PROPOSAL:
Adopt the Staff Recommended Methodology for Calculating PM2.5 and PM2.5
Regional and Localized Significance Thresholds to Determine PM2.5
Significance in CEQA and NEPA Documents
SYNOPSIS:
In response to adoption of PM2.5 ambient air quality standards by U.S.
EPA and CARB, AQMD staff has developed a methodology for calculating PM2.5
emissions when preparing air quality analyses for CEQA or NEPA documents.
Further, to determine if PM2.5 air quality impacts are significant, staff
has also developed recommended regional and localized significance
thresholds. During the development of the PM2.5 thresholds, AQMD staff
met with a stakeholder working group and held a public workshop to solicit
public input.
COMMITTEE:
Mobile Source, July 28, 2006
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the attached resolution adopting the Methodology to Calculate
Particulate Matter (PM) 2.5 and PM2.5 Significance Thresholds, which
includes directly emitted PM2.5 Fraction Tables and Localized Significance
Threshold Look-up Tables, and to incorporate these as part of the revised
CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
Barry R. Wallerstein, D.Env.
Executive Officer
Background
In the last few years, both California and the federal government have
established ambient air quality standards for fine particulate matter (PM)
less than or equal to 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5). As a result, AQMD
staff has developed a methodology for calculating directly emitted PM2.5 and
proposed localized and regional PM2.5 significance thresholds for the
purpose of analyzing local and regional PM2.5 air quality impacts in
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) air quality analyses.
Proposal
Calculation Method
Because there are currently few or no PM2.5 emission factors for
mechanical or combustion processes, staff is recommending an indirect
approach to calculating PM2.5 emissions until such time as PM2.5 factors are
developed. Total suspended PM (TSP) emissions typically contain specific
fractions of PM10 and PM2.5 that can be measured. Since PM2.5 is a subset
of PM10, the current methodology for calculating PM10 from fugitive dust
sources (grading, demolition, unpaved roads, open storage piles, etc.) and
combustion sources (stationary combustion sources, vehicle exhaust, etc.)
will continue to be used and would then be multiplied by the applicable
PM2.5 fraction, derived by emissions source category fraction, using PM
profiles developed by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). The CARB
PM fraction profiles are used to develop emission inventories for a variety
of sources and operations in the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The
California Emission Inventory Data and Reporting System (CEIDARS) PM
profiles have been streamlined to be used for most types of processes that
would be encountered in a CEQA or NEPA analysis. The streamlined CARB PM
fraction profiles can be found in Appendix A of Attachment D.
Significance Thresholds
Localized Significance Thresholds
In addition to the PM2.5 calculation methodology, staff is also proposing
localized and regional significance thresholds for both construction and
operation of proposed projects. Localized significance thresholds (LSTs)
were developed in response to the SCAQMD Governing Board’s environmental
justice (EJ) initiatives (EJ initiative I-4) in recognition of the fact that
criteria pollutants, carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and
PM10 in particular, can have local air quality impacts as well as regional
impacts to receptors.
To establish operational PM2.5 LSTs, staff reviewed the AQMP combustion
inventories, which indicates that PM2.5 comprises 99 percent of the
combustion PM10 emissions. Since combustion PM10 and PM2.5 fractions are
essentially equivalent, staff is recommending that the operational localized
significance threshold for PM2.5 be the same as the current operational
localized significance threshold for PM10, i.e., 2.5 micrograms per cubic
meter (μ g/m3).
Similarly, to develop a PM2.5 construction significance threshold for
localized impacts, staff considered the PM2.5 contribution from fugitive
sources and the PM2.5 contribution from combustion sources (construction
equipment). Modeling conducted as part of this effort showed that the
contribution of off-road combustion PM2.5 emissions can be three to four
times higher than the contribution of PM2.5 from fugitive sources. Based on
the modeling results, staff is recommending a PM2.5 construction LST of 10.4
μ g/m3, the same as the construction LST for PM10. As part of the current
staff proposal staff has created PM2.5 look-up tables for both operation and
construction (see Appendix B of Attachment D).
