## SACRAMENTO REGIONAL

8

- HOUR OZONE ATTAINMENT AND

REASONABLE FURTHER P ROGRESS PLAN

( 2013 SIP REVISION S )

September 26, 20132013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

El Dorado County Air Quality Management District

Dave Johnston , Air Pollution Control Officer 2850 Fairlane Court, Bldg. C Placerville, CA 95667

- 4100 (530) 621

- 7501 http://edcgov.us/AirQualityManagement/

Feather River Air Quality Management District

Chris topher Brown, Air Pollution Control Officer

1007 Live Oak Blvd Suite B

- 3 Yuba City, CA 95991 (530) 634

- 7660 http://www.fraqmd.org

Placer County Air Pollution Control District Tom Christofk, Air Pollution Control Officer 110 Maple Street Auburn, CA 95603 (530) 745

- 2330 http://www.placer.ca.gov/ Departments / Air.a sp x

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Larry Greene, Air Pollution Control Officer

777 12 th Street, Third Floor Sacramento, CA 95814

- 1908 (916) 874

- 4800 http://www.airquality.org

Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management District Mat Ehrhardt, Air Pollution Control Officer 1947 Galileo Court, Suite 103 Davis, CA 9561 8 (530) 757

- 3650 http://www.ysaqmd.org2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Title Page Page i 

## SACRAMENTO REGIONAL

8

- HOUR OZONE ATTAINMENT AND

REASONABLE FURTHER P ROGRESS PLAN

( 2013 SIP REVISION S )

This Plan demonstrates how existing and new control strategies will provide the necessary future emission reductions to meet the federal Clean Air Act requirements for reasonable further

prog ress and attain ment of the 1997 8

- hour ozone NAAQS for the Sacramento region

. In addition, this Plan includes an updated emission inventory

, sets new motor vehicle emission budgets for transportation and general conformity purposes , provides photochemical modeling results, and documents the implementation of reasonab ly available con trol measures

.



## September 26, 20132013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Acknowledgements

Page ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report was prepared by Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

staff from the Program Coordination Division and the Mobile Source and Land Use

Division as a joint project with the El Dorado County Air Quality Management District, Feather River Air Quality Management District, Placer County Air Pollution Control
District, Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management District , and Sacrame nto Area Council of

Governments

.

Project O versight Brigette Tollstrup, Charles Anderson

Lead A uthors Bruce Katayama, Greg Tholen, Steven Lau, Janice Lam

Subject ( A uthors or C ontributors) Emissions Inventory: Hao Quinn , Jimmy Cheng

, Karen Taylor

Mobile S ource and Land Use C ontrol M easures: Tim Taylor Transportation Control Measures: Jason Crow, SACOG

Stationary Source Control Measure Authors Oversight and Sacramento AQMD: Aleta Kennard

Yolo

- Solano AQMD: Matt Jones Placer County APCD: Yu

- Shu o Chang

El Do rado County AQMD: Carolyn Craig

, Adam Baughman

Feather River AQMD: Sondra Spaethe

We would like to thank staff from the California Air Resources Board for their major contributions in the development of the updated motor vehicle emission s budgets

, photochemical modeling, weight

- of

- evidence analyses, and reasonable further progress

evaluation

. Various consultants and California Air Resources Board staff also provided

information on local, state

, and federal control measures in conjunction with the

at tainment demonstration modeling assessment

. In addition, we would like to acknowledge all of the governmental agencies, organizations, and consultants involved in the Central California Ozone Study (CCOS) which provided the basis for the photochemical mode ling.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Table of Contents

Page iii TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... viii

LIST OF FIGURES

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... x

LIST OF ABBREV IATIONS AND ACRONYMS

................................ .............................. xii

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

................................ ................................ ................... 1

- 1

1.1 Background Information on Ozone 1

- 1

1.2 Overview of Federal 8

- Hour Ozone Standard 1

- 1

1.3 8

- Hour Ozone Trends in the Sacramento Region 1

- 2

1.4 VOC and NO X Emissions Inventory 1

- 3

1.5 Air Quality Modeling Analysis 1

- 5

1.6 Proposed Regional and Local Control Measures 1

- 5

1.7 Attainment Demonstration 1

- 9

1.8 Transport Analysis 1

- 10

1.9 Weight

- of

- Evidence Determination 1

- 11

1.10 Transportation Conformity and Emission Budgets 1

- 12

1.11 General Conformity 1

- 13

1.12 Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration 1

- 14

1.13 Conclusions 1

- 15

2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION and PLAN DEVELOPMENT OVERVIEW

..... 2

- 1

2.1 Ozone Health Effects 2

- 1

2.2 Ozone Formation and Precursor Pollutants 2

- 1

2.3 Clean Air Act and Prior Federal 1

- Hour Ozone Standard 2

- 2

2.4 1994 Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Plan 2

- 2

2.5 Federal 8

- Hour Ozone Standard 2

- 3

2.6 Development of the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment and

Reasonable Further Progress Plan 2

- 5

2.7 Public Input and Review Process 2

- 6

2.8 Contents of 8

- Hour Ozone Plan 2

- 6

3 FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT REQUIREMENTS

................................ ................ 3

- 1

3.1 Purpose of a Federal Ozone Attainment Plan 3

- 1

3.2 Federal Clean Air Act Requirements 3

- 12013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Table of Contents

Page iv 3.3 New Source Review (NSR) and Other Permitting Requirements 3

- 2

3.4 Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Requirements 3

- 2

3.5 Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Requirements 3

- 3

3.6 Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) Offset Requirement 3

- 3

3.7 Sacramento Nonattainment Area Designation 3

- 4

3.8 Nonattainment Classification and Attainment Deadline 3

- 4

3.9 Reasonable Further Progress Plan 3

- 5

4 8

- HOUR OZONE AIR QUALITY TRENDS

................................ ........................ 4

- 1

4.1 Introduction to Air Quality Trends 4

- 1

4.2 Ozone Monitoring Sites 4

- 1

4.3 Annual Number of Exceedance Days 4

- 1

4.4 Trend in Exceedance Days 4

- 1

4.5 Ozone Design Values 4

- 2

4.6 Trend in Ozone Design Value 4

- 2

5 EMISSIONS INVENTORY

................................ ................................ ................. 5

- 1

5.1 Introduction to Emissions Inventory 5

- 1

5.2 Emission Inventory Requirements 5

- 1

5.3 Emission Inventory Source Categories 5

- 2

5.4 Base Year Emissions Inventory 5

- 5

5.5 Emission Inventory Forecasts 5

- 14

5.6 Emission Reduction Credits Added to Emission Inventory Forecasts 5

- 17

5.7 Emissions Inventory Documentation 5

- 18

6 AIR QUALITY MODELING ANALYSIS

................................ .............................. 6

- 1

6.1 Introduction to Air Quality Modeling 6

- 1

6.2 Air Quality Modeling Methodology and Applications 6

- 1

6.3 Air Quality Modeling Analysis Requirements 6

- 1

6.4 Central California Ozone Study 6

- 2

6.5 Description of Air Quality Model and Modeling Inputs 6

- 3

6.6 Selection and Characterization of Modeling Episodes 6

- 5

6.7 Base Case Model Performance Evaluation 6

- 6

6.8 Baseline and Future Year Model Runs for Each Episode 6

- 6

6.9 Emission Reduction Credits Added to Future Year Model Runs 6

- 72013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Table of Contents

Page v 6.10 Forecasted Ozone Design Values 6

- 7

6.11 Analysis of VOC and NO X Emission Reduction Strategies 6

- 10

6.12 Air Quality Modeling Uncertainties 6

- 11

7 PROPOSED CONTROL MEASURES

................................ ............................... 7

- 1

7.1 Introduction to Control Measures 7

- 1

7.2 Reductions from Existing Controls 7

- 1

7.3 Reductions from New State and Federal Control Measures 7

- 3

7.4 Consideration and Selection of New Regional and Local Control Measures 7

- 12

7.5 SIP Control Measure Commitments 7

- 12

7.6 SIP Emission Reduction Tracking 7

- 13

7.7 Non

- regulatory Control Measures 7

- 13

7.8 Mobile Source Incentive Measures 7

- 14

7.9 “Spare The Air Program” 7

- 16

7.10 SACOG Transportation Control Measures 7

- 17

7.11 New and Continuing TCM Projects 7

- 18

7.12 Research and Policy Development TCMs 7

- 23

7.13 Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program 7

- 24

7.14 Regulatory Control Measures 7

- 26

7.15 Stationary and Area

- wide Source Control Measures 7

- 26

7.16 VOC Emission Control Measures 7

- 27

7.17 NO X Emission Control Measures 7

- 30

7.18 Summary of Regional and Local Proposed Emission Reductions 7

- 31

7.19 Further Study Measures 7

- 33

7.20 Contingency Measures 7

- 34

8 ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION

................................ ................................ ... 8

- 1

8.1 Introduction to Attainment Demonstration 8

- 1

8.2 Attainment Demonstration Requirements 8

- 1

8.3 Attainment Demonstration Evaluation 8

- 1

8.4 Attainment Demonstration Conclusions 8

- 3

8.5 Summary of Attainment Demonstration 8

- 5

8.6 Attainment Demonstration Contingency Measures Requirement 8

- 6

9 TRANSPORT ANALYSIS

................................ ................................ .................. 9

- 12013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Table of Contents

Page vi 9.1 In troduction to Pollutant Transport 9

- 1

9.2 Interbasin Transport Issues 9

- 1

9.3 EPA Rules and Regulations on Intrastate Transport 9

- 2

9.4 Attainment Assumptions of Domain

- wide Reductions 9

- 2

10 WEIGHT

- OF

- EVIDENCE DETERMINATION

................................ .................. 10

- 1

10.1 Introduction to Weight

- of

- Evidence 10

- 1

10.2 Weight

- of

- Evidence Requirements 10

- 1

10.3 Methodology for Applying Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses 10

- 2

10.4 Summary of CARB Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses 10

- 2

11 TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY AND EMISSION BUDGETS

................. 11

- 1

11.1 Introduction to Transportation Conformity 11

- 1

11.2 Transportation Conformity Requirements 11

- 1

11.3 Purpose of the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget 11

- 1

11.4 Latest Planning Assumptions 11

- 2

11.5 SACOG’s Blueprint and MTP/SCS 2035 11

- 2

11.6 Proposed New Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets 11

- 4

11.7 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget Approval Process 11

- 5

11.8 Vehicle Miles Traveled Offset (VMT Offset) 11

- 6

12 GENERAL CONFORMITY

................................ ................................ .............. 12

- 1

12.1 Introduction to General Conformity 12

- 1

12.2 General Conformity Requirements 12

- 1

12.3 Types of Federal Actions Subject to General Conformity Requirements 12

- 2

12.4 Emissions Criteria for Demonstrating General Conformity 12

- 2

12.5 Airports Emis sions Inventory 12

- 3

13 REASONABLE FURTHER PROGRESS DEMONSTRATIONS

...................... 13

- 1

13.1 Introduction to Reasonable Further Progress 13

- 1

13.2 Reasonable Further Progress Requirements 13

- 1

13.3 Contingency Measures Requirement 13

- 1

13.4 Methodology for Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations 13

- 2

13.5 Calculations of Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations 13

- 4

14 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

................................ ................................ .. 14

- 1

14.1 8

- Hour Ozone Nonattainment Designation for Sacramento Region 14

- 12013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Table of Contents

Page vii 14.2 “Severe” 8

- Hour Ozone Classification with 2019 Attainment Deadline 14

- 1

14.3 Trend in Ozone Air Quality Shows Improvement 14

- 1

14.4 VOC and NO X Emissions Inventory Forecasted to Decline 14

- 2

14.5 Air Quality Modeling Analysis Indicates Additional Emission Reductions Are

Needed for Attainment 14

- 3

14.6 Proposed Regional and Local Control Measures 14

- 4

14.7 2018 Attainment Demonstration 14

- 7

14.8 Pollutant Transport from Upwind Bay Area Region 14

- 8

14.9 Weight

- of

- Evidence Determination 14

- 9

14.10 Transportation Conformity and Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets 14

- 10

14.11 Updated Emissions Inventory for General Conformity 14

- 11

14.12 Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration Achieved 14

- 12

14.13 Future Ozone Planning Efforts 14

- 12

APPENDICES

A

. EMISSION S INVENTORY

B. PHOTOCHEMICAL MODELI NG

C

. PROPOSED CONTROL MEASURES

D. TRANSPORTATION CONTR OL MEASURES

E

. WEIGHT

- OF

- EVIDENCE ANALYSES

F

. MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSI ONS BUDGETS

G

. REASONABLE FURTHER P ROGRESS DEMONSTRATIO NS

H

. REASONABLY AVAILABLE CONTROL MEASURES (RA CM) ANALYSIS

I

. FEDERAL CLEAN AIR AC T REQUIREMENTS2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

List of Tables Page viii LIST OF TABLES

Table 1

- 1 Emissions Inventory of Volatile Organic Compounds

- Sacramento

Nonattainment Area

................................ ................................ .................. 1

- 4

Table 1

- 2 Emissions Inventory of Nitrogen Oxides

- Sacramento Nonattainment Area

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 1

- 5

Table 1

- 3 Summary of New Regional and Local Proposed Control Measures

–

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

................................ .............................. 1

- 7

Table 1

- 4 Summary of SACOG Transportation Control Measures

............................ 1

- 8

Table 1

- 5 Summary of Attainment Demonstration for 8

- Hour Ozone NAAQS 2018

“Severe” Classification Scenario

................................ ............................. 1

- 10

Table 1

- 6 Proposed New Moto r Vehicle Emissions Budget s

– Sacramento

Nonattainment Area

................................ ................................ ................ 1

- 12

Table 4

- 1 8

- Hour Ozone Exceedance Days

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

–

Ozone Monitoring Sites

................................ ................................ ............. 4

- 4

Table 4

- 2 8

- Hour Ozone Design Values

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Ozone

Monitoring Sites

................................ ................................ ......................... 4

- 7

Table 5

- 1 Biogenic Emissions

................................ ................................ ................... 5

- 5

Table 5

- 2 Emissions of VOC (tons per day)

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

...... 5

- 7

Table 5

- 3 Emissions of NO X (tons per day)

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

....... 5

- 8

Table 5

- 4 VOC Emission Reduction Credits Added to the Emission Inventor y

Forecasts

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

................................ ........ 5

- 19

Table 5

- 5 NO X Emission Reduction Credits Added to the Emission Inventory

Forecasts

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

................................ ......... 5

- 1 9

Table 6

- 1 Forecasted 8

- Hour Ozone Design Values

– 2018 Attainment Analysis Year

for Severe Classification

................................ ................................ ............ 6

- 9

Table 7

- 1 State Measures Adopted Since 2007

................................ ........................ 7

- 3

Table 7

- 2 Analysis of ARB’s Implemented Regulations using Calendar Year 2018 NO X

Summer Season Emissions (tpd)

................................ .............................. 7

- 4

Table 7

- 2A Phase

- in of truck engine standards

................................ ........................... 7

- 6

Tabl e 7

- 2 B Phase

- in of off

- road engine standards 7

- 72013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

List of Tables Page ix Table 7

- 3 Summary of SACOG Transportation Control Measures

– New and

Continuing Projects and Funding Programs

................................ ............ 7

- 2 2

Table 7

- 4 Summary of SACOG Transportation Control Measures

– Research and

Policy Development Studies

................................ ................................ .... 7

- 2 3

Table 7

- 5 Summary of New Regional and Lo cal Proposed Control Measures

–

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

................................ ............................ 7

- 32

Table 8

- 1 Summary of Attainment Demonstration for 8

- Hour Ozone N A AQS

– 2018

“Severe” Classification Scenario

................................ ............................... 8

- 5

Table 8

- 2 Attainment Contingency Measures Reductions

– Sacramento

Nonattainment Area

................................ ................................ .................. 8

- 6

Table 1 1

- 1 Proposed New Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

– Sacramento

Nonattainment Area

................................ ................................ ................ 1 1

- 4

Table 1 2

- 1 Airport (Aircraft Operations + Ground Support Equipment) Emis sions for the

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

................................ ............................ 1 2

- 4

Table 1 3

- 1 Calculat ion of Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations

– Sacramento

Nonattainment Area

................................ ................................ ................ 1 3

- 5

Table 1 4

- 1 Summary of New Regional and Local Proposed Control Measures

–

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

................................ ............................ 1 4

- 5

Table 14

- 2 Summary of SACOG Transportation Control Measures

– New and

Continuing Projects and Funding Programs

................................ ............ 14

- 6

Table 1 4

- 3 Summary of 2018 Attainment Demonstration for 1997 8

- Hour Ozone

N A AQS

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 1 4

- 8

Table 1 4

- 4 Proposed New Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

– Sacramento

Nonattainment Area

................................ ................................ .............. 1 4

- 102013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

List of Figures Page x LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1

- 1 8

- Hour Ozone Exceedance Days

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Peak

Monitoring Site

................................ ................................ .......................... 1

- 3

Figure 1

- 2 8

- Hour Ozone Design Values

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Peak

Monitoring Site

................................ ................................ .......................... 1

- 3

Figure 1

- 3 Summary of R easonable Further Progress Demonstration s

– Sacramento

Nonattainment Area

................................ ................................ ................ 1

- 15

Figure 3

- 1 Federal 8

- Hour Ozone Sacramento Nonattainment Area

.......................... 3

- 7

Figure 4

- 1 Sacramento Nonattainment Area Ozone Monitoring Stations

................... 4

- 3

Figure 4

- 2 8

- Hour Ozone Exceedance Days

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Peak

Monitoring Site

................................ ................................ .......................... 4

- 5

Figure 4

- 3 8

- Hour Ozone Exceedance Days Trend

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Peak Monitoring Site

................................ ................................ ............. 4

- 6

Figure 4

- 4 8

- Hour Ozone Design Values Trend

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Peak Monitoring Site

................................ ................................ .............. 4

- 8

Figure 5

- 1 2002 VOC Planning Inventory

– Sacramento Nonattainment Region

..... 5

- 10

Figure 5

- 2 200 2 NO X Planning Inventory

– Sacramento Nonattainment Region

...... 5

- 10

Figure 5

- 3 Top Ten Categories for VOC Planning Emissions

– Sacramento

Nonattainment Region

................................ ................................ ............. 5

- 11

Figure 5

- 4 Top Ten Categories for NO X Planning Emissions

– Sacramento

Nonattainment Region

................................ ................................ ............. 5

- 12

Figure 5

- 5 VOC Emissions Contribution by Primary Agency Responsibility

–

Sacramento Nonattainment Region

................................ ........................ 5

- 13

Figure 5

- 6 NO X Emissions Contribution by Primary Agency Responsibility

–

Sacramento Nonattainment Region

................................ ........................ 5

- 13

Figure 5

- 7 Population Growth Forecast

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

............ 5

- 15

Figure 5

- 8 VOC Planning Inventory Forecasts

– Sacramento Nonattainment Region

.....

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 5

- 162013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

List of Figures Page xi Figure 5

- 9 NO X Planning Inventory Forecasts

– Sacramento Nonattainment Region

.....

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 5

- 16

Figure 6

- 1 Photochemical Modeling Domain

– Central California Ozone Study

......... 6

- 5

Figure 7

- 1 2008 Benefits From District VOC Rules Since 1975

– 60 TPD

– Sacramento

Nonattainment Area

................................ ................................ .................. 7

- 2

Figure 7

- 2 2008 Benefits From District NO X Rules Since 1975

– 20 TPD

– Sacramento

Nonattainment Area

................................ ................................ .................. 7

- 2

Figure 8

- 1 Attainment Demonstration Analysis

– P redicted 2018 Regional Peak Ozone

Design Value at Cool

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

......................... 8

- 4

Figure 1 3

- 1 Summary of Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations

– Sacramento

Nonattainment Area

................................ ................................ ................ 1 3

- 6

Figure 1 4

- 1 VOC and NO X Emission Forecasts

– Sacramento Nonattainment Area

.. 1 4

- 3

Figure 1 4

- 2 Summary of Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations

– Sacramento

Nonattainment Area

................................ ................................ .............. 1 4

- 1 22013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms Page xii LIST OF ABBREVIATION S AND ACRONYMS

94SIP

- 1994 Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Plan

ABAG

- Association of Bay Area Governments

APCD

- Air Pollution Control District

AQMD

- Air Quality Management District

ARB

- California Air Resources Board

BAR

- Bureau of Automotive Repair

BTU

- British thermal unit

BVOC

- biogenic volatile organic compounds

CAA

- Clean Air Act

CAMx

- C omprehensive A ir Quality M odel with e x tension

CARB

- California Air Resources Board

CCOS

- Central California Ozone Study

CEFS

- California Emissions Forecasting System

CEQA

- California Environmental Quality Act

CFR

- Code of Federal Regulations

CI

- compression ignition

CMAQ

- Congestion M itigation and Air Quality Improvement Program

CMR

- Construction Mitigation Rule

CTG

- Control Technique s Guideline s

DOF

- Department of Finance

DOT

- U.S. Department of Transportation

DRI

- Desert Research Institute

DTIM

- Direct Travel Impact Model

EDCAQMD

- El Dorado County Air Quality Management District

EIC

- emission inventory category code

EMFAC

- California’s on

- road motor vehicle emission factor model

EMS

- Emissions Modeling System

EPA

- U. S. Environmental Protection Agency2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms Page xiii ERCs

- emission reduction credits

FDDA

- four dimensional data analysis

FHWA

- Federal Highway Administration of DOT

FMVCP

- federal motor vehicle control program

FR

- Federal Register

FRAQMD

- Feather River Air Quality Management District

FTA

- Federal Transit Administration of DO T

GVWR

- gross vehicle weight rating

HDGT

- heavy

- duty gas trucks

HDV

- heavy

- duty vehicles

HHDDT

- heavy heavy

- duty diesel trucks

IC

- internal combustion

ICC

- Interagency Coordination Committee

I/M

- motor vehicle inspection and maintenance

ISR

- Indirect Source Rule

ITS

- Intelligent Transportation Systems

LDV

- light

- duty vehicles

LHDT

- light heavy

- duty trucks

MC

- Mountain Counties

MCR

- mid

- course review

MHR

- Mather Airport

MM5

- Mesoscale Model version 5

MNB

- mean normalized bias

MNGE

- mean normalized gross error

MPO

- Metropolitan Planning Organization

MTC

- Metropolitan Transportation Commission (Bay Area)

MTIP

- Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program

MTP

- Metropolitan Transportation Plan

MTP2035

- Metropolitan Transportation Plan for 2035

MVEB

- m otor v ehicle e missions b udget2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms Page xiv MVSTAFF

- Motor Vehicle Stock, Travel and Fuel Forecast (Caltrans Report)

NAA

- nonattainment area

NAAQS

- national ambient air quality standard

NG

- natural gas

NSR

- new source review

NO X - nitrogen ox ides

OAQPS

- EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

OBD

- o n board diagnostics

PCAPCD

- Placer County Air Pollution Control District

ppb

- parts per billion

ppm

- parts per million

RACM

- reasonabl y available control measure

RACT

- reasonably available control technology

RFP

- reasonable further progress

ROG

- reactive organic gases

ROP

- rate

- of

- progress

RRF

- relative reduction factor

RVP

- Reid vapor pressure

SACMET

- SACOG’s previous regional transportation model

SACOG

- Sacramento Area Council of Governments

SACSIM

- SACOG’s new regional transportation model

SAPRC

- Statewide Air Pollution Research Center

SECAT

- Sacramento Emergency Clean Air and Transportation

SFNA

- Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area

SI

- spark ignited

SIP

- State Implementation Plan

SJVAPCD

- San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

SMAQMD

- Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

SMF

- Sacramento International Airport

SNA

- Sacramento Nonattainment Area2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms Page xv SOCMI

- Synthetic Organic Chemical M anufacturing Industry

SRTS

- Safe Route to Schools

STARNET

- Sacramento Transportation Area Network

SV

- Sacramento Valley

TCM

- transportation control measure

TDM

- Transportation Demand Management

TMA

- Transportation Management Association

tpd

- tons per day

UAM

- Urban Airshed Model

ULEV

- ultra

- low emission vehicle

VMT

- vehicle miles traveled

VOC

- volatile organic compounds

YSAQMD

- Yolo

- Solano Air Quality Management District2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 1 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Background Information on Ozone

Air pollution or “smog ” is composed of many different gaseous and particulate pollutants , which can create a regional haze reducing atmospheric visibility. Ground

level ozone, a colorless gas, is a major component of photochemical smog

. Since ozone is formed especially in the presence of strong sunlight, ambient ozone concentrations are more problematic during May through October in the Sacramento region

.

Ground

- level o zone can have harmful health effects

. Breathing air containing ozone can reduce lung function and increase respiratory symptoms, thereby aggravating asthma, bronchitis, or other respiratory conditions including chest pains and wheezing. Ozone exposure has been associated with increased susce ptibility to respiratory infections,

cardiac

- related effects , medical visits, school absenteeism, and contributing to premature death, especially in people with heart and lung disease. Ozone can also cause damage to crops and natural vegetation by acting a s a chemical oxidizing agent.

O zone is formed as a result of photochemical reactions involving two types of precursor pollutants: volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides ( NO X ). VOC and NO X air pollutants are emitted by many types of sources, including on

- road and off

- road combustion engine vehicles, power plants, industrial facilities, gasoline stations, organic solvents, and consumer products. VOC pollutants are also known as reactive organic gases (ROG).

1.2 Overview of Federal 8

- Hour Ozone Sta ndard

The 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone standard lowered the health

- based limit for ambient ozone concentration from 0.12 parts per million of ozone averaged over one hour 1 to 0.08 parts per million of ozone averaged over eight hours 2

. An area’s nonattainment designation is based on whether the 8

- hour ozone design value for any of the monitoring sites in the area exceeds the national ambient air quality sta ndard (NAAQS)

. The Sacramento region is designated a nonattainment area, and include s all of Sacramento and Yolo counties and portions of Placer, El Dorado, Solano, and Sutter

counties.

N onattainment areas are classifi ed as marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme

areas depending on the magnitude of the highest 8

- hour ozone design value for the monitoring sites in the nonattainment area. In 2004, t he Sacramento region was classifi ed as a “serious” nonattainment area with an attainment deadline of June 15,

1 The one

- hour ozone standard violation criterio n is defined as no more than 3 daily exceedances (>124 ppb) over 3 years at a monitoring site.

2 Under the eight

- hour ozone standard violation criterion, the annual 4 th

- highest daily maximum 8

- hour ozone concentration averaged over 3 years (i.e., ozone des ign value) may not exceed 84 ppb at a monitoring site.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 2 2013

. This classification was based on the 8

- hour ozone design value of 107 pp b at Cool, calculated from ozone concentrations monitored from 2001 to 2003.

However, s ince the Sacramento region needs to rely on the long er term emission reduction strategies from state and federal mobile source control programs, the 2013

attainment dat e cannot be me t. Consequently, o n February 14, 2008, CARB

, on behalf

of the air districts in the Sacramento region

, submitted a letter to EPA request ing a voluntary reclassification (bump

- up) of the Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area

from a “serious” to a “severe” 8

- hour ozone nonattainment area with an extended attainment deadline of June 15, 2019 3

. EPA approved the reclassification request on May 5, 2010 (75 FR 24409 ).

This plan includes the information and analyses to fulfill the federal Clean Air Act requirements for demonstrating reasonable further progress and attainment of the 1997

8

- hour ozone NAAQS for the Sacramento region

. In addition, this plan establishes an update d emission s inventory , provides photochemical modeling results, pr oposes the implementation of reasonably available control measures , and sets new motor vehicle emission budgets for transportation conformity purposes

.

1.3 8

- Hour Ozone Trends in the Sacramento Region

The progress toward attainment is measured by analyzing ambient air quality data collected at various monitoring sites over a period of many years (1990

- 200 7 ). There are currently 1 6 ozone monitoring stations located throughout the Sacramento region

that are operated by either local air districts or the Califor nia Air Resources Board.

T he annual number of 8

- hour ozone exceedance days recorded at the peak monitoring

site s fluctuates from year to year due to meteorological variability and changes in precursor emission patterns. The most frequent exceedances of th e federal 8

- hour ozone standard occur at the region’s eastern monitoring sites (Cool, Folsom, Placerville, and Auburn). The 1 8

- year trend line indicates a decline in the overall average peak number of annual exceedance days, from about 3 3 down to 2 2 (see F igure 1

- 1)

.

3 In order to attain by June 15 th , the prior year’s ozone season would need to be in attainment, making 2018 to be the attainment demonstration analysis year.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 3 Figure 1

- 1

8

- Hour Ozone Exceedance Days

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Peak Monitoring Site

Federal 8

- hr ozone standard = 84 pp b

This tre nd analysis uses the highest number of 8

- hour ozone exceedance days recorded each year at the various monitoring

sites

, including the addition of the Cool station in 1996

.

T he peak 8

- hour ozone design value concentration also varies from year to year and

occurs at t he eastern monitoring site s in the Sacramento region. T he overall 1 8

- year trend line shows a slight decline, from 10 8 pp b down to about 10 0 pp b (see Figure 1

- 2)

. The design value has improved from being 24 ppb (or 2 8%) over the standard 4 down to

about 1 6 ppb (or 19 %)

.

Figure 1

- 2

8

- Hour Ozone Design Values

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Peak Monitoring Site

Federal 8

- hr ozone standard = 84 pp b This trend analysis uses the highest 8

- hour ozone design values based on ozone concentrations recorded each year at the various monitoring sites , including the addition of the Cool station in 1996

1.4 VOC and NO X Emissions Inventory

Ozone is not directly emitted into the atmosphere, but is a pollutant produced by photochemical reactions in the air involving volati le organic compounds (VOC) and

4 Federal 8

- hour ozone standard = 84 ppb.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 4 nitrogen oxides ( NO X ). Therefore, planning efforts to evaluate and reduce ozone air pollution include identifying and quantifying the various processes and sources of VOC emissions (such as solvents, surface coatings, and mot or vehicles) and NO X emissions (such as motor vehicles and other fuel combustion equipment).

EPA emission inventory guidance requires the planning emissions inventory to be based on estimates of actual emissions for an average summer weekday, typical of t he ozone season (May

– October). The anthropogenic emissions inventory is first divided into four broad source categories : stationary sources, area

- wide sources, on

- road motor vehicles, and other mobile sources. Each of these major categories is further de fined into more descriptive equipment types and specific emission processes. The biogenic VOC emissions from vegetation for natural areas, crops, and urban landscapes are estimated separately from the anthropogenic inventory

.

The 2002 base year anthropoge nic planning inventory is estimated to be 147 tons per day of VOC emissions and 165 tons per day of NO X emissions for the Sacramento

nonattainment area. The base year emissions are used to forecast future year inventories by using socio

- economic growth indicators and the post

- 2002 emission

reduction effects of existing control strategies. Also, potentially available pre

- 2002

emission reduction credits (ERCs) are included as additional growth in future years to

ensure that thei r use will not be inconsistent with the reasonable further progress and attainment targets.

Table s 1

- 1 and 1

- 2 summarize the V O C and NO X emissions inventory for the Sacramento nonattainment area by the four major emission categories. The VOC and

NO X emission forecasts out to 20 18 show significant declines in mobile source emissions, despite increasing population, vehicle activity, and economic development in the Sacramento region

.

Table 1

- 1

Emissions Inventory of Volatile Organic Compounds ( VOC )

Sac ramento Nonattainment Area (tpd)

Emission Category 2002 2014 2017 2018

Stationary Sources 22 2 6 2 7 27

Area

- Wide Sources 32 30 30 31

On

- Road Motor Vehicles 52 21 17 15

Other Mobile Sources 41 28 25 24

Total 147 10 4 9 9 9 8

Note s :

– ERCs are included in the 2014, 2017, and 2018 inventories.

– Totals may not add exactly due to rounding.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 5 Table 1

- 2 Emissions Inventory of Nitrogen Oxides ( NO X )

Sacramento Nonattainment Area (tpd)

Emission Category 2002 2014 2017 2018

Stationary Sources 12 1 3 1 2 1 2

Area

- Wide Sources 3 3 3 3

On

- Road Motor Vehicles 99 46 37 34

Other Mobile Sources 50 28 27 2 5

Total 165 90 7 8 7 4

Notes:

– ERCs are included in the 2014, 2017, and 2018 inventories.

– Totals may not add exactly due to rounding.

1.5 Air Quality Modeling Analysis

Updated photochemical air quality grid modeling was developed to simulate base case episodes of high ozone formation as part of the extensive air monitoring and data analysis conducted for the 2000 Central California Ozone Study. The air quality model was then run with 2002 baseline year emissions and future year emissions forecasts (including VOC and NO X ERCs) to see if the ozone standard would be attained with existing control strategies

. The relative decline in future ozone concentrations shown in the photochemical modeling results p redict ed attainment at all ozone monitors in 2018 except for two sites (Cool and Folsom) located in the eastern part of the Sacramento region.

Additional air quality modeling runs of across

- the

- board emission reduction scenarios

were conducted. The air quality modeling analysis shows that attainment can be reached by 2018 with different combinations of VOC and NO X control. The modeling

results indicate that both VOC and NO X reductions provide ozone ben efits in the Sacramento region, but on a ton for ton basis NO X reductions provide greater ozone

benefits than VOC reductions. More specific conclusions regarding attainment targets for the Sacramento region’s peak ozone monitoring site at Cool are provided in the

attainment demonstration evaluation

.

1.6 Proposed Regional and Local Control Measures

The Sacramento SIP control strategy relies on the following components:

1. Reductions from existing control measures and adopted rules,

2. Reductions from ne w state and federal regulations, and

3. Reductions from defined new SIP local and regional measures.

The proposed SIP emissions control strategy includes reductions of both VOC and NO X air pollutants. A single NO X pollutant strategy is not appropriate becaus e, even though

VOC measures are not as effective as NO X , they still provide needed reductions. Moreover, many existing statewide and local control programs will inherently achieve reductions from both ozone precursors.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 6 EPA’s final 8

- hour ozone implementat ion rule (pursuant to section 172(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act) requires the attainment SIP submittal to include adopting all reasonably available control measures (RACM) necessary to demonstrate attainment as expeditiously as practicable and to meet any RFP requirements. EPA’s RACM policy indicates that areas should consider all candidate measures that are potentially reasonably available. Sources of potentially reasonable measures include measures adopted in other nonattainment areas, measures that the EPA has identified in guidelines or other documents, and any measures that have been suggested for the particular nonattainment area during a public comment period.

Areas should consider all reasonably available measures for implementation in light of

local c ircumstances. However, areas need only adopt measures if they are both economically and technologically feasible and cumulatively will either advance the attainment date by one year or more or are necessary for RFP. This plan contains required reasonabl y a vailable control measures

.

The total emission reductions from the new measures are an enforceable commitment

in the SIP and provide a buffer for attainment

. While the proposed regional and local

control measures include estimates of the emission reductions from each of the individual measures, it is important to note that the commitment is to achieve the total emission reductions necessary to attain the federal standards. Therefore, if a particular measure or a portion thereof is found infeasible or does not get its expected emission reductions, each air district still commits to achieving the total aggregate emission reductions, whether this is realized through additional or surplus reductions from the other adopted measures, from alternative cont rol measures, or incentive programs.

A lthough the regional and local commitment is to the "total emission reductions," for purposes of transportation conformity, an explicit commitment is made to the reductions

associated with the on

- road mobile source in centive program. Also t he urban forest control measure, SMAQMD

- 1, is an emerging measure. Because of the uncertainties associated with implementation and validation of this urban forest measure, th e emission benefits from th is strategy are not included in the attainment or reasonable further progress demonstrations

.

