### SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

FINAL

2003 COACHELLA VALLEY

PM10 STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

(A Revision to the 2002 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan)

August 1, 2003

Deputy Executive Officer Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources Elaine Chang, DrPH

Assistant Deputy Executive Officer Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources Laki Tisopulos, Ph.D., P.E.

Manager Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources Zorik Pirveysian

Authors: Julia C. Lester, Ph.D. Program Supervisor Michael Laybourn, A.I.C.P. Air Quality Specialist

Reviewed by: Frances Keeler Senior Deputy District Counsel John Olvera Senior Deputy District Counsel

Contributors: Joe Cassmassi Senior Meteorologist Shoreh Cohanim Air Quality Specialist Kevin Durkee Air Quality Specialist

Kathy Hsiao Program Supervisor Bong Mann-Kim, Ph.D. Air Quality Specialist Mary Woods, Ph.D. Air Quality Specialist Xinqiu Zhang, Ph.D. Air Quality SpecialistSOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

GOVERNING BOARD

CHAIR: WILLIAM A. BURKE, Ed.D. Speaker of the Assembly Appointee

VICE CHAIR: S. ROY WILSON, Ed.D. Supervisor, Fourth District Riverside County Representative

MEMBERS:

FRED AGUIAR Supervisor, Fourth District San Bernardino County Representative

MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH Supervisor, Fifth District Los Angeles County Representative

HAL BERNSON Councilmember, City of Los Angeles Cities Representative, Los Angeles County, Western Region

JANE CARNEY Senate Rules Committee Appointee

WILLIAM S. CRAYCRAFT Councilmember, City of Mission Viejo Cities Representative, Orange County

BEATRICE J.S. LAPISTO-KIRTLEY Councilmember, City of Bradbury Cities Representative, Los Angeles County, Eastern Region

RONALD O. LOVERIDGE Mayor, City of Riverside Cities Representative, Riverside County

LEONARD PAULITZ Mayor Pro Tem, City of Montclair Cities Representative, San Bernardino County

JAMES W. SILVA Supervisor, Second District Orange County Representative

CYNTHIA VERDUGO-PERALTA Governor's Appointee

EXECUTIVE OFFICER:

BARRY R. WALLERSTEIN, D.Env.LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

APCD Air Pollution Control District AQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District AQMP Air Quality Management Plan

BACM Best Available Control Measure

Basin South Coast Air Basin

CARB California Air Resources Board CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CVAG Coachella Valley Association of Governments CVSIP Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Pl an MSM Most Stringent Measure

MSRC Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review C ommittee NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NEP Natural Events Policy

NEAP Natural Events Action Plan PM10 Particulate Matter with Aerodynamic Diameter l ess than 10 Microns RACM Reasonably Available Control Measure SIP State Implementation Plan U.S. EPA U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyFinal 2003 CVSIP Table of Contents

TOC – i August 2003 

### TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

................................................... ............................................... i

TABLE OF TABLES

................................................... ................................................... .. ii

TABLE OF FIGURES

................................................... ................................................. ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

................................................... .....................................ES-1 Air Quality and Regulatory Background ............. ..............................................ES-1 Purpose of the 2003 CVSIP .........................

................................................... ...ES-1

CHAPTER 1 – BACKGROUND INFORMATION Purpose and Regulatory Requirements............... ................................................. 1- 1 The Coachella Valley Area.........................

................................................... ...... 1-2 Latest PM10 Air Quality...........................

................................................... ........ 1-4 Previous Coachella Valley SIPs and Plans .......... ................................................ 1-5

Latest Dust Control Efforts.......................

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

CHAPTER 2 – EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE Revisions to the 2002 CVSIP Emissions Inventory ... ......................................... 2-1 2003 CVSIP Emissions Inventory ....................

................................................... 2-2 Transportation Conformity Emission Budget for Coac hella Valley.................... 2-9

Interim Milestone Year............................

................................................... ....... 2-11

CHAPTER 3 – ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION UPDATE Previous Coachella Valley Modeling ................ .................................................. 3 -1 Modeling Attainment Demonstration ................. ................................................. 3- 2

CHAPTER 4 – 2002 CVSIP IMPLEMENTATION AND 2003 CVSI P APPROVAL REQUEST 2002 CVSIP Implementation Summary ................. ............................................. 4-1 Formal Request for Approval of the 2003 CVSIP Elem ents............................... 4-1Final 2003 CVSIP Table of Contents

TOC – ii August 2003 

### TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF TABLES

Table 1-1 Expected Annual Arithmetic Mean 1-4

Table 1-2 Coachella Valley 1 (Palm Springs) Annual Average Me an 1-5

Table 1-3 Coachella Valley 2 (Indio) Annual Average Mean 1-5

Table 2-1 Comparison of Year 2000 Fugitive Dust PM10 Emission s 2-2

Table 2-2 1995 PM10 Coachella Valley Emissions Inventory 2-3

Table 2-3 2000 Coachella Valley PM10 Emission Inventory 2-4

Table 2-4 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 Emission Inventory 2-5

Table 2-5 2006 Coachella Valley PM10 Emission Inventory 2-6

Table 2-6 Summary of 2002 CVSIP Control Measure Implementatio n 2-7

Table 2-7 2006 Coachella Valley PM10 Emission Inventory With 2002

CVSIP Controls 2-8

Table 2-8 Transportation Conformity PM10 Emission Budget for 2006

and Post-Attainment Years and Non-transportation Em issions for the Coachella Valley (tons/day) 2-10

Table 2-9 PM10 Emission Interim Milestone Year Target 2-12

Table 2-10 Transportation Conformity Emission Budget at the En d of

2003 Interim Milestone Year 2-12

Table 3-1 Modeling Base-Year (1995) and Modeled 2000 PM10

Coachella Valley Contributions 3-2

Table 3-2 Base-Year and 2006 Modeled PM10 Coachella Valley

Concentrations 3-3

Table 3-3 Base-Year and 2006 Conformity Scenario Modeled PM10

Coachella Valley Concentrations 3-4



### TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1 District, Air Basins, and Coachella Valley Air Moni toring

Stations 1-2

Figure 1-2 Coachella Valley Communities 1-3

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARYFinal 2003 CVSIP Executive Summary

ES – 1 August 2003 

### INTRODUCTION
This executive summary includes:

 Background information about recent PM10 air qualit y in the Coachella Valley and pertinent regulatory background;

 Purpose of the 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Imp lementation Plan (2003 CVSIP).



### AIR QUALITY AND REGULATORY BACKGROUND
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQ MD) is the local agency responsible for air quality assessment and improvem ent in the Coachella Valley. The Coachella Valley is the desert portion of Riverside County in the Salton Sea Air Basin. The Coachella Valley and the AQMD have a de monstrated history of adopting and implementing PM10 dust controls (e.g., 1990 CVSIP, 1994 BACM SIP, AQMD Rules 403 and 403.1, local dust control ordina nces, clean streets management program) to ensure healthful air for local resident s and tourists. These efforts are summarized in the 1996 Coachella Valley PM10 Redesi gnation Request and Maintenance Plan (1996 CV Plan). U.S. EPA SIP-appr oved the Coachella Valley’s local dust control ordinances and AQMD’s fugitive d ust rules, effective January 8,

1999. The attainment date for serious non-attainme nt areas to achieve the PM10 NAAQS was 2001. After years of demonstrating attai nment of the PM10 standards, PM10 levels in 1999 through 2001 did not demonstrat e attainment of the annual average PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). For reference, Coachella Valley has attained the 24-hour PM10 stan dard since 1993.