Regional Significance Thresholds
PM emissions also affect air quality on a regional basis. When fugitive
dust enters the atmosphere, the larger particles of dust typically fall
quickly to the ground, but smaller particles less than 10 microns in
diameter may remain suspended for longer periods, giving the particles time
to travel across a regional area and affecting receptors at some distance
from the original emissions source. Fine PM2.5 particles have even longer
atmospheric residency times. Staff is recommending a PM2.5 regional
significance threshold based on the following EPA proposal.
On September 8, 2005, EPA published in the Federal Register “Proposed
Rule to Implement the Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards,”
which proposed a significant emission rate for PM2.5 of 10 tons per year.
Staff is proposing to use EPA’s significant emission rate for PM2.5 to
develop the daily mass emission regional significance threshold for PM2.5.
Converting the annual rate, 10 tons, into a daily rate produces a daily
emission rate, or in this case a regional significance threshold, of
approximately 55 pounds per day. A similar approach was used to derive the
operational regional significance thresholds for NO2 and VOC. Similar to
the regional significance threshold for PM10 of 150 pounds per day, the
proposed PM2.5 regional significance threshold of 55 pounds per day would
apply to both construction and operation.
Summary of Proposed PM2.5 Significance Thresholds
|
|
Construction Phase |
Operation
Phase |
| Localized Significance Thresholds |
10.4 μ g/m3 |
2.5 μ g/m3 |
| Regional Significance Thresholds |
55 lbs/day |
55 lbs/day |
Implementation
Once the Governing Board approves the staff PM2.5 proposals, staff would
implement the proposals according to the following timetable:
- Conduct further public outreach after Board adoption;
- Implement the proposals for AQMD lead agency projects for
any new projects received after board adoption;
- As part of AQMD intergovernmental review (IGR) commenting
responsibilities, begin submitting comments relative to the PM2.5 proposal
on CEQA documents beginning January 2007.
- Revise Air Quality Handbook to incorporate the new
methodology and significance thresholds.
Public Outreach
Staff conducted a Public Workshop on the staff proposals August 9, 2006,
to solicit public comment on the staff proposals. In addition to the Public
Workshop, AQMD staff held three stakeholder working group meetings to seek
guidance from stakeholders on the staff proposals.
Legal Authority
CEQA Guidelines §15022(a) states that a public agency shall adopt
objectives, criteria, and specific procedures consistent with CEQA and these
[State] Guidelines for administering its responsibilities under CEQA. CEQA
Guidelines 15022(d) states further, “In adopting procedures to implement
CEQA, a public agency may adopt the State CEQA Guidelines through
incorporation by reference. The agency may then adopt only those specific
procedures or provisions, described in subsection [15022] (a), which are
necessary to tailor the general provisions of the guidelines to the specific
operations of the agency.” At the December 11, 1998 Public Hearing the AQMD
Board formally incorporated by reference the State CEQA Guidelines as the
implementing guidelines for the AQMD’s CEQA program. Adopting PM2.5
significance thresholds would be consistent with CEQA Guidelines §15022
provision to tailor a public agency’s implementing guidelines by adopting
criteria relative to the specific operations of the AQMD.
Specifically with regard to thresholds of significance, CEQA Guidelines
§15064.7(a) states, " Each public agency is encouraged to develop and
publish thresholds of significance that the agency uses in the determination
of the significance of environmental effects.” Subsection (b) of the same
section states further, “Thresholds of significance to be adopted for
general use as part of the lead agency’s environmental review process must
be adopted by ordinance, resolution, rule or regulation, and developed
through a public review process and be supported by substantial evidence.”
The methodology for developing LSTs and the resulting LSTs developed by the
AQMD staff have undergone an extensive public review process as part of
stakeholder working group meetings that were open to the public. One public
workshop meeting was also held. The attached methodology document provides
the substantial evidence relative to the methodology for calculating PM2.5
emissions and developing the PM2.5 significance thresholds. The LST
proposal is also being heard by the AQMD Board at a public meeting, where it
will be considered for adoption by resolution, consistent with CEQA
Guidelines §15064.7(b). Upon Board adoption, AQMD staff will implement the
PM2.5 calculation methodology and significance thresholds as discussed below
Key Issues
The following summarizes the key comments received during the development
of the staff proposal.
