ring Sites, 1989-2009

Year Branch Center Rd CitrusHeightsSunrise

Blvd* Del Paso Manor Earhart Dr / A irport Rd / Goldenland Ct** North Highlands Stockton Blvd T Street Peak Site

1989 120 139 147 125 158 140 158 1990 113 153 187 96 95 140 187 1991 95 98 127 76 96 98 134 134 1992 71 89 84 62 79 85 72 89 1993 80 61 118 104 63 75 77 118 1994 83 98 76 92 94 99 99 1995 81 65 90 69 67 85 90 1996 68 83 59 65 86 75 86 1997 85 70 36 52 107 108 108 1998 81 104 93 73 79 75 104 1999 86 141 70 73 88 99 141 2000 56 59 73 82 86 64 86 2001 78 68 51 64 58 89 89 2002 77 86 73 53 85 77 86 2003 75 54 57 62 53 65 75 2004 45 49 47 44 44 58 58PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

PM 10 Monitoring Network and Air Quality Data Page 3-7 2005 61 72 56 110 64 53 110 2006 81 63 81 65 56 109 109 2007 56 70 94 56 56 53 94 2008 89 71 71 97 88 73 97 2009 76 45 48 33 45 47 76

*Citrus Heights-Sunrise Blvd site closed in 1993. **Earhart Dr site closed 1997 and relocated to Airport Rd si te 1998. Airport Rd site closed June 2008 and relocated to Goldenland Ct site. Data source: California Air Resources Board ADAM air quality data base of PM 10 FRM SSI monitors. Pre-1994 data supplemented by SMAQMD data.

The chart in Figure 3.3 plots the annual peak 24-hour average PM 10 concentration for the years 1989-2009 monitored in Sacramento County. Th is data shows no further violations of the 24-hour average PM 10 standard since the nonattainment designation period. The historical trend (broken) line indicates a dec line in the maximum 24-hour average PM 10 concentrations at the peak monitori ng site over the 21-year period. The trend line R 2 statistic (coefficient of determinatio n = 0.34) is low, which represents a weak correlation due to the variability in th e data caused by year-to-year differences in meteorological conditions and ai r pollutant emissions patterns.

Figure 3.3: Peak 24-Hour Average PM 10 Concentrations Sacramento County 1989-2009

R 2 = 0.345

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

YEARMaximum 24-Hour PM10concentration (g/m3)

Sacramento Peak Monitoring Site 24-Hour PM10 NAAQS Standard Linear (Sacramento Peak Monitoring Site)

Note: The 1999 peak concentration of 141 μ g/m 3 occurred on July 5 th at the Del Paso Manor monitoring site, and was likely impacted by emissions from Fourth of July fireworks.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

PM 10 Monitoring Network and Air Quality Data Page 3-8 PM 10 TEOM Data

As previously mentioned in this chapter, PM 10 data from tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) monitors is not used fo r analysis due to its potential inaccuracies during the winter time when there is wood co mbustion. In Sacramento County, daily TEOM monitors have recorded three separ ate days exceeding, the 24-hour average PM 10 NAAQS since they were first operated in winter 1992.

Three TEOM sampler sites exceeded PM 10 concentrations over 200 μ g/m 3 on October 4, 1995. The Earhart Drive site’s TEOM monitor measured a concentration of 156 μ g/m 3 on October 21, 1995. The Stockton Blvd-H ealth Department site’s TEOM monitor recorded a concentration of 160 μ g/m 3 on September 22, 2006. All of these TEOM exceedances of the 24-hour average PM 10 NAAQS were flagged and suspected of being caused by high wind events.

A violation at a monitoring site occurs if the expected number of 24-hour NAAQS exceedance days per calendar y ear is greater than 1.0 av eraged over 3 consecutive years of representative data (40 CFR 50 , Appendix K). The TE OM exceedance days are based on daily monitoring data sampli ng. The most exceedance days at TEOM sites in any 3-year period would include 1995, and it would be tw o. Therefore, the expected average number of exceedance days per calendar year was less than 1.0, and there was no violat ion of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS.

3.4 PM 10 Seasonality Analysis

A PM 10 seasonality analysis was conducted to evaluate whether the potential for high PM 10 was an all year round problem or a mo re seasonal occurrence in Sacramento County. Various meteorological factors 4 can vary during the year and play an important role in their effect on PM 10 levels.

Wind. Wind speed and direction are important, because they are indicative of the level of pollutant dispersi on. Predominant winds ar e from south-southwest during the spring, summer and fall. During the winter, predominant winds are coming from north-west and south-east. Wind speeds av erage around 8 miles per hour (mph) during the spring, summer, and early fall. Typica lly, during the late fall and winter, air flows experience a significant decrease in speed leading to ca lm conditions. The light winds and calm conditions result in higher ai r pollution potential, because pollutants can accumulate in the area for several days before being di spersed. Wind velocities average approximately 5.9 mph for the month of November and 6.4 mph for the month of December.

4 Average wind speed, precipitation, and temperature data for Sacramento from: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Data Center website at http://ols.nndc.noaa.gov/plolstore /plsql/olstore.prodspecific?pro dnum=C00095-PUB-A 0001#OVERVIEWPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

PM 10 Monitoring Network and Air Quality Data Page 3-9 Precipitation. Sacramento av erages approximately 18 inches of precipitation per year, with 90 percent of the annua l precipitation falling bet ween November and April. November through March averages greater than 2 inches of precipitation per month, while the summer months of June through September average less than 1/5 of an inch of precipitation per m onth. As expected, fugitive dust levels are greater in hot, dry months when little atmospheric moisture is present to control fu gitive dust, although studies have also suggested that secondary par ticulate (nitrates and sulfates) formation is enhanced with elevated humidit y levels. While elevated PM 10 levels have occasionally occurred when no measurable prec ipitation was present, elev ated levels have occurred with increased humidity.

Atmospheric Stability and Dispersion. Vert ical air movement is important in the dispersion of air pollutants. A temperature inversion acts as a nearly impenetrable lid to the vertical mixing of the at mosphere and inhibits the dilution of pollution near the ground. Inversions occur with great frequency throughout the year in the Sacramento Valley, and when they are accompanied by low wind speeds in the winter, pollution concentration levels can escalate.

Temperature. Sacramento te mperatures can reach a high of 115 degrees Fahrenheit during the summer, and can experience low readings of 18-20 degrees during winter months. Low temperatures in the presence of increased humidity are conducive to the formation of secondary particulates. In addi tion, as winter temperatures drop, more residents are likely to utilize wood combus tion devices such as fireplaces and woodstoves for residential heating, increasing PM 10 levels. Although in November 2007, the District began to implement a program (Rule 421) for mandatory episodic wood combustion curtailment on po or air quality days. Rule 421 has been shown to lower particulate matter during those poor air quality days. 5

PM 10 Air Quality Data. Figure 3.4 illustrates the monthly variation in average and peak PM 10 concentrations monitored in Sacr amento County for 1998-2008. Elevated concentrations generally occur in fall and win ter timeframes, with lowest concentrations during spring. The peaks shown in months of May and September may occur due to occasions of high winds comb ined with agricultural burning and agricultural tilling activities. Peaks during winter months typically occur from increased secondary formation of particulates and more resident ial wood combustion. This seasonality analysis of PM 10 FRM SSI data excluded the July 5, 1999 peak concentration of 141 μ g/m 3 at the Del Paso Manor monitoring site si nce it was likely impacted by emissions from Fourth of July fireworks.

5 “Report on Rule 421 – Mandatory Episodic Curtailment of Wood and Other Solid Fuel Burning Effectiveness,” SMAQMD staff report package for May 28, 2009 Board of Directors meeting.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

PM 10 Monitoring Network and Air Quality Data Page 3-10 Figure 3.4: Monthly Average and Peak PM 10 Concentration Values* for Sacramento County, 1998-2008

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
MonthConcentration (ug/m3)

Average PM10 1998-2008 2nd High 1st High

*PM 10 FRM SSI 24-hour filter average concentration ( μ g/m 3 ) Note: This seasonality analysis excluded the July 5, 1999 peak concentration of 141 μ g/m 3 at the Del Paso Manor monitoring site since it was likely impact ed by emissions from Fourth of July fireworks.

3.5 PM 10 Speciation Analysis

In 1999, the California Air Resources Board submitted a technical paper on wintertime PM 2.5 and PM 10 source apportionment for Sacrament o, California (Motallebi, 1999). The Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) modeling calcul ated source contributions for ambient air quality samples (>40 μg/m 3 ) collected from November to January for 1991-1996. Results show that the main source types that contribute to the wintertime PM 10 air quality problem in Sacr amento were (1) secondary particle s of ammonium nitrate [29%]; (2) motor vehicle exhaust (from cars, tr ucks, and buses fueled with diesel, leaded gasoline, and unleaded gasoline) [23%]; (3) wood smoke (from wood stoves, fire places, and agricultural burning) [17%]; a nd (4) fugitive dust (from tilling and roads) [12%].

Other sources that have contributed to a lesser extent were secondary particles of ammonium sulfate [4%] and traces of resi dual and crude oil combustion and marinegenerated aerosols (suggesting coastal transpor t). Approximately 15% of the measured PM 10 was not explained by the se lected source types at the 13 th and T Streets site.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

PM 10 Monitoring Network and Air Quality Data Page 3-11 Figure 3.5 is a pie chart of the average source contri butions to wintertime PM 10 1991- 1996 in Sacramento based on Chemical Mass Balance modeling for 24-hour PM 10 samples greater than 40 μ g/m 3

. Figure 3.5 Average CMB Source Estimates to 24-Hour PM 10 Sacramento 13 th and T Street, Winter 1991-1996

Secondary A mmonium Nitrate, 28.9%

Motor Vehicles, 22.9% Woodsmoke, 16.7% Unexplained, 14.6% Fugitive Dust, 12.5% Secondary A mmonium Sulfate, 4.4%

Average PM 10 mass = 51.5 μ g/m 3

3.6 PM 10 Air Quality Data Conclusions

PM 10 air quality data includes so lid and liquid particles with a diameter of 10 micrometers or less. EPA's hea lth-based national ambient ai r quality standard for 24- hour PM 10 is 150 μg/m 3 (measured as a daily concentrat ion). There are currently six PM 10 monitoring sites withi n Sacramento County.

EPA determined that the Sacramento PM 10 nonattainment area attained the PM 10 NAAQS as of December 31, 2000 since no exceedances of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS were measured between 1998 and 2000. The ai r quality monitoring data shows an overall declining trend in peak 24-hour PM 10 concentrations from 1989 to 2009. DataPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

PM 10 Monitoring Network and Air Quality Data Page 3-12 collected since the 2000 attainment determi nation continues to sh ow that Sacramento County meets the federal PM 10 standard.

A PM 10 seasonality analysis was conducted to evaluate whether the potential for high PM 10 was an all year round problem or a mo re seasonal occurrence in Sacramento County. Elevated concentrations during 19 98-2008 generally occur in fall and winter timeframes, with lowest c oncentrations during spring.

The Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) model was used to identify the source contributions for ambient air quality samples collected during November to January for 1991-1996. CMB results show that the main sour ce types contributing to wintertime PM 10 air quality in Sacramento were secondary ammonium nitr ate particles, motor vehicles exhaust, wood smoke, and fugitive dust.

Historically in Sacramento County , violations of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS have only occurred during late November and Decem ber. These peak concentrations typically occur due to wintertime weather condition s (e.g., atmospheric stability, low wind dispersion, and colder temperatures) conducive to PM 10 pollutant build up in conjunction with increased secondary formation of par ticulates and more residential wood combustion activities.

3.7 References

Motallebi, Nehzat. Wintertime PM 2.5 and PM 10 Source Apportionment at Sacramento California . Air and Waste Management A ssociation 1999: 25-34.

U.S. Code of Federal Regul ations, Title 40, Appendix K to Part 50, referenced November 17, 2009.

USEPA. Designation of Areas for Ai r Quality Planning Purposes , Federal Register, Volume 58, December 21, 1993, p. 67334.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissions Inventory Page 4-1 4. EMISSIONS INVENTORY

4.1 Introduction to Emissions Inventory

An emissions inventory is an account of pol lutant emissions that estimates the amount of air pollutants emitted from many sources. It is a star ting point used in air quality modeling and attainment demonstrations.

Although it is impractical to directly meas ure and compile emissions from a multitude of sources on a continuous basis, surveys and sampling may be used to increase understanding. For example, ac tual emission measurements are taken on a subset of devices to determine an average emission rate , source tests at stationary emission sources provide a snapshot of emission rate s that are then be appl ied over time, and field measurements of fugitive dust emi ssions taken at area sources (such as construction sites) are used to determine an average emission rate under a variety of conditions.

Emission factors, repr esentative values that relate th e quantity of emitted pollutants to an associated activity, may be developed by using the methods mentioned above, and are used to determine the total emissions. Thes e factors are multiplied by activity and control factors to estimate emissions from sources.

For this emissions inventory, 2008 is the base year, the year from wh ich the inventory is projected forward and backward. This baseline year is the year from which rate of progress calculations, control measure dev elopment, and other calculations are based.

More detailed information and emissions inv entory tables are prov ided in Appendix A – Emissions Inventory.

4.2 Emissions Inventory Requirements

Emissions are updated as part of the overall requirement for “plan revisions to include a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutants” under sections 172(c )(3) and 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act.

4.3 Precursors to PM 10

This maintenance plan includes an emi ssions inventory for total primary PM 10 and NO X as a PM 10 precursor. An analysis of inventories from the Calif ornia Air Resources Board (CEFS Version 1.06 Sacramento Metropolit an AQMD, Rf#980) along with Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) modeling analysis (Motall ebi, 1999) indicate that emissions of sulfur oxides (SO X ) from Sacramento County sources ar e an insignificant contributor to secondary particulate formation. Adju sting for the past decrease in SO X emissions, current ambient ammonium su lfate concentrations are estimated to be about 1 μ g/m 3

. Therefore, SO X emissions are not included in this chapter.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissions Inventory Page 4-2 4.4 Emissions Inventory Source Categories

Due to the large number and wide variety of emission processes and sources, a hierarchical system of emission inventory categories was developed for more efficient use of the data. The anthropogenic (man-made) emissions in ventory is divided into four broad categories: stationary s ources, area-wide sources, on-road mobile sources, and other mobile sources. Each of these major categories is subdivided into more descriptive subcategory sources. Each of these subcategories is further defined into more specific emission processes.