When it became apparent that the Coachella Valley w ould not be able to continue to demonstrate attainment of the PM10 NAAQS by 2001, A QMD staff, in conjunction with local Coachella Valley jurisdictions, agencies , and stakeholders prepared the 2002 CVSIP. The 2002 CVSIP included control progra m enhancements that met the Most Stringent Measure (MSM) requirements and CAA r equirements for an

extension of the PM10 attainment date to 2006. Loc al assistance with 2002 CVSIP preparation was also provided by the Coachella Vall ey Air Quality Ad Hoc Task Force. The 2002 CVSIP was adopted by the AQMD Gove rning Board on June 21, 2002. It was adopted by CVAG’s Executive Committee on June 25, 2002. After comments by U.S. EPA, the AQMD Governing Board adop ted the 2002 CVSIP Addendum on September 12, 2002, which detailed the 2003 milestone year target and emission budgets. U.S. EPA proposed approval of th e 2002 CVSIP on December 17, 2002, and final approval occurred on April 18, 2003 (67 FR 77206-77211). AQMD and CVAG staff are currently working on implementin g the 2002 CVSIP.



### PURPOSE OF THE 2003 CVSIP
At the time of the 2002 CVSIP development, CARB had not completed its update of its motor vehicle emissions model. As part of the June 21, 2002 adopting resolution, AQMD Governing Board directed the Executive Officer to update the 2002 CVSIP, including emissions budgets in 2003, using the late st approved motor vehicle emissions model and planning assumptions. It also requested that the U.S. EPAFinal 2003 CVSIP Executive Summary

ES – 2 August 2003 approve the emissions budgets based on the 2002 CVS IP for use only until the U.S. EPA finds adequate the revised budgets in the 2003 revision to the 2002 CVSIP.

The 2003 CVSIP updates the 2002 CVSIP emissions inv entories, transportation mobile source budgets, and attainment demonstration with the latest approved motor vehicle emissions model (i.e., EMFAC2002) and plann ing assumptions. AQMD is requesting that CARB and U.S. EPA approve the follo wing 2003 CVSIP revisions to the corresponding elements of the 2002 CVSIP:

• Base year and future baseline PM10 emissions invent ories (c.f. Tables 2-2 through 2-5)

• Emission reduction commitment for the attainment ye ar 2006 (c.f. Table 2-6)

• Future controlled PM10 emissions inventories for 20 06 (c.f. Tables 2-7)

• Transportation conformity emission budget (c.f. Tab le 2-8)

• Interim milestone year targets and transportation c onformity emission budget for the end of year 2003 (c.f. Tables 2-9 and 2-10, res pectively)

• Attainment demonstration for 2006 (c.f. Table 3-2)

• Conformity scenario attainment demonstration (c.f. Tables 3-3)

Other elements of the 2002 CVSIP remain the same, e .g., the Most Stringent Measures analysis, the Coachella Valley control and contingency measures, and the

Natural Event Action Plan.

The following summarizes the highlights of each cha pter of the 2003 CVSIP:

Chapter 1: Background Information The introduction describes the purpose of the 2003 CVSIP, brief background information on the Coachella Valley, 2002 PM10 leve ls, a brief summary of the 1990, 1994, 1996 and 2002 Coachella Valley plans, and 200 2 CVSIP implementation.

Chapter 2: Emission Inventory Update 2002 CVSIP emissions in most categories have been u pdated based on the latest emission inventory methodologies. Mobile source em issions are based on latest CARB-approved motor vehicle emissions model and pla nning assumptions. Future growth is based on the latest projections and plann ing assumptions. Future year baseline and controlled emissions are presented for 2006 (attainment year), as well as 2003 (reasonable further progress milestone year). The chapter also includes emission budgets for use in transportation conformi ty determinations.

Chapter 3: Attainment Demonstration Update This chapter contains the modeling attainment demon stration, based on the 2002 CVSIP control strategy.

Chapter 4: 2002 CVSIP Implementation Summary and 2 003 CVSIP Approval Request This chapter provides a summary of the implementati on of the 2002 CVSIP and

checklist of 2003 CVSIP elements to be forwarded to CARB and U.S. EPA for review and approval.

### CHAPTER 1

BACKGROUND INFORMATIONFinal 2003 CVSIP Chapter 1: Background Information

1 - 1 August 2003 

### INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses the following:

 The purpose and regulatory background of this plan;

 The Coachella Valley area;

 2002 PM10 measurements

 Previous Coachella Valley SIPs, plans and dust regu lations; and

 2002 CVSIP implementation.



### PURPOSE AND REGULATORY BACKGROUND The Coachella Valley is currently designated as a s erious non-attainment area for PM10. The AQMD is the air agency responsible for a ir quality planning and regulations in the Coachella Valley (Health and Saf ety Code §§ 40410, 40413). Since it was designated as a PM10 non-attainment ar ea, Coachella Valley governments, agencies, private and public stakehold ers, along with the AQMD, have proactively worked to reduce unhealthful levels of PM10 dust. These efforts are

detailed in the 1990 SIP for PM10 in the Coachella Valley (1990 CVSIP), the 1994 BACM Revision of the 1990 CVSIP (1994 BACM CVSIP), and the 1996 Coachella Valley PM10 Attainment Redesignation Request and Ma intenance Plan (1996 CV Plan). As noted in the 1996 CV Plan, local and AQM D dust control efforts were so successful that Coachella Valley became the first s erious non-attainment area in the nation to request redesignation. The local dust co ntrol ordinances and AQMD’s fugitive dust rules 403 and 403.1 were SIP-approved by U.S. EPA on January 8, 1999 (cf. 63 FR 67784-67787, dated December 9, 1998). T he AQMD has invoked the U.S. EPA’s Natural Events Policy (NEP) to identify high PM10 days that resulted from high-wind natural events. These days are not used in determining the 24-hour or annual average PM10 levels. Based on monitoring dat a and the NEP, the Coachella Valley demonstrated attainment of the annual averag e PM10 NAAQS (expected annual average mean for past three years) for each year from 1995 through 1999. It

has demonstrated attainment of the 24-hour PM10 NAA QS from 1993 through 2002.

In 1999, annual average PM10 levels jumped up to 52 .7 μ g/m 3 , significantly above levels seen in previous years. (PM10 levels all re flect removal of natural events, if any.) An improving economy had resulted in greater development, particularly of large resorts and recreational areas, and the area had suffered a number of dry years. After a series of AQMD enforcement actions at these large developments, the AQMD began a program of greater enforcement and outreach to developers and builders, and local government dust plan review and enforcement s taff. The expected annual average mean for 1999-2001 was 51.7 μ g/m 3

.

In response to this situation, the 2002 CVSIP was d eveloped, including a Most Stringent Measures analysis and additional control measures. It was adopted by the AQMD Governing Board on June 21, 2002. It was adop ted by CVAG’s Executive Committee on June 25, 2002. After comments by U.S. EPA, the AQMD Governing Board adopted the 2002 CVSIP Addendum on September 12, 2002, which detailed the 2003 milestone year target and emission budgets . U.S. EPA approved the 2002 CVSIP on April 18, 2003 (67 FR 77206-77211). AQMD and CVAG staff are currently working on implementing the 2002 CVSIP.Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 1: Background Information

1 - 2 August 2003 At the time of the 2002 CVSIP, CARB had not complet ed its update of its motor vehicle emissions model. As part of the June 21, 2 002 adopting resolution, AQMD Governing Board directed the Executive Officer to u pdate the 2002 CVSIP, including emissions budgets in 2003, using the latest approve d motor vehicle emissions model and planning assumptions. It also requested that t he U.S. EPA approve the emissions budgets based on the 2002 CVSIP for use only until the U.S. EPA finds adequate the revised budgets for the same years submitted as par t of the 2003 revision to the 2002

CVSIP.



### THE COACHELLA VALLEY AREA The Coachella Valley PM10 non-attainment area consi sts of an approximately 2,500 square mile portion of central Riverside County (se e Figures 1-1 and 1-2). The Valley itself is within the newly created Salton Se a Air Basin (formerly Southeast Desert Air Basin) and is aligned in a northwest-sou theast orientation stretching from Banning Pass to the Salton Sea. Geographically, th e Valley is bounded by the San Jacinto Mountains to the west, and the Little San B ernardino Mountains to the east. Elevation ranges from approximately 500 feet above sea level in the northern part of the Valley to about 150 feet below sea level near t he Salton Sea.

