⁄×“fl‘ ÓðÔÓ

fl·Æ œ ́ø¥· ̈ß ”ø2ø1a3a2 ̈ –¥ø2

Õ± ́ ̈ ̧ ›±ø­ ̈ fl·Æ œ ́ø¥· ̈ß ”ø2ø1a3a2 ̈ ‹·­ ̈Æ·1⁄2 ̈

›¥aø2·21 ̈ ̧aø·Æ  ̈ ̧ø ̈ ©aæÆaø ̈ ̧aÚÚÚ

Ã”

⁄aæÆ ́øÆß ÓðÔÌ
FINAL 2012 AIR QUALITY 

MANAGEMENT PLAN 

FEBRUARY 2013
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 

GOVERNING BOARD 

CHAIRMAN: WILLIAM A. BURKE, Ed.D. 

Speaker of the Assembly Appointee 

VICE CHAIR: DENNIS R. YATES 

Mayor, Chino 

Cities of San Bernardino 

MEMBERS: 

MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH 

Supervisor, Fifth District 

County of Los Angeles 

JOHN J. BENOIT 

Supervisor, Fourth District 

County of Riverside 

MICHAEL A. CACCIOTTI 

Councilmember, South Pasadena 

Cities of Los Angeles County/Eastern Region 

JOSIE GONZALES

Supervisor, Fifth District 

San Bernardino County Representative 

RONALD O. LOVERIDGE 

Mayor, City of Riverside 

Cities Representative, Riverside County 

JOSEPH K. LYOU, Ph.D. 

Governor's Appointee 

JUDITH MITCHELL 

Mayor Pro Tem, Rolling Hills Estates 

Cities of Los Angeles County/Western Region 

SHAWN NELSON 

Supervisor, Fourth District 

County of Orange 

DR. CLARK E. PARKER, Sr. 

Senate Rules Appointee 

JAN PERRY 

Councilmember, Ninth District 

City of Los Angeles Representative 

MIGUEL A. PULIDO 

Mayor, Santa Ana 

Cities of Orange County 

EXECUTIVE OFFICER: 

BARRY R. WALLERSTEIN, D.Env. 
CONTRIBUTORS

South Coast Air Quality Management District 

Barry R. Wallerstein, D.Env. 

Executive Officer 

Elaine Chang, DrPH 

Deputy Executive Officer 

Planning, Rule Development & Area Sources 

Laki Tisopulos, Ph.D., P.E. Henry Hogo 

Assistant Deputy Executive Officer Assistant Deputy Executive Officer 

Planning, Rule Development & Area Sources Science and Technology Advancement 

Joseph Cassmassi Philip M. Fine, Ph.D. 

Planning and Rules Manager Planning and Rules Manager 

Planning, Rule Development & Area Sources Planning, Rule Development & Area Sources 

Authors 

Jillian Baker, Ph.D. Air Quality Specialist Michael Krause Program Supervisor 

Naveen Berry Planning & Rules Manager Ian MacMillan Program Supervisor 

Shoreh Cohanim Air Quality Specialist Victoria Moaveni Senior Air Quality Engineer 

Kevin Durkee Senior Meteorologist Jean Ospital, Dr.PH Health Effects Officer 

Ed Eckerle Program Supervisor Randall Pasek, Ph.D. Planning & Rules Manager 

Ali Ghasemi, P.E. Program Supervisor Minh Pham, P.E. Air Quality Specialist 

Tracy Goss, P.E. Program Supervisor Andrea Polidori, Ph.D. Air Quality Specialist 

Kathy Hsaio Programs Supervisor Dean Saito Fleet Implementation Manager 

Aaron Katzenstein, Ph.D. Program Supervisor 

Contributors 

Tom Chico Program Supervisor Jonathan Nadler SCAG Department Manager 

Bong-Mann Kim, Ph.D. Air Quality Specialist Chris Nelson Senior Staff Specialist 

Jong Hoon Lee, Ph.D. Air Quality Specialist Community Relations Manager 

Sang-Mi Lee, Ph.D. Air Quality Specialist Susan Yan Air Quality Specialist 

Arlene Martinez Administrative Secretary Xinqiu Zhang, Ph.D. Air Quality Specialist 

Reviewers 

Barbara Baird, J.D. District Counsel Chung Liu, D.Env. Deputy Executive Officer 

Carol Gomez Planning & Rules Manager Megan Lorenz, J.D. Deputy District Counsel II 

Peter Greenwald, J.D. Senior Policy Advisor Lauren Nevitt, J.D. Deputy District Counsel II 

Michael Laybourn Air Quality Specialist Patti Whiting Staff Specialist 

Production 

Ryan Banuelos Student Intern SCAQMD Print Shop 

Faye Thomas Senior Administrative Secretary SCAQMD Graphics Department 



i

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Introduction ____________________________________________________________ES-1 

Why Is This Final Plan Being Prepared? ______________________________________ES-2 

Is Air Quality Improving? _________________________________________________ES-2 

How Did the Recent Recession Affecting Air Quality?___________________________ES-8 

What Are the Major Sources Contributing to Air Quality Problems? ________________ES-8 

What is the Overall Control Strategy in the 2012 AQMP? ________________________ES-9 

Why Not Request the Full 5-year Extenstion to Meet the 24-Hour PM2.5 Standard? __ES-11 

Why and How is the 8-Hour Ozone Plan Being Updated? _______________________ES-11 

Given the Current Difficult & Uncertain Economic Condition, Should the District Wait 

Before Adding Refined Control Commitments Into the SIP? _____________________ES-12 

Is the 2012 AQMP Being Coordinated with the State & Greenhouse Gas Reduction 

Efforts? _______________________________________________________________ES-12 

1. INTRODUCTION 

Purpose _________________________________________________________________ 1-1 

Constraints in Achieving Standards ___________________________________________ 1-2 

Setting ______________________________________________________________ 1-2 

Emission Sources______________________________________________________ 1-4 

Population ___________________________________________________________ 1-4 

The Recent Recession __________________________________________________ 1-7 

Control Efforts ___________________________________________________________ 1-8 

History ______________________________________________________________ 1-8 

Air Quality Impact of Control Efforts ______________________________________ 1-9 

Progress in Implementing the 2007 AQMP ____________________________________ 1-10 

_____________________________________________________ 1-10 

CARB Actions _______________________________________________________ 1-14 

U.S. EPA Actions ____________________________________________________ 1-17 

Final 2012 AQMP ______________________________________________________ 1-18 

Scope ______________________________________________________________ 1-18 

Approach ___________________________________________________________ 1-18 

Need for Integrated and Coordinated Planning ______________________________ 1-19 

Economic Considerations ______________________________________________ 1-20 

Federal CAA Planning Requirements Addressed by the Final 2012 AQMP _______ 1-21 

State Law Requirements Addressed by the Final 2012 AQMP__________________ 1-24 

Format of This Document _________________________________________________ 1-24

2. AIR QUALITY AND HEALTH EFFECTS 

Introduction _____________________________________________________________ 2-1 

Ambient Air Quality Standards ______________________________________________ 2-2 

Federal and State Standards______________________________________________ 2-2 

NAAQS Attainment Status ______________________________________________ 2-6 
ii

Current Air Quality ______________________________________________________ 2-10 

Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM10) Specific Information____________________ 2-13 

Health Effects, Particulate Matter ___________________________________ 2-13 

Air Quality, PM2.5_______________________________________________ 2-14 

Air Quality, PM10 _______________________________________________ 2-16 

Ozone (O3) Specific Information _________________________________________ 2-18 

Health Effects, O3________________________________________________ 2-18 

Air Quality, O3 __________________________________________________ 2-18 

Other Criteria Pollutants _______________________________________________ 2-21 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) Specific Information _________________________ 2-21 

Health Effects, CO __________________________________________ 2-21 

Air Quality, CO ____________________________________________ 2-22 

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Specific Information__________________________ 2-23 

Health Effects, NO2 _________________________________________ 2-23 

Air Quality, NO2____________________________________________ 2-24 

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Specific Information ____________________________ 2-25 

Health Effects, SO2__________________________________________ 2-25 

Air Quality, SO2 ____________________________________________ 2-26 

Sulfates (SO4

2-) Specific Information_________________________________ 2-27 

Health Effects, SO4

2-

________________________________________ 2-27 

Air Quality, SO4

2-

___________________________________________ 2-28 

Lead (Pb) Specific Information _____________________________________ 2-29 

Health Effects, Pb___________________________________________ 2-29 

Air Quality, Pb _____________________________________________ 2-29 

Comparison to Other U.S. Areas ____________________________________________ 2-30 

Summary ______________________________________________________________ 2-33 

3. BASE YEAR & FUTURE EMISSIONS 

Introduction _____________________________________________________________ 3-1 

Emission Inventories ______________________________________________________ 3-2 

Stationary Sources _____________________________________________________ 3-2 

Mobile Sources _______________________________________________________ 3-4 

On-Road _______________________________________________________ 3-4 

Off-Road _______________________________________________________ 3-7 

Uncertainty in the Inventory ____________________________________________ 3-11 

Gridded Emissions____________________________________________________ 3-11 

Base Year Emissions _____________________________________________________ 3-12 

2008 Emission Inventory _______________________________________________ 3-12 

Future Emissions ________________________________________________________ 3-20 

Data Development ____________________________________________________ 3-20 

Summary of Baseline Emissions _________________________________________ 3-21 

Impact of Growth ________________________________________________________ 3-31 

Pre-Base-Year Offsets _________________________________________________ 3-31

Top Ten Source Categories (2008, 2014, 2023)_________________________________ 3-33

4. CONTROL STRATEGY AND IMPLEMENTATION 

Introduction _____________________________________________________________ 4-1 

Overall Attainment Strategy_________________________________________________ 4-1 
iii

24-Hour PM2.5 Strategy ________________________________________________ 4-4 

Modeling Results _________________________________________________ 4-4 

Sensitivity Analysis _______________________________________________ 4-5 

Basin-wide Short Term PM2.5 Measures ______________________________ 4-5 

8-hour Ozone Strategy __________________________________________________ 4-6 

Proposed PM2.5 Short-term Control Measures 4-7 

Combustion Sources_______________________________________________ 4-9 

PM Sources ____________________________________________________ 4-10 

Multiple Component Sources_______________________________________ 4-12 

Indirect Sources _________________________________________________ 4-12 

Educational Programs ____________________________________________ 4-13 

Proposed PM2.5 Contingency Measures ______________________________________ 4-13 

SCAG's Regional Transportation Strategy and Transportation Control Measures ______ 4-14 

Linking Regional Transportation Planning to Air Quality Planning ______________ 4-15 

Regional Transportation Strategy and Transportation Control Measures __________ 4-15 

Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis____________________ 4-16 

Proposed 8-hour Ozone Measures ___________________________________________ 4-17 

Proposed Stationary Source 8-hour Ozone Measures _________________________ 4-21 

Coatings and Solvents ____________________________________________ 4-25 

Combustion Sources______________________________________________ 4-26 

Petroleum Operations and Fugitive VOC Emissions_____________________ 4-27 

Multiple Components Sources ______________________________________ 4-28 

Incentive Programs_______________________________________________ 4-29 

Educational Programs ____________________________________________ 4-30 

Proposed Mobile Source 8-hour Ozone Measures____________________________ 4-31 

On-Road Mobile Source Measures __________________________________ 4-34 

Off-Road Mobile Sources Measures _________________________________ 4-35 

Actions to Deploy Advanced Control Technologies _____________________ 4-35 

Emission Reduction Commitment ________________________________ 4-41 

SIP Emission Reduction Tracking________________________________________ 4-41 

Reductions from Adopted Rules _________________________________________ 4-42 

ary Source Control Measures ___________ 4-42 

Stationary Control Measures 4-43 

Adoption and Implementation of Alternative/Substitute Measures _____ 4-43 

Overall Emission Reductions _______________________________________________ 4-46 

Implemenation __________________________________________________________ 4-47 

Responsible Agencies _________________________________________________ 4-48 

5. FUTURE AIR QUALITY 

Introduction _____________________________________________________________ 5-1 

Background _____________________________________________________________ 5-1 

Modeling Approach _______________________________________________________ 5-2 

Design Values and Relative Response Factors (RRF)__________________________ 5-2 

Design Value Selection ____________________________________________ 5-2 

RRF and Future Year Design Values__________________________________ 5-4 

PM2.5 Modeling ______________________________________________________ 5-5 

24-Hour PM2.5 Modeling Approach __________________________________ 5-7 

Weight of Evidence _______________________________________________ 5-7 
iv

Future Air Quality ________________________________________________________ 5-8 

24-Hour PM2.5 _______________________________________________________ 5-8 

Spatial Projections of PM2.5 Design values ____________________________ 5-9 

Weight of Evidence Discussion _____________________________________ 5-11 

Control Strategy Choices __________________________________________ 5-13 

Additional Modeling Analyses______________________________________________ 5-15 

Annual PM2.5 _______________________________________________________ 5-15 

Annual PM2.5 Modeling Approach__________________________________ 5-15 

Future Annual PM2.5 Air Quality ________________________________________ 5-16 

Ozone Modeling _____________________________________________________ 5-17 

Ozone Representativeness _________________________________________ 5-18 

Ozone Modeling Approach ________________________________________ 5-20 

Future Ozone Air Quality ______________________________________________ 5-21 

Spatial Projections of 8-Hour Ozone Design Values_____________________ 5-23 

A First Look at Attaining the 2006 8-Hour Ozone Standard _______________ 5-25 

Summary and Conclusions_________________________________________________ 5-25 

6. FEDERAL & STATE CLEAN AIR ACT REQUIREMENTS 

Introduction _____________________________________________________________ 6-1 

Specific 24-Hour PM2.5 Planning Requirements ________________________________ 6-1 

Federal Air Quality Standards for Fine Particulates_______________________________ 6-1 

Federal Clean Air Act Requirements __________________________________________ 6-3 

Attainment Demonstration and Modeling ___________________________________ 6-3 

Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)________________________________________ 6-4 

Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) and 

Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Requirements _______________ 6-5 

New Source Review____________________________________________________ 6-7 

Contingency Measures__________________________________________________ 6-7 

Contingency Measure Requirements __________________________________ 6-7 

Air Quality Improvement Scenario ___________________________________ 6-8 

Magnitude of Contingency Measure Air Quality Improvements____________ 6-11 

Satisfying the Contingency Measure Requirements _____________________ 6-11 

Transportation Control Measures ________________________________________ 6-13 

California Clean Air Act Requirements _______________________________________ 6-14 

