1 

### San Joaquin Valley



# DRAFT CONFIDENTIAL

April 24, 20142 

### INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the vehicle miles travelled (VMT) emissions offset demonstration for the

1

- hour and 8

- hour ozone standards is to respond to U.S. EPA’s action withdrawing approval of revisions to California’s State Implementation Plan for the San Joaquin

Val ley pub lished on November 2 6 , 201 2 (7 7 Fed.Reg. 70376 ). In that action, U.S. EP A withdrew its approval of the 2004 1

- hour ozone plan (including the VMT emissions

offset demonstration ), and withdrew its approval of the VMT offset demonstration

contained in the 2007 8

- hour ozone plan

. U.S. EPA’s action is in response to decision s of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Association of Irritated Residents v U.S. EPA, (9th Cir., reprinted as amended on January 27, 2012, 686 F. 3d 668) , and Sierra Club v

U.S. EPA, (671 F.3d 955 (9 th Cir. 2012))

.



### BACKGROUND

In 1979, U.S. EPA established a primary health

- based national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone at 0.12 parts per million (ppm) averaged over a 1

- hour period. See 44 Fed.Reg. 8220 (February 9 , 1979). The Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended in 1990, classified areas that had not yet attained that standard, based on the severity of their ozone problem, ranging from Marginal to Extreme. Extreme areas were provided the most time to attain, until Novem ber 15, 2010, but were also subject to the most stringent requirements. In particular, Severe and Extreme areas were subject to CAA Section 182(d)(1)(A), which requires state implementation plans to adopt “specific enforceable transportation control strat egies and transportation control measures to offset any growth in vehicle miles traveled or numbers of vehicle trips in such area....” U.S. EPA designated the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin as “Extreme” on April 16, 2004 (69 Fed Reg 20550). Thus the S an Jo aquin Valley Air Basin was subject to this requirement. The U.S. EPA has historically interpreted this provision of the CAA (now called “VMT emissions offset requirement”) to allow areas to meet the requirement by demonstrating that emissions from motor v ehicles decline each year through the attainment year. See, e.g., 57 Fed. Reg. 13498, at 13521

- 13523 (April 16, 1992).



### NEW OZONE STANDARD

In 1997, U.S. EPA replaced the 1

- hour ozone standard with an 8

- hour standard of 0.08 ppm [62 Fed.Reg. 38856 (July 18, 1997)]. The U.S. EPA promulgated rules implementing the new standard. The “Phase 1” rule was issued on April 30, 2004 (69 Fed.Reg. 23951). That rule includes anti

- backsliding requirements that meant that many requirements remained applicable even af ter the revocation of the 1

- hour standard, which was effective June 2005. See 40 CFR §51.905(a)(1) and §51.900(f). In particular, an area that was classified as Extreme for the 1

- hour standard would remain subject to the VMT emissions offset requirement even if it would not otherwise have been subject to that requirement based on its classification under the new 8

- hour ozone standard [40 CFR §51.900(f)(11)]. The U.S. EPA’s Phase 2 rule, issued on3 November 29, 2005 (70 Fed. Reg. 71612) required that ar eas classified as Severe or

Extreme under the new 8

- hour standard would also be subject to the VMT offset requirement.



### SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY SIP SUBMISSIONS FOR VMT OFFSET
REQUIREMENT AND LITAGATION

U.S. EPA approved the 2004 Extreme Ozone Attainment Demons tration Plan (2004 1

- Hour Ozone Plan) and the 2007 Ozone Plan (for the 1997 8

- hour ozone NAAQS) on March 8, 2010 and March 1, 2012, respectively. Each plan contained VMT emissions offset demonstrations consistent with EPA’s interpretation of CAA §182(d)(1 )(A) at the time of submission and approval.

Subsequent to those approvals, a decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in

Association of Irritated Residents (AIR) v U.S. EPA (reprinted as amended on January 27, 2012, 632 F.3d 584

, 9th Cir. 2011 ) r ejected EPA’s interpretation of the CAA, which had provided the basis for U.S. EPA’s approval of VMT offset demonstrations in district plans

. With the AIR decision, the Court determined that the CAA requires additional transportation control strategies an d measures whenever vehicle emissions are projected to be higher than would have been had VMT not grown, even if aggregate vehicle emissions are decreasing.