South Coast Air Quality Management District

SCAQMD Jurisdiction Mojave Desert

Air Basin

Salton Sea

Air Basin San Diego

Air Basin South

Central

Coast Air Basin

South Coast

Air Basin

San Diego County Imperial County

Riverside County Los Angeles County Kern County San Bernardino County

Orange County Santa

Barbara County

Ventura County San Joaquin Valley

Air Basin

COACHELLA

VALLEY San Bernardino County



### FIGURE 1-1

District, Air Basins, and Coachella Valley AreaFinal 2003 CVSIP Chapter 1: Background Information

1 - 3 August 2003 

### FIGURE 1-2

Coachella Valley CommunitiesFinal 2003 CVSIP Chapter 1: Background Information

1 - 4 August 2003 

### LATEST PM10 AIR QUALITY A more detailed description of the Valley’s meteoro logy, climate, winds, and blowsand can be found in the first chapter of the 1 990 CVSIP, 1994 CVSIP and the 1996 CV Plan, which are included by reference. PM1 0 continues to be sampled by means of size selective inlet high volume (SSI) sam plers that collect airborne particles with diameter smaller than approximately 10 micrometers over a 24-hour period. The 2002 CVSIP describes the Coachella Val ley’s PM10 air quality from the early 1990s through 2001. Tables 1-1 through 1-3 s ummarize PM10 air quality metrics for the past years. Coachella Valley monit oring station 1 is in the Palm Springs area, which is more sheltered from high win ds and is generally upwind of most valley fugitive dust sources. Coachella Valle y monitoring station 2 is in the Indio area, in the eastern portion of the valley.

TABLE 1-1

Expected Annual Arithmetic Mean

Site/Year Arithmetic Mean PM10 Concentration μg/m 3 Expected

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 AAMQM AAM
Coachella Valley 1

99 27.1 28.8 35.6 23.9 28.9

00 16.9 25.0 28.6 26.9 24.4

01 22.3 29.6 69.1 22.0 35.8

01* 22.3 29.6 32.8 22.0 26.7 26.7*

02 22.3 31.2 30.6 24.5 27.2 25.6*
Coachella Valley 2

99 54.6 48.9 59.5 47.7 52.7

00 47.9 63.3 60.7 49.8 55.4

00* 47.9 53.1* 56.6* 49.8 51.9*

01 35.7 63.5 91.9 44.8 59.0

01* 35.7 52.7* 67.9* 44.8 50.2* 51.6*

02 41.5 57.2 59.3 56.2 53.5

02* 41.5 52.6* 59.3 48.9* 50.6* 51.0*
* Values after deletion of high-wind natural event s. Qn = arithmetic mean PM10 for nth calendar quarter.
AAMQM = annual arithmetic mean of quarterly means.
Expected AAM = expected annual arithmetic mean = av erage of three years AAMQM.

In summary, Tables 1-2 and 1-3 show the annual aver age mean and 3-year expected annual average mean PM10 for Coachella Valley 1 and 2, respectively, from 1995 through 2002. In Tables 1-2 and 1-3, an asterisk ( *) denotes that at least one highwind event has been excluded from the data accordin g to the Natural Events Policy.Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 1: Background Information

1 - 5 August 2003 TABLE 1-2

Coachella Valley 1 Annual Average Mean (AAM) and La gging 3-Year AAM PM10 in μg/m 3

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001* 2002*

AAM 27.4 29.3 26.4 26.4 28.9 24.4 26.7 27.2 3-Year Average 27.4 28.1 27.7 27.4 27.2 26.5 26.7 25.6

TABLE 1-3

Coachella Valley 2 AAM and Lagging 3-Year AAM PM10 in μg/m 3

1995* 1996* 1997* 1998* 1999 2000* 2001* 2002*

AAM 49.6 50.7 49.7 47.2 52.7 51.9 50.2 50.6 3-Year Average 48.2 49.7 50.0 49.2 49.9 50.6 51.6 51.0



### PREVIOUS COACHELLA VALLEY SIPS AND PLANS Since adoption of the 1990 CVSIP, the local Coachel la Valley jurisdictions, CVAG, and the AQMD have worked closely to implement the v arious 1990 CVSIP control measures. This team approach has resulted in what was the most comprehensive dust control program in the nation at that time. The 19 96 CVSIP describes the implementation status of these control measures in detail. In the 1994 CVSIP, additional BACM measures were identified. However, by 1996, the Coachella Valley had achieved the PM10 NAAQS and the AQMD requested its redesignation to attainment. At that time, the 1994 CVSIP BACM meas ures were incorporated as contingency measures in the 1996 CV Plan. In respo nse to elevated PM10 levels from 1999 through 2001, the AQMD prepared and adopt ed the 2002 CVSIP, which included a most stringent measures analysis and enh anced control strategy. The 2002

CVSIP demonstrated attainment of the federal PM10 s tandards by 2006. The 2002 CVSIP described the previous dust control measures, including the original local dust control ordinances and AQMD Rules 403 and 403.1, al l of which were adopted in 1992 and 1993 and have been SIP-approved by U.S. EP A, and the Clean Streets Management Program.



### LATEST DUST CONTROL EFFORTS

The 2002 CVSIP summarizes the dust control efforts that arose in response to significant dust control problems and nuisance situ ations at large construction sites in Spring 1999 and the rise in local PM10 levels above the annual average standard from 1999 through 2001. These programs, that are descri bed in the 2002 CVSIP and summarized below, are continuing, including the exp edited implementation of CMAQ-funded PM10 control projects, CVAG- and AQMD- sponsored Compliance Promotion Classes, “dust czars” for each jurisdicti on, and a full-time AQMD inspector to coordinate AQMD and local enforcement activities.

In May 2001, AQMD assigned a full-time inspector to the Coachella Valley to improve outreach and compliance with existing dust control regulations. This was in addition to AQMD inspectors who had been responding to potential AQMD ruleFinal 2003 CVSIP Chapter 1: Background Information

1 - 6 August 2003 violations. In addition, each Coachella Valley jur isdiction has assigned a “dust czar” to coordinate dust control for that jurisdiction (e .g. dust plan review, ordinance enforcement, public and industry outreach, AQMD lia ison). All “dust czars” have taken the Compliance Promotion Class and have worke d with the AQMD inspector to address dust sources within their individual jurisd ictions.

On October 4, 2002, the Board approved the FY 2002- 03 AB 2766 MSRC Discretionary Fund Work Program in Concept totaling $14.95 million. This included the Coachella Valley PM10 Reduction Program; the t otal amount of Discretionary Funds allocated to this category was $1,000,000. Th e Coachella Valley Program offers to co-fund qualifying particulate matter red uction projects, focusing on the early implementation of Most Stringent Measures (MS Ms) as defined by the South Coast AQMD in the new Coachella Valley State Implem entation Plan. The goal of the MSRC Program is to assist CVAG jurisdictions in effectively and expeditiously implementing MSMs prior to the imposition of mandat ory PM10 Reduction Rules by the AQMD. The MSRC Program provides qualifying CMA Q projects an 11.47% match against federal CMAQ (TEA-21) funds, a 75% ma tch against AB 2766 Subvention Funds, and a 50% match when other source s of funds are applied. The solicitation mechanism is a Program Announcement an d Application, with a proposal receipt period beginning on November 5, 2002 and en ding on April 8, 2003. The funding was available on a first-come, first-serve basis and twelve projects were approved for a total of $1,000,000. Leveraged with CMAQ, AB2766 subvention, and other funds, this program resulted in over $5,000,0 00 of PM10 mitigation and control projects being initiated in the Coachella Valley. Details can be found in the 2003 February and March AQMD Governing Board agendas.