Plan Effectivess ______________________________________________________ 6-14 

Emission Reductions __________________________________________________ 6-16 

Population Exposure __________________________________________________ 6-17 

Cost Effectivenes Ranking______________________________________________ 6-17 

Transportation Conformity Budgets__________________________________________ 6-20 

7. CURRENT & FUTURE AIR QUALITY DESERT NONATTAINMENT AREAS 

Introduction _____________________________________________________________ 7-1 

Air Quality Setting ________________________________________________________ 7-3 

Air Quality Summary __________________________________________________ 7-3 

Attaiment Status__________________________________________________ 7-4 

PM10 __________________________________________________________ 7-7 

PM2.5__________________________________________________________ 7-9 

Ozone (O3) _____________________________________________________ 7-9 
v

Other Criteria Pollutants __________________________________________ 7-12 

Pollutant Transport ___________________________________________________ 7-12 

Emissions Inventories _________________________________________________ 7-15 

Future Air Quality _______________________________________________________ 7-17 

Conclusions ____________________________________________________________ 7-18 

8. LOOKING BEYOND CURRENT REQUIREMENTS 

Introduction _____________________________________________________________ 8-1 

Potential Changes in the Federal Ozone Standard ________________________________ 8-1 

Implications of a New Ozone Standard for the Basin _____________________________ 8-1 

1-Hour Ozone Requirements ________________________________________________ 8-3 

Proposed Changes to the Federal Particulate Matter Standards ______________________ 8-3 

Implications of the Proposed New PM2.5 Standards for the Basin __________________ 8-6 

9. NEAR ROADWAY EXPOSURE AND ULTRAFINE PARTICLES 

Introduction _____________________________________________________________ 9-1 

Ultrafine Particles_________________________________________________________ 9-4 

Formation and Transport ________________________________________________ 9-4 

Ambient Diurnal and Seasonal Variations___________________________________ 9-6 

Concentration Levels in Different Environments _____________________________ 9-7 

Chemical Composition__________________________________________________ 9-8 

Measurement Methods__________________________________________________ 9-9 

Other Near-roadway Pollutants _____________________________________________ 9-10 

Ambient Measurements ___________________________________________________ 9-12 

Near Roadway Studies_________________________________________________ 9-12 

On-road Studies and In-Vehicle Exposure__________________________________ 9-15 

Important Factors Affecting Near-Roadway Measurements ____________________ 9-17 

Health Effects___________________________________________________________ 9-18 

Ultrafine Particles ____________________________________________________ 9-18 

Near-Roadway Health Impacts __________________________________________ 9-21 

Future Research and Assessment Needs ______________________________________ 9-22 

Chemical Composition_________________________________________________ 9-22 

Processes Leading to Formation _________________________________________ 9-22 

Standardized Measurement Methods and Procedures _________________________ 9-22 

____________________________ 9-23 

Emission Inventories __________________________________________________ 9-23 

Air Quality Modeling__________________________________________________ 9-23 

Health Effects _______________________________________________________ 9-23 

Other Typles of Sources________________________________________________ 9-23 

Planning and Regulatory Issues _____________________________________________ 9-24 

Jurisdiction over Near-Roadway Exposures ________________________________ 9-24 

Sustainable Community Strategies _______________________________________ 9-25 

Enhanced Environmental Analysis _______________________________________ 9-25 

Mitigation Measures __________________________________________________ 9-27 

Emission Control Technologies__________________________________________ 9-28 

Testing Protocols _____________________________________________________ 9-30 
vi

Emission Standards ___________________________________________________ 9-34 

European Standards ______________________________________________ 9-34 

California Standards______________________________________________ 9-34 

National Standards _______________________________________________ 9-35 

District Future Actions ____________________________________________________ 9-35 

10. ENERGY AND CLIMATE 

Introduction ____________________________________________________________ 10-1 

Energy Consumption Inventory and Projections ________________________________ 10-4 

Electricity Sources ___________________________________________________ 10-10 

Basin Electricty Consumption __________________________________________ 10-11 

Electricity Consumption by Sector ______________________________________ 10-12 

Recently Implemented State Regulations and Electricity Generation _______________ 10-13 

Natural Gas____________________________________________________________ 10-16 

Transportation Fuels_____________________________________________________ 10-17 

Efficiency Impacts on Energy Use __________________________________________ 10-18 

Waste Heat Recovery_________________________________________________ 10-21 

Available Tools to Develop Projects _____________________________________ 10-22 

Efficiency Incentives and Financing ________________________________________ 10-22 

Energy Future ________________________________________ 10-23 

Transformation of the Energy Sector_____________________________________ 10-24

11. PUBLIC PROCESS AND PARTICIPATION 

Introduction ____________________________________________________________ 11-1 

Outreach Program________________________________________________________ 11-2 

Audience ___________________________________________________________ 11-2 

Format _____________________________________________________________ 11-3 

Outreach Activities ___________________________________________________ 11-4 

Key Agency Coordination Meetings _________________________________ 11-4 

Local Stakeholder Meetings________________________________________ 11-4 

Topical Workshops ______________________________________________ 11-5 

Focus Groups ___________________________________________________ 11-5 

Peer Review ____________________________________________________ 11-5 

General Public Outreach __________________________________________ 11-5 

Outreach Results_________________________________________________________ 11-6 

Summary of Outreach Activities ____________________________________________ 11-7 

GLOSSARY 
vii

APPENDIX I HEALTH EFFECTS 

APPENDIX II CURRENT AIR QUALITY 

APPENDIX III BASE AND FUTURE YEAR EMISSION INVENTORY 

APPENDIX IV-A STATIONARY SOURCE CONTROL MEASURES 

APPENDIX IV-B PROPOSED 8-HOUR OZONE MEASURES 

APPENDIX IV-C REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY AND CONTROL 

MEASURES 

APPENDIX V MODELING AND ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATIONS 

APPENDIX VI REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL MEASURES (RACM) 

DEMONSTRATION 

APPENDIX VII 2012 1-HOUR OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION 

APPENDIX VIII DEMONSTRATION OF OFFSET OF GROWTH IN EMISSIONS 

ASSOCIATED WITH GROWTH IN VEHICLE MILES 

TRAVELED UNDER SECTION 182(D)(1)(A) OF THE FEDERAL 

CLEAN AIR ACT 
PREFACE 

The 2012 AQMP represents a regional blueprint for achieving healthful 

air on behalf of the 16 million residents of the South Coast Basin. 

The air quality 

the legal deadlines loom sooner than most people realize. 

STEADY PROGRESS AND MOMENTUM

The primary task of the 2012 AQMP is to bring our Basin into attainment with federal health-based 

standards for unhealthful fine particulate matter (PM2.5) by 2014. Yet to have any reasonable 

expectation of meeting the 2023 ozone deadline, the scope and pace of continued air quality 

improvement must greatly intensify. 

Regulatory frameworks to reduce unhealthful emissions are mostly pollutant-specific, focusing on 

one pollutant at a time to meet clean air standards. However, outdoors, people inhale pollutants as a 

mixture, and the chemical interactions of multiple pollutants are complex. For this reason, each 

AQMP is also a comprehensive plan that examines multiple pollutants and the most up-to-date 

scientific knowledge, in order to achieve the greatest air quality and health benefits for Southland 

residents while also balancing factors of cost and available funding. 

The 2012 AQMP is a critical opportunity to re-sharpen our approach to achieve both breathable air 

and a healthier, revitalized economic future. Fuel combustion for goods movement, transportation, 

and energy is the major cause of our worst-in-the-nation ozone problem, while strategies for climate 

protection that reduce fuel use & energy consumption also have corresponding air quality benefits 

for everyone in the Southland region. 

ECONOMIC SENSITIVITY

The District remains sensitive to our region's slow recovery from recession, while retaining the 

precept that healthful air is not a luxury, but a right. Therefore the 2012 AQMP seeks to maintain 

steady momentum along a dollar-wise path - - one that will reduce near-term public health expenses 

and lay a long-term foundation for more livable, energy-efficient communities and open additional 

economic opportunities. 

Wherever possible, the plan seeks to identify solutions that can solve multiple problems from 

focused investments and clean-technology incentives. Also, a number of the proposed measures are 

voluntary incentives and/or education programs that encourage innovation and early adoption. In 

addition, the District, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and fellow non-attainment 

district San Joaquin Valley have engaged in a major effort to collaborate on concepts for combined 

clean air gains and more efficient energy production & usage, especially in transportation - - in a 

coordinated manner. 

COLLABORATIVE, SYNERGISTIC EFFORTS

Key to timely implementation of the 2012 AQMP will be coordinated, integrated planning efforts 

among local, regional, state, and federal entities, together with effective public-private partnerships; 

and continuing active participation by stakeholders including community health groups, academic, 

research, & training institutions, and experts in advanced near-zero and zero-emission technologies, 

especially as related to advanced goods movement technologies.

Recent years have seen co-funded projects among entities including SCAQMD, U.S. EPA, U.S. 

DOE, CARB, CEC, metropolitan planning organizations (such as SCAG), Clean Cities affiliates, 

Councils of Government, major OEMS, utility providers, goods movement authorities, and even 

international environmental consortiums. These efforts have been an important first step - - but the 

time for redoubled commitment by all parties is now. 
› ̧ø° ̈aÆ Ì

fiø­a «aøÆ ø2o

⁄ ́ ̈ ́Æa ¤3·­­·±2­

Õ± ́ ̈ ̧ ›±ø­ ̈ fl·Æ œ ́ø¥· ̈ß ”ø2ø1a3a2 ̈ ‹·­ ̈Æ·1⁄2 ̈

›¥aø2·21 ̈ ̧aø·Æ  ̈ ̧ø ̈ ©aæÆaø ̈ ̧aÚÚÚ

Ã”
CHAPTER 3 

BASE YEAR AND FUTURE EMISSIONS 

Introduction

Emission Inventories 

Base Year Emissions

Future Emissions 

Impact of Growth 

Top Ten Source Categories (2008, 2014, 2023) 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-1 

INTRODUCTION 

This chapter summarizes emissions that occurred in the Basin during the 2008 base 

year, and projected emissions in the years 2014, 2019, 2023, and 2030. More detailed 

emission data analyses are presented in Appendix III of the Final 2012 AQMP. The 

2008 base year emissions inventory reflects adopted air regulations with current 

compliance dates as of 2008; whereas future baseline emissions inventories are based 

on adopted air regulations with both current and future compliance dates. A list of the 

District and CARB rules and regulations that are part of the base year and future-year 

baseline emissions inventories is presented in Appendix III of the Final 2012 AQMP. 

The District is committed to implement the District rules that are incorporated in the 

Final 2012 AQMP future baseline emissions inventories. 

The emissions inventory is divided into four major classifications: point, area, on-road, 

and off-road sources. The 2008 base year point source emissions are based principally 

on reported data from facilities 

Program. The area source emissions are estimated jointly by CARB and the District. 

The on-road emissions are calculated by applying CARB EMFAC2011 emission 

factors to the transportation activity data provided by Southern California Association 

of Governments (SCAG) from their adopted 2012 Regional Transportation Plan (2012 

RTP). In-Use Off-Road Fleet Inventory Model is used for the 

construction, mining, gardening and agricultural equipment. CARB also provides other 

off-road emissions, such as ocean-going vessels, commercial harbor craft, locomotives 

and cargo handling equipment. Aircraft emissions are based on an updated analysis by 

the District. The future emission forecasts are primarily based on demographic and 

economic growth projections provided by SCAG. In addition, emission reductions 

resulting from District regulations adopted by June, 2012 and CARB regulations 

adopted by August 2011 are included in the baseline. 

This chapter summarizes the major components of developing the base year and future 

emission reductions resulting from adopted rules and regulations since the 2007 AQMP, 

growth factors, and demographic trends, are presented in Appendix III of the Final 2012 

AQMP. In addition, the top ten source categories contributing to the 2008, 2014, and 

2023 emission inventories are identified in this chapter. Understanding information 

about the highest emitting source categories leads to the identification of potentially 

more effective and/or cost effective control strategies for improving air quality. 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-2 

EMISSION INVENTORIES 

Two inventories are prepared for the Final 2012 AQMP for the purpose of regulatory 

and SIP performance tracking and transportation conformity: an annual average 

inventory, and a summer planning inventory. Baseline emissions data presented in this 

chapter are based on average annual day emissions (i.e., total annual emissions divided 

by 365 days) and seasonally adjusted summer planning inventory emissions. The Final 

2012 AQMP uses annual average day emissions to estimate the cost-effectiveness of 

control measures, to rank control measure implementation, and to perform PM2.5 

modeling and analysis. The summer planning inventory emissions are developed to 

capture the emission levels during a poor air quality season, and are used to report 

emission reduction progress as required by the federal and California Clean Air Acts. 

Detailed information regarding the emissions inventory development for the base year 

and future years, the emissions by major source category of the base year, and future 

baseline emission inventories are presented in Appendix III of the Final 2012 AQMP. 

Attachments A and B to Appendix III list the annual average and summer planning 

emissions by major source category for 2008, 2014, 2017, 2019, 2023 and 2030, 

respectively. Attachment C to Appendix III has the top VOC and NOx point sources 

which emitted greater than or equal to ten tons per year in 2008. Attachment D to the 

Appendix III contains the on-road emissions by vehicle class and by pollutant for 2008, 

2014, 2019, 2023 and 2030. Attachment E to Appendix III shows emissions associated 

with the combustion of diesel fuel for various source categories. Attachment F to 

Appendix III has the greenhouse gas emission inventory by major source categories. 

Stationary Sources 

Stationary sources can be divided into two major subcategories: point and area sources. 

Point sources are large emitters with one or more emission sources at a permitted 

facility with an identified location (e.g., power plants, refineries). These facilities have 

annual emissions of 4 tons or more of either Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), 

Nitrogen Oxide (NOx), Sulfur Oxide (SOx), or total Particulate Matter (PM), or annual 

emissions of over 100 tons of Carbon Monoxide (CO). Facilities are required to report 

their criteria pollutant emissions and selected toxics to the District on an annual basis, if 

any of these thresholds are exceeded. 

Area sources consist of many small emission sources (e.g., residential water heaters, 

architectural coatings, consumer products as well as permitted sources smaller than the 

above thresholds) which are distributed across the region. There are about 400 area 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-3 

source categories for which emissions are jointly developed by CARB and the District. 

The emissions from these sources are estimated using activity information and emission 

factors. Activity data are usually obtained from survey data or scientific reports (e.g., 

Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports for fuel consumption other than 

natural gas fuel, Southern California Gas Company for natural gas consumption, paint 

suppliers and, District databases). The emission factors are based on rule compliance 

factors, source tests, Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), default factors (mostly from 

AP- ), or weighted emission 

factors derived from the point source ns reports. Additionally, 

the emissions over a given area may be calculated using socioeconomic data. 

Appendix III of the Final 2012 AQMP has more detail regarding emissions from 

specific source categories such as fuel combustion sources, landfills, composting waste, 

metal-coating operations, architectural coatings, and livestock waste. Since the 2007 

AQMP was finalized, new area source categories, such as LPG transmission losses, 

storage tank and pipeline cleaning and degassing, and architectural colorants, were 

created and included in the emission inventories. These updates and new additions are 

listed below: 

Fuel combustion sources: The emissions from commercial and industrial 

internal combustion engines were updated to include the portable equipment 

emissions. 