If an infeasibility finding is made for a control measure or a portion thereof in the future

, the region's SIP commitment can be adjusted downward. For purposes of SIP commitment, infeasibility means that the proposed control technology is not reasonably likely to be available by the implementation date needed, or achievement of the emission reductions by that date is not cost

- effective or technologically feasible because

of local circumstances

.

The following T able 1

- 3 contains a summary of the proposed new regional and local control measures and expected VOC and NO X emission reductions for the Sacramento nonattainment area for the 2018 attainment demonstration year. Emission benefits from

these new committal measures are estimated to provide reductions of 3 tons per day of2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 7 VOC and 3 tons per day of NO X in 2018. Some of these new local measures will be adopted by the end of 2008, and emission benefits from just these adopted new

measures are esti mated to provide reductions of 1 ton per day of VOC in 2018.

Table 1

- 3 Summary of New Regional and Local Proposed Control Measures

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Control Measure Name 2018 Emission Reductions ( tpd )

VOC NO X Regional Non

- regulatory Measures
Regional Mobile Incentive Program

– On

- road < 0. 1 0.5
Regional Mobile Incentive Program

– Off

- road < 0.1 < 0. 1
Spare The Air Program < 0.1 < 0.1
SACOG Transportation Control Measures

- - Urban Forest Development Program 0

- 0. 2

- Total Regional Non

- regulatory Measures * 0. 1 0.5

Local Regulatory Measures
Architectural Coating 1. 5

- Automotive Refinishing 0.2

- Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning 0.7

- Graphic Arts na

- Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products <0.1

- Natural Gas Production and Processing 0.1

- Boilers, Steam Generator, and Process Heaters

- 0.2
IC Engines

- 0.0
Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers

- 0.2

Total Local Regulatory Measures * 2. 6 0. 5

Total Reductions * 2. 7 1.1

Note s : N umbers are truncated to one decimal place

. na = not available

*Total reductions are summed from untruncated values. See summary table in Appendix C

– Proposed Control Measures.

The following Table 1

- 4 contains a s ummary of SACOG t ransportation c ontrol m easures (TCMs) that are included in the Sacramento region’s federal 8

- hour ozone plan. The

TCMs include n ew and c ontinuing p rojects and f unding p rograms

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 8 Table 1

- 4 Summary of SACOG Transportation Control Measures New and Continuing Projects and Funding Programs

TCM Name and (ID) Implementing Agency Implement or

Completion Date VOC

Reduction (Tons/Day) NO X

Reduction (Tons/Day)
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Projects

Arden Way Smart Corridor (ITS

- 1) City of Sac

- Dept of Transportation 2008

--- ---

Sacramento Traffic Operations Center (ITS

- 2) City of Sac

- Dept of Transportation 2009

--- ---

STARNET Implementation (ITS

- 4) SACOG 2009

--- --- Park and Ride Lots / Transit Centers

El Dorado Central Park and Ride Facility (TF

- 1) El Dorado County

Transit 2009

--- ---

Improvements to Loomis Multimodal Center (TF

- 2) Town of Loomis

– Dept of Public Works 2010

--- ---

13 th and 16 th St :Light Rail Station Improvements (TF

- 3) Sac Regional Transit

District 200 9

--- ---

Transit Service Funding Programs

Transit Vehicle Acquisitions (TR

- 1) Various Agencies Various

Dates --- ---

Transit Operations (TR

- 2) Various Agencies Various

Dates --- ---

Other Specific Funding Programs

Freeway Service Patrol (AQ

- 1) Sac Transportation Authority Through 2018

--- ---

SECAT Program (AQ

- 2) SMAQMD Through 2018

--- a

--- a

Spare The Air Program (AQ

- 3) SMAQMD Through 2018

--- b

--- b

MTP Regional Funding Programs
Air Quality Funding Program (FP

- 1) Various Agencies Through 20 18

--- --- Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Program (FP

- 2) Various Agencies Through 20 18

--- ---

Transportation Demand Management Funding Program (FP

3) Various Agencies Through 20 18

--- ---

Community Design Funding Program (FP

- 4) Various Agencies Through 20 18

--- ---

Miscellaneous Projects
Light Rail Grade Separation at Watt Ave and Folsom Blvd (M

- 2) Sac County

– Dept of Transportation 200 9

--- ---

Dry Creek Parkway Trail Phase 1 Sac County

– Dept of Transportation 20 11

--- ---

Total Emission Reductions

--- ---

a SECAT emission reductions are assumed to be included in SMAQMD mobile source control measure ONMS

HD

- 1.

b Spare The Air emission reductions are assumed to be included in SMAQMD control measure TCM

- ONMS

ED

- 1.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 9 1.7 Attainment Demonstration

A ttainment of the 1997 8

- hour ozone NAAQS is evaluated for a 2018 “severe” classification scenario, based on modeling results for the peak ozone site (Cool) in the region. The modeled VOC and NO X emission forecasts for 2018 incorporate growth assumptions and the estimated reduct ions associated with the existing control strategy. The photochemical modeling results were used to estimate the percent reductions

needed from the 2018 emission forecasts in order to achieve the 1997 federal 8

- hour

ozone standard (84 ppb)

.

The emissions reduction from new measures is shown in Table 1

- 5. T hese future new

committal measures provide a buffer in the attainment demonstration

. It is anticipated that the attainment would be achieved by the 2018 deadline even if there is a reduction

in their emis sion benefits. The attainment demonstration assessment for the

Sacramento nonattainment area is summarized in Table 1

- 5

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 10 Table 1

- 5 Summary of Attainment Demonstration for 8

- Hour Ozone NAAQS 2018

“Severe” Classification Scenario

Sacramento Nonattainment A rea VOC (tpd) NO X (tpd)

Summary of 2009 Plan Attainment Demonstration

A) 2002 Planning Emissions Inventory 1 160 .3 196 .1

B) 2018 Planning Emissions Inventory with Existing Controls 1 121 .1 104 .1

C) Attainment Emission Reduction in percentage 2 3.3% 12.5%

D) SIP Emissions Target: Line B × (1

– Line C) 117 .1 91 .1

E Percentage Emission Reduction Required for Attainment: ( 1

– (Line D ÷ Line A) ) × 100% 27. 0 % 53. 6 %

Revised Emissions Targets

F) Updated 2002 Inventory 3 14 6. 7 16 4.8

G) Updated SIP Emissions Target: Line F × ( 1

– Line E ) 107 .1 76 .5

Revised Attainment Demonstration

H) Updated 2018 Inventory 3 97 .7 73 .9

I Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Safety Margin 4 1 3

J) Emission Reductions in 2018 from Remaining Regional/Local Control

Measures 5,7 2.7 1.1

K Emissions Reductions in 2018 from Remaining State/Federal Control

Measures 6 ,7 5.7 0.3

L) Total Emission s in 2018 with All Remaining Controls : ( Line H + Line I

- Line J

– Line K ) 9 0. 3 75

. 5

M ) Is Attainment Demonstrated? (Is Line L ≤ Line G?) Yes

1. The 2009 inventory is shown in Appendix A8

. 2. The percent emission reduction targets for attainment are based on modeling results

. Figure 8

- 1

Point A.

3. Chapter 5. Tables 5

- 2 and 5

- 3 include ERC s ( ERC details are in Tables 5

- 4 and 5

- 5)

. 4. Chapter 11 Table 11

- 1

5. Appendix C, Table of Emission Reductions by Air District, Page C

- 5

. 6. Chapter 7. Table 7

- 2 , sum of expected emission reductions from New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats and Expanded Off

- Road Rec. Vehicle Emission Standards.

7. These reductions provide a buffer for meeting attainment targets.

1.8 Transport Analysis

T he air quality in the Sacramento region is impacted by pollutant transport from the San Francisco Bay Area. Delta breezes carry ai r pollutants from upwind Bay Area emission sources into the Sacramento region, and these pollutants may contribute to ozone formation during the same day or the following day s

. The California Air Resources Board has determined that the relative impact from this Bay Area transport can be considered overwhelming, significant, or inconsequential on various days 5

, depending

5 California Air Resources Board, “Ozone Transport: 2001 Review”, April 2001.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 11 on meteorological conditions

. CARB has also made findings that pollutant transport from the San Joaquin Valley can have significant or inconsequential impact 6 on air quality in the Sacramento region.

States are responsible for submitting SIPs for all areas of their State and need to demonstrate attainment in all areas addressing intrastate transport where appropriate. The photochemical grid modeling study includes the northern and central regions of California in the modeling domain, and was used to address and account for air pollutant transport impacts among the San Francisco Bay Area, San Joaquin Valley, Sacramento Valley, and Mountai n Counties air basins.

CARB modeling for the attainment demonstration for the Sacramento nonattainment

area used domain

- wide emission reductions to characterize future ozone reductions at peak ozone monitoring stations. Therefore, for our area to attain, reductions in forecasted emissions necessary and committed to in Sacramento must also be

achieved in the areas that significantly impact the region

. In other words, the attainment demonstration for the Sacramento nonattainment area is predicated on the San Francisco Bay Area and the San Joaquin Valley also achieving an equivalent additional percent reduction of VOC and NO X emissions in their forecasted 2018 inventor ies

. The reductions could come from either state or upwind regions’ local measures, but we

un derstand that CARB has committed to address the reduction requirement by implement ing the new state measures statewide , which are expected to achieve similar reductions in the Bay Area and San Joaquin Valley.

In addition, pollutant transport from the Sacr amento region can potentially impact the air quality in other regions under certain meteorological conditions. For example, CARB analyses have determined that ozone violations at the Grass Valley monitoring station in Nevada County are considered to be ove rwhelmingly due to transport from the Sacramento region. 7 Emission reduction strategies in the Sacramento region will benefit

their efforts to attain the federal ozone standards

.

1.9 Weight

- of

- Evidence Determination

Attainment demonstrations based on photochemical modeling can be strengthened by supplemental evidence from additional modeling analyses and from considering modeling outputs other than the attainment test results. More diverse non

- modeling and observational methods analyzing air quality, m eteorological, and emissions data can also be used to corroborate the modeling predictions. EPA guidance 8 specifies that a comprehensive weight

- of

- evidence approach should be undertaken to support the

modeled attainment demonstration.

6 Ibid.

7 Ibid.

8 “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM 2.5 , and Regional Haze” (EPA, April 2007, p. 98

- 109).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 12 Since 1999, the numb er of area

- wide exceedance da ys has decreased by over 10%. The ozone design value has decreased by 5%. A smaller portion of the nonattainment region violates the 1997 federal ozone standard, and the western most and eastern most portions of the region atta in. Analyses show that these improvements are due to emissions reductions, not favorable weather conditions.

The overall conclusions of the weight

- of

- evidence analyses support the attainment

demonstration

. T he ozone modeling concluded that NO X reductions will be critical to reaching attainment . The additional weight

- of

- evidence analyses looked at three areas: (i) the general decline in emissions, (ii) ambient air pollutants, and (iii) ozone concentration trend indicators. The ozone concentration analyses i ncluded adjustments for meteorology. These weight

- of

- evidence analyses found that each of these areas are improving over time, consistent with the overall NO X and VOC emission control strategy reducing peak ozone in the region , and support the conclusion that the region will attain by 2018

.

1.10 Transportation Conformity and Emission Budgets

Under the federal Clean Air Act

, federal agencies may not approve or fund transportation plans and projects unless they are consistent with state air quality implementati on plans (SIPs). Conformity with the SIP require s that transportation activities not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Conformity regulations stat e that emissions from transportation plans and projects must be less than or equal to the motor vehicle emissions budgets established by reasonable further progress, attainment or maintenance plans (SIPs)

. (40 CFR 93.118)

Table 1

- 6 lists the proposed new transportation conformity budgets for the 2014, and

2017 RFP milestone years, and the 20 18 attainment analysis year for the Sacramento

nonattainment area. The proposed budgets incorporate the recent on

- road motor vehicle emission inventory factors of EMFAC2011

, updated travel activity data

, and

latest regional and state control strategies

.

Table 1

- 6 Proposed New Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

NO X VOC

2014 2017 2018 2014 2017 2018 ARB Inventories for Conformity (Tons per Day) 46 37 34 21 17 16
Safety Margin 3 2 3 2 1 1

Budgets 49 39 37 23 18 17

* All motor vehicle emission budget years include regional incentive benefits. State control measure reductions are only included in 20182013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 13 T his ozone plan includes the updated on

- road motor vehicle emissions and the proposed transportation budgets that assume vehicle activity levels based on the road and transit projects contained in the region’s 2013/16 Metropolitan Tr ansportation Improvement Program on SACOG’s new SAC SIM regional travel forecasting model to
estimate future traffic volumes in the 6

- county Sacramento region

.

The vehicle activity levels for the eastern part of Solano County in the Sacramento

nonattainmen t area are based on MTP data from the Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC).

If these proposed new motor vehicle emission budgets are determined to be adequate for transportation conformity purposes by EPA, future transportation plans will need to

conform to them. The Metropolitan Planning Organizations, SACOG and MTC, must ensure that the aggregate transportation emissions in the region stay below these levels when approving new metropolitan transportation plans and transportation improvem ent programs, even if the mix of projects changes or growth increases. These new, adequate 8

- hour MVEBs will remain in effect until other budgets are found adequate or approved by EPA.

Vehicle Miles Traveled Offset (VMT Offset)

In early 2011, EPA’s inter pretation of the Clean Air Act VMT offset requirements ( Section 182(d)(1)(A) ) was challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. 9

The ruling effectively requires severe and extreme nonattainment areas, including Sacramento, to submit VMT offs et demonstrations.

A detailed VMT offset demonstration was prepared by California Air Resources Board and is included in Appendix F

– Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets and VMT Offset

Demonstration

.

1.11 General Conformity

General c onformity is the federal regul atory process for preventing major federal actions or projects from interfering with air quality planning goals. Conformity provisions ensure that federal funding and approval are given only to those activities and projects that are

consistent with state a ir quality implementation plans (SIPs). Conformity with the SIP means that major federal actions will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Exampl es of general federal actions that may require a conformity determination include, but are not limited to, the following: leasing of federal land; private construction on federal land; reuse of military bases; airport construction and expansions, and const ruction of federal office buildings.

9 Association of Irritated Residents v EPA, (9th Cir. 2011, reprinted as amended on January 27, 2012,
632 F. 3d 584, at 596

- 597)

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 14 A federal agency may demonstrate conformity by showing that the total of direct and indirect emissions from the action is accounted for in the applicable SIP’s attainment or

maintenance demonstration. Therefore, the up dated emissions inventory in this 8

- hour ozone attainment demonstration plan would be applicable for general conformity

purposes. Specific emission budgets for airport operations are identified for future

years.

1.12 Reasonable Further P rogress D emonstration

The federal 8

- hour ozone regulations 10 require that areas classified as “ serious or above ” submit a r easonable further progress (R F P) demonstration plan that provides for

a t least 3% average annual reductions of VOC (and/or NO X ) emission s every 3

- year perio d after 2008 out to the attainment year

. The RFP demonstration must fully a ccount for emissions growth when calculating the net emission reductions.

In February 2006, the Sacramento region submitted an early 8

- hour ozone RFP plan to EPA demonstrating an 1 8% reduction from 2002

- 2008 for the Sacramento nonattainment area with existing control strategies. In addition, the early RFP plan included an updated emission inventory and set new motor vehicle emission budgets for 2008, which EPA found to be adequate f or transportation conformity purposes. 11
Consequently, t his Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment and RFP Plan does

not include a 2002

- 2008 RFP demonstration.

Th e RFP evaluation in this ozone plan is based on the emission inventory forecasts

, which assume expected growth rates and current control measures. The 3

- year RFP demonstrations are achieved through VOC and NO X emission reductions for the milestone years of 2014, 2017 , and the 20 18 attainment analysis year

. Figure 1

- 3 shows the percenta ges of VOC reductions and NO X substitution that are used to meet the RFP reduction targets.

10 Federal Register, November 29, 2005, p. 71634.

11 Federal Register, March 14, 2006, p. 13124 (effective date March 2 9, 2006).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 15 Figure 1

- 3 Summary of Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

1.13 Conclusions

1. Since 1990, there has been a d eclining t rend in 8

- h our o zone e xceedances and ozone design value concentration

, with the most frequent and highest violations occurring at eastern monitoring sites (e.g., Cool, Folsom, Placerville, Auburn)

.

2. The VOC and NO X emissions inventory forecasts through 20 18 show sign ificant declines in mobile source emissions, despite increasing population, vehicle activity, and economic development in the Sacramento region.

3. The air quality modeling analysis indicates additional emission reductions are

needed to achieve attainment b y 20 18 , and NO X reductions on a ton for ton basis would be more effective at reducing high ozone in the region than VOC

reductions

.

4. N ew regulatory and non

- regulatory VOC and NO X control measures at the regional and local level are proposed for adoption in this plan , which includes commitments to adopt required reasonabl y available control measures (RACM)

.

5. The combined reductions from new state and federal control measures and from new regional and local proposed control measures contained in this plan provide

the additional VOC and NO X emission reductions needed to demonstrate attainment by the 2018 “severe” classification deadline

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Executive Summary

Page 1

- 16 6. New transportation conformity emission budgets are being proposed for the Sacramento region

, which incorporate the recent EMFAC2007 motor vehicle

emission factors

, updated travel activity data

, and latest control strategies

.

7. R easonable further p rogress d emonstration s for the milestone years of 2014,

2017 , and the 2018 attainment analysis year are a chieved by a combination of

VOC and NO X reductions

.

8. Future ozone planning efforts will include the preparation of progress (milestone) reports to assess reasonable further progress

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Background Information and Plan Development Overview Page 2

- 1 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION and PLAN DEVELOPMENT OVERVIEW

2.1 Ozone Health Effects

Air pollution or “smog” is composed of many different gaseous and particulate pollutants, which can create a regional haze reducing atmospheric visibility. Ground

level ozone, a colorless gas, is a major component of photochemical smog. Since ozone is formed especially in the presence of strong sunlight, ambient ozone concentrations are more problematic during May through October

.

Ozone is a strong irritant that adversely affects human health. Breathing air containing ozone can reduce lung function and increase respiratory symptoms, thereby aggravating asthma, bronchitis, or other respiratory conditions including chest pains and wheezing. As documented by th e EPA in their 2006 Criteria Document 12 for ozone, both

short

- term and long

- term exposure to ozone can irritate and damage the human respiratory system, resulting in:



###  increased susceptibility to respiratory infections;



###  increased risk of cardiovascular probl ems such as heart attacks and strokes;



###  increased doctors visits, hospitalizations, and emergency room visits;



###  increased school absenteeism; and



###  an increase in mortality/premature deaths, especially in people with heart and lung

disease. 13

The adverse effects of ozone are not just limited to humans. Ozone can also cause damage to crops and natural vegetation by acting as a chemical oxidizing agent

.

Ground

- level ozone is one of the air pollutants regulated by the federal and state
government. Reducing o zone to levels below state and federal standards is one of the primary goals of the air districts.

2.2 Ozone Formation and Precursor Pollutants

Ozone is not directly emitted into the atmosphere. It is a pollutant formed in the atmosphere through complex chem ical reactions involving volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides ( NO X ) in the presence of sunlight. Because of this, VOC and

NO X are known as ozone “precursors.”

VOC and NO X air pollutants are emitted by many types of sources, including on

- ro ad

and off

- road combustion engine vehicles, power plants, industrial facilities, gasoline

12 “Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants” (EPA, February 2006)

– http://www.epa.gov/ncea.

13 Staff Report Revisions to the “Review of the California Ambient Air Quality Standard for Ozone” (California Air Resources Board, October 27, 2005, p. 1

- 1 and 1

- 2).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Background Information and Plan Development Overview Page 2

- 2 stations, organic solvents, and consumer products. VOC pollutants are also known as reactive organic gases (ROG).

2.3 Clean Air Act and Prior Fed eral 1

- Hour Ozone Standard

The first comprehensive national air pollution legislation was the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970. The CAA was amended in 1977 to require local plans for meeting national ambient air quality standards. To protect the public from unhealthy oz one levels, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revised the national ambient ozone standard in 1979 to a concentration of 0.12 parts per million averaged over one

hour 14

.

The federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 included new attainment deadl ines and planning requirements. In 1991, the Sacramento region was initially designated by EPA

as a “serious” nonattainment area for the 1

- hour ozone standard with an attainment

deadline of 1999. Attainment demonstration plans for the 1

- hour ozone standard were due to EPA by November 15, 1994.

2.4 1994 Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Plan

Sophisticated a ir quality computer model ing was used to simulate future ozone

formation and evaluate the effectiveness of emission control scenarios. Computer modeling did not project attainment by the 1999 deadline. As a result, the 1994 Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Plan was prepared to demonstrate that a combined strategy controlling emissions of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen

oxides coul d achieve attainment of the federal 1

- hour ozone standard by 2005. Commitments were made to develop and implement new regional, state, and federal control measures to reduce emission levels below the amounts shown by the modeled

attainment demonstration.

In response to the 1994 SIP relying on a 2005 attainment date, EPA approved the attainment plan and voluntary request for nonattainment reclassification from a “serious” area to a “severe” area, effective June 1, 1995 15

. The control measures implemented

fr o m the 1994 SIP are incorporated into the existing control strategies and reflected in

future emission forecasts. EPA has recognized the Sacramento Region attained the 1

- hour ozone standard 16

.

14 One

- hour ozone standard violation criterion defined as no more than 3 daily exceedances (>124 ppb) over 3 years at a monitoring site.

15 “California, Sacramento Ozone Nonattainment Area, Reclassification to Severe” (Federal Register, April 25, 1995).

16 Federal Register, October 12, 2012, p. 64036

- 64039.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Background Information and Plan Development Overview Page 2

- 3 2.5 Federal 8

- Hour Ozone Standard

In July 1997, EPA promulgated an 8

- hour standard for ozone 17

. This change lowered

the health

- based standard for ambient ozone from 0.12 parts per million of ozone averaged over one hour to 0.08 parts per million of ozone averaged over eight hours. In general, the 8

- hour standard is more pr otective of public health and more stringent than

the federal 1

- hour standard.

Court Challenges and Findings

The American Trucking Association challenged this standard in the Washington D.C. Court of Appeals

. In May 1999, the Court ruled that EPA’s delegation of authority and implementation approach were improper, and remanded the standard. EPA appealed this decision, and in February 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the 8

- hour ozone standard, but maintained that EPA’s implementation approach was u nreasonable. In June 2003, EPA proposed a revised implementation strategy for the 8

- hour ozone standard to address the Supreme Court findings, and finalized phases 1 and 2 of the rulemaking in the April 30, 2004 Federal Register and November 29, 2005 Feder al Register, respectively

.

The Phase 1 rule addressed such topics as: 1) classification and attainment deadlines, 2) revocation of the 1

- hour ozone standard

, 3) transitioning to the 8

- hour ozone rule,

and 4 ) control measure anti

- backsliding provisions 18

. The Phase 2 rule addressed remaining elements of implementing the 8

- hour ozone standard, such as: 1) reasonably available control technology and measures, 2) reasonable further progress, 3) modeling and attainment demonstrations, and 4) new source review.

Several parties representing various interest groups challenged different aspe cts of the

Phase 1 rule in the D.C. Court

. On December 22, 2006, the Court decided in favor of

some of the petitioners but upheld parts of EPA ’s action. The Court determined that

EPA could revoke the 1

- hour ozone standard and did not dispute EPA’s classification

scheme for the new 8

- hour ozone standard using the approach promulgated under the

1990 CAA Amendments. 19 The Court then found that EPA did not comply with the

Clean Air Act anti

- backsliding provisions in section 172(e), under which 8

- hour ozone nonattainment areas remain subject to control measure commitments that applied under

the 1

- hour ozone standard. The anti

- backsliding issue s included:

1. The Phase 1 rule provided th at NSR levels be based on new 8

- hour ozone classifications, rather than maintaining the more restrictive 1

- hour ozone NSR

levels that were applicable to some areas

.

17 “National Ambient Air Quality Standard s for Ozone” (Federal Register, July 18, 1997, p. 38855

- 38896).

18 Section 172(e) of the Clean Air Act provides that in the event EPA relaxes a primary standard, controls cannot be less stringent than the controls applicable to nonattainment areas before th e relaxation.

19 Court allowed 8

- hour ozone classifications using Clean Air Act, Title 1, part D, subpart 2, but not using subpart 1.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Background Information and Plan Development Overview Page 2

- 4 2. The Phase 1 rule deferred Clean Air Act, section 185 fees that would have been

enforced for areas that did not attain the federal 1

- hour ozone standards beginning

in 2005.

3. The Phase 1 rule allowed states to remove 1

- hour ozone plan contingency measures that have not been triggered, or to modify the trigger for measures to

reflect the 8

- hour stan dard.

4. The Phase 1 rule no longer required conformity determinations for the 1

- hour

ozone standard.

EPA requested a rehearing by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. On June 8, 2007, the Court rejected the rehearing of classification and anti

- backsliding iss ues. However, the

Court clarified its reference to 1

- hour ozone conformity determinations and limited the scope of its previous decision vacating the Phase 1 rule by stating that only those portions of the rule specifically challenged by the petitioners we re affected by the ruling. Additionally, the Court urged EPA to promptly promulgate a revised rule.

Finally, on January 14, 2008, the Supreme Court denied two i ndustry petitions to review the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision on EPA’s Phase 1 rule. These two petitions challenged the Circuit Court’s interpretation of the Clean Air Act’s anti

- backsliding provisions, arguing in part that these provisions should not apply when EPA strengthens
a NAAQS.

This 8

- hour ozone attainment plan assumes that upon new action by EPA in response to the Court’s remand, EPA will not modify the 8

- hour ozone classification scheme and

attainment deadlines

.

Since 1992, EPA applied its longstanding interpretation of CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) requirement that allowed a state to conclude that no further transportation control

measure s (TCMs) are necessary if aggregate motor vehicle emissions are projected to decline each year from the base year of t he plan to the attainment year.

In early 2011, EPA’s interpretation was challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the

9th Circuit. 20 The ruling effectively requires severe and extreme nonattainment areas

, including Sacramento, to submit the VMT offset demonstrations

.

In August 2012, EPA released guidance 21 in response to the Court’s opinion. This guidance indicates that technology improvements such as vehicle technology improvements, motor vehicle fuels, and ot her control strategies that are transportation

related could be used to offset increases in emissions due to VMT. This guidance also sets out a methodology for demonstrating achievement of the VMT offset requirement.

20 Association of Irritated Residents v EPA, (9th Cir. 2011, reprinted as amended on January 27, 2012,
632 F. 3d 584, at 596

- 597)

21 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 (EPA, August 2012)

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Background Information and Plan Development Overview Page 2

- 5 This Plan contains a vehicle miles travelled offset demonstration that satisfies Clean Air Act requirements under section 182(d)(1)(A)

, using the methodolog y outlined in EPA’s August 2012 guidance entitled “Implementing Clean Air Act Section 182(d)(1)(A): Transportation Control Measures and Transportation Control Strategies to Offset

Growth in Emissions Due to Growth in Vehicle Miles Travelled.”

New 8

- Hour Ozone NAAQS

On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised 8

- hour ozone NAAQS 22 of 0.075 parts per million, based on a review of new health studies. However, the 1997 8

- hour

standard remain s in effect, as do the SIP requirements and implementation rules for

that standard

, including this Plan update requirement

. Planning requirements for the

new 8

- hour ozone NAAQS will be identified and addressed in the future.

2.6 Develop ment of the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan

Th is ozone attainment plan was developed for the Sacramento region by the five air

districts in the nonattainment area with participation from t he California Air Resources Board (CARB)

, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) , and the Bay

Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)

. The five local air districts include the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD), the Yolo

Solano Air Quality Management District (YSAQMD), the Placer County Air Pollution

Control Dist rict (PCAPCD), the El Dorado County Air Quality Management District (EDCAQMD), and the Feather River Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD).

SACOG and MTC 23 are the metropolitan planning organization s (MPO) for transportation planning in the Sacramento re gion.

Because of recent changes in the long range transportation plans, SACOG was a key contributor in the development of the updated motor vehicle emissions inventory and transportation control measures

. CARB staff also conducted the photochemical

modeli ng and provided information regarding state and federal control measures, weight

- of

- evidence analyses, motor vehicle emissions budgets, and the reasonable further progress demonstration

.

Several committees provided input on technical and policy issues during the development of the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan. The Interagency Coordination Committee (ICC) consisted of participants from the various agencies mentioned above and from the California Departm ent of Transportation, EPA, and Federal Highways Administration. The ICC

was assembled to coordinate the efforts of the local, state, and federal governmental agencies directly involved in the preparation and/or review of the ozone plan

.

22 “National Ambient Air Quality Standa rds for Ozone” (Federal Register, March 27, 2008, p. 16436

- 16514).

23 MTC is the MPO for the east Solano County portion of the Sacramento nonattainment area.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Background Information and Plan Development Overview Page 2

- 6 A SIP coordinatio n working group was formed from participants of the Central California Ozone Study Technical Committee to focus on evaluat ing and improving the modeling

and emissions inventory. Also , a subcommittee of the air districts in the Sacramento

nonattainment area met periodically to coordinate the development of the various potential local VOC and NO X emission control measures needed in the SIP attainment
strategy. In addition, t he Regional Air Pollution Control Officers Committee for the Sacramento region was used to discuss and coordinate SIP topics and concerns.

2.7 Public Input and Review Process

E xisting public working groups were used to disseminate information and seek input

from a wide variety of key community stakeholders during the d evelopment proces s of the draft plan

. These committees included the Sacramento Cleaner Air Partnership,

SACOG’s Climate and Air Quality C ommittee and Regional Planning Partnership, and the Chamber of Commerce’s Air Quality and Transportation C ommittee, who represent major business interests, environmental groups, transportation agencies, local governments, and other community organizations. In addition, representatives for the various Native American tribes in the Sacramento region were contacted and invited to participate in the public process to develop the draft plan.

In the fall of 2006, public workshops were held to solicit comments on potential control

measures for the attainment demonstration. Additional public workshops were held early fall of 2008 to present inform ation and receive comments on the draft Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress P lan. Finally, the

Board of Directors for each of the air districts in the Sacramento nonattainment area

h e ld a public hearing prior to appr ov ing the plan. The 2013 technical amendments were noticed in each air district and the public hearing conducted by the SMAQMD Board of

Directors.

2.8 Contents of 8

- Hour Ozone Plan

This document includes the information and analyses to fulfill the federal 8

- hou r ozone attainment and reasonable further progress planning requirements for the Sacramento regional nonattainment area

. This plan does not address state ozone planning obligations prescribed by the California Clean Air Act

. This document relies on

in formation about proposed state and federal control strategies that are included here by reference. This document does not describe in detail or evaluate those strategies. For more information about emission control strategies implemented by the California Air Resources Board or other state agencies, contact the California Air Resources Board, P.O. Box 2815, Sacramento, CA 95812

- 2815 or see http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2007sip/2007sip.htm

.

Chapter 1 is an executive summary of the 8

- hour ozone plan. Ch apter 2 provides an introduction that contains background information on ozone health effects, ozone formation, the federal ozone standard s

, and an overview of the plan’s development

process

. Chapter 3 explains the purpose of the attainment plan and defines federal2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Background Information and Plan Development Overview Page 2

- 7 Clean Air Act 8

- hour ozone requirements for the region

. Chapter 4 analyzes and

illustrates 8

- hour ozone air quality trends in the Sacramento region. Chapter 5 presents the 2002 base year emissions inventory and the emission forecasts t hat are based on existing control strategies and growth assumptions

.

Chapter 6 characterizes the air quality modeling simulations and predictions, and analysis of results for determining attainment emission targets

. Chapter 7 identifies and

evaluates the proposed new regional and local control measures that are needed to

reduce future emissions

. Some control measures may provide benefits for other air contaminants such as fine particles or greenhouse gases. This plan does not quantify

those benefits. Chapt er 8 shows the 8

- hour ozone attainment demonstration for the Sacramento region using the emission forecasts, photochemical modeling results

, and the proposed control strategy scenario

. Chapter 9 discusses inter

- basin pollutant transport issues and addresses transport assumptions included in the photochemical modeling

. Chapter 1 0 discusses additional evidence supporting the attainment

demonstration based on supplemental non

- modeling data analys e s of air quality and emission trends in conjunction with modeling results

.

Chapter 11 documents the motor vehicle emissions budgets for transportation conformity purposes. This chapter also provides an analysis demonstrat ing that the

SFNA meets the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) Offset requirements under CAA sec tion 182(d)(1)(A)

. Chapter 12 explains general conformity requirements and provides estimates for forecasted airport emissions. Chapter 13 demonstrates how the reasonable further progress emission reduction requirements will be achieved. Finally, Chapter 1 4 summarizes the key points and major conclusions of this report, and mentions expected future air quality planning efforts by the air districts.

Additional documentation for the more technical sections of the 8

- hour ozone attainment plan is contained in the following Appendices:

A

– Emissions Inventory

B

– Photochemical Modeling

C

– Proposed Control Measures

D

– Transportation Control Measures

E

– Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

F

– Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets and VMT Offset Analysis

G

– Reasonable Furt her Progress Demonstrations

H

– Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis

I

– Federal Clean Air Act Requirements2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Hour Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 3

- 1 3 FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Purpose of a Federal Ozone Attainment Plan

In 2004, the Sacramento region was rated one of the four worst ozone air quality areas in the nation, based on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designations

and classifications 24 for the 1997 8

- hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 25

. The Sacramento region was classified as a “serious” nonattainment area. While air quality has improved

, and the area met the 1

- hour standard in 2009,

exceedances of the 8

- hour ozone air quality standar d continue to occur in many parts of the region

. Emissions of air pollutants that contribute to the form ation of ozone must be reduced significantly in order to attain the 8

- hour NAAQS.

The federal 8

- hour ozone implementation rules 26 set new deadlines for attaining the

ozone standard. The rules also set specific planning requirements to ensure that the attainment goal is met. Foremost among these requirements is adoption and implementation of an ozone attainment plan

. This plan must i dentify a comprehensive strategy to reduce emissions needed for attainment by the mandat ed deadline. The rules and programs in a plan are then implemented over time to reduce the emissions that go ing into the air, reducing unhealthful concentrations of air pollutants

, and helping areas reach federal air quality standards.

This Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress

Plan was prepar ed to meet t h ese requirement s as part of California’s State Implementation Plan (SIP) updat e

. The California SIP includes plans for each of the state’s nonattainment areas, along with rules, regulations, and other control measures adopted by air districts and the California Air Resources Board (CARB). After SIP updates are reviewed and approved by CARB, they are submitted to EPA for federal review and approval.

3.2 Federal Clean Air Act Requirements

The federal Clean Air Act (CAA) contains many SIP requirements for areas classified as

a nonattainment area for 8

- hour ozone. The CAA requirements applicable to nonattainment plan elements are outline d in Appendix I. SIP requirements for several basic plan elements are summarized in the following sections.

24 “Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the 8

- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality

S tandards” (Federal Register, April 30, 2004, p. 23858

- 23951) and EPA Website for “Classifications of 8

- Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas” (http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/gnc.html), accessed March 2,

2006.

25 “National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Oz one” (Federal Register, July 18, 1997, p. 38855

- 38896).