The Coachella Valley Air Quality Ad Hoc Task Force (CV Task Force), sponsored by CVAG, is assisting CVAG and the AQMD in implementin g the 2002 CVSIP. The CV Task Force includes mayors and city council memb ers of all Coachella Valley cities, a County Supervisor from Riverside County, tribal chairs or vice-chairs from all local Indian tribes, CVAG Energy and Environmen tal Resources subcommittee members (city managers), the Coachella Valley Econo mic Partnership, and representatives from the local farm bureau, buildin g industry association, developers, Caltrans, as well as staff from AQMD, CARB, and U.S . EPA. Other interested stakeholders, including SunLine Transit Agency, Coa chella Valley Water District, Southern California Gas Company, the Building Indus try Association (BIA), local developers, the Construction Industry Air Quality C oalition (CIAQC), local farmers, and the “dust czars,” have also participated. The CV Task Force met on March 12, 2003, to review the initial drafts of the model ord inance, dust control handbook, and memorandum of understanding, which taken together, will implement the local government portion of the 2002 CVSIP control measur es.

### CHAPTER 2

EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATEFinal 2003 CVSIP Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory Up date

2- 1 August 2003 

### INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses the following:

 Revisions to the previous emission inventory; and

 The 2003 CVSIP emissions inventory;

 Transportation conformity PM10 emission budget; and

 Milestone year (2003) emission target and transport ation conformity budget.



### REVISIONS TO THE 2002 CVSIP EMISSIONS INVENTORY The 2002 CVSIP inventory was extensively based on t he 1996 CV Plan inventory assumptions, except that construction emissions for 2000 were updated using the latest Construction Industry Research Board (CIRB) activity data. The emissions inventory for the 2003 CVSIP has been comprehensive ly updated, based on the latest emission factors, activity levels, mobile source em ission models, and population growth, socioeconomic and transportation system est imates. A summary of the latest inventory methodologies, including those that have been updated or improved, can be found in Chapter 1 of the 2003 AQMP, Appendix III – Base and Future Year Inventories. Specific Coachella Valley inventory r evisions are described below.

Mobile Sources CARB, U.S. EPA and SCAG have revised the mobile sou rce emissions model EMFAC and the related planning assumptions to impro ve the mobile source emissions inventory. CARB’s EMFAC7G model was used in the 1996 CV Plan and

the 2002 CVSIP. EMFAC2002 model is used in the 200 3 AQMP and 2003 CVSIP. Between these two models, CARB released two other E MFAC models; they are

EMFAC2001 version 2.02 and EMFAC2001 version 2.08. Major improvements from EMFAC7G to EMFAC2002 include updated unregistered v ehicle estimates; updated Inspection/Maintenance benefit estimates; updated i dle emission rates; extended idle for heavy-duty trucks; adding EVII and Tier II prog rams; and adding air conditioning correction factors, as well as updating all the exi sting factors from the most current adopted rules and available data and other technica l items (see Chapter 1 of the 2003 AQMP, Appendix III – Base and Future Year Inventori es). A detailed description of EMFAC2002 is available at CARB’s website. ( www.arb.ca.gov/msei/msei.htm)

EMFAC2002 results indicate that EMFAC7G underestima ted the emissions. It should be noted that in addition to methodology imp rovements, EMFAC2002 also incorporates rules adopted since the release of EMF AC7G.

Stationary Sources The stationary source inventory decreased for all c riteria pollutants due to the effect of rules adopted by SCAQMD and CARB as well as due to the improved or updated area source methodologies used for estimating emiss ions. The 2002 CVSIP were based on a 1993 base year, as was done in 1996 CV P lan. Subsequent to the approval of the 1996 CV Plan (and 1997 AQMP), CARB released updated emission factors for several fugitive dust sources. These emission fact ors and methodologies are available at CARB’s web site ( www.arb.ca.gov/emisinv/areasrc/index7.htm) . The 2003 CVSIP incorporates those updated emission factors and / o r recent activity data for source categories such as entrained paved and unpaved road dust, construction, windblown dust, and farming operations. As in the 2003 AQMP, these emission estimates use 1997 as the base year. The greatest change was in the estimation of windblownFinal 2003 CVSIP Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory Up date

2- 2 August 2003 agricultural dust; new emission factors dramaticall y reduced annual emission estimates. [Peak 24-hour windblown dust estimates have not changed and are the overwhelming contributor to peak 24-hour PM10 days. The estimates assume 60 mph and higher winds and are calculated as in the 2 002 CVSIP (see page 3-1).] Better road construction activity data have become available with the release of SCAG’s 2001 RTP, resulting in revised road construc tion emissions. Entrained unpaved paved road dust emission estimates are smal ler in the 2003 CVSIP due to

lower CARB emission factor. Entrained road dust re mains the major source of fugitive primary PM10 emissions. Overall emission estimates are significantly lower for the 2003 CVSIP, mostly due to the sharply lower estimate of annual windblown dust emissions. Table 2-1 indicates the changes to the PM10 fugitive dust inventories.

Table 2-1 Comparison of Year 2000 Fugitive Dust PM10 Emission s (Tons/Day)

Source Category 2002 CVSIP* Draft 2003 CVSIP*

Paved Road Dust 7.29 6.89 Unpaved Road Dust 5.44 4.23

Construction 7.42 5.46 Farming Operations 1.06 1.23

Windblown 31.31 9.31

Total 52.52 27.12 *1993 base year inventory used in 1997 AQMP ** 1997 base year inventory with updated methodolog ies used in 2003 AQMP



### 2003 CVSIP EMISSIONS INVENTORY
As indicated in Table 2-3, about 30.5 tons of PM10 were emitted on an average day in the Coachella Valley in 2000. [The1995 baseline inventory is used in the modeling analysis and is described in Table 2-2. Note the i ncrease in year 2000 construction emissions from 1995. Large–scale construction incr eased by a factor of thirty between those years (see 2002 CVSIP, page 3-4.)] A pproximately 29.1 tons/day (~ 95% of the total) were fugitive dust emissions from wind erosion of disturbed sources, entrained road dust, construction and demo lition activity, and farming operations. About 0.8 tons/day of primary PM10 emis sions are emitted by mobile sources in the study area, with about half from on- road sources and half from off-road sources. However, mobile sources contribute to PM1 0 exceedances through entrained paved road dust (6.9 tons per day) and en trained unpaved road dust (4.2 tons per day). Emission estimates for peak 24-hour PM10 days reflect large amounts of windblown dust entrained by high winds (~60 mph) . Existing control programs are incorporated into the 2000 base year inventory, including the Clean Streets Management Program. The control efficiency of previ ous control programs has been described and documented in the 1990 CVSIP, the 199 4 CVSIP, the 1996 CV Plan, and the 2002 CVSIP, as well as staff reports for th e AQMD’s fugitive dust rules.