Landfills: The emission estimation methodology for this area source category 

was revised to incorporate greenhouse gas (GHG) emission 

inventory data. 

Composting waste category: The emission estimation methodology for this 

area source category was revised to include the emissions from green waste 

composting covered under District Rule 1133.3. The 2007 AQMP only 

included the emissions from co-composting, as it relates to District Rule 

1133.2. 

Metal coating operations: This area source category in the 2007 AQMP only 

included the emissions from small permitted facilities with VOC emissions 

below 4 tons per year. As such, emissions from these sources maybe 

underreported in the 2007 AQMP. During the rule development process for 

amending Rule 1107, staff discovered numerous small shops using coating 

materials with compliant high solid concentrations, which are subsequently 

thinned beyond the allowable limits permitted by Rule 1107. The Final 2012 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-4 

AQMP revised inventory adjusts the 2007 AQMP inventory to account for 

excess emissions from these coating activities. 

Architectural coating category: Three new area source categories were added 

under this category to accurately track the emissions from colorants. 

LPG transmission losses: This newly added area source category was created 

to include the emissions from LPG storage and fueling losses. 

Livestock waste sources: This inventory was updated to reflect the difference 

amongst dairy cattle based on the fraction of milking cows, dry cows, calves, 

and heifers as each has different VOC and NH3 emission factors based on the 

quantity of manure production. 

Storage tanks and pipeline cleaning: This new area source category was 

added to include the emissions from these types of operations. 

Mobile Sources 

Mobile sources consist of two subcategories: on-road and off-road sources. On-road 

vehicle emissions are calculated 

to the transportation activity data provided by SCAG from their adopted 2012 RTP. 

Spatial d TIM4) are used 

to generate the gridded emissions. Off-road emissions are calculated using 

2011 In-Use Off-Road Fleet Inventory model for construction, mining, gardening, and 

agricultural equipment. Ship, locomotive, and aircraft emissions are excluded from 

-Use Off-Road Fleet Inventory model. Their emissions for 2008 and future 

years were revised separately based on the most recently available data. 

On-Road

CARB EMFAC2011 has been updated to reflect more recent vehicle population, 

activity, and emissions data. Light-duty motor vehicle fleet age, vehicle type, and 

vehicle population are updated based on 2009 California Department of Motor Vehicles 

data. The model also reflects recently adopted rules and benefits that were not reflected 

in EMFAC2007. The rules and benefits include on-road diesel fleet rules, the Pavley 

Clean Car Standards, and the Low Carbon Fuel standard. The most important 

improvement in the model is the integration of new data and methods to estimate 

emissions from diesel trucks and buses. -

road heavy-duty in-use diesel vehicles applies to nearly all privately owned diesel 

fueled trucks and privately and publicly owned school buses with a gross vehicle 

weight rating (GVWR) greater than 14,000 pounds. EMFAC2011 includes the 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-5 

emissions benefits of the Truck and Bus Rule and previously adopted rules for other onroad diesel equipment. The impacts of the recent recession on emissions, quantified as 

part of the truck and bus rulemaking, are also included. 

EMFAC2011 uses a modular emissions modeling approach that departs from past 

EMFAC versions. The first module, named EMFAC-LDV, is used as the basis for 

estimating emissions from gasoline powered on-road vehicles, diesel vehicles below 

14,000 pounds GVWR, and urban transit buses. The second module, called EMFACHD, is the basis for emissions estimates for diesel trucks and buses with a GVWR 

greater than 14,000 pounds operating in California. This module is based on the 

Statewide Truck and Bus Rule emissions inventory that was developed between 2007 

and 2010 and approved by the CARB Board in December 2010. The third module is 

called EMFAC2011SG. It takes the output from EMFAC-LDV and EMFAC-HD and 

applies scaling factors to estimate emissions consistent with user-defined vehicle miles 

of travel and vehicle speeds. Together the three modules comprise EMFAC2011. 

Several external adjustments were made to EMFAC2011 in the Final 2012 AQMP to 

r the development of 

EMFAC2011. The adjustments include the advanced clean cars regulations, 

reformulated gasoline, and smog check improvement. 

Figure 3-1 compares the on-road emissions between EMFAC2007 V2.3 used in the 

2007 AQMP and EMFAC2011 used in the Final 2012 AQMP, respectively. It should 

be noted that the comparison for 2008 reflects changes in methodology whereas the 

comparison for 2023 includes adopted rules and updated growth projections since the 

release of EMFAC2007. In general, the emissions are lower in EMFAC2011 as 

compared to EMFAC2007. The lower emissions can be attributed to additional rules 

and regulations which result in reduced emissions, revisions to growth projections, and 

the economic impacts of the recent recession. 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-6 

FIGURE 3-1 

Comparison of On-Road Emissions Between EMFAC2007 V2.3 (2007 AQMP) and EMFAC2011 

(Final 2012 AQMP) 

(VOC & NOx Summer Planning; SOx & PM2.5 Annual Average Inventory) 

214

103 

213 

70 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

2008 2023 

Emissions (tons/day)

VOC

2007 AQMP 

FINAL 2012 AQMP 

427 

161

426 

117 

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

2008 2023

Emissions (tons/day)

NOx

2007 AQMP 

FINAL 2012 AQMP

2 2 2 2

0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

2008 2023 

Emissions (tons/day)

SOx 

2007 AQMP 

FINAL 2012 AQMP 

18

16

19

11

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

2008 2023

Emissions (tons/day)

PM2.5 

2007 AQMP 

FINAL 2012 AQMP 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-7 

Off-Road

Emissions from off-road vehicle categories (construction & mining equipment, lawn & 

gardening equipment, ground support equipment, agricultural equipment) 

In-Use Off-Road Model were developed primarily based on estimated activity levels 

and emission factors. Ships, commercial harbor crafts, locomotives, aircrafts, and cargo 

handling equipment emissions are -Use Off-Road Fleet 

Inventory Model. Separate models or estimations were used for these emissions 

sources. The off-road source population, activities, and emission factors were reevaluated and re-estimated since the last AQMP. Consequently, the emissions are 

modified accordingly. 

The major updates and/or improvements to the off-road inventory include: 

1. The equipment population -Use Off-Road Fleet Inventory model 

is updated by using the equipment population reported to CARB for rule 

compliance. Based on information from CARB, the total population in 2009 

was 26% lower than had been anticipated in 2007 due to fleet downsizing 

during the recent recession. 

2. The equipment -Use Off-Road Fleet Inventory 

model are updated based on the reported activity data between 2007 and 2009. 

According to CARB, the new data indicates a 30% or more reduced activity in 

most cased for 2009 as compared to 2007 due to recession. 

3. The equipme -Use Off-Road Fleet Inventory model 

is updated using a 2009 academic study and information from engine 

manufacturers. According to CARB, the new data suggests that the load 

factors should be reduced by 33%. 

4. According to CARB, construction activity and emissions have dropped by 

more than 50% between 2005 and 2011. Future emissions are uncertain and 

depend on the pace of economic recovery. The -

Use Off-Road Fleet Inventory model is projected based on the average of the 

-road activity and emissions 

will recover slowly from the recessionary lows. 

5. Locomotive inventories reflect the 2008 U.S. EPA Locomotive regulations 

and adjustments due to economic activity. 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-8 

6. Cargo handling equipment has been updated for population, activity, 

recessionary impacts on growth, and engine load. The updates are based on 

new information collected since 2005. The new information includes 

regulatory reporting data which provides an accounting of all the cargo 

handling equipment in the state including their model year, horsepower and 

activity. In addition, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have developed 

annual emissions inventories and a number of the major rail yards and other 

ports in the state have completed individual emission inventories. 

7. Ocean-going vessel emissions in the Final 

regulation for ocean-going vessels and the 2007 shore power regulation. In 

addition, the improvements and corrections include recoding the model for 

speed, updating auxiliary engine information, updating ship routing, revising 

vessel speed reduction compliance rates, and an adjustment factor to estimate 

the effects of the recession. In March 2010, the International Maritime 

Organization (IMO) officially designated the waters within 200 miles of the 

North American Coast as an Emissions Control Area (ECA). Beginning 

August 2012, IMO requires ships that travel these waters to use fuel with a 

sulfur content of less than or equal to 1.0% and in 2015 the sulfur limit will be 

further reduced to 0.1%. Additionally, vessels built after January 1, 2016 will 

be required to meet the most stringent IMO Tier 3 NOx emission levels while 

transiting within the 200 mile ECA zone. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) 

emissions (i.e. emissions from vessels beyond the three-mile state waters line) 

are included in the ships emissions as well. 

8. Another improvement is the development of a separate emission category for 

the commercial harbor craft from a new commercial harbor craft database. 

CARB approved a regulation to significantly reduce diesel PM and NOx 

emissions from diesel-fueled engines on commercial harbor craft vessels. 

These vessels emit an estimated 3 tons per day of diesel PM and 70 tons per 

day of NOx statewide in 2007. The harbor craft database includes emissions 

from crew & supply, excursion, fishing, pilot, tow boats, barge, and dredge 

vessels. 

9. The aircraft emissions inventory is updated for the 2008 base year and the 

2035 forecast year based on the latest available activity data and calculation 

methodologies. A total of 43 airports were identified as having aircraft 

operations within the District boundaries including commercial air carrier, air 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-9 

taxi, general aviation, and military aircraft operations. The sources of activity 

data include airport operators (for several commercial and military airports), 

i.e., Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Air Traffic Activity 

Data System, Terminal Area Forecast), and SCAG. For commercial air carrier 

adopted for the 2012 RTP, reflects the future aircraft fleet mix. The emissions 

calculation methodology is 

Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) model for airports with 

detailed activity data for commercial air carrier operations (by aircraft make 

and model). For other airports and aircraft types (i.e., general aviation, air taxi, 

military), the total number of landing and takeoff activity data is used in 

conjunction with the U.S. for major aircraft 

types (e.g., general aviation, air taxi, military). For the intermediate milestone 

years, the emissions inventories are linearly interpolated between 2008 and 

2035. 

Several external adjustments to the off-road emissions are 

and regulations and new estimates of activity. The adjustments include locomotives, 

large spark ignition engines and non-agricultural internal combustion engines. 

Figure 3-2 shows a comparison between the off-road baseline emissions in the 2007 

AQMP and the Final 2012 AQMP. In general, the emissions are lower in the 2011 InUse Off-Road Fleet Inventory model, except for 2008 SOx emissions. The projected 

2008 off-road NOx emissions in the 2007 AQMP were 339 tons per day, while the 

2008 base year off-road NOx emissions in the Final 2012 AQMP are 207 tons per day. 

The 2011 In-Use Off-Road Fleet Inventory emissions are lower because of the rules and 

regulations adopted since 2007 OFFROAD model, updated data, future growth 

corrections and recessionary impacts to commercial and industrial mobile equipment. 

The higher 2008 estimated SOx emissions reflect a temporary stay in the 

implementation of the lower sulfur content marine fuel regulation for a portion of 2008. 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-10 

FIGURE 3-2 

Comparison of Off-Road Emissions Between 2007 AQMP and Final 2012 AQMP 

(VOC & NOx Summer Planning; SOx & PM2.5 Annual Average Inventory) 

189 

148 

162 

108 

0 

50 

100 

150 

200 

250 

2008 2023

Emissions (tons/day)

VOC 

2007 AQMP 

FINAL 2012 AQMP 

339 

275

208

133

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

2008 2023

Emissions (tons/day)

NOx

2007 AQMP 

FINAL 2012 AQMP 

22 

36 

38 

6 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

2008 2023 

Emissions (tons/day)

SOx 

2007 AQMP 

FINAL 2012 AQMP 

19 

16

13 

7

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

2008 2023 

Emissions (tons/day)

PM2.5

2007 AQMP 

FINAL 2012 AQMP 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-11 

Uncertainty in the Inventory 

An effective AQMP relies on a complete and accurate emission inventory. Over the 

years, significant improvements have been made to quantify emission sources for which 

control measures are developed. Increased use of continuous monitoring and source 

tests has contributed to the improvement in point source inventories. Technical 

assistance to facilities and auditing of reported emissions by the District have also 

improved the accuracy of the emissions inventory. Area source inventories that rely on 

average emission factors and regional activities have inherent uncertainty. Industryspecific surveys and source-specific studies during rule development have provided 

much-needed refinement to the emissions estimates. 

Mobile source inventories remain the greatest challenge due to continuously collected 

new information from the large number and types of equipment and engines. Every 

AQMP revision provides an opportunity to further improve the current knowledge of 

mobile source inventories. The Final 2012 AQMP is not an exception. As described 

earlier, many improvements were included in EMFAC2011 and such work is still 

ongoing. However, it should be acknowledged that there are still areas that could be 

significantly improved if better data were available. Technological changes and 

advancement in the area of electric, hybrid, flexible fuel, fuel cell vehicles coupled with 

changes in future gasoline prices, all add uncertainty to the on-road emissions inventory. 

It is important to note that the recent recession began in 2007, and being unforeseen, its 

impacts were not included in the 2007 AQMP. As the Final 2012 AQMP is being 

developed, Southern California is still in the midst of a slow economic recovery. The 

impact of the recession is deep and is still being felt, and thus adds to the uncertainty in 

the emissions provided here. Relative to future growth, there are many challenges with 

making accurate projections, such as where vehicle trips will occur, the distribution 

between various modes of transportation (such as trucks and trains), as well as estimates 

for population growth and changes to the number and type of jobs. Forecasts are made 

with the best information available; nevertheless, they contribute to the overall 

uncertainty in emissions projections. Fortunately, AQMP updates are generally 

developed every three to four years; thereby allowing for frequent improvements to the 

inventories. 

Gridded Emissions 

For air quality modeling purposes, the region extends to Southern Kern County in the 

north, the Arizona border in the east, northern Mexico in the south and more than 100 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-12 

miles offshore to the west. The modeling area is divided into a grid system comprised of 

4 km by 4 km grid cells defined by Lambert Conformal coordinates. Both stationary 

and mobile source emissions are allocated to individual grid cells within this system. In 

general, the modeling emissions data features daily emissions. Variations in temperature, 

hours of operation, speed of motor vehicles, or other factors are considered in 

developing gridded motor vehicl

both PM2.5 and ozone modeling applications differ from the average annual day or 

planning inventory emission data in two respects: (1) the modeling region covers larger 

geographic areas than the Basin; and (2) emissions represent day-specific instead of 

average or seasonal conditions. Summary of emissions inventories are generated for 

the PM2.5 and ozone modeling applications. For PM2.5, the annual average day is used, 

which represents the characteristic of emissions that contribute to year-round particulate 

impacts. The summer planning inventory focuses on the warmer months (May through 

October) when evaporative VOC emissions play an important role in ozone formation. 