4.4.1 Stationary Sources

The stationary source categor y of the emissions inventory includes non-mobile, fixed sources of air pollution. They are main ly comprised of individual, industrial, manufacturing, and commercial facilities called “point sources.” The more descriptive subcategories include fuel combustion (e.g. electric utilities), waste disposal (e.g. landfills), petroleum production and marketi ng, and industrial processes (e.g. mineral). Industrial facility operators reported the proc ess and emissions data used to calculate emissions from point sources.

4.4.2 Area-Wide Sources

The area-wide sources inventory category in cludes aggregated emissions data from processes that are in dividually small and widespread or not well- defined point sources. The area-wide subcategories include residentia l fuel combustion, farming operations, construction and demolition activities, and road dust. Emissions from these sources are calculated from fuel usage, product sales, population, em ployment data, and other parameters for a wide range of activities th at generate air pollution across Sacramento County. More detailed informa tion on the area-wide source category emissions can be found on the CARB website: http://www.arb.ca.gov/e i/areasrc/areameth.htm

.

4.4.3 On-Road Motor Vehicles

The on-road motor vehicles inventory categor y consists of trucks, automobiles, buses, and motorcycles. EMFAC, the California m odel for on-road motor vehicle emissions, has undergone significant revision since t he EMFAC2002 model (version 2.2). As discussed below, this analysis re lies on updated model parameters.

Improved Motor Vehicle Em issions Model, EMFAC2007

The California Air Resources Board has c ontinued to update and improve its EMFAC on-road motor vehicle emissions model with extensive new data. CARB’s EMFAC2007PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissions Inventory Page 4-3 model (version 2.3) was released November 2006. The most significant improvements in EMFAC2007 include:

 Revised vehicle fleet information based on Ca lifornia Department of Motor Vehicles registration records specific to each coun ty, which reflect the growth in vehicle populations and the increasi ng average age of the fleet;

 Current base year and forecast year VMTs and speed distributions from regional transportation and metropolitan planning organizations;

 Redistribution of heavy-duty dies el truck populations based on VMT;

 Enhanced emission rate data for heavy-duty di esel trucks that include the results of testing larger sample sizes and recent model years; and

 New temperature and relative humidity profiles better repr esenting the meteorological conditions corresponding to air pollution problems.

EMFAC software and detailed information on t he vehicle emission model can be found on the CARB website: http://www.arb.ca.gov /msei/onroad/on-road.htm

. Vehicle Activity Data

On-road motor vehicle emission estimates for this plan were developed using the latest available transportation data and Ca lifornia’s new EMFAC2007 model 6 . The current and forecasted vehicle miles traveled (VMT) are from SACOG-supplied activity data (submitted to CARB July 2010) 7 based on transportation modeling prepared for the Sacramento region’s August 2009 MTIP analysis.

4.4.4 Other Mobile Sources

The emission inventory category for other mobile sources incl udes aircraft, trains, boats, and off-road vehicles and equipment used fo r construction, farming, commercial, industrial, and recreational activities. The OFFROAD2007 model was released November 2006 by CARB and us ed to calculate the air pollution emissions from offroad vehicles and equipment. In general, emi ssions are calculated based on estimated equipment population, engine size and load, usage activity, and emissions factors.

Aircraft, boat, and train emissions are es timated outside the OFFROAD model. More detailed information on the OFFROAD 2007 m obile emissions model can be found on the CARB website: http://www.arb.ba.gov/mse i/offroad/offroad.htm

6 ARB conducted off model runs to incorporate SACOG’s regional travel demand model forecasts prepared for the August 2009 MTIP analysis that were not included in the released EMFAC2007 model (version 2.3).

7 SACOG (Griesenbeck) e-mail transmitting travel data to CARB (Wade) and SMAQMD (Anderson) on July 12, 2010.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissions Inventory Page 4-4 4.5 Base Year Emissions and Forecasts

4.5.1 Anthropogenic Emissions Tables by Source Category

In Sacramento County, viol ations of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS have only occurred during late November and Dece mber. These peak concentrations typically occur due to wintertime weather conditions (e.g., atmos pheric stability, low wind dispersion, and colder temperatures) conducive to PM 10 pollutant build up in c onjunction with increased secondary formation of particulates and more re sidential wood combustion activities. Therefore, emissions inventories for PM 10 and NO X are compiled for an average winter day. Emissions of volatile organic co mpounds (VOC) and sulfur oxides (SO X ) are considered to be insignificant contributors to the formation of PM 10 in Sacramento County, based on previous CMB analyses (see page 3-11).

The following tables (Table 4. 1 and 4.2) show the anthropogen ic emissions inventory of PM 10 and NO X by source categories for Sacramento County. The emissions inventory is shown for average winter day in units of tons per day. Inventories were obtained from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) on September 3, 2010 for the years 2008, 2012, and 2022. 8

8 CARB (Ruiz) e-mail transmitting emissi ons inventory data for the Sacramento PM 10 Maintenance Plan to SMAQMD (Tollstrup) on September 3, 2010.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissions Inventory Page 4-5 Table 4.1 PM 10 Emissions (tons per day) Sacramento County

AVERAGE WINTER DAY INVENTORY 2008 2012 2022

TOTAL EMISSIONS 35 35 36

STATIONARY 1 1 2

AREAWIDE 30 30 31

ON-ROAD MOTOR VEHICLES 2 2 2

OTHER MOBILE 1 1 1

STATIONARY

Fuel Combustion 0.5 0.5 0.6

Industrial Processes 1.0 0.9 1.1

AREAWIDE

Residential Fuel Combustion 9.9 9.2 10.2 Farming Operations 2.4 2.3 2.1

Construction and Demolition 7.0 7.2 7.8

Paved Road Dust 6.1 6.2 6.4 Unpaved Road Dust 3.6 3.6 3.6

Other 1.2 1.3 1.4

ON-ROAD MOTOR VEHICLES 2.2 2.1 2.1

OTHER MOBILE

Aircraft 0.1 0.1 0.1

Trains 0.1 0.1 0.1

Boats 0.1 0.1 0.1 Equipment (Off-Road/Farm) 1.1 1.0 0.4

Data Source: CARB (Ruiz) e-mail transmitting emissions inventory data for the Sacramento PM 10 Maintenance Plan to SMAQMD (Tollstrup) on September 3, 2010.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissi ons Inventory Page 4-6 Table 4.2 NO X Emissions (tons per day) Sacramento County

AVERAGE WINTE R DAY INVENTORY 2008 2012 2022

TOTAL EMISSIONS 82 67 42

STATIONARY 4 4 4

AREAWIDE 4 4 4

ON-ROAD MOTOR VEHICLES 50 38 18

OTHER MOBILE 24 21 15

STATIONARY

Fuel Combustion 3.9 4.0 4.2

Industrial Processes 0.1 0.1 0.1

AREAWIDE

Residential Fuel Combustion 4.4 4.3 4.4 Managed Burning and Disposal 0.1 0.1 0.1

ON-ROAD MOTOR VEHICLES 49.6 37.6 18.1

OTHER MOBILE

Aircraft 2.0 2.3 3.0

Trains 3.4 3.3 3.6

Boats 0.5 0.5 0.5 Off-Road Equipment 16.0 13.6 7.6 Farm Equipment 1.8 1.4 0.6

Data Source: CARB (Ruiz) e-mail transmitting emissions inventory data for the Sacramento PM 10 Maintenance Plan to SMAQMD (Tollstrup) on September 3, 2010.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissions Inventory Page 4-7 4.5.2 2008 Base Year Emissions Distribution

The following pie chart (Figure 4.1) shows the 2008 PM 10 emission inventory categories as a percentage of the total inventory for Sacramento County. In 2008, the PM 10 inventory was mainly comprised of area-wi de sources – Paved Road Dust, Residential Fuel Combustion, and Construction & Demolition.

Figure 4.1 2008 PM 10 Emissions Distribution Sacramento County

35 Tons Per Day (avg. winter day)

Off-Road Equipment 3% Stationary Sources 4% Other Areawide Sources 3% Other Mobile Sources 7%

Unpaved Road Dust 10%

Paved Road Dust 17%

Construction & Demolition 20% Farming Operations 7% Residential Fuel

Combustion 29%

Data Source: CARB (Ruiz) e-mail transmitting emissions inventory data for the Sacramento PM 10 Maintenance Plan to SMAQMD (Tollstrup) on September 3, 2010.

The main contribution of NO X emissions comes from on-road motor vehicles and then other mobile sources. In 2008, on-road moto r vehicles accounted for about 60% of the NO X inventory, and other mobile s ources contributed almost 30%.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissions Inventory Page 4-8 4.6 Analysis of Emissions Inventory Forecasts

Figure 4.2, shows that between 2008 and 2022, combined values of PM 10 and NO X emissions are expected to steadily decline from 117 tons per day down to 78 tons per day, for a 33% decrease.

Figure 4.2 PM 10 & NO X Emissions and Forecasts Sacramento County

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

2008 2012 2022

Yeartons per day

NOx PM10

Data Source: CARB (Ruiz) e-mail transmitting emissions inventory data for the Sacramento PM 10 Maintenance Plan to SMAQMD (Tollstrup) on Se ptember 3, 2010 for average winter day.

An examination of the inventor y forecast indicates that the three largest categories of primary PM 10 will continue to be pav ed road dust, residential fuel combustion, and construction & demolition. Table 4.3 s hows that between 2008 and 2022, these subcategories of primary PM 10 are expected to increase.

Table 4.3 Major Categories of PM 10 Expected Increase Sacramento County for 2008-2022

PM 10 Inventory Category Paved Road Dust Residential Fuel Combustion Construction & Demolition

Tons Per Day 2008 2022 2008 2022 2008 2022
6.12 6.35 9.91 10.24 7.01 7.76

Percent Increase 4% 3% 11%PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissions Inventory Page 4-9 The increase in paved road dust is forecasted to correlate to the increase in centerline road miles. The increase in residential fuel combustion PM 10 is estimated by assumptions on population growth and the effe ctiveness of residential wood burning control measures. The PM 10 emissions increase from construction & demolition activities is related to the expected gr owth in population and economic development.

The NO X emissions inventory forecast indica tes a steady decline due to emission controls, despite expected increases in po pulation and vehicle m iles traveled (VMT). Between 2008 and 2022, NO X emissions from on-road motor vehicles are estimated to emit 50 tons per day down to 18 tons per da y, for a 64% decrease. Other mobile source NO X emissions decline from 24 tons per day down to 15 tons per day, for a 37% decrease.

Figure 4.3 illustrates trends in population and VMT. Between 2008 and 2022, population and VMT in Sacramento County are expe cted to increase by 24% and 21%, respectively. Figure 4.3 Population and Vehicle Mi les Traveled (VMT) Forecasts Sacramento County (1990-2035)

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

YEARPopulation (million)

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000VMT (Thousands of miles per day)

Population VMT

Data sources: 1. SACOG household population forecasts are from SACOG’s Tina Glover 7-3-08 email. Data are derived from the December 2007 SACSIM travel model. http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/trends/ems_trends_results.php 2. 2005 to 2035 VMT data are based on SACSIM regional travel demand model forecasts for SACOG’s August 2009 MTIP analysis (submittal to CARB, June 2010). Pre-2005 VMT data are from CARB EMFAC2007 model runs (version 2.3). 3. Yearly values not given in eit her SACOG report are interpolated.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissions Inventory Page 4-10 4.7 General Conformity and Airport Emissions Inventory

General conformity is the federal regulatory process fo r preventing major federal actions 9 or projects from interfer ing with air quality planning goa ls. Conformity provisions ensure that federal funding and approval are given only to those activities and projects that are consistent with stat e air quality implementation pl ans (SIPs). Conformity with the SIP means that major federal actions will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely a ttainment of the natio nal ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).

Current federal rules require t hat federal agencies use the emissions inventory from an approved SIP’s attainment or maintenance demonstration to support a conformity determination. The emissions inventory in this PM 10 implementation/maintenance plan may be used for general conformity purposes. A specific inventory for airport emissions is provided for the potential general confo rmity analysis of future airport expansions.

Sacramento County has prepared a master plan for future grow th in airport activities that shows an increase in emissions. The Sacramento County Airport System is comprised of four airports: Sacramento Inte rnational (SMF), Mather (MHR), Executive (SAC), and Franklin (F32). In addition, the C ounty Airport System manages the aviation activities at McClellan Airport on behalf of another County agency. Three private airports also operate in Sacramento Count y: Rancho Murieta, Rio Linda, and Sunset. 10

To facilitate future confo rmity determinations, the emissi ons from growth in airport activities are estimated for 2012 and 2022. The PM 10 and NO X airport emissions forecasts associated with aircraft oper ations and ground suppor t equipment in Sacramento County are pr ovided in Table 4.4

. This table reflects elementary mathematical rounding conventi on to nearest tenths, for exampl e 0.25 or greater is 0.3 and 0.24 or less is 0.2. Numbers less than 0.05 are rounded up to 0.1 to avoid the erroneous impression that the emissions are zero.

9 Federal actions are defined as any activity engaged in by a department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal government, or any activity that they supp ort, fund, license, permit, or approve, other than activities related to transportation plans, programs , and projects that are applicable to transportation conformity requirements. (40 CFR 93.152)
10 Information from Sacramento County Airpor t System; comment letter dated October 24, 2008.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissions Inventory Page 4-11 Table 4.4 Airport (Aircraft Operations + Ground Support Equipment) Emissions a for Sacramento County Only

Year Operations PM 10 (tons/day) NO X (tons/day)

2012 Aircraft Operations Only 0.1 2.3 Ground Support Equipment 0.1 0.3

2022 Aircraft Operations Only 0.2 0.1 3.0 Ground Support Equipment 0.1 0.2

a Data Source: CARB CEFS Version 1.06 Sacrament o Metropolitan AQMD (Rf#980), February 28, 2007, for average winter day.

