![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Conformity Adequacy Review - Region 9
Transportation
Conformity
- Main Transportation Conformity Page
- General Information
- Policy Guidance
- Training Materials
- Regulations
- Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions
- Regional Contacts
NOTE: You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader, available as a free download, to view some of the files on this page. See EPA's PDF page to learn more about PDF, and for a link to the free Acrobat Reader.
SIP Submissions that EPA has Found Adequate or Inadequate
Region 9: Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, and
the territories of Guam and American Samoa
For more information about adequacy review, return to the main adequacy page.
Contacts: Karina O'Connor, at 775-833-1276 or
John J. Kelly, at 415-947-4151 or
Wienke Tax at 415-947-4192 or
Ginger Vagenas at 415-972-3964 or
R9.adequacy@epa.gov, U.S. EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105
| Arizona | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Area | Pollutant | SIP Submission |
Finding (date budgets apply) |
Additional Information/ Comments |
| Bullhead City | pm10 | limited maintenance plan | Adequate (08/26/02) FR Notice | PDF version (8pp, 69K) |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| Payson City | pm10 | limited maintenance plan | Adequate (08/26/02) FR Notice | PDF version (8pp, 69K) |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| Pima County | carbon monoxide |
maintenance plan | Adequate (12/08/99) Letter 1 (PDF) (2pp, 86K) and Letter 2 (PDF) (8pp, 84K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 21K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. |
| Phoenix (Maricopa and Pinal Counties) | pm10 | 5% plan | Withdrawn (01/31/11) Letter (PDF) (2pp, 35K) |
Budgets previously found adequate on the 7/1/08 FR Notice. FR Notice | PDF Version (2pp, 85K) |
| 8-hour ozone | attainment demonstration | Adequate (11/09/07) Letter (PDF) (6pp, 95K) FR Notice |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| pm10 | attainment demonstration | Adequate (04/21/00) Letter (PDF) (5pp, 69K) FR Notice | PDF verson (1p, 11K) |
PM10 budget for Maricopa County applies to entire non-attainment area including Pinal County. Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| Inadequate (12/27/99) Letter (PDF) (5pp, 997K) FR Notice | PDF version (1p, 73K) |
||||
| Phoenix (Maricopa County) | carbon monoxide |
maintenance plan | Adequate (10/14/03) Letter (PDF) (1p, 23K) FR Notice | PDF version (5pp, 34K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. |
| attainment demonstration (serious area) | Adequate (11/01/01) Letter (PDF) (4pp, 81K) FR Notice | PDF version (1p, 61K) |
Revision to budget from 12/14/99. Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | ||
| Adequate (12/14/99) Letter (PDF) (4pp, 851K) FR Notice | PDF version (1p, 14K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |||
| attainment demonstration (moderate area) | Inadequate (05/05/99) |
Determination made under old process | ||
| 1-hour ozone | maintenance plan | Adequate (09/01/04) Letter (PDF) (6pp, 191K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 54K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| attainment demonstration and 15% | Inadequate (05/05/99) |
Determination made under old process | ||
| Tucson | carbon monoxide | limited maintenance plan | Adequate (12/21/09) FR Notice | PDF version (3pp, 54K) |
Budgets found adequate through the SIP approval process. |
| Yuma County | pm10 | maintenance plan | Adequate (06/27/07) Letter (PDF) (6pp, 237K) FR Notice |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. |
| attainment demonstration | Inadequate (11/16/99) Letter (PDF) (2pp, 59K) FR Notice | PDF version (1p, 13K) |
|||
| California | ||||
| Area | Pollutant | SIP Submission |
Finding (date budgets apply) |
Additional Information/ Comments |
| Bakersfield Metropolitan Area | carbon monoxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (01/30/06) FR Notice |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| Chico Urbanized Area | carbon monoxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (01/30/06) FR Notice |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| Coso Junction | pm10 | maintenance plan | Adequate (09/03/10) FR Notice |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| East Kern County | 8-hour ozone | early progress plan | Adequate (12/10/08) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 75K) |
Budgets found adequate through adequacy review process. |
| 1-hour ozone | maintenance plan | Adequate (06/21/04) FR Notice | PDF version (3pp, 43K) |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. | |
| Fresno Urbanized Area | carbon monoxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (01/30/06) FR Notice | Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| Imperial County | 8-hour ozone | early progress plan | Adequate
(05/20/08) Letter (PDF) (2pp, 56K) Enclosure (PDF) (3pp, 108K) FR Notice | PDF Version (1p, 67K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. |
| Indian Wells | pm10 | maintenance plan | Adequate (05/07/03) FR Notice | PDF version (3pp, 43K) |
Budgets found adequate by virtue of SIP approval. |
| Lake Tahoe North Shore Area | carbon monoxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (01/30/06) FR Notice | Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| Lake Tahoe South Shore Area | carbon monoxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (01/30/06) FR Notice | Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| Los Angeles (Coachella) | pm10 | attainment demonstration | Adequate (04/09/04) Letter (PDF) (7pp, 18K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 54K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. |