In addition to the Court’s ruling in the AIR case, a previous Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision (Sierra Club v EPA, 671 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 2012)) found that U.S. EPA’s action approving the 2004 1

- Hour Ozone Plan was arbitrary and capricious under

the Administrative Procedure Act because it did not take into account new emissions inventory data that California had submitted subsequent to submittal of the plan. The

Court remanded U.S. EPA’s approval back to the agency in its entirety.

O n November 26, 2012 , in an effort t o address issues pertinent to both court cases

, U.S. EPA withdrew its March 8, 2010 final action approving state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to provide for

attainment of the 1

- hour ozone NAAQS in the San Joaquin Valley extreme ozone

nonatta inment area (77 F ed. R eg. 70376). In the same March 8, 2010 final action, EPA also withdrew the March 1, 2012 approval of the VMT Offset Demonstration in the 2007

8

- hour Ozone Plan.



### U.S. EPA GUIDANCE ON VMT OFFSET REQUIREMENT

In August 2012, U.S. EPA issued guidance entitled “Implementing Clean Air Act Section 182(d)(1)(A): Transportation Control Measures and Transportation Control Strategies to Offset Growth in Emissions Due to Growth in Vehicle Miles Travelled”. Among other things, U.S. EPA’s guidan ce points out that the Court

, in the AIR decision, omitted any reference to “transportation control strategies” (TCS). TCSs, which are not defined in4 the CAA or U.S. EPA regulation, are eligible to offset growth in emissions due to growth

in VMT. The U.S . EPA’s new guidance indicates that technology improvements such as vehicle technology improvements, motor vehicle fuels, and other control strategies that are transportation

- related could be used to offset increases in emissions due to VMT.

U.S. EPA’s re vised guidance sets forth a method of calculating the actual growth in emissions due to growth in VMT. Essentially, the state would compare projected attainment year emissions assuming no new control measures and no VMT growth with projected actual attain ment year emissions (including new control measures and VMT growth). If the latter number is smaller than the former, no additional transportation control measures or strategies would be required. If additional transportation control measures and transpo rtation control strategies are required, they should be clearly identified and distinguished from the measures included in the initial calculations for the base year and the three scenarios identified for the attainment year.

In addition, the guidance rec ommends that the base year to be used in the demonstration be the base year used in the attainment demonstration for the ozone ambient air quality standard. This Appendix includes VMT offset demonstrations in accordance with U.S. EPA’s new guidance for bo th the 8

- hour and 1

- hour ozone requirements. To address U.S. EPA’s guidance on the base year, two base years are

used: 2002 for the 1997 8

- hour standard and 1990 for the 1

- hour ozone standard.



### TRANSPORTATION CONTROL STRATEGIES AND TRANSPORTATION

CONTRO L MEASURES

By listing them separately, the Clean Air Act [CAA §182(d)(1)(A)] differentiates between transportation control strategies (TCS) and transportation control measures (TCM), and thus provides for a wide range of strategies and measures as options to offset growth in emissions from vehicle miles traveled (VMT) growth. In addition, the example TCMs listed in Section 108(f)(1)(A) of the CAA include measures that reduce emissions by reducing VMT, reducing tailpipe emissions, and removing dirtier vehi cles from the fleet. California’s motor vehicle control program includes a variety of strategies and measures including new engine standards and in

- use programs (e.g., smog check, vehicle scrap, fleet rules, idling restrictions). TCMs developed by the ei ght San Joaquin Valley Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) provide additional reductions. In addition, the eight MPOs report every two years on the implementation status of TCMs in their jurisdiction

.