4.8 Emission Reduction Credits

Certain pollutant emission reductions due to equipment shutdown or voluntary control may be converted to emission reduction cr edits (ERCs) and registered with the Air District. These ERCs may then be used as “o ffsets” to compensat e for an increase in emissions from a new or modified major emissi on source regulated by the Air District. In the SMAQMD, ERCs may also be used as an alternative to strict compliance with specified rules. Thus, if a permitted s ource cannot meet the applicable emission standard requirements, usually becaus e it is technically infeasib le or not cost effective, the source may lease or purchase ERCs to achieve the required reductions.

Since ERCs represent potential emissions, t hey need to be taken into account in the emission inventories. One met hod is to assume that the us e of ERCs will already be included within the projected ra te of stationary source growth in the emissions inventory. However, if the use of available ERCs ex ceeds anticipated emissi ons growth, future emissions could be underestimat ed. Therefore, to ensure that the use of ERCs will not be inconsistent with the future PM 10 maintenance goals, the amount of ERCs issued for reductions that occurred prior to the 200 8 base year are added to the emission inventory forecasts in t he maintenance demonstration.

Pre-2008 Emission Reduction Credits

For this PM 10 maintenance plan, the amounts of unused banked ERCs of emissions reductions that occurred prior to the 2008 baseline year in Sacramento County are listed in Table 4.5. The ERCs consist of emissions reduced from stationary sources and military aircraft. Including these ERCs here si mply maintains the validity of previously banked ERCs and other reductions.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissions Inventory Page 4-12 Future Bankable Rice Burning Emission Reduction Credits

California legislation 11 in 1991 (known as the Connelly bi ll) 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 Sacrament o Valley Air Basin was est ablished, and growers with 400 acres or less were granted the option to burn their entire ac reage once every four years. Since the rice burning reductions we re mandated by stat e law, they would ordinarily not be “surplus” and eligible for bank ing. However, the C onnelly bill included a special provision declaring that the reduction s qualified for banking if they met the State and local banking rules.

Reductions in rice burning may be banked in the future under an ERC rule 12 currently in development. The total amounts of potential bank able rice burning ERCs in Sacramento County are summarized in Table 4.5.

Available Wood Stove/Fireplace Change Out Incentive Program Emission Reduction Credits

The Wood Stove/Fireplace Change Out Inc entive Program was es tablished in June 2006 to provide financial incentives to remove or replace existing fireplaces and dirty wood stoves. About half of t he emission reductions from th is program wi ll be available for the ERC bank. These potent ial ERCs from the Wood St ove/Fireplace Change Out Incentive Program are summarized in Table 4.5.

Summary of Emission Reduction Credits

ERCs issued for reductions that occurred prior to the 2008 base year and potential future bankable ERCs from rice burni ng and Wood Stove/Fireplace Change Out Incentive Program are summarized for Sacr amento County in Tabl e 4.5. These ERCs are in tons per day for average winte r day and will be in cluded in the PM 10 maintenance demonstration.

11 Connelly-Areias-Chandler Rice Straw Burning Reduction Act of 1991, section 41865 of California Health and Safety Code.
12 This rice burning ERC rule must be approved by EPA into the SIP for the rice ERCs to be used for compliance with federal air quality requirements.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Emissions Inventory Page 4-13 Table 4.5 Emission Reduction Credits Added to the Maintenance Demonstration Sacramento County

Emissions in tons/day (avg. winter day) PM 10 NO X SO X

Pre-2008 Emission Reduction Credits 0.081 1.469 0.222

Future Bankable Rice Burning Emission Reduction Credits 0.109 0.090 0.019

Wood Stove/Fireplace Change Out Incentive Program 0.067 0.004 0.001

Total ERCs 0.257 1.563 0.242

Total ERCs (rounded up) 0.3 1.6 0.3

4.9 Emissions Inventory Documentation

More detailed tables of the PM 10 and NO X emissions inventory ar e provided in Appendix A. This appendix contains the estimated 2008, 2012, and 2022 emissi ons inventory for Sacramento County.

Emission inventories are c onstantly being updated to incorporate new and better information and methodologies. Detailed information on emission methodologies, changes and forecasts can be found on CARB websites: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/ei.htm and http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/msei.htm

4.10 Emissions Inventory Conclusions

The emissions inventory is an account of po llutant emissions that estimates the amount of air pollutants emitted fr om many sources. This ma intenance plan includes an emissions inventory for total primary PM 10 and NO X as a PM 10 precursor. 2008 is the base year, the year from which the inventory is projected forw ard. An examination of the emissions inventory indicates that the three largest categor ies of primary PM 10 are the area-wide sources for paved road dust, resident ial fuel combustion, and construction & demolition, while mo bile source categories cont ribute over 85% of the NO X emissions inventory. Between 2008 and 2022, total PM 10 emissions are expected to increase 2-3% and NO X emissions are expected to steadily decrease by 48%, despite increasing vehicle miles traveled and popul ation in Sacramento County. The combined inventory of PM 10 and NO X precursors is projected to decline about 33%.

4.11 References

Motallebi, Nehzat. Wintertime PM 2.5 and PM 10 Source Apportionment at Sacramento California . Air and Waste Management A ssociation 1999: 25-34.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Control Measures Page 5-1 5. CONTROL MEASURES

5.1 Introduction to Control Measures

This chapter briefly describes the contro l measure requirements and identifies the appropriate control measur es that enabled Sacramento County to attain the PM 10 NAAQS and also provide for maintenance of t he standard. The control strategy includes a combination of actions taken by loca l, state, and federal agencies to reduce PM 10 and applicable PM 10 precursor emissions from various so urce categories. Control measures are developed and adopted into regulatory rules and programs, which are then implemented, monitored, and enforced. No new contro l measure commitments are included in this plan since the existing contro l strategy is predicted to maintain the PM 10 NAAQS throughout the future 10-year maintenance period.

5.2 Control Measure Requirements

Sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C) of the Clean Air Act require that PM 10 nonattainment area plans include provisions to ensure that reasonably available control measures (RACM) are implemented, includ ing, at a minimum, the adoption of reasonably available control technology (RAC T). Section 189(e) of the Clean Air Act requires control requirem ents that apply to major stationary sources of PM 10 also apply to major stationary sources of PM 10 precursor pollutants.

However, the RACM and RACT requirements ma ke certain allowances. EPA will allow rejection of any of the RACM , provided it can be shown that emissions from the sources affected do not contribute significantly to PM 10 levels which exceed the NAAQS (Calcagni, 1991, p.7). Also, a SIP can commit to less than all the available measures when attainment and RFP requirements have been adequately and appropriately demonstrated or already achieved. Thus, w here an area is already attaining the standard, no additional RACM measur es are required (71 FR 27444).

EPA provided a list of certain RA CM measures in the General Preamble to Title I of the Clean Air Act that were suggested for incorporation into a PM 10 SIP (57 FR 13498). These EPA-established RACM for PM 10 control strategies include:

1. Fugitive dust control measures, 2. Residential wood combustion control measures, and 3. Prescribed burning control measures.

5.3 RACM/RACT Evaluation

Since EPA determined that Sacrament o County already attained the PM 10 NAAQS, RACM requirements are suspended under EPA’ s Clean Data Policy. Therefore, no additional RACM measures are required. Rules previously adopted prior to thePM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Control Measures Page 5-2 nonattainment designation period and contro l measures that were implemented afterwards and brought the nonat tainment area into atta inment are identified.

Fugitive Dust Control Measures

Fugitive dust is particulate matter suspended in the air eit her by mechanical disturbance of the surface material or by wind action bl owing across the surface. RACM for fugitive dust primarily focuses on stabilizing the particu late on the road surf ace, or eliminating the particulate. Several RACM measures hav e already been adopted in the past, and are currently being enforced in the Sacram ento area. An example is the California Vehicle Code (23114) which requires that haul trucks cover their load or maintain adequate freeboard. This plan does not include any fugitive dust control measures above those already in place. The SMAQMD proposes to evaluate additional RACM PM 10 measures as potential c ontingency plan measures.

The following District measures were previ ously implemented to reduce fugitive dust emissions:

Rule Number and Topic Date Initially Adopted

 Rule 401 Ringelmann Chart/Opacity 8-3-77

 Rule 403 Fugitive Dust 8-3-77

 Rule 404 Particulate Matter 3-11-70

 Rule 405 Dust and Condensed Fumes 8-1-62

Residential Wood Combustion Control Measures

Incomplete combustion in residential wood stoves and fireplaces can lead to elevated PM 10 concentrations. The residential wood com bustion control measures are intended to reduce emissions from existing stoves and fireplaces through inspections, education, shifting to cleaner fuels, voluntary or mandatory cu rtailment of burning during meteorological conditions wh ich trap particulates (such as stagnant air and inversions), and limit the future growth of wood combustion emissi ons. The highest recorded PM 10 levels in the county have occurred durin g the winter months when stagnation and inversions were evident.

The following District measures were implemented to reduce residential wood combustion emissions. These measures we re adopted after attaining the federal PM 10 standard and will help in main taining the standard.

 The Wood Stove/Fireplace Change Out Inc entive Program was established in June 2006 to provide financial incentives to remove or replace existing fireplaces and dirty wood stoves.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Control Measures Page 5-3  Rule 417, Wood Burning Appliances, wa s approved by the Boar d of Directors on October 26, 2006 to prohibit installing new fireplaces and dirty wood burning devices.

 Rule 421, Mandatory Ep isodic Curtailment of Wood an d Other Solid Fuel Burning, was adopted on October 25, 2007 to rest rict wood burning on forecasted high PM 2.5 days during November through February. It was amended on September 24, 2009 to tighten the forecast thresholds for burning restrictions. Emission reductions from Rule 421 were included in the emissi on inventory projections used in the maintenance demonstration.

 The Spare The Air public educati on program has inco rporated ambient PM 2.5 air pollution awareness and AQI forecasti ng during November through February.

Prescribed Burning Control Measures

EPA suggests that a prescribed burning pr ogram include the following elements:

 smoke dispersion evaluation

 burn planning, authorizat ion, and administration

 requirements to ensure burner qualifications

 public education and awareness

 surveillance and enforcement

 emissions inventories and emission efforts

 state oversight

The existing District Rule 501 – Agricultural Burning (initially adopted September 13, 1971) is equivalent to thes e specifications and meets the RACM requirements for prescribed burning. In addition, Sacrament o County is included in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin Sm oke Management Program 13 which ensures that agricultural burning is prohibited on days met eorologically conducive to potentially elevated PM 10 concentrations.

Other Burning Control Measures

The following District measures were pr eviously implemented to reduce burning emissions:

Rule Number and Topic Date Initially Adopted

 Rule 407 Open Burn 3-11-70

 Rule 408 Incinerator Burning 3-11-70

 Rule 409 Orchard Heaters 5-15-72

13 Specifics can be found in the “Smoke Management Gu idelines for Agricultural and Prescribed Burning,” CARB, May 14, 2001. Title 17 California Code of Regu lations, Subchapter Z, Section 80100 et. seq. <http://www.arb.ca.gov/smp/ regs/RevFinRegwTOC.pdf>PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Control Measures Page 5-4 Sulfur Dioxide Control Measures

The following District measures were previous ly implemented to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions:

Rule Number and Topic Date Initially Adopted

 Rule 406 Specific Contaminants 3-11-70

 Rule 420 Sulfur Content of Fuels 8-3-77

RACT Measures

Reasonably available control te chnology (RACT) is the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by t he application of control technology that is “reasonably available” considering technological and economic feasibility. RACT applies to existing stationary sour ces, and EPA recommends that major stationary sources be the minimum starting point for RACT anal ysis (Calcagni, 1991). Generally, it is recommended that RACT be applied to existing s ources in the nonattainment area that are reasonable to control, based on t he attainment needs of the area.

SMAQMD’s various fugitive dust and combusti on restriction rules have been applied to major stationary sources within Sacramento County to reduce PM 10 emissions and meet RACT requirements. However, PM 10 emissions from existing stationary sources only add up to less than 2% of the to tal emissions inventory of PM 10 and NO X

. In addition to RACT for major PM 10 stationary sources, CAA Section 189(e) suggests that moderate PM 10 nonattainment areas apply RACT for major stationary sources of PM 10 precursors, unless EPA determines such sources do not contribute significantly to PM 10 exceedance levels (Calcagni, 1991). The District has applied RACT rules to existing NO X sources. The NO X RACT evaluations of re duction measures were completed to satisfy ozone nonattainme nt mandates (SMAQMD, 2006) (SMAQMD, 2008). The evaluation/demonstration sati sfies the RACT requirements for PM 10 required due to the secondary formation of atmos pheric ammonium nitrates, which are a significant component of PM 10 concentrations in the Sacramento area.

The following District cont rol measures to reduce NO X emissions from existing stationary sources were implemented:

 Rule 411 – NO X from Boilers, Process Heaters, and Steam Generators (initially adopted 2-2-95)

 Rule 412 – Stationary Internal Combusti on Engines at Major Stationary Sources of NO X (initially adopted 6-1-95)

 Rule 413 – Stationary Gas Turb ines (initially adopted 4-6-95)

 Rule 414 – Natural Gas Fired Wate r Heaters (initial ly adopted 8-1-96)PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Control Measures Page 5-5 State Control Measures

Several emission reduction programs have been implemented by t he California Air Resources Board (CARB) to reduce direct ly emitted particulates and secondary PM precursor pollutants (NO X and SO X ). These measures prim arily address cleaner fuel specifications for diesel and reformulated ga soline, and mobile s ource engine emission standards that CARB has implemented statewide.

5.4 New Source Review Program

Sections 172(c)(5) and 189(a)(1)(A) of the Cle an Air Act require the SIP to include provisions for a new source review (N SR) program to require permits for the construction and operation of new or modified major stationary sources anywhere in the nonattainment area, in accor dance with Section 173, Permit Requirements. The term major stationary sources for a PM 10 “moderate” nonattainment cl assification means any stationary source which directly emits, or has the potential to emit, 100 tons per year or more of PM 10 . NSR requirements also apply to major stationary sources of PM 10 precursors. The proposed sources are required to comply with the lowest achievable emission rate.

