CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
Lincoln Plaza
Auditorium, First Floor
400 "P" Street
Sacramento, CA
May 28, 1992
9:30 a.m.
AGENDA
Page
92-8-1 Public Hearing to Consider Amendments to the 001
Regulation Identifying the Areas in Which
Transported Air Pollutants Contribute to
Violations of the State Ambient Air Quality
Standard for Ozone and the Areas of Origin of
the Pollutants.
92-8-2 Public Meeting to Consider Approval of Attainment 027
Plans for Districts Within the Broader Sacramento
Area as Required by the California Clean Air Act
of 1988.
ITEM NO.: 92-8-1
Public Hearing to Consider Amendments to the Regulation
Identifying the Areas in Which Transported Air Pollutants
Contribute to Violations of the State Ambient Air Quality
Standard for Ozone and the Areas of Origin of the Pollutants.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Board adjust the boundaries of the "Upper Sacramento
Valley" and the "Broader Sacramento Area" as set forth in
previously adopted transport regulations.
DISCUSSION
Transport is the airborne movement of pollutants or pollutants
from one area to another. State law requires the Board to
identify downwind districts affected by transported pollutants
and the upwind district(s) where those pollutants are coming
from. State law further requires the Board to assess the
magnitude of transport and to establish commensurate mitigation
requirements. The transport laws apply to ozone, only.
When the Board identified transport corridors in 1989, it relied
primarily on air basins to define source and receptor areas. For
example, the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin was identified as
one source of transport to the San Joaquin Valley.
Air basin boundaries did not fit every circumstance, however. In
three cases, special boundaries had to be created. One of these
was in the South Central Coast Air Basin, where only the southern
two counties (Santa Barbara and Ventura) were identified as
transport contributors. The other two were in the Sacramento
Valley, where the Board attempted to distinguish between the
multi-county metropolitan area in the south and the northern
rural counties. Ultimately, the Board defined Sacramento, Yolo-Solano,
Sutter, Yuba, Placer, El Dorado and Nevada as the
metropolitan source area. The remaining counties to the north
(Glenn, Tehama, Butte, Shasta, and Colusa) were deemed to be
receptors.
In 1990 the Board adopted transport mitigation regulations
applicable to all upwind source areas. These provoked
significant controversy in the Broader Sacramento Area, as they
imposed significant additional burdens on the counties adjacent
to Sacramento. The "no net increase" permitting rule required
for stationary sources caused the greatest concern, since it
inhibits growth in areas with few available offsets.
Staff is proposing to lessen this burden by removing Nevada
County and portions of the Feather River district from the
Broader Sacramento Area. The latter would be shifted to the
Upper Sacramento Valley. The former would become an independent
planning area.
SUMMARY AND IMPACTS
Amending the boundaries of the "Broader Sacramento Area" and the
"Upper Sacramento Valley" will lessen regulatory burdens in
Nevada County and in portions of the Feather River AQMD. Making
this change may result in localized, adverse environmental
impacts in those areas. Staff believe that social and economic
considerations support a finding of overriding considerations.
The downsizing of the Broader Sacramento Area is not expected to
significantly diminish the degree of mitigation afforded to
downwind receptor areas.
ITEM NO.: 92-8-2
Public Meeting to Consider Approval of the Air Quality Plans for
Portions of the Broader Sacramento Area; Specifically Sacramento,
Yolo-Solano, and El Dorado.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Board approve most of the plan elements for the
Sacramento and Yolo-Solano plans; that the Board request the
Sacramento and Yolo-Solano districts to address the remaining
plan elements as proposed by staff; and that the Board defer
approval of most of the elements of the El Dorado plan and
request the District to revise the plan as proposed by staff.
DISCUSSION
The three individual plans submitted by Sacramento, Yolo-Solano
and El Dorado satisfy California Clean Air Act requirements to
varying degrees. Sacramento and Yolo-Solano plans include all
feasible measures and propose expeditious rule adoption (with
staff proposed conditions for Yolo-Solano). The primary
requirements not yet satisfied in these two plans are
transportation performance standards and "no net increase"
requirements for new and modified stationary sources. In
addition, Yolo-Solano does not meet the uniformity requirement.
The Ell Dorado plan does not satisfy requirements for most plan
elements, however, district staff have agreed to submit a
timetable for addressing staff recommendations.
Because the Sacramento, Yolo-Solano, and El Dorado districts
share a common planning area, the Broader Sacramento Area (BSA),
a cohesive and uniform plan would most ideally meet the goals of
the Act. Staff is recommending that the Board apply a single
area classification throughout the BSA and interpret the Act's
uniformity requirement to apply to the BSA. Staff believe that a
regional perspective is essential in addressing the BSA's ozone
problem and that the same general strategies, control measures,
and timetables for action should apply throughout the planning
area.
Transportation control measures are typically the most complex
portion of any district's air quality plan. Air districts cannot
independently move their transportation measures forward;
regulatory authority often rests with other agencies. The
majority of transportation control measures in all three plans
lack essential details on funding and commitments. Staff is
asking that all three districts clarify the current level of
financial and policy commitment by the responsible implementing
agencies, and, where these commitments are lacking, to submit a
workplan and schedule for obtaining these commitments within two
months. Staff is also recommending that districts actively
participate in regional transportation and congestion management
planning.
SUMMARY AND IMPACTS
Partial approval of the plans will allow all three districts to
begin implementing satisfactory plan elements while other plan
deficiencies are addressed. Significant emission reductions can
be expected from full implementation of the plan measures. The
interpretations of regional planning requirements place new
responsibilities on the districts for greater regional
coordination. Uniformity in control levels within the BSA, using
the most stringent district as a reference point, will provide
greater emission reductions in the BSA. Increased coordination
among BSA districts could have the added benefit of reducing
financial burdens as districts begin to pool resources and
coordinate planning efforts.