BASE YEAR EMISSIONS 

2008 Emission Inventory 

Table 3-1A compares the annual average emissions between the 2008 base year in the 

Final 2012 AQMP and the projected 2008 emissions in the 2007 AQMP by major source 

category for VOC and NOx. Table 3-1B compares the annual average emissions 

between the 2008 base year in the Final 2012 AQMP and the projected 2008 emissions 

in the 2007 AQMP for SOx and PM2.5. Due to the economic recession which began in 

2007, it is expected that the more recent 2008 base year emissions estimates should be 

lower than the previously projected 2008 emissions. Yet, several categories show higher 

emissions in the 2008 base year in the Final 2012 AQMP, such as fuel consumption, 

waste disposal, petroleum production and marketing for VOC; fuel consumption for 

NOx; off-road emissions for SOx; and industrial processes for PM2.5. The reasons are 

as follows: 

1. Fuel consumption The emissions from commercial and industrial internal 

combustion engines were updated to include portable equipment emissions 

which were overlooked in the 2007 AQMP. The update causes increases in 

emissions for this category. 

2. Waste disposal Due to erroneous activity data reported by point sources in 

the 2007 AQMP, landfill emissions increased drastically. In addition, landfill 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-13 

emission estimation methodology was revis GHG 

Emission Inventory data to calculate the amount of methane being generated in 

2008. Industry stakeholders have requested further evaluation of the emission 

factors currently used. As a result, the District staff will initiate a working 

group to undertake this effort. 

3. Petroleum production and marketing Two new area source categories (LPG 

transmission, storage tanks and pipeline cleaning and degassing) were added to 

the Final 2012 AQMP. LPG transmission source category tracks the fugitive 

emissions associated with transfer and dispensing of LPG and is based on 

emission rates derived from the District source tests conducted in 2008 and 

2011, sale volumes provided by the industry association, and category 

breakdowns. A total of 8.4 tons per day VOC emissions were added to the 

2008 inventory. Storage tanks and pipeline cleaning and degassing source 

category was updated based on Rule 1149 amendments to reflect more 

frequent degassing events as well as the effectiveness of control techniques. 

During the amendment, it was determined that the actual degassing events 

were more than triple the amount that was estimated when the rule was 

originally developed. It was also assumed that once the degassing rule 

requirements were fulfilled, there would be no more fugitive emissions; 

however, a review of degassing logs indicated that sludge and product residual 

in the storage tanks significantly increase the emissions emanating from the 

storage tanks. Finally, the source category was expanded to include previously 

exempted tanks and pipelines. The storage tanks and pipeline source adds 1.4 

tons per day VOC to the 2008 base year. 

4. Off-road SOx CARB adopted a regulation in 2005 to set sulfur content limits 

on marine fuels for auxiliary diesel engines and diesel-electric engines 

operated on ocean-going vessels within California waters and 24 nautical miles 

of the California coastline. The regulation became effective January 1, 2007, 

and as a result the SOx reductions were accounted for in the 2007 AQMP. 

However, pursuant to an injunction issued by a federal district court (district 

court), CARB ceased enforcing the regulation in the fall of 2007. See Pacific 

Me (E.D. Cal. Aug. 30, 2007), 

No. Civ. S-06 2791-WBS-KJM. CARB filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit 

and requested a stay of the injunction pending the appeal. As permitted under 

the appellate court stay, CARB decided to continue to enforce the regulation 

while litigation involving the regulation remained active. On May 7, 2008, 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-14 

CARB issued another announcement to discontinue enforcement of the 

regulation pursuant to the same injunction after the Court of Appeals issued its 

decisions which invalidated the 2005 regulation. In the meantime, CARB staff 

prepared a new Ocean-Going Vessel Clean Fuel Regulation that was approved 

by its Board on July 24, 2008, and implementation began on July 1, 2009. The 

2008 regulation includes the auxiliary engines and also the main engines and 

auxiliary boilers on ocean-going vessels within the same 24 nautical miles 

zone as the earlier auxiliary engine rule. The 2008 regulation achieves higher 

SOx reductions than the original auxiliary engine rule, primarily due to 

regulating the main engines and auxiliary boilers in addition to the auxiliary 

engines. 

Tables 3-2A and 3-2B show the 2008 emissions inventory by major source category. 

Table 3-2A shows annual average emissions, while Table 3-2B shows the summer 

planning inventory. Stationary sources are subdivided into point (e.g., chemical 

manufacturing, petroleum production, and electric utilities) and area sources (e.g., 

architectural coatings, residential water heaters, consumer products, and permitted 

sources smaller than the emission reporting threshold generally 4 tpy). Mobile sources 

consist of on-road (e.g., light-duty passenger cars) and off-road sources (e.g., trains and 

ships). Entrained road dust is also included. 

Figure 3-3 characterizes relative contributions by stationary and mobile source 

categories. On- and off-road sources continue to be the major contributors for each of 

the five pollutants. Overall, total mobile source emissions account for 59% of the VOC 

and 88% of the NOx emissions for these two ozone-forming pollutants, based on the 

summer planning inventory. The on-road mobile category alone contributes about 33 

and 59% of the VOC and NOx emissions, respectively, and approximately 68% of the 

CO for the annual average inventory. For directly emitted PM2.5, mobile sources 

represent 40% of the emissions with another 10% due to vehicle-related entrained road 

dust. 

Within the category of stationary sources, point sources contribute more SOx emissions 

than area sources. Area sources play a major role in VOC emissions, emitting about 

seven times more than point sources. Area sources, including sources such as 

commercial cooking, are the predominant source of directly emitted PM2.5 emissions 

(39%). 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-15 

TABLE 3-1A 

Comparison of VOC and NOx Emissions By Major Source Category of 

2008 Base Year in Final 2012 AQMP and Projected 2008 in 2007 AQMP 

Annual Average Inventory (tpd1) 

SOURCE CATEGORY

2007 

AQMP 

Final 

2012 

AQMP 

% 

Change 

2007 

AQMP 

Final 

2012 

AQMP 

% 

Change 

VOC NOx 

STATIONARY SOURCES

 Fuel Combustion 7 14 +100% 30 41 +36% 

 Waste Disposal 8 12 +50% 2 2 0% 

 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 37 37 0% 0 0 0% 

 Petroleum Production and Marketing 32 41 +28% 0 0 0% 

 Industrial Processes 19 16 -16% 0 0 0% 

 Solvent Evaporation 

 Consumer Products 97 98 +1% 0 0 0% 

 Architectural Coatings 23 22 -5% 0 0 0% 

 Others 3 2 -33% 0 0 0% 

 Misc. Processes 15 15 0% 26 26 0% 

 RECLAIM SOURCES 0 0 0% 29 23 -21% 

Total Stationary Sources 241 257 +7% 87 92 +6% 

MOBILE SOURCES

 On-Road Vehicles 207 209 +1% 447 462 +3% 

 Off-Road Vehicles 150 127 -15% 325 204 -37% 

Total Mobile Sources 357 336 -6% 772 666 -14% 

TOTAL 598 593 -1% 859 758 -12% 

1 Values are rounded to nearest integer. 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-16 

TABLE 3-1B 

Comparison of SOx and PM2.5 Emissions By Major Source Category of 

2008 Base Year in Final 2012 AQMP and Projected 2008 in 2007 AQMP 

Annual Average (tpd1) 

SOURCE CATEGORY 

2007 

AQMP 

Final

2012 

AQMP 

% 

Change 

2007 

AQMP 

Final

2012 

AQMP 

% 

Change 

SOx PM2.5 

STATIONARY SOURCES 

 Fuel Combustion 2 2 0% 6 6 0% 

 Waste Disposal 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 

 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 0 0 0% 1 1 0% 

 Petroleum Production and Marketing 1 1 0% 1 2 +100% 

 Industrial Processes 0 0 0% 5 7 +40% 

 Solvent Evaporation 

 Consumer Products 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 

 Architectural Coatings 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 

 Others 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 

 Misc. Processes * 1 1 0% 52 32 -39% 

 RECLAIM SOURCES 12 10 -17% 0 0 0% 

Total Stationary Sources 16 14 -12% 65 48 -26% 

MOBILE SOURCES 

 On-Road Vehicles 2 2 0% 18 19 +6% 

 Off-Road Vehicles 14 382+171% 18 13 -28% 

Total Mobile Sources 16 40 +150% 36 32 -11% 

TOTAL 32 54 +69% 101 80 -21% 

1 Values are rounded to nearest integer. 

2 Refer to Base Year Emissions Off-road-Sox. 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-17 

TABLE 3-2A 

Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2008 Base Year 

Average Annual Day (tpd1) 

SOURCE CATEGORY VOC NOx CO SOx PM2.5 

STATIONARY SOURCES 

 Fuel Combustion 14 41 57 2 6 

 Waste Disposal 12 2 1 0 0 

 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 37 0 0 0 1 

 Petroleum Production and Marketing 41 0 5 1 2 

 Industrial Processes 16 0 2 0 7 

 Solvent Evaporation 

 Consumer Products 98 0 0 0 0 

 Architectural Coatings 22 0 0 0 0 

 Others 2 0 0 0 0 

 Misc. Processes* 15 26 72 1 32 

 RECLAIM Sources 0 23 0 10 0 

Total Stationary Sources 257 92 137 14 48 

MOBILE SOURCES 

 On-Road Vehicles 209 462 1966 2 19 

 Off-Road Vehicles 127 204 778 38 13 

Total Mobile Sources 336 666 2743 40 32 

TOTAL 593 758 2881 54 80 

1 Values are rounded to nearest integer. 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-18 

TABLE 3-2B 

Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2008 Base Year 

Summer Planning Inventory (tpd1) 

SOURCE CATEGORY

SUMMER OZONE 

PRECURSORS 

VOC NOx 

STATIONARY SOURCES 

 Fuel Combustion 14 41 

 Waste Disposal 12 2 

 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 43 0 

 Petroleum Production and Marketing 41 0 

 Industrial Processes 19 0 

 Solvent Evaporation 

 Consumer Products 99 0 

 Architectural Coatings 25 0 

 Others 2 0 

 Misc. Processes 9 20 

 RECLAIM Sources 0 24 

Total Stationary Sources 264 87 

MOBILE SOURCES 

 On-Road Vehicles 213 426 

 Off-Road Vehicles 162 208 

Total Mobile Sources 375 634 

TOTAL 639 721 

1 Values are rounded to nearest integer.
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-19 

FIGURE 3-3 

Relative Contribution by Source Category to 2008 Emission Inventory 

(VOC & NOx Summer Planning; CO, SOx, & PM2.5 Annual Average Inventory) 

point, 5% 

area, 17% 

Architect

ural 

Ctgs/Cons

umer 

Products, 

19% 

on-road , 

33% 

off-road, 

26% 

VOC Emissions: 639 tons/day 

point, 5% 

area, 7% 

on-road , 

59% 

off-road, 

29% 

NOx Emissions: 721 tons/day 

point, 1% area, 4% 

on-road , 

68% 

off-road, 

27% 

CO Emissions: 2881 tons/day 

point, 

23% 

area, 2% 

on-road , 

4% 

off-road, 

71% 

SOx Emissions: 54 tons/day 

point, 

11% 

area, 

39% 

on-road , 

23% 

off-road, 

17% 

road 

dust, 

10% 

Directly Emitted PM2.5 Emissions: 

80 tons/day 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-20 

FUTURE EMISSIONS 

Data Development 

The milestone years 2008, 2014, 2019, 2023, and 2030 are the years for which 

inventories were developed as they are relevant target years under the federal CAA and 

the CCAA. The base year for the attainment demonstration is 2008. 2014 is the 

attainment year for the federal 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard without an extension, and 

2019 represents the latest attainment date with a full five-year extension. The 80 ppb 

federal 8-hour ozone standard attainment deadline is 2023, and the new 75 ppb 8-hour 

ozone standard deadline is 2032. A 2030 inventory will be used to approximate this 

latter year. 

Future stationary emissions are divided into RECLAIM and non-RECLAIM emissions. 

Future NOx and SOx emissions from RECLAIM sources are estimated based on their 

allocations as specified by District Rule 2002 Allocations for NOx and SOx. The 

forecasts for non-RECLAIM emissions were derived using: (1) emissions from the 

2008 base year; (2) expected controls after implementation of District rules adopted by 

June, 2012, and CARB rules adopted as of August 2011; and (3) activity growth in 

various source categories between the base and future years. 

Demographic growth forecasts for various socioeconomic categories (e.g., population, 

housing, employment by industry), developed by SCAG for their 2012 RTP, are used in 

the Final 2012 AQMP. Industry growth factors for 2008, 2014, 2018, 2020, 2023, and 

2030 are also provided by SCAG, and interim years are calculated by linear 

interpolation. Table 3-3 summarizes key socioeconomic parameters used in the Final 

2012 AQMP for emissions inventory development.
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-21 

TABLE 3-3 

Baseline Demographic Forecasts in the Final 2012 AQMP 

CATEGORY 2008 2023 

2023 % 

GROWTH 

FROM 2008 

2030 

2030 % 

GROWTH 

FROM 2008 

Population 

(Millions) 15.6 17.3 11% 18.1 16% 

Housing Units 

(Millions) 5.1 5.7 12% 6.0 18% 

Total Employment 

(Millions) 7.0 7.7 10% 8.1 16% 

Daily VMT 

(Millions) 379 396 4% 421 11% 

Current forecasts indicate that this region will experience a population growth of 11% 

between 2008 and 2023, with a 4% increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT); and a 

population growth of 16% by the year 2030 with a 11% increase in VMT. 

As compared to the projections in the 2007 AQMP, the current 2030 projections in the 

Final 2012 AQMP show about 1.5 million less population (7.6% less), 900,000 less total 

employment (10% less), and 32 million miles less in the daily VMT forecast (7.1% less). 

Summary of Baseline Emissions 

Emissions data by source categories (point, area, on-road mobile and off-road mobile 

sources) and by pollutants are presented in Tables 3-4 through 3-7 for the years 2014, 

2019, 2023, and 2030. The tables provide annual average, as well as summer planning 

inventories. 

Without any additional controls, VOC, NOx, and SOx emissions are expected to 

decrease due to existing regulations, such as controls on off-road equipment, new 

vehicle standards, and the RECLAIM programs. Figure 3-4 illustrates the relative 

contribution to the 2023 inventory by source category. A comparison of Figures 3-3 and 

3-4 indicates that the on-road mobile category continues to be a major contributor to CO 

and NOx emissions. However, due to already-adopted regulations, 2023 on-road mobile 

sources account for: about 16% of total VOC emissions compared to 33% in 2008; about 

36% of total NOx emissions compared to 59% in 2008; and about 38% of total CO 

emissions compared to 68% in 2008. Meanwhile, area sources become the major 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-22 

contributor to VOC emissions from 36% in 2008 to 50% in 2023. See Figures 3-5 

through 3-16 for the top ten highest-ranking source categories for 2008, 2014, and 2023. 