- Availability of PM2.5 Mitigation Measures
Stakeholders requested that AQMD staff compile a list of mitigation
measures for reducing PM2.5 emissions and associated cost information. At
the second stakeholder working group meeting on July 11, 2006, AQMD staff
provided handouts listing fugitive dust and off-road construction mitigation
measures. The lists showed applicable control efficiencies for the relevant
pollutants. At that time, staff indicated that the same control
efficiencies applied to PM10 emissions should be applied to PM2.5 emissions
unless otherwise listed. Such information can currently be found in Chapter
11 of the AQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook and staff will clarify in the
revised Handbook that PM10 mitigation measures are applicable to PM2.5 as
well. In connection with an AQMD Governing Board directive, staff is
currently compiling lists of goods management-related mitigation measures
and for other applications where emission control efficiencies are known,
including: fugitive dust, on-road heavy-duty vehicles, off-road vehicles,
etc. Staff began uploading these lists of mitigation measures onto the
AQMD’s CEQA webpages in September and will continue uploading lists as they
are completed. All mitigation measure lists will be updated periodically as
new information becomes available.
- Effects of the PM2.5 significance thresholds on
preparation of CEQA documents
Stakeholders were concerned that with the introduction of PM2.5
significance thresholds, more CEQA documents would show significant impacts
than would otherwise be the case. In response, staff revisited the
construction scenarios developed as part of the original LST proposal and,
using the same construction characteristics, calculated PM2.5 emissions.
Staff demonstrated that all construction scenarios would not exceed the
PM2.5 construction LST, except that the five-acre scenario required
modifying equipment hours of operation from eight hours to seven hours.
Operators at most construction sites do not typically operate their
equipment continuously more than seven hours per day anyway. If they do,
PM10 emissions may be of greater concern. With regard to the PM2.5 regional
significance threshold during construction, the construction scenarios show
that PM2.5 emissions did not exceed the PM2.5 LST and were, in fact,
substantially less than the regional significance threshold of 55 pounds per
day.
With regard to operational emission impacts, for most projects, emissions
are primarily generated by mobile sources. PM2.5 emissions from mobile
sources are generally relatively small compared to other pollutants such as
NOx and CO. As a result, it is not expected that the proposed PM2.5
significance thresholds will trigger significance to a greater extent than
is currently the case.
- Regional significance threshold for construction
should be higher than operational phase
After completion of the 2007 AQMP, which will include PM2.5 control
strategies and monitoring the implementation of the proposed significance
thresholds, staff may reevaluate the proposed significance thresholds and
revise as necessary.
Resource Impacts
If approved by the Governing Board implementation of staff’s PM2.5
proposals will be phased in according to the timetable listed in the
preceding section. Existing AQMD resources will be used to implement this
policy.
Attachments (EXE 136kb)
A. LST Development Process
B. Resolution
C. Stakeholder Working Group Members
D. Draft - Localized Significance Threshold Methodology Document
ATTACHMENT A
DEVELOPMENT OF PM2.5 CALCULATION METHODOLOGY
AND PROPOSED PM2.5 LOCALIZED AND REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS
Stakeholder
Working Group Meeting #1 Held
June 8, 2006

Stakeholder Working Group Meeting #2 Held
July 11, 2006

Public Workshop Held
August 9, 2006

Stakeholder Working Group Meeting #3 Held
August22, 2006

Public Hearing
October 6, 2006
ATTACHMENT B
RESOLUTION NO. 06-_____
A Resolution of the Governing Board of the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (AQMD) approving the Staff Recommended Methodology for
Calculating PM2.5 and PM2.5 Regional and Localized Significance Thresholds
to Determine PM2.5 Significance in CEQA and NEPA Documents prepared by the
AQMD and recommended for use by other public agencies.