The District’s New Source Review Rule (Rul e 202) requires that all new or modified sources of PM 10 , nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, or reactive organic compounds apply best available control technology (BACT) to control those emissions. Rule 202 requirements meet or are more stri ngent than those required for a moderate nonattainment area and therefor e satisfy the Clean Air Act’s NSR permit program requirement. The Calcagni memo states that , “the Part D new source review program will be replaced by the prev ention of significant deterio ration (PSD) program once the area has been redesignated” (Cal cagni, 1992). Rule 203 – Pr evention of Significant Deterioration will be implemented afte r EPA redesignates Sacramento County to attainment.

5.5 Control Measures Conclusions

The SMAQMD has adopted and im plemented a number of PM control measures to reduce emissions from fugitive dust, wood burning devices, and agricultural burning. In addition, the SMAQMD has applied RACT rules to existing PM 10 and NO X sources, which will directly reduce fugitive dust, combustion particulates, and the secondary formation of atmospheric ammonium nitr ates, a significant component of PM 10 concentrations in the Sacramento area. Seve ral emission reduction programs have also been implemented by the California Air Resour ces Board (CARB) to reduce directly emitted particulates and secondar y PM precursor pollutants (NO X and SO X ) from mobile sources. These measures prim arily address cleaner fuel s pecifications for diesel and reformulated gasoline, and mobile source e ngine emission standar ds that CARB has implemented statewide. No ne w control measure commitments are included in this planPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Control Measures Page 5-6 since the existing control strategy is predicted to maintain the PM 10 NAAQS throughout the future 10-year maintenance period.

5.6 References

Calcagni, John. PM-10 Moderate Area SIP Guidanc e: Final Staff Work Product , Air Quality Management Division, EPA, April 2, 1991.

Calcagni, John. Procedures for Processing Reques ts to Redesignate Areas to Attainment , Air Quality Management Division, EPA, September 4, 1992, p. 6.

SMAQMD. Analysis of Reasonably Available Cont rol Technology for the 8-Hour Ozone State Implementation Plan (RACT SIP) Staff Report , September 26, 2006.

SMAQMD. Updated Analysis of Reasonably Ava ilable Control Technology for the 8- Hour Ozone State Implementation Pl an (Updated RACT SIP) Staff Report

, September 22, 2008.

USEPA. General Preamble for the Implementat ion of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990

, Appendix C , Federal Register, Volu me 57, April 16, 1992, p. 13498. (http://www.epa.gov /ttn/oarpg/t1pfpr.html)

USEPA. Approval and Promulgation of Air Qualit y Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Redesignation of the City of Weirton PM-10 Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Maintenance Plan , Federal Register, Volume 71, May 11, 2006, p. 27440-27447.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Maintenance Demonstration Page 6-1 6. MAINTENANCE DEMONSTRATION

6.1 Introduction to Maintenance Demonstration

The maintenance demonstration is a key element in a SIP maintenance plan that shows future compliance of the national ambient ai r quality standard (NAAQS) will continue to be achieved. This chapter describes t he basic requirements for a maintenance demonstration, provides a maintenance demonstration analysis, and discusses methods for implementing verifi cation and tracking procedures.

6.2 Maintenance Demonstration Requirements

Section 175A of the Clean Air Act (CAA) c ontains planning requirements pertaining to the general framework of a maintenance plan. These requirements include a maintenance demonstration to provide for ma intenance of the NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation is approved by EPA (not 10 years after submittal of a redesignation request). Therefor e, the maintenance planning per iod also must factor in time necessary for EPA review and approv al action on the redesignation request. Section 107(d)(3)(D) allows EP A up to 18 months from receipt of a complete submittal to process a redesignation request. Sinc e this maintenance plan and redesignation request are being submitted simultaneously in 2010, the maintenance planning years are from 2012 to 2022.

Section 175A also specifies that the maintenance plan s hall contain such additional measures, if any, as may be necessary to ensure such maintenance. In 1992, EPA issued additional discussion, clarific ation and guidance on requirements for redesignation requests and maintenance plan s (Calcagni, 1992) . This Calcagni memorandum included the following additional provisions needed for a maintenance demonstration plan:

 Maintenance demonstration of the NAAQS either by show ing that future emissions will not exceed the attainment level or by modeling to show future emissions will not cause a violation of the standard.

 Verification of continued attainment th rough operation of an ap propriate air quality monitoring network.

 Tracking the progress of the maintenance demonstration by a periodic review or update of the factors and assumptions used in the maintenance demonstration.

6.3 Maintenance Demonstration Analysis

The maintenance demonstration must show that the future mix of sources and emission rates, when combined with implemented c ontrol strategies during the 10-year maintenance planning period, will not cause any violations of the NAAQS. The method used for the maintenance demonstration is performed by proportional rollback modeling to show that future emissions will not cause a violation of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQSPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Maintenance Demonstration Page 6-2 (150 μ g/m 3 ). The premise of propor tional rollback is that the change in individual pollution sources are directly proportional to the change in associated ambient concentrations due to that individual source as determined by receptor modeling using the Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) model.

Four steps were taken to demons trate maintenance of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS.

Step 1: PM 10 and Precursor Emissions Source Inventories

Table 6.1 contains the emissi ons source inventories for PM 10 and secondary PM 10 precursor pollutants for 1995, 2008, 2012, and 2022. Emission reduction credits (described in Section 4.8) are added to the 2012 and 2022 em ission forecasts to ensure their use will not be inconsistent with the PM 10 maintenance demonstration.

The additional increase in 1.0 ton per day of PM 10 to Paved Road Dust and 0.5 ton per day of PM 10 to Road Construction Dust in t he 2022 transportation budgets are accounted for in the maintenan ce demonstration emission forecasts for Fugitive Dust PM 10 . The additional increase in the 2008, 2012, and 2022 NO X and PM 10 transportation budgets due to rounding up to the nearest ton are also accounted for in the maintenance demonstration emi ssion forecasts for Total NO X and Fugitive Dust PM 10

.

The PM 10 and precursor emissions source inventor y categories are assumed to directly impact the matching CMB ambient PM 10 speciation categories for projection purposes in Step 2. For example, as shown in the following table, Total NO X emissions are matched to CMB ambient Ammonium Nitrate concentrations.

Category No. Emissions Source Category CMB Ambient Source Category 1. Total NO X Ammonium Nitrate 2. Mobile Sources PM 10 (all on-road and off-road mobile sources) Motor Vehicles PM 10 3. Wood Burning PM 10 (residential fuel combustion, fires, waste burning and disposal) Wood Smoke PM 10

4. Fugitive Dust PM 10 (mineral processes, farming operations, construction and demolition, paved road dust, unpaved road dust, and fugitive windblown dust) Fugitive Dust PM 10

5. Total SO X Ammonium Sulfate 6. Total PM 10 (all direct PM 10 emission source categories) Unidentified OtherPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Maintenance Demonstration Page 6-3 Table 6.1 PM 10 and Precursor Emissions Source Inventories Sacramento County

Emissions (tons/day, winter average) Emissions Source Category 1995* 2008 2012 2022 1. Total NO X + 1.6 tpd ERCs 118.2 82.1 67.7 + 1.6 43.1 + 1.6 2. Mobile Sources PM 10 3.6 3.6 3.3 2.8 3. Wood Burning PM 10 ** 10.2 10.2 9.5 10.5 4. Fugitive Dust PM 10 17.8 20.2 20.4 22.8 5. Total SO X *** + 0.3 tpd ERCs 2.2 0.6 0.7 + 0.3 0.7 + 0.3 6. Total PM 10 + 0.3 tpd ERCs 33.0 35.2 34.5 + 0.3 35.9 + 0.3

* 1995 source emissions are listed since 1991-1996 ambien t monitoring data used for CMB modeling analysis. ** Reflects mandatory episodic wood burning restrict ions (SMAQMD Rule 421) implemented Nov 2007.

*** SO X emissions obtained from CARB CEFS Ve rsion 1.06 winter average inventory.

Step 2: Ambient PM 10 Speciation Concentrations

CMB receptor modeling resu lts for 1991-1996 wintertime (N ov-Jan) ambient 24-hour PM 10 samples (>40 μ g/m 3 ) were used to derive an average speciation profile to represent high value 1995 PM 10 winter concentrations. However, the 1995 ambient PM 10 speciation profile may have changed over ti me due to emission source inventory changes and may no longer reflect current am bient data. Therefor e, the 1995 ambient PM 10 speciation concentrations are forecasted to 2008 by applying the ratio of associated emissions source cat egory changes listed in Step 1.

Table 6.2 contains the 1995 CMB analysis concentration profile and the projected speciation adjustments to 2008. The percent adjustment is assumed linear at 1 to 1, except ammonium nitrate concentrations are assumed to change 0.7% for every 1% change in NO X emissions, based on evaluation of San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District modeling results from their 2007 PM 10 Maintenance Plan (SJVAPCD, 2007).PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Maintenance Demonstration Page 6-4 Table 6.2 Ambient PM 10 Speciation Concentrations Sacramento County

1995 CMB*

Analysis 1995 2008 Projection 2008 Conc. 2008

PM 10 CMB Source Category ( μ g/m 3 ) (% Total) Factor ( μ g/m 3 ) (% Total) 1. Ammonium Nitrate 14. 9 28.9% 0.786 11.7 24.4% 2. Motor Vehicles 11.8 22.9% 0.996 11.7 24.5% 3. Wood Smoke 8.6 16.6% 0.997 8.5 17.8% 4. Fugitive Dust 6.4 12.4% 1.135 7.3 15.1% 5. Ammonium Sulfate 2. 3 4.4% 0.277 0.6 1.3% 6. Unidentified Other 7. 6 14.7% 1.065 8.1 16.9% Total PM 10 51.5 100.0% 48.0 100.0%

*Average CMB speciation analysis of 1991-1996 wintertime (Nov-Jan) ambient 24-hour PM 10 samples >40 ( μ g/m 3 ) for 13th and T St. site assumed to represent 1995.

Step 3: Speciated 2008 Base Peak PM 10 Concentrations

2008 base peak 24-hour PM 10 concentrations are derived by applying the % total speciation categories to the recent peak PM 10 monitored value of 109 μ g/m 3 (shown in Table 6.3). The 109 μ g/m 3 represents the 2008 design (high) value for 24-hour PM 10 concentrations monitored duri ng 2006-2008 in Sacramento County.

The PM 10 monitoring data used to determine the design value concentrations are from the FRM filter based high-volume samplers. TEOM data samples were not used for this analysis due to potential inaccuracies du ring the winter time when there is wood combustion. 14

Step 4: Predicted Future Peak 24-Hour PM 10 from 2008 Base Peak

Predicted peak 24-hour PM 10 concentrations for 2012 and 2022 in Table 6.3 are estimated by using applicable emissions fore cast changes (with ERCs) to project 2008 base peak PM 10 concentrations. The reduction in source contributions from motor vehicles and nitrates in future years is due to the existing emissions control strategies that have already been accounted for in the em issions forecast inventories. Increases in future wood smoke, fugitive dust, and su lfate concentrations can be attributed to population growth, the construction of more roads, and increasing fuel combustion. The unidentified other PM 10 concentrations are forecasted using the change in total PM 10 since their associated emission s ource categories are not known.

14 The SMAQMD older model TEOM monitors contain a heater for reducing moisture, which can remove volatile compounds from ambient air samples, such as those in wood smoke.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Maintenance Demonstration Page 6-5 Table 6.3 Predicted Peak PM 10 from “2008” Base Peak Sacramento County

2008 2008 Peak Conc. 2012 Projection 2012 Peak Conc. 2022 Projection 2022 Peak Conc.

PM 10 CMB Source Category (% Total) ( μ g/m 3 ) Factor ( μ g/m 3 ) Factor ( μ g/m 3 ) 1. Ammonium Nitrate 24.4% 26.6 0.891 23.7 0.681 18.1 2. Motor Vehicles 24.5% 26.7 0.932 24.9 0.775 20.7 3. Wood Smoke 17.8% 19.4 0.931 18.1 1.032 20.0 4. Fugitive Dust 15.1% 16.5 1.010 16.7 1.129 18.6 5. Ammonium Sulfate 1.3% 1.4 1.532 2.2 1.677 2.4 6. Unidentified Other 16.9% 18.4 0.991 18.2 1.028 18.9 Total PM 10 100.0% 109* 104 99

* 109 μ g/m 3 was peak monitored value from 2006-2008 in Sacramento County (T Street, 2006)

6.4 Results of Maintenance Demonstration

Overall peak 24-hour PM 10 concentrations are forecasted to decline in Sacramento County. Figure 6.1 shows hist orical 3-year peak 24-hour PM 10 concentrations from 1988-2008 and the predict ed peak during the 10-year ma intenance perio d, 2012-2022. The peak 24-hour PM 10 concentration is predicted to be 104 μ g/m 3 at the start of the maintenance period in 2012 and 99 μ g/m 3 at the end of the maintenance period in 2022. Therefore, 10-year main tenance of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS (150 μ g/m 3 ) is demonstrated through 2022, due to declining NO X and motor vehicle exhaust emissions, despite increasing fugitive dust and wood smoke emissions.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Maintenance Demonstration Page 6-6 Figure 6.1 3-Year Peak* 24-Hour PM 10 Concentration Trend and NAAQS 10-Year Maintenance Demonstration for Sacramento County

99 104

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022

Year24-Hour PM10Concentration (μg/m3)

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Sacramento 3-Year Peak Conc. NAAQS Maintenance Demonstration 24-Hour PM10 NAAQS Standard

*For exam p le: 3- y ear maximum for 2008 is the p eak concentration of 109 μ g /m 3 Data Source: Ambient PM10 monitoring data from FRM high volume samplers with size selective inlet.

6.5 Future Monitoring Network

EPA guidance states that once an area has been redesi gnated, the area should continue to operate an appropriate air quality monitoring network, in accordance with 40 CFR Part 58, to verify the attainment st atus of the area (Calcagni, 1992). The maintenance plan should contain provisions for continued operation of air quality monitors that will provide such verification.

As mentioned in Chapter 3 of this report, there are two types of PM 10 monitors currently used throughout the monitoring network: 1) the Federal Reference Method (FRM) filter based high-volume sampler (hi-vols), 2) t he Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance (TEOM), which measures PM 10 on a continuous 24- hour basis. The schedule for PM 10 sample collection is one in six days for the filter based high-volume samplers. There are currently six PM 10 monitoring sites within Sacramento County.