26 “Final Rule to Implement the 8

- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard

– Phase 1” (Federal Register, April 30, 2004, p. 23951

- 24000) and “Final Rule to Implement the 8

- Hour Ozone National

A mbient Air Quality Standard

– Phase 2” (Federal Register, November 29, 2005, p. 71612

- 71705).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Hour Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 3

- 2 3.3 New Source Review (NSR) and Other Permitting Requirements

Section 181(b)(3 ) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) permits a state to request that EPA reclassify or “bump

- up” a nonattainment area to a higher classification and extend the

time allowed for attainment. This bump

- up process is appropriate for areas that must rely on longer term strategies to achieve the emission reductions needed for attainment. On February 14, 2008, CARB on behalf of the air districts 27 in the Sacramento nonattainment area requested a voluntary reclassification (bump

- up) of the Sacramento

Federal Nonattainment A rea from a “serious” to a “severe” 8

- hour ozone nonattainment area with an associated attainment deadline of June 15, 2019. EPA approved the

reclassification , effective June 4, 2010 (75 FR 24409, May 5, 2010).

The region must meet requirements associated with the “severe” classification. Pursuant to section 182(d) of the CAA, the New Source Review offset ratio of total VOC

and NO X emission reductions to total increased emissions of such air pollutants must be at least 1.3 to 1 (instead of at least 1.2 to 1 for a serious classification).

Also, the emissions threshold for the definitions of a “major source” and a “major stationary source” are 25 tons per year of either VOC or NO X emissions

.

3.4 Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Requirements

The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the final Phase 2 Rule to implement the 8

- hour ozone air quality standard on November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71611). Among the requirements of the Phase 2 Rule, a new section was added to the Code of Federal Regu lations (40 CFR 51.912) that requires the District to submit a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) that meets the Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements for VOC and NO X in accordance with Sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f) of the federal Clean Air Act

. This requirement is known as the

RACT SIP

.

EPA defines RACT (44 FR 53762) as “the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably

available co nsidering technological and economic feasibility.” Sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f) of the Clean Air Act require the District to implement RACT for:

 Each category of VOC sources that is covered by a Control Technique s Guideline s (CTG) document issued by EPA; and

 All major stationary sources of VOC and/or NO X

.

The submittal deadline for RACT SIPs was September 15, 2006 ( 27 months after designation for the 8

- hr ozone NAAQS). RACT SIPs for major sources under “serious” requirements were prepared and submitted b y each district

.

27 District action dates approving the reclassification request: SMAQMD 1

- 24

- 08; FRAQMD 2

- 04

- 08;
EDCAQMD 2

- 05

- 08; YSAQMD 2

- 13

- 08; PCAPCD 2

- 14

- 08.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Hour Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 3

- 3 For areas designated as “severe” nonattainment for the 8

- hr ozone NAAQS, RACT control measures would apply to sources with emissions equal to or greater than 25 tons per year. Each air district will independently prepare and submit updated RACT

SIPs as needed

.

3.5 Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Requirements

Section 172(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act states that SIP “plan provisions shall provide for the implementation of all reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as practicable (including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology) and shall provide for attainment of the national primary ambient air qu ality

standards.” In addition, EPA’s final 8

- hour ozone implementation rule in 40 CFR 51.912(d), adopted under section 172(c)(1) of the CAA, requires the attainment SIP submittal to include “a SIP revision demonstrating that it has adopted all RACM

necessa ry to demonstrate attainment as expeditiously as practicable and to meet any RFP requirements.”

EPA’s RACM policy 28

, 29 indicates that areas should consider all candidate measures that are potentially reasonably available. Sources of potentially reasonable measures include measures adopted in other nonattainment areas, measures that the EPA has identified in guidelines or other documents, and any measures that have been suggested for the particular nonattainment area during a public comment period.

Areas sh ould consider all reasonably available measures for implementation in light of

local circumstances. However, areas need only adopt measures if : (i) they are both economically and technologically feasible and cumulatively will advance the attainment date by one year or more

, or (ii) are necessary for RFP. Furthermore, “EPA does not believe that Congress intended the RACM requirement to compel the adoption of measures that are absurd, unenforceable, or impracticable 30 .”

3.6 Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) Offset Re quirement

Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the federal Clean Air Act applies to areas classified as severe or extreme nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. The Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area is currently designa ted as

Severe

- 15, (75FR24409) and is subject to this requirement. A VMT offset demonstration

28 “Final Rule to Implement the 8

- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard

– Phase 2” (Federal Register, November 29, 2005, p. 71659

- 71661).

29 “Guidance on the Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Requirement and Attainment

Demonstration Submissions for Ozo ne Nonattainment Areas” (EPA, December 1999).

30 ”General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990” (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Hour Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 3

- 4 was prepared in accordance with U.S. EPA’s guidance 31 and is included as part of this plan.

3.7 Sacramento Nonattainment Area Designation

EPA made determinations rega rding which areas violate the standard under the federal

8

- hour ozone regulations 32 , effective June 15, 2004

. The nonattainment designation is based on whether the ozone design value concentration for any of the monitoring sites

in the area exceeds the nati onal ambient air quality standard 33

. A monitoring site’s 8

- hour ozone design value is calculated by averaging the annual fourth

- highest daily

maximum 8

- hour average ozone concentrations over the most recent three years.

The Sacramento region is designated a nonattainment area, and include s all of Sacramento and Yolo counties and portions of Placer, El Dorado, Solano, and Sutter

counties. See Figure 3

- 1 for a map of the 8

- hour ozone Sacramento nonattainment area (same boundaries as federal 1

- hour ozone nonattainment area)

.

3.8 Nonattainment Classification and Attainment Deadline

N onattainment areas are classifi ed 34 as marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or

extreme areas depending on the magnitude of the highest 8

- hour ozone design value for the monitoring sites in the nonattainment area. The Sacramento region wa s initially

classified as a “serious” nonattainment area 35 for the 8

- hour ozone standard, w ith an attainment deadline of June 15, 2013 (i.e., 9 years a fter designation). This classification

was based on the 8

- hour ozone design value of 107 ppb at Cool, calculated from ozone concentrations monitored during 2001

- 2003

.

Section 181(b)(3) of the Clean Air Act permits a state to request that EPA reclassify or “bump

- up” a nonattainment area to a higher classification and extend the time allowed

for attainment. Reclassification is appropriate for areas that must rely on longer term strategies to achieve the emission reductions needed for attainment. More stringent requirements are imposed with each higher classification level.

S ince the Sacramento region needs to rely on the longer term emission reduction strategies from state and federal mobile source control programs, the 2013 attainment

date cannot be me t. Consequently, o n February 14, 2008, CARB , on b ehalf of the air

31 “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.” (EPA August 2012)

32 “Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the 8

- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards” (Federal Register, April 30, 2004, p. 23857

- 23951.

33 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone standard = 84 ppb.

34 Sacramento’s classification was given by the more specific requirements of the subpart 2 provisions in

the Clean Air Act.

35 “Air Quality Designations and Classifications for t he 8

- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards” (Federal Register, April 30, 2004, p. 23887.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Hour Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 3

- 5 districts in the Sacramento region, submitted a letter to EPA request ing a voluntary

reclassification of the Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area from a “serious” to a

“severe” 8

- hour ozone nonattainment area with an extended attainment d eadline of June 15, 2019.

3.9 Reasonable Further Progress Plan

Sections 172(c)(2), 182(b)(1), and 182(c)(2)(B) of the Clean Air Act include reasonable further progress (RFP) requirements for reducing emissions in ozone nonattainment

areas. EPA’s 8

- hour ozone planning implementation Phase 2 r ule requires RFP reductions averaging at least 3% per year demonstrated in specific milestone years; 6 years after the 2002 baseline year and every 3 years thereafter through attainment

.

In February 2006, the Sacramento r egion submitted an early 8

- hour ozone RFP plan 36

to EPA demonstrat ing an 18% reduction from 2002

- 2008 for the Sacramento nonattainment area with existing control strategies. In addition, the 2006 RFP plan included an updated emission s inventory and set new motor vehicle emission budgets for 2008, which EPA found to be adequate for transportation conformity purposes 37

.

The Sacramento region was required to submit a plan demonstrating RFP through

2011. The 2011 RFP was due to EPA on June 15, 2007. EPA made a finding of failure

to submit the 2011 RFP SIP and began federal sanctions clocks for the Sacramento region, effective March 24, 2008 38

.

In May 2008, an 8

- hour ozone 2011 RFP plan 39 approved by the air districts in the

Sacramento nonatt ainment area was submitted to CARB. This RFP plan demonstrated

a 27% reduction from 2002

- 2011 for the Sacramento nonattainment area with existing control strategies. In addition, the 2011 RFP plan included an updated emissions inventory and carried forward 2008 motor vehicle emission budgets to 2011 for transportation conformity purposes.

The preparation and approval of the 2011 RFP plan was expedited to stop the sanctions

clocks. Because of the expeditious schedule, the 2011 RFP was prepared before final approval of SACOG’s recent Metropol itan Transportation Plan for 2035, which contained updated motor vehicle activity. T herefore, t his Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour

Ozone Attainment and RFP Plan incorporates the transportation activity data from the

final MTP2 035 and replaces the emission s inventory and motor vehicle emission budgets in the previous 20 11 RFP submittal.

36 Sacramento Regional Nonattainment Area 8

- Hour Ozone Rate

- of

- Progress Plan (February 2006).

37 Federal Register, March 14, 2006, p. 13124 (effective date M arch 29, 2006).

38 “Finding of Failure to Submit State Implementation Plans Required for the 1997 8

- Hour Ozone NAAQS” (Federal Register, March 24, 2008, p.15416

- 15421.

39 Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone 2011 Reasonable Further Progress Plan (May 2008).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8-Hour Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 3-6 As a result of the Sacramento nonattainment area’s reclassification to severe, RFP milestone years also include 2014, 2017, and 2018. Therefore, this ozone plan includes RFP demonstrations for each of these years to satisfy the RFP submittal requirements.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8-Hour Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 3-7 Figure 3-1

Federal 8-Hour Ozone

Sacramento Nonattainment AreaNW.EsPLACER....r---------:-I.;J.........I''ufilt"\ElOORAOO\..,SACRA1.1e,.,"'-........__.,.,.,.....-.GanMajorHigh""'YSRegimalAirDistrictsC3SFNABoundaryElDc.-adoI'PCD.....-.)t:...!{CountiesFeatherRiverAQMDPlacerCountyI'PCDSacramentoAQMDtift'Yolo-SolanoAQMD0510203JqJ502013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Hour Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 4

- 1 4 8

- HOUR OZONE AIR QUALITY TRENDS

4.1 Introduction to Air Quality Trends

The progress toward attainment is measured by analyzing ambient air quality data collected at various monitoring sites over a period of many years. This chapter focuses

on two different 8

- hour ozone parameters : the number of days exceeding the 8

- hour ozone standard and the magnitude of the 8

- hour ozone design value concentrations. Additional information regarding trend analyses can be found in Chapter 10 and Appendix E

– Weight

- of

- Evidence Analy ses.

4.2 Ozone Monitoring Sites

There are currently 16 ozone monitoring stations located throughout the Sacramento nonattainment area that are operated by either local air districts or the California Air

Resources Board. In 2010, one monitoring site was relocat ed from the Sacramento Airport Road site to Goldenland Court

. Most ozone sites also have meteorological instruments, and some sites sample for ambient concentrations of ozone precursor pollutants.

See Figure 4

- 1 for a map showing the location of ea ch of the ozone monitoring stations operating in the Sacramento region during 20 12

.

4.3 Annual Number of Exceedance Days

Table 4

- 1 shows the annual number of days over the 8

- hour ozone standard for each of the ozone monitoring sites in the Sacramento nonatta inment area since 1990. The most frequent exceedances of the federal 8

- hour ozone standard occur at the region’s eastern monitoring sites (Cool, Folsom, Placerville, and Auburn). The number of exceedance days at the peak monitoring site varies year to year , between 8 and 42. The bar chart in Figure 4

- 2 illustrates the monitoring site locations that exceeded the

federal 8

- hour ozone standard the most days in each year. Year to year ozone differences are caused by meteorological variability and changes in pre cursor emission patterns. The 8

- hour ozone standard allows for up to 3 exceedance days per site per year since the fourth

- highest daily maximum 8

- hour ozone concentration is used to calculate the ozone design value.

4.4 Trend in Exceedance Days

The line grap h in Figure 4

- 3 shows the number of exceedance days for the peak monitoring site in each year and a trend line from 1990 to 2012. The 23

- year trend line indicates a decline in the overall average peak number of annual exceedance days,

from about 34 down to 15, which equals a decline rate of about 0.8 exceedance day s

per year.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Hour Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 4

- 2 The historical ambient air quality data (Tables 4

- 1) show that Cool and Folsom were the sites recording the highest number of exceedance days in the past 23 years. In the previous Pl an revisions, Cool was the peak exceedance site from 1996

- 2007. During this 12 year period, Cool has recorded the highest number of exceedance days for 8 years. In the recent five year period (2008

– 2012), the Folsom monitor has recorded the highest numb er of exceedan ce days and peak design values.

4.5 Ozone Design Values

Table 4

- 2 lists the 8

- hour ozone design value concentrations for each of the ozone monitoring sites in the Sacramento nonattainment area since 1990. To show attainment, the ozone design value must meet the 8

- hour ozone standard (84 ppb). A monitoring

site’s 8

- hour ozone design value is calculated by averaging the annual fourth

- highest daily maximum 8

- hour average ozone concentrations over the most recent three

years 40 . The location of the highest 8

- hour ozone design value concentrations occurs most frequently at the region’s eastern monitoring sites (Cool, Folsom, Placerville, Auburn, and Colfax). The region’s peak ozone design value concentration varies from year to year, between 95 ppb an d 110 ppb. Folsom was the peak design value site for the past 7 years

.

4.6 Trend in Ozone Design Value

The line graph in Figure 4

- 4 shows the ozone design value for the peak monitoring site in each year and a trend line from 1990 to 2012. The overall 23

- year trend line indicates a decline, from 10 7 ppb down to about 98 ppb. The ozone design value has improved from being 24 ppb (or 28%) over the standard 41 down to about 14 ppb (or 16%), which equals a decline rate of about 0.4 ppb per year.

40 F or example, the 2007 ozone design value concentration for a specific monitoring site would be calculated by taking the average of:

2005 4 th highest daily maximum 8

- hour average ozone concentration

2006 4 th highest daily maximum 8

- hour average ozone concent ration

2007 4 th highest daily maximum 8

- hour average ozone concentration

41 Federal 8

- hour ozone standard = 84 ppb.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone A ttainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Hour Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 4

- 3 Figure 4

- 1

Sacramento Nonattainment Area Ozone Monitoring Stations

2012 Ozone Monitoring Sites (County)

Sacramento Nonattainment Area Sites

1. Auburn (Placer Co.) 11. Sacramento

– Goldenland Court

. (Sac. Co.) 2. Colfax (Placer Co.) 12. Sacramento

– Del Paso Manor (Sac. Co.) 3. Cool (El Dorado Co.) 13. Sacramento

– T Street (Sac. Co.)
4. Davis (Yolo Co.) 14. Sloughhouse (Sac. Co.) 5. Echo Summit (El Dorado Co.) 15. Vacaville (Solano Co.)
6. Elk Grove (Sac. Co.) 16. Woodland (Yolo Co.)
7. Folsom (Sac. Co.) 8. North Highlands (Sac. Co.) Other Sites

9. Placerville (El Dorado Co.) 17. Grass Valley* (Nevada Co.)
10. Roseville (Placer Co.) 18. Jackson** (Amador Co.)

*Grass Valley site: 2007 ozone design value = 95 ppb, and modeling analysis is applied for 2018. **Jackson site informational only: 2007 ozone design value = 81 ppb, and modeling analysis is not applied.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Ho ur Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 4

- 4 Table 4

- 1

8

- Hour Ozone Exceedance Days

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Ozone Monitoring Sites

Monitoring Site 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Auburn 41 25 26 15 25 18 17 1 16 25 17 21 15 11 12 10 29 0 13 3 3 3 na

Colfax 12 4 12 11 5 2 8 9 0 2 18 12 9 13 14 1 3 0 0 1 1

Cool 30 10 25 35 29 32 42 22 8 22 30 10 15 6 1 8 1

Davis 3 0 4 1 0 2 4 1 4 5 2 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0

Echo Summit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Elk Grove 0 3 4 9 3 4 7 1 3 0 5 1 2 7 1 2 1 1 0 1

Folsom 1 40 30 13 22 27 23 8 26 18 15 19 23 26 7 19 25 7 25 22 8 14 12

North Highlands 4 5 5 3 6 11 15 0 9 5 7 7 11 4 1 2 10 1 0 1 2 1 1

Placerville 29 12 22 31 27 13 17 23 15 15 20 19 7 16 20 4 16 5 2 1 6

Pleasant Grove* 0 0 4 2 0 7 5 0 4 3 3 3 2

Rocklin* 12 24 9 19 17 20 4 12 11 12 8 15

Roseville 7 8 8 12 2 12 9 8 9 11 5 1 9 9 3 13 11 5 3 5

Sac

- Airport Rd. ** 6 1 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 1 2

Sac

- Del Paso M. 17 14 14 6 5 23 13 1 10 6 9 6 23 13 3 10 10 2 7 8 1 1 3

Sac

- Goldenland

Court 0 0 0 0 0

Sac

- T Street 2 2 2 1 0 3 3 1 4 4 0 3 3 1 0 1 3 1 2 1 0 1 1

Sloughhouse 3 24 19 18 15 16 19 8 10 17 2 10 7 4 4 7

Vacaville 1 na na na na 3 2 0 7 8 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0

Woodland 2 1 6 1 0 3 2 0 4 4 0 1 4 0 0 2 4 0 1 0 0 0 0

Peak Site 41 40 30 15 25 31 30 13 26 35 29 32 42 26 12 22 30 10 25 22 8 14 12

Data source: CARB air quality data base ( www.arb.ca.gov/adam/welcome.html ). Downloaded on 06/06/02013

.

* Site closed

** Sac

- Airport Road site was relocated to Sac

- Goldenland Court in 2010.

na = insufficient data available2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Ho ur Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 4

- 5 Figure 4

- 2

8

- Hour Ozone Exceedance Days

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Peak Monitoring Site

Federal 8

- hr ozone standard = 84 ppb2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Ho ur Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 4

- 6 Figure 4

- 3

8

- Hour Ozone Exceedance Days Trend

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Peak Monitoring Site2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Ho ur Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 4

- 7 Table 4

- 2

8

- Hour Ozone Design Values (ppb)

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Ozone Monitoring Sites

Monitoring Site 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Auburn 107 105 105 101 102 105 103 95 95 97 102 101 101 99 95 92 93 89 90 86 87 80 na

Colfax na na 92 92 91 86 86 86 79 73 77 88 92 91 97 94 89 79 78 74 75

Cool na na 103 103 107 104 106 107 102 97 95 96 98 93 89 84 83

Davis 78 73 80 78 79 78 82 79 80 81 85 81 77 76 74 73 74 75 76 74 72 70 70

Echo Summit 75 76 75 72 72 73 76 74 71 67 69

Elk Grove 81 87 87 87 88 85 84 75 80 77 82 82 83 82 79 77 74 74

Folsom 101 100 101 110 104 106 106 na 92 101 104 99 100 100 97 97 97 98 102 100 102 95 95

North Highlands 87 82 88 87 87 88 91 88 89 87 89 89 92 91 85 80 82 80 78 74 75 77 77

Placerville na na 97 99 103 99 98 98 99 96 94 95 94 94 94 93 96 92 90 80 81

Pleasant Grove* 82 76 79 82 81 82 83 82 81 81 84 83 82

Rocklin* na na 101 103 100 100 95 94 92 93 91 92

Roseville na na 97 96 93 93 89 93 90 92 90 87 86 89 89 90 89 90 86 85

Sac

- Airport Rd.** na na 82 79 78 77 74 73 73 76 78

Sac

- Del Paso M. 96 95 100 99 92 96 100 97 95 91 95 92 95 97 95 92 90 90 87 86 85 81 78

Sac

- Goldenland

Court 57 69 69

Sac

- T Street 76 79 79 78 78 80 77 79 80 82 80 79 79 75 73 76 78 79 77 75 71 71

Sloughhouse na 100 105 98 95 95 94 94 96 93 95 91 92 87 88

Vacaville 75 na na na na na na 76 82 85 85 77 72 68 na 71 73 74 75 72 71 68 69

Woodland 80 77 na na 79 78 81 79 na na 84 82 83 83 79 77 79 80 79 74 72 69 69

Peak Site 107 105 105 110 104 106 106 101 103 103 107 104 106 107 102 97 97 98 102 100 102 95 95

Data source: CARB air quality data base ( www.arb.ca.gov/adam/welcome.html ) Downloaded on 06/06/02013

.

* Site closed after 2002.

** Sac

- Airport Road site was relocated to Sac

- Goldenland Court in 2010.

na = insufficient data available2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

8

- Ho ur Ozone Air Quality Trends Page 4

- 8 Figure 4

- 4

8

- Hour Ozone Design Values Trend

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

– Peak Monitoring Site

This trend analysis uses the highest 8

- hour ozone design values based on ozone concentrations recorded each year at the air monitoring stations, including the addition of the Cool

station in 1996.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 1 5 EMISSIONS INVENTORY

5.1 Introduction to Emissions Inventory

Planning efforts to evaluate and reduce ozone air pollution include identifying and quantifying the various processes and sources of VOC emissions (such as solvents, surface coatings, and motor vehicles) and NO X emissions (such as motor vehicles and other fuel combustion equipment). VOC pollutants are also known as reactive organic gases (ROG), and the two are considered to be synonymous for this report.

The summary of VOC and NO X emissions estimates by different air pollutant source categories are provided for the SIP planning year s in tabular and graphical formats. This

Plan reflects the impact from the recent economic recession and the improvements to

the on

- road motor vehicles and the off

- road equipment emission estimates. The 2002 base year, 2014, 2017 and 2018 emission inventor ies use the latest planning assumptions and emissions data in California Air Resources Board’s (CARB’s) California Emission Projection Analysis Model (CEPAM). These inventories, presented in tons per day for an average summer day, are forecasted using the latest socio

economic growth indicators and applying the emission reduction benefits from adopted control strategies. Emission reduction credits are also included in the emissions inventory forecasts. More detailed information and emissions inventory table s are provided in Appendix A

– Emissions Inventory.

5.2 Emission Inventory Requirements

Emissions are updated as part of the overall requirement for “plan revisions to include a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutants” under sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act. The baseline year for the SIP planning emissions inventory is identified as 2002 by EPA guidance memorandum 42

.

Additional EPA emission inventory guidance 43 and federal 8

- hour ozone implementation

rules 44 set specific planning requirements pertaining to future milestone years for reporting reasonable further progress (RFP) and to attainment demonstration years. Key RFP analysis years in this report include 2014 and every s ubsequent 3 years out to and including the attainment date

.

The attainment date for a “severe” nonattainment area classification is June 15, 2019. However, in order to attain by June 15th, the prior year’s ozone season would need to

42 “2002 Base Year Emission Inventory SIP Planning: 8

- Hour Ozone, PM 2.5 and Regional Haze Programs” (EPA Memorandum from L. Wegman and P. Tsirigotis, November 18, 2002).

43 “Emission Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations” (EPA

- 454/R

- 05

- 001, August 2005, updated November 2005).

44 “Final Rule to Implement the 8

- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard

– Phase 2” (Federal Register, November 29, 2005, p. 71612

- 71705).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 2 be in attainment. 45 The refore, the emission inventory year for attainment analysis purposes is 2018, the year preceding the mandated attainment date.

T he emissions inventory years included in this plan are 2002 (baseline), 2014, 2017, and 2018. EPA emission inventory guidance 46 also requires the SIP planning emissions inventory to be based on estimates of actual emissions for an average summer weekday, typical of the ozone season (May

– October).

5.3 Emission Inventory Source Categories

Due to the large number and wide variety of e mission processes and sources, a hierarchical system of emission inventory categories was developed for more efficient use of the data. The anthropogenic emissions inventory is divided into four broad categories: stationary sources, area

- wide sources, on

- r oad motor vehicles, and other mobile sources. Each of these major categories is subdivided into more descriptive subcategory sources. Each of these subcategories is further defined into more specific emission processes.

5.3.1 Stationary Sources

The stationary source category of the emissions inventory includes non

- mobile, fixed sources of air pollution. They are mainly comprised of individual industrial, manufacturing, and commercial facilities called “point sources.” The more descriptive

subcate gories include fuel combustion (e.g., electric utilities), waste disposal (e.g., landfills), cleaning and surface coatings (e.g., printing), petroleum production and marketing, and industrial processes (e.g., chemical). Industrial facility operators
report ed the process and emissions data used to calculate emissions from point

sources.

5.3.2 Area

- Wide Sources

The area

- wide sources inventory category includes aggregated emissions data from processes that are individually small and widespread or not well

- defined point sources.

The area

- wide subcategories include solvent evaporation (e.g., consumer products and

ar chitectural coatings) and miscellaneous processes (e.g., residential fuel combustion and farming operations). Emissions from these sources are calculated from product sales, population

, employment data, and other parameters for a wide range of activities

t hat generate air pollution across the Sacramento nonattainment region. More detailed

information on the area

- wide source category emissions can be found on the CARB

website: http://www.arb.ca.go v/ei/areasrc/areameth.htm

45 “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM 2 .5 , and Regional Haze” (EPA, April 2007, p. 35).

46 “Emission Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations” (EPA

- 454/R

- 05

- 001, August 2005, updated

Novembe r 2005, p. 17).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 3 5.3.3 On

- Road Motor Vehicles

The on

- road motor vehicles inventory category consists of trucks, automobiles, buses, and motorcycles. EMFAC (EMission FACtor) is California’s model for estimating

emissions from on

- road motor vehicle s ope rating in California. It is built on decades of vehicle testing and analysis. It uses travel activity data from metropolitan planning organizations, vehicle registration data from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), and data from the Smog Check program

. EMFAC has undergone many revisions over the years and the c urrent on

- road motor vehicles emission model

, EMFAC2011 47

, is

used in this Plan

.

Motor Vehicle Emissions Model, EMFAC2011

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has continued to update and improve its

EMFAC on

- road motor vehicle emissions model. CARB’s EMFAC2011 model was released in September 2011, and it replaces EMFAC2007. EMFAC2011 model improvements include:

 The latest information on vehicle populations and miles traveled in California.

 The impacts of recently adopted diesel regulations including the Truck and Bus
Rule and other diesel truck fleet rules; the Pavley Clean Car Standard, and the

Low Carbon Fuel Standard.

 The latest emissions inventory methods for heavy duty trucks and buses

.

EMFAC2011 software and detailed information on the vehicle emission model can be

found on the CARB website: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/modeling.htm

.

Vehicle Activity Data

On

- road motor vehicle emi ssion estimates were developed using the latest available transportation data and California’s EMFAC2011 model. The forecasted vehicle miles traveled (VMT) 48 and speed distributions used in this plan are based on transportation modeling for the Sacramento r egion’s Final 2013/2016 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (2013/2016 MTIP) 49 , which was adopted by Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) on August 16, 2012 , and approved by FHWA on December 14, 2012

. All projects included in the MTIP must be consistent with the Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy 2035 (MTP/SCS

47 CARB conducted off model runs to incorporate 2013/2016 MTIP travel forecasts that were not included in the released EMFAC2011 model. (Jon Taylor e

- mail providing 2014, 2017, 2018 on

- road emissions

based on October & November 2012 SACOG ac tivity, formally transmitted to SMAQMD on December 5, 2012).

48 SACOG travel data transmittal letter to CARB, and October 10, 2012 and November 30, 2012 e

- mails
to SMAQMD.

49 Final 2013/16 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP), Amendment #1 to the MTP/SCS 2035, and Air Quality Conformity Analysis. (August 16, 2012), FHWA approval December 14,

2012.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 4 2035) for the Sacramento Region. Final 2013/2016 MTIP is Amendment #1 to the

MTP/SCS2035. Vehicle activity data for Solano County portion of the non attainment area is based on Plan Bay Area Preferred Land Use Scenario/Transportation Investment Strategy (May 11, 2012) and was provided by San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) to SACOG 50

.

5.3.4 Other Mobile Sources

The emission inventory category for other mobile sources includes aircraft, trains, ships,

and off

- road vehicles and equipment used for construction, farming, commercial, industrial, and recreational activities. Like EMFAC, the off

- road emissions model

und erwent a significant update. The OFFROAD2007 model has been updated with
category

- specific methods and inventory models. The diesel equipment categories using category specific method include: In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment (Construction, Industrial, Ground Sup port and Oil Drilling); Cargo Handling Equipment; In

- Use Mobile Agricultural Equipment; Locomotives; Transport Refrigeration Units; Commercial Harbor Craft; Ocean Going Vessels; and Stationary Commercial Engines. The base

OFFROAD2007 emission model also in cludes emission estimates of equipment categories which have not yet been replaced with a category specific method (e.g., lawn and garden equipment, farm equipment) . In general, emissions are calculated by using estimated equipment population, engine size and load, usage activity, and emissions

factors.

Off

- road inventory improvements that have the greatest impact in the Sacramento region are described in a CARB report entitled “2010 Documentation (Appendix D)”. The most significant o ff

- road inventory impr ovements include:

 Updated estimates of equipment population

 New data from 2009 academic studies and from engine manufacturers

suggest ing load factors be reduced by 33%

 Decreases in construction activity and revised projections of growth due to the

recent e conomic recession

.

More detailed information on the latest off

- road motor vehicle emissions inventory

, including “ 2010 Documentation (Appendix D)”, can be found on the CARB website: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/categories.htm#offroad_motor_vehicles

.

5.3.5 Biogenic Sources

Biogenic emissions are emissions from natural sources, such as plants and trees. Using the BEIGIS model and region

- specific input databases on vegetation land cover, species composition, leaf mass distribution, temperature and light conditions, CARB estimates emission of biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOC) from vegetation for

50 MTC (Harold Brazil) Eastern Solano travel data transmittal l etter to SACOG, May, 2012, and October
16, 2012 e

- mail forwarded to SMAQMD.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 5 natural areas, agricultural crops, and urban landscapes. BVOC emissions vary with
temperature.

Table 5

- 1 shows the sum of biogenic emissions for the Sacramento nonattainment area for six episodic days used in ozone modeling and for an average episodic day. More

d etailed information on the emissions from natural sources can be found on the CARB website: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/naturalsources.htm

Table 5

- 1 Biogenic Emissions

Biogenic Category VOC a (tons per day) By Episodic Day Used in Ozone Modeling

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

7/28/2000 7/29/2000 7/30/2000 7/31/2000 8/1/2000 8/ 2 /2000 A vg D ay

Urban 55 60 64 75 72 72 66

Agricultural 33 36 38 45 44 43 40

Natural 383 409 418 494 465 481 442

Total 4 72 50 5 520 614 5 80 5 96 548

a Source: CARB, sum of Sacramento Nonattainment Area biogenic gridded emissions for episodic days, July 28

- August 2, 2000, used in ozone modeling.

5.4 Base Year Emissions Inventory

Anthropogenic Emissions Table by Source Category

The following tables (Tables 5

- 2 and 5

- 3) show the anthropogenic emissions inventory

of VOC and NO X by source categories for the Sacramento nonattainment area. The

Sacramento nonattainment area for the federal 8

- hour ozone standard includes all of Sacramento and Yolo Counties, easter n portion of Solano County, Placer and El

Dorado Counties excluding the Lake Tahoe Basin , and the southern portion of Sutter County 51

. The emissions inventory for ozone planning purposes represents emissions

for a summer seasonal average day in units of ton s per day 52

. Inventories

, except for 2014, 2017 and 2018 on

- road vehicles

, were generated using CEPAM: NORCAL 2012

51 Southern Sutter County emissions include: 1) all point sources located in the area, 2) 6% of the county total of area and aggregated point sources that are projected by population or construction/demolition activity, where, 6% is the percent of Sutter County population in the Sutter portion of the Sacramento nonattainment area, 3) 34% of the county total for emissions from agriculture and off

- road equipment, where, 34% is the percent of S utter County land area in the Sutter portion of the Sacramento nonattainment area, 4) 0% of the county total for emissions from oil and gas operations, landfills, and cogeneration categories.

52 Annual emissions are multiplied by a summer seasonal factor, TF = [sum of fractional monthly throughputs for the emission process during May through October] / 184 days in the summer ozone

season.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5-6 SIP Baseline Emission Projections 53 . On-road vehicle emissions for 2014, 2017 and 2018 in this plan were generated separately to reflect updated VMT activity forecasts in

the SACOG 2013/2016 MTIP 54

. The VOC emissions total is 147 tons per day in 2002.

The NO X emissions total is 165 tons per day in 2002.

53 CARB CEPAM website, http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/2012pm25sip/norcal2012pm25sip/ ; CEPAM:

NORCAL 2012 PM 2.5 SIP Baseline Emission Projections, Section a1

– Emission Projections With External Adjustments.

54 Final 2013/16 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP), Amendment #1 to the MTP/SCS 2035, and Air Quality Conformity Analysis. (August 16, 2012). FHWA approved on December
14, 2012.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 7 Table 5

- 2

Emissions of VOC a (tons per day)

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

2002 2014 2017 2018

TOTAL EMISSIONS 147 104 99 98

STATIONARY 22 26 27 27

AREA

- WIDE 32 30 30 31

ON

- ROAD MOTOR VEHICLES 52 21 17 15

OTHER MOBILE SOURCES 41 28 25 24

STATIONARY
Solvent/Coatings 7.6 8.7 9.0 9.2

Petroleum Production/Marketing 4.7 6.2 6.4 6.5

Industrial Process 3.5 4.0 4.4 4.5
Waste Composting 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4

Other 1.5 2.6 2.5 2.5

AREA

- WIDE

Consumer Products 14.8 12.6 13.0 13.2
Architectural Coatings 8.4 8.8 9.2 9.3

Pesticides 1.8 1.2 1.2 1.2

Livestock Waste 2.6 2.9 2.9 2.9
Ag Burn/Other Managed Burn 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Other 3.9 3.2 3.2 3.2

ON

- ROAD

Automobiles 22.9 6.4 4.4 3.8
Lt/Med Duty Trucks 19.9 8.8 7.3 6.8
Heavy Duty Gas Trucks 3.5 1.9 1.6 1.5
Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks 2.5 1.4 1.2 1.2
Motorcycles 2.4 2.0 2.0 2.0

Buses/Motor Homes 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.2

OTHER MOBILE

Recreational Boats 20.3 13.7 12.3 11.9
Equipment (Const/Ind/Farm) 7.0 3. 2 2. 7 2.5
Lawn & Garden Equipment 6.5 5.5 5.1 5.1
Fuel Storage and Handling 3.1 1.6 1.4 1.4

Off

- Road Recreational Vehicles 2.4 2.5 2.5 2.5

Trains 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.3

Aircraft 0.5 0.7 0.6 0.6

Ocean Vessels & Harbor Craft 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

a Source: ( CARB, 2012), includes 4 tpd of VOC ERCs and inventory adjustments identified in Appendix A5, Tables

A5

- 1 and A5

- 2

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 8 Table 5

- 3

Emissions of NO X a (tons per day)

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

2002 2014 2017 2018

TOTAL EMISSIONS 165 90 78 74

STATIONARY 12 13 12 12

AREA

- WIDE 3 3 3 3

ON

- ROAD MOTOR VEHICLES 99 46 37 34

OTHER MOBILE SOURCES 50 28 27 25

STATIONARY

Fuel Combustion 7.6 9.8 9.8 9.8
Ag Irrigation Pumps 3.8 2.1 1.1 1.0

Industrial Process 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9

AREA

- WIDE

Residential Fuel Combustion 2.5 2.7 2.6 2.5 Ag Burn/Other Managed Burn 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6

ON

- ROAD
Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks 48.4 25.7 20.1 18.5
Lt/Med Duty Trucks 24.9 9.1 7.3 6.6

Automobiles 18.3 4.7 3.5 3.2
Heavy Duty Gas Trucks 3.1 3.0 2.8 2.7

Buses/Motor Homes 4.1 2.5 2.3 2.1
Motorcycles 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.6

OTHER MOBILE
Construction & Mining Equip 11.6 3.5 4. 1 3. 6

Trains 12.1 7. 1 7. 1 7. 0
Farm Equipment 13.0 7.3 5.8 5.3

Marine Vessels 4.6 3.7 3.2 3.2

Commercial/Industrial Equipment 3.5 1.5 1. 5 1. 4

Aircraft 1.7 2.5 2.8 2.8
Oil Drilling/Workover 1.7 0. 6 0. 5 0.5

Other 1.7 1.1 1.0 1.0
Transportation Refrigeration Units 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5

a Source: ( CARB, 2012), includes 3 tpd of NO X ERCs and inventory adjustments identified in Appendix A5, Tables

A5

- 1 and A5

- 2

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 9 2002 Emission s Pie Charts

The following pie charts (Figures 5

- 1 to 5

- 2) show the 2002 VOC and NO X emission inventory categories as a percentage of the total inventory for the Sacramento nonattainment region. In 2002, the VOC inventory includes 35% on

- road mobile sources, 28% other mobile sources, 22% area

- wide sources, and 15% stationary

sources.