TABLE 3-4A 

Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2014 Baseline 

Average Annual Day (tpd1) 

SOURCE CATEGORY VOC NOx CO SOx PM2.5 

STATIONARY SOURCES 

 Fuel Combustion 13 27 54 2 6 

 Waste Disposal 12 2 1 0 0 

 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 39 0 0 0 2 

 Petroleum Production and 

Marketing 

38 0 5 1 2 

 Industrial Processes 13 0 2 0 7 

Solvent Evaporation 

 Consumer Products 85 0 0 0 0 

 Architectural Coatings 15 0 0 0 0 

 Others 2 0 0 0 0 

 Misc. Processes* 17 21 102 1 33 

 RECLAIM Sources 0 27 0 8 0 

Total Stationary Sources 234 77 164 12 50 

MOBILE SOURCES 

 On-Road Vehicles 117 272 1165 2 12 

 Off-Road Vehicles 100 157 766 4 8 

Total Mobile Sources 217 429 1931 6 20 

TOTAL 451 506 2095 18 70 

1 Values are rounded to nearest integer. 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-23 

TABLE 3-4B 

Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2014 Baseline 

Summer Planning Inventory (tpd1) 

Summer Ozone Precursors 

SOURCE CATEGORY VOC NOx 

Stationary Sources 

 Fuel Combustion 13 28 

 Waste Disposal 12 2 

 Cleaning and Surface Coatings 45 0 

 Petroleum Production and Marketing 38 1 

 Industrial Processes 15 0 

 Solvent Evaporation 

 Consumer Products 86 0 

 Architectural Coatings 18 0 

 Others 2 0 

 Misc. Processes 10 15 

 RECLAIM Sources 0 27 

Total Stationary Sources 239 73 

Mobile Sources 

 On-Road Vehicles 120 251 

 Off-Road Vehicles 128 161 

Total Mobile Sources 248 412 

TOTAL 487 485 

1 Values are rounded to nearest integer. 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-24 

TABLE 3-5A 

Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2019 Baseline 

Average Annual Day (tpd1) 

SOURCE CATEGORY VOC NOx CO SOx PM2.5 

Stationary Sources 

Fuel Combustion 14 27 56 2 6 

Waste Disposal 13 2 1 1 0 

Cleaning and Surface Coatings 46 0 0 0 2 

Petroleum Production and Marketing 36 0 5 1 2 

Industrial Processes 15 0 2 0 8 

Solvent Evaporation 

 Consumer Products 87 0 0 0 0 

 Architectural Coatings 16 0 0 0 0 

 Others 2 0 0 0 0 

Misc. Processes* 16 18 102 1 34 

RECLAIM Sources 0 27 0 6 0 

Total Stationary Sources 245 74 166 11 52 

Mobile Sources 

On-Road Vehicles 80 186 755 2 11 

Off-Road Vehicles 90 145 795 5 7 

Total Mobile Sources 170 331 1550 7 18 

TOTAL 415 405 1716 18 70 

1 Values are rounded to nearest integer. 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-25 

TABLE 3-5B 

Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2019 Baseline 

Summer Planning Inventory (tpd1) 

Summer Ozone Precursors 

SOURCE CATEGORY VOC NOx 

Stationary Sources 

Fuel Combustion 14 28 

Waste Disposal 13 2 

Cleaning and Surface Coatings 53 0 

Petroleum Production and Marketing 36 0 

Industrial Processes 17 0 

Solvent Evaporation 

 Consumer Products 88 0 

 Architectural Coatings 19 0 

 Others 2 0 

Misc. Processes 9 13 

RECLAIM Sources 0 27 

Total Stationary Sources 251 70 

Mobile Sources 

On-Road Vehicles 83 173 

Off-Road Vehicles 114 148 

Total Mobile Sources 197 321 

TOTAL 448 391 

1 Values are rounded to nearest integer. 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-26 

TABLE 3-6A 

Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2023 Baseline 

Average Annual Day (tpd1) 

SOURCE CATEGORY VOC NOx CO SOx PM2.5 

Stationary Sources 

Fuel Combustion 14 27 56 2 6 

Waste Disposal 14 2 1 0 0 

Cleaning and Surface Coatings 49 0 0 0 2 

Petroleum Production and Marketing 36 0 5 1 2 

Industrial Processes 16 0 2 0 8 

Solvent Evaporation 

 Consumer Products 89 0 0 0 0 

 Architectural 17 0 0 0 0 

 Others 2 0 0 0 0 

Misc. Processes* 16 17 102 1 35 

RECLAIM Sources 0 27 0 6 0 

Total Stationary Sources 253 73 166 10 53 

Mobile Sources 

On-Road Vehicles 67 125 591 2 11 

Off-Road Vehicles 86 130 826 6 7 

Total Mobile Sources 153 255 1417 8 18 

TOTAL 406 328 1583 18 71 

1 Values are rounded to nearest integer. 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-27 

TABLE 3-6B 

Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2023 Baseline 

Summer Planning Inventory (tpd1)

Summer Ozone Precursors 

SOURCE CATEGORY VOC NOx 

Stationary Sources 

Fuel Combustion 14 27 

Waste Disposal 14 2 

Cleaning and Surface Coatings 56 0 

Petroleum Production and Marketing 37 0 

Industrial Processes 17 0 

Solvent Evaporation 

 Consumer Products 91 0 

 Architectural 20 0 

 Others 3 0 

Misc. Processes 9 13 

RECLAIM Sources 0 27 

Total Stationary Sources 261 69 

Mobile Sources 

On-Road Vehicles 69 117 

Off-Road Vehicles 108 133 

Total Mobile Sources 177 250 

TOTAL 438 319 

1 Values are rounded to nearest integer. 
Final 2012 AQMP

3-28 

TABLE 3-7A 

Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2030 Baseline 

Average Annual Day (tpd1) 

SOURCE CATEGORY VOC NOx CO SOx PM2.5 

Stationary Sources 

Fuel Combustion 15 28 59 3 6 

Waste Disposal 15 2 1 0 0 

Cleaning and Surface Coatings 54 0 0 0 2 

Petroleum Production and Marketing 38 0 5 1 2 

Industrial Processes 17 0 2 0 9 

Solvent Evaporation 

 Consumer Products 93 0 0 0 0 

 Architectural 18 0 0 0 0 

 Others 2 0 0 0 0 

Misc. Processes* 16 15 102 1 36 

RECLAIM Sources 0 27 0 6 0 

Total Stationary Sources 268 72 169 11 55 

Mobile Sources 

On-Road Vehicles 55 101 446 2 12 

Off-Road Vehicles 84 116 886 7 6 

Total Mobile Sources 139 217 1332 9 18 

TOTAL 407 289 1501 20 73 

1 Values are rounded to nearest integer. 
Chapter 3: Base Year and Future Emissions

3-29 

TABLE 3-7B 

Summary of Emissions By Major Source Category: 2030 Baseline 

Summer Planning Inventory (tpd1) 

Summer Ozone Precursors 

SOURCE CATEGORY VOC NOx 

Stationary Sources 

Fuel Combustion 15 29 

Waste Disposal 15 2 

Cleaning and Surface Coatings 62 0 

Petroleum Production and Marketing 38 0 

Industrial Processes 19 0 

Solvent Evaporation 

 Consumer Products 95 0 

 Architectural 20 0 

 Others 3 0 

Misc. Processes 9 12 

RECLAIM Sources 0 27 

Total Stationary Sources 276 70 

Mobile Sources 

On-Road Vehicles 56 95 

Off-Road Vehicles 105 119 

Total Mobile Sources 161 214 

TOTAL 437 284 

1 Values are rounded to nearest integer. 
› ̧ø° ̈aÆ Î

⁄ ́ ̈ ́Æa fl·Æ œ ́ø¥· ̈ß 

Õ± ́ ̈ ̧ ›±ø­ ̈ fl·Æ œ ́ø¥· ̈ß ”ø2ø1a3a2 ̈ ‹·­ ̈Æ·1⁄2 ̈

›¥aø2·21 ̈ ̧aø·Æ  ̈ ̧ø ̈ ©aæÆaø ̈ ̧aÚÚÚ

Ã”
CHAPTER 5 

FUTURE AIR QUALITY 

Introduction 

Background

Modeling Approach 

Future Air Quality 

Additional Modeling Analyses

Summary and Conclusions
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-1 

INTRODUCTION 

Air quality modeling is an integral part of the planning process to achieve clean air. The 

attainment demonstrations provided in this Final 2012 AQMP reflect the updated 

baseline emissions estimates, new technical information, enhanced air quality modeling 

techniques, and the control strategy provided in Chapter 4 for 24-hour PM2.5. 

Projections for progress towards meeting the annual PM2.5 standard by 2014 and the 

1997 8-hour ozone standard by 2023 are also presented in this chapter. These latter two 

requirements are addressed in the 2007 AQMP. 

The Basin is currently designated nonattainment for PM2.5, and extreme nonattainment 

for ozone. 

ensures that ambient air quality standards for all criteria pollutants are met by the 

established deadlines in the federal Clean Air Act (CAA); and 2) achieves an expeditious 

rate of progress towards attaining the state air quality standards. The overall control 

strategy is designed so that efforts to achieve the standard for one criteria pollutant do 

not cause unnecessary deterioration of another. A two-step modeling process which is 

consistent with the approach used in the 2007 AQMP has been conducted for the Final 

2012 AQMP. First, future year 24-hour PM2.5 levels are simulated for 2014 and 2019 to 

determine the earliest possible date of attainment. If attainment cannot be demonstrated 

by 2014, U.S. EPA can grant up to an additional five years to demonstrate attainment of 

the 24-hour standard. However, the length of the extension is contingent upon the 

earliest year beyond 2014 that the 24-hour average PM2.5 standard can be achieved 

implementing all feasible control measures. 

BACKGROUND 

During the development of the 2003 AQMP, the District convened a panel of seven 

experts to independently review the regional air quality modeling. The consensus of the 

panel was for the District to move to the more current state-of-the-art dispersion 

platforms and chemistry modules. In keeping with the recommendations of the expert 

panel as well as the Scientific Technical Modeling Peer Review Committee, the Final 

2012 AQMP has continued to move forward to incorporate the current state-of-the-art 

modeling platforms to conduct regional modeling analyses in support of the PM2.5 

attainment demonstrations and ozone update. The Final 2012 AQMP PM2.5 attainment 

demonstration has been developed using the U.S. EPA supported Community Multiscale 

Air Quality (CMAQ) (version 4.7) modeling platform with SAPRC99 chemistry, and the 

Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF) (version 3.3) meteorological fields. 

Supporting PM2.5 and ozone simulations were also conducted using the most current 
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-2 

and publicly available version of CAMx (version 5.3), which also used SAPRC99 

chemistry and WRF meteorology, to ensure smooth transition from the CAMx platform 

used in the 2007 AQMP to CMAQ. The model analyses were conducted on an expanded 

domain, with increased resolution in the vertical structure, and a finer 4 km grid size. 

Detailed information on the modeling approach, data gathering, model development and 

enhancement, model application, and interpretation of results is presented in Appendix 

V. The following sections summarize the results of the 24-hour PM2.5 attainment 

demonstration modeling effort and provide an update to the annual PM2.5 and future 

projected Basin ozone levels given new emissions, design values and modeling tools. 

MODELING APPROACH 

Design Values and Relative Response Factors (RRF)

As first employed in the 2007 AQMP, the Final 2012 AQMP modeling approach to 

demonstrate attainment of the air quality standards relies heavily on the use of design 

values and relative response factors (RRF) to translate regional modeling simulation 

output to the form of the air quality standard. Both PM2.5 and ozone have standards that 

require three consecutive years of monitored data, averaged according to the form of the 

standard to derive a design value, to assess compliance. The 24-hour PM2.5 design 

value is determined from the three-year average of the 98thpercentile of all 24-hour 

concentrations sampled at a monitoring site. The annual PM2.5 design value is based on 

quarterly average PM2.5 concentrations, averaged by year, for a three-year period. In the 

case of ozone, compliance with the standard is determined from a three-year average of 

the 4th highest daily ozone 8-hour average concentration. 

Design Value Selection

U.S. EPA guidance recommends the use of multiple year averages of design values, 

where appropriate, to dampen the effects of single year anomalies to the air quality trend 

due to factors such as adverse or favorable meteorology or radical changes in the local 

emissions profile. The trend in the Basin 24-hour PM2.5 design values, determined from 

routinely monitored Federal Reference Monitoring (FRM), from 2001 through 2011 

(Figure 5-1) depicts sharp reductions in concentrations over the period. The 24-hour 

PM2.5 design value for 2001 was 76 3while the 2008 design value (based on data 

from 2006, 2007 and 2008) is 53 3. Furthermore, the most current design value 

computed for 2011 has been reduced to 38 3

. The annual PM2.5 design value has 

demonstrated a reduction of 13.6 3

over the 10-year period from 2001 through 

2011. In each case, the trend in PM2.5 is steadily moving in the direction of air quality 
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-3 

improvement. The trend of Basin ozone design values is presented in Figure 5-2. The 

design values have averaged a reduction of approximately three parts per billion over the 

14-year period; however the most recent design value (107 ppb) continues to exceed the 

1997 8-hour ozone standard (80 ppb) by 34 percent and the 2006 ozone standard by 43 

percent (75 ppb). 

FIGURE 5-1 

South Coast Air Basin 24-Hour Average and Annual PM2.5 Design Values 

Note: Each value represents the 3-year average of the highest annual average PM2.5 concentration 

FIGURE 5-2 

South Coast Air Basin 8-Hour Average Ozone Design Values 

Note: Each value represents the 3-year average of the 4th highest 8-Hour Average Ozone concentration 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 

μg/m3

PM2.5 Design Values 

24-Hour Annual

60 

80 

100 

120 

140 

160 

180 

Part Per Billion

Ozone Design Values 
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-4 

The Final 2012 AQMP relies on a set of five years of particulate data centered on 2008, 

the base year selected for the emissions inventory development and the anchor year for 

the future year PM2.5 projections. In July, 2010, U.S. EPA proposed revisions to the 24-

hour PM2.5 modeling attainment demonstration guidance. The new guidance suggests 

using five years of data, but instead of directly using quarterly calculated design values, 

the procedure requires the top 8 daily PM2.5 concentrations days in each quarter to 

reconstruct the annual 98thpercentile. The logic in the analysis is twofold: by selecting 

the top 8 values in each quarter the 98thpercentile concentration is guaranteed to be 

included in the calculation. Second, the analysis projects future year concentrations for 

each of the 32 days in a year (160 days over five years) to test the response of future year 

24-hour PM2.5 to the proposed control strategy. Since the 32 days in each year include 

different meteorological conditions and particulate species profiles it is expected those 

individual days will respond independently to the projected future year emissions profile 

and that a new distribution of PM2.5 concentrations will result. Overall, the process is 

more robust in that the analysis is examining the impact of the control strategy 

implementation for a total of 160 days, covering a wide variety of potential meteorology 

and emissions combinations. 