The SMAQMD will assure the on-going quality of the measured data by performing the operational procedures for data collection, including routine calibrations, pre-run and post-run test procedures, and routine service c hecks. An annual review of the entire air quality monitoring network is required by feder al regulations as a means to determine if the network is effectively meet ing the objectives of the moni toring program. If relocation or a closure is recommended in the annual net work review, reports are submitted to EPA and ARB to document compliance with siting criteria. The data collection procedures already in place, in conjunction with t he annual review pr ogram, will ensurePM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Maintena nce Demonstration Page 6-7 that the future PM 10 ambient monitoring network in Sacramento Coun ty meets or exceeds the minimum monitoring requirements and that ambient PM 10 concentrations are monitored appropriately to verify the attainment status of the area.

6.6 Verification and Tracking th e Maintenance Demonstration

EPA guidance states that t he maintenance plan submittal should indicate how the progress of the maintenanc e plan will be track ed. “This is necessary due to the fact that the emission projections made for the maintenance demonstration depend on assumptions of point and area source growth” (Calcagni, 1992). Options for tracking the progress of the maintenance dem onstration would be to perio dically (typically every 3 years) review and update the emissions inventory, if needed, and reevaluate the assumptions and inputs used in the demonstra tion. In any event, the indicators for triggering contingency measures (specified in Chapter 7) should be monitored as well.

The SMAQMD will review the assumptions and data for the PM 10 maintenance demonstration in 2015 and 2018 to fulfill the ve rification and tracking requirements. The SMAQMD will also continue to operate an appropriate PM 10 ambient monitoring network in Sacramento County to tr ack maintenance of the PM 10 standard and monitor the indicator for triggering the maintenance contingency plan.

In addition, two years prior to the end of the maintenance planning period, Clean Air Act (CAA Section 175A) requirement s specify that a subsequ ent maintenance plan is required. This second plan must provide for maintenance of the NAAQS for 10 more years after expiration of the first 10-year maintenance period. Therefore, the SMAQMD will prepare and submit another maintenance plan in 2020 to demonstrate maintenance of the PM 10 standard through 2032.

6.7 References

Calcagni, John. Procedures for Processing Reques ts to Redesignate Areas to Attainment . Air Quality Management Division, EPA, September 4, 1992, p. 11-12.

SJVAPCD. 2007 PM 10 Maintenance Plan and Request for Redesignation

, Appendix F. Modeling Analysis . September 20, 2007, p. 60-98.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Maintenance Contingency Plan Page 7-1 7. MAINTENANCE CONTINGENCY PLAN

7.1 Introduction to Contingency Plan

A contingency plan provides for future acti ons and additional measures to implement if needed to mitigate any unexpected increases in emissions and ambient air quality concentrations to ensure specific target s and goals are achieved to maintain the applicable NAAQS. This chapter menti ons the federal requirements for a PM 10 maintenance contingency plan and discus ses the proposed SMAQMD contingency plan to fulfill these requirements.

7.2 Contingency Plan Requirements

Section 175A (d) of the Clean Air Act requires a maintenance plan to:

 Include contingency provisions, as necessary , to promptly correct any violation of the standard that occurs after redesi gnation of the area to attainment.

 Provide a contingency provision to implement all control measures contained in the nonattainment SIP for the area befor e redesignation to attainment.

EPA guidance further states that fully adopted contingency measures that will take effect without further action are not requir ed in order for the maintenance plan to be approved (Calcagni, 1992). However, the cont ingency plan is considered to be an enforceable part of the SIP and should en sure that the cont ingency measures are adopted expediently once they are triggered. The plan should clearly identify the measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for adopt ion and implementation, and a specific time limit for action. It is al so necessary for the contingency plan to identify specific indicators or triggers which will be used to determine when the contingency measures need to be implement ed. EPA will review the maintenance contingency plan on a case-by-case basis.

In addition, Section 175A (d) of the Clean Air Act specifies that the failure of any area, which has been redesignated as an attainment area, to maintain the national ambient air quality standard concerned sha ll not result in a requirem ent for a SIP revision unless EPA, in its discretion, requires such submittal.

7.3 Maintenance Contingency Plan

The contribution of sources to the PM 10 problem can vary at different seasons of the year under a variety of differ ent meteorological conditions . Therefore, the SMAQMD is proposing a contingency strategy to evaluate applicable PM 10 events that trigger the contingency plan and take appropriate action to ensure continued maintenance of the PM 10 NAAQS. It is recommended that the SMAQ MD implement the contingency plan during the maintenance period if a PM 10 monitor should violate the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS (150 μ g/m 3 ) not due to natural or exceptional events.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Maintenance Contingency Plan Page 7-2 After verification of a moni toring violation of the PM 10 NAAQS, which includes sufficient time for sample weighing and processing, t he following major steps are envisioned for the contingency plan process:

1. First, the SMAQMD will exam ine the event and determine if it needs to be classified as a natural or exceptional event in acco rdance with EPA require ments. If the data qualify for flagging, the SM AQMD would proceed with pr eparing and submitting the necessary documentation for a natural or exceptional event, as required by EPA’s “Treatment of Data Influenced by Except ional Events” Rule (72 CFR 13560). The flagged data would not be considered to tri gger the maintenance contingency plan.

2. Second, if the event does not qualify as a natural or exceptional event, the SMAQMD would then analyze the event to determine its possible causes. Any applicable emission reductions from already adopted rule s that have not yet been implemented would be evaluated to dete rmine if these new emission reductions would be sufficient to prevent future PM 10 exceedances. These already adopted controls could include CARB and District PM 2.5 and NO X measures to address ozone and PM 2.5 SIP requirements. In addition, the District would evaluate applicable reasonably available control measures (R ACM) that could potentially provide the corrective action needed. This evaluation step will take no more than 18 months.

3. Third, if the additio nal emission reductions from already adopted rules are insufficient, the SMAQMD would proceed with selecting specific RACM measures for adoption and implementation t hat would be applicable to addressing the seasonal PM 10 problem. The contingency provision to implement all control measures contained in the nonattainm ent SIP for the area before r edesignation to attainment does not apply since there were no addi tional SIP measures proposed beyond existing measures. This adoption and implem entation step will take no more than 12 months.

Details of the potential rules would be developed at that time . The rule development and adoption process would be subject to indivi dual and specific public review and a separate Board of Directors public hearing.

7.4 Contingency Plan Conclusions

The proposed contingency plan is expected to ensure prompt correction of any violation of the PM 10 NAAQS that occurs after redesignat ion and provide continued maintenance of the standard. The plan ident ifies a specific indicator or trigger to determine when the contingency requirements are activated for evaluating, selecting, developing, and adopting the most appropriate contingency m easures in an expedient timeframe. A suggested list of reasonably ava ilable control measures is in Appendix B, which may provide cost-effective, particulate matter emissions reduction benefits.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Maintena nce Contingency Plan Page 7-3 7.5 References

Calcagni, John. Procedures for Processing Reques ts to Redesignate Areas to Attainment , Air Quality Management Divisio n, EPA, September 4, 1992.

USEPA, Treatment of Data Influe nced by Exceptional Events , Federal Register, Volume 72, March 22, 2007, p. 13560-13581.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Tran sportation Conformity Budgets Page 8-1 8. TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY BUDGETS

8.1 Introduction to Transportation Conformity

Transportation conformity is the federal regulatory procedure for linking and coordinating the transportati on and air quality planning pr ocesses. Under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, federal agencies may not appr ove or fund transportation plans and projects unless they are consist ent with state air quality implementation plans (SIPs). Conformity with the SI P requires that transportation ac tivities (1) not cause or contribute new air quality violations, (2) increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation, or (3) delay timely a ttainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The quanti fication and comparison of on-road motor vehicles emissions is one of the elements for determi ning transportation conformity between air quality and transportation planning.

This chapter provides a summary of princi pal transportation conformity requirements and proposed motor vehicles emissions budgets (MVEB) for PM 10 and for NO X , which is a significant PM 10 precursor forming ammonium nitrate particulates.

8.2 Transportation Conformity Requirements

The CAA Section 176 states that no federal department engage in, support in any way or provide financial assistance for or licens e or approve any activity that does not conform to the State Implem entation Plan (SIP). To impl ement this requirement, EPA established the Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR §93). This Rule:



###  Establishes criteria and procedures for determining whether long range metropolitan transportation plans (MTPs), short range metropo litan transportation improvement programs (MTIPs), and pr ojects conform to the SIP.



###  Ensures that transportation plans and projec ts are consistent with the applicable SIP, such that associated transportation em issions are less than or equal to motor vehicle emissions budgets established for demonstrating reasonable further progress, attainment or maintenance of health-based air quality standards.



###  Ensures that transportation plans, program s, and other individual projects do not cause new air quality vi olations, exacerbate existing ones , or delay attainment of air quality standards.

8.3 Latest Planning Assumptions

Sacramento County had rapid growth in popul ation, number of ho useholds, number of dwelling units, and jobs in the last tw o decades and these trends are expected to continue. Forecasting of t hese factors is important in establishing the MVEB. Sacramento Area Council of Go vernments (SACOG) adopted po pulation, dwelling units and employment forecasts in September 2007. These are applied to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) forecasting. The current and forecasted VMT estimates are fromPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Transportation Conformity Budgets Page 8-2 SACOG-supplied activity data which are fr om the SACSIM region al travel demand model prepared for the August 2009 Metropo litan Transportation Im provement Program (MTIP) analysis (SACOG, 2010). The 2009 MTIP is based on transportation projects included in the SACOG Metropolitan Tr ansportation Plan for 2035 (MTP2035).

8.4 SACOG’s MTP2035

Over the past several years, the Sacram ento region has embarked on a process of defining and implementing a new, higher density, land use pattern which reduces congestion, encroachment on open space, average vehicle miles traveled per household and air pollutants. The program, called Blueprint, was initiated by SACOG with the goal of reducing traffic congestion in future metropolitan transportation plans.

In December 2004, Blueprint smart growth pr inciples and a 2050 gr owth scenario were approved by SACOG (SACOG, 2004) to achieve the following objectives:

1. Provide a variety of transportation choices 2. Offer housing choices 3. Take advantage of compact development 4. Use existing assets 5. Increase mixed land use 6. Encourage natural resource conservation 7. Ensure distinctive, attracti ve communities with quality design

The region then began the more detailed planning efforts for the long range MTP2035. SACOG works with local jurisdictions, Ca lifornia Department of Transportation (CalTrans), and transportation and planning agencies to define interim land use allocations and specific transportation proj ect needs. Federal MTP guidelines require that the land use allocations represent what is most likel y to be built. Therefore, the specific Blueprint smart growth policies affect land use allocations only to the extent that the local jurisdictions and SACOG are able to demonstrate that the po licies will actually be implemented. The MTP2035 was adopted by the SACOG Board on March 20, 2008 (SACOG, 2008).

SACOG’s Transportation Model

The transportation analysis for the 2009 MT IP and MTP2035 relied on the latest planning assumptions and SACOG’s new regi onal travel demand forecasting model, SACSIM (Bradley et al, 2007). The SACSIM m odel was used to estimate future traffic volumes and public transit ridership in the 6-county Sacramento region. SACSIM incorporates an “activity-based” travel m odel which simulates the population of households allocated to parcels and creates a one-day activity and trip travel schedule for each person in the population.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Transportation Conformity Budgets Page 8-3 The activity and travel schedule are sensitive to transportation network accessibility and a variety of demographic and land use variables . SACSIM also incorporates a mode choice (i.e. bus, car, bike, walking, et c) model which determines how each travel destination is reached.

The network traffic assignment models load the trips onto the network, resulting in vehicle miles traveled at four time intervals (AM peak, midday, PM peak, and evening/early morning) and speed within each time period. To develop the travel forecasting, information on the characteri stics and constraints of the transportation system and residents’ travel survey data we re collected. The SACSIM travel outputs were compared to actual base year dat a to be able to demonstrate adequate model performance results.

SACOG used the SACSIM travel demand model to forecast average weekday travel patterns for several future years, based on given assumptions about expected future population and employment projections ( SACOG, 2007), land use allocations, and transportation system improv ements and changes containe d in the MTP2035. The results of the travel model pr edicted that growth in vehicl e trips and growth in vehicle miles traveled will be slightly lower than t he population growth rate for the Sacramento region through 2035.

8.5 Proposed Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets

To reflect the updated motor vehi cle emission forecasts, the PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Rede signation Request for Sacramento County include transportation conformity budget s for 2008, 2012 and 2022. These years are selected because 2008 is the emission in ventory base year, t he beginning of the maintenance period is 2012, and the end of the 10 year maintenance period is 2022. The proposed transportation budgets listed in Table 8.1, incorporate:

1) The recent on-road motor vehicle em ission inventory factors of EMFAC2007, 15 2) Updated travel activity data from SACOG’s August 2009 MTIP analysis, based on the SACSIM (Sacramento Activity-B ased Travel Demand Simulation Model) transportation modeling syst em (SACOG, 2010), and 3) Latest regional and stat e control strategies.

The PM 10 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget for conf ormity purposes includes regional reentrained dust from travel on paved roads, v ehicular exhaust, travel on unpaved roads, and road construction. Transportation Conformi ty Rule (40 CFR Part 93, §93.122(e)(2)) requires that PM 10 from construction-related fugitive dust be included in the regional PM 10 emissions analysis if it is identified as a contributor to the nonattainment problem in a PM 10 implementation plan.

15 CARB’s EMFAC2007 model (version 2.3) was released November 2006.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Transportation Conformity Budgets Page 8-4 In addition to PM 10 , Transportation Conformity Rule (4 0 CFR Part 93, §93.102(b)(2)(iii)) identifies volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NO X ) as PM 10 precursor pollutants that must also have a motor vehicle emissions budget if deemed a significant contributor to the PM 10 nonattainment problem. T he CMB modeling analysis in Chapter 6 indicates that the secondar y formation of ammonium nitrate from NO X emissions contributes a significant amount to the wintertime ambient PM 10 concentration.

An additional 1.5 t ons per day of PM 10 were added to the 2022 PM 10 budgets in order to account for potential emission increases in Paved Road Dust (1.0 ton per day) and Road Construction Dust (0.5 ton per day) bey ond 2022. This additiona l increase may be needed for SACOG to make a transportation c onformity determination for a horizon year of 2035 or later for transportation planni ng purposes when using the latest year of motor vehicle emissions budgets (2022) in this maintenance plan. Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR Part 93, §93.124(a) a llows an implementation plan to explicitly increase the motor vehicle emissions budget s for available use by the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MP O) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) for conformity purposes as long as emissions will be lower than n eeded to provide for continued maintenance.