WHEREAS, the U.S. EPA adopted National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for PM2.5 in 1997 and CARB adopted California Ambient Air Quality
Standards for PM2.5 in 2002; and
WHEREAS, since adoption of ambient air quality standards for PM2.5
by U.S. EPA and CARB, there has been a need to develop a methodology for
calculating PM2.5 when preparing air quality analyses for National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or CEQA documents; and
WHEREAS, there is also a need for establishing PM2.5 significance
thresholds to determine whether or not PM2.5 emissions from projects
analyzed in NEPA or CEQA documents may contribute to significant adverse air
quality impacts; and
WHEREAS, the PM2.5 calculation methodology and proposed localized
and regional significance thresholds were originally developed in connection
with a stakeholders’ working group; and
WHEREAS, the AQMD established and held three stakeholder working
groups meetings in 2006 comprised of local government planners;
representatives of local councils of government; environmental groups; the
building and construction industries; and other interested individuals to
solicit input on the localized significance thresholds; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15064.7(b), the AQMD staff
conducted a public workshop on August 9, 2006, to solicit additional public
testimony on the PM2.5 calculation methodology and staff proposal for PM2.5
localized and regional significance thresholds; and
WHEREAS, the Methodology to Calculate Particulate Matter (PM) 2.5
and PM 2.5 Significance Thresholds document, which includes the PM2.5
calculation methodology, staff proposal for PM2.5 localized and regional
significance thresholds, PM2.5 fractions of PM10, and PM2.5 localized
significance threshold look-up tables for construction and operation, was
released for public review in May 2006, and updated in September and October
2006 to incorporate stakeholder working group comments and revise the PM2.5
fraction inventories; and
WHEREAS, it is intended that the PM2.5 calculation methodology and
staff proposal for PM2.5 localized and regional significance thresholds be
use in connection with air quality analysis tools such as the URBEMIS2002
land use model; and
WHEREAS, AQMD staff has developed construction scenarios for small
projects that include assumptions, equations, types of equipment, etc.; to
further assist local public agencies with evaluating construction impacts;
and
WHEREAS, AQMD staff has modified the construction scenarios for
small projects to include PM2.5 emissions.
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the AQMD to reduce emissions from all
possible sources that hinder the region’s ability to achieve the federal and
state ambient air quality standards. Use of the localized significance
thresholds may serve to reduce emissions from future projects to the extent
that additional mitigation measures are required and implemented. This
policy encourages local governments and other public agencies to consider
localized air quality impacts in a CEQA or NEPA analysis.
NOW, THEREFORE BEIT RESOLVED
that the AQMD Governing Board does hereby adopt the PM2.5
calculation methodology and staff proposals for PM2.5 localized significance
thresholds of 10.4 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) for construction and
2.5 ug/m3 for operation and regional significance threshold of 55 pounds per
day for both construction and operation (Attachment D) pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines §15064.7 (b).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
that the PM2.5 calculation methodology and staff proposal for PM2.5
localized and regional significance thresholds will be incorporated into the
AQMD’s Handbook in December 2006.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
that the Governing Board hereby directs the Executive Officer to annually
update the PM2.5 localized significance thresholds based upon the most
current air quality monitoring data.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
that the AQMD staff will provide outreach on the use of the PM2.5
calculation methodology and staff proposal for PM2.5 localized and regional
significance thresholds to other public agencies and stakeholders and
provide a report, including implementation issues identified, to the
Governing Board’s Mobile Source Committee one year after adoption.
DATE: _________________
___________________________________________________________________
CLERK OF THE BOARDS
ATTACHMENT C
|
STAKEHOLDER WORKING GROUP MEMBERS |
| Gretchen Hardison |
City of Los Angeles |
| Thomas Jelanic – Represented
by Julia Lester, Ph.D. |
Port of Long Beach
Environ |
| Clayton Miller |
Construction Industry Air
Quality Coalition |
| Bill Piazza |
Los Angeles Unified School
District |
Jim Ritchie – Represented by
Dennis Quilliam |
Los Angeles World Airports
Los Angeles World Airports |
| Carla Walecka |
Realtors Committee on Air
Quality |
| Ron Wilkness |
Western States Petroleum
Association |
|