Future Year Emissions Future year emissions inventories were developed fo r 2003 and 2006 (see Tables 2-4 and 2-5, respectively), based on a specific set of projected growth rates for population, industry, and motor vehicle activity fo r the Coachella Valley, which are consistent with the methodologies and data used in the 2003 AQMP.Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory Up date

2- 3 August 2003 TABLE 2-2

1995 PM10 Annual Average Emission Inventory by Majo r Source Category (tons/day)

Source Category Ann. Avg. Max. 24-hour

STATIONARY SOURCES

Point Sources Other Mfg./Industrial 0.02 0.02
Service and Commercial 0.01 0.01
Mineral Processes 0.02 0.02 Wood & Paper 0.01 0.01 Total Point Sources 0.06 0.06

Area Sources
Residential Fuel Combustion 0.11 0.11 Cooking 0.25 0.25 Farming Operation 1.31 1.31
Construction & Demolition 1.34 1.34
Entrained Road Dust/Paved 6.95 6.95 Entrained Road Dust/Unpaved 4.23 4.23
Fires 0.01 0.01 Waste Burning and Disposal 0.06 0.06
Windblown Dust 9.34 2285.50 Total Area Sources 23.60 2299.76

TOTAL STATIONARY SOURCES 23.66 2299.82

MOBILE SOURCES

On-Road Vehicles Light-Duty Passenger 0.13 0.13
Lt.- Med.- Trucks 0.09 0.09 Heavy-Duty Gas Trucks 0.00 0.00 Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks 0.16 0.16
School Buses 0.00 0.00 Total On-Road Vehicles 0.38 0.38

Other Mobile
Aircraft 0.00 0.00
Trains 0.04 0.04
Recreational Boats 0.03 0.03 Off-Road Equipment 0.23 0.23 Farm Equipment 0.07 0.07 Truck Stops 0.01 0.01 Total Other Mobile 0.38 0.38

TOTAL MOBILE SOURCES 0.76 0.76

TOTAL ALL SOURCES 24.42 2300.58Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory Up date

2- 4 August 2003 TABLE 2-3

2000 PM10 Emission Inventory by Major Source Catego ry (tons/day) Source Category Ann. Avg. Max. 24-hour

STATIONARY SOURCES

Point Sources Other Mfg./Industrial 0.04 0.04
Service and Commercial 0.00 0.00
Mineral Processes 0.02 0.02 Wood & Paper 0.01 0.01 Total Point Sources 0.07 0.07

Area Sources
Residential Fuel Combustion 0.12 0.12 Cooking 0.35 0.35 Farming Operation 1.23 1.23
Construction & Demolition 7.42 7.42
Entrained Road Dust/Paved 6.89 5.86 Entrained Road Dust/Unpaved 4.23 4.23
Fires 0.01 0.01 Waste Burning and Disposal 0.05 0.05
Windblown Dust 9.31 2285.50 Total Area Sources 29.61 2305.80

TOTAL STATIONARY SOURCES 29.68 2305.87

MOBILE SOURCES

On-Road Vehicles Light-Duty Passenger 0.16 0.16
Lt.- Med.- Trucks 0.12 0.12 Heavy-Duty Gas Trucks 0.00 0.00 Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks 0.10 0.10
School Buses 0.00 0.00 Total On-Road Vehicles 0.38 0.38

Other Mobile
Aircraft 0.00 0.00
Trains 0.04 0.04
Recreational Boats 0.03 0.03 Off-Road Equipment 0.25 0.25 Farm Equipment 0.07 0.07 Truck Stops 0.01 0.01 Total Other Mobile 0.40 0.40

TOTAL MOBILE SOURCES 0.78 0.78

TOTAL ALL SOURCES 30.46 2306.65Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory Up date

2- 5 August 2003 TABLE 2-4

2003 PM10 Emission Inventory by Major Source Catego ry (tons/day) Source Category Ann. Avg. Max. 24-hour

STATIONARY SOURCES

Point Sources Other Mfg./Industrial 0.04 0.04
Service and Commercial 0.00 0.00
Mineral Processes 0.02 0.02 Wood & Paper 0.01 0.01 Total Point Sources 0.07 0.07

Area Sources
Residential Fuel Combustion 0.13 0.13 Cooking 0.35 0.35 Farming Operation 1.18 1.18
Construction & Demolition 8.04 8.04
Entrained Road Dust/Paved 7.12 7.12 Entrained Road Dust/Unpaved 4.23 4.23
Fires 0.01 0.01 Waste Burning and Disposal 0.05 0.05
Windblown Dust 9.30 2285.50 Total Area Sources 30.41 2306.61

TOTAL STATIONARY SOURCES 30.48 2306.68

MOBILE SOURCES

On-Road Vehicles Light-Duty Passenger 0.16 0.16
Lt.- Med.- Trucks 0.12 0.12 Heavy-Duty Gas Trucks 0.00 0.00 Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks 0.11 0.11
School Buses 0.00 0.00 Total On-Road Vehicles 0.39 0.39

Other Mobile
Aircraft 0.00 0.00
Trains 0.04 0.04
Recreational Boats 0.04 0.04 Off-Road Equipment 0.24 0.24 Farm Equipment 0.06 0.06 Truck Stops 0.01 0.01 Total Other Mobile 0.39 0.39

TOTAL MOBILE SOURCES 0.78 0.78

TOTAL ALL SOURCES 31.26 2307.46Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory Up date

2- 6 August 2003 TABLE 2-5

2006 PM10 Emission Inventory by Major Source Catego ry (tons/day)

Source Category Ann. Avg. Max. 24-hour

STATIONARY SOURCES

Point Sources Other Mfg./Industrial 0.03 0.03
Service and Commercial 0.00 0.00
Mineral Processes 0.02 0.02 Wood & Paper 0.01 0.01 Total Point Sources 0.06 0.06

Area Sources
Residential Fuel Combustion 0.14 0.14 Cooking 0.35 0.35 Farming Operation 1.14 1.14
Construction & Demolition 8.67 8.67
Entrained Road Dust/Paved 7.34 7.34 Entrained Road Dust/Unpaved 4.23 4.23
Fires 0.01 0.01 Waste Burning and Disposal 0.05 0.05
Windblown Dust 9.28 2285.50 Total Area Sources 31.21 2307.43

TOTAL STATIONARY SOURCES 31.27 2307.49

MOBILE SOURCES

On-Road Vehicles Light-Duty Passenger 0.17 0.17
Lt.- Med.- Trucks 0.13 0.13 Heavy-Duty Gas Trucks 0.00 0.00 Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks 0.11 0.11
School Buses 0.01 0.01 Total On-Road Vehicles 0.42 0.42

Other Mobile
Aircraft 0.00 0.00
Trains 0.04 0.04
Recreational Boats 0.05 0.05 Off-Road Equipment 0.22 0.22 Farm Equipment 0.05 0.05 Truck Stops 0.01 0.01 Total Other Mobile 0.37 0.37

TOTAL MOBILE SOURCES 0.79 0.79

TOTAL ALL SOURCES 31.97 2308.28Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory Up date

2- 7 August 2003 Future Year Controlled Emissions A future year controlled emissions inventory was de veloped based on implementation of the control measures described in Chapter 5 of t he 2002 CVSIP. Table 2-6 updates

the control measures’ emission reduction estimates. The emission reductions are estimated at 3.0 tons/day, compared to 3.3 tons/day estimated in the 2002 CVSIP. The change is solely due to inventory estimate changes; the control eff iciencies of

each control measure are the same as in the 2002 CV SIP. The control strategy calls for adoption of the control measures as expeditious ly as possible, based on the

schedule in Table 2-6.

Table 2-6

Summary of 2002 CVSIP Control Measure Implementatio n

Control

Measure Implementation
Schedule 2006 Estimated

Emission

Reductions

CV BCM 1 (Construction) Begin no later than 10/03 (local) or 1/04 (AQMD) 1.96 tons/day

CV BCM 2 (Disturbed Lands) Begin no later than 10/03 TBD after survey

CV BCM 3 (Unpaved roads / lots) Begin no later than 10/03, phased implementation 0.55 tons/day

CV BCM 4 (Paved Roads) Begin no later than 10/03 (local) or 1/04 (AQMD) 0.44 tons/day

CV BCM 5 (Agriculture) Begin no later than 1/04 (AQMD) 0.02 tons/day (farming operations)

CV CTY 1 (Overseeding) In event of RFP failure or

non-attainment TBD (implemented voluntarily now) TOTAL 2.97 tons/day

The remaining emissions in 2006 after the implement ation of future controls are presented in Table 2-7. AQMD is still committed to expeditiously adopt and implement the control measures, no later than the s chedule specified in Chapter 5 of

the 2002 CVSIP.