Based on the provisions in Section 182(d)(1)(A ) and the clarifications provided in the U.S. EPA guidance, any combination of transportation control strategies and TCMs may be used to meet the requirement to offset growth in emissions resulting from VMT growth. Since 1990 when this requirement was est ablished, California has adopted more than sufficient enforceable transportation strategies and measures to meet the requirement to offset the growth in emissions from VMT growth. For the 1997 8

- hour standard offset demonstration, 2002 controls are used a s the base case control level since 2002 is the base year of the SIP. For the 1

- hour ozone standard demonstration,5 1990 level controls are used as the base year control level since 1990 is the base year

for the 1

- hour SIP.

A list of the state’s mobile source control program adopted since 1990 is provided in

Attachment 1. In addition, a list of TCMs implemented in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin is provided in Attachment 2.



### EMISSIONS DUE TO VMT GROWTH

As discussed above, the U.S. EPA guidance does pr ovide a recommended calculation methodology that could be done to determine if sufficient transportation control strategies and TCMs have been adopted and implemented to offset the growth in emissions due solely to growth in VMT. As such, any increase in emissions solely from VMT increases in the future attainment year from the base year (assuming that there are no further motor vehicle control programs implemented after the base year) would need to be offset. In addition, a calculation is needed to show the emissions levels if VMT had remained constant from the base year to the future attainment year. As discussed earlier, a comparison of the projected attainment year emissions assuming no new control measures and no VMT growth with projected actual atta inment year emissions (including new control measures and VMT growth) would be made. If the latter number is smaller than the former, no additional transportation control measures or strategies would be required.



### METHODOLOGY

The following calculations are based on the U.S. EPA guidance recommended calculation methodology. As shown for the 8

- hour ozone standard, 2002 is the base year used for the attainment demonstration and 2023 is the attainment year. For the 1

- hour ozone s tandard demonstration, 1990 serves as the base year and 20 17 is the projected attainment year.

Analysis Tool

This analysis uses California’s approved motor vehicle emissions model, EMFAC.

The EMFAC model estimates the emissions from two combustion processes: running exhaust and start exhaust, and four evaporative processes: hot soak, running losses, diurnal, and resting losses.

Emissions from running exhaust, start exhaust, hot soak, and running losses are a

function of how much a vehicle is driven . Emissions from these processes are directly related to VMT, trips, and starts. These processes are included in the calculation of the emissions levels used in the VMT offset demonstration. Emissions from resting loss and diurnal loss processes are not related to VMT, trips or vehicle starts and are not6 included in the analysis because these emissions occur regardless if the vehicle makes a trip (i.e. a start) or not.

EMFAC combines trip

- based VMT from the regional transportation planning agencies,

sta rts data based on household travel surveys, and vehicle population data from the Department of Motor Vehicles with corresponding emission rates to calculate

emissions. 1

With the EMFAC model, the calculation of emissions growth and whether it is offset i s simplified to a comparison of future year emissions with “no growth” in VMT or new control strategies to future emissions with VMT growth and new control strategies. This follows EPA’s 2012 guidance and is consistent with the Ninth Circuit’s interpretat ion of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A).

The Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) regulations adopted by ARB in 2012 are not included in EMFAC 2011. The output from EMFAC 2011 was adjusted off

- model to estimate the benefits of the ACC regulations. No other off

- model adjus tments were taken.

Analysis Using 2002 as the Base Year for the 1997 8

- hour Ozone Standard with

Attainment Year of 2023.

**Step 1. Provide the emissions level for the base year.**

The following table shows the VOC emissions, VMT, starts, and vehicle pop ulation for calendar year 2002 from the EMFAC2011 model.

Summary of 2002 Base Year

VMT

(thousand miles/day) Starts

(thousands / day) Vehicle Population

(thousands) VOC

Emissions

(tons/day)

2002 Base Year 78,400 11,307 1,826 76

_____________________________ 1 More information on data sources can be found in the EMFAC technical document which is located on the web at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/emfac2011

- technical

- documentation

- final

- updated

- 0712

- v03.pdf7 **Step 2. Calculate three emissions levels in the attainment year.** 

For the attainment year,

(1) Calculate emissions level with the motor vehicle control program frozen at 2002 levels and with projected VMT, starts, and vehicle population for the attainment year

. This represents what the emissions in the attainment year would have been if transportation control strategies and TCMs had not been implemented after 2002;

(2) Calculate emissions level with the motor vehicle control program frozen at

2002 levels and assumi ng VMT, starts, and vehicle population do not increase from 2002 levels; and

(3) Calculate an emissions level that represents emissions with full implementation of all transportation control strategies and TCMs since 2002 and which represents the projec ted future year baseline emissions inventory using the VMT, starts, and vehicle population for the attainment

year.