The NO X inventory is mainly due to mobile source combustion emissions. In 2002, the

NO X inventory includes 60% on

- road mobile sources, 31% other mobile sources, 2%

area

- wide sources, and 7% stationary sources.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 10 Figure 5

- 1

Figure 5

- 22013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 11 2002 Top 10 Emission Categories

Figures 5

- 3 and 5

- 4 contain bar charts that display the 2002 top 10 emission inventory categories for VOC and NO X , respectively. The largest source categories for VOC are automobiles, light

- duty trucks, recreational boats, consumer pro ducts, and architectural coatings. The largest source categories for NO X are heavy

- duty diesel trucks, off

- road equipment, light

- duty trucks, automobiles, farm equipment, and trains.

State and federal laws limit local air district authority to regulate ce rtain emissions sources, notably motor vehicles, off

- road engines, and consumer products. EPA retains almost exclusive regulatory authority for emissions from trains, aircraft, and ships. Local air districts do not have direct authority to regulate seven o f the top ten VOC source categories, and nine of the top ten NO X source categories. The significant categories that air districts have regulatory authority include solvents and coatings, architectural coatings, petroleum marketing, and stationary fuel comb ustion.

Figure 5

- 32013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5- 12 Figure 5-4

60

50

40**~** 0 Vi 3 0

c: 0 1- 20

10

0 4 8

,....--

I--

1-

1-

1- Top Ten Categories for NOx Planning Emissions

Sacramento Nonattainment Region


### 2002

19 1 8 18



### -


## - 1 3 12

### ~m 8 7



### - - - 

# D D 5 4 

### D D2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 13 Emissions Contribution by Agency Responsibility

Figures 5

- 5 and 5

- 6 show pie charts that identify the VOC and NO X e missions

c ontribution by p rimary a gency r esponsibility (District, CARB, or EPA)

. In terms of emissions, local air districts have direct regulatory authority for only 25% of VOC

emissions and 9% of NO X emissions in the Sacramento region. CARB has the most regulatory responsibility over emissions, 74% of VOC and 82% of NO X , due to their

authorit y over mobile source emissions.

Figure 5

- 5 VOC Emissions Contribution by Primary Agency Responsibility

Sacramento Nonattainment Region

Figure 5

- 6

NO X Emissions Contribution by Primary Agency Responsibility

Sacramento Nonattainment Region District

25%

EPA

1% CARB

74% 

### 2002 VOC

Total VOC = 1472013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 14 5.5 Emission Inventory Forecasts

The emission inventory forecasts take into account anticipated population and economic growth and emission benefits from the federal, state and local control measures. In

order to forecast emissions for various future milesto ne and attainment analysis years, growth parameters and the post

- 2002 emission reduction effects of control measures 55
received by CARB as of mid

- 2011 are applied to the 2005emissions inventory at the emission process level for stationary and area

- wide sources. The various growth parameters include forecasts for population, housing, employment, energy demand, motor vehicle travel, and other industrial a nd commercial outputs. O ff

- road motor

vehicle emissions are forecasted separately by off

- road category specific models using growth rates that were based on category

- specific economic indicators such as employment, expenditures and fuel use. Future on

- road emissions are determined by EMFAC2011 model using VMT forecasts in SACOG’s 2013/2016 MTIP 56 and MTC’s Plan Bay Area Preferred Land Use Scenario/Transportation Investment Strategy (May 11, 2012) for Solano County portion of SFNA 57

. Figure 5

- 7 contains a grap h showing population and VMT growth 58 for the Sacramento region. Existing control strategies

continue to reduce future VOC and NO X emissions from stationary and area sources,

on

- road motor vehicles, and some other mobile source categories (such as off

- road equipment).

55 Recently adopted CARB measures that went into effect by J anuary 2012 and some adopted district control measures that went into effect by mid

- 2011 were manually adjusted into emission projections. These inventory adjustments are identified in Appendix A5, Tables A5

- 1 and A5

- 2.

56 Final 2013/16 Metropolitan Transpo rtation Improvement Program (MTIP), Amendment #1 to the MTP/SCS 2035, and Air Quality Conformity Analysis. (August 16, 2012), FHWA approval December 14,

2012.

57 Joint MTC Planning/ABAG Administrative Committees, Plan Bay Area Preferred Land Use and Transpo rtation Investment Strategy . Oakland, CA: Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission. [May 2012.]

58 Population:

1. Data source: CARB CEPAM growth table. 2. Except Solano

, CEPAM population growth rate is based on SACOG forecasts in the 2008 MTP adopted by SACOG Board of Directors 12/16/04. CEPAM population growth rate, which is used for stationary and area

– wide source forecasts is higher than the population growth rate in the

MTP/SCS 2035

. 3. Solano County population is from DOF projection released May 2012

. 4. El Dorado County and Placer County population data exclude the Tahoe Basin.

5 . Sacramento Nonattainment Area fraction for South Sutter is estimated at 6% of Sutter County.

VMT:

1. 2014, 2017, 2018 VMT activities are from SACOG travel data transmittal letter to CARB, and

October 10, 2012 and November 30, 2012 e

- mails to SMAQMD.

2. 2002 VMT is EMFAC2011 2002 default VMT.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 15 Figure 5

- 7 Population Growth and VMT Forecast

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Tables 5

- 2 and 5

- 3 include the anthropogenic emissions inventory forecasts of VOC

and NO X by source categories for the Sacramento nonattainment area. Emissions are given for milestone RFP years of 2014, and 2017, and for the attainment demonstration analysis year of 2018.

The following bar charts (Figures 5

- 8 and 5

- 9) show the VOC and NO X emission inventory forecasts for stationary sources, area

- wide sources, on

- road motor vehicles, and other mobile sources for the Sacramento nonattainment region. Bar charts are given for the 2002 base year and compared to the milestone RFP years of 2014, and 2017, and to the attainment demonstration analysis year of 2018. The VOC and NO X emission forecasts show significant declines in mobile source emissions, despite increasing population, vehicle activity, and economic development.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 16 Figure 5

- 8

Figure 5

- 92013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 17 5.6 Emission Reduction Credits Added to Emission Inventory Forecasts

Certain pollutant emission reductions due to equipment shutdown or voluntary control may be converted to emission reduction credits (ERCs) and registered with the air

districts. These ERCs may then be used as “offsets” to compensate for an increase in emissions from a new or modified major emission source regulated by the air districts. In the SMAQMD, ERCs may also be used as an alternative to strict compliance with specified rules. Thu s, if a permitted source cannot meet the applicable emission standard requirements, usually because it is technically infeasible or not cost effective, the source may lease or purchase ERCs to achieve the required reductions.

Since ERCs represent potentia l emissions, they need to be taken into account in the emission inventories. One method is to assume that the use of ERCs will already be included within the projected rate of stationary source growth in the emissions inventory. However, if the use of avai lable ERCs exceeds anticipated emissions growth, future emissions could be underestimated. Therefore, to ensure that the use of ERCs will not be inconsistent with the future reasonable further progress and attainment goals, the

amount of ERCs issued for re ductions that occurred prior to the 2002 base year are added to the emission inventory forecasts.

Emission Reduction Credits

For this attainment plan, the amounts of unused banked ERCs of emissions reductions that occurred prior to the 2002 baseline year for the Sacramento nonattainment area are 2.6 tons per day of VOC and 1.4 tons per day of NO X . The quantity of these ERCs is listed for each air district in Appendix A. The ERCs consist of emissions reduced from stationary sources and military aircraft. I ncluding these ERCs here simply maintains the validity of previously banked ERCs and other reductions.

Future Bankable Rice Burning Emission Reduction Credits

California legislation 59 in 1991 (known as the Connelly bill) required rice farmers to phase dow n rice field burning on an annual basis, beginning in 1992. A burn cap of 125,000 acres in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin was established, and growers with 400 acres or less were granted the option to burn their entire acreage once every four years. Since the rice burning reductions were mandated by state law, they would ordinarily not be “surplus” and eligible for banking. However, the Connelly bill included a special provision declaring that the reductions qualified for banking if they met the State

and local banking rules

.

Some rice burning reductions have been banked as ERCs. Other pre

- 2002 reductions in rice burning may be banked in the future under an ERC rule 60 currently in

59 Connelly

- Areias

- Chandler Rice Straw Burning Reduction Act of 1991, section 41865 of California Health and Safety Code.

60 This rice burning ERC rule must be approved by EPA into the SIP for the rice ERCs to be used for compliance with federal air quality requirements.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 18 development. The total amounts of potential bankable rice burning ERCs for th e Sacramento nonattainment area are estimated at 0.9 ton per day of VOC and 1.0 ton per day of NO X . The potential future bankable rice burning ERCs are listed for each air district in Appendix A

.

Summary of Emission Reduction Credits

ERCs issued for redu ctions that occurred prior to the 2002 base year and potential future bankable rice burning ERCs are summarized for the Sacramento nonattainment

area , rounded up to 4 tpd VOC and 3 tpd NO X ERCs, and added to the VOC and NO X emission inventory forecasts in Tables 5

- 4 and 5

- 5. The ERCs are not included in the 2002 base year inventory.

5.7 Emissions Inventory Documentation

More detailed documentation of the VOC and NO X emissions inventory is provided in Appendix A. This appendix contains the estimated 2002, 2014, 2017, and 2018 emission inventories for each county and air basin combination in the Sacramento nonattainment area. A listing of the VOC and NO X emission reduction credits by

individual air district is also included.

Emi ssion inventories are constantly being updated to incorporate new and better information and methodologies. Many improvements, especially in the mobile source categories, and the addition of previously un

- inventoried emission sources, have been

made to the inventory. Detailed information on emission methodologies, changes, and forecasts can be found on CARB websites: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/ei.htm and http:/www.arb.ca.gov/msei/msei.htm

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Emissions Inventory

Page 5

- 19 Table 5

- 4

VOC Emission Reduction Credits Added to the Emission Inventory Forecasts

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Emissions in tons/day 2002 2014 2017 2018

Emission Reduction Credits

--- 2.6 2.6 2.6

Future Bankable Rice Burning

Emission Reduction Credits --- 0.9 0.9 0.9

Total ERCs (rounded up)

--- 4 4 4

Emission Inventory Forecasts 61 147 100 95 94

Total 147 104 99 98

Table 5

- 5

NO X Emission Reduction Credits Added to the Emission Inventory Forecasts

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Emissions in tons/day 2002 2014 2017 2018

Emission Reduction Credits

--- 1.4 1.4 1.4

Future Bankable Rice Burning

Emission Reduction Credits --- 1.0 1.0 1.0

Total ERCs (rounded up)

--- 3 3 3

Emission Inventory Forecasts 62 165 87 75 71

Total 165 90 78 74

61 VOC Emissions summaries in Tab le 5

- 2 include ERCs. The emission inventory forecasts in Table 5

- 4 are calculated by subtracting 4 tpd of VOC ERCs from total emission in Table 5

- 2.

62 NO X Emissions summaries in Table 5

- 3 include ERCs. The emission inventory forecasts in Table 5

- 5

are calc ulated by subtracting 3 tpd of NO X ERCs from total emission in Table 5

- 3.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Air Quality Modeling Analysis

Page 6

- 1 6 AIR QUALITY MODELING ANALYSIS

6.1 Introduction to Air Quality Modeling

Ozone is a secondary pollutant produced by complex chemical reactions in the air involving ozone precursor pollutants of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen

oxides ( NO X ) in the presence of sunlight. Ozone formation is also affected by meteorological c haracteristics (e.g., temperature, wind, vertical mixing, and humidity)

and land surface features (e.g.

, land use, surface roughness, albedo, and terrain ).

Due to the large number of atmospheric interactions , varying physical factors, and vast spatial bou ndaries pertaining to ozone formation , the evaluat i on of air quality problems

t o de velop adequate emission reduction strategies is inherently difficult and resource

intensive

. Therefore, s tate

- of

- the

- science c omputer modeling is used to simulate the formation of ozone through mathematical descriptions of atmospheric processes and photo chemical reactions of pollutants over large regional air basins.

This chapter describes the updated a ir quality modeling and analysis performed by the

California Air Re sources Board (CARB) with the help and cooperation of the various air

districts

, contracted agencies and consultants

. The methodology and application of the modeling results for determining the emission reduction targets needed for attainm ent of

the 1997 8

- hour ozone standard in the Sacramento region are provid ed. More detailed documentation of the air quality modeling and analysis of results are included in Appendix B

– Photochemical Modeling.

6.2 Air Quality Modeling Methodology and Applications

T o evaluate attainment of the 8

- hour ozone standard, it is necessary to understand existing high ozone episodes and then predict future ozone concentrations under changing emission scenarios. Extensive a ir monitoring and emissions data are first

collected or estimate d for actual high ozone episodes to provide information for developing base case model simulations. An air quality model ing episode can then be run for different future year emissions scenarios to study how reducing VOC and NO X emissions will decrease ozone concentrations. Emission reduction level s for meeting

the ambient ozone standard can be quantified for a specified attainment year

.

Ozone a ir quality model ing has other uses besides estimating attainment of the ambient

standard. It can also be used to assess the magnitude and impact of pollutants being transported between air basins. Another useful application could be to determine potential unmonitored high ozone areas where future monitoring sites may be installed.

6.3 Air Quality Modeling Analysis Re quirements

Under s ection 182(c)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act

, the attainment demonstration for

“ serious and higher ” nonattainment areas must be based on photochemical grid modeling or any other EPA

- approved analytical method determined to be at least as2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Air Quality Modeling Analysis

Page 6

- 2 effective. In addition, EPA provides recommended guidance 63 on how to apply air quality models to generate results for prepar ing 8

- hour ozone attainment

demonstrations

. The guidance document lists the following nine steps for applying an air quality model:

1. Develop a conceptual description of the problem to be addressed.

2. Develop a modeling/analysis protocol.

3. Select an appropriate model to support the demonstration.

4. Select appropriate meteorological episode time periods to model.

5. Choose an appropriate area to model with appropriate horizontal/vertical resolution and establish suitable initial and boundary conditions.

6. Generate meteorological inputs to the air quality model.

7. Generate emissions inputs to the air quality model.

8. Evaluate the performance of the air quality model and perform diagnostic tests to improve the model, as necessary.

9. Perform future year modeling (including additional control strategies, if necessary) and apply the attainment test.

EPA’s modeling guidance document 64 describes a modeled attain ment test as an exercise in which an air quality model is used to simulate current and future air quality for selected high ozone episodes

. The estimat ed reduction in modeled future ozone is used in a relative rather than absolute sense to predict attainme nt. T he simulated
percent reduction in future ozone at each nonattainment monitor is applied to the

monitor’s actual observed average baseline ozone design value. If the calculated future

ozone design value concentrations are  84 ppb, then th e attainment test is satisfied for

the monitors.

T he modeled attainment test should be applied at monitors within the nonattainment

area

. Because the State is responsible for analyzing downwind and upwind influences

from or on other areas outside the nonattainment area

, the recommended modeled attainment test predicts whether or not all estimated future design values will achieve
the ozone NAAQS under modeled meteorological conditions

.

6.4 Central California Ozone Study

The Centr al California Ozone Study (CCOS) consist ed of a field program, data analysis, emission inventory development, and modeling

. Sponsors and p artici pants in CCOS include federal, state, and local governmental agencies, university researchers, private

consultin g firms, industry associations, and environmental groups. The main goal s of

the CCOS activities and analyses were to enable CARB and central California air

districts to further evaluate VOC and NO X control strategies , to determine the impacts of pollutant transport between air basins, and to provide the technical basis for preparing

63 “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM 2.5 , and Regional Haze” (EPA, April 2007, p. 121

- 125).

64 Ibid., p.1 5 and 40

- 42.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Air Quality Modeling Analysis

Page 6

- 3 the attainment demonstration plans for the federal 8

- hour ozone State Implementation

Plan

.

The CCOS field program was conducted during the summer of 20 00 and included massive air quality and meteorological data collection over all of central California and

most of northern California. Supplemental continuous s urface and upper air monitoring equipment and more comprehensively instrumented research station s were specifically

installed and operated to complement the existing routine air monitoring network s

. Also, during forecasted high ozone episode days, additional s ophisticate d air measurements were taken using specially

- equipped aircraft, speciated VOC surface sampl ers, and

radiosonde upper air meteorological and ozone telemetry monitor s

.

6.5 Description of Air Quality Model and Modeling Inputs

The photochemical grid model ing used for the 8

- hour ozone attainment analysis is developed with the CAMx 65 air quality model. The CAMx model simulates a three

dimensional atmosphere over multiple days

, and is used to investigate air pollution at the spatial resolution of 4 km grid squares for the entire CCOS area (see modeling domain in Figure 6

- 1)

. It is comp utationally efficient, publicly available, and acceptable

to EPA for SIP modeling

. The CAMx model is run using the SAPRC

- 99 chemical

mechanism 66

. The model calculates air quality concentrations averaged for each hour at

each 4 km grid square location at the surface and for each vertical layer above

.

Air quality models require time varying meteorological fields including winds, temperature, and water vapor content to calculate the transport and transformations of air pollutants. Meteorological inputs to the SIP air quality model ing project were develop ed by NOAA and CARB using the widely employ ed M esoscale M odel version 5 (MM5)

. The MM5 model is a prognostic meteorological model which is driven mainly by

the principles of physic s (e.g., laws of thermodynamics and conservation of mass ) instead of being strongly influenced by observed meteorological data. However, the

MM5 model run is improved by using four dimensional data analysis (FDDA), which does allow some wind calculations to be adjusted by actual monitor ing data.

The MM5 model is able to simulate mesoscale and regional

- scale atmospheric circulation using its multiple

- nest capability that allows sub

- domains to be examined at finer spatial resolutions. The MM5 model was run using multiple sub

- domains with resolutions of 36 km, 12km, and 4 km grid squares

. Also, the vertical structure of the meteorological modeling incorporated a 30

- 50 layer configuration

.

Air quality models also require inputs for time varying and spatially gridded emissions

estimates. The modeling emissions files consist of hourly speciated emissions for

elevated point, area, motor vehicle, and biogenic sources for each grid cell

, which are provided by various methods

. Point and area source emissions are processed into

65 CAMx is C omprehensive A ir Quality M odel with e x tension, version 4.03a (as modified by CARB).

66 Chemical mechanism originally developed by the Statewide Air Pollution Research Center (SAPRC) of the University of California at Riverside.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Air Quality Modeling Analysis

Page 6

- 4 modeling inputs usin g the CARB

- developed Emissions Modeling System (EMS

- 95 )

. On

road motor vehicle emissions are gridded using Caltrans’ D irect T ravel I mpact M odel (DTIM). Emissions from biogenic sources are generated for modeling by CARB’s

BEIGIS program

.

Other air quality model inputs include estimates of speciated concentrations for initial and boundary conditions. Initial pollutant concentrations represent ambient air quality inside the modeling domain at the time the modeling episode begins. Boundary

co nditions represent pollutant concentrations entering the modeling domain from the

vertical top and horizontal side border s.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Air Quality Modeling Analysis

Page 6

- 5 Figure 6

- 1 Photochemical Modeling Domain Central California Ozone Study

185x185 Grid Cells at 4x4

- km Horizontal Resolution

6.6 Sel ection and Characterization of Modeling Episodes

Two high ozone episodes were selected for air quality modeling and analysis in this plan

. One of the episodes occurred during the summer 2000 field data collection of the Central California Ozone Study. The summer 2000 ozone modeling episode includes 5 days from July 29 to August 2. The start of this episode was characterized by a typical high pressure system centered over the Four Corners area (Utah, Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico). The relatively large high pressure ridge slowly migrated west and became centered near Reno, Nevada by July 31, creating meteorological conditions conducive to high ozone formation in Central California.

The other episode took place in July 1999 under more routine air monitoring data

collection. The July 1999 ozone modeling episode includes 5 days from July 9 to 13. This episode is characterized by a much broader high pressure system than the summer 2000 episode. The high pressure system encompassed the Four Corners are a, the Pacific Northwest region, and the Eastern Pacific Ocean, causing meteorological conditions conducive to high ozone formation in Central and Northern California.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Air Quality Modeling Analysis

Page 6

- 6 Additional details of the meteorological and air quality characterization of the two

mo deling episodes are provided in Appendix B

– Photochemical Modeling.

6.7 Base Case Model Performance Evaluation

After preparing the air quality modeling input file s (e.g., meteorological fields, gridded emissions, initial and boundary conditions), the CAMx a ir quality model was run for the two different high ozone episodes

. The July 2 9

- August 2, 2000 and July 9

- 1 3 , 1999 episodes also included two s pin

- up days prior to the beginning of each episode

. Due to varying uncertainties and conditions in running air qu ality models, the model performance wa s evaluated for each base case scenario

.

EPA modeling guidance 67 recommends the operational evaluation should compare hourly ozone observations and predictions as well as 8

- hour daily maxim um observations and predictio ns over the episode days (excluding spin

- up days). The ozone data should be evaluated for all data pairs in which the observed concentrations are above 60 ppb, and for all data pairs without any minimum threshold. At a minimum,

statistical calculations should be performed for: 1) mean normalized bias (MNB), 2) mean normalized gross error (MNGE), and 3) average peak prediction bias and error. The summary statistics should be calculated for individual days averaged over all sites

and for individual sites a veraged over all days, and then aggregated into meaningful subregions or subperiods.

EPA modeling guidance does not assign an acceptance criteria level that distinguishes between adequate and inadequate model performance. Instead, EPA recommends that

a qu alitative weight

- of

- evidence approach consisting of a variety of performance tests be used to determine whether a particular modeling application is valid for assessing

the future attainment status of an area.

Based on the statistical compariso ns between observed and predicted ozone data, the base case modeling scenarios were determined to be performing adequately overall in the Sacramento region

. V arious summary base case model performance statistic s tables , a dditional base case model performance evaluati ons

, and modeling

documentation are provided in Appendix B

– Photochemical Modeling.

6.8 Baseline and F uture Year Model Runs for Each Episode

After the photochemical modeling base case episodes were shown to perform adequately, the modeling was run with the summer planning inventory for a 2002 baseline year and a 2018 future year with existing control strategies for assessing
attainment of the ozone NAAQS. The EPA 8

- hour ozone implementation rule (40 CFR 51.908) states that emission reductions needed for attainment must be implemented by

67 “Gu idance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM 2.5 , and Regional Haze” (EPA, April 2007, p. 190

- 198).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Air Quality Modeling Analysis

Page 6

- 7 the beginning of the ozone season immediately preceding the area’s attainment

deadline date. Since the ozone season typica lly occurs May through October, t he forecast model year for attainment demonstration analysis needs to represent the year preceding the June 15 , 2019 attainment deadline date for a “severe” nonattainment

classification.

6.9 Emission Reduction Credits Added to Future Year Model Runs

Emission reduction credits (ERCs) for the Sacramento region were discussed and quantified in Section 5. 6

. Since ERCs are potential future emissions, it is not currently known as to what emission sources they will be applied to and where the emission sources will be specifically located. Existing inventories for stationary emissions are gridded for modeling by using the point source facility locations. Estimated area

- wide emissions are gridded for modeling using related spatial surro gate parameters

, such as population and land use types.

Due to the uncertainty of the type and location of future sources using ERCs, the

baseline VOC and NO X ERCs (including rice burning) for the Sacramento nonattainment area were spatially d istributed to the future year gridded modeling inventory by increasing the existing stationary and area

- wide emissions in Sacramento

and Yolo Counties. This across

- the

- board percentage increase was only applied to Sacramento and Yolo Counties, because othe r counties in the Sacramento nonattainment area partially extend outside the nonattainment area.

6.10 Forecasted Ozone Design Values

The results from baseline and future year modeling runs are applied to each ozone nonattainment monitor to determine the predicted future ozone design value with the

estimated future emissions scenario

. The method for calculating the predicted future ozone design values is described by the following equation 68 :

DV future = RRF x ( DV base - BG) + BG where,

DV future = the estim ated future design value concentration at the monitor used to

predict attainment of the 8

- hour ozone NAAQS (  84 ppb). [ T runcated to whole ppb]

RRF = the relative reduction factor which is the ratio of the future year (FY) modeled

average 8

- hour daily maximum ozone (rounded to tenths of a ppb) to the base year (BY) modeled average 8

- hour daily maximum ozone (rounded to tenths of a ppb) for the monitor. [ R ounded to three significant figures to right of decimal]

68 “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Qua lity Goals for Ozone, PM 2.5 , and Regional Haze” (EPA, April 2007, p. 20), and modified by ARB with consideration of background ozone.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Air Quality Modeling Analysis

Page 6

- 8 BG = background o zone which is assumed at 40 ppb.

DV base = the actual observed average base year design value concentration (2002

-

2004) at the monitor for 8

- hour ozone. [Rounded to tenths of a ppb]

A background ozone concentration is considered in the equations for calculating future ozone design value and relative reduction factor, because it is assumed that this represents the portion of a site’s ozone problem that cannot be mitigated by anthropogenic emission controls.

The results for the forecasted ozone design values for the future year 2018 a re shown

in Table 6

- 1

. Th is future year correspond s to the attainment demonstration analysis year for a severe nonattainment classification. Any monitors with predicted future ozone design values gre ater than 84 ppb (in bold ) are not expected to attain the 8

- hour ozone
NAAQS and indicate the need for additional VOC and/or NO X emission reductions in the Sacramento region

.

Based on the photochemical modeling results, attainment was predicted at all ozo ne monitors in 2018, except for two sites (Cool and Folsom) located in the eastern part of

the Sacramento nonattainment area. Therefore, additional modeling runs were

conducted to estimate the emission reductions needed to demonstrate attainment of the

8

- h our ozone NAAQS for the 2018 forecast year.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Air Quality Modeling Analysis

Page 6

- 9 Table 6

- 1

Forecasted 8

- Hour Ozone Design Values

2018 Attainment Analysis Year for Severe Classification

Sacramento Nonattainment Area [A]
Baseline Design

Value a (ppb) [B]

Modeled
Baseline

Ozone (ppb) [C]

Modeled

Future

Ozone (ppb) [D]

Relative

Reduction

Factor b [E]

Future Design

Value c (ppb)

Auburn (Placer Co.) 98.3 104.8 88.3 0. 745 83

Colfax (Placer Co.) 90.0 91.5 75.5 0.6 89 74

Cool (El Dorado Co.) 105.0 98. 5 8 3.5 0. 744 8 8

Folsom (Sac. Co.) 99.0 107. 9 92.0 0.7 66 8 5

North Highlands (Sac. Co.) 89.3 101. 4 8 9.8 0. 811 7 9

Placerville (El Dorado Co.) 94.3 99.4 8 4.0 0. 741 80

Roseville (Placer Co.) 89.7 103. 4 8 9.1 0.7 7 5 7 8

Sac

- Del Paso Manor (Sac. Co.) 95.7 106. 6 93.6 0. 805 8 4

Sloughhouse (Sac. Co.) 94.7 10 3.0 91.0 0. 810 8 4

Adjacent Downwind Areas

Grass Valley (Nevada Co.) 97.7 95.0 81.0 0.745 83

a Based on average of ozone design values for 2002, 2 003 and 2004 , except Colfax had insufficient data for 2002

. b RRF calculation = (C

– 40) / (B

– 40)

c Future design value calculation = RRF x (A

– 40) + 40 [truncated to whole ppb]

The forecasted 8

- hour ozone design values indicate that all of the high ozone monitoring sites in

the Sacramento nonattainment area , except for Cool and Folsom

, are predicted to attain the

federal 8

- hour ozone standard (84ppb) by 20 18 with out new control strategies

. The Cool and

Folsom monitoring site s are forecasted to remain above the standard and will need additional

emission reductions to attain.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Air Quality Modeling Analysis

Page 6

- 10 6.11 Analysis of VOC and NO X Emission Reduction Strategies

The attainment plan must show that emissions in the Sacramento nonattainment area will be reduced sufficiently to meet the federal 8

- hour ozone air quality standard. The plan must identify emission reduction levels that provi de for attainment of the standard, and show how the targets will be reached. Emission reduction targets are defined for both ozone precursor pollutants, VOC and NO X

.

Ozone /Emission Reduction Graphs

Systematic r educ tions in anthropogenic VOC and/or NO X emissions were simulated to

characterize the change in the resulting ozone concentrations. For each individual modeling run, domain

- wide emissions for NO X - only, VOC

- only, or both VOC and NO X are scaled by factors ranging from 100% to 8 0% in increments of 5 %. As a result,

forecasted o zone concentration s were determined for 25 different combinations of varying VOC and/or NO X emission reductions. For example, one modeling run scaled VOC emissions by 95 % and NO X emissions by 85 % , and then another run scaled VOC emissions by 85 % and NO X emissions by 95 %.

The forecasted ozone concentration data (in ppb) associated with each of the 25 emission reduction modeling scenarios were used to ratio the future ozone design values, which were plotted on a graph for an individual mon itoring site

. These diagrams

show the pattern of ozone responses to varying combinations in VOC and NO X emission reductions. This exercise wa s performed for the 2018 attainment demonstration year, and evaluated at each of the nonattainment ai r monitoring sites.

The graph for the peak ozone design value site in the Sacramento region will generally

determine the extent of additional emission reductions needed for attainment. Also, t he particular VOC and NO X emission reductions associated with t he region’s new control

measures can be applied to the peak site’s diagram to estimate a future ozone design

value concentration. The individual ozone/emission reduction graphs for the nonattainment ozone sites in the Sacramento region are shown in Appendi x B

– Photochemical Modeling.

Air Quality Modeling Analysis Conclusions

Some general conclusions can be drawn based on the 2018 modeling results of

forecasted emissions and the additional across

- the

- board percent emission reduction

scenarios. The air qua lity modeling analysis shows that attainment can be reached by

2018 with different combinations of VOC and NO X control. The modeling results indicate

that both VOC and NO X reductions provide ozone benefits in the Sacramento region,

but on a ton for ton basis NO X reductions provide greater ozone benefits than VOC

reductions. More specific conclusions regarding attainment targets for the Sacramento region’s peak ozone monitor ing site at Cool are provided in Chapter 8

– Attainment

Demonstration

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Air Quality Modeling Analysis

Page 6

- 11 6.12 Air Quality Modeling Uncertainties

EPA’s modeling guidance document 69 explains that

, “Uncertainty is the notion that model estimates will not perfectly predict observed air quality at any given location, neither at the present time nor in the future. ” Uncertainty arises for a variety of reasons

. F or example, limitations in the model’s for mulation may be due to an incomplete representation in the model of atmospheric phys i cal and c hemical processes

. Modeling

inaccuracies can also result from meteorological , emissions, and other input data base limitations, and uncertainty in forecasting fut ure levels of emissions and changing land

use

.

O ther factor s adding to air quality modeling uncertainties include: 1) how well the meteorological episodes simulated in the modeling represent the severity of f uture meteorological conditions conducive to high ozone formation , 2) how well the methodology for forecasting ozone design values (by applying the relative reduction modeling results to baseline ozone design value concentrations ) corresponds to actual future monitored ozone design values , and 3) how well domain

- wide ( especially Bay Area) emission reductions in the Sacramento attainment analysis are achieved, especially during those Sacramento ozone episodes when Bay Area transport is significant

.

The impact of future climate change is not included i n the photochemical modeling assumptions. In the view of CARB modeling experts, the temperature changes during

the timeframe of this SIP will likely be small enough to have very little impact on the

model results. Effects of climate change would be specula tive in the short term

, and impacts on the region’s ability to attain will be tracked through the RFP process. However, long term effects of climate change on future ozone concentrations are being

evaluated. CARB staff reported 70 that projected ozone respon se to climate change in 2050 is estimated to cause a four percent increase in ozone relative to current meteorological conditions in the Sacramento region

.

In order to mitigate potential air quality modeling uncertainties, the modeling guidance suggests using corroborative methods and analyses to support the air quality modeling results and attainment control strategy. This supplemental weight

- of

- evidence approach

is discussed in Chapter 1 0

.

69 “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM 2.5 , and Regional Haze” (EPA, April 2007, p. 3)

. 70 Report to the Board on Impacts of Climate Change on California: Scenarios Assessment Findings of the Climate Action Team, November 20, 2008. Staff presentation slide 15, which references Steiner et al.,

“Influ ence of future climate and emissions on regional air quality in California”, JGR (2006).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 1 7 PROPOSED CONTROL MEASURES

7.1 Introduction to Control Measures

The air quality modeling analysis performed by the California Air Resources Board (described in Chapter 6 ) show s that the Sacramento region will not attain the 1997

federal 8

- hour ozone standards by the mandated attainment deadline 71 unless

additional emission reductions are achieved. In addition, all reasonably available control measures are required. The proposed control strategy in this chapter will describe

measures and emission reductions to meet these requirements

. This section use s the current projected inventory data and projected control measure reductions based on that current inventory. In addition, a contingency control measure strategy is defined.

More detailed information on the regional and local proposed new control measures is provided in Appendix C

– Proposed Control Measures (separate document) and Appendix D

– Transportation Control Measures

.

The Sacramento SIP control strategy relies on the following components:

1. Reductions from existing control measures and adopted rules,

2. Reductions from new state and federal regulations, and

3. Reductions from defined new SIP local and regional measures.

The proposed SIP emissions control strategy includes redu ctions of both VOC and NO X air pollutants. A single NO X pollutant strategy is not appropriate because, even though

VOC measures are not as effective as NO X , they still provide needed reductions.

Moreover

, many existing statewide and local control programs will inherently achieve reductions from both ozone precursors.

7.2 Reductions from E xisting C ontrols

Air districts have been regulating stationary air pollution sources since the 1970’s.

E xisting rules and their emission benefits are helping to make progress toward achieving air attainment goals

. The benefits from existing rules are reflected in the 2018 forecast inventory.