The 2003 AQMP outlines an overall control strategy that will ultimately achieve ambient air quality standards in the South Coast Ai r Basin. The impact of these controls will reduce the amount of transported part iculates into the Coachella Valley from both direct PM10 emissions and from secondary particulate resulting from Basin precursor emissions such as VOCs, NOx, SOx, a nd ammonia. A full

discussion of the South Coast Air Basin emissions c an be found in the 2003 AQMP (Chapter 3 and Appendix III). As seen in attainmen t demonstration in Chapter 3,

South Coast Air Basin controls reduce the level of transported PM10 to the Coachella Valley in future years in the control scenarios.Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory Up date

2- 8 August 2003 TABLE 2-7

2006 PM10 Emission Inventory with 2002 CVSIP Contro ls (tons/day)

Source Category Ann. Avg. Max. 24-hour

STATIONARY SOURCES

Point Sources Other Mfg./Industrial 0.03 0.03
Service and Commercial 0.00 0.00
Mineral Processes 0.02 0.02 Wood & Paper 0.01 0.01 Total Point Sources 0.06 0.06

Area Sources
Residential Fuel Combustion 0.14 0.14 Cooking 0.35 0.35 Farming Operation 1.12 1.12
Construction & Demolition 7.81 7.81
Entrained Road Dust/Paved 5.80 5.80 Entrained Road Dust/Unpaved 3.68 3.68
Fires 0.01 0.01 Waste Burning and Disposal 0.05 0.05
Windblown Dust 9.28 2285.50 Total Area Sources 28.24 2304.46

TOTAL STATIONARY SOURCES 28.30 2304.52

MOBILE SOURCES

On-Road Vehicles Light-Duty Passenger 0.17 0.17
Lt.- Med.- Trucks 0.13 0.13 Heavy-Duty Gas Trucks 0.00 0.00 Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks 0.11 0.11
School Buses 0.01 0.01 Total On-Road Vehicles 0.42 0.42

Other Mobile
Aircraft 0.00 0.00
Trains 0.04 0.04
Recreational Boats 0.05 0.05 Off-Road Equipment 0.22 0.22 Farm Equipment 0.05 0.05 Truck Stops 0.01 0.01 Total Other Mobile 0.37 0.38

TOTAL MOBILE SOURCES 0.79 0.79

TOTAL ALL SOURCES 29.09 2305.31Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory Up date

2- 9 August 2003 

### TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY EMISSION BUDGET FOR

COACHELLA VALLEY

As described earlier in this chapter, the mobile so urce portion of the draft 2003 CVSIP emissions inventory is based on EMFAC2002. R oad construction emissions are based on SCAG’s 2001 Regional Transportation Pl an (RTP). For on-road mobile sources, Section 176(c) of the CAA requires that tr ansportation plans and programs do not cause or contribute to any new violation of a standard, increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation, or delay the timely attainment of the air quality standards. In other words, on-road mobile sources must "conform" to the attainment

demonstration contained in the SIP.

U.S. EPA's transportation conformity rule, found in 40 CFR parts 51 and 93, details the requirements for establishing motor vehicle emi ssions budgets in SIPs for the purpose of ensuring the conformity of transportatio n plans and programs with the SIP

attainment demonstration. The on-road motor vehicl e emissions budgets act as a "ceiling" for future on-road mobile source emission s. Exceedances of the budget indicate an inconsistency with the SIP, and could j eopardize the flow of federal funds for transportation improvements in the region. As required by the CAA, a comparison of regional on-road mobile source emissi ons to these budgets will occur during the periodic updates of regional transportat ion plans and programs.

The on-road motor vehicle emissions estimates for t he 2003 CVSIP were analyzed using the CARB's EMFAC2002 on-road mobile source em ission factor model in conjunction with the most recent motor vehicle acti vity data from SCAG. These budgets reflect existing control programs and new c ommitments for technology and transportation control measures.

AQMD staff conducted the following analysis for det ermining conformity budgets. The 2006 controlled emissions, which are based on e xpeditious implementation of the 2002 CVSIP, result in modeled levels of 49.6 ug/m 3 (annual) and 141.6 ug/m 3 (24- hour average). Total transportation emissions for this case are 10.0 tpd (0.42 tpd onroad motor vehicles, 5.80 tpd reentrained paved roa d dust, 3.68 tpd reentrained unpaved road dust, and 0.06 tpd road construction e missions). Since modeled attainment levels can be 50.4 ug/m 3 for the annual average, greater emission levels could still demonstrate attainment (see Table 2-8). In the conformity scenario, the emissions from VMT-related categories (on-road moto r vehicle sources and entrained local and collector paved road dust) can be increas ed to test the maximum emissions allowed while meeting the federal PM10 standard of 50.4 ug/m 3 . The scenario demonstrates attainment of the federal standards (s ee Table 3-3). In addition, this 2003 CVSIP sets up a budget trading mechanism (see below), that would allow nontransportation emissions to be traded for transport ation emissions. Therefore, Table 2-8 establishes the PM10 budget for 2006 and post-a ttainment years for transportation conformity analyses.Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory Up date

2- 10 August 2003 TABLE 2-8

Transportation Conformity PM10 Emission Budget for 2006

and Post-Attainment Years (tons/day)

Emissions (tons/day)

Motor Vehicles 0.42 Reentrained paved road dust 5.80 Reentrained unpaved road dust 3.68

Road construction 0.06 Additional margin (based on modeling) 0.97 Total (Transportation Conformity PM10 Emission Budget) 10.9

Non-Transportation Emissions 19.1* * Off-road emissions are 0.37 tpd.

Budget Trading Mechanism The following section describes a budget trading me chanism. It is not being submitted as part of the 2003 CVSIP. It is include d for discussion purposes only.

The PM10 transportation conformity emissions budget PM10 is provided here for the attainment year 2006. However, since transportatio n analyses are needed beyond the attainment dates, the 2006 transportation budget al so serves as the budget for future years (e.g., 2010, 2020 and 2030). There is projec ted long-term growth in direct PM10 emissions due to increased vehicle travel on p aved roads.

1. To address this increase in primary PM10 emissions from travel while continuing to provide for attainment after 2006, th is plan describes a PM10 transportation conformity budget trading mechanism as authorized under Section 93.124 (C) of the federal conformity rule. Section 93.124 (C) states that “A conformity demonstration shall not trade em ission among budgets.... , unless the implementation plan establishes appropri ate mechanisms for such trades.” The purpose of trading is to allow a dif ferent combination of PM10 emissions from stationary and mobile sources adequa te to maintain the attainment demonstration for future years beyond th e attainment date. Thus, the benefits of adopted measures or enforceable com mitments for any sources

that reduce emissions of PM10 below the PM10 attain ment demonstration targets for 2006 (as shown in Table 2-8) would be available to trade or compensate for the travel-based direct PM10 increas es in later year conformity analyses.

− This PM10 trading mechanism will only be used for c onformity analyses after the attainment date (i.e., 2006).Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory Up date

2- 11 August 2003 − This mechanism will allow primary PM10 reductions f rom any source beyond those needed for attainment to be traded for motor vehicle and related primary PM10 emissions included in the tran sportation conformity budget, on a 1:1 basis.

For each conformity analysis year that relies on tr ading, SCAG’s draft conformity analysis circulated for interagency cons ultation and public review will clearly document the projected emissions for P M10 from all sources (based on adopted measures and enforceable commitme nts), the excess primary PM10 emissions from travel, the reductions in each pollutant beyond the attainment target to be used for trading, the s ource of the emission reductions and mechanism to achieve them, and the t rading ratio derived from

the attainment demonstration.

2. The amount of emissions to be traded identified thr ough the transportation conformity analyses are beyond those needed for the 2006 attainment demonstration; therefore, it will be reassessed in each subsequent SIP revision

based on the most recent technical information.

3. The description herein provides the basic framework of budget trading allowed under the federal conformity rule. The Dis trict, SCAG or CARB may clarify this framework, if necessary, during the pu blic review process on the plan at the local, State, and federal level.