| Adequate (04/18/03) Letter (PDF) (6pp, 26K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 32K) |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. | |||
| Inadequate (01/04/00) Letter (PDF) (2pp, 324K) FR Notice | PDF version (7pp, 87K) |
||||
| Los Angeles - San Bernadino Counties (Western Mohave Desert) | 8-hour ozone | early progress plan | Adequate
(05/20/08) Letter (PDF) (3pp, 52K) Enclosure (PDF) (3pp, 113K) FR Notice | PDF Version (51pp, 67K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. |
| Modesto Urbanized Area | carbon monoxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (01/30/06) FR Notice | Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| Riverside County (Coachella Valley) | 8-hour ozone | early progress plan | Adequate
(05/22/08) Letter (PDF) (2pp, 61K) Enclosure (PDF) (3pp, 117K) FR Notice | PDF Version (1pp, 72K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. |
| Sacramento Metro Area | pm10 | maintenance plan | Adequate (12/08/11) Letter (PDF) (4pp, 155K) FR Notice |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. |
| 8-hr ozone | attainment demonstration and reasonable further progress | Adequate / Inadequate (08/12/09) Letter (PDF) (7pp, 421K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 81K) |
Budgets found adequate / inadequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| reasonable further progress | Adequate
(03/29/06) Letter (PDF) (5 pp, 406K) FR Notice |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | ||
| Sacramento Urbanized Area | carbon monoxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (01/30/06) FR Notice | Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| San Bernardino County | pm10 | attainment demonstration | Inadequate (01/04/00) Letter (PDF) (2pp, 406K) FR Notice | PDF version (1p, 117K) |
|
| San Diego Area | 8-hour ozone | attainment plan | Adequate
(06/09/08) Letter (PDF) (2pp, 166K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 72K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. |
| carbon monoxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (01/30/06) FR Notice | Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. | |
| 1-hour ozone | maintenance plan | Adequate (05/14/03) Letter (PDF) (5pp, 170K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 39K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| San Francisco Bay Area | carbon monoxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (01/30/06) FR Notice | Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| 1-hour ozone | attainment demonstration | Adequate (03/08/02) Letter (PDF) (45pp, 159K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 39K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| Inadequate (10/22/01) FR Notice | PDF version (8pp, 67K) |
Budgets inadequate by virtue of partial SIP disapproval | |||
| San Joaquin Valley | pm2.5 | attainment plan | Adequate (11/09/11) FR Notice (PDF) (31 pp, 308K) |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| reasonable further progress and attainment plan | Adequate / Inadequate (05/27/10) Letter (PDF) (6pp, 229K) FR Notice | Budgets found adequate / inadequate through the adequacy review process. | ||
| 8-hour ozone | attainment demonstration and reasonable further progress plan | Adequate (02/06/09) Letter (PDF) (11 pp, 1M) FR Notice| PDF Version (3 pp, 110K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| 1-hour ozone | attainment demonstration and rate of progress | Adequate (03/02/05) Letter (PDF) (11pp, 62K) FR Notice |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| pm10 | maintenance plan | Adequate (11/12/08) FR Notice | PDF version (17pp, 227K) |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. | |
| attainment demonstration | Adequate (05/26/04) FR Notice | PDF version (32pp, 233K) |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. | ||
| 1-hour ozone | rate of progress (2002 and 2005) | Adequate (08/08/03) Letter (PDF) (8pp, 28K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 133K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| pm10 | attainment demonstration | Inadequate (05/05/99) |
Determination made under old process | |
| Santa Barbara | 1-hour ozone | maintenance plan | Adequate (07/09/03) Letter (PDF) (5pp, 18K) FR Notice | PDF version (3pp, 43K) |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| attainment demonstration | Adequate (01/14/00) Letter (PDF) (8pp, 539K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 14K) |
Technical Support Document (PDF) (6pp, 24K). Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | ||
| Searles Valley | pm10 | attainment demonstration | Inadequate (01/04/00) Letter (PDF) (2pp, 339K) FR Notice |
|
| South Coast | pm2.5 | attainment plan | Adequate (11/09/2011) FR Notice (PDF) (28 pp, 281K) |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| nitrogen dioxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (01/04/2010) Letter (PDF) (5pp, 200K) FR Notice | PDF Version (3pp, 130K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 | reasonable further progress, attainment plan, and out-year budgets | Adequate / Inadequate (05/30/08) Letter (PDF) (2pp, 48K) Attachment (PDF) (18pp, 72K) FR Notice | PDF version (3pp, 130K) |
Budgets found adequate / inadequate through the adequacy review process.