A coarse analysis was conducted to illustrate benefits from existing air district rules. Figures 7

- 1 and 7

- 2 il lustrate the amount of 2008 emission reduction benefits that are

attributable to district stationary and area

- wide source VOC and NO X rules since 1975. Existing district rules result ed in reductions of roughly 60 tons per day of VOC and 20 tons per day of NO X emissions. The most beneficial VOC rules are those affecting: 1) gasoline dispensing facilities and bulk terminals, and 2) solvent cleaning, degreasing, and painting operations

. NO X rules regulating gas turbines and internal combustion engines have ach ieved the most NO X emission reduction s f or stationary and area

- wide

sources.

71 “Final Rule to Implement the 8

- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard

– Phase 1” (Federal Register, April 30, 2004, p. 23951

- 24000).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 2 Figure 7

- 1

Figure 7

- 22013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 3 7.3 Reductions from New State and Federal Control Measures

Since 2007, ARB has adopted a number of statewide measures that will further reduce

ozone precursor emissions in the Sacramento Metropolitan 8

- Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area. Listed below are ARB measures adopted since 2007 and sent to

U.S. EPA as revisions to the SIP or as requests for waivers (Clean Air Act section 209(b)) or for authorization s (Clean Air Act section 209(e)(2)).

Table 7

- 1 State Measures Adopted Since 2007

Measure Date of Adoption Date Sent to U.S. EPA

Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline June 14, 2007 Feb. 3, 2009 Vapor Recovery for Above

- Ground

Storage Tanks June 21, 2007 June 12, 2008

Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft Nov. 15, 2007 Apr.12, 2010 Ship Auxiliary Engine Cold Ironing and

Clean Technology Dec. 6, 2007 Aug. 2, 2010

Consumer Products Program

-- 2008 amendment

-- 2009 amendmen t June 26, 2008 Sept. 24, 2009 Feb. 16, 2010 Jan. 28, 2011 Additional Evaporative Emission

Standards Sept. 25, 2008 May 2, 2011

Portable Outboard Marine Tanks Sept. 25, 2008 May 2, 2011 Smog Check Improvements Aug. 31, 2009 Oct. 28, 2009

Pesticides Element Oct. 12, 2009 Aug. 2, 2011

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks Dec. 16, 2010 Sept. 21, 2011

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment Dec. 17, 2010 Sept. 21, 2011

The control strategy in the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone attainment and
Reasonable Further Progress Plan (Plan) relies on reductions of NO X and VOC to meet

the 8

- hour ozone standards. Because mobile sources are the largest contributors to

ozone

- forming emissions, reducing emissions from passenger vehicles, trucks, and a
variety of off

- road engines is key to attaining the ozone standards. In developing the

Sacramento Area SIP for mee ting the 8

- hour standard by 2018 , the biggest challenge
was cleaning up the exi sting fleets of diesel engines.

Over the past five years, ARB adopted a number of regulations aimed at reducing
emissions of oxides of nitrogen from existing, “in

- use” diesel sources like heavy

- duty

diesel trucks, and off

- road sources like large con struction equipment. Phased
implementation of these regulations will produce increasing emission reduction benefits
over time, as the regulated fleets are retrofitted, and as older and dirtier portions of the
fleets are replaced with newer and cleaner models at an accelerated pace. ARB’s
longstanding programs to reduce emissions from passenger vehicles, including the
smog check program, also provide continuing benefits needed for attainment of the

ozone standard.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 4 Table 7

- 2 shows the impact of adopted st ate measures on projected 2018 emissions in
the Sacramento Metropolitan 8

- Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area. The region also
compared this Plan to the 2009 Plan to ensure that the revisions do not weaken the
control measures and strategies. That analysis is su mmarized in Table 7

- 2. As the table
illustrates, the 2009 SIP committed to control measures that have since been adopted
and incorporated into the emissions inventory, and the 20 18 SIP baseline inventory

minus the expected emissions reductions equals the “ Remaining Emissions” after 2009
SIP implementation. The sum of the 2009 SIP “Remaining Emissions” is higher than the
“Current Estimate” demonstrating that this 2013 SIP will achieve greater emissions

reduction s than the 2009 SIP. This section describes the adopted measures and
programs that are providing these reductions.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 5 Table 7

- 2 : Analysis of ARB's Implemented Regulations using Calendar Year 2018 NO X Summer Season Emissions (tpd)

Statewide SIP Measures 2009 SIP Summary Current

Estimate

2018

Baseline Expected

Reductions Remaining

Emissions Remaining

Emissions

Passenger Vehicles 22.2 1.7 20.5 16.7

Smog Check Improvements (BAR)

22.20 1.4

20.5 16.7 Expanded Vehicle Retirement 0.3

Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program 0.0

Heavy

- Duty Trucks 22.4 9.5 12.9 12.6

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks 22.4 9.5 12.9 12.6

Goods Movement Sources 10.3 2.1 8.2 7.0

Accelerated Intro. Of Cleaner Line

- Haul Locomotives 9.4 1.9 7.5 6.2

Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 0.9 0.2 0.7 0.9

Off

- Road Equipment 13.4 1.9 11.5 7. 0

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment (over 25hp) 13.4 1.9 11.5 7. 0

Other Off

- road Sources 6.1 0.3 5.8 2.4

New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 5.9 0.3 5.6 2.3

Expanded Off

- Road Rec. Vehicle Emission Standards 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1

Additional Evaporative Emission Standards

-- -- -- --

Areawide Sources 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Consumer Products Program 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

2018 NO X Totals

State SIP Measure Sources1 74 16 59 46

All Other State/Federal Source Categories 9

-- 9 13

District Source Categories2 17 2 15 1 2

Total Inventory 101 18 83 7 1

Emission Reduction Credits 3 3

-- 3 3 3 3

Motor Vehicle Emission Budget Safety Margin

-- -- -- 3

Total Inventory for Modeling/RFP 4 10 4 18 86 7 72013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 6 Table 7

- 2 (continued) : Analysis of ARB's Implemented Regulations using Calendar Year

2018 VOC Summer Season Emissions (tpd)

Statewide SIP Measures 2009 SIP Summary Current

Estimate

2018

Baseline Expected

Reductions Remaining

Emissions Remaining

Emissions

Passenger Vehicles 24. 9 2.6 22. 3 16.3

Smog Check Improvements (BAR)

24. 9 1.3

22. 3 16.3 Expanded Vehicle Retirement 0.2

Modifications to Reformulated Gasoline Program 1.1

Heavy

- Duty Trucks 1.9 0.8 1.1 0.8

Cleaner In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks 1.9 0.8 1.1 0.8

Goods Movement Sources 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.4

Accelerated Intro. Of Cleaner Line

- Haul Locomotives 0.6 0.1 0.5 0.3

Clean Up Existing Harbor Craft 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1

Off

- Road Equipment 7.5 0.4 7.1 6. 5

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment (over 25hp) 7.5 0.4 7.1 6. 5

Other Off

- road Sources 22.8 6.1 1 6.7 14.4

New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats 3.0

Expanded Off

- Road Rec. Vehicle Emission Standards 22.8 2.7 16.7 14.4

Additional Evaporative Emission Standards 0.4

--

Areawide Sources 15.1 1.9 13.2 13.2

Consumer Products Program 15.1 1.9 13.2 13.2

2018 VOC Totals

State SIP Measure Sources1 73 12 61 52

All Other State/Federal Source Categories 5

-- 5 3

District Source Categories2 4 0 3 3 6 39

Total Inventory 117 15 102 94

Emission Reduction Credits 4 3

-- 4 3 4 3

Motor Vehicle Emission Budget Safety Margin

-- -- -- 1

Total Inventory for Modeling/RFP 4 121 15 106 9 9

1 State SIP Measure Sources un

- truncated. 2013 Plan uses truncated numbers.

2 For the purposes of this table, ERCs are shown separately.

3 ERCs for the 2009 SIP Commitment listed in the 2013 Update, Tables 5

- 4 and 5

- 5.

4 The inventory used for this update also serves as a model inventory. For modeling purposes, ERCs were distributed across Stationary and Area Source Categories.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 7 Clean New and In

- Use Heavy

- Duty Trucks

Increasingly stringent standards for new t rucks, as shown in the Table 7

- 2 A , are a central element of ARB’s emission reduction strategy. New heavy

- duty trucks sold since
2010 emit 98 percent less NO X and PM 2.5 than new trucks sold in 1986.

Table 7

- 2 A : Phase

- in of truck engine standards

Model Year Applicable Standard g/bhp

- hr

NO X PM

1986 and older 10.7 0.60

1987

- 2006 From 6.0 to 2.0 From 0.6 to 0.10

2007

- 2009 1.1 0.01

2010 0.2 0.01

However, older, higher

- emitting trucks with long service lives can stay on the road for
many years, because of the typically slow replacement of older trucks on the road with

the latest models. Consequently, e missions from existing “on

- road” trucks must also be

reduced to meet near

- term air quality standards.

To addre ss this, ARB developed the Cleaner In

- use Heavy

- duty Truck SIP measure.
This measure leverages the benefits provided by new truck emission standards by
accelerating introduction of the cleanest trucks. This “Truck and Bus Regulation” was
adopted in Decembe r 2008, and amended in December 2010 to account for the
reduced emissions resulting from the economic effects of the recession. This rule
represents a multi

- year effort to turn over the legacy fleet of engines and replace them
with the cleanest technology available. More information is available at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/truckbus10/truckbus10.htm

. Starting in 2012, the Truck and Bus Regulation phases in requirements so that by 2023
nearly all vehicles will meet 2010 model year engine emissions levels. The regulation
applies to nearly all diesel fueled trucks and buses with a gross vehicle weight rating
greater than 14,000 pounds that are privately or federally owned, inc luding on

- road and

off

- road yard goats, and privately and publicly owned school buses. Moreover, the
regulation applies to any person, business, school district, or federal government
agency that owns, operates, leases or rents affected vehicles. The regul ation also
establishes requirements for any in

- state or out

- of

- state motor carrier, California

- based
broker, or any California resident who directs or dispatches vehicles subject to the
regulation. Finally, California sellers of a vehicle subject to the re gulation would have to
disclose the regulation’s potential applicability to buyers of the vehicles.

In addition to the Truck and Bus Regulation, separate regulations reduce emissions

from on

- road vehicles in public fleets, including solid waste collection trucks and transit2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 8 buses. Trucks that transport marine containers must comply with the drayage truck
regulation.

Cleaner In

- Use Off

- Road Equipment

ARB has also adopted increasingly stringent standards for engines used in new off

- road
diesel equipment. As a result of these standards, new construction, mining, industrial
and oil drilling equipment will become progressively cleaner. The requirements vary
according to the pow er rating of engines. Table 7

- 2 B shows the schedule for phasing in
tiered requirements for new off

- road engines with a power rating between 175 and 300
horsepower (hp). Beginning in 2014, new Tier 4 construction equipment with the power
rating shown below will emit about 96 percent less NO X and PM than new Tier 1
equipment sold in the year 2 000.

Tabl e 7

- 2 B: Phase

- in of off

- road engine standards

Model year Level of Control Applicable Emission Standard for

New Off

- road Engines 175<hp<300

g/bhp

- hr

NO X PM

1996

- 2002 Tier 1 6.9 0.4

2003

- 2005 Tier 2 4.9* 0.15

2006

- 2010 Tier 3 3.0* 0.15

2011

- 2013 Tier 4 interim 1.5 0.015

2014+ Tier 4 final 0.3 0.015

* Reflects combined limit for non

- methane hydrocarbons and NO X

However, large diesel off

- road equipment typically remains in use for many years, if not

decades. As with heavy

- duty trucks, this long life means that newer, lower

- emitting
engines would be introduced into fleets relatively slowly, which will also delay the
emission reductions and associated health benefits from these cleaner engines

. To

address this, the State Strategy for California’s 2007 SIP included the Cleaner In

- use

Off

- road Equipment measure, the “Off

- Road Regulation.”

First approved in 2007, the Off

- Road Regulation was amended in 2010 in light of the
impacts of the economic recession. Affected off

- road equipment is used in construction,
manufacturing, the rental industry, road maintenance, airport ground support

, and
landscaping. In December 2011, the Off

- Road Regulation was modified to include on

road trucks with two diesel engines. More inform ation is available at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/offroadlsi10/offroadlsi10.htm

.

The Off

- Road Regulation will significantly reduce emissions of diesel PM and NO X from

th e over 150,000 in

- use off

- road diesel vehicles that operate in California by requiring

their owners to modernize their fleets and install exhaust retrofits. The regulation affects
dozens of vehicle types used in thousands of fleets by requiring owners to m odernize2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 9 their fleets by replacing older engines or vehicles with newer, cleaner models, by retiring
older vehicles or using them less often, or by appl ying retrofit exhaust controls.

The Off

- Road Regulation imposes idling limits on off

- road diesel vehicle s, requires a
written idling policy, and requires a disclosure when selling vehicles. The regulation also
requires that all vehicles be reported to ARB, restricts the addition of older vehicles into
fleets, and requires fleets to reduce their emissions by retiring, replacing, or repowering
older engines, or installing verified exhaust retrofits. The requirements and compliance

dates of the Off

- Road Regulation vary by fleet size.

Advanced Clean Cars

The Board established California’s Low Emission Vehicle (LE V) program in 1990 and
the LEV2 program in 1998. ARB’s Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) regulation

, which
affects passenger cars and light

- duty trucks, has also spurred movement towards
commercialization of advanced clean cars and light

- duty trucks. As a result, many new
gasoline engines now emit extremely low levels of smog forming emissions.
Conventional hybrid electric vehicles have been commercialized, and the number of
models offered for sale is quickly expanding. Recently battery electric vehicles an d plug

in hybrid electric vehicles have been introduced for sale, and fuel cell electric vehicles
are expected to follow.

ARB’s Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) Program, approved in January 2012, is a
pioneering approach of a ‘package’ of regulations, that althou gh separate in
construction, are related in terms of the synergy developed to address both ambient air
quality needs and climate change. The ACC program combines the control of smog,
soot causing pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions into a single coordi nated
package of requirements for model years 2015 through 2025. The program assures the
development of environmentally superior cars that will continue to deliver the
performance

, utility, and safety vehicle owners have come to expect

. The ACC program inc ludes amendments affecting the current ZEV regulation through
the 2017 model year to enable manufacturers to successfully meet 2018 and
subsequent model year requirements. The ZEV amendments are intended to achieve

commercialization by simplifying the regu lation and pushing technology to higher
volume production to achieve cost reductions.

The ACC Program will produce increasing benefits over time as new cleaner cars enter
the fleet, displacing older and dirtier vehicles. This program will continue to provi de
benefits well after 2019 as vehicles meeting the new standards replace older, higher

emitting vehicles.

Many additional programs are currently in place to reduce emissions from the
passenger car legacy fleets and accelerate fleet turn over. The Smog Che ck Program
ensures that passenger vehicles stay clean as they age and on

- board diagnostic2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 10 systems identify smog control problems. The Smog Check Program is continuously
being improved to provide additional emission reductions such as requiring stricter

ins pection standards and annual inspection of older vehicles. ARB is also active in
encouraging consumers with older dirtier vehicles to retire them early. Replacing older
dirtier vehicles with cleaner new vehicles provides permanent emission reductions.

Expanded Passenger Vehicle Retirement

Voluntary accelerated vehicle retirement or “car scrap” programs provide monetary
incentives to vehicle owners to retire older, more polluting vehicles. The purpose of
these programs is to reduce fleet emissions by acc elerating the turnover of the existing
fleet and subsequent replacement with newer, cleaner vehicles. Reducing emissions
from the existing fleet is a component of California’s SIP, which outlines the State’s
strategy for meeting health

- based ambient air quality standards. Both State and local
vehicle retirement programs are available.

California’s updated voluntary vehicle retirement program is administered by the Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR) and provides $1,000 per vehicle and $1,500 for low

- income
consumers for unwanted vehicles that meet certain eligibility guidelines. This program is
referred to as the Consumer Assistance Program.

The Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program (EFMP) was approved by the AB 118
legislation to augment the State’s existing vehicle retirement program. Approximately $30 million is available annually through 2015 to fund the EFMP via a $1 increase in
vehicle registration fees. ARB developed the program in consultation with BAR. The
program is jointly administered by both BAR f or vehicle retirement, and local air districts
for vehicle replacement.

Other programs, in addition to vehicle retirement programs, help to clean up the light
duty fleet. The Air Quality Improvement Program ( AQIP ) , established by AB 118, is an

ARB voluntar y incentive program to fund clean vehicle and equipment projects. The
Clean Vehicle Rebate Project (CVRP) is one of the current projects under AQIP. CVRP,
started in 2009, is designed to accelerate widespread commercialization of zero

emission vehicles and plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles by providing consumer rebates up to $2,500 to partially offset the higher cost of these advanced technologies. These
vehicles are a key element of California’s strategy for meeting health based air quality

stan dards and cl imate change goals.

The CVRP is administered statewide by the California Center for Sustainable Energy. In

Fiscal Years 2009

- 2012, $26.1 million, including $2 million provided by the California
Energy Commission, funded approximately 2,000 rebates. In June 2012, the ARB allocated up to $21 million to the CVRP as outlined in the AQIP FY2012

- 2013 Funding

Plan.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 11 Improvements and Enhancements to California’s Smog Check Program

The following requirements were added to improve and enhance the Smog Check
Program:

• L ow pressure evaporative test;

• More stringent pass/fail cutpoints;

• Visible smoke test; and

• Inspection of light

- and medium

- duty diesel vehicles.

AB 2289, adopted in October 2010, restructured California’s Smog Check Program by
streamlining and strengthening inspections, increasing penalties for misconduct, and
reducing costs to motorists. This new law, sponsored by ARB and BAR, promises faster
and less expensive Smog Checks by taking advantage of diagnostic software installed

on all vehicles since 2000. The new law also directs vehicles without this equipment to
high

- performing stations, helping to ensure that these cars comply with current emission

standards.

This program will reduce consumer costs by ha ving stations take advantage of
diagnostic software tha t monitors pollution

- reduction components and tailpipe

emissions. This technology, known as On

- Board Diagnostics (OBD), has been required

on all new vehicles since 1996. Under the new law, testing of passenger vehicles using
OBD will begin mid

- 2013 on all vehicles model years 2000 or newer. Statewide, this is expected to reduce consumer costs by up to $180 million annually.

Accelerated Introduction of Cleaner Line

- Haul Locomotives

California leads the nation with the most extensive efforts to reduce locomo tive and rail
yard emissions. In 2007 ARB staff proposed to replace existing switch and medium
horsepower locomotives with cleaner locomotives; retrofitting these locomotives with
particulate matter and NO X after

- treatment devices, and accelerating the introduction of

cleaner new Tier 4 interstate line

- haul locomotives to operate in California and other

western states. ARB completed 18 major rail yard health risk assessments that showed

increased risk for th ose who live and work near these facilities.

The Union Pacific (UP) rail yards located in Roseville has benefitted from numerous
programs targeting NO X and PM emissions. ARB utilized Proposition 1B funding for 15
Tier 2 “regional” line haul locomotives. Th e UP also operates 6 ultra

- low emitting genset
switch locomotives within the Roseville rail yards. The UP 9900, an experimental Tier
3+ locomotive (Tier 4 PM, and Tier 3+ NO X ), has been assigned to UP Roseville and
operates primarily in Northern California

. Finally, the California interstate line haul
locomotive fleet has become significantly cleaner than the rest of the country due to the
spillover benefits from the 1998 Locomotive NO X Fleet Average Agreement in the South

Coast Air Basin. Emissions within Sacramento’s Nonattainment area have been
reduced by about 42 percent from the 2002 baseline.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 12 Consumer Products

Under State law, ARB has regulatory responsibility for reducing VOC emissions from
consumer products. Since 2005, consumer products regulations adopted by ARB
reduce VOC levels in significant, but previously unregulated, sectors of commerce and
ban the use of toxic and high global warning potential chemicals in these and previously
regulated sectors.

On November 17, 2006, ARB approved amendments t o the Consumer Products
regulations including automotive care products, cleaners, degreasers, disinfectants,
adhesives, fabric care products, personal care products, and waxes and polishes. On
June 26, 2008, the ARB approved amendments that include househo ld cleaning and
degreasing products, home and garden pesticides, aerosol paints, personal care
products, and automotive maintenance products. These amendments have been
approved by the EPA, and the effects are reflected in the inventory used in this update

.

7.4 Consideration and Selection of New Regional and Local Control Measure s

EPA’s final 8

- hour ozone implementation rule 72 ( see section 172(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act) requires “a SIP revision demonstrating that it has adopted all reasonably available control measures ( RACM ) necessary to demonstrate attainment as expeditiously as practicable and to meet any RFP requirements.” EPA’s RACM policy 73 indicates that areas should consider all candidate measures that are potentially reasonably available.

Sources of potentially reasonable measures include measures adopted in other nonattainment areas, measures that the EPA has identified in guidelines or other documents, and any measures that have been suggested for the particular nonattainment area during a publi c comment period.

Areas should consider all reasonably available measures for implementation in light of

local circumstances. However, areas need only adopt measures if they are both economically and technologically feasible and cumulatively will either a dvance the attainment date by one year or more or are necessary for RFP. The emission reductions needed to attain 1 year earlier would be the difference in the emission forecasts (including new proposed control measures) between 2017 and 2018.

Th is plan c ontains required reasonabl y available control measures

. Documentation

, analysis , and conclusions regarding each control measure are provided in Appendix H

– Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis

.

7.5 SIP Control Measure Commitments

72 “Final Rule to Imple ment the 8

- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard

– Phase 2” (Federal Register, November 29, 2005, p. 71659

- 71661).

73 “Guidance on the Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Requirement and Attainment

Demonstration Submissions for Ozone Nonattainment Areas” (EPA, December 1999).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 13 To achieve the ad ditional emission reductions needed for attaining the 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone standard, the implementation of new control measures are proposed as a

SIP commitment. The total emission reductions and the obligation to propose specific

new measures would b ecome federally enforceable upon approval by U.S. EPA of the control measures in the attainment plan. The commitments for emission reductions are calculated using the planning emissions inventory, and progress will be tracked in the same inventory currency to assess compliance.

The total emission reductions from the new measures necessary to attain the federal

standards are an enforceable commitment in the SIP. While the proposed regional and

local control measures include estimates of the emission reducti ons from each of the individual measures, it is important to note that the commitment is to achieve the total emission reductions necessary to attain the federal standards. Therefore, if a particular measure or a portion thereof is found infeasible or does not get its expected emission reductions, each air district still commits to achieving the total aggregate emission reductions necessary for attainment, whether this is realized through additional or surplus reductions from the other adopted measures, fro m alternative control measures, or incentive programs.

A lthough the regional and local commitment is to the "total emission reductions," for purposes of transportation conformity, an explicit commitment is made to the reductions

associated with the on

- roa d mobile source incentive program. Also, the urban forest control measure, SMAQMD

- 1, is an emerging measure. Because of the uncertainties associated with implementation and validation of this urban forest measure, the emission benefits from this strategy a re not included in the attainment or reasonable further progress demonstrations.

Should future air quality modeling or air quality improvements indicate that all of the emission reductions from the new measures are not necessary for attainment and an

infe asibility finding is made for a control measure or a portion thereof, the region's SIP commitment can be adjusted downward. For purposes of SIP commitment, infeasibility means that the proposed control technology is not reasonably likely to be available by the implementation date needed, or achievement of the emission reductions by that

date is not cost

- effective or technologically feasible because of local circumstances

.

7.6 SIP Emission Reduction Tracking

For purposes of tracking progress in emission reductions, the baseline emissions for the year 2002 and for milestone years in this plan will be used, regardless of any subsequent new inventory information that reflects more recent knowledge. This is to ensure that the same “currency” is used in measur ing progress as was used in designing the ozone attainment and RFP plan. This will provide a fair and equitable measurement of progress.

7.7 Non

- regulatory Control Measures2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 14 The non

- regulatory control measures proposed in this 8

- hour ozone plan are regional

p rograms that will achieve emission reductions throughout the Sacramento

nonattainment area. The following non

- regulatory measures are proposed:

 Mobile Source Incentive Measures

– On

- road and Off

- road

 Spare The Air Program

 SACOG Transportation Control Meas ures

 Urban Forest Development Program

7.8 Mobile Source Incentive Measure s

Mobile sources such as trucks, automobiles, trains, boats, construction and farm equipment are by far the largest sources of ozone precursors in the Sacramento

nonattainment area. Inc luded under this major source category are all non

- stationary

sources from lawn mowers to jumbo jets. The air districts do not have authority to directly regulate mobile source emissions through emission standards; however

, the air

district incentive progr ams may complement state and federal regulatory efforts in reducing mobile source emissions. These regional mobile source incentive measures

are implemented in all or parts of the Sacramento nonattainment area by the air

districts.

The estimated emission reductions from the proposed regional mobile incentive measures are summarized, followed by descriptions of the individual on

- road mobile

and off

- road mobile cont rol measures. Because many of the incentive measures in the

mobile source categories target th e same vehicles or engines, it is difficult to predict in advance what portion of the benefits should be assigned to each of the individual strategies. Therefore, the benefits from the collection of measures have been estimated, and all or any portion of t he measures may be implemented to achieve those benefits. Some measures noted may likewise not be implemented if cost effective reductions are

not available. However, for purposes of transportation conformity, an explicit

commitment is made to the reductio ns associated with the on

- road mobile source incentive program.

Control Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year Emission Reduction (TPD)

2018

VOC NO X Mobile Source Incentive Programs 2012 2008

- 2018 <0.1 0.5

The incentive program measures rely on funding provided according to existing laws and policies. The funding sources for 2008

- 2018 include SECAT program ($33.0M) and local district Department of Motor Vehicle fees ($13.0M).

On

- road Measures

The on

- road motor vehicle category includes trucks, automobiles, buses and motorcycles. The on

- road emissions inventory includes estimates of exhaust and2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 15 evaporative emissions. Regional measures for reducing on

- road vehicle emissions include the use of financial incentives to promote the accelerated introdu ction of low emission vehicle, engine, and fuel technologies to the Sacramento region.

ONMS

- HD

- 1: SECAT

- Like Program

This measure implements an incentive program for NO X reduction in heavy

- duty vehicles similar to that created by the Sacramento Emergency Clean Air Transportation (SECAT) program. Incentives would be distributed on a dollar per ton basis. The level of

reductions is based on both the amount of money available and the options available to specific truck s

. This measure is implemented annually through the attainment year (2008

- 2018)

.

ONMS

- LD

- 1: Light Duty Early Retirement

This measure would implement an incentive based light

- duty vehicle early retirement program for non

- OBD

- II vehicles 74

. Light duty scrappage programs have been successfully implemented in the SCAQMD and the Bay Area. This program would be based upon the Bay Area program, providing cash incentives to retire registered, working vehicles early. The program would require more monitoring than is cu rrently performed in other programs to ensure emission reductions are achieved and would require replacement with at least ULEVs. No incentives for purchase of new vehicles are provided in the measure. This measure is implemented from 2009

- 201 4

. The specif ic program details, quantification methods, auditing, and reporting will be adopted and submitted separate from this SIP document.

Control Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year Emission Reduction ( tpd )

2018

VOC NO X Mobile Source Incentive Programs

- On

- road 2012 2008

- 2018 < 0.1 0.5

Off

- road Measures

The off

- road mobile source category encompasses a wide variety of sources including

small off

- road engines and equipment, off

- road recreational vehicles, farm and construction equipment, forklifts, locomotives, commercial marine vessels, and marine pleasure craft. Regional measures for reducing off

- road emissions include the use of financial incentives to accelerate voluntary retirement or retrofit of older, high emitting equipment, resulting in redu ced off

- road emissions.

74 OBD is abbreviation for onboard diagnostics2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 16 OFMS

- HD

- 1 : Off

- road CI Incentive Program

This measure implements an incentive program for NO X reductions through after

treatment retrofits , engine repowers, and fleet modernization in off

- road heavy

- duty compression ignition (CI) equipment. Incentives would be distributed on a dollar per ton

basis. This measure is implemented from 2008

- 201 4

.

OFMS

- SI

- 1 : Zero Emission Lawn and Garden Incentive (Residential)

This measure would implement a year

- round continuous incentive program for the replacement of residential spark ignited (SI) gasoline

- powered mowers with electric or

zero emission alternatives. Cash incentives per mower replaced will be offered in exchange for SI equipment through local retailers

. Eligible e quipment is primarily limited

to lawn mowers with engines less than five horsepower

. The measure is implemented

from 2008

- 201 4

.

Control Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year Emission Reduction ( tpd )

2018

VOC NO X Mobile Source Incentive Programs

- Off

- road 2012 2008

- 201 4 < 0.1 < 0. 1

7.9 “Spare The Air Program”

The “Spare The Air” control measure is a year

- round public education program with an episodic ozone reduction element during the summer ozone season, plus general awareness throughout the rest of the year. It is designed to protect public health by informing people when air quality is unhealthy and achieving voluntary emission reductions by encouraging them to reduce vehicle trips. This program is implemented by the SMAQMD staff on behalf of the region. Funding for this program has historically been federal Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds, with local matching funding provided by each air district’s DMV and/or Sacramento County’s Measure A funding. CMAQ funding ($600,000 per year) has be en included in the SACOG MTP2035 through 2018.

Since transportation control measures (TCMs) are strategies for reducing vehicle trips, vehicle use, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle idling, or traffic congestion for the purpose of reducing motor vehicle emi ssions, the Spare The Air program is proposed as a TCM in

this SIP. The estimated emission reductions from this program are provided in the following table.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 17 Control Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year Emission Reduction ( tpd )

2018

VOC NO X Spare The Air Program (TCM

- ONMS

- E D

- 1) 2009 2008

- 2018 <0.1 <0.1

7.10 SACOG Transportation Control Measures

Transportation control measures (TCMs) are strategies for reducing vehicle trips, vehicle use, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle idling, or traffic congestion for the purpose of reducing motor vehicle emissions. The Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the greater Sacramento region (includes Sacramento, Yolo, Placer, El Dorado, Sutter, and Yuba counti es). SACOG provides transportation planning and funding for the region. SACOG, local governments, and the air districts have worked together over the years to develop and implement TCMs. They have included public transit, carpooling and vanpooling, bicycling and pedestrian enhancement, and land use programs. The Spare The Air program is also a TCM.

TCMs are included in the “smart growth” assumptions for the Blueprint program used in the SACOG transportation model to forecast future vehicle activity. Federal MTP guidelines require that the land use allocations represent what is most likely to be built. Therefore, the specific Blueprint smart growth policies affect land use allocations only to the extent that the local jurisdictions and SACOG are able to demonstrate that the policies will actually be implemented. These updated activity data were used in setting the baseline projections for the motor vehicle inventory. While the Blueprint principles affect these baseline projections, Blueprint is not inc luded in this plan as a transportation control measure.

There are transportation planning implications associated with including TCMs in a SIP. Every time the MPO makes a conformity determination to accompany a new Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP), a new Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP), or an amendment to either document, it must demonstrate that all TCMs are still on track to be implem ented in a timely fashion. If a TCM does not stay on schedule, the MPO must show that all State and local agencies with influence over approvals or funding for TCMs are giving maximum priority to approval or funding of TCMs over other projects within their control. The MPO and any other responsible agencies would have to either ensure that the TCM is able to get back on schedule, or be able to substitute another TCM. In other words, the MPO may not be able to demonstrate conformity on a new or amend ed MTP o r MTIP if a TCM is failing.

In addition, the Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR 93.103) states, “When assisting or approving any action with air quality

- related consequences, FHWA and FTA shall give priority to the implementation of those transportati on portions of an applicable implementation plan prepared to attain and maintain the NAAQS.”2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 18 7.11 New and Continuing TCM Projects

All of the following new and continuing TCM projects 75 chosen to be included in the

federal 8

- hour ozone plan were selected because they had early completion dates, costs were not large, funding was already committed, and delivery appeared to be likely. Additional information and documentation of the TCM proj ects are included in Appendix D

– Transportation Control Measures.

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Projects

SACOG is working with local partners to plan and implement Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) projects to improve traffic flow and reduce vehicle emissions. ITS projects use advanced technology and tools such as freeway ramp meters, dynamic message signs, and traffic signal timing to provide real

- time information on traffic conditions and coordinate operations at local traffic center s.

 Arden Way “Smart Corridor” from Del Paso to Watt

– Smart Corridor on Arden Way from Del Paso to Watt Avenue

.

 Sacramento Traffic Operations Center

– evaluate and implement on downtown and other major corridors, ITS elements and infrastructure necessary to provide traffic responsive/coordinated signal timing and communications to the Traffic Operation Center.

 STARNET Implementation

– develop and install an information exchange system called the Sacramento Transportation Area Network (STARNET), and conne ct 18 traffic and emergency centers.

Park and Ride Lots / Transit Centers

 El Dorado Central Park and Ride Facility

– construct Central Transfer Facility and Park & Ride with capacity for 95 spaces in Diamond Springs, on Commerce Way at

State Route 49.

 Improvements to Loomis Multimodal Center

– design and construct pedestrian and landscaping improvements at the multimodal center including a Class I bike facility adjacent to Taylor Road from downtown Loomis to Sierra College Blvd.

 13 th and 16 th Street Li ght Rail Station Improvements

– construct improved pedestrian access, lighting, and signage at 13 th and 16 th Street Light Rail Stations in

Sacramento.

Transit Service Funding Programs

75 These TCMs were approved for inclusion by SACOG Board (August 21, 2008, Consent Item #08

- 8

- 10).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 19 Travel by transit is of great interest in the Sacramento region for several reasons. First, transit provides an opportunity for reducing VMT and emissions , through shifts from low

occupancy modes like driving alone to a very high occupancy mode of travel. Second, for commute trips, which tend to occur at peak periods of tr avel demand when congestion is highest, transit can provide substantial congestion relief. Finally, high quality transit service can provide necessary mobility to residents and employees in higher density, mixed use areas, where auto travel can be impracti cal. For these reasons, SACOG proposes making a commitment to maintain existing levels of transit service through the following TCMs:

 Transit Vehicle Acquisitions

- fund the following bus purchas es :

SACOG Measure Title Cost

Auburn Transit Bus Replacement $225,000

Roseville Transit Bus Purchase $2,300,000
Roseville Transit Bus Replacement $375,000
Replacement Neighborhood Ride Buses $255,000

E

- Tran Replacement Buses $1,400,000
SRTD Neighborhood Ride Vehicle Replacement $3,600,000
Yuba Sutter Transit Bus Expansion $1,500,000
YCTD Bus Replacement $1,700,000

 Transit Operations

– fund the following transit operations :

SACOG Measure Title Cost
El Dorado Transit Operating Assistance $580,000
Roseville Operating Assistance $145,000
Elk Grove Operating Assistance $1,800,000
Folsom Operating Assistance $745,000
Paratransit Operating Assistance $350,000
Sacramento County Operating Assistance $59,000
Regional Transit Operating Assistance $364,000,000
YCTD Operating Assistance $1,100,000

Other Spec i fic Funding Programs

 Freeway Service Patrol

- Sacramento County: provide motorist assistance and towing of disabled vehicles during a.m. and p.m. commute periods on various highways in Sacramento County and a portion of I

- 80 in Yolo County.

 S acramento E mergency C lean A ir T ransportation (SECAT) Program

- Heavy

Duty NO X control strategies; SECAT program; GIS Transit program (includes bus stop and centralized regional transit information system, and trip planning). Bus Replacement projects include: REG17782, YCT18087, UNI10441, SAC24145,

PCT10481.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 20  “Spare The Air” Program

- conduct the Spare The Air Education Program, jointly funded by the Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD, Yolo

- Solano AQMD, and the Placer County APCD.