Table 5-1 provides the weighted 2008 24-hour average PM2.5 design values for the 

Basin. 

TABLE 5-1 

2008 Weighted 24-Hour PM2.5 Design Values (μg/m3) 

MONITORING SITE 24-HOURS 

Anaheim 35.0 

Los Angeles 40.1 

Fontana 45.6 

North Long Beach 34.4 

South Long Beach 33.4 

Mira Loma 47.9 

Rubidoux 44.1 

Relative Response Factors and Future Year Design Values

To bridge the gap between air quality model output evaluation and applicability to the 

health-based air quality standards, U.S. EPA guidance has proposed the use of relative 

response factors (RRF). The RRF concept was first used in the 2007 AQMP modeling 

attainment demonstrations. The RRF is simply a ratio of future year predicted air quality 
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-5 

with the control strategy fully implemented to the simulated air quality in the base year. 

The mechanics of the attainment demonstration are pollutant and averaging period 

specific. For 24-hour PM2.5, the top 10 percentile of modeled concentrations in each 

quarter of the simulation year are used to determine the quarterly RRFs. For the annual 

average PM2.5, the quarterly average RRFs are used for the future year projections. For 

the 8-hour average ozone simulations, the aggregated response of multiple episode days 

to the implementation of the control strategy is used to develop an averaged RRF for 

projecting a future year design value. Simply stated, the future year design value is 

estimated by multiplying the non-dimensional RRF by the base year design value. Thus, 

the simulated improvement in air quality, based on multiple meteorological episodes, is 

translated as a metric that directly determines compliance in the form of the standard. 

The modeling analyses described in this chapter use the RRF and design value approach 

to demonstrate future year attainment of the standards. 

PM2.5 Modeling 

Within the Basin, PM2.5 particles are either directly emitted into the atmosphere 

(primary particles), or are formed through atmospheric chemical reactions from 

precursor gases (secondary particles). Primary PM2.5 includes road dust, diesel soot, 

combustion products, and other sources of fine particles. Secondary products, such as 

sulfates, nitrates, and complex carbon compounds are formed from reactions with oxides 

of sulfur, oxides of nitrogen, VOCs, and ammonia.

The Final 2012 AQMP employs the CMAQ air quality modeling platform with 

SAPRC99 chemistry and WRF meteorology as the primary tool used to demonstrate 

future year attainment of the 24-hour average PM2.5 standard. A detailed discussion of 

the features of the CMAQ approach is presented in Appendix V. The analysis was also 

conducted using the CAMx modeling platform approach 

comprised of the SAPRC99 gas phased chemistry and a static two-mode particle size 

aerosol module as the particulate modeling platform. Parallel testing was conducted to 

evaluate the CMAQ performance against CAMx and the results indicated that the two 

model/chemistry packages had similar performance. The CAMx results are provided in 

Appendix V as a component of the weight of evidence discussion. 

The Final 2012 modeling attainment demonstrations using the CMAQ (and CAMx) 

platform were conducted in a vastly expanded modeling domain compared with the 

analysis conducted for the 2007 AQMP modeling attainment demonstration. In this 

analysis, the PM2.5 and ozone base and future simulations were modeled 

simultaneously. The simulations were conducted using a Lambert Conformal grid 
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-6 

projection where the western boundary of the domain was extended to 084 UTM, over 

100 miles west of the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The eastern boundary 

extended beyond the Colorado river while the northern and southern boundaries of the 

domain extend to the San Joaquin Valley and the Northern portions of Mexico (3543 

UTM). The grid size has been reduced from 5 kilometers squared to 4 kilometers 

squared and the vertical resolution has been increased from 11 to 18 layers. 

The final WRF meteorological fields were generated for the identical domain, layer 

structure and grid size. The WRF simulations were initialized from National Centers for 

Environmental Prediction (NCEP) analyses and run for 3-day increments with the option 

for four dimensional data assimilation (FDDA). Horizontal and vertical boundary 

conditions were designated using 

PM2.5 data measured as individual species at six-sites in the AQMD air monitoring 

network during 2008 provided the characterization for evaluation and validation of the 

CMAQ annual and episodic modeling. The six sites include the historical PM2.5 

maximum location (Riverside- Rubidoux), the stations experiencing many of the highest 

county concentrations (among the 4-county jurisdiction including Fontana, North Long 

Beach and Anaheim) and source oriented key monitoring sites addressing goods 

movement (South Long Beach) and mobile source impacts (Central Los Angeles). It is 

important to note that the close proximity of Mira Loma to Rubidoux and the common 

in-Basin air flow and transport patterns enable the use of the Rubidoux speciated data as 

representative of the particulate speciation at Mira Loma. Both sites are directly 

downwind of the dairy production areas in Chino and the warehouse distribution centers 

located in the northwestern corner of Riverside County. Speciated data monitored at the 

selected sites for 2006-2007 and 2009-2010 were analyzed to corroborate the 

applicability of using the 2008 profiles. 

Day-specific point source emissions were extracted from the District stationary source 

and RECLAIM inventories. Mobile source emissions included weekday, Saturday and 

Sunday profiles based on CALTRANS weighin-motion profiles, and vehicle population data and transportation analysis zone (TAZ) 

data provided by SCAG. The mobile source data and selected area source data were 

subjected to daily temperature corrections to account for enhanced evaporative emissions 

on warmer days. Gridded daily biogenic VOC emissions were provided by CARB using 

the MEGAN biogenic emissions model. The simulations benefited from enhancements 

made to the emissions inventory including an updated ammonia inventory, improved 

emissions characterization that split organic compounds into coarse, fine and primary 
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-7 

particulate categories, and updated spatial allocation of primary paved road dust 

emissions. 

Model performance was evaluated against speciated particulate PM2.5 air quality data 

for ammonium, nitrates, sulfates, secondary organic matter, elemental carbon, primary 

and total particulate mass for the six monitoring sites (Rubidoux, Central Los Angeles, 

Anaheim, South Long Beach, Long Beach, and Fontana). 

The following section summarizes the PM2.5 modeling approach conducted in 

preparation for this Plan. Details of the PM2.5 modeling are presented in Appendix V. 

24-Hour PM2.5 Modeling Approach

CMAQ simulations were conducted for each day in 2008. The simulations included 

8784 consecutive hours from which daily 24-hour average PM2.5 concentrations (0000-

2300 hours) were calculated. A set of RRFs were generated for each future year 

simulation. RRFs were generated for the ammonium ion (NH4), nitrate ion (NO3), 

sulfate ion (SO4), organic carbon (OC), elemental carbon (EC) and a combined grouping 

of crustal, sea salts and metals (Others). A total of 24 RRFs were generated for each 

future year simulation (4 seasons and 6 monitoring sites). 

Future year concentrations of the six component species were calculated by applying the 

model generated quarterly RRFs to the speciated 24-hour PM2.5 (FRM) data, sorted by 

quarter, for each of the five years used in the design value calculation. The 32 days in 

each year were then re-ranked to establish a new 98thpercentile concentration. The 

resulting future year 98thpercentile concentrations for the five years were subjected to 

weighted averaging for the attainment demonstration. 

In this chapter, future year PM2.5 24-hour average design values are presented for 2014, 

and 2019 to (1) demonstrate the future baseline concentrations if no further controls are 

implemented; (2) identify the amount of air quality improvement needed to advance the 

attainment date to 2014; and (3) confirm the attainment demonstration given the 

proposed PM2.5 control strategy. In addition, Appendix V will include a discussion and 

demonstration that attainment will be satisfied for the entire modeling domain. 

Weight of Evidence

PM2.5 modeling guidance strongly recommends the use of corroborating evidence to 

support the future year attainment demonstration. The weight of evidence demonstration 

for the Final 2012 AQMP includes brief discussions of the observed 24-hour PM2.5, 
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-8 

emissions trends, and future year PM2.5 predictions. Detailed discussions of all model 

results and the weight of evidence demonstration are provided in Appendix V. 

FUTURE AIR QUALITY 

Under the federal Clean Air Act, the Basin must comply with the federal PM2.5 air 

quality standards by December 2014 [Section 172(a)(2)(A)]. An extension of up-to five 

years (until 2019) could be granted if attainment cannot be demonstrated any earlier with 

all feasible control measures incorporated. 

24-Hour PM2.5 

A simulation of 2014 baseline emissions was conducted to substantiate the severity of 

the 24-hour PM2.5 problem in the Basin. The simulation used the projected emissions 

for 2014 which included all adopted control measures that will be implemented prior to 

and during 2014, including mobile source incentive projects under contract (Proposition 

1B and Carl Moyer Programs). The resulting 2014 future-year Basin design value 

(37.3 3

) failed to meet the federal standard. As a consequence additional controls 

are needed. 

Simulation of the 2019 baseline emissions indicates that the Basin PM2.5 will attain the 

federal 24-hour PM2.5 standard in 2019 without additional controls. With the control 

program in place, the 24-hour PM2.5 simulations project that the 2014 design value will 

be 34.3 3

and that the attainment date will advance from 2019 to 2014. 

Figure 5-3 depicts future 24-hour PM2.5 air quality projections at the Basin design site 

(Mira Loma) and six PM2.5 monitoring sites having comprehensive particulate species 

characterization. Shown in the figure, are the base year design values for 2008 along 

with projections for 2014 with and without control measures in place. All of the sites 

with the exception of Mira Loma will meet the 24-hour PM2.5 standard by 2014 without 

additional controls. With implementation of the control measures, all sites in the Basin 

demonstrate attainment. 
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-9 

FIGURE 5-3 

Maximum 24-Hour Average PM2.5 Design Concentrations: 

2008 Baseline, 2014 and 2014 Controlled 

Spatial Projections of PM2.5 Design Values

Figure 5-4 provides a perspective of the Basin-wide spatial extent of 24-hour PM2.5 

impacts in the base year 2008, with all adopted rules and measures implemented. 

Figures 5-5 and 5-6 provide a Basin-wide perspective of the spatial extent of 24-hour 

PM2.5 future impacts for baseline 2014 emissions and 2014 with the proposed control 

program in place. With no additional controls, several areas around the northwestern 

portion of Riverside and southwestern portion of San Bernardino Counties depict grid 

cells with weighted PM2.5 24-hour design values exceeding 35 μg/m3. By 2014, the 

number of grid cells with concentrations exceeding the federal standard is restricted to a 

small region surrounding the Mira Loma monitoring station in northwestern Riverside 

County. With the control program fully implemented in 2014, the Basin does not exhibit 

any grid cells exceeding the federal standard. 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

Mira Loma Fontana Rubidoux Los Angeles Anaheim North Long 

Beach 

South Long 

Beach 

2008 2014 2014 Controlled 

Federal Std.*
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-10 

FIGURE 5-4 

2008 Baseline 24-Hour PM2.5 Design Concentrations (μg/m3) 

FIGURE 5-5 

2014 Baseline 24-Hour PM2.5 Design Concentrations (μg/m3) 
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-11 

FIGURE 5-6 

2014 Controlled 24-Hour PM2.5 Design Concentrations (μg/m3) 

Weight of Evidence Discussion

The weight of evidence discussion focuses on the trends of 24-hour PM2.5 and key 

precursor emissions to provide justification and confidence that the Basin will meet the 

federal standard by 2014. 

Figure 5-7 depicts the long term trend of observed Basin 24-hour average PM2.5 design 

values with the CMAQ projected design value for 2014. Also superimposed on the 

graph is the linear best-fit trend line for the observed 24-hour average PM2.5 design 

values. The observed trend depicts a steady 49 percent decrease in observed design 

value concentrations between 2001 and 2011. The rate of improvement is just under 4 

μg/m3per year. If the trend is extended beyond 2011, the projection suggests attainment 

of the PM2.5 24-hour standard in 2013, one year earlier than determined by the 

attainment demonstration. While the straight-line future year approximation is 

aggressive in its projection, it offers insight to the effectiveness of the ongoing control 

program and is consistent with the attainment demonstration. 

Figures 5-8 depicts the long term trend of Basin NOx emissions for the same period. 

Figure 5-9 provides the corresponding emissions trend for directly emitted PM2.5. Base 
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-12 

year NOx inventories between 2002 (from the 2007 AQMP) and 2008 experienced a 31 

percent reduction while directly emitted PM2.5 experienced a 19 percent reduction over 

the 6-year period. The Basin 24-hour average PM2.5 design value experienced a 

concurrent 27 percent reduction between 2002 and 2008. The projected trend of NOx 

emissions indicates that the PM2.5 precursor associated with the formation of nitrate will 

continue to be reduced though 2019 by an additional 48 percent. Similarly, the projected 

trend of directly emitted PM2.5 projects a more moderate reduction of 13 percent 

through 2019. However, as discussed in the 2007 AQMP and in a later section of this 

chapter, directly emitted PM2.5 is a more effective contributor to the formation of 

ambient PM2.5 compared to NOx. While the projected NOx and direct PM2.5 

emissions trends decrease at a reduced rate between 2012 and 2019, it is clearly evident 

that the overall significant reductions will continue to result in lower nitrate, elemental 

carbon and direct particulate contributions to 24-hour PM2.5 design values. 

FIGURE 5-7 

Basin Observed and CMAQ Projected 

Future Year PM2.5 Design Concentrations (μg/m3) 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

20012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014

μg/m3

Observed CMAQ Projected
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-13 

FIGURE 5-8 

Trend of Basin NOx Emissions (Controlled) 

FIGURE 5-9 

Trend of Basin PM2.5 Emissions (Controlled) 

Control Strategy Choices

PM2.5 has five major precursors that contribute to the development of the ambient 

aerosol including ammonia, NOx, SOx, VOC, and directly emitted PM2.5. Various 

combinations of reductions in these pollutants could all provide a path to clean air. The 

24-hour PM2.5 attainment strategy presented in this Final 2012 AQMP relies on a dual 

0 

200 

400 

600 

800 

1000 

1200 

1400 

2001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019

Tons Per Day

NOx Emissions Trend 

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

2001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019

Tons Per Day

PM2.5 Emissions Trend 
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-14 

approach to first demonstrate attainment of the federal standard by 2019 and then 

focuses on controls that will be most effective in reducing PM2.5 to accelerate 

attainment to the earliest extent. The 2007 AQMP control measures since implemented 

will result in substantial reductions of SOx, direct PM2.5, VOC and NOx emissions. 

Newly proposed short-term measures, discussed in Chapter 4, will provide additional 

regional emissions reductions targeting directly emitted PM2.5 and NOx. 