The additional increase in 1.0 ton per day of PM 10 to Paved Road Dust and 0.5 ton per day of PM 10 to Road Construction Dust in t he 2022 transportation budgets are accounted for in the maintenan ce demonstration emission forecasts for Fugitive Dust PM 10 in Chapter 6. The additional increase in the 2008, 2012, and 2022 NO X and PM 10 transportation budgets due to rounding up to the nearest ton are also accounted for in the maintenance demonstration em ission forecasts for Total NO X and Fugitive Dust PM 10

. The proposed motor vehicle budgets for NO X and PM 10 average winter day emissions in Table 8.1 are for the Sacram ento County which is the nonatta inment area for federal PM 10 standards.

Table 8.1: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Maintenance of PM 10 NAAQS

Sacramento County 2008 2012 2022

NO X PM 10 NO X PM 10 NO X PM 10 Direct Exhaust (includes tire and brake wear for PM 10 ) 49.6 2.2 37.6 2.1 18.1 2.1

Paved Road Dust --- 6.1 --- 6.2 --- 6.4 + 1.0 Unpaved Road Dust --- 3.6 --- 3.6 --- 3.6

Road Construction Dust --- 2.7 --- 2.8 --- 2.8 + 0.5 Total (rounded up to nearest ton) 50 15 38 15 19 17PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Transportation Conformity Budgets Page 8-5 8.6 Impact of New Emission Budgets

Currently, Sacramento Count y has no established PM 10 budgets. The Metropolitan Planning Organization, SACOG, us es “build vs no build” test to determine transportation conformity for the region’s transpo rtation plans and programs for PM 10 . If the proposed MVEBs are determined to be adequate by EPA, future transportation plans will need to conform to these motor vehicle emissions budgets in any future transportation plan amendment and updates. SACOG must ens ure that the aggr egate wintertime transportation emissions in Sacramento Count y (including, but not limited to, vehicle emissions, dust from paved and unpaved r oads and road construction), rounded up to the nearest integer, do not exceed these levels when approving new metropolitan transportation plans and transportation improv ement programs, even if the mix of projects changes or growth increases. Following EPA ac tion, these new NO X and PM 10 MVEBs will remain in effect until ot her budgets are found adequate or approved by EPA.

8.7 References

Bradley, M.A., Bowman J.L. and Griesenbeck B. Development and appl ication of the SACSIM activity-based model system. Berkeley, CA [2007.]

SACOG. Examples from the Sacramento Region of the seven principles of smart growth: Better Ways to Grow. Sacramento, CA: Sacram ento Area Council of Governments, Sacramento, CA [2004.] Web. January 7, 2010. <http://www.sacog.org/regi onalfunding/betterways.pdf>

SACOG. SACOG Board of Directors approved 2013 and 2018 housing and employment allocations based on July 2007 California Department of Finance projections

. Sacramento, CA [2007.]

SACOG. Sacramento Region Metropolitan Transportation Plan for 2035 , Sacramento Area Council of Government s. Sacramento, CA [2008.]

SACOG. Sacramento County travel data for PM 10 plan , Griesenbeck e-mail to Anderson, SMAQMD, July 12, 2010, Sacr amento Area Council of Governments [2010].

SMAQMD. Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment And Reasonable Further Progress Plan (with errata sheets incorporated). Sacramento, CA: Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, Sacramento, CA [2009.]

USEPA. Transportation Conformity Rule Amend ment To Implement Provisions Contained in the 2005 Safe, Accountab le, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), Federal Register, Volume 73, January 24, 2008, p. 4420.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Redesignation Request Page 9-1 9. REDESIGNATION REQUEST

9.1 Introduction to Redesignation and Redesignation Requirements

The Sacramento Metropolitan Ai r Quality Management District is requesting that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) redesig nate Sacramento County to attainment status for the PM 10 National Ambient Air Quality Stan dards (NAAQS). The Air District has met the criteria for the EPA Administrator to promulgate redesignation as outlined in the Federal Clean Air Act (C AA) Section 107(d)(3)(E).

The EPA Administrator may not promulgate a redesignation of a nonattainment area (or portion thereof) to attainment unless —

 the Administrator determines that the ar ea has attained the na tional ambient air quality standard;

 the Administrator has fully approved t he applicable implementation plan for the area under Section 110 (k);

 the Administrator determines that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable implement ation plan and applic able Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions;

 the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of Section 175A; and

 the State containing such area has met all requirements applicable to the area under Section 110 and Part D.

The following Table 9.1 includes the compliance statements for each of the redesignation criteria.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Redesignation Request Page 9-2 Table 9.1 Compliance with CAA Secti on 107(d)(3)(E) Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment for PM 10 NAAQS

Criterion Compliance Attainment of the PM 10 NAAQS USEPA found the Sacr amento County to be in attainment of the PM 10 NAAQS (67 FR 7082). 24-hour PM 10 attainment demonstrated for last 3 years (2007-2009) in Table 9.2. State Implementation Plan (SIP) Approval under CAA Section 110(k) PM 10 Implementation Plan element s are submitted in this Plan and are discussed in Sect ions 2.5 to 2.7. Chapter 3 describes the PM 10 air quality monitoring network. Chapter 4 documents the emissions inve ntory. Chapter 5 discusses the control measures responsible for attainment and the SMAQMD new source review stationary source permit program. Permanent and Enforceable Improvement in Air Quality Section 9.2.3 in this Plan dem onstrates that Sacramento County’s improvement in PM 10 air quality was due to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions achieved through Air District and CARB rules and regulations that will remain in effect after redesig nation to attainment. Long term trends show emissions decreased and air quality improved in spite of growth in populatio n and vehicle miles traveled. Fully Approved Maintenance Plan In accordance with EPA Guid ance (Calcagni, 1992), the PM 10 Maintenance Plan is submitted in this Plan with the request for redesignation. Chapt er 4 includes the emission inventories, documenting a base year and forecast inventories for the maintenance period. Chapter 6 includes the maintenance demonstration analysis and a commitment to an appropriate future monitoring network, and verification and tracking of the maintenance demonstration. Chapter 7 describes the maintenance contingency plan. CAA Section 110 and Part D requirements Contingent to the EPA approval of this PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets, this would satisfy the CAA Section 110 and Part D requirements.

9.2 Evaluation of Redesignation

9.2.1 Attainment of PM 10 NAAQS

USEPA published a Proposed Rule on July 25, 2001 (66 FR 38603 ), and a Final Rule of Attainment Finding on Febr uary 15, 2002 (67 FR 7082) determining that the Sacramento County had attained the PM 10 NAAQS. The Final Rule became effective on March 18, 2002. The Rule co ntained the Sacramento PM 10 monitoring data which showed no measured exc eedances of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS between 1998 andPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Redesignation Request Page 9-3 2000. The February 15, 2002 finding determined that the Sacramento County attained the 24-hour and annual PM 10 standards by the attainment date of December 31, 2000. Data collected since the 2000 attainment determination continues to show that Sacramento County has not had any vi olations and meet s the federal PM 10 standard.

Table 9.2 contains a summary of FRM PM 10 air quality data for the six Sacramento County monitoring sites for the last 3 years, 2007-2009. The highest 24-hour PM 10 concentration over this 3-year period was 97 μ g/m 3 , recorded at the North Highlands monitoring site. The 2009 design value of 97 μ g/m 3 is below the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS of 150 μ g/m 3 . Therefore, the number of expect ed exceedances per year from all monitoring sites in the area is less than 1. 0, which demonstrates continued attainment of the standard.

Table 9.2 Summary of PM10 Air Quality Data – Sacramento County 2007-2009

Sacramento County Monitoring Site Highest 24-Hour Concentration ( μ g/m 3 )
2007 2008 2009 North Highlands – Blackfoot Way 56 97 33 Sacramento – Branch Center Road 2 56 89 76 Sacramento – Del Paso Manor 70 71 45 Sacramento – Goldenland Court 56 48 Sacramento – Health Dept Stockton Blvd 56 88 45 Sacramento – T Street 53 73 47

9.2.2 Fully Approved St ate Implementation Plan

The Air District is submitting the required PM 10 Implementation Plan elements to meet the requirement. Contingent to the approval of this Plan, the Sacramento nonattainment area would satisfy the requirement of havi ng a fully approved app licable implementation plan. There have been no previous disapproval s, or partial, conditional, or limited approvals of required elements of a PM10 Implementation Plan. Approval of the PM 10 State Implementation Plan would allow E PA to proceed with the redesignation of Sacramento County as attainment for the PM 10 NAAQS.

PM 10 Implementation Plan element s are discussed in Sections 2.5 to 2.7. Chapter 3 describes the PM 10 air quality monitoring network. C hapter 4 documents the emissions inventory. Chapter 5 discusses the control measures responsible for attainment and the SMAQMD new source review st ationary source permit program.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Redesignation Request Page 9-4 9.2.3 Permanent and Enforceable Improvement in Air Quality

EPA redesignation guidance states that “the State must be abl e to reasonably attribute the improvement in air quality to emi ssion reductions which are permanent and enforceable” (Calcagni, 1992). It also further notes that temporar y emission reductions or “unusually favorable meteorology” would not qualify as an air quality improvement due to permanent and enforceabl e emission reductions.

Figure 9.1 shows the long term air qua lity trend of maximum 24-hour PM 10 from 1986 to 2009. The air monitoring data shows no vi olation since 1991 and the annual maximum concentrations are maintained below the 24-Hour PM 10 NAAQS 16 . Additionally, the data do not show any upward air quality trend for the annual maximum 24-hour PM 10 concentrations at an air monitoring station.

Figure 9.1 Annual Maximum 24-hour PM 10 Concentration ( μ g/m 3 ) Sacramento County for 1986-2009

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

YearMaximum 24-Hour PM10Concentration (μg/m3)

Sacramento-Peak Monitoring Site 24-Hour PM10 NAAQS Standard Linear (Sacramento-Peak Monitoring Site)

Data source: Ambient PM 10 monitoring data from high volume samplers with size selective inlet (SMAQMD, 1996 and CARB, 2009)

Since the Sacramento County has not had a 24-hour PM 10 violation for the past 19 years, this demonstrates that the attainm ent is not a result of temporary emission reductions or from “unusually favorabl e meteorology”. The Sacramento County

16 When comparing a 24-hour average PM 10 concentration to the federal standard of 150 μ g/m 3 , the concentration value is rounded to the nearest 10 μ g/m 3 . Therefore, the minimum concentration exceeding the 24-hour standard is 155 μ g/m 3 , which rounds to 160 μ g/m 3

.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Redesignation Request Page 9-5 experienced a variety of meteorological cond itions over the past 19 years (1991-2009.) Although the Sacramento Count y experienced growth in both population and vehicle miles traveled (VMT), these conditions hav e not lead to a violat ion of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS due to the implementat ion of emission reduction meas ures which resulted in declining emissions. Figure 9.2 shows the population and VMT histor ical growth and projection for Sacramento C ounty. Figure 9.3 shows the historical and projected emission inventory for PM 10 and its NO X precursor.

Figure 9.2 Population and VMT for Sacramento County

1990-2022 (historical data and projection)

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

YEARPopulation (million)

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000 50000VMT (Thousands of miles per day)

Population VMTPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Redesignation Request Page 9-6 Figure 9.3 PM 10 and NO X Precursor Emissions for Sacramento County 1990-2022 (historical data and projection)

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

1990 2000 2008 2012 2022

YearTons per Day

NOx PM10

9.2.4 Fully Approved Maintenance Plan

In accordance with EPA guidance (Calcagni, 1992) the Air District is submitting this PM 10 Maintenance Plan and request for redesi gnation for Sacramento County. Approval of this document would allo w EPA to proceed with redesig nation of the Sacramento County as attainment for the PM 10 NAAQS. Chapter 4 in cludes the emission inventories, documenting a base year and fo recast inventories for the maintenance period. Chapter 6 includes the maintenance demonstration analysis, showing continued maintenance of the PM 10 NAAQS from 2012 to 2022. Chapter 6 also contains a commitment to a future monitoring network and verification and tracking of the maintenance demonstration. C hapter 7 describes the maintenance contingency plan to ensure prompt correction of any violation of the NAAQS.

9.2.5 CAA Section 110 and Part D Requirements

Contingent to the approval of this Im plementation/Maintenanc e Plan and the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets discussed in Chapter 8, the Sacramento PM 10 nonattainment area would meet the requ irements of Section 110 and applicable portions of Part D of the F ederal Clean Air Act. This woul d allow EPA to proceed with redesignation of the Sa cramento County as a ttainment for the PM 10 NAAQS.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Redesignation Request Page 9-7 9.3 References

Calcagni, John. Memorandum, Procedures for Proc essing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC [1992.]

CARB. CEPAM: 8-Hour Ozone SIP Baseline Emissi on Projections – Version 1.06 MAIN Planning Inventory Tool. CA: California Air Resources Board, 28 February 2007. Web. 31 December 2009.

< http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/em sinv/o3sip/fcemssumcat_o3v106.php

.

CARB. CEPAM: 2009 Almanac – Populati on and Vehicle Trends Tool. CA: California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA [2009.]

CARB. iADAM Air Quality Data Statistics. CA: California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA, 15 April 2009. Web. 31 December 2009.

< http://www.arb.ca.gov /adam/welcome.html >.

SJVAPCD. 2007 PM 10 Maintenance Plan and Request for Redesignation. Fresno, CA: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution C ontrol District, Fresno, CA [2007.]

SMAQMD. Revised Draft 1995 Attainment and Ma intenance Plan For The Federal PM 10 Standard. Sacramento, CA: Sacramento Metr opolitan Air Quality Management District, Sacramento, CA [1996.]

USEPA Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes , Federal Register, Volume 56, November 6, 1991, p. 56694.

USEPA. Proposed Rule: Clean Air Act Attainment Fi nding; Bullhead City and Payson Nonattainment Areas, AZ; Sacramento and San Bernardino Nonattainment Areas, CA; Particulate Matter of 10 Microns or Less (PM-10). Federal Register, Volume 66, July 25, 2001, p. 38603.