MTP Regional Funding Programs

The Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) includes four federally

- funded programs to be used for regional transportation and related priorities that implement the goals of the

MTP. This TCM is a SACOG commitment to continue to implement the MTP Funding Program for the following:

 Air Quality Funding Program

– includes projects under Other Specific Funding Programs (Freeway Service Patrol, SECAT Program, and “Spare The Air” Program)

.

 Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Program

– t o provide facilities for walking and biking in the cities and towns of the region, or to provide connections between them

, and includes the following list of projects:

Adopted Projects from SACOG's Regional Bike/Pedestrian Funding Program Cost

City of Sacramento: I

- 80 Bike/Ped Bridge at the West Canal $ 6,600 ,000

City of Folsom Bikestation and "Bikelink" On

- Demand Long

- Term Class I Bike Parking at Transit Stations $ 178 ,000

City of Elk Grove: Elk Grove Creek Bike/Ped Bridge Crossing at SR 99 $ 5,600 ,000

Retrofit Yolobus bus fleet with higher capacity bike racks $ 67,500

 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Funding Program

– composed of strategies that can lower the demands made on the road and highway system and improve air quality by encouraging the use of carpooling, vanpooling, public transit, bicycling, and walking. The goal is to reduce single

- occupant vehicle trips in the Sacramento region using TDM strategies and measure the effects of these strategies. SACOG currently operates the regional ride sharing database and performs a number of marketing activities that publicize TDM strategies to the public. SACOG also sponsors the TDM Task Force, a group of Transportation Management Associations (TMAs) and other organizations that perform or promote TDM services for employers and residents of the region.

This measure includes funding the following program :

SACOG Measure Title Cost
SACOG Regional Rideshare Program $ 1,200 ,000 through 201 82013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 21  Community Design Funding Program

– to provide support and financial incentives to local governments for planning and capital development projects that promote and implement the Blueprint Project principles. Grants are awarded to projects sponsored by qualified public agencies in the SACOG region that conform to the seven Blueprint principles: 1) transportation choices, 2) housing diversity, 3) compact development, 4) mixed land uses, 5) use of existing assets, 6) natural resource pr otection, and 7) quality design.

The Community Design program results from the recognition that land use influences travel behavior and can be a powerful tool to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the regional transportation system. Land use and projects that lead to fewer vehicle miles traveled and more walking, biking, an d transit usage can provide air quality and congestion

- relief benefits at the local and regional scale.

This measure includes funding the following projects:

Adopted Projects from SACOG's Regional Community Design Funding Program Cost

City of Marysville: East 10th Street and Ramirez Street Intersection Improvement $ 510 ,000

City of Rancho Cordova: Folsom Boulevard Complete Streets $ 12,200 ,000

Sacramento County: Complete Streets for Freedom Park Drive and

North Watt Avenue $ 6,400 ,000

City of Woodland: Lemen, North, East Streets Intersection Realignment $ 2,600 ,000

Miscellaneous Projects

 Light Rail Grade Separation at Watt Avenue and Folsom Boulevard

– in Sacramento County, Regional Transit Light Rail tracks south of Folsom Blvd. on Watt Ave., grade separate the rail tracks over Watt Ave.

 Dry Creek Parkway Trail, Phase 1

– In Sacramento County, Rio Linda

- Dry Creek Parkway, from Dry Creek Road at Dry Creek Ranch to the Cheery Island Soccer Complex: Construct a 3

- mile Class I shared

- use bicycle/pedestrian trail.

Summary of SACOG New and Continuing TCM Projects and Funding Programs

Table 7

- 3 contains a summary of SACOG new and continuing transportation control measure (TCM) projects and funding programs that are being included in th e federal 8

- hour ozone plan. Also listed are the implementing agencies, the predicted implementation or completion dates, and the estimated V OC and NO X emission reductions, if quantified.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 22 Table 7

- 3 Summary of SACOG T ransportation C ontrol M easure s New and Continuing Projects and Funding Programs

TCM Name and (ID) Implementing Agency Implement or

Completion Date VOC

Reduction (Tons/Day) NO X

Reduction (Tons/Day)
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Projects

Arden Way Smart Corridor (ITS

- 1) City of Sac

- Dept of Transportation 200 8

--- ---

Sacramento Traffic Operations Center (ITS

- 2) City of Sac

- Dept of Transportation 2009

--- ---

STARNET Implementation (ITS

- 4) SACOG 2009

--- --- Park and Ride Lots / Transit Centers

El Dorado Central Park and Ride Facility (TF

- 1) El Dorado County

Transit 2009

--- ---

Improvements to Loomis Multimodal Center (TF

- 2) Town of Loomis

– Dept of Public Works 2010

--- ---

13 th and 16 th St :Light Rail Station Improvements (TF

- 3) Sac Regional Transit

District 200 9

--- ---

Transit Service Funding Programs

Transit Vehicle Acquisitions (TR

- 1) Various Agencies Various

Dates --- ---

Transit Operations (TR

- 2) Various Agencies Various

Dates --- ---

Other Specific Funding Programs

Freeway Service Patrol (AQ

- 1) Sac Transportation Authority Through 2018

--- ---

SECAT Program (AQ

- 2) SMAQMD Through 2018

--- a

--- a

Spare The Air Program (AQ

- 3) SMAQMD Through 2018

--- b

--- b

MTP Regional Funding Programs
Air Quality Funding Program (FP

- 1) Various Agencies Through 2018

--- --- Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Program (FP

- 2) Various Agencies Through 2018

--- ---

Transportation Demand Management Funding Program (FP

3) Various Agencies Through 2018

--- ---

Community Design Funding Program (FP

- 4) Various Agencies Through 2018

--- ---

Miscellaneous Projects
Light Rail Grade Separation at Watt Ave and Folsom Blvd (M

- 2) Sac County

– Dept of Transportation 200 9

--- ---

Dry Creek Parkway Trail Phase 1 Sac County

– Dept of Transportation 2011

--- ---

Total Emission Reductions

--- ---

a SECAT emission reductions a re assumed to be included in SMAQMD mobile source control measure

ONMS

- HD

- 1.

b S pare The Air emission reductions are assumed to be included in SMAQMD control measure TCM

- ONMS

ED

- 1

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 23 7.12 Research and Policy Development TCMs

The research efforts listed below are included as TCMs because they are expected to result in policies that will help improve the region’s air quality. Since these measures are only in the preliminary “study” stage, it is not possible to quantify the potentia l emission reductions from policies developed as a result of the studies. Consequently, no associated emissions reduction benefits are included as part of this SIP. Instead,

e missions reductions for future adopted policies will be accounted for in future S IPs.

The SIP does include a present commitment to adopt the Complete Streets Policy and

Safe Route to School P olicy TCMs. The following T able 7

- 4 lists the recommended research and policy development TCMs:

Table 7

- 4 Summary of SACOG T ransportation C ontrol M easure s Research and Policy Development Studies

1. Blueprint Implementation & Planning Technical Assistance

2. Develop Rural

- Urban Connections Strategy & Best Practices Toolkit

3. Research a Transportation Pricing Policy

4. Research a Regional Parking Regulation Policy

5. Adopt a Complete Streets Policy

6. Initiate a Complete Streets Technical Assistance Program

7. Adopt a Safe Routes to School Policy and Implement a Pilot Program

Blueprint Implementation & Planning Technical Assistance

T o implement the Bl ueprint Project ’s vision and “smart growth” principles through existing and new programs, SACOG will : 1) continue to fund the regional Community Design Grant Program, 2) develop a form

- based zoning code handbook , 3) provide evaluations of proposed development projects for Blueprint consistency, and 4) provide technical planning assistance in the development or update of local government plans.

Develop Rural

- Urban Connections Strategy & Best Practices Toolkit

SACOG will develop a Rural

- Urban Connections Strategy to expand on and support implementation of the Blueprint growth strategy and the MTP. The Rural

- Urban Connections Strategy will utilize state

- of

- the

- art data collection, modeling, research and participation metho ds to develop a toolkit of best practices to enhance land use planning practices in rural areas that are both economically viable for land owners and local governments and environmentally sustainable.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 24 Research a Transportation Pricing Policy

SACOG will p repare an analysis on the impacts and viability of using pricing policies with the transit system and selected portions of the road network to encourage people to drive less and use transit, walking, and bicycling modes more.

Research a Regional Parking R egulation Policy

SACOG will perform travel modeling and air emissions analysis to identify a range of alternatives for local governments to use to modify current parking regulations to create incentives for people to use available transit, walking and bik ing options, and neighborhood electric vehicles. This study will be conducted cooperatively with key partners such as the air districts and local governments within the region.

Adopt a Complete Streets Policy

SACOG will adopt a “Complete Streets” policy to require that applicants for SACOG regional funding programs demonstrate that the planning, design, construction and maintenance of roadway and transit facilities include the needs of all transportation

users

– pedestrians, bicyclists, the disabled, tran sit users, and motorists.

Initiate a Complete Streets Technical Assistance Program

To implement the Complete Streets policy, SACOG will review and analyze the practices of local governments within the SACOG region and around the nation to identify appropriate “Best Practices” for complete street design within the SACOG region. SACOG will also provide technical assistance to local governme nts on a case by case basis, as requested, to help them successfully implement this concept.

Adopt a Safe Routes to School Policy and Implement Pilot Program

SACOG will adopt a Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS) policy to promote the practice of safe bicyclin g and walking to and from schools throughout the MTP Plan Area to reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and enhance neighborhood safety. SACOG will also obtain federal funds from the Federal Highway Administration through Caltrans to implement at least one SRTS pilot program within the MTP Plan Area.

7.13 Urban Forest Air Quality Development Program

Emerging and Voluntary Measures

It is imperative today that we look for new and innovative strategies to include in the SIP

to offset the impacts of anthropogenic emissions. Emerging control measures are control strategies based on science and technology that are new, difficult to quantify, and do not possess the high level of certainty normally found in traditional control2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 25 measu res. Voluntary measures are strategies that will result in the reduction of a criteria pollutant or precursor that the State could claim as an emission reduction in a SIP for the purposes of demonstrating attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Stan dard (NAAQS) or reasonable further progress (RFP), but that is not directly enforceable against a source. The Urban Forest and Spare The Air programs are the only two voluntary measures in this plan.

Numerous scientific studies and research projects have documented the benefits of heat island strategies using urban forest expansion programs, and several states are exploring the benefits of adopting urban forest strategies into their SIPs. This emerging and voluntary control measure proposes one such strate gy that is based on the selection of trees provided for the expansion of the urban forest to minimize biogenic volatile organic compound (BVOC) emissions.

Sacramento Region Urban Forest

T he Sacramento region has succeeded in creating a renowned urban for est. Our forest evolved over many years, with each generation of our community adding trees that met the needs of their day. In earlier years, urban trees were planted for comfort cooling and public health benefits. More recently, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) has invested millions of dollars in the strategic planting of an energy

- saving urban

forest. Today we have a pressing need to improve the purity of the region’s air. While our urban trees make a major contribution to air quality, th ey were not planted with this in mind and so do not do as much as they could.

The regional urban forest is populated by about 7 million trees, composed of over 100

different species. Each of these tree species can be categorized as low, medium and high bi ogenic volatile organic compound (BVOC) emitting trees. Currently, about 61% of the trees are considered low emitting trees, 28% medium and 11% high emitting trees.

Control Strategy to Minimize BVOC Emissions

This control measure proposes a targeted urba n forest management program to reduce total urban forest BVOC emissions by favoring the planting of low emitting trees rather than medium and high emitting trees during the next 10 years. Through a combination of community education and governmental policy change over the next 10 years, the

control measure calls for a minimum of 390,000 low emitting trees to be planted that

otherwise would have been medium or high emit ting trees. Although the duration of the project is 10 years, the actual benefit will last many years longer.

Estimated Emission Reductions

The estimated emission reductions from this urban forest development program for the Sacramento region are summarized in the following table. The estimated 2018 VOC reduction is about 0.8 tpd, but the cre dited reduction is limited to 0. 2 tpd. This is2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 26 consistent with the EPA policy 76 for incorporating emerging and voluntary measures in a SIP that limits the amount of emission reductions allowed due to the uncertainty and

untested nature of the control mechan isms. For total emerging and voluntary measures,

EPA has adopted a presumptive 77 limit of 6 percent of the total amount of emission

reduction s necessary to demonstrate attainment.

Emerging/Voluntary

Measure s Adoption

Year Implement

Year Emission Reduction * ( tpd )

2018

VOC NO X Urban Forest Development Program (SMAQMD

- 1) 201 4 2008

- 2018 0

- 0. 2

---

* Reductions within 6% limitation of VOC emission reduction needed to achieve attainment and result from lower BVOC emitting trees. More detailed documentation of the credited emission reductions is included in Appendix C

– Proposed Control Measures.

7.14 Regulatory Control Measures

The regulatory control measures proposed in this 8

- hour ozone plan are local programs that will achieve emission reductio ns from :

 Stationary/Area Source Control Measures.

7.15 Stationary and Area

- wide Source Control Measures

Historically, local air district regulatory control measures have been implemented to control emissions from stationary and area

- wide type sources. In general, s tationary

s ources include non

- mobile sources such as power plants, cement plants , and manufacturing facilities

. A rea

- wide sources of pollution are those where the emissions are spread over a wide area, such as gas stations, house paints, and resi dential fuel

combustion

. New air district r egulatory control measures are being proposed to obtain

additional emission reductions from specific stationary and area

- wide sources. The proposed VOC and NO X emission control measures are briefly summarized in t he following descriptions , along with estimated emission reductions for the future 2018 attainment demonstration year

.

There are differences in the commitments for each district. These differences are due to one or more of the following reasons. See Appen dix H

– Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis, for additional details.

1. The costs are too high and/or the emissions benefits of the measure are too low.

76 “Incorporating Emerging and Voluntary Measures in a State Implement ation Plan (SIP)” (OAQPS, EPA, September 2004, p. 9).

77 The limit is presumptive in that EPA believes it may approve measures into a SIP in excess of the presumptive 6 percent where a clear and convincing justification is made by the State for a higher lim it.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 27 2. The requirements are already in place.

3. The measure is technically infeasible due to local circumstances.

7.16 VOC Emission Control Measures

Architectural Coatings

This control measure regulates the volatile organic compound (VOC) content in coatings applied to residential, commercial, and industrial structures and their appurtenances (e.g., gener al use flats, general use non

- flats, and specialty coatings such as industrial maintenance coatings, lacquers, floor coatings, roof coatings, stains, etc.). The strategy also regulates the sale of coatings within the district by prohibiting

manufacturers a nd suppliers of coatings from selling coatings that do not comply with the strategy.

Architectural Coatings Category VOC Emission Reduction ( tpd )

District Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year 2018

SMAQMD

- 442 2014 2016 0. 9

EDCAQMD

- 215 2013 201 5 0. 1

FRAQMD

- 3.15 2014 2014 < 0. 1

PCAPCD

- 218 2012 2013 0.2

YSAQMD

- 2.14 2014 2016 0. 2

Total 1. 5

Automotive Refinishing

Automotive refinishing coatings are used on motor vehicles and other mobile equipment, primarily by auto body repair and paint shops and automotive dealerships. The main coating categories include primers, color coatings, and clear coatings. VOC emissions from the surface coating operations result from the evaporation of the organic solvents used in the coatings. These emissions occur in a number of places during the operation, including surface preparation and cleanup, application of the coating, drying of the parts, and cleanup of the application equipment.

Th e control measure will lower the VOC emissions by further regulating the VOC content in automotive refinishing coatings

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 28 Automotive Refinishing Category VOC Emission Reduction ( tpd )

District Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year 2018

SMAQMD

- 459 2011 2012 0.1

FRAQMD

- 3.19 2016 2017 < 0.1

PCAPCD

- 234 2015 2017 < 0. 1

YSAQMD

- 2.26 2008 2009

- 2010 < 0 .1

Total 0.2

Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning

Degreasing and solvent cleaning operations are performed by many commercial and

industrial facilities. Solvents are used for surface preparation for further processing and cleaning after manufacturing. Degreasing is widely used by automotive repair and maintenance facilities and by electric apparatus and electronic component manufacturing or repair, construction trades, printing shops, metal parts and products, can coating, and other types of commercial and manufacturing facilities. Solvents are also used by coating operations for cleaning of coating application equipment such as

spray guns and brushes. VOC emissions from general surface preparation and degreasing operations result from the evaporation of organic solvents.

This measure primarily proposes to lower the VOC limits in the materials used in general cleaning and degreasing operations (which include cold cleaning, vapor degreas ers, hand wiping, thinning and cleanup solvents).

Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning Category VOC Emission Reduction ( tpd )

District Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year 2018

FRAQMD

- 3.14 2011 2011 < 0.1

YSAQMD

- 2.24/2.31 200 8 2009 0. 7

Total 0.82013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 29 Graphic Arts

VOC emissions from graphic art operations result from the evaporation of organic solvents in the inks, fountain solutions, and solvents used in the various types of printing

processes. These operations produce a wide variety of printed products that incl ude books, magazines, newspapers, fliers, posters, and packaging materials. These various types of products require that facilities use very specific materials and printing methods. The different types of printing methods include lithography, flexography, gravure, and letterpress.

T his proposed control measure for graphic arts operations lower s the current rule exemption limit f rom 400 lbs/month to 60 lbs/month. A dd itional l y, this control measure is to revise the various cleaning solvent VOC limits to matc h the current S M AQMD

standards.

Graphic Arts Category VOC Emission Reduction ( tpd )

District Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year 2018

YSAQMD

- 2.29 2016 2018 Not available

Total

---

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products

This category is comprised of VOC emissions from the coating of miscellaneous metal parts and products including signs, storage and trash containers, door frames, window frames, panels, metal cabinets, caskets and various other metal coating operations.

VOC emissions from the surfac e coating operations result from the evaporation of the organic solvents used in the coatings. These emissions occur in a number of places during the operation, including surface preparation and cleanup, application of the coating, drying of the parts, and cleanup of the application equipment. This control measure will only address the VOC emissions from the coating process. The surface preparation and cleanup VOC emissions are addressed under other measures.

Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Category VOC Emission Reduction ( tpd )

District Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year 2018

PCAPCD

- CM3 200 8 200 9 < 0. 1

Total < 0. 12013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 30 Natural Gas Production and Processing

There are several natural gas production fields within Sacramento County. Fugitive

emissions of VOC from natural gas production occur from equipment leaks in valves, pumps, compressors, pressure relief devices, flanges, and threaded connections at gas wells and associated transmission systems. The proposed control measure would establish inspecti on and repair requirements for leaking components. Emission reductions would result from a reduction in the number of leaking components. The proposed measure would establish leak inspection frequencies and allowable repair periods.

Natural Gas Production and Processing Categor y VOC Emission Reduction ( tpd )

District Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year 2018

SMAQMD

- 461 2014 2015 0.1

Total 0.1

7.17 NO X Emission Control Measures

Boilers, Steam Generator, and Process Heaters

Boilers and steam generators are used to provide hot water and steam for numerous industrial and commercial applications. These applications include space heating, food processing, garment laundering, and equipment sterilization. Manufacturing operations

u se process heaters to heat materials or equipment. The equipment burners can be fired on solid, liquid or gaseous fuels. The proposed control measure lowers the NO X emission to a more stringent level. Current technology is widely available to adopt this

co ntrol measure.

Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters

Category NO X Emission Reduction ( tpd )

District Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year 2018

YSAQMD

- 2.27 2016 2018 0.2

Total 0.2

IC Engines

Internal combustion (IC) engines are used widely in many different facilities. They can be used to drive electric generators, pumps, gas compressors, or blowers. A h igh percentage of the engines are used to provide backup power or electricity in emergencies

. IC engines use propane, gasoline, natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas,

diesel or other fuels as their source of energy. The ignition of the fuels converts the2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 31 energy in the fuel to mechanical energy. NO X is produced during the combustion

process

.

The pro posed control measure would establish emission standards for stationary engines.

IC Engines Category NO X Emission Reduction ( tpd )

District Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year 2018

FRAQMD

- 3.22 2010 2011 < 0. 1

Total < 0.1

Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers

Large water heaters and small boilers are used to provide hot water and steam to a variety of different applications , including space heating and food processing. Those units are usually fired on gaseous fuels and have burner ratings of less than 1 million

BTU/hr. In general, units with burner rating under 0.3 million BTU/hr use the draft created during the combustion process to transfer heat into the water. Large units (0.3 million BTU/hr or above) use fans or the natural draft to transfe r heat into the heating
system.

Currently, 75,000 to 1 million BTU/hr units are exempted from the districts ’ rule for water

heaters and boilers. This revised control measure will eliminate the exemption for new 75,000 to 1 million BTU /hr units

.

Large Water Heat ers and Small Boilers Category NO X Emission Reduction ( tpd )

District Measure Adoption

Year Implement

Year 2018

EDCAQMD

- 239 2015 2016 < 0. 1

FRAQMD

- 3.23 2016 2017 0

PCAPCD

- CM 2 2015 2017 < 0. 1

YSAQMD

- 2.37 200 9 20 10 0.2

Total 0.2

7.18 Summary of Regional and Local Proposed Emission Reductions

The following Table 7

- 5 summarizes the list of new regional and local proposed control measures and their expected 2018 emission reductions for the Sacramento

nonattainment area. Emission benefits from these new measures are estimated to provide reductions of 2 tons per day of VOC and 1 tons per day of NO X in 2018. Some2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 32 of these new local measures were adopted by mid

- 20 11 , but have not been reflected in the inventory

.

Table 7

- 5

Summary of New Regional and Local Proposed Control Measures

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Control Measure Name 2018 Emission Reductions (TPD)

VOC NO X Regional Non

- regulatory Measures
Regional Mobile Incentive Program

– On

- road < 0. 1 0.5
Regional Mobile Incentive Program

– Off

- road <0.1 <0.1
Spare The Air Program < 0.1 < 0.1
SACOG Transportation Control Measures

-- -- Urban Forest Development Program 0

- 0. 2

-- Total Regional Non

- regulatory Measures * 0.1 0.5

Local Regulatory Measures
Architectural Coating 1. 5

-- Automotive Refinishing 0.2

-- Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning 0.7

-- Graphic Arts na

-- Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products <0.1

-- Natural Gas Production and Processing 0.1

-- Boilers, Steam Generator, and Process Heaters

-- 0.2
IC Engines

-- < 0.1
Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers

-- 0.2

Total Local Regulatory Measures * 2. 6 0. 5

Total Reductions * 2. 7 1.1

Note s : N umbers are truncated to one decimal place. na = not available

*Total reductions are summed from un

- truncated values. See summary table in Appendix C

– Proposed Control Measures.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 33 7.19 Further Study Measures

Further study measures are measures for which insufficient information was available during the development of the control strategy to allow the region to commit to them as

control measures. The adoption of further study measures requires full evaluations of emission data, cost effectiveness, technological feasibility, and authorit y for implementation. If the evaluations show that the measures are viable control measures,

the y will be considered for adoption and implementation.

These measures are evaluated qualitatively for environmental impacts in this State Implementation Plan and will be evaluated quantitatively for the actual emission benefits and feasibility in the futur e. These further study measures are: 1) Heat Island Mitigation, 2) Alternative Energy, 3) Energy Efficiency , 4) Gasoline Transfer Phase I/II, 5)

Lubricants , and 6) Episodic Controls . More detailed information on these measures can be found in Appendix C

– Proposed Control Measures.

Urban Heat Island

The Urban Heat Island Measure encourage s activities that would lower the ambient temperature in urban area s , such as lighter, more reflective surface materials

, building surface and pavements, solar roofing membranes , and increased tree planting. Programs to promote use of reflective materials and tree planting could be a required element for new sources or recommendations through California Environmental Quality

Act (CEQA) Air Quality Handbook. Sources that promote higher reflective materials or tree planting could be eligible for emission credits. The emission credits could be based on the type of reflective materials and trees per unit area that meet or exceed the

benchmark.

Alternative Energy

The use of alternative energy in transportation or stationary applications can reduce ozone precursors. This measure will look at reductions possible in the stationary sector

of the r egion. This source category includes facilities or operations that have VOC

containi ng byproducts that can be converted to electric energy by utilizing currently available technology or other byproducts such as biomass waste, from which energy

could also be derived. This measure will also evaluate opportunities to convert green

waste or o ther forms of biomass into electricity generation. The electricity produced may be used for the source facility or metered and sold to utility companies.

Energy Efficiency

This measure will look at possible source s of emissions in the r egion that could reduce ozone precursors by reducing energy consumption . The region districts will evaluate energy efficiency projects and practices that have a demonstrable benefit to air quality2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 34 and examine green certification of energy efficient buildin gs that utilized green building practices

.

Gasoline Transfer Phase I/II

This measure seeks to reduce VOC and toxic emissions from gasoline dispensing facilities by improving implementation of the Enhanced Vapor Recovery (EVR) Regulation. The EVR r egulati on includes testing and certification procedures to improve the performance and specification of Phases I and II vapor recovery systems. This measure will evaluate methods to improve the functions of the in

- station diagnostic. Improvements may include prov iding earlier warning signal, changing both the warning and gross failure alerting ranges, disallowing the use of the reset button, or installing a “shut down” sensor or mechanism on the dispenser to stop fueling if the fuel filters are

blocked and the fue ling flow rate drops below the s ystem certification standards. In addition, this measure will explore the option to require controls for mobile refuelers if a district rule has not established such requirements.

Lubricants

This measure seeks to reduce VO C emissions from the use of lubricants that are utilized by different industrial processes. Lubricants with their additives are at least 50 percent VOC solvents and are believed to emit a significant amount of VOCs. In

addition , lubricant thinners usually contain toxic chemicals which are classified as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) by the EPA and Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) by the

state of California. This measure will look at further reduc ing source emissions by either plac ing an overall emission limit by source or by limiting VOC content in lubricant formulations at the point of sale or use.

Episodic Controls

There are various emission reduction strategies that could potentially be implemented on an episodic basis when me teorological conditions would normally result in ozone exceedances. This further study measure will evaluate the feasibility of banning or reducing the use of a variety of types of equipment on high ozone days such as construction equipment, pleasure craft or other recreational vehicles; and lawn and landscaping equipment.

7.20 Contingency Measures

In general, contingency measures are control measures that go into effect if planned emission controls fail to reach desired goals and targets. Contingency provisions are required under sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act in the event the nonattainment area fails to meet a reasonable further progress milestone or attainment

deadline. Contingency measures are specific additional controls to b e implemented2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Proposed Control Measures

Page 7

- 35 automatically without further significant rulemaking activities, such as public hearings or legislative review, and without further action by the State or the Administrator (EPA).

Federal guidance 78 requires that contingency measures must be adopted to provide 3% more emission reductions than needed to meet the reasonable further progress and attainment demonstration requirements. The control measure strategy in this plan is expected to surpass the amount of emission reductions needed for reas onable further progress targets and for attainment by a margin that meets the contingency measures requirements. The calculations that demonstrate the anticipated contingency reductions are documented in conjunction with the attainment demonstration in Cha pter 8 and the reasonable further progress demonstration in Chapter 13.

78 ”General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990” (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Attainment Demonstration

Page 8

- 1 8 ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION

8.1 Introduction to Attainment Demonstration

EPA guidance 79 states, “A modeled attainment demonstra tion consists of (a) analyses

which estimate whether selected emissions reductions will result in ambient concentrations that meet the NAAQS, and (b) an identified set of control measures which will result in the required emissions reductions.” To meet the se requirements, this chapter incorporates all the major plan elements from Chapters 5 to 7 (emission inventories, modeling, and control measures) to demonstrate attainment by the required

deadline.

8.2 Attainment Demonstration Requirements

Section 182(c)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act requires that attainment demonstrations for “serious and higher” classified nonattainment areas be based on photochemical grid modeling or any other analytical method determined by EPA to be at least as effective.

In addit ion, EPA provides recommended guidance 80 on how to apply air quality models to generate results for preparing 8

- hour ozone attainment demonstrations

.

EPA regulations also require serious and higher nonattainment areas to meet various

criteria contained in 40 CFR 51.112 for attainment demonstrations. The demonstration criteria include the following:



###  A summary of the computations, assumptions, and judgments used to determine the level of emission reductions (or reductions in the growth of emissions) that will result from the implementation of the control strategy.



###  A presentation of emission levels expected to result from implementation of each measure of the control strategy.



###  A presentation of the air quality levels expected to result from implementation o f the overall control strategy presented either in tabular form or as an isopleth map showing expected maximum pollutant concentrations.



###  A description of the air quality models used to project air quality and to evaluate control strategies.

8.3 Attainment Dem onstration Evaluation

Attainment of the 8

- hour ozone NAAQS is evaluated for a 2018 “severe” classification scenario, based on modeling results for the peak ozone site (Cool) in the Sacramento region. The modeled VOC and NO X emission forecasts for 2018 in corporate growth assumptions and the estimated reductions associated with the existing control strategy. The photochemical modeling results in Chapter 6 were used to predict the 2018

79 “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM 2.5 , and Re gional Haze” (EPA, April 2007, p. 15).

80 Ibid, p. 15

- 40.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Attainment Demonstration

Page 8

- 2 regional peak ozone design value (88 ppb) and estimate the percent reduct ions needed

from the 2018 emission forecasts in order to achieve the federal 8

- hour ozone standard.

The combined reductions from adopted local, state

, and federal control measures are used to assess future 2018 attainment. These includ e (i) measures adopt ed since the initial regional adoption of this Plan in 2009, and (ii) from proposed control measures

identified in this Plan that have yet to be adopted or reflected in the current inventory

. The total benefits from all remaining control measure are estima ted to be 8 tpd of VOC

and 1 tpd of NO X in 2018 81

.

The emission reductions from new measures are shown in Table 8

- 1 , line s J and K

. Although it appears that some NOx reductions from ‘remaining measures’ are needed to reach the 2018 attainment emissions target (Table 8

- 1, Line G), one of the measures

, YSAQMD Rule 2.37 for water heaters

, has been adopted and approved by EPA (75 FR 25778) and achiev ed more than the anticipated emissions benefits expected in 2018.

That measure is still included as a “ r emaining m easure” because the emissions benefits have not yet been reflected in the emissions inventory. Rule 2.37 was expected to achieve 0.2 tpd NOx emissions reductions in this plan. The EPA approved Rule 2.3 7 is expected to achieve 0.5 tpd NOx reductions. Therefore, we conclude that the region does not rely on new measures to attain by 2018. These remaining measures provide a

buffer for meeting attainment by 2018

.

VOC and NO X Reduction Goals for 2018

Figur e 8

- 1 contains the ozone and pollutant emission reduction graph, based on modeling results, for the peak ozone design value site at Cool in the Sacramento region. This diagram shows the pattern of ozone responses to varying combinations in

domain

- wide VOC and NO X emission reductions. There are any number of potential

VOC and NO X reduction combinations that could provide for attainment. Since the ozone design values are truncated to the whole ppb, values be low 85 ppb represent

attainment of the federal 8

- hou r ozone standard.

The modeling results for the combination of emission reductions from new control

measures indicate attainment of the federal 8

- hour ozone standard ( 8 4 ppb ) for:

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

measure committal s ( 11.6% of VOC and 16.3% of NO X , designated at Point A )

.

2) the 2018 emission reductions from only the new local, regional, state and federal control measures adopted by the end of 2008 ( 3.3% of VOC and 12.5% of NO X , design ated at Point B )

.

Additional modeling details and assumptions for assessing the VOC and NO X reduction attainment goals are provided in Appendix B

– Photochemical Modeling.

81 Sum of Expected emission reductions from New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats and Expanded Off

- Road Recreation Vehicle Emissions Standards (Table 7

- 1) and Emissions Reductions from

Local/R egional Control Measures (Page C

- 5)2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Attainment Demonstration

Page 8

- 3 8.4 Attainment Demonstration Conclusions

Attainment of the 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone standard is demonstrated for the 2018 “severe” classification deadline in the Sacramento region as shown in Table 8

- 1 and the graph in Figure 8

- 1. The total emission reductions from remaining, non

- EPA approved,

measures are not needed for attainment and pr ovide a buffer to ensure the region

meets the 2018 attainment deadline.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Attainment Demonstration

Page 8

- 4 Figure 8

- 1 Attainment Demonstration Analysis Predicted 2018 Regional Peak Ozone Design Value at Cool

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

1. The upper right corner point designates the predicted 2018 peak ozone design value (88 ppb) based on the forecasted 2018 planning emissions inventory used in the Plan as adopted in 2009 (without new control measures): 121 tpd of VOC and 104 tpd of NO X

. 2. The x and y axes represent fractional emissi ons reductions from the forecasted 2018 planning emissions inventory used in the Plan as adopted in 2009

. 3. The whole numbers on the graph represent predicted ozone design value concentrations (truncated to whole ppb), based on modeling results for fracti onal VOC and NO X reductions at 5% increments.

V alues be low 85 ppb represent attainment of the federal 8

- hour ozone standard.

4 . Point A identifies the percentage of emission reductions (3.3% VOC and 12.5% NO X from 2018 emissions projected without new contr ols) that would have been achieved with the control strategy identified in the plan as adopted by local districts in 2009. Point A is below 85 ppb, demonstrating that this percentage of reductions would result in attainment of the standard at the Cool moni toring site

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Attainment Demonstration

Page 8

- 5 8.5 Summary of Attainment Demonstration

The attainment demonstration for the Sacramento nonattainment area is summarized in

Table 8

- 1. The attainment demonstration is based on the combination of emission

reductions from new VOC and NO X control measures that reduce the peak ozone design value to the 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone standard (84 ppb) , based on modeling

results

.

Table 8

- 1

Summary of Attainment Demonstration for 8

- Hour Ozone NAAQS

2018 “Severe” Classification Scenario

Sacramento Nonattainment Area VOC (tpd) NO X (tpd)

Summary of 2009 Plan Attainment Demonstration

A) 2002 Planning Emissions Inventory 1 160 .3 196 .1

B) 2018 Planning Emissions Inventory with Existing Controls 1 121 .1 104 .1

C) Attainment Emission Reduction in percentage 2 3.3% 12.5%

D) SIP Emissions Target: Line B × (1

– Line C) 117 .1 91 .1

E Percentage Emission Reduction Required for Attainment: ( 1

– (Line D ÷ Line A) ) × 100% 27. 0 % 53. 6 %

Revised Emissions Targets

F) Updated 2002 Inventory 3 14 6. 7 16 4.8

G) Updated SIP Emissions Target: Line F × ( 1

– Line E ) 107 .1 76 .5

Revised Attainment Demonstration

H) Updated 2018 Inventory 3 97 .7 73 .9

I Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Safety Margin 4 1 3

J) Emission Reductions in 2018 from Remaining Regional/Local Control

Measures 5,7 2. 7 1.1

K Emissions Reductions in 2018 from Remaining State/Federal Control

Measures 6 ,7 5.7 0.3

L) Total Emission s in 2018 with All Remaining Controls : ( Line H + Line I

- Line J

– Line K ) 9 0. 3 75

. 5

M ) Is Attainment Demonstrated? (Is Line L ≤ Line G?) Yes

1. The 2009 inventory is shown in Appendix A8

. 2. The percent emission reduction targets for attainment are based on modeling results

. Figure 8

- 1

Point A.

3. Chapter 5. Tables 5

- 2 and 5

- 3 include ERC s ( ERC details are in Tables 5

- 4 and 5

- 5)

. 4. Chapter 11 Table 11

- 1

5. Appendix C, Table of Emission Reductions by Air District, Page C

- 5

. 6. Chapter 7. Table 7

- 2 , sum of expected emission reductions from New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats and Expanded Off

- Road Rec. Vehicle Emission Standards.