**Calculation 1**

. **Calculate the emissions in the attainment year assuming**  **no new measures since the base year, and including growth in VMT, s**  **tarts, and vehicle population.**

To perform this calculation, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) staff

identified the on

- road motor vehicle control programs adopted since 2002 and adjusted the EMFAC2011 to reflect the VOC emissions levels in 2023 wit hout the benefits of the post

- 2002 control programs. The projected VOC emissions are

4 9 tons/day.

**Calculation 2. Calculate the emissions with no growth in VMT, starts, or vehicle population** 

.

EMFAC2011 allows the user to input different VMT, starts, and vehicle population than default. As such, for this calculation, the EMFAC 2011 model was run without the benefit of the post 2002 control program for calendar year 2023 with

the 2002 level of VMT of 78,399,543 miles per day, the 2002 level of starts at

1 1,307,036 per day, and the 2002 level of population at 1,825,573 vehicles . The VOC emissions associated with 2002 VMT, starts, and vehicle population are

28 tons/day.8 **Calculation 3. Calculate emission reductions with full**

**I mplementation of**  **Transporta tion Control Strategies & TCMs** 

.

The VOC emission levels for 2023 assuming the benefits of the post

- 2002 motor vehicle control program and the projected VMT, starts, and vehicle population in 2023 are calculated using EMFAC2011. The projected VOC emissions level is

24 tons/day. VOC emis sions for the three sets of calculations described above are provided in the following table.

Summary of 2023 Attainment Year Emissions Levels

* CY 2023 V M T bas e d on 2013 FTIPs from the 8 San Joaquin Valley MPOs
** Does not include diurnal or resting loss emissions. Description VMT*

(miles/day,
thousands) Starts

(thousands/day) Vehicle Population

(thousands) VOC

Emissions**

(tons/day)

(1) Emissions with
Motor Vehicle Control Program

Frozen at 2002

Levels.

(VMT, starts and vehicle
population at 2023 levels.) 130,431 19,466 3,047 4 9

(2) Emissions with
Motor Vehicle Control Program

Frozen at 2002
Levels.

(VMT

, starts, and vehicle
population at 2002 l evels) 78,400 11,307 1,826 28

(3) Emissions with Full
Motor Vehicle Control Program in

Place

(VMT, starts and vehicle
population at 2023 l evels) 130,431 19,466 3,047 249 As provided in the U.S. EPA guidance, to determine compliance with the provisions of Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the federal Clean Air Act, the emissions levels calculated in

Calculation 3 should be less than the emissions levels in Calculation 2:

VOC: 24 < 28 tons/day

Analysis Using 1990 as the Base Year for the 1

- hour Ozone Standard with

Attainment Year of 2017

.

**Step 1. Provide the emissions levels for the base year.**

The following table shows the VOC emissions, VMT, starts, and vehicle population for calendar year 1990 from the EMFAC2011 model.

Summary of 1990 Base Year

VMT

(thousand miles/day) Starts

(thousands / day) Vehicle Population

(thousands) VOC

Emissions

(tons/day)

1990 Base Year 52,199 7,730 1,269 196

**Step 2. Calculate three emissions levels in the attainment year.**

For the attainment year,

(1) Calculate emissions level with the motor vehicle control program frozen at

1990 levels and with projected VMT, starts, and vehicle population for the attainment year. This represents what the emissions in the attainment year would have been if transportation control strategies and TCMs had not been implemented after 1990;

(2) Calculate emissions level with the motor vehicle control program frozen at 1990 levels and assuming VMT, starts, and vehicle population do not increase from 1990 levels; and

(3) Calculate an emissions level that represents emissions with full implementation of all transp ortation control strategies and TCMs since 1990 and which represents the projected future year baseline emissions inventory using the VMT, starts, and vehicle population for the attainment

year.10 **Calculation 1. Calculate the emissions in the attainment year**  **assuming no new measures since the base year, and including growth in VMT, starts, and vehicle population** 

.