USEPA. Final Rule: Clean Air Act Attainment Finding; Bullhead City and Payson Nonattainment Areas, AZ; Sacramento and San Bernardino Nonattainment Areas, CA; Particulate Matter of 10 Microns or Less (PM-10). Federal Register, Volume 67, February 14, 2002, p. 7082.

USEPA. Final Rule: Air Quality Designations fo r the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM 2.5 ) National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Federal Register, Volume 74, November 13, 2009, p.58688.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Summary and Conclusions Page 10-1 10. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

10.1 PM 10 Nonattainment Designation

Upon enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Ac t Amendments, Sacramento County was designated as unclassifiable for PM 10 . However, during 1989 and 1990, two different SMAQMD PM 10 monitors (Del Paso Manor and Stockton Boulevard sites) violated the 24-hour PM 10 standard. Effective January 20, 1994, EPA took final action to redesignate Sacramento County as a “moderate” nonattainment area for the PM 10 NAAQS with an attainment deadline of December 31, 2000.

10.2 PM 10 Air Quality Data

PM 10 air quality data includes so lid and liquid particles with a diameter of 10 micrometers or less. EPA's hea lth-based national ambient ai r quality standard for 24- hour PM 10 is 150 μg/m 3 (measured as a daily concentrat ion). There are currently six PM 10 monitoring sites within Sa cramento County. The Chem ical Mass Balance (CMB) model was used to identify the source cont ributions for ambient air quality samples. CMB results show that the main source types contributing to PM 10 air quality in Sacramento were secondary ammonium nitrate particles, motor vehicles exhaust, wood smoke, and fugitive dust. EPA dete rmined that the Sacramento PM 10 nonattainment area attained the PM 10 NAAQS as of December 31, 2000 since no exceedances of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS were measured between 1998 and 2000. There have been no violations of the PM 10 NAAQS through 2009.

10.3 Emissions Inventory

The emissions inventory is an account of po llutant emissions that estimates the amount of air pollutants emitted fr om many sources. This ma intenance plan includes an emissions inventory for total primary PM 10 and NO X as a PM 10 precursor. 2008 is the base year, the year from which the invent ory is projected forw ard and backward. An examination of t he emissions inventory indicates that the three largest categories of primary PM 10 are the area-wide sources for paved road dust, residential fuel combustion, and construction & dem olition, while mobile sour ce categories contribute over 85% of the NO X emissions inventory. Between 2008 and 2022, total PM 10 emissions are expected to increase 2-3% and NO X emissions are expected to steadily decrease by 48%, despite increasing vehicl e miles traveled and population in Sacramento County.

10.4 Control Measures

The SMAQMD has adopted and im plemented a number of PM control measures to reduce emissions from fugitive dust, wood burning devices, and agricultural burning. In addition, the SMAQMD has applied RA CM/RACT rules to existing NO X sources, which will directly reduce the secondary formati on of atmospheric a mmonium nitrates, aPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Summary and Conclusions Page 10-2 significant component of PM 10 concentrations in the Sacram ento area. Several emission reduction programs have also been implemented by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to reduce directly emitted particulates and sec ondary PM precursor pollutants (NO X and SO X ) from mobile sources. These meas ures primarily address cleaner fuel specifications for diesel and reformulated ga soline, and mobile s ource engine emission standards that CARB has implemented st atewide. No new control measure commitments are included in this plan since the existing contro l strategy is predicted to maintain the PM 10 NAAQS throughout the future 10-year maintenance period.

10.5 Maintenance Demonstration

Overall peak 24-hour PM 10 concentrations are forecasted to decline in Sacramento County. The peak 24-hour PM 10 concentration is predicted to be 104 μ g/m 3 at the start of the maintenance period in 2012 and 99 μ g/m 3 at the end of the ma intenance period in 2022. Therefore, 10-year ma intenance of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS (150 μ g/m 3 ) is demonstrated through 2022, due to declining NO X and motor vehicle exhaust emissions, despite increasing fugitive dust and wood smoke emissions. The SMAQMD will continue to operate an appropriate air quality monitoring network and review the assumptions and data for the PM 10 maintenance demonstration to fulfill the verification and tracking requirements

10.6 Contingency Plan

The proposed contingency plan is expected to ensure prompt correction of any violation of the PM 10 NAAQS that occurs after redesignati on and continued ma intenance of the standard. The plan identifies a specific indicator or trigger to determine when the contingency requirements are activated for sele cting, developing, and adopting the most appropriate contingency measures in an expedi ent timeframe. Any applicable emission reductions from already adopted rules t hat have not yet been im plemented would be evaluated to determine if these new emission reductions would be sufficient to prevent future PM 10 exceedances. These already adopted controls could include CARB and District PM 2.5 and NO X measures to address ozone and PM 2.5 SIP requirements. In addition, the District would evaluate applicabl e reasonably availabl e control measures (RACM), which may provide cost-effective particulate matter em issions reduction benefits that could potentially pr ovide the corrective action needed.

10.7 Transportation Conformity Budgets

Under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, federal agencies ma y not approve or fund transportation plans and projects unless they are consistent with state air quality implementation plans (SIPs). The quantific ation and comparison of on-road motor vehicle emissions is the method for determi ning transportation conformity between air quality and transportation plan ning. Currently, Sacramento County has no established PM 10 motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs). The Metropolitan Planning Organization, SACOG, uses “build vs no build ” test to determine transportationPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Summary an d Conclusions Page 10-3 conformity for the region’s transportation plans and programs for PM 10 . To reflect updated motor vehicle emission forecasts, this maintenance plan for Sacramento County includes transportation conformity budgets for 2008, 2012 and 2022 for PM 10 (including motor vehicle exhaust and road-rela ted dust) and oxides of nitrogen (NO X ), a significant PM 10 precursor. If the proposed MVEBs are deter mined to be adequate or approved by EPA, SACOG must ensure that the aggregate tr ansportation emissions do not exceed these motor vehicle emissions budgets in any future transportation plan amendment and updates.

10.8 Redesignation Request

The Sacramento Metropolitan Ai r Quality Management District is requesting that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) redesig nate Sacramento County to attainment status for the PM 10 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The SMAQMD has met the following criteria for the EPA Admi nistrator to promulgate redesignation as outlined in the Federal Clean Ai r Act (CAA) Section 107(d)(3)(E):

1. Attainment of the PM 10 NAAQS: effective March 18, 2002, continuing through 2009.

2. Fully approved PM 10 SIP for the area: submittal contained in this plan.

3. Improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions: control measures have reduced overal l emissions despite increas ing population and VMT, and not due to temporary emission reductions or unusually favorable meteorology.

4. Fully approved PM 10 maintenance plan for the area: s ubmittal contained in this plan.

5. Met CAA Section 110 and Pa rt D requirements: contingent on the approval of this implementation and maintenance plan, and motor vehicle emissions budgets.

10.9 Overall Conclusions

Collective local and state air quality regulat ions were successful in attaining the PM 10 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQ S) in Sacramento County by the 2000 deadline. Continued a ttainment of the PM 10 standard is demonst rated throughout the 10-year maintenance period, 2012-2022, from existing control strategies. In addition, it is anticipated that future PM 10 and NO X emission reductions will occur due to the adoption and implementation of new control measures needed for the attainment demonstration SIP efforts for achieving the PM 2.5 and 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the region.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Appendi ces

Title Page 

### PM 10 

### IMPLEMENTATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND

REDESIGNATION REQUEST FOR SACRAMENTO COUNTY

APPENDICES

A. EMISSIONS INVENTORY

B. CONTROL MEASURES

C. TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY BUDGETSPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Appendix A: Emissi ons Inventory Page A- 1 Appendix A: Emissions Inventory

The following tables show the an thropogenic emissions inventory of PM 10 and NO X by source categories for Sacramento County . The emissions inventory is shown for average winter day in units of tons per day. Inventories were obtained from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) on September 3, 2010 fo r the years 2008, 2012, and 2022. 17 These inventories included recent CARB updates to the Residential Fuel Combustion and Paved Road Dust categories.

An average winter emi ssion inventory of PM 10 and NO X is also shown for the years 1990, 1995, and 2000. These inventories are used in the emissions trend analysis and the CMB analysis. The data source is CARB CEFS Version 1.06 Sacramento County (Rf#980), except Residential Fuel Combusti on and Paved Road Dust were adjusted by SMAQMD staff to reflect the rec ent changes in CARB methodology.

17 CARB (Ruiz) e-mail transmitting emissi ons inventory data for the Sacramento PM 10 Maintenance Plan to SMAQMD (Tollstrup) on September 3, 2010.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Appendix A: Emissi ons Inventory Page A- 2 Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan - 2008 Emissions Data (Tons/Day) (Sacramento County Only)

WINTE R DAY

FYEAR EIC SUM EICSUMN NOX PM10
2008 10 ELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.69 0.25 2008 20 COGENERATION 0.00 0.00 2008 30 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COMBUSTION) 0.06 0.01 2008 50 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.99 0.04 2008 52 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.25 0.01 2008 60 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 1.52 0.16 2008 99 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.42 0.02 2008 110 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.00 0.00 2008 120 LANDFILLS 0.02 0.01 2008 130 INCINERATORS 0.01 0.00 2008 199 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 2008 210 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 2008 220 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 2008 230 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 2008 240 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 2008 250 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 2008 299 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 2008 310 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0.00 0.00 2008 330 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 2008 410 CHEMICAL 0.03 0.03 2008 420 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.10 2008 430 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.07 0.53 2008 440 METAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 2008 450 WOOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.18 2008 470 ELECTRONICS 0.00 0.00 2008 499 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.01 0.01 2008 510 CONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 2008 520 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 2008 530 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 2008 540 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.01 2008 610 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 4.42 9.91 2008 620 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 2.40 2008 630 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 7.01 2008 640 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 6.12 2008 645 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 3.58 2008 650 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.12 2008 660 FIRES 0.01 0.06 2008 670 WASTE BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.06 0.20 2008 690 COOKING 0.00 0.82 2008 ALL ON-ROAD MOBILE 49.56 2.20 2008 810 AIRCRAFT 1.95 0.08 2008 820 TRAINS 3.37 0.09 2008 840 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.52 0.06 2008 850 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.01 0.00 2008 860 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 16.00 1.04 2008 870 FARM EQUIPMENT 1.75 0.10 2008 890 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00
2008 TOTALS: 81.72 35.15

CMB PM10 Source Categories (EIC SUM) Adjusted MVEB Adjusted Total Motor Vehicles PM10 (On-Road Mobile, 810-870) 3.57 Wood Smoke PM10 (610, 660, 670) 10.17 Fugitive Dust PM10 (430, 620-650) 19.77 0.4 20.17 Total NOx 81.72 0.4 82.12 Total PM10 35.15

Note that the increase in the motor vehicle emission budgets due to rounding up to the nearest integer is added to the Fugitive Dust PM10 and Total NOx emission forecasts. Fugitive Dust PM10: 14.6 rounds up to 15 = 0.4 increase Total NOx: 49.6 rounds up to 50 = 0.4 increasePM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Appendix A: Emissi ons Inventory Page A- 3 Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan - 2012 Emissions Data (Tons/Day) (Sacramento County Only)

WINTE R DAY

FYEAR EIC SUM EICSUMN NOX PM10
2012 10 ELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.83 0.30 2012 20 COGENERATION 0.00 0.00 2012 30 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COMBUSTION) 0.06 0.01 2012 50 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 1.05 0.04 2012 52 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.18 0.01 2012 60 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 1.50 0.16 2012 99 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.38 0.02 2012 110 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.00 0.00 2012 120 LANDFILLS 0.02 0.01 2012 130 INCINERATORS 0.01 0.00 2012 199 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 2012 210 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 2012 220 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 2012 230 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 2012 240 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 2012 250 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 2012 299 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 2012 310 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0.00 0.00 2012 330 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 2012 410 CHEMICAL 0.03 0.03 2012 420 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.10 2012 430 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.07 0.57 2012 440 METAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 2012 450 WOOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.19 2012 470 ELECTRONICS 0.00 0.00 2012 499 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.01 0.02 2012 510 CONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 2012 520 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 2012 530 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 2012 540 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.01 2012 610 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 4.32 9.21 2012 620 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 2.32 2012 630 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 7.22 2012 640 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 6.17 2012 645 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 3.58 2012 650 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.12 2012 660 FIRES 0.01 0.06 2012 670 WASTE BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.06 0.20 2012 690 COOKING 0.00 0.87 2012 ALL ON-ROAD MOBILE 37.61 2.13 2012 810 AIRCRAFT 2.25 0.09 2012 820 TRAINS 3.31 0.09 2012 840 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.51 0.07 2012 850 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.01 0.00 2012 860 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 13.61 0.86 2012 870 FARM EQUIPMENT 1.44 0.08 2012 890 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00
2012 TOTALS: 67.28 34.54

CMB PM10 Source Categories (EIC SUM) Adjusted MVEB Adjusted Total Motor Vehicles PM10 (On-Road Mobile, 810-870) 3.32 Wood Smoke PM10 (610, 660, 670) 9.47 Fugitive Dust PM10 (430, 620-650) 19.97 0.4 20.37 Total NOx 67.28 0.4 67.68 Total PM10 34.54

Note that the increase in the motor vehicle emission budgets due to rounding up to the nearest integer is added to the Fugitive Dust PM10 and Total NOx emission forecasts. Fugitive Dust PM10: 14.6 rounds up to 15 = 0.4 increase Total NOx: 37.6 rounds up to 38 = 0.4 increasePM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Appendix A: Emissi ons Inventory Page A- 4 Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan - 2022 Emissions Data (Tons/Day) (Sacramento County Only)

WINTE R DAY

FYEAR EIC SUM EICSUMN NOX PM10
2022 10 ELECTRIC UTILITIES 1.00 0.37 2022 20 COGENERATION 0.00 0.00 2022 30 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COMBUSTION) 0.05 0.01 2022 50 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 1.22 0.05 2022 52 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.09 0.01 2022 60 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 1.52 0.16 2022 99 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.26 0.01 2022 110 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.00 0.00 2022 120 LANDFILLS 0.02 0.01 2022 130 INCINERATORS 0.02 0.00 2022 199 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 2022 210 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 2022 220 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 2022 230 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 2022 240 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 2022 250 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 2022 299 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 2022 310 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0.00 0.00 2022 330 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 2022 410 CHEMICAL 0.03 0.03 2022 420 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.11 2022 430 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.08 0.65 2022 440 METAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 2022 450 WOOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.22 2022 470 ELECTRONICS 0.00 0.01 2022 499 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.01 0.03 2022 510 CONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 2022 520 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 2022 530 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 2022 540 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.01 2022 610 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 4.36 10.24 2022 620 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 2.13 2022 630 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 7.76 2022 640 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 6.35 2022 645 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 3.57 2022 650 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.11 2022 660 FIRES 0.01 0.07 2022 670 WASTE BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.05 0.19 2022 690 COOKING 0.00 1.00 2022 ALL ON-ROAD MOBILE 18.12 2.05 2022 810 AIRCRAFT 2.95 0.10 2022 820 TRAINS 3.62 0.10 2022 840 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.51 0.12 2022 850 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.01 0.00 2022 860 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 7.58 0.37 2022 870 FARM EQUIPMENT 0.64 0.03 2022 890 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00
2022 TOTALS: 42.20 35.86

CMB PM10 Source Categories (EIC SUM) Adjusted MVEB Adjusted Total Motor Vehicles PM10 (On-Road Mobile, 810-870) 2.77 Wood Smoke PM10 (610, 660, 670) 10.50 Fugitive Dust PM10 (430, 620-650) 20.58 2.2 22.78 Total NOx 42.20 0.9 43.10 Total PM10 35.86

Note that the 2022 motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEB) for Fugitive Dust PM10 are increased by 1.5 tpd to allow for potential increases in Paved Road Dust and Road Construction Dust from 2022 to 2035. This additional increase may be needed for SACOG to make a transportation conformity determination for a horizon year of 2035 or later for transportation planning purposes when using the latest year of motor vehicle emissions budgets (2022) from the PM10 Maintenance Plan.