7. These reductions provide a buffer for meeting attainment targets.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Attainment Demonstration

Page 8

- 6 8.6 Attainment Demonstration Contingency Measures Requirement

Federal guidance requires that sufficient contingency m easures in the plan should be adopted to provide a 3% emission reduction beyond what is needed for the attainment demonstration. The expected additional emission reduction benefits achieved from existing control programs meet the attainment contingency req uirement in 2019. More detailed information and documentation on the 2019 emissions inventory are provided in Appendix A

– Emissions Inventory.

The calculations of the attainment contingency measures reductions for 2019 are provided in Table 8

- 2. The combined VOC and NO X reductions in 2019 exceed the 3%

needed to meet the attainment contingency requirement.

Table 8

- 2 Attainment Contingency Measures Reductions

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Revised Inventory (adjusted CEPAM 2012) (tpd) VOC NO X

A. Updated SIP Emission Target 1 107 .1 76 .5

B. Updated 2019 Emissions 2 9 9 .8 74 .4

2019 Total Reductions (tpd) VOC NO X
C. 2019 Reductions From Emission Target [Line A

– Line B] 7.4 2 .2

D. Percent Reduction from SIP Emission Target [Line C ÷ Line A] × 100% 6.9 % 2. 8 %

Conclusion: The combined VOC and NO X reductions

total 9

. 7 %, which exceeds the 3% attainment contingency requirement.

1. Table 8

- 1 Line G

. 2. Appendix A, Table A7

- 1. P lus the MVEB safety margin from Table 8

- 1 Line I

. Total ERC s (rounded up) listed in

Tables 5

- 4 and 5

- 5 are included in the 2019 inventory

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Transport Analysis

Page 9

- 1 9 TRANSPORT ANALYSIS

9.1 Int roduction to Pollutant Transport

The air quality in the Sacramento region can be impacted by pollutant transport from the San Francisco Bay Area. D elta breezes carry air pollutants from coastal Bay Area

emission sources downwind to the inland areas of the Sacramento region, and these pollutants may contribute to ozone formation during the same day or the following days. The California Air Resources Board has determined that the relative impact from this Bay Area transport can be considered overwhelming, significant, or inconsequential on various days 82

, depending on meteorological conditions. CARB has also made findings that pollutant transport from the San Joaquin Valley can have significant or inconsequential impact 83 on air quality in the Sacramento region.

In addition, pollutant transport from the Sa cramento region can potentially impact the air quality in other regions under certain meteorological conditions. For example, CARB analyses have determined that ozone violations at the Grass Valley monitoring station

in Nevada County are considered to be o verwhelmingly due to transport from the Sacramento region 84

.

This chapter discusses various interbasin transport issues and modeling assumptions regarding transported air pollutants.

9.2 Interbasin Transport Issues

There are many different issues involving i nterbasin transport of air pollutants. First, air pollutant transport is evaluated in order to get a more complete picture of how ozone is formed in the Sacramento region. Depending on meteorological conditions, the amount of transport from outside the non attainment area can vary from day to day. Understanding the impacts of transport can be an important factor in predicting future attainment of the ozone standard in the Sacramento region. For example, if a region’s ozone problem is significantly caused by outside pollutant transport, the n a local emission control strategy may not achieve its goal.

Another issue is that air pollutant transport is difficult to assess and can involve many different complex methodologies with varying degrees of limitations and uncertainty. For example, s urface wind flow studies using ambient meteorological and air quality monitoring data can reveal general directional and temporal potential for transport and qualitative air pollution impacts

. However

, specific quantitative impact s on downwind ozone formation may still be undetermined and carryover effects may be unaccounted

for

. P hotochemical grid modeling studies can quantify a more precise transport

contribution to downwind ozone and take carryover into account , but they may only be

82 California Air Resources Board, “Ozone Transport: 2001 Review” (April 2001).

83 Ibid.

84 Ibid.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Transport Analysis

Page 9

- 2 representative of a specific ozone episode of several days and subject to various modeling performance uncertainties.

In addition, other issues pertaining to transport assessment include : 1) uncertainties in transport occurring from aloft laye rs 85 , 2) potentially different assumptions in future emission reduction strategies in upwind air basins, 3) transport from the Sacramento region to other downwind areas, and 4) emissions transport due to motor vehicles traveling between air basins.

9.3 EPA Rul es and Regulations on Intrastate Transport

The Federal 8

- hour ozone implementation rule s 86 state that intrastate transport could be considered by EPA and States in determining the attainment date that is as expeditious as practicable for nonattainment area s. However, if the date were later than allowed for the area’s classification, the State would need to request a bump

- up of the area to a higher classification for that date to be approved. In identifying the appropriate attainment date for an area, the State should consider measures to address intrastate transport of pollution from sources within its jurisdiction.

9.4 Attainment Assumptions of Domain

- wide Reductions

Transported pollutants from upwind areas can contribute to the ozone problem further downwind across geographic air basins. The photochemical grid modeling study includes the northern and central regions of California in the modeling domain (see Chapter 6

– Air Quality Modeling Analysis ). This extensive air quality model was used to

a ddr es s and account for air pollutant transport impacts among the San Francisco Bay

Area , San Joaquin Valley, Sacramento Valley, and Mountain Counties air basins

.

States are responsible for submitting SIPs for all areas of their State and need to

demonstrate at tainment in all areas addressing intrastate transport where appropriate

. CARB modeling for the attainment demonstration for the Sacramento nonattainment

area us ed domain

- wide emission reductions to characterize future ozone reductions at peak ozone monitor ing stations. Therefore, for our area to attain, reductions in

f orecasted emissions necessary and committed to in Sacramento must also be

achieved in the areas that significantly impact the region

. In other words, the attainment

demonstration for the Sacra mento nonattainment area is predicated on the San Francisco Bay Area and the San Joaquin Valley also achiev ing an equivalent additional
percent reduction of VOC and NO X emissions in their forecasted 2018 inventory.

The reductions could come from either state or upwind regions’ local measures, but we understand that CARB has committed to address the reduction requirement by implement ing the new state measures statewide. The CARB attainment demonstration

for Sacramento has not quantified state measure benefits in the Bay Area or the impact

85 Aloft layers are the layers above the surface inversion layer.

86 “Final Rule to Implement the 8

- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard

– Phase 2” (Federal Register, November 29, 2005, p. 71623

- 71624).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Transport Analysis

Page 9

- 3 of Bay Area transport. Because the measures identified in CARB’s 2007 Statewide SIP Strategy 87 achieve 9% VOC and 1 4 % NO X reductions from the 2018 emission inventory

forecasts for the Sacramento region, it is likely that the state measures will achieve

similar reductions in the Bay Area and San Joaquin Valley

.

Regarding the ozone violations in Nevada County, emission reduction strategies in the

Sacramento region will benefit their effo rts to attain the federal ozone standards. CARB modeling results predict that future ozone reductions at the Grass Valley monitoring

station could achieve the 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone standard by 201 8

. Ultimately, CARB is responsible for ensuring that Nev ada County meets its federal attainment requirements.

87 CARB. Air Resources Board’s Proposed State Strategy for California’s 2007 State Implementation

Plan. CA: California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA [2007.] Web 18 April 2013,

< http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2007sip/2007sip.htm#April26 >2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Weight

- of

- Evidence Determination Page 10

- 1 10 WEIGHT

- OF

- EVIDENCE DETERMINATION

10.1 Introduction to Weight

- of

- Evidence

Air quality computer models attempt to represent or simulate complex physical and chemical phenomena occurring in the atmosphere, based on the best available

information. Photochemical models are used to predict future ozone concentrations and quantify VOC and NO X emission reduction targets for meeting the ambient ozone

sta ndard. As mentioned at the end of Chapter 6, air quality modeling uncertainties can arise due to: 1) the model’s simplification of atmospheric processes, 2) inaccuracies from meteorological, emissions, and other input data bases, and 3) limitations in the assumptions and methodologies for forecasting future emissions, meteorological conditions, and ozone design value concentrations.

Attainment demonstrations based on photochemical modeling can be strengthened by supplemental evidence from additional modeli ng analyses and from considering modeling outputs other than the attainment test results. More diverse non

- modeling and observational methods analyzing air quality, meteorological, and emissions data can also be used to corroborate the modeling predictions

.

This chapter summarizes the recommended requirements and methodology for preparing a weight

- of

- evidence (WOE) determination and the WOE analysis performed by the California Air Resource Board staff for the region. T he CARB weight

- of

- evidence

assessment indicates that the ozone attainment demonstration is likely to be achieved by the mandated deadline. More detailed information on the weight

- of

- evidence techniques and evaluations are provided in Appendix E

– Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses.

10.2 Weight

- of

- Evidence Requirements

EPA guidance 88 requires districts (or the state) to conduct a comprehensive weight

- of

evidence analysis to support the modeled attainment demonstration. The amount of supporting material needed depends on how close the attai nment modeling demonstration is to meeting the 8

- hour ozone standard (  84 ppb) at all monitors. For example, a limited amount of basic supplemental analyses is required if the predicted future ozone design value concentration is less than 82 ppb at all monitors. However, if future design values are closer to the NAAQS, more rigorous analyses must be

conducted.

Corroborative analyses can include the following: 89



###  Modeling performance evaluation and assessment of uncertainty, such as:

- accuracy in simulating ozone formation

- reliability of modeling data bases

- confidence in forecasting methodologies

88 “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM 2.5 , and Regional Haze” (EPA, April 2007, p. 98

- 109).

89 Ibid.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Weight

- of

- Evidence Determination Page 10

- 2 

###  Other modeling results and characteristics, such as:

- how close predicted future ozone results are to attainment

- number of years projected to attainment year

- represe ntativeness of modeling episodes



###  Trends in ambient air quality and ozone precursor emissions, such as:

- assessment of monitored ozone trends

- assessment of monitored ambient ozone precursor pollutant trends

- assessment of VOC and NO X emission trends



###  Observati onal methods to assess control strateg ies , such as:

- using receptor models to verify emission source categories causing ambient precursor pollutants

- using ambient indicator species/ratios to evaluate sensitivity of ozone formation to precursor pollutants

- review success of implementing SIP committal controls

10.3 Methodology for Applying Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses

EPA guidance 90 states, “A weight

- of

- evidence determination examines results from a diverse set of additional analyses, including the outcome of the primary attainment test, and attempts to summarize the results into an aggregate conclusion” with respect to the

attainment demonstration. “Each analysis is weighed qualitatively, depending on: 1) the capacity of the analysis to address the adequacy of a s trategy and 2) the technical credibility of the analysis.”

The weight

- of

- evidence end product is a document which describes the following:



###  Analyses performed,



###  Data bases used,



###  Key assumptions and outcomes of each analysis, and



###  Rationale for concluding tha t the aggregate evidence supports a conclusion regarding whether the area will or will not attain the ozone standard, which may

differ from the modeled attainment test.

10.4 Summary of CARB Weight

- of

- Evidence Analyses 91

Photochemical modeling results indicate that reducing NO X emissions will be the most effective strategy for bringing the Sacramento Metro Area 92 into attainment. These reductions will not be in place by the 2013 deadline. However, they will be implemented by 2018. Therefore, districts in the Sacr amento Metro Area have approved reclassification, and ARB has requested that U.S. EPA reclassify the Sacramento Metro

Area as Severe

- 15, with a required attainment date of June 15, 2019

.

90 Ibid.

91 This section was not updated. See Chapter 4, 8

- Hour Ozone Air Quality Trends, for updated trend

information.

92 Sacramento Metro Area is considered the same as the Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Weight

- of

- Evidence Determination Page 10

- 3 The ARB staff’s modeling results indicate that NO X emissions reducti ons will be critical for bringing sites in the Sacramento Metro Area into attainment. Given the timeframe over which these reductions are expected to occur, the Sacramento Metro Area should be attainment by June 15, 2019, with a 10 percent or more reductio n in forecasted NO X emissions. Based on modeling, as well as supporting analyses included in this WOE evaluation, attainment by 2019 is anticipated because of the following factors:

 Since 1999, the number of areawide exceedance days has decreased a little

more than 10 percent. The maximum concentration and design value show more modest reductions, with decreases of about 10 and 5 percent, respectively, from 1999 to 2006. Because these are areawide numbers, they

reflect the “worst case” sites. Although 2007 data show a slightly higher maximum concentration and a design value comparable with 2006, they show the number of areawide exceedance days at an all

- time low of 16 days for the entire year.

 While the amount of progress varies on a subregional basis, there has been a substantial reduction in the number of exceedance days in the western subregion. Since 1999, exceedance days decreased 25 percent, and all sites in this subregion now attain the federal 8

- hour ozone standard.

 Between 1999 and 2006, the central subregion shows a 10 percent decrease

in the three

- year average of exceedance days at all sites but Folsom, which shows only a slight reduction in days. Although progress at Folsom appears

to have slowed over the last sev eral years, the central subregion has demonstrated long

- term progress. Sites with long

- term data, including Folsom, show a 35 to 50 percent decrease in exceedance days since 1990,

based on three

- year averages. The decrease in design values has been more

mo dest, averaging about 5 percent since 1990.

 Although sites in the eastern subregion still have some of the highest ozone concentrations, the three

- year average of exceedance days at Cool, the worst
site in this area, decreased about 15 percent between 199 9 and 2006. Other sites in the subregion showed little change in the average number of exceedance days between 1999 and 2006.

 During the late

- 1990s, the ozone problem was more widespread throughout

the Sacramento Metro Area. Since then, all areas have imp roved, although at differing rates. All of the western subregion and the easternmost portion of the eastern region now meet the federal standard. The ozone problem is now confined to the central subregion and the more urbanized portions of the

eastern subr egion. However, even at the worst sites in these subregions (Cool and Folsom ), 60 to 65 percent of the days during the 2006 ozone season were below the more stringent S tate 8

- hour ozone standard.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Weight

- of

- Evidence Determination Page 10

- 4  Ozone indicator values for many sites in the Sacramento Met ro Area were higher for 2005, 2006, and 2007 than for 2004. However, the 2004 values were uncharacteristically low. When compared with values for 2002 and 2003, the values for 2005 through 2007 are generally lower, indicating

progress. The Sacramento Metro Area is much closer to attainment than other areas of the State, such as the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley air

basins. Because the Sacramento Metro Area values are closer to the standard, small variations in meteorology can result in relatively large

year

- to

- year changes in the trends. These variations can make it difficult to interpret the trends. However, in the Sacramento Metro Area, it appears there has been overall improvement, despite this variability.

 Analyses suggest that recent ozone improve ments are linked to emissions

reductions. The decline in the number of exceedance days relative to the number of days with a high potential for ozone formation indicates that the modest improvements in ozone over the last few years were related to

emission s reductions rather than favorable meteorological conditions. A more detailed adjustment of ozone trends for the annual mean of the Top 30 produced similar results. Results of these analyses also indicate that increasingly adverse meteorological conditions are now needed to create ozone levels exceeding the federal 8

- hour standard.

 Estimated ROG and NO X emissions trends, as well as ambient measurements, indicate reductions in both precursors since the mid

- 1990s.

These reductions have resulted in modest ozo ne improvements. Emissions estimates indicate a continuing decline in ROG and NO X emissions. However, photochemical modeling results show that NO X reductions will be critical to

attainment. As a result, a control strategy relying on a 10 percent or more

re duction in NO X emissions is proposed as the most efficient path to attainment by June 15, 2019.

 Photochemical modeling results show a design value of less than 0.085 ppm with proposed new controls for the Sacramento Metro Area by the end of

2018. Many sit es will reach attainment before this date. Coupled with the analyses completed for the WOE, it is reasonable to conclude that the entire Sacramento Metro Area will reach attainment within this timeframe, consistent

with the June 15

, 2019, attainment deadline.

Taken together, all of these factors indicate that the Sacramento Metro Area can expect

to attain the federal 8

- hour ozone standard by June 15

, 2019, the required attainment

date for a Severe

- 15 ozone nonattainment area.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Transportation Conformity and Emission Budgets Page 11

- 1 11 TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY AND EMISSION BUDGETS

11.1 Introduction to Transportation Conformity

Transportation conformity is the federal regulatory procedure for linking and coordinating the transportation and air quality planning processes

. Under the federal Clean Air Act, federal agencies may not approve or fund transportation plans and project s unless they are consistent with state air quality implementation plans (SIPs). Conformity with the SIP requires tha t transportation activities not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The quantification and comparison of on

- road motor

vehicle emissions is the method for determining transportation conformity between air quality and transportation planning.

This chapter summarizes principal transportation conformity requirements, and

proposes new motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEB)

.

11.2 Transportation Conformity Requirements

The CAA states that no federal department engage in, support in any way or provide financial assistance for or license or approve any activity that does not conform to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). (42 USC 7506 ) To implement this requ irement, EPA

established the Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR 93)

. This Rule:



###  Establishes criteria and procedures for determining whether long

- range metropolitan transportation plans (MTPs), short

- range metropolitan transportation improvement programs (MTIPs), and projects conform to the SIP.



###  Ensures that transportation plans and projects are consistent with the applicable

SIP

, such that associated transportation emissions are less than or equal to motor

vehicle emission s budgets established fo r demonstrating reasonable further

progress, attain ment or maint enance of health

- based air quality standards.



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

11.3 Purpose of the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget

The m otor v ehicle e missions b udget is the total allowable emissions allocated to on

road motor v ehicle s in the submitted or approved SIP revision or maintenance plan for reasonable further progress milestones or demonstrating attainment or maintenance of
the NAAQS

. (40 CFR 93

. 101 )

Transportation c onformity determinations are accomplished by comparing the motor

vehicle emissions associated with MTPs and MTIPs with the motor vehicle emissions budgets established in the SIP for each attainment, milestone, or transportation planning year. If the emissions associated with implementation of the MTP and/or MTIP2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Transportation Conformity and Emission Budgets Page 11

- 2 are less than or equal to the budgets established in the SIP, a confo rmity determination

can be made.

In this SIP, a n emission budget is established for both VOC and NO X for two reasons:

1. Both VOC and NO X are ozone precursors, and reductions of both pollutants are

needed to demonstrate attainment of the ozone standards , and

2. The reasonable further progress demonstration relies on NO X substitution to meet the required goals

.

This ozone plan proposes to upda te the allowable motor vehicle emissions budgets that SACOG must use to demonstrate that projected regional motor vehicle emissions with all of the new transportation projects will conform to the levels established in the SIP

.

11.4 Latest Planning Assumptions

The current and forecasted vehicle miles traveled (VMT) are from SACOG

- supplied activity data (submitted to ARB October 2012 ) 93 based on transportation modeling for the Sacramento region and recent amendments to the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Plan ( 2013/16 MTIP ) 94

, which received federal approval on December 14,

2012

. In addition, t he vehicle activity levels for the eastern part of Solano County in the Sacramento nonattainment area are based on MTP data from the Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission (submitted to ARB November 2012 )

.

11.5 SACOG’s Blueprint and MTP / SCS 2035

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

In December 2004, Blueprint smart growth principles and a 2050 growth scenario were approved by SACOG 95 to achieve the following objectives:

1. Provide a variety of transportation choices

2. Offer housing choices

3. Take advantage of compact development

4. Use existing assets

5. Increase m ixed land use

93 SACOG travel data transmittal e

- mails to ARB and SMAQMD dated October 10, 2012 and November 30, 2012 respectively.

94 Final 2013/16 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP), Amendment #1 to the MTP/SCS 2035, and Air Quality Conformity Analysis. (August 16, 2012), FHWA approval Decem ber
14, 2012.

95 http://www.sacog.org/regionalfunding/betterways.pdf2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Transportation Conformity and Emission Budgets Page 11

- 3 6. Encourage n atural resource conservation

7. Ensure distinctive, attractiv e communities with quality design

The region then began the more detailed planning efforts for the long range Metropolitan Transportation Plan for 2035 (MTP2035). SACOG works with local jurisdictions, CalTrans, and transportation and planning agencies to define interim land use allocations and specific transportation project needs. Federal MTP guidelines require that the land use allocations represent what is most likely to be built. Therefore, the specific Blueprint smart growth policies affect land use a llocations only to the extent that the local jurisdictions and SACOG are able to demonstrate that the policies will actually be implemented

.

Since the last MTP, California adopted Senate Bill 375, which requires a Sustainable Communities Strategy, to be a dded to transportation plans across the state. As a result, the region adopted on April 19, 2012, t he Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy ( 2012 MTP/SCS) . This is a long

- range plan for transporta tion

built on the Blueprint conc ept and replaced MTP2035

U pdated activity data based on the 2013/16 MTIP 96 were used in setting the baseline projections for the motor vehicle inventory. While the Blueprint principles affect these baseline projections, Blueprint is not included in this pl an as a transportation control

measure.

SACOG’s Transportation Model 97

The transportation analysis for the 201 3/16 MT IP relied on the latest planning assumptions and SACOG’s new regional travel demand forecasting model , SACSIM. 98

The SACSIM model was used to estimate future traffic volumes and public transit ridership in the 6

- county Sacramento region. SACSIM incorporates an “activity

- based” travel model which simulates the population of households allocated to parcels and

creates a one

- day activity and tri p travel schedule for each person in the population.

The activity and travel schedule are sensitive to transportation network accessibility and a variety of demographic and land use variables. SACSIM also incorporates a mode

choice model which determines how each travel destination is reached.

The network traffic assignment models load the trips onto the network , resulting in

vehicle miles traveled at four time intervals (AM peak, midday, PM peak, and evening/early morning) and speed within each time peri od

. To develop the travel

96 Final 2013/16 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP), Amendment #1 to the MTP/SCS 2035, and Air Quality Conformity Analysis. (August 16, 2012), FHWA approval December

14 , 2012.

97 SACOG’s transportation model description and results provided by SACOG’s Gordon Garry e

- mail to SMAQMD (5

- 28

- 08).

98 Bradley, M.A., J.L. Bowman and B. Griesenbeck. “Development and application of the SACSIM activity

- based model system,” submitte d for presentation at the 11 th World Conference on Transport Research, Berkeley, California. June 2007.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Transportation Conformity and Emission Budgets Page 11

- 4 forecasting model, information on the characteristics and constraints of the transportation system and residents’ travel survey data were collected. The SACSIM travel outputs were compared to actual base year data to be able to de monstrate adequate model performance results.

SACOG used the SACSIM travel demand model to forecast average weekday travel patterns for several future years, based on given assumptions about expected future population and employment projections, 99 land use allocations, and transportation system improvements and changes contained in the 2013/16 MTIP 100 The results of the travel model predicted that growth in vehicle trips and growth in vehicle miles traveled would be slightly lower than the population growth ra te for the Sacramento region through 2035.

11.6 Proposed New Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget s

To reflect the updated motor vehicle emission forecasts, the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan includes new transportation conformity budgets for the, 2014, and 2017 RFP milestone years, and the

20 18 attainmen t analysis year, listed in Table 11

- 1 . The proposed budgets incorporate: 1) the recent on

- road motor vehicle emission inventory factors of EMFAC2011 (described in Section 5.3.3), 2) updated travel activity data from SACOG’s 2013/16

MTIP 101 and MTC’s Plan Bay Area Preferred Land Use Scenario/Transportation Investment Strategy (May 11, 2012) 102 , based on the new SACSIM transportation modeling system, and 3) latest regional and state control strategies

.

Table 11

- 1 Proposed New Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets

Sacra mento Nonattainment Area

NO X VOC

2014 2017 2018 2014 2017 2018 ARB Inventories for Conformity (Tons per Day) 46 37 34 21 17 16
Safety Margin 3 2 3 2 1 1

Budgets 49 39 37 23 18 17

* All motor vehicle emission budget years include regional incentive benefits

.

99 SACOG Board of Directors (September 2007) approved 2013 and 2018 housing and employment allocations based on July 2007 DOF projections.

100 Final 2013/16 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP), Amendment #1 to the MTP/SCS 2035, and Air Quality Conformity Analysis. (August 16, 2012) FHWA approved on December 14, 2012.

101 Ibid.

102 Joint MTC Planning/ABAG Administrative Committees, Plan Bay Area Preferred Land Use and Transportation Investment Strategy . Oakland, CA: Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission. [May 2012.]2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Transportation Conformity and Emission Budgets Page 11

- 5 A lthough the regional and local commitment is to the "total emission reductions," for purposes of establishing motor vehicle emissions budgets for transportation conformity, an explicit commitment is made to the reductions associated with the on

- road mobile source incentive program in each of the milestone years. These external adjustments for certain proposed State measures and local control measures are documented in Appendix F

– Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets and VMT Offset demonstration. Additionally, the transportation budgets incorporate a “safety margin

. ” 103 These transportation budgets decline significantly from 2014 through 2018, which will ensure continued progress towards attainment of the 8

- hour ozone standards. As required by 40CFR93.105, the regional air districts consulted with the metropolitan planni ng organization s , state agencies, Department of Transportation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency during development of the MVEBs proposed in this

P lan Revision

. On December 11, 2012, a meeting of SACOG’s Regional Planning Partnership (RPP) 104 was held to review and recommend for adoption of the MVEBs

. By

a consensus vote, members of RPP approved that the proposed MVEBs to be included

in the Plan revision

. The proposed MVEBs were also presented to the Land Use and

Natural Resources Committee of the SACOG Board on February 7, 2013.

11.7 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget Approval Proces s

EPA can make an adequacy finding on new 8

- hour m otor v ehicle e missions b udget s prior to their approval of a SIP revision plan. This adequacy review process is subject to public participation and review requirements pursuant to 40 CFR 93.118(f). This adequacy process is intended to expedite the use of conformity budgets to protect air quality.

US EPA determined the motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2014, 2017 , to be adeq uate and found the budget for 2018 inadequate on July 28, 2009. The budgets in this plan replace the prior budgets 105

.

If determined to be adequate for transportation conformity purposes by EPA, future transportation plans will need to conform to these new motor vehicle emissions budgets. The Metropolitan Planning Organizations, SACOG and MTC, must ensure that the aggregate transportation emissions in the region stay below these levels when approving new metropolitan transportation plans and transportation i mprovement

programs

, even if the mix of projects changes or growth increases. Following EPA

action

, t hese new 8

- hour MVEBs will remain in effect until other budgets are found adequate or approved by EPA.

103 40 CFR 93.101 and 40 CFR 93.124.

104 SACOG. Regional Planning Partnership December 11, 2012 Meeting Agenda Item 6 : Proposed Update to Sacramento Ozone Pre

- Cursor Emissions Budgets

. Sacramento Area Council of Governments, Sacramento, CA. [December 11, 2012.]

105 Federal Register Volume 74 No. 143 p.37210, 07/28/2009.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Transportation Conformity and Emission Budgets Page 11

- 6 11.8 Vehicle Miles Traveled Offset (VMT Offset)

Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the federal Clean Air Act applies to areas classified as severe or extreme nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for

ozone. The Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area is currently designated as

Severe

- 15, (75FR24409) and is subject to the requirement to offset any growth in emissions resulting from an increase in vehicle miles travelled

. A detailed VMT offset demonstration was prepared by California Air Resources Board and is included in Appendix F

– Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets and VMT Offset Demonstration as part of the 2013 revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan. The analysis shows there are sufficient transportation control strategies and TCMs t o offset the emissions increase due to growth in VMT and demonstrates compliance with the requirements of Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the federal Clean Air Act.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

General Conformity

Page 12

- 1 12 GENERAL CONFORMITY

12.1 Introduction to General Conformity

General conformity is the federal regulatory proce ss for preventing major federal

acti ons 106 or projects from interfer ing with air quality planning goals. Conformity provisions ensure that federal funding and a pproval are given only to those activities and projects that are consistent with state air quality implementation plans (SIPs). Conformity with the SIP means that major federal actions will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).

Current federal rules require that federal agencies use the emissions inventory from an

app roved SIP’s attainment or maintenance demonstration to support a conformity

determination

. The 1994 SIP i s the most recent attainment plan for the Sacramento region that may be used to assess general conformity. T he emissions inventory in this

8

- hour ozone attainment plan will replace the old 1994 SIP emis sions inventory for general conformity purposes.

This chapter summarizes basic general conformity requirements and emissions criteria for demonstrating general conformity. In addition, a specific inventory for airport emissions is provided in this chapter for the potential general conformity analysis of future airport expansions.

12.2 General Conformity Requirements

The Clean Air Act (CAA) states that no federal department may engage in, support in any way or provide financial assistance for or license or app rove any activity that does

not conform to an approved SIP. (42 USC 7506)

The EPA promulgated the c onformity regulations for general federal actions (40 CFR 51

s ubpart W and 40 CFR 93 s ubpart B) pursuant to section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act

. The “ General Conformity ” R ule sets forth the requirements a federal agency must comply with to make a conformity determination. G eneral c onformity requires that federal agencies and departments not support or approve an action that does any of the following:



###  C auses or contributes to new violations of any NAAQS in an area;



###  Increases the frequency or severity of an existing violation of any NAAQS ; or



###  Delays timely attainment of any NAAQS , required interim emission reduction, or

other milestones.

106 Federal actions are defined as any activity engaged in by a department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal government, or any activity that they support, fund, license, permit, or approve, other than activities related to transportation plans, programs, and projects that are applicable to tra nsportation conformity requirements. (40 CFR 93.152)2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

General Conformity

Page 12

- 2 12.3 Types of Federal Actions Subject to General Conformity Requirements

Examples of general federal actions that may require a conformity determination include, but are not limited to, the following: leasing of federal land

, private construction

on federal la nd

, reuse of military bases

, airport construction and expansions, and construction of federal office buildings.

General c onformity requirements apply only if federal actions satisfy one of the following

two conditions: (40 CFR 93.153)



###  The action’s direct and indirect emissions have the potential to exceed the de minimus threshold levels established for criteria pollutants in the r ule. For a severe nonattainment area, the threshold level is 25 tons per year of VOC or NO X

.



###  The action’s direct and indirect emissions of any criteria pollutant represent 10% or

more of a nonattainment or maintenance area’s total emissions inventory for that pollutant. For the nonattainment area, 10% of the total 2002 VOC emission inventory

is 1 6 tons per day (or about 5

, 7 00 tons per year) , and 10% of the total 2002 NO X emission inventory is 1 9 tons per day (or about 6

, 9 00 tons per year)

.

Direct emissions of a criteria pollutant or its precursors 107 are emissions that are caused

or created by the f ederal action, and occur at the same time and place as the action

. Indirect emissions are reasonably foreseeable emissions that are further removed from

the f ederal action in time and/or distance, and can be practicably controlled by the

f ederal agency due to a continuing program responsibility

. (40 CFR 93.152) A f ederal agency can indirectly control emissions by placing conditions on f ederal approval or

f ederal funding. An example would be controlling emissions by limiting the size of a parking facility or by making employee trip reduction requirements

. 108

12.4 Emissions Criteria for Demonstrating General Conformity

T o meet the conformity determination emissions criteria, the total of direct and indirect

emissions from a federal action must meet all relevant re quirements and milestones contained in the applicable SIP (40 CFR 93.158(c)), and must meet other specified requirements, such as:



###  For any criteria pollutant , the total of direct and indirect emissions from the action

must be specifically identified and accounted for in the applicable SIP’s attainment or maintenance demonstration (40 CFR 93.158(a)(1)) ; or



###  For ozone, the total of direct and indirect emissions from the action must be fully offset within the same nonattainment ( or maintenance) area through a revision to the applicable SIP or a similarly enforceable emissions control measure in the SIP (40 CFR 93.158(a)( 2 )) ; or

107 Precursors for ozone include NO X and VOC pollutants (40 CFR 93.152).

108 “General Conformity Guidance: Questions and Answers” (OAQPS, EPA, dated July 13, 1994), p. 13.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

General Conformity

Page 12

- 3 

###  For ozone, CARB must make a finding that t he total of direct and indirect emissions

from the action will result in a level of emissions that , together with all other

emissions in the nonattainment (or maintenance) area, will not exceed the emissions inventory specified in the applicable SIP (40 CFR 93.158(a)(5)(i) (A) ) ; or



###  For ozone, CARB must make a finding that t he total of direct and indirect emissions

from the action will result in a level of emissions that , together with all other

emissions in the nonattainment (or maintenance) area, will exceed the emissions inventory specified i n the applicable SIP but the State Governor or designee for SIP

actions makes a written commitment to EPA to take specific future actions (40 CFR 93.158(a)(5)(i) (B) ).

12.5 Airports Emissions Inventory

Airports in the nonattainment area are planning for future growth. Sacramento County

has prepar ed a master plan for this growth that shows an increase in emissions. The Sacramento County Airport System is comprised of four airports: Sacramento International (SMF), Mather (MHR) , Executive (SAC)

, and Franklin (F32)

. In addition, the County Airport System manages the aviation activities at McClellan Airport on behalf of another County agency. Three private airports also operate in Sacramento County:
Rancho Murieta, Rio Linda , and Sunset 109

. The aircraft emissions inven tory forecast includes airports from all counties in the Sacramento nonattainment area.

To facilitate future conformity determinations, the projected direct and indirect emissions from airport growth are identified for the 2014, and 2017 RFP milestone yea rs , and for

the 20 18 attainment analysis year in Table 1 2

- 1

. A portion of the airport emissions inventory is represented by ground support equipment (GSE) and subject to CARB’s

2007 In

- Use, Off

- Road Equipment Regulation. In 2010 C ARB approved a suite of

amendments to the in

- use rules that were designed to account for reduced activity resulting from the recession and provide regulatory relief to truck and equipment

owners. The off

- road rule revisions delayed implementation requirements for small

fleets. CA RB’s inventory uses the same average GSE emission rates for all counties in California and does not reflect fleet size and characteristics specific to each airport. The state’s total GSE emissions are dominated by “large fleet” emissions and controls, and CARB’s rule requires accelerated and greater control of “large fleets” as compared to

those of “medium and small fleets

. ”

This Plan revision combine s the GSE emissions with aircraft emissions for each planning year and the total is rounded up to the next tenth decimal number. This rounding convention is used in estimating emissions inventories included in the Plan.

109 Information from Sacramento Count y Airport System; comment letter dated October 24, 2008.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

General Conformity

Page 12

- 4 Table 12

- 1 (Revised)

Airport (Aircraft Operations + Ground Support Equipment) Emissions

for the Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Year of Operations VOC NO X
(tons/day) (tons/day)

2014 Projected Emissions Inventory
Aircraft Operations and GSE 0.7 2. 7

2017 Projected Emissions Inventory
Aircraft Operations and GSE 0.7 3. 0

2018 Projected Emissions Inventory
Aircraft Operations and GSE 0.7 3. 02013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Reas onable Further Progress Demonstrations Page 13

- 1 13 REASONABLE FURTHER PROGRESS DEMONSTRATIONS

13.1 Introduction to Reasonable Further Progress

T he Clean Air Act specif ies reasonable further progress (RFP) requirements for ozone

nonattainment areas. RFP refers to the general need to obtain a certain level of annual incremental reductions in emissions of the relevant air pollutant for the purpose of ensuring attainment of th e standard by the applicable attainment deadline.

This chapter begins with a discussion of RFP requirements for the 8

- hour ozone
NAAQS. It also describes t he methodology for deriving the base year emissions inventory, calculating RFP emission targets

, ass essing creditable reductions , and using

NO X substitution for VOC reduction shortfalls

. Finally, t his chapter includes the emission

reduction summary that demonstrate s the RFP targets are met for each of the future milestone years. Additional RFP informatio n and documentation are provided in Appendix G

– Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations

.