The May 15, 2008 adequacy FR notice incorrectly stated that the 2017 NOx budget for the 8-hour ozone standard was 32 tpd. The adequate 2017 NOx budget for ozone is actually 232 tpd. This typographical error was corrected in a June 18, 2008 FR notice | PDF Version (1p, 45K). |
|
| 1-hour ozone, CO, and PM10 | attainment demonstration | Adequate (04/09/04) Letter (PDF) (16pp, 51K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 54K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| nitrogen dioxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (04/09/04) Letter (PDF) (16pp, 51K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 54K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| pm10 | attainment demonstration | Adequate (04/18/03) Letter (PDF) (4pp, 25K) FR Notice | PDF version 4pp, 98K) |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. Budgets replace those posted on 06/24/99. | |
| Southeast Desert | 1-hour ozone | rate of progress and attainment demonstration | Adequate (06/14/04) Letter (PDF) (7pp, 45K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 54K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. |
| Stockton Urbanized Area | carbon monoxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (01/30/06) FR Notice | Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| Ventura | 8-hour ozone | early progress plan | Adequate
(05/20/08) Letter (PDF) (2pp, 57K) Enclosure (PDF) (3pp, 116K) FR Notice | PDF Version (53pp, 67K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. |
| 1-hour ozone | attainment demonstration | Adequate (06/14/04) Letter (PDF) (6pp, 43K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 54K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |
| Nevada | ||||
| Area | Pollutant | SIP Submission |
Finding (date budgets apply) |
Additional Information/ Comments |
| Lake Tahoe | carbon monoxide | limited maintenance plan | Adequate (02/13/04) FR Direct Final Rule | PDF version (8pp, 67K) |
Budgets found adequate through SIP approval process. |
| Las Vegas (Clark County) |
8-hour ozone | early progress plan | Adequate (05/29/09) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 76K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process | pm10 | attainment demonstration | Adequate (1/26/02) Letter (PDF) (2 pp. 97K) FR Notice | PDF version (1p 34K) |
Response to Comments (PDF) (24pp, 585K) Adequacy Review Table (PDF) (4pp 133K). Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process |
| carbon monoxide |
maintenance plan | Adequate (09/27/10) FR Notice |
Budgets found adequate through the SIP approval process. | |
| attainment demonstration | Adequate (12/15/00) Letter (PDF) (7 pp, 505K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 120K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | ||
| Inadequate (02/17/00) Letter (PDF) (5pp, 84K) FR Notice |
||||
| Inadequate (05/05/99) |
Determination made under old process | |||
| pm10 | attainment demonstration | Inadequate (11/16/99) Letter (PDF) (2pp, 56K) FR Notice | PDF version 1p, 13K) |
||
| Truckee Meadows (Washoe County) | pm10 | maintenance plan | Adequate (06/02/10) Letter (PDF) (6pp, 227K) FR Notice |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. |
| carbon monoxide | maintenance plan | Adequate (03/30/06) Letter (PDF) (10pp, 340K) FR Notice | PDF version (2pp, 191K) |
Budgets found adequate through the adequacy review process. | |