### INTERIM MILESTONE YEAR Appendix E of the 2002 CVSIP provided the emission reductions, the interim milestone year emission target, and emission budget s (for transportation conformity) at the end of the interim milestone year of 2003. It was approved by the AQMD Governing Board as an addendum to the approved 2002 CVSIP at its September 13, 2002 meeting. This section updates and revises the interim milestone information presented in Appendix E of the 2002 CVSIP. The 200 3 baseline inventory is 31.26 tons/day (see Table 2-4). The full implementation o f CV BCM-1 “Construction and

Earth-Movement Activities” would result in 1.87 ton s/day of emissions reductions. [Additional on-site construction dust control will reduce emissions in the construction category (0.80 tons/day) and enhanced track-out con trols will reduce entrained paved road dust (1.07 tons/day).] However, since the ado ption date of the local ordinances can be as late as October 2003, and the control mea sure adoption by the AQMD may not occur until the end of the year, only 50% combi ned ordinance/rule penetration is assumed by the end of 2003 for this reasonable furt her progress interim milestone assessment. As noted in Chapter 3 of the 2002 CVSI P, no annual average emission reductions can be assumed for 2003, but for the pur poses of a reasonable further progress determination in the interim milestone yea r, 0.94 tons/day of reductions are anticipated at the end of 2003 as a result of imple mentation of CV BCM–1 with a 50% combined ordinance/rule penetration by that tim e.

Interim Milestone Target The interim milestone year emission target for the Coachella Valley is based on expected emission reductions by the end of 2003. T he 2002 CVSIP interim milestoneFinal 2003 CVSIP Chapter 2: Emissions Inventory Up date

2- 12 August 2003 year target is shown in Table 2-9. Emissions at th e end of 2003 are less than the 2000 baseline emissions and demonstrate progress toward the attainment levels in 2006.

TABLE 2-9 PM10 Interim Milestone Year Target (Average Day – Tons per Day)

Pollutant 2000(Baseline) End of 2003*

PM10 30.46 30.32*

* Represents remaining emissions at the end of t he year 2003 with implementation of CV BCM-1 and 50% combined ordinance/rule penetra tion by that time.

Transportation Conformity Emission Budgets for the Interim Milestone Year 40 CFR Part 93 requires that emission budgets for c riteria air pollutants be specified in the SIP for milestone years. Table 2-10 provid es the emission budgets after implementation of the 2002 CVSIP controls at the en d of the interim milestone year (2003), consistent with the applicable requirements for reasonable further progress and attainment [40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iv)].

TABLE 2-10 Coachella Valley Emission Budgets for Transportatio n Conformity at the End of the 2003 Interim Milestone Year (tons/day)

2003* PM10

Motor Vehicles 0.39 Reentrained paved

road dust 7.64

Reentrained unpaved road dust 4.23

Road construction 0.06

Total 12.3*

* Represents remaining emissions at the end of th e year 2003 with implementation of CV BCM-1 and 50% combined ordinance/rule penetra tion by that time.

### CHAPTER 3

ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONFinal 2003 CVSIP Chapter 3:Attainment Demonstratio n Update

3 - 1 August 2003 

### INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses the following:

 A summary of previous Coachella Valley PM10 modelin g; and

 The modeling attainment demonstration.



### PREVIOUS COACHELLA VALLEY PM10 MODELING PM10 is a multicomponent pollutant including direct ly emitted primary particles and secondary particles resulting from the chemical tra nsformations of the precursor emissions, such as hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, a nd sulfur oxides. The receptor model used for source apportionment in the Coachell a Valley is known as the Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) Model. This U.S. EPA-a pproved method matches the measured chemical components of the PM10 sample s with known chemical profiles, or signatures, of individual sources of P M10 particles. AQMD staff has collected a library of chemical profiles for more t han 170 sources of PM10 emissions. AQMD staff also conducted special 1989 field studie s to obtain the chemical speciation of ambient PM10 data at two receptor sit es in the Coachella Valley: Palm Springs and Indio. The CMB receptor model has been applied to Coachella Valley PM10 concentrations measured at Palm Springs and In dio

Receptor modeling is a technique for determining th e emission sources and the accompanying contributions to ambient PM10 air qual ity at specific receptor sites. Unlike complex mathematical models that require det ailed simulations of physics, chemistry, meteorology, and other processes, recept or models are relatively simple statistical models that require only the availabili ty of measurement data. Using receptor models, emission sources can be identified and quantified. With this information, future-year PM10 air quality can be es timated from the emission rollback methodology. The CMB analysis has been co rroborated and augmented by a Principal Component Analysis.

As described and justified in previously submitted Coachella Valley SIPs and Plans, the modeling attainment demonstration for future ye ars is based on the CMB model with rollback based on emission changes. The impac t of transport is estimated using modeled PM10 levels in the Basin. The UAMAERO-LT, a simplified version of three-dimensional full photochemical/aerosol model UAM-AERO, was used in the 1997 AQMP for projecting annual average PM10 levels (including secondary particulates) in the Basin. The import of transpor ted secondary particulates into the Coachella Valley from the Basin is estimated using UAMAERO-LT model results.

A more complete description of the source apportion ment and modeling for Coachella Valley can be found in the approved 2002 CVSIP and the 1996 CV Plan (Chapter 4).

1995 Design Value The design values for the 1996 CV Plan were selecte d from the 1995 ambient PM10 concentrations. The design values determined for t his analysis were 49.5 μg/m 3 for an annual average and 133 μg/m 3 for the maximum 24-hour average PM10 concentration. As in previous plans, the year 1995 remains the modeling base year; however, 1989 PM10 data is the only chemically spec iated PM10 data base availableFinal 2003 CVSIP Chapter 3:Attainment Demonstratio n Update

3 - 2 August 2003 at this time. Therefore, the 1995 source contribut ions were estimated using a proportionality approach that involves multiplying the fractions of the 1989 source contributions, as estimated by the CMB model, to th e 1995 annual and 24-hour design values. (For more details, see the previous CVSIPs and plans.) As noted in the 2002 CVSIP, construction activity dramatically increased from 1999 on. The 1995 modeling base year contribution estimates, as well as the model results for the year 2000, are summarized in Table 3-1.

TABLE 3-1

Modeling Base-Year (1995) and Modeled Year 2000 PM1 0 Concentrations (μg/m 3 ) in the Coachella Valley

1995 Base Year 2000 Base Year Design Values Modeled Values Annual 24

- Hour Annual 24

- Hour

Background 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Transport 8.8 14.2 6.4 14.2
Mobile 1.3 3.6 1.3 3.7 Fugitive Dust:
Construction 0.8 2.7 4.3 15.8
Paved Roads 4.4 15.8 4.3 15.7 Unpaved Roads 3.2 11.6 3.2 11.6 Agriculture 0.6 2.2 0.6 2.0
Windblown 18.3 67.7 18.3 66.7 Veg. Burning 5.9 10.4 4.9 8.7
Others 3.4 2.8 4.2 3.5

Totals 49.7 134.0 50.5 144.9



### MODELING ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION Future-year PM10 concentrations were estimated usin g a linear rollback approach for each primary source (such as mobile, fugitive dust, vegetative burning, and other sources). This involves multiplying the ratio of f uture year (2006) to base-year (1995) emissions to the 1995 base-year source contr ibutions. In the linear rollback approach, it is presumed that future-year PM10 cont ributions from each source category are a linear function of emission rates fo r each source category.

Source contribution from the transport source categ ory is the amount of PM10 transported from the Basin. For the purposes of th is analysis, it was presumed that all secondary particles (such as ammonium, nitrate, and sulfate) were a result of transport from the Basin. In addition, a portion of the moto r vehicle contribution was assumed to be a result of transport from the Basin. Since the emissions inventory indicates that motor vehicle sources in the Coachella Valley accou nt for 3.1 percent of the PM10 emissions, the motor vehicle contribution above the 3.1 percent level is attributed to
transport.