13.2 Reasonable Further Progress Requirements

Sections 172(c)(2), 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2)(B) of the Clean Air Act include RFP provisions for reducing emissions in ozone nonattainment areas. The federal 8

- hour ozone regulations 110 (40 CFR 51.910) require that areas classified under subpart 2 as

“serious and above” need to submit a reasonable further progress plan that show s a VOC (and/or NO X ) emission reduction of at least 18% over the first 6 years from the 2002 baseline year (i.e., 2002

- 2008) 111 and 9% between each subsequent milestone

year (i.e., 2009

- 2011, 2012

- 2014, 2014

- 2017 ) and 3% in the attainment year

. These

demonstrations are made fo r future milestone years 2014, 2017 , and 2018

. A plan to demonstrate how progress toward milestone targets in 2008 and 2011 is considered moot, since those milestone years are in the past.

13.3 Contingency Measures Requirement

In general, contingency measures are control measures that go into effect if planned emission controls fail to reach desired goals and targets. Contingency provisions are required under sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act in the event the

nonattainment area fails to mee t a reasonable further progress milestone or attainment

deadline. Contingency measures are specific additional controls to be implemented automatically without further significant rulemaking activities, such as public hearings or legislative review, or wit hout further action by the State or the Administrator (EPA).

110 The final 8

- hour ozone implementation rule (Phase 2) which includes the reasonable further progress requirements was signed and published in the November 29, 2005 Federal Register.

111 The Sacramento Regional Nonattainment Area 8

- Hour Ozone Rate

- of

- Progress Plan (February 2006)

included over 18% RFP reductions of VOC and NO X emissions for the first 6 years from the 2002 baseline year.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Reas onable Further Progress Demonstrations Page 13

- 2 Federal guidance 112 requires that sufficient contingency measures in the plan be adopted to provide a 3% emission reduction beyond what is needed for the reasonable further progress requirement. The existing control measure strategy in this plan is expected to surpass the amount of emission reductions needed for reasonable further progress targets by a margin that meets the contingency measures requirement.

13.4 Methodology for Reasonable Further Pro gress Demonstrations

The methodology for demonstrating reasonable further progress includes deriving the base year and milestone year emissions inventor ies

, calculating RFP emission

reduction targets, assessing creditable reductions, and using NO X substit ution for VOC

reduction shortfalls.

13.4.1 Base Year and Forecast Milestone Year Emissions Inventor ies

The first step is compiling the 2002 base year VOC and NO X inventories of anthropogenic emissions that are used as the basis for calculating the required per cent reduction target s

. Section 182(b)(1)(B) of the Clean Air Act defines the se baseline

emissions as the total amount of actual VOC or NO X emissions from all anthropogenic sources in the nonattainment area, excluding emissions eliminated by federal motor vehicle control program (FMVCP) regulations promulgated prior to 1990 and federal

Reid V apor P ressure (RVP) fuel regulations promulgated prior to the enactment of the

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.

The VOC and NO X emission inventory forecasts are neede d for each future milestone year to quantify the emission reductions that are expected to be achieved since the 2002 base year. The emission forecasts are derived by projecting base year emissions using expected growth assumptions and the effects of adopte d control measures. In addition, the emission inventory include s emission reduction credit s (ERC s ) 113 to ensure they will not interfere with reasonable further progress if they are used in the future

. ERCs may be used as “offsets” to compensate for an increase in emissions from a new source or modified major source regulated by the air districts. The “ s afety margin” 114 is

added to the baseline emission inventory for each milestone year to calculat e

reaso nable further progress

.

13.4.2 RFP Emission Reduction Targets

40 CFR 51.910(a)(1)(ii)(B) requires a 18% reduction between 2002 base year and the first milestone year of 2008 and 9% between each subsequent milestone year. For the 2008 RFP target VOC level, the required 18% RFP emission reduction is applied to the adjusted 2002 baseline for 2008 milestone year. For the subsequent milestone RFP target VOC level, the required 9% is applied to the previous milestone RFP target VOC

112 ”General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990” (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992).

113 Chapter 5, Section 5.6.

114 Chapter 11, Table 11

- 2.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Reas onable Further Progress Demonstrations Page 13

- 3 level minus current milestone‘s FMV CP/RV P adjustments. For the 2018 attainment RFP target VOC level, the required 3% is applied to the 2017 milestone RFP target VOC

level minus 2018 FMVCP/RV P adjustments.

13.4.3 Creditable Control Measure Reductions

When assessing R F P emission reductions creditable toward the percent reductions required, there are specific restrictions as listed in section 182(b)(1)(D) of the Clean Air

Act. For example, post

- 1990 control benefits are not creditable as reductions if they were already required prior to the e nactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. These measures include the federal motor vehicle control program, federal R VP fuel regulations, corrections to reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules, and corrections to motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs.

The creditable VOC reductions from existing control regulations are applied to the required RFP target levels. If there are any RFP reduction shortfalls for VOC , the NO X reductions are included in the RFP demonstration asse ssment to fulfill the shortfall

.

13.4.4 NO X Substitution for VOC Reduction Shortfall s

Any remaining VOC reduction shortfalls are met by using NO X emission reductions. Section 182(c)(2)(C) of the Clean Air Act allows for the substitution of NO X emission

reductio ns in place of VOC reductions to meet the r easonable further progress requirements. According to EPA’s NO X Substitution Guidance 115 , the substitution of NO X reductions for VOC reductions must be done on a percentage basis, rather than a straight ton

- for

- ton exchange.

Thus, if there is a certain percent VOC reduction shortfall, a n equal percentage

reduction in NO X emissions can be substituted to provide the equivalent reductions necessary for meeting the reasonable further progress goals toward attainment

. For example, the 10. 7 % apparent shortfall in VOC in 2014 milestone year can be

substituted with 10. 7 % NO X reductions.

13.4.5 NO X Substitution Attainment Consistency Requirement

The overall VOC and NO X reduction total s applied to the RFP demonstration must be

co nsistent with the SIP attainment control strategy. Therefore, the cumulative amount of

NO X substitution reductions used toward the RFP requirement cannot be greater than

the total NO X reductions dictated by the modeled attainment demonstration. This

attain ment consistency requirement is meant to prevent the substitution of NO X reductions that would not lead to progress toward attaining the ozone standard.

The current air quality modeling analysis from the Central California Ozone Study (CCOS) show s that attainment can be reached with different combinations of VOC and

NO X control. P hotochemical modeling results indicate that both VOC and NO X

115 Environmental Protection Agency (OAQPS), “ NO X Substitution Guidance”, December 1993.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Reas onable Further Progress Demonstrations Page 13

- 4 reductions provide ozone benefits in the Sacramento region, but on a ton for ton basis

NO X reductions provide greater ozone benefits than VOC reductions. Therefore, a

substantial use of NO X substitution would be consistent with current analyses of ozone attainment strategies in the Sacramento nonattainment area.

13.5 Calculations of R easonable Furt her Progress Demonstrations

Table 1 3

- 1 contains a summary of the calculations for determining whether reasonable further progress is achieved for the required milestone targets for 2014, 20 17 , and the 2018 attainment demonstration year

. P rojected f uture VOC and NO X emission

reductions will provide the required RFP reductions

, as well as a 3% contingency margin

.

T he reasonable further progress demonstration s are a chieved by forecasted emission reductions from existing control regulations and already adopted control measures

. No

emission reductions from new measures identified in Chapter 7 are used in the reasonable further progress demonstrations or in the RFP contingency demonstration

. Also, both VOC and NO X emission reductions are neede d to meet the RFP reduction targets as shown in Figure 1 3

- 1. The NO X substitution is used on a percentage basis to

cover any VOC percent age shortfalls. Since the total sum of NO X emission reductions ( 14% ) used to cover any VOC shortfalls is less than the total NO X reductions ( 5 4 % ) required for attainment 116

, t he use of NO X substitution for RFP purposes is consistent with the attainment demonstration strategy.

116 2018 attainment demonstration analysis in Table 8

- 1 indicates NO X reduction needed from 2002 base year = 1

- (91/196) = 54%2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Reas onable Further Progress Demonstrations Page 13

- 5 Table 1 3

- 1

Calculation of R easonable Further Pr ogress Demonstration s

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

A CARB RFP and Pre

- 90 RFP write

- up March 26, 2013, email transmittal to SMAQMD.

B Sum of emissions from Chapter 5, Tables 5

- 2 and 5

- 3 and motor vehicle “safety margin” from Chapter
11, Table 11

- 1

. The emission reduction credits ( are included in em ission inventory) see Tables 5

- 4 and 5

- 5.

C CARB provided the non

- creditable FMVCP/RVP adjustments, using CA MVCP method in Appendix G. VOC Emission Calculations

– Tons/Day 2002 2014 2017 2018

Baseline VOC B 146.7 106.0 99.9 98.7

Non

- Creditable F MVCP/RVP Adjustment C 0.0 10.9 11.9 12.2

RACT Corrections 0 0 0 0

Adjusted 2002 Baseline VOC in milestone year 146.7 135.8 134.8 134.5

RFP commitment for VOC reductions from new measures 0 0 0 0

Future Year VOC with existing and proposed measures 106.0 99.9 98.7
Required % change since previous milestone year ( VOC or NO X ) compared to 2002 9% 9% 3%

Target VOC levels 91.5 82.3 79.5

Apparent shortfall in VOC 14.5 17.6 19.2

Apparent shortfall in VOC , % 10.7% 13.0% 14.3%

VOC shortfall previously provided by NO X substitution, % 0.0% 10.7% 13.0%

Actual VOC shortfall, % 10.7% 2.3% 1.2%

NO X Emission Calculations

– Tons/Day 2002 2014 2017 2018

Baseline NO X B 164.8 92.6 80.0 76.9

Non

- Creditable F MVCP Adjustment C 0.0 10.4 11.0 11.2

Adjusted 2002 Baseline NO X in milestone year 164.8 154.4 153.8 153.6

RFP commitment for NO X reductions from new measures 0 0 0 0

Change in NO X since 2002 61.8 73.8 76.7

Change in NO X since 2002, % 40.0% 48.0% 49.9%

NO X reductions since 2002 already used for RFP substitution and contingency through last milestone year, % 0.0% 13.7% 16.0%

NO X reductions since 2002 available for RFP substitution and contingency in this milestone year, % 40.0% 34.3% 33.9%

Change in NO X since 2002 used for VOC substitution in this milestone year, % 10.7% 2.3% 1.2%

Change in NO X since 2002 available for contingency in this milestone year, % 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%

Change in NO X since 2002 surplus after meeting substitution and contingency needs in this milestone year, % 26.3% 31.9% 32.6%

RFP Met? YES YES YES

Contingency Met? YES YES YES2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Reas onable Further Progress Demonstrations Page 13

- 6 Figure 1 3

- 1 Summary of R easonable Further Pro gress Demonstration s

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

Reasonable further progress (RFP) demonstrations are achieved by forecasted emission reductions from existing control strategies and accounting for emissions growth

. B oth VOC and NO X emission

r eductions are needed to meet the RFP reduction targets

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 1 14 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

14.1 8

- Hour Ozone Nonattainment Designation for Sacramento Region

The 1997 federal 8

- hour ozone standard lowered the health

- based limit for ambient

ozone concentration from 0.12 parts per million of ozone averaged over one hour to 0.08 parts per million of ozone averaged over eight hours. An area’s nonattainment designation is based on whether the ozone design value concentration 117 for any of the monitoring sites in the area exceeds the national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)

. The Sacramento region is designated a nonattainment area, and include s all of Sacramento and Yolo counties and portions of Placer, El Dorado, Solano, and Sutter

counties.

14.2 “Severe ” 8

- Hour Ozone Classification with 201 9 Attainment Deadline

N onattainment areas are classifi ed as marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme

areas depending on the magnitude of the highest 8

- hour ozone design value for the monitoring sites in the nonattainment area. In 2004, t he Sacramento region was classifi ed as a “serious” nonattainment area with an attainment deadline of June 15,

2013

. This classification was based on the 8

- hour ozone design value of 107 pp b at Cool, calculated from ozone concentrations monitored from 2001 to 2003.

However, s ince the Sacramento region needs to rely on the longer term emission reduction strategies from state and federal mobile emission standard programs, t he Sacramento region cannot meet the 2013 attainment date for serious nonattainment

areas. Consequently, o n February 14, 2008, CARB on behalf of the air districts in the Sacramento region submitted a letter to EPA requesting a voluntary reclassification (bump

- up) of the Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area from a “serious” to a

“severe” 8

- hour ozone nonattainment area with an extended attainment deadline of June 15, 2019. EPA approved th e reclassification request on May 5, 2010 (75 FR

24409 ).

14.3 Trend in Ozone Air Quality Shows Improvement

The progress towar d attainment is measured by analyzing ambient air quality data collected at various monitoring sites over a period of many years (1990

- 200 7 ). There are currently 1 6 ozone monitoring stations located throughout the Sacramento region

that are operated by either local air districts or the California Air Resources Board.

T he annual number of 8

- hour ozone exceedance days recorded at the peak monitoring

site s fluctuates from year to year due to meteorological variability and changes in precursor emission patt erns. The most frequent exceedances of the federal 8

- hour ozone standard occur at the region’s eastern monitoring sites (Cool, Folsom, Placerville,

117 The 8

- hour ozone design value is the standard

- related indicator calculated as the annual 4 th

- highest daily maximum 8

- hour ozone con centration averaged over 3 years.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 2 and Auburn). The 1 8

- year trend line indicates a decline in the overall average peak

number of annual exceeda nce days, from about 3 3 down to 2 2

.

T he peak 8

- hour ozone design value concentration also varies from year to year and

occurs at the eastern monitoring site s in the Sacramento region. T he overall 1 8

- year trend line shows a decline, from 10 8 pp b down to ab out 10 0 pp b

. The design value has improved from being 24 ppb (or 2 8%) over the standard 118 down to about 1 6 ppb (or

19 %)

.

14.4 VOC and NO X Emissions Inventory Forecasted to Decline

Ozone is not directly emitted into the atmosphere, but is a pollutant produced by photochemical reactions in the air involving volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides ( NO X ). Therefore, planning efforts to evaluate and reduce ozone air pollution include identifying and quantifying the various processes and sources of VOC emissions (such as solvents, surface coatings, and motor vehicles) and NO X emissions (such as motor vehicles and other fuel combustion equipment).

EPA emission inventory guidance requires the planning emissions inventory to be

based on estimates of actual emissions for an average summer weekday, typical of the ozone season (May

– October). The anthropogenic emissions inventory is first divided

into four broad source categories : stationary sources, area

- wide sources, on

- road motor vehicles, and other mobile sources. Each of these major categories is further defined

into more descriptive equipment types and specific emission processes

. The biogenic VOC emissions from vegetation for natural areas, crops, and urban landscapes are estimated separately from the a nthropogenic inventory

.

The 2002 base year anthropogenic planning inventory is estimated to be 147 tons per day of VOC emissions and 165 tons per day of NO X emissions for the Sacramento

nonattainment area. The base year emissions are used to forecast future year inventor ies by using socio

- economic growth indicators and the post

- 2002 emission

reduction effects of existing control strategies. Also, potentially available pre

- 2002 emission reduction credits (ERCs) are included as additional growth in futur e years to ensure that their use will not be inconsistent with the reasonable further progress and attainment targets.

The 2002 base year emissions and emission forecasts out to 20 18 for the Sacramento nonattainment area are summarized by the four major e mission categories in Figure 1 4

- 1

. The VOC and NO X emission forecasts show significant declines in mobile source emissions, despite increasing population, vehicle activity, and economic development in the Sacramento region

.

118 Federal 8

- hour ozone standard = 84 ppb.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 3 Figure 1 4

- 1

VOC and NO X Emission Forecasts*

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

* Post

- 2002 stationary source emission forecasts include ERCs (4 tpd VOC and 3 tpd NO X ).

14.5 Air Quality Modeling Analysis Indicates Additional Emission Reductions Are

Needed for Attainment

Updated photochemical air quality grid modeling was developed to simulate base case episodes of high ozone formation as part of the extensive air monitoring and data analysis conducted for the 2000 Central California Ozone Study. The air quality model

was then run with 2002 baseline year emissions and future year emissions forecasts (including VOC and NO X ERCs) to see if the ozone standard would be attained with existing control strategie s. The relative decline in future ozone concentrations shown in the ph otochemical modeling results predict ed attainment at all ozone monitors in 2018 except for two sites (Cool and Folsom) located in the eastern part of the Sacramento region

.

Additional air quality modeling runs of across

- the

- board control scenarios were

co nducted. The air quality modeling analysis shows that attainment can be reached by

2018 with different combinations of VOC and NO X control. The modeling results indicate

that both VOC and NO X reductions provide ozone benefits in the Sacramento region,

but on a ton for ton basis NO X reductions provide greater ozone benefits than VOC

reductions. More specific conclusions regarding attainment targets for the Sacramento region’s peak ozone monitoring site at Cool are provided in the attainment

demonstration eva luation

. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

2002 2014 2017 2018 2002 2014 2017 2018 Emissions (tons/day)

Stationary

Area-Wide

On-Road Motor

Vehicles

Other Mobile Sources

VOC NOx2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 4 14.6 Proposed Regional and Local Control Measures

The Sacramento SIP control strategy relies on the following components:

1. Reductions from existing control measures and adopted rules,

2. Reductions from new state and federal regulations, and

3. Reductions from defined new SIP local and regional measures.

The proposed SIP emissions control strategy includes reductions of both VOC and NO X air pollutants. A single NOX pollutant strategy is not appropriate because, even though

VOC measures are not as effective as NO X , they still provide needed reductions. Moreover, many existing statewide and local control programs will inherently achieve reductions from both ozone precursors.

EPA’s final 8

- hour ozone implementation rule (pursuant to section 172(c)(1) of the

C lean Air Act) requires the attainment SIP submittal to include adopting all reasonably available control measures (RACM) necessary to demonstrate attainment as expeditiously as practicable and to meet any RFP requirements. EPA’s RACM policy

indicates that areas should consider all candidate measures that are potentially reasonably available. Sources of potentially reasonable measures include measures adopted in other nonattainment areas, measures that the EPA has identified in guidelines or other documents, and any measures that have been suggested for the particular nonattainment area during a public comment period.

Areas should consider all reasonably available measures for implementation in light of

local circumstances. However, areas need only adopt mea sures if they are both economically and technologically feasible and cumulatively will either advance the attainment date (by one year or more) or are necessary for RFP. This plan contains required reasonabl y available control measures

.

The total emission reductions from the new measures are an enforceable commitment

in the SIP. T he proposed regional and local control measures include estimates of the emission reductions from each of the individual measures, but the commitment is for

emissions reductions f rom the aggregate of all proposed new measures combined. Because new measures provide a buffer to attain standards by 2018, and are not included in the Reasonable Further Progress demonstration, if a particular measure does not get its expected emission re ductions, it does not compromise the attainment demonstration or Reasonable Further Progress demonstration. A n explicit commitment

is made to the reductions associated with the on

- road mobile source incentive program for purposes of transportation conformity

.

The following T able 14

- 1 contains a summary of the proposed new regional and local control measures and expected VOC and NO X emission reductions

. Emission benefits from these new committal measures are estimated to provide reductions of 2 .7 to ns per day of VOC and 1 .1 tons per day of NO X in 2018

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 5 Table 1 4

- 1 Summary of New Regional and Local Proposed Control Measures Sacramento

Nonattainment Area

Control Measure Name 2018 Emission Reductions ( tpd )

VOC NO X Regional Non

- regulatory Measures
Regional Mobile Incentive Program

– On

- road < 0. 1 0.5
Regional Mobile Incentive Program

– Off

- road < 0.1 < 0. 1
Spare The Air Program < 0.1 < 0.1
SACOG Transportation Control Measures

- - Urban Forest Development Program 0

- 0. 2

- Total Regional Non

- regulatory Measures 0. 1 0.5

Local Regulatory Measures *
Architectural Coating 1. 5

- Automotive Refinishing 0.2

- Degreasing/Solvent Cleaning 0.7

- Graphic Arts na

- Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products <0.1

- Natural Gas Production and Processing 0.1

- Boilers, Steam Generator, and Process Heaters

- 0.2
IC Engines

- < 0.1
Large Water Heaters and Small Boilers

- 0.2

Total Local Regulatory Measures * 2. 6 0. 5

Total Reductions * 2. 7 1.1

Note: N umbers are truncated to one decimal place. na = not available

*Total reductions are summed from untruncated values. See summary table in Appendix C

– Proposed Control Measures.

The following Table 14

- 2 contains a s ummary of SACOG t ransportation c ontrol

m easures (TCMs) that are included in the Sacramento region’s federal 8

- hour ozone plan. The TCMs include n ew and c ontinuing p rojects and f unding p rograms

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 6 Table 14

- 2 Summary of SACOG Transportation Control Measures New and Continuing Projects and Funding Programs

TCM Name and (ID) Implementing Agency Implement or

Completion Date VOC

Reduction (Tons/Day) NO X

Reduction (Tons/Day)
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Projects

Arden Way Smart Corridor (ITS

- 1) City of Sac

- Dept of Transportation 200 8

--- ---

Sacramento Traffic Operations Center (ITS

- 2) City of Sac

- Dept of Transportation 2009

--- ---

STARNET Implementation (ITS

- 4) SACOG 2009

--- --- Park and Ride Lots / Transit Centers

El Dorado Central Park and Ride Facility (TF

- 1) El Dorado County

Transit 2009

--- ---

Improvements to Loomis Multimodal Center (TF

- 2) Town of Loomis

– Dept of Public Works 2010

--- ---

13 th and 16 th St :Light Rail Station Improvements (TF

- 3) Sac Regional Transit

District 200 9

--- ---

Transit Service Funding Programs

Transit Vehicle Acquisitions (TR

- 1) Various Agencies Various

Dates --- ---

Transit Operations (TR

- 2) Various Agencies Various

Dates --- ---

Other Specific Funding Programs

Freeway Service Patrol (AQ

- 1) Sac Transportation Authority Through 2018

--- ---

SECAT Program (AQ

- 2) SMAQMD Through 2018

--- a

--- a

Spare The Air Program (AQ

- 3) SMAQMD Through 2018

--- b

--- b

MTP Regional Funding Programs
Air Quality Funding Program (FP

- 1) Various Agencies Through 20 18

--- --- Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Program (FP

- 2) Various Agencies Through 20 18

--- ---

Transportation Demand Management Funding Program (FP

3) Various Agencies Through 20 18

--- ---

Community Design Funding Program (FP

- 4) Various Agencies Through 20 18

--- ---

Miscellaneous Projects
Light Rail Grade Separation at Watt Ave and Folsom Blvd (M

- 2) Sac County

– Dept of Transportation 200 9

--- ---

Dry Creek Parkway Trail Phase 1 Sac County

– Dept of Transportation 2011

Total Emission Reductions

--- ---

a SECAT emission reductions are assumed to be included in SMAQMD mobile source control measure ONMS

- HD

- 1.

b Spare The Air emission reductions are assumed to be included in SMAQMD control measure TCM

- ONMS

- ED

- 1.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 7 14.7 20 18 Attainment Demonstration

A ttainment of the 1997 8

- hour ozone NAAQS is evaluated for a 2018 “severe”

classification scenario , based on modeling results for the peak ozone site (Cool) in the region

. The modeled VOC and NO X emission forecasts for 2018 incorporate growth assumptions and the estimated r eductions associated with the existing control strategy. The photochemical modeling results were used to estimate the percent reductions

needed from the 2018 emission forecasts in order to achieve the 1997 federal 8

- hour

ozone standard (84 ppb)

.

The proje cted 2018 emission inventory with adopted control measures, including emission reduction credits and a safety margin in the motor vehicle emissions budgets

demonstrate s attainment by the 2018 “severe” classification deadline. N ew local control

measures pro vide a buffer in the attainment demonstration

. The attainment

demonstration assessment for the Sacramento nonattainment area is summarized in

Table 1 4

- 3

.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 8 Table 1 4

- 3 Summary of Attainment Demonstration for 8

- Hour Ozone NAAQS 2018

“Severe” Classification Scenario

Sacramento Nonattainment Area VOC (tpd) NO X (tpd)

Summary of 2009 Plan Attainment Demonstration

A) 2002 Planning Emissions Inventory 1 160 .3 196 .1

B) 2018 Planning Emissions Inventory with Existing Controls 1 121 .1 104 .1

C) Attainment Emission Reduction in percentage 2 3.3% 12.5%

D) SIP Emissions Target: Line B × (1

– Line C) 117 .1 91 .1

E Percentage Emission Reduction Required for Attainment: ( 1

– (Line D ÷ Line A) ) × 100% 27. 0 % 53. 6 %

Revised Emissions Targets

F) Updated 2002 Inventory 3 14 6. 7 16 4.8

G) Updated SIP Emissions Target: Line F × ( 1

– Line E ) 107 .1 76 .5

Revised Attainment Demonstration

H) Updated 2018 Inventory 3 97 .7 73 .9

I Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Safety Margin 4 1 3

J) Emission Reductions in 2018 from Remaining Regional/Local Control

Measures 5,7 2.7 1.1

K Emissions Reductions in 2018 from Remaining State/Federal Control

Measures 6 ,7 5.7 0.3

L) Total Emission s in 2018 with All Remaining Controls : ( Line H + Line I

- Line J

– Line K ) 9 0. 3 75

. 5

M ) Is Attainment Demonstrated? (Is Line L ≤ Line G?) Yes

1. The 2009 inventory is shown in Appendix A8

. 2. The percent emission reduction targets for attainment are based on modeling results

. Figure 8

- 1

Point A.

3. Chapter 5. Tables 5

- 2 and 5

- 3 include ERC s ( ERC details are in Tables 5

- 4 and 5

- 5)

. 4. Chapter 11 Table 11

- 1

5. Appendix C, Table of Emission Reductions by Air District, Page C

- 5

. 6. Chapter 7. Table 7

- 2 , sum of expected emi ssion reductions from New Emission Standards for Recreational Boats and Expanded Off

- Road Rec. Vehicle Emission Standards.

7. These reductions provide a buffer for meeting attainment targets.

14.8 Pollutant Transport from Upwind Bay Area Region

T he air quality in the Sacramento region is impacted by pollutant transport from the San Francisco Bay Area. Delta breezes carry air pollutants from upwind Bay Area emission sources into the Sacramento region, and these pollutants may contribute to ozone formation during the same day or the following day s

. The California Air Resources Board has determined that the relative impact from this Bay Area transport can be considered overwhelming, significant, or inconsequential on various days 119

, depending on meteorological condit ions

. CARB has also made findings that pollutant transport

119 California Air Resources Board, “Ozone Transport: 2001 Review”, April 2001.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 9 from the San Joaquin Valley can have significant or inconsequential impact 120 on air quality in the Sacramento region.

States are responsible for submitting SIPs for all areas of their State and need to demonstrate attainment in all areas addressing intrastate transport where appropriate. The photochemical grid modeling study includes the northern and central regions of California in the modeling domain, and was used to address and account for air pollutant transport impacts among the San Francisco Bay Area, San Joaquin Valley, Sacramento Valley, and Mountain Counties air basins.

CARB modeling for the attainment demonstration for the Sacramento nonattainment

area used domain

- wide emission reductio ns to characterize future ozone reductions at peak ozone monitoring stations. Therefore, for our area to attain, reductions in forecasted emissions necessary and committed to in Sacramento must also be

achieved in the areas that significantly impact the re gion

. In other words, the attainment demonstration for the Sacramento nonattainment area is predicated on the San Francisco Bay Area and the San Joaquin Valley also achieving an equivalent additional percent reduction of VOC and NO X emissions in their fore casted 2018 inventory. The reductions could come from either state or upwind regions’ local measures, but we

understand that CARB has committed to address the reduction requirement by implement ing the new state measures statewide , which are expected to ach ieve similar reductions in the Bay Area and San Joaquin Valley.

In addition, pollutant transport from the Sacramento region can potentially impact the air quality in other regions under certain meteorological conditions. For example, CARB analyses have de termined that ozone violations at the Grass Valley monitoring station in Nevada County are considered to be overwhelmingly due to transport from the Sacramento region. 121 Emission reduction strategies in the Sacramento region will

benefit their efforts to atta in the federal ozone standards.

14.9 Weight

- of

- Evidence Determination

Attainment demonstrations based on photochemical modeling can be strengthened by supplemental evidence from additional modeling analyses and from considering modeling outputs other than the attainment test results. More diverse non

- modeling and observational methods analyzing air quality, meteorological, and emissions data can also be used to corroborate the modeling predictions. EPA guidance 122 specifies that a comprehensive weight

- of

- evi dence approach should be undertaken to support the

modeled attainment demonstration.

Since 1999, the number of area

- wide exceedance days has decreased by over 10%. The ozone design value has decreased by 5%. A smaller portion of the nonattainment

120 Ibid.

121 Ibid.

122 “Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses in Attainment Demonstrations for t he 8

- hour Ozone NAAQS” (EPA, October 2005, p. 28

- 33).2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 10 region v iolates the 1997 federal ozone standard, and the western most and eastern most portions of the region attain. Analyses show that these improvements are due to emissions reductions, not favorable weather conditions.

The overall conclusions of the weight

- of

- evidence analyses support the attainment demonstration when taking into account : 1) the ozone modeling results and th at NO X reduction will be critical to attainment

, and 2) the general declin e in emissions

, ambient air pollutant s

, and ozone trend indicator s

. These evaluations are consistent with the

overall NO X and VOC emission control strategy in reducing peak ozone in the region

.

14.10 Transportation Conformity and Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Under the federal Clean Air Act, federal agencies may not approve or fund transportation plans and projects unless they are consistent with state air quality implementation plans (SIPs). Conformity with the SIP requires that transportation activities not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing viol ations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Conformity regulations state that emissions from transportation plans and projects must be less than or equal to the motor vehicle emissions budgets established by re asonable further progress, attainment or maintenance plans (SIPs)

. (40 CFR 93.118)

Table 1 4

- 4 lists the proposed n ew transportation conformity budgets for the 2014, and

2017 RFP milestone years, and the 20 18 attainment analysis year for the Sacramento

nonattainment area

. The proposed budgets incorporate the recent on

- road motor vehicle emission inventory factors of EMFAC2011

, updated travel activity data , latest control strategies , and a safety margin

.

Table 14

- 4 Proposed New Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets *

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

NO X VOC

2014 2017 2018 2014 2017 2018 ARB Inventories for Conformity (Tons per Day) 46 37 34 21 17 16
Safety Margin 3 2 3 2 1 1

Budgets 49 39 37 23 18 17

*All motor vehicle emission budget years include regional incentive benefits. State control measure reductions are only included in 2018.

T his ozone plan includes the updated on

- road motor vehicle emissions and the proposed transportation budgets that assume vehicle activity levels based on the road and transit projects contained in SACOG ’s Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Plan (2013/16 MTIP) and MTC’s Plan Bay Area Preferred Land Use Scenario/Transportation Investment Strategy (May 11, 2012)

. The transportation analysis for the 201 3/16 MTIP relied on SACOG’s new SACSIM regional travel2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 11 forecasting model to estimate future traffic volumes in the 6

- county Sacramento region.

This model also incorporated the latest SACOG land use assumptions from the Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sust ainable Communities Strategies (2012 MTP/SCS)

.

If these proposed new motor vehicle emission budgets are d etermined to be adequate for transportation conformity purposes by EPA, they will replace the prior 2014 and 2017 budgets found adequate in 2009. The Metropolitan Planning Organizations, SACOG and MTC, must ensure that the aggregate transportation emissions in the region stay below these levels when approving new metropolitan transportation plans and transportation improvement programs

, even if the mix of projects changes or growth increases. These new, adequate 8

- hour MVEBs will remain in effect until other budgets are found adequate or approved by EPA.

Vehicle Miles Traveled Offset (VMT Offset)

Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the federal Clean Air Act applies to areas classified as severe or extreme nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for

ozone. The Sacramento Federal Ozone Nonattainment Area is currently designated as

Severe

- 15, (75FR24409) and is subject to the requirement to offset any growth in emissions resulting from an increase in vehicle miles travelled

. A detailed VMT offset demonstration was prepared by California Air Resources Board and is included in Appendix F

– Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets and VMT Offset Demonstration as part of the 2013 revision to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan. The analysis shows there are sufficient transportation control strategies and TCMs to offset the emissions increa se due to growth in VMT and demonstrates compliance with the requirements of Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the federal Clean Air Act.

14.11 Updated Emissions Inventory for General Conformity

General conformity is the federal regulatory process for preventing major f ederal actions or projects from interfering with air quality planning goals. Conformity provisions ensure that federal funding and approval are given only to those activities and projects that are consistent with state air quality implementation plans (SIP s). Conformity with the SIP means that major federal actions will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Examples of general federal actions that m ay require a conformity determination include, but are not limited to, the following: leasing of federal land; private construction on federal land; reuse of military bases; airport construction and expansions, and construction of federal office buildings.

A federal agency may demonstrate conformity by showing that the total of direct and indirect emissions from the action is accounted for in the applicable SIP’s attainment or

maintenance demonstration. Therefore, the updated emissions inventory in this 8

- hour ozone attainment demonstration plan would be applicable for general conformity2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 12 purposes. Specific emission budgets for airport operations are identified for future

years.

14.12 R easonable Further Progress Demonstration Achieved

The federal 8

- hour ozone regulations 123 require that area s classified as “ serious or above ” submit a r easonable further progress ( R F P ) demonstration plan that provides for

at least 3% average annual reductions of VOC (and/or NO X ) emissions every 3

- year period after 20 08 out to the a ttainment year

. The RFP demonstration must fully account for emissions growth when calculat ing the net emission reductions.

The RFP evaluation is based on the emission inventory forecasts, which assume expected growth rates and current control measures. T he 3

- year RFP demonstration s are achieved through VOC and NO X emission reductions for the milestone years 2014, 2017, and the 2018 attainment analysis year. Figure 1 4

- 2 shows the percentages of

VOC and NO X emission reductions used to meet the RFP reduction goal s

. A NO X reduction surplus is used to meet a 3% contingency margin requirement

.

Figure 1 4

- 2 Summary of Reasonable Further Progress Demonstrations

Sacramento Nonattainment Area

14.13 Future Ozone Planning Efforts

The proposed Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour O zone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress P lan reflects the best available information at this time. However, emission inventories, modeling analyses, and control strategies will continue to be updated and

123 Federal Register, November 29, 2005, p. 71634.2013 Revisions to the Sacramento Regional 8

- Hour Ozone Attainment

and Reasonable Further Progress Plan September 26, 2013

Summary and Conclusions

Page 14

- 13 re

- evaluated. Revisions to this plan can be made at any time if new information indicates a change is needed. Each air district has prepare d and submit ted RACT SIPs

for major sources ( emissions equal to or greater than 25 tons per year ) under severe

area requ irements

.

Milestone Reports

Section 182(g) of the Clean Air Act Amendments requires that progress (milestone) reports be prepared to evaluate whether actual emission reductions meet the minimum reasonable further progress targets. In addition, the milest one analysis assesses the control measures that have actually been adopted and implemented in comparison to the overall comprehensive attainment strategy contained in the ozone plan. The 2011 8

- hour ozone milestone report was the Sacramento Regional 8

‐ Hour Ozone Milestone Report: 2011 Milestone Year (SMAQMD, 2012) 124 . The air districts will prepare subsequent reports every three years out to the attainment year.

124 SMAQMD et al. Sacramento Regional 8

‐ Hour Ozone Milestone Report: 2011 Milestone Year. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District et al: S acramento, CA. [2012.]