In addition, the increase in the motor vehicle emission budgets due to rounding up to the nearest integer is added to the Fugitive Dust PM10 and Total NOx emission forecasts. Fugitive Dust PM10: 16.3 rounds up to 17 = 0.7 increase Total NOx: 18.1 rounds up to 19 = 0.9 increasePM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Appendix A: Emissi ons Inventory Page A- 5 Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan - 1990 Emissions Data (Tons/Day) (Sacramento County Only)

CARB CEFS v.1.06

FYEA R EIC SUM EICSUMN NOX PM10 1990 10 ELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.02 0.00 1990 20 COGENERATION 0.67 0.05 1990 30 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COMBUSTION) 0.20 0.01 1990 50 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.92 0.03 1990 52 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.39 0.02 1990 60 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 2.72 0.20 1990 99 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.40 0.02 1990 110 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.00 0.00 1990 120 LANDFILLS 0.00 0.00 1990 130 INCINERATORS 0.02 0.00 1990 199 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.39 1990 210 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 1990 220 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 1990 230 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 1990 240 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 1990 250 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 1990 299 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 1990 310 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0.00 0.00 1990 330 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 1990 410 CHEMICAL 0.01 0.06 1990 420 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.16 1990 430 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.13 0.87 1990 440 METAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 1990 450 WOOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.27 1990 470 ELECTRONICS 0.00 0.00 1990 499 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.00 0.00 1990 510 CONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 1990 520 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 1990 530 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 1990 540 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.01 1990 610 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 4.83 10.24 1990 620 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 2.81 1990 630 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 7.44 1990 640 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 5.92 1990 645 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 3.31 1990 650 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.14 1990 660 FIRES 0.01 0.04 1990 670 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.14 0.30 1990 690 COOKING 0.00 0.42 1990 ALL ON-ROAD MOBILE 92.61 2.46 1990 810 AIRCRAFT 0.73 0.04 1990 820 TRAINS 4.50 0.09 1990 840 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.33 0.04 1990 850 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.02 0.03 1990 860 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 20.88 1.67 1990 870 FARM EQUIPMENT 3.16 0.22 1990 890 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 1990 TOTALS: 132.69 37.27

CMB PM10 Source Categories (EIC SUM) Motor Vehicles PM10 (On-Road Mobile, 810-870) 4.55 Wood Smoke PM10 (610, 660, 670) 10.58 Fugitive Dust PM10 (430, 620-650) 20.49

Note that these 1990 PM10 source emissions are adjusted to reflect updated CARB inventory changes to Residential Fuel Combustion and Paved Road Dust per September 3, 2010 e-mail. WINTER DAYPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Appendix A: Emissi ons Inventory Page A- 6 Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan - 1995 Emissions Data (Tons/Day) (Sacramento County Only)

CARB CEFS v.1.06 WINTE R DAY

FYEAR EIC SUM EICSUMN NOX PM10
1995 10 ELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.01 0.00 1995 20 COGENERATION 0.66 0.14 1995 30 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COMBUSTION) 0.33 0.00 1995 50 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.85 0.04 1995 52 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.25 0.04 1995 60 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 1.81 0.18 1995 99 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.45 0.02 1995 110 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.00 0.00 1995 120 LANDFILLS 0.00 0.00 1995 130 INCINERATORS 0.03 0.01 1995 199 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.01 0.09 1995 210 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 1995 220 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 1995 230 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 1995 240 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 1995 250 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 1995 299 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 1995 310 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0.00 0.00 1995 330 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 1995 410 CHEMICAL 0.02 0.00 1995 420 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.22 1995 430 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.04 0.53 1995 440 METAL PROCESSES 1995 450 WOOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.24 1995 470 ELECTRONICS 0.00 0.00 1995 499 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.00 0.00 1995 510 CONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 1995 520 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 1995 530 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 1995 540 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.01 1995 610 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 4.58 9.79 1995 620 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 2.69 1995 630 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 5.30 1995 640 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 5.98 1995 645 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 3.14 1995 650 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.13 1995 660 FIRES 0.01 0.05 1995 670 WASTE BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.15 0.37 1995 690 COOKING 0.00 0.47 1995 ALL ON-ROAD MOBILE 82.25 2.05 1995 810 AIRCRAFT 1.09 0.05 1995 820 TRAINS 4.56 0.09 1995 840 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.35 0.04 1995 850 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.02 0.03 1995 860 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 18.08 1.16 1995 870 FARM EQUIPMENT 2.70 0.16 1995 890 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00
1995 TOTALS: 118.24 33.01

CMB PM10 Source Categories (EIC SUM) Motor Vehicles PM10 (On-Road Mobile, 810-870) 3.58 Wood Smoke PM10 (610, 660, 670) 10.20 Fugitive Dust PM10 (430, 620-650) 17.77

Note that these 1995 PM10 source emissions are adjusted to reflect updated CARB inventory changes to Residential Fuel Combustion and Paved Road Dust per September 3, 2010 e-mail.PM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Appendix A: Emissi ons Inventory Page A- 7 Sacramento PM10 Maintenance Plan - 2000 Emissions Data (Tons/Day) (Sacramento County Only)

CARB CEFS v.1.06

FYEAR EIC SUM EICSUMN NOX PM10 2000 10 ELECTRIC UTILITIES 0.40 0.15 2000 20 COGENERATION 0.02 0.01 2000 30 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION (COMBUSTION) 0.05 0.01 2000 50 MANUFACTURING AND INDUSTRIAL 0.83 0.04 2000 52 FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING 0.30 0.02 2000 60 SERVICE AND COMMERCIAL 1.64 0.17 2000 99 OTHER (FUEL COMBUSTION) 0.49 0.03 2000 110 SEWAGE TREATMENT 0.00 0.00 2000 120 LANDFILLS 0.02 0.01 2000 130 INCINERATORS 0.01 0.00 2000 199 OTHER (WASTE DISPOSAL) 0.00 0.00 2000 210 LAUNDERING 0.00 0.00 2000 220 DEGREASING 0.00 0.00 2000 230 COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 2000 240 PRINTING 0.00 0.00 2000 250 ADHESIVES AND SEALANTS 0.00 0.00 2000 299 OTHER (CLEANING AND SURFACE COATINGS) 0.00 0.00 2000 310 OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION 0.00 0.00 2000 330 PETROLEUM MARKETING 0.00 0.00 2000 410 CHEMICAL 0.05 0.02 2000 420 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 0.00 0.04 2000 430 MINERAL PROCESSES 0.14 0.59 2000 440 METAL PROCESSES 0.01 0.01 2000 450 WOOD AND PAPER 0.00 0.13 2000 470 ELECTRONICS 0.00 0.00 2000 499 OTHER (INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES) 0.00 0.11 2000 510 CONSUMER PRODUCTS 0.00 0.00 2000 520 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS AND RELATED PROCESS SOLVENTS 0.00 0.00 2000 530 PESTICIDES/FERTILIZERS 0.00 0.00 2000 540 ASPHALT PAVING / ROOFING 0.00 0.01 2000 610 RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION 4.32 9.34 2000 620 FARMING OPERATIONS 0.00 2.54 2000 630 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION 0.00 6.53 2000 640 PAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 6.03 2000 645 UNPAVED ROAD DUST 0.00 3.14 2000 650 FUGITIVE WINDBLOWN DUST 0.00 0.13 2000 660 FIRES 0.01 0.05 2000 670 MANAGED BURNING AND DISPOSAL 0.13 0.28 2000 690 COOKING 0.00 0.52 2000 ALL ON-ROAD MOBILE 63.26 1.90 2000 810 AIRCRAFT 1.72 0.07 2000 820 TRAINS 4.90 0.10 2000 840 RECREATIONAL BOATS 0.34 0.05 2000 850 OFF-ROAD RECREATIONAL VEHICLES 0.01 0.01 2000 860 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT 19.11 1.23 2000 870 FARM EQUIPMENT 2.34 0.14 2000 890 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING 0.00 0.00 2000 TOTALS: 100.11 33.36

CMB PM10 Source Categories (EIC SUM) Motor Vehicles PM10 (On-Road Mobile, 810-870) 3.50 Wood Smoke PM10 (610, 660, 670) 9.67 Fugitive Dust PM10 (430, 620-650) 18.96

Note that these 2000 PM10 source emissions ar e adjusted to reflect updated CARB inventory changes to Residential Fuel Combustion and Paved Road Dust per September 3, 2010 e-mail. WINTER DAYPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Appendix B: Control Mea sures Page B-1 Appendix B: Control Measures

The following fugitive dust measures are considered to be potential reasonably available control measures (RACM) for PM 10 :

Source Category Control Action Paved Roads Improved sanding/salting applications/materials Truck covering Construction site measures Curb installation and shoulder stabilization Storm water drainage Unpaved Roads Paving and surface improvements (graveling) Chemical stabilization Traffic reduction plans Vehicle speed reduction Storage Piles (Transfer Operations) Wet suppression and dust control Construction/Demolition Paving permanent roads early in project Truck covering Access apron construction and cleaning Watering of graveled travel surfaces Open Area Wind Erosion Revegetation Limitation of off-road vehicle traffic Limitation of leafblowers Agricultural Tilling Land conservation practices

The following residential wood combustion control measur es are consider ed to be potential reasonably availabl e control measures for PM 10 :

Source Category Control Action Integral Measures Public awareness/education and voluntary curtailment program Mandatory curtailment during predicted periods of high PM 10 concentrations New stoves EPA-certified Phase II Improved wood burning performance

 Control of wood moisture content

 Weatherization of homes with wood stoves

 Educational o p acit y p ro g ram Existing Installations Convert wood- burning fireplaces to gas logs Changeover to EPA-certified Phase II stoves or low emitting stoves New Installations Gas fireplaces or gas logs in new installations Upgrade offset Restriction on number or density of new stove and fireplace installations Requirement that new stove installations are low emitting New and Existing Installations Device offset and upgrade offsetPM 10 Implementation/Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request for Sacramento County October 28, 2010

Appendix C: Transportation Conformity Budgets Page C- 1 Appendix C: Transportati on Conformity Budgets

Sacramento County PM 10 Maintenance Plan Transportation Conformity Budgets Average Winter Day

Tons per Winter Day

Sacramento County 2008 2012 2022

NO X PM 10 NO X PM 10 NO X PM 10 Direct Exha ust (includes tire and brake wear for PM 10 ) 49.6 2.2 37.6 2.1 18.1 2.1

Paved Road Dust --- 6.1 --- 6.2 --- 6.4 + 1.0

Unpaved Road Dust --- 3.6 --- 3.6 --- 3.6

Road Construction Dust --- 2.7 --- 2.8 --- 2.8 + 0.5

Total 49.6 14.6 37.6 14.6 18.1 14.8 + 1.5

Total (rounded up to nearest ton) 50 15 38 15 19 17

Notes:

1. An additio nal 1.5 tons per day of PM 10 was added to the 2022 PM 10 budgets in order to acco unt for potential in creases in Paved R oad Dust and Road Construction Dust beyond 2022. This additional increase may be needed for SACOG to make a transpor tation conformity determination for a horizon year of 2035 or later for transportation planning purposes when using the latest year of motor vehicle emissions budgets (2022) in the PM 10 Maintenance Plan.

2. The additional incre ase in 1.0 ton per day of PM 10 to Paved Road Dust and 0.5 ton per day of PM 10 to Road Construction Dust in the 2022 transportatio n budgets are accounted for in the maintenance demonstration emission forecasts for Fugitive Dust PM 10 to ensure consistency with the maintenance demonstration.

3. The additional increase in the 2008, 2012, and 2022 NO X and PM 10 transportation budgets due to rounding up to the nearest ton are accounted for in the maintenance demonstration emission forecasts for Total NO X and Fugitive Dust PM 10 to ensure consistency with the maintenance demonstration.

4. If the proposed MVEBs are determined to be adeq uate by EPA, future transportation plans will need to conform to these motor vehicle emissions budgets in any future transportation plan amendment and updates. SACOG must ensure that the aggregate wint ertime transportation emissions in Sacramento County (including, but not limited to, vehicle em issions, dust from paved and unpaved roads and road construction), rounded up to the nearest integer, do not exceed these levels when approving new metropolitan transportation plans and transportation im provement programs, even if the mix of projects changes or growth increases.