Future-year annual average transported secondary PM 10 levels were estimated by an annual PM10 model (UAMAERO-LT). The transported mo tor vehicle sourceFinal 2003 CVSIP Chapter 3:Attainment Demonstratio n Update

3 - 3 August 2003 contribution was estimated by a linear rollback usi ng Basin motor vehicle PM10

emissions. Details of the UAMAERO-LT model and res ults can be found in Appendix V of the 2003 AQMP.

Since the UAMAERO-LT is an annual PM10 model, it ca nnot be used to estimate the future-year 24-hour average transported secondary P M10 concentrations. For the purposes of this analysis, a worst-case assumption that the future-year transported secondary PM10 concentration is the same as the 199 5 base-year transported secondary PM10 concentration was made. (As noted a bove, transported PM10 will decrease due to the Basin control programs describe d in the 2003 AQMP.) Therefore, one would be confident that the 24-hour average standard will continue to be met in the future years, since the modeling assu mes worst-case transport
conditions.

Table 3-2 details the modeling results for 2006. Wi th the implementation of the 2002 CVSIP control strategy (additional controls on cons truction/earthmoving, vacant lands, agriculture, paved road dust, and on-going c ontrol of the remaining unpaved surfaces), PM10 levels in 2006 are below the annual average PM10 standard. As in the 2002 CVSIP, modeling demonstrates attainment of the annual average PM10 standard by the year 2006.



### TABLE 3-2

Base-Year and 2006 Modeled PM10 Concentrations (μg/ m 3 )in the Coachella Valley

1995 Base Year 2006 PM10 Levels 2006 PM10 Levels Design Values Baseline With CVSIP Control Annual 24

- Hour Annual 24

- Hour Annual 24

- Hour

Background 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Transport 8.8 14.2 6.4 14.2 6.3 14.2
Mobile 1.3 3.6 1.3 3.8 1.3 3. 8 Fugitive Dust:
Construction 0.8 2.7 5.0 18.4 4.5 16.6
Paved Roads 4.4 15.8 4.6 16.7 3.6 13.2 Unpaved Roads 3.2 11.6 3.2 11.6 2.8 10.1 Agriculture 0.6 2.2 0.5 1.9 0.5 1. 9
Windblown 18.3 67.7 18.2 66.7 18.2 66.7 Veg. Burning 5.9 10.4 4.9 8.7 4.9 8.7
Others 3.4 2.8 4.4 3.6 4.4 3.6

Totals 49.7 134.0 51.5 148.5 49.6 141.6



### CONFORMITY MODELING DEMONSTRATION Table 3-3 details the modeling results for the conf ormity scenario. In the conformity scenario, VMT-related categories (on-road motor sou rces and entrained local and collector paved road dust) are increased as shown i n Table 2-8 to reach a predicted concentration of 50.4 ug/m 3 , the maximum level for attainment demonstration. The conformity scenario demonstrates attainment of the federal standards. See Chapter 2, “Transportation Conformity Emission Budgets for Coa chella Valley for more details.Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 3:Attainment Demonstratio n Update

3 - 4 August 2003 

### TABLE 3-3

Base-Year and 2006 Conformity Modeled PM10 Concentr ations (μg/m 3 )

1995 Base Year Conformity Design Values Scenario Annual 24

- Hour Annual 24

- Hour

Background 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Transport 8.8 14.2 6.3 14.2
Mobile 1.3 3.6 1.6 4.8 Fugitive Dust:
Construction 0.8 2.7 4.5 16.6
Paved Roads 4.4 15.8 4.1 14.9 Unpaved Roads 3.2 11.6 2.8 10.1 Agriculture 0.6 2.2 0.5 1.9
Windblown 18.3 67.7 18.2 66.7 Veg. Burning 5.9 10.4 4.9 8.7
Others 3.4 2.8 4.4 3.6

Totals 49.7 134.0 50.4 144.3

### CHAPTER 4

2002 CVSIP IMPLEMENTATION SUMMARY AND 2003 CVSIP APRROVAL REQUESTFinal 2003 CVSIP Chapter 4: 2003 CVSIP Checklist

4 - 1 August 2003 

### INTRODUCTION This chapter contains the following:

 A summary of the implementation of the 2002 CVSIP t o date; and

 The formal request for approval of 2003 CVSIP eleme nts.



### 2002 CVSIP IMPLEMENTATION SUMMARY As described in Chapter 1, the AQMD, CVAG, MSRC, in dividual Coachella Valley cities, and the County of Riverside have moved expe ditiously to implement the 2002 CVSIP. A summary of the major implementation effor ts includes:

• Continuation of monthly dust control classes by AQM D staff

• Early implementation of 2002 CVSIP control measure elements by local jurisdictions (e.g., construction signage requireme nts, track-out control improvements, increased enforcement activities, dus t plan review using the criteria specified in the latest Coachella Valley D ust Control Plan Review Guidance)

• Release of preliminary draft Memorandum of Understa nding among the local jurisdictions and AQMD concerning enforcement stand ards and protocols

• Expedited funding of CMAQ-funded PM10 mitigation an d control projects, under the Clean Streets management Program

• MSRC adoption of a $1,000,000 Coachella Valley PM10 Reduction Program, as part of their FY2002-03 AB2766 Discretionary Fund W ork Program

• Initiation of PM10 reduction projects totaling over $5,000,000 though the MSRC Coachella Valley PM10 Reduction Program (MSRC funds had to be matched by other funds (e.g., CMAQ) to be approved)

• Release of preliminary draft documents (e.g., model ordinance, CV Dust Control Handbook, Memorandum of Understanding) necessary fo r local jurisdiction implementation of the 2002 CVSIP control measures ( CVBCM 1 though 5) at the March 12, 2003 Coachella Valley Ad Hoc Air Quality Task Force meeting



### FORMAL REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF 2003 CVSIP ELEMENTS
The 2003 CVSIP updates the 2002 CVSIP emissions inv entories, transportation mobile source budgets, and attainment demonstration with the latest approved motor vehicle emissions model and planning assumptions. At the time of the 2002 CVSIP, CARB had not completed its update of its motor vehi cle emissions model. As part of the June 21, 2002 adopting resolution, AQMD Governi ng Board directed the Executive Officer to update the 2002 CVSIP, includi ng emissions budgets in 2003, using the latest approved motor vehicle emissions m odel and planning assumptions. It also requested that the U.S. EPA approve the emi ssions budgets based on the 2002 CVSIP for use only until the U.S. EPA finds adequat e the revised budgets for the same years submitted as part of the 2003 revision t o the 2002 CVSIP. Other elements of the 2002 CVSIP remain the same, e.g., the Most S tringent Measures analysis, the Coachella Valley control and contingency measures, and the Natural Event Action

Plan.Final 2003 CVSIP Chapter 4: 2003 CVSIP Checklist

4 - 2 August 2003 AQMD requests approval of the following 2003 CVSIP elements by CARB and U.S. EPA, replacing the previously approved 2002 CVSIP e lements:

• Base year (1995 and 2000) and future baseline (year s 2003, 2006) PM10 emissions inventories (c.f. Tables 2-2 through 2-5)

• Emission reduction commitment for the attainment ye ar 2006 (c.f. Table 2-6)

• Future controlled PM10 emissions inventories for 20 06 (c.f. Table 2-7)

• Transportation conformity emission budget for 2006 and post-attainment years (c.f. Table 2-8)

• Interim milestone year targets and transportation c onformity emission budget for the end of year 2003 (c.f. Tables 2-9 and 2-10, res pectively)

• Attainment demonstration for 2006 (c.f. Table 3-2)

• Attainment modeling for conformity (c.f. Table 3-3)

AQMD requests that U.S. EPA terminate approval of t he 2002 CVSIP budgets when they determine that the budgets submitted as part o f this 2003 CVSIP are adequate, in accordance with U.S. EPA’s rule published on 11/15/ 02 (67 FR 69139). AQMD is not requesting that U.S. EPA approve the budget tra ding mechanism in the 2003

CVSIP.