To perform this calculation, staff identified the on

- road motor vehicle control programs adopted si nce 1990 and adjusted the EMFAC2011 model to reflect the

VOC emissions levels in 20 17 without the benefits of the post

- 1990 control programs. The projected VOC emissions are 178 tons per day.

**Calculation 2. Calculate the emissions with no growth in VMT, starts,**  **or vehicle population.**

EMFAC2011 allows the user to input different VMT, starts, and vehicle population than default. As such, for this calculation, the EMFAC 2011 model was run without the benefit of the post 1990 control program for calendar y ear 20 17 with

the 1990 level of VMT of 52,198,974 miles per day, the 1990 level of starts at
7,729,877 per day, and the 1990 level of population at 1,269,165 vehicles . The VOC emissions associated with 1990 VMT, starts, and vehicle population are

81 tons/ day.

**Calculation 3. Calculate emission reductions with full implementation of**  **Transportation Control Strategies and TCMs.**

The VOC emission levels for 20 17 assuming the benefits of the post

- 1990 motor vehicle control program and the projected VMT, sta rts, and vehicle population in

20 17 are calculated using EMFAC2011. The projected VOC emissions level is

30 tons/day. VOC emissions for the three sets of calculations described above are provided in the following table.11 Summary of 20 17 Attainment Year Emissions Levels

* CY 20 17 VMT based on 2013 FTIPs from the 8 San Joaquin Valley MPOs
** Does not include resting or diurnal loss emissions.

As provided in the U.S. EPA guidance, to determine compliance with the provisions of Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the federal Clean Air Act, the emissions

levels calculated in Calculation 3 should be less than the emissions levels in

Calculation 2:

VOC: 30 < 81 tons/day

Description VMT*

(miles/day,
thousands) Starts

(thousands/ day) Vehicle Population

(thousands) VOC

Emissions**

(tons/day)

(1) Emissions with
Motor Vehicle Control Program

Frozen at 1990

Levels.

(VMT, starts, and vehicle
population at 20 17 levels.) 115,070 17,133 2,688 178

(2) Emissions with
Motor Vehicle Control Program

Frozen at 1990

Levels.

(VMT

, starts, and vehicle
population at 1990 Levels) 52,199 7,730 1,269 81

(3) Emissions with Full
Motor Vehicle Control Program in

Place

(VMT, starts, and vehicle
population at 20 17 Levels) 115,070 17,133 2,688 3012 

### SUMMARY

The previous sections provide an analysis to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the federal Clean Air Act. To further illustrate the demonstration, Figures 1 and 2 below show graphically the emissions benefits of the motor vehicle control pro grams in offsetting VOC emissions due to increased VMT, starts, and vehicle population in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin for both the 1997 8

- hour ozone standard (2002 base year) and the 1

- hour ozone standard (1990 base year). The left bar (in purple) sh ows the emissions in the base year with base year controls. The three bars on the right in each figure show the emissions levels in the attainment year for the three calculations identified above: the red bar shows attainment year emissions with base yea r controls and attainment year VMT, starts, and vehicle population, the green bar shows attainment year emissions with base year controls, VMT, starts, and vehicle population, and the blue bar shows attainment year emissions with attainment year controls, VMT, starts, and vehicle population. Based on the U.S. EPA guidance, if the blue bar is lower than the green bar, then the identified transportation control strategies and TCMs are sufficient to offset the growth in

emissions.13 F igure 1. VOC E m issions * f r om O n

- Road Mobile Sources in

the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (2002 Base Ye a r )

* Does not include resting or diurnal loss emissions14 F ig u re 2. VOC E m is s io n s * f r om O n

- Road Mob i le So u rces in t h e San Joaquin Valley for 1990 Base Year

* Does not include resting or diurnal loss emissions

X: \ VMT Offset Demonstration \ SJV VMT Offset Doc for EPA March 2014 Reformated.docx