It is useful to weigh the value of the precursor emissions reductions (on a per ton basis) 

to microgram per cubic meter improvements in ambient PM2.5 levels. As presented in 

the weight of evidence discussion, trends of PM2.5 and NOx emissions suggest a direct 

response between lower emissions and improving air quality. The Final 2007 AQMP 

established a set of factors to relate regional per ton precursor emissions reductions to 

PM2.5 air quality improvements based on the annual average concentration. The Final 

2012 AQMP CMAQ simulations provided a similar set of factors, but this time directed 

at 24-hour PM2.5. The analysis determined that VOC emissions reductions have the 

lowest return in terms of micrograms reduced per ton reduction, one third of the benefit 

of NOx reductions. SOx emissions were about eight times more effective than NOx 

reductions. However, directly emitted PM2.5 reductions were approximately 15 times 

more effective than NOx reductions. It is important to note that the contribution of 

ammonia emissions is embedded as a component of the SOx and NOx factors since 

ammonium nitrate and ammonium sulfate are the resultant particulates formed in the 

ambient chemical process. Table 5-2 summarizes the relative importance of precursor 

emissions reductions to 24-hour PM2.5 air quality improvements based on the analysis. 

(A comprehensive discussion of the emission reduction factors is presented in 

Attachment 8 of Appendix V of this document). Emission reductions due to existing 

programs and implementation of the 2012 AQMP control measures will result in 

projected 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations throughout the Basin that meet the standard by 

2014 at all locations. Basin-wide curtailment of wood burning and open burning when 

the PM2.5 air quality is projected to exceed 30 μg/m3in Mira Loma will effectively 

accelerate attainment at Mira Loma from 2019 to 2014. Table 5-3 lists the mix of the 

staged control measure 

implementation approach. 
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-15 

TABLE 5-2 

Relative Contributions of Precursor Emissions Reductions to Simulated Controlled 

Future-Year 24-hour PM2.5 Concentrations 

PRECURSOR PM2.5 COMPONENT (μg/m3) 

STANDARDIZED 

CONTRIBUTION TO 

AMBIENT PM2.5 MASS 

VOC Organic Carbon Factor of 0.3 

NOx Nitrate Factor of 1 

SOx Sulfate Factor of 7.8 

PM2.5 Elemental Carbon & Others Factor of 14.8 

TABLE 5-3 

Final 2012 AQMP 

24-hour PM2.5 Attainment Strategy 

Allowable Emissions (TPD) 

YEAR SCENARIO VOC NOx SOx PM2.5 

2014 Baseline 451 506 18 70 

2014 Controlled 451 490 18 58* 

*Winter episodic day emissions 

ADDITIONAL MODELING ANALYSES 

As a component of the Final 2012 AQMP, concurrent simulations were also conducted 

to update and assess the impacts to annual average PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone given the 

new modeling platform and emissions inventory. This update provides a confirmation 

that the control strategy will continue to move air quality expeditiously towards 

attainment of the relevant standards. 

Annual PM2.5 

Annual PM2.5 Modeling Approach

The Final 2012 AQMP annual PM2.5 modeling employs the same approach to 

estimating the future year annual PM2.5 as was described in the 2007 AQMP attainment 

demonstrations. Future year PM2.5 annual average air quality is determined using site 
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-16 

and species specific quarterly averaged RRFs applied to the weighted quarterly average 

2008 PM2.5 design values per U.S. EPA guidance documents. 

In this application, CMAQ and WRF were used to simulate 2008 meteorological and air 

quality to determine Basin annual average PM2.5 concentrations. The future year 

attainment demonstration was analyzed for 2015, the target set by the federal CAA. The 

2014 simulation relies on implementation of all adopted rules and measures through 

2014. This enables a full year-long demonstration based on a control strategy that would 

be fully implemented by January 1, 2015. It is important to note that the use of the 

quarterly design values for a 5-year period centered around 2008 (listed in Table 5-4) 

continue to be used in the projection of the future year annual average PM2.5 

concentrations. The future year design reflects the weighted quarterly average 

concentration calculated from the projections over five years (20 quarters). 

TABLE 5-4 

2008 Weighted Annual PM2.5 Design Values

*

(μg/m3) 

MONITORING SITE ANNUAL* 

Anaheim 13.1 

Los Angeles 15.4 

Fontana 15.7 

North Long Beach 13.6 

South Long Beach 13.2 

Mira Loma 18.6 

Rubidoux 16.7 

* Calculated based on quarterly observed data between 2006 2010 

Future Annual PM2.5 Air Quality 

The projections for the annual state and federal standards are shown in Figure 5-10. All 

areas will be in attainment of the federal annual standard (15.0 μg/m3) by 2014. The 

2014 design value is projected to be 9 percent below the federal standard. However, as 

shown in Figure 5-10, the Final 2012 AQMP does not achieve the California standard of 

12 μg/m3by 2014. Additional controls would be needed to meet the California annual 

PM2.5 standard. 
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-17 

FIGURE 5-10 

Annual Average PM2.5 Design Concentrations: 

2008 and 2014 Controlled 

Ozone Modeling 

The 2007 AQMP provided a comprehensive 8-hour ozone analysis that demonstrated 

future year attainment of the 1997 federal ozone standard (80 ppb) by 2023 with 

implementation of short-term measures and CAA Section 182(e)(5) long term emissions 

reductions. The analysis concluded that NOx emissions needed to be reduced 

approximately 76 percent and VOC 22 percent from the 2023 baseline in order to 

demonstrate attainment. The 2023 base year VOC and NOx summer planning emissions 

inventories included 536 and 506 TPD, respectively. 

As presented in Chapter 3, the Final 2012 AQMP controlled 2023 emissions of both 

precursor pollutants are estimated to be lower than the 2023 baseline established in the 

2007 AQMP. The 2023 baseline VOC and NOx emission summer planning emissions 

have been revised to 438 and 319 TPD, respectively. The emissions revision 

incorporated changes made to the on-road truck and off-road equipment categories that 

resulted from CARB rulemaking. The new emissions inventory also reflects the impact 

of the economic slowdown and revisions to regional growth estimates. As a 

consequence, it is important to revisit the projections of 2023 baseline ozone to 

investigate the impact of the inventory revision on the attainment demonstration and 

equally important, what is the impact on the size of the proposed long term NOx 

emissions reduction commitment. 

0 

2 

4 

6 

8 

10 

12 

14 

16 

18 

20 

Mira Loma Rubidoux Fontana Los Angeles North Long 

Beach 

South Long 

Beach 

Anaheim 

2008 2014 

Federal Std

California Std. 
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-18 

Ozone Representativeness

As a component of the PM2.5 attainment demonstration, the CMAQ modeling provided 

Basin-wide ozone air quality simulations for each hour in 2008. Past ozone attainment 

demonstrations evaluated a set of days characterized by restrictive meteorology or 

episodes occurring during concurrent intensive field monitoring programs. Of great 

importance, these episodic periods needed to be rated in terms of how representative 

they were in reference to the ozone standard being evaluated. For the now revoked 1-

hour ozone standard, the attainment demonstration focused on a limited number of days 

closely matching the annual design value. Typically, the analysis addressed fewer than 

5 days of simulations. The 2007 AQMP was the first to address the 8-hour ozone 

standard and the use of the RRFs in the future year ozone projection. To provide a 

robust characterization of the RRFs for use in the attainment demonstration, the analysis 

simulated 36 days. The ozone modeling guidance recommends that a minimum of 5-

days of simulations meeting modeling acceptance criteria be used in a future year RRF 

calculation, but recommends incorporating as many days as possible to fully capture 

both the meteorological variations in the ozone season and the response of ozone 

formation for different daily emissions profiles. 

This update to the future year ozone projection focuses on 91 days of ozone air quality 

observed during June through August 2008. During this period, seven well defined 

multiday ozone episodes occurred in the Basin with 75 total days having daily Basinwide maximum concentrations of 80 ppb or higher. More importantly, when adjusted by 

a normalized meteorological potential using a regression based weighting covering 30-

years of data (1998-2010), summarized in the 2003 AQMP, 8 days during the 2008 

period were ranked above the 95thpercentile in the long term distribution and another 19 

were ranked between the 90thand 94thpercentile. 

Figure 5-11 depicts the time series of the daily Basin 8-hour maximum and Crestline 

(the Basin design station) daily maximum 8-hour ozone air quality during the three 

month period in 2008. The seven primary meteorological episodes which occur between 

mid June and August are highlighted in the figure. It is important to note that the 

analysis not only focused on the seven periods or Crestline specifically. All station days 

meeting the acceptance criteria for calculating a daily RRF were included in the analysis. 

Several locations in the San Bernardino and Riverside Valleys exhibit similar transport 

and daily patterns of ozone formation as Crestline. The peak Basin 2008 8-hour average 

ozone concentration was observed at Santa Clarita on August 2nd at a value of 131 ppb, 

along a distinctly different transport route. 
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-19 

FIGURE 5-11 

Observed Basin and Crestline Daily Maximum 8-Hr Average Ozone Concentrations 

(Shaded areas indicate multiple day regional ozone episodes)

Overall, the 91-day period provides a robust description of the 2008 ozonemeteorological season. Table 5-4 lists the number of days each Basin station exceeded 

the 8-hour ozone standard during the June through August 2008 period. Also listed in 

Table 5-4 are the 2008, 5-year weighted design values used in the future year ozone 

projections. 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

90 

100 

110 

120 

130 

140 

Basin Maximum Crestline 
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-20 

TABLE 5-4 

2008 Basin Weighted Design Values* and Number of Days Daily Maximum 

Concentrations Exceeded 80 ppb 

STATION 

2008 5-YEAR 

WEIGHTED 

DESIGN (PPB) 

NUMBER OF DAYS IN 2008 

WITH OBSERVED 8-HR 

AVERAGE MAXIMUM 

OZONE > 80 PPB 

Azusa 94 16 

Burbank 88 10 

Reseda 94 16 

Pomona 97 19 

Pasadena 90 7 

Santa Clarita 101 41 

Glendora 106 26 

Rubidoux 101 39 

Perris 104 47 

Lake Elsinore 99 39 

Banning Airport 102 49 

Upland 106 31 

Crestline 116 66 

Fontana 107 36 

San Bernardino 109 46 

Redlands 109 50 

*Stations having design values greater than 80 ppb 

Ozone Modeling Approach

The ozone modeling approach used in this update follows the same criteria employed for 

the 2007 AQMP attainment demonstration. Briefly, the set of 91 days from June 1 

through August 30, 2008, simulated as a subset of the annual PM2.5 simulations, were 

analyzed to determine daily 8-hour average maximum ozone for the 2008 and 2023 

emissions inventories. A separate 2023 simulation was conducted to assess future year 

ozone with VOC and NOx emissions specified at the levels defined by the 2007 AQMP 

attainment demonstration carrying capacity (420 TPD VOC and 114 TPD NOx). 

Finally, a set of simulations with incremental VOC and NOx emissions reductions from 

2023 baseline emissions was generated to create ozone isopleths for each station in the 

Basin. The ozone isopleths provide updated guidance to the determination of the future 
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-21 

control strategy, particularly in light of the challenge in meeting the current 75 ppb 

standard which will require an attainment demonstration to be submitted to U.S. EPA in 

2015. 

The ozone RRFs were calculated using the ratio methodology described for the PM2.5 

modeling. Individual station day inclusion in the analysis was determined by three basic 

criteria: (1) the observed ozone concentration 

weighted design value; (2) the absolute prediction accuracy of the base 2008 simulation 

for that day was required to be within 20 percent; and (3) the observed daily maximum 

concentration needed to be greater than 84 ppb. The criteria were designed to eliminate 

extreme values from entering the analysis and to only focus on station days where model 

performance met the long-standing criteria for acceptance used in previous attainment 

demonstrations. Finally, only station days where ozone exceeded the 84 ppb threshold 

established to demonstrate attainment of the 1997 ozone standard, as specified in the 

U.S. EPA Modeling Attainment Guidance Document, were included in the analysis. 

Future Ozone Air Quality 

Table 5-5 summarizes the results of the updated ozone simulations. Included for general 

comparison are the 2023 ozone baseline and 2023 controlled ozone projections from the 

2007 AQMP ozone attainment demonstration modeling analysis approved by U.S. EPA 

as part of the SIP The Final 2012 AQMP baseline ozone simulations reflect the changes 

made to the 2023 baseline inventory. The Final 2012 summer planning inventory has a 

higher ratio between VOC and NOX emissions, 1.39 vs. 1.05, although total tonnages of 

both precursor emissions are lower than presented in the 2007 AQMP. The higher VOC 

to NOx ratio is indicative of a more reactive pollutant mix with average projected ozone 

design concentrations 9 percent higher than previously projected. One implication of 

this simulation is that moderate VOC emissions reductions in the years between 2014 

and 2023 will benefit regional ozone concentrations. Yet, the projected 2023 baseline 

design value of 108 ppb continues to exceed the federal standard by 35 percent. With 

the implementation of the Final 2012 AQMP short term control measures and the 

Section 185(e)(5) long-term control measures, (defined in this update as the difference 

between the Final 2012 AQMP 2023 base year VOC and NOx emissions and the 

corresponding Basin 2007 AQMP ozone attainment demonstration carrying capacity), 

projected regional ozone design values closely match those defined in the 2007 AQMP 

ozone attainment demonstration. Regardless, it will still require a 64 percent reduction 

in NOx emissions and an additional 3 percent reduction in VOC emissions to attain the 

1997 ozone standard. 
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-22 

TABLE 5-5 

Model-Predicted 8-Hour Ozone Concentrations 

LOCATION 

2007 OZONE 

SIP-2023 

BASELINE 

DESIGN (PPB)

2007 OZONE 

SIP-2023 

CONTROLLED 

DESIGN (PPB) 

FINAL 2012 

AQMP-UPDATED 

2023* BASELINE 

DESIGN (PPB) 

FINAL 2012 

AQMP- UPDATED* 

2023*CONTROLLED 

DESIGN (PPB) 

Azusa 82 80** 95 77 

Burbank 86 70** 88 72 

Reseda 86 68 90 73 

Pomona 85 75 100 80 

Pasadena 78 74** 92 76 

Santa Clarita 95 74 94 73 

Glendora 91 79 107 84 

Riverside 92 78 100 77 

Perris 94 78*** 88 66 

Lake Elsinore 80 64 85 66 

Banning 88 70 94 73 

Upland 92 78 106 83 

Crestline 100 83 107 81 

Fontana 97 81 104 81 

San 

Bernardino 

92 78 108 83 

Redlands 98 81 103 77 

* Informational purpose only based on draft emissions inventories and across-the-board reductions. 

** Based on the city-

*** determined from the stations meeting the criteria having more than 5 

episode days. 

Note: Attainment with the 1997 Federal 8-hour ozone standard requires 84 ppb or less 

With controls in place, the updated analysis corroborates the approved 2007 AQMP 

ozone attainment demonstration in that it is expected that all stations in the Basin will 

meet the federal 8-hour ozone standard. The east Basin stations in the San Bernardino 

Valley continue to have among the highest projected 8-hour controlled design values for 

this update. The 2023 controlled ozone design value at Glendora is also projected to 

exceed 80 ppb, but all stations show attainment with the federal 8-hour ozone standard 

(<84ppb). Glendora, Upland, Fontana and San Bernardino are downwind receptors 

along the primary wind transport route that moves precursor emissions and developing 

ozone eastward by the daily sea breeze. The higher projected design value at Glendora 

reflects the higher VOC to NOx ratio observed in the 2023 baseline inventory relative to 
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-23 

the 2007 AQMP 2023 baseline inventory. The 2023 controlled design value at Glendora 

for the Final 2012 AQMP actually represents a greater response to emissions reductions 

than in the 2007 AQMP attainment demonstration. Future year projections of ozone for 

this update along the northerly transport route through the San Fernando Valley indicate 

that the ozone design value in the Santa Clarita Valley will be approximately 15 percent 

below the standard. 

Spatial Projections of 8-Hour Ozone Design Values

The spatial distribution of ozone design values for the 2008 base year is shown in Figure 

5-12. Future year ozone air quality projections for 2024 with and without 

implementation of all control measures are presented in Figures 5-13 and 5-14. The 

predicted ozone concentrations will be significantly reduced in the future years in all 

parts of the Basin with the implementation of proposed control measures in the South 

Coast Air Basin. 

Appendix V provides base year model performance statistics, grid level spatial plots of 

simulated ozone (base cases and future year controlled) as well as weight of evidence 

discussions to support the modeling attainment demonstration. 

FIGURE 5-12 

2008 Baseline 8-Hour Ozone Design Concentrations (ppb) 
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-24 

FIGURE 5-13 

Model-Predicted 2023 Baseline 8-Hour Ozone Design Concentrations (ppb) 

FIGURE 5-14 

Model-Predicted 2023 Controlled 8-Hour Ozone Design Concentrations (ppb) 
Chapter 5: Future Air Quality 

5-25 

A First Look at Attaining the 2006 8-Hour Ozone Standard

In 2006, the U.S. EPA lowered the federal 8-hour ozone standard to 75 ppb. Recent 8-

hour ozone rule implementation guidance requires that a SIP revision with an updated 

attainment demonstration and control strategy be submitted to U.S. EPA no later than 

December 2015. The Basin has been designated as an extreme non-attainment area for 

the new standard, consistent with the classification of the 80 ppb standard. Thus, the 

deadline for attainment of the 75 ppb standard is 2032, 8-years after the attainment date 

for the previous 80 ppb federal standard in 2024. It is critical to conduct preliminary 

analyses to assess the need for potential adjustments to the overall control strategy 

considering this new standard and deadline 

The preliminary projections, based upon a modeling evaluation of how VOC and NOx 

that a 75 

percent reduction in NOX emissions beyond the 2023 baseline is needed to meet the 75 

ppb level in 2032. The resulting 2032 Basin NOx carrying capacity could be as low as 

to 85 tpd. Further discussion of the ozone isopleths and a glance at the potential impact 

to the control strategy and carrying capacity for potential future revisions to the 8-hour 

ozone standard is presented in Chapter 8. 

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

Figure 5-15 shows the 2008 observed and model-predicted regional peak concentrations 

for 24-hour average and annual PM2.5 as percentages of the most stringent federal 

standard, for 2014. The federal 24-hour and annual PM2.5 standards are predicted to be 

met in 2014 with implementation of the Final 2012 AQMP control strategy. The 

California annual PM2.5 standard will not be attained before 2019. (See Figure 5-16). 

Given the changes made to the modeling platform, the number of episodes evaluated, 

and the distinct changes in the projected Final 2012 AQMP 2023 baseline inventory, 

projected 8-hour ozone design values with implementation of the short- and long-term 

controls are very consistent with those presented in the 2007 AQMP attainment 

demonstration. Again, an approximate 65 percent reduction in NOx emissions in 2023 

will be required to meet the 1997 80 ppb standard by 2024. 

The challenges of meeting potential future standards for 8-hour ozone and a proposed 

federal annual PM2.5 standard between 12 and 13 μg/m

3

are discussed in Chapter 8 of 

this document. 
Final 2012 AQMP 

5-26 

The challenge of future year attainment of proposed revisions to the federal annual 

PM2.5 standard at a value between 12 and 13 μg/m

3

are discussed in Chapter 8 of the 

Draft Final 2012 AQMP. 

 

FIGURE 5-15 

Projection of Future Air Quality in the Basin in Comparison 

with the Federal Standards. 

FIGURE 5-16

Projection of Future PM2.5 in the Basin in Comparison with 

California State Standard

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

140 

160 

2008 Observed 2014 Baseline 2014 Controlled 

24-Hr Average Annual

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

140 

160 

180 

2008 Observed 2014 Predicted 2019 Predicted

Percent of California Standard

California 

Standard 

Federal Standard 

Percent of Fed. Std.
fl°°a2o·® ×××

fl·Æ œ ́ø¥· ̈ß ”ø2ø1a3a2 ̈–¥ø2

⁄aæÆ ́øÆß ÓðÔÌ

fiø­a ø2o ⁄ ́ ̈ ́Æa «aøÆ 

¤3·­­·±2 ×2TMa2 ̈±Æß

Õ± ́ ̈ ̧ ›±ø­ ̈ fl·Æ œ ́ø¥· ̈ß ”ø2ø1a3a2 ̈ ‹·­ ̈Æ·1⁄2 ̈

›¥aø2·21 ̈ ̧aø·Æ  ̈ ̧ø ̈ ©aæÆaø ̈ ̧aÚÚÚ

Ã”
FINAL 2012 AQMP 

APPENDIX III 

BASE AND FUTURE YEAR EMISSION INVENTORY 

FEBRUARY 2013
CODE Source Category TOG VOC CO NOx SOx TSP PM10 PM2.5 NH3

Fuel Combustion

10 Electric Utilities 4.87 0.89 8.71 0.20 0.28 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.17

20 Cogeneration 0.33 0.05 0.39 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.27

30 Oil and Gas Production (combustion) 0.93 0.10 0.57 0.66 0.02 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.25

40 Petroleum Refining (Combustion) 4.42 1.28 5.06 0.00 0.00 1.62 1.56 1.54 0.97

50 Manufacturing and Industrial 25.87 5.93 18.23 13.20 0.52 1.31 1.30 1.29 2.01

52 Food and Agricultural Processing 0.19 0.06 1.06 0.09 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.10

60 Service and Commercial 14.47 4.47 16.78 9.53 0.93 1.38 1.37 1.37 3.17

99 Other (Fuel Combustion) 1.56 0.36 3.05 3.80 0.22 0.36 0.28 0.20 0.01

Total Fuel Combustion 52.65 13.15 53.85 27.49 1.99 5.93 5.77 5.64 7.94

Waste Disposal

110 Sewage Treatment 0.09 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.17

120 Landfills 614.57 8.71 0.51 0.51 0.32 0.14 0.14 0.14 3.90

130 Incineration 0.43 0.07 0.38 0.90 0.08 0.18 0.08 0.06 0.14

140 Soil Remediation 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

199 Other (Waste Disposal) 4.21 3.41 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.62 0.30 0.03 23.40

Total Waste Disposal 619.30 12.24 0.92 1.43 0.43 0.95 0.53 0.24 27.61

Cleaning and Surface Coatings

210 Laundering 3.24 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

220 Degreasing 59.63 11.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

230 Coatings and Related Processes 22.48 21.52 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.72 1.65 1.59 0.14

240 Printing 1.82 1.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04

250 Adhesives and Sealants 4.49 3.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

299 Other (Cleaning and Surface Coatings) 0.58 0.58 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

Total Cleaning and Surface Coatings 92.24 39.28 0.05 0.03 0.00 1.74 1.66 1.60 0.20

Petroleum Production and Marketing

310 Oil and Gas Production 2.51 1.42 0.07 0.09 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00

320 Petroleum Refining 6.15 4.11 4.98 0.19 0.56 2.84 1.82 1.58 0.20

330 Petroleum Marketing 112.98 31.99 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

399 Other (Petroleum Production and Marketing) 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total Petroleum Production and Marketing 121.66 37.54 5.05 0.29 0.57 2.85 1.83 1.59 0.20

Industrial Processes

410 Chemical 8.48 6.90 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.55 0.46 0.06

420 Food and Agriculture 1.52 1.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.24 0.10 0.00

430 Mineral Processes 0.45 0.40 0.86 0.02 0.01 8.72 5.73 3.11 0.08

440 Metal Processes 0.16 0.13 0.21 0.03 0.01 0.58 0.39 0.26 0.00

450 Wood and Paper 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.12 4.27 2.57 0.00

460 Glass and Related Products 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.00

470 Electronics 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00

499 Other (Industrial Processes) 4.44 3.88 0.25 0.03 0.00 1.26 0.87 0.54 9.32

Total Industrial Processes 15.21 12.95 1.50 0.08 0.03 18.00 12.17 7.14 9.45

Solvent Evaporation

510 Consumer Products 103.24 84.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

520 Architectural Coatings and Related Solvent 16.49 15.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

530 Pesticides/Fertilizers 0.99 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.05

540 Asphalt Paving/Roofing 0.91 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00

Total Solvent Evaporation 121.64 102.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 1.05

Table A-2

2014 Annual Average Emissions by Source Category in South Coast Air Basin (Tons/Day)
CODE Source Category TOG VOC CO NOx SOx TSP PM10 PM2.5 NH3

Miscellaneous Processes

610 Residential Fuel Combustion 19.73 8.61 48.36 19.79 0.49 7.73 7.36 7.15 0.11

620 Farming Operations 34.11 2.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.29 1.18 0.30 13.93

630 Construction and Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.59 19.36 1.94 0.00

640 Paved Road Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 102.76 46.96 7.09 0.00

645 Unpaved Road Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.85 5.85 0.58 0.00

650 Fugitive Windblown Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.51 1.76 0.25 0.00

660 Fires 0.34 0.24 3.02 0.08 0.00 0.45 0.44 0.41 0.00

670 Waste Burning and Disposal 5.66 3.23 50.65 1.52 0.47 5.37 5.17 4.60 0.04

690 Cooking 2.60 1.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.89 10.89 10.89 0.00

699 Other (Miscellaneous Processes) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.03

RECLAIM 26.51 7.99

Total Miscellaneous Processes 62.44 16.62 102.03 47.90 8.95 182.45 98.97 33.23 39.11

On-Road Motor Vehicles

710 Light Duty Passenger Auto (LDA) 46.70 42.86 421.38 34.77 0.83 10.76 10.56 4.52 6.51

722 Light Duty Trucks 1 (T1) 14.22 13.12 120.88 10.23 0.11 1.37 1.34 0.62 0.97

723 Light Duty Trucks 2 (T2) 20.46 18.79 202.78 22.85 0.39 3.75 3.69 1.58 3.49

724 Medium Duty Trucks (T3) 21.35 19.39 218.73 26.78 0.39 2.96 2.91 1.25 4.07

732 Light Heavy Duty Gas Trucks 1 (T4) 7.53 6.86 62.75 16.32 0.09 0.63 0.62 0.26 0.79

733 Light Heavy Duty Gas Trucks 2 (T5) 0.75 0.69 6.16 1.61 0.01 0.07 0.06 0.03 0.08

734 Medium Heavy Duty Gas Trucks (T6) 1.40 1.27 16.86 2.69 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.05

736 Heavy Heavy Duty Gas Trucks ((HHD) 0.24 0.20 8.45 1.14 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01

742 Light Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks 1 (T4) 0.67 0.56 3.29 18.44 0.02 0.50 0.50 0.27 0.01

743 Light Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks 2 (T5) 0.23 0.19 1.12 5.99 0.01 0.19 0.19 0.10 0.00

744 Medium Heavy Duty Diesel Truck (T6) 1.13 0.94 3.82 24.55 0.05 1.39 1.38 0.94 0.12

746 Heavy Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks (HHD) 3.97 3.33 17.84 80.39 0.16 2.55 2.54 1.84 0.24

750 Motorcycles (MCY) 8.42 7.04 61.89 2.35 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.04 0.02

760 Diesel Urban Buses (UB) 0.60 0.50 2.41 13.40 0.02 0.95 0.94 0.51 0.02

762 Gas Urban Buses (UB) 0.41 0.32 3.98 0.76 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01

771 Gas School Buses (SB) 0.10 0.09 1.50 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

772 Diesel School Buses (SB) 0.05 0.04 0.16 2.25 0.00 0.17 0.16 0.08 0.01

777 Gas Other Buses (OB) 0.43 0.40 5.20 0.93 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

779 Diesel Other Buses (OB) 0.16 0.13 0.59 4.42 0.01 0.15 0.15 0.10 0.01

780 Motor Homes (MH) 0.22 0.18 5.35 1.61 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.03

Total On-Road Motor Vehicles 129.05 116.91 1165.13 271.62 2.10 25.70 25.29 12.23 16.46

Other Mobile Sources

810 Aircraft 3.59 3.51 37.02 13.94 1.50 0.88 0.83 0.42 0.00

820 Trains 2.00 1.68 6.59 21.73 0.02 0.62 0.62 0.57 0.00

833 Ocean Going Vessels 2.33 2.08 3.86 35.13 2.70 0.85 0.85 0.82 0.03

835 Commercial Habor Crafts 1.28 1.08 6.27 11.89 0.01 0.53 0.53 0.49 0.00

840 Recreational Boats 30.94 29.30 104.40 5.91 0.00 1.84 1.77 1.69 0.00

850 Off-Road Recreational Vehicles 6.79 6.54 7.87 0.13 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.00

860 Off-Road Equipment 53.11 48.72 593.53 64.03 0.08 4.27 4.20 3.93 0.06

870 Farm Equipment 1.03 0.89 6.53 4.62 0.01 0.27 0.26 0.24 0.00

890 Fuel Storage and Handling 6.63 6.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total Other Mobile Sources 107.71 100.41 766.07 157.38 4.33 9.28 9.09 8.18 0.10

Total Stationary and Area Sources 1085.13 233.80 163.40 77.22 11.97 211.94 120.95 49.47 85.57

Total On-Road Vehicles 129.05 116.91 1165.13 271.62 2.10 25.70 25.29 12.23 16.46

Total Other Mobile 107.71 100.41 766.07 157.38 4.33 9.28 9.09 8.18 0.10

Total 1321.90 451.12 2094.59 506.22 18.40 246.92 155.33 69.89 102.13

Table A-2 (continued)

2014 Annual Average Emissions by Source Category in South Coast Air Basin (